@SammieSaliu The latter obviously as clearly seen in the quotes I posted, I have not made against it now ๐ญ.
You want to drag me into this convo sha ๐
@SammieSaliu -"fading faith" (his critics call it temporary faith) as used by Calvin literally is not understood to be a genuine but fading faith but also "a sense" of faith, in the same vein nobody understands evanescent Grace to be a genuine but vanishing Grace
@SammieSaliu I've not made a conclusive statement all through our convo, I was dropping quotes and references.
I didn't use the word "vanishing Grace" you did and I assumed you synonymised it with evanescent Grace which I said wasn't a term Calvin used but the concept was present. Just like
@SammieSaliu within Calvin's work even though he never used the term but he called it a sense of grace that was evanescent.
So all along, I'm not trying to prove they are the same, I'm only trying to answer your two questions.
@SammieSaliu There are two questions that drew me to your conversation
1. where did Calvin say they are indistinguishable? And I answered that he did (maybe not to the third party but to the reprobate they are)
2. Where then is vanishing Grace? I showed you that the concept is very present-
@SammieSaliu In the same book 3 chapter 2 section 11 of his writing Temporary faith was picked up when he said "I answer, that though there is a great resemblance and affinity between the elect of
God and those who are impressed for a time with a *fading faith*"
It's a lot to unpack, you would have to read exhaustively on it to understand.
It's an ancient philosophical and religious school of thought centered around knowledge.
It's not always Christian but there's the Christian version too. But what people call gnosticism here is not it