I’d really like to caution folks about using Wiki as a definitive source for anything.
Christ is the Path, the Way, the Via. Not the chauffeur. The continuing claims that Catholics give credit to man weren’t right the first time a heretic said ‘em and they’ll never be right. We’re not on the hook, theologically speaking. We’re just following Christ’s instructions, not those of somebody who came along centuries later with a new twist on theology and hung up a shingle.
If perseverance is only for the elect, does that mean that the non elect do not persevere? Not even in their sin? But even the elect sin. Does that mean that there is a qualitative difference in the sin of the elect versus the non elect?
I got some strong replies to my posting of the hyper Calvinist article by folks that really seemed to adhere to its definition. :)
I don't see how you can claim the independence of free will without also claiming the credit for the decisions it produces. I note that you offer no opinion on the statement about virtue. I obviously posted the statement because I think anyone agreeing with it gives credit to man.
If perseverance is only for the elect, does that mean that the non elect do not persevere? Not even in their sin?
I am using perseverance as a theological term. It does not refer to sin for these purposes, but only to good. Therefore, the non elect do not persevere. In fact, they do no good at all in God's eyes.
Does that mean that there is a qualitative difference in the sin of the elect versus the non elect?
No, sin is sin. There is a quantitative difference, though.
I got some strong replies to my posting of the hyper Calvinist article by folks that really seemed to adhere to its definition. :)
I'll bet. :)