Eternal security is a true doctrine based on the Bible which is God's Word.

The Pro said, "Let the record show that my opponant has again gone off topic and made ad hominim attacks about me just because I do not belong to his sect of "Christianity"." There is nothing wrong in providing facts about my opponent which makes the case that she does not have the authority to interpret Scripture on her own because she is not a member of the one true Church Jesus established 2000 years ago. The Pro said, "Christianity is about having a relationshipt with Jesus, and that is it" So the Pro contradicted her past statement which said, "A Christian is someone who follows Jesus, end of story". Besides, since your profile page said that you support abortion and euthanasia, then it proves that you reject the teachings of Christ, but instead you embrace satan. Therefore your "relationship" is with satan. The Pro said, "Let the record show that my opponant has also refuse to address every single Scripture that I have provided" Why should I address each and every verse you posted, when you have refused to address the one passage from Scripture that I posted? Nonetheless, I will address each and every verse you posted anyway so as to show that your interpretation of scripture is false because you are a spiritually blind person who has no authority to look to for the correct understanding of Scripture because you have no true Church. The Pro said, "Let the record also show that there are more Scriptures that support my position than any that ALLEGEDLY support his, caps for emphasis only." As I said before, all I have to do is provide one passage from Scripture that refutes the heretical eternal security doctrine to prove my case since all the verses the Pro posts in this debate will have to be understood in context with that one passage I posted. The Pro claims this verse proves her position, 1 Peter 1:5 - "Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time." Obviously the Pro believes that the word "faith" in that verse means to only "believe", yet what she fails to understand is that the term "faith" includes all the conditions that Christ requires of the Christian. Therefore a Christian must adhere to all the conditions that Christ has required of him throughout his lifetime and until his death so as to have been considered kept by the power of God. If one did not meet those conditions, then one is not kept by God's power and instead becomes a castaway and a heathen. The Pro claims this verse proves her position, Ephesians 4:30 - "And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption." To all those following this debate, if you read the entire chapter of Ephesians 4, then you will see that a set of conditions are being required and its calling on Christians to meet those conditions. Therefore Ephesians 4:30 only applies if one meets those conditions until the end of their lifetime. Obviously if one fails to meet those conditions and does not repent of that sin, then one no longer remains sealed. Lets remember that Scripture(Book of Revelation) shows us that God has the ability to unseal what he has sealed. The Pro claims this verse proves her position, Philippians 1:6 - "Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ" Obviously a true Christian is confident through faith that the Lord would continue to work through him or her as long as that individual remains open to God's grace. But again, the Pro doesn't give you the context because its not just faith, but also "HOPE" in the Lord to do so. Which is why Ephesians 4 also says this, Ephesians 4:20 - "According to my earnest expectation and my HOPE, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death." Therefore he "HOPES" that the Lord continues to be shown through him by his preaching and by his good works. Therefore its possible for him to fall away from the Lord through sin, and that is why he cannot be "CERTAIN" that the Lord will continue to do good works through him, which is why he can only "HOPE" that the Lord continues to do good works through him. Pro claims this verse proves her position, Ephesians 2:6 - "And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" Again, in context this verse is speaking of those who became Christians, but no place in that verse does it say they will continue as Christians and no place in that verse does it claim that all who were raised up will continue to remain raised up. This is because its possible for a Christian to once again fall into sin and turn away from God. Pro claims this verse proves her position, Ephesians 1:3 - "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ" Again, a Christian can be blessed for a while as long as they abide in the Lord, but if that Christian falls back into committing sins then that Christian will no longer remain sanctified. Pro claims this verse proves her position, Ephesians 5:30 - "30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones." Again she takes that verse out of context. If all of you have read what I posted earlier in the debate from Ephesians 5, then you will see that it clearly lists sins that leads one to hell, and it goes on to warn the believers not to be partakers with those who commit such sins. Which means that its possible for a believer to take part in committing those same mortal sins and therefore also be casts into hell. So therefore those who are members of his body are indeed members of his Church, but being a member of his Church does not guarantee salvation if one falls into mortal sin. I could go on and on in explaining the rest of the verses that the Pro posted, but I think you all get the idea by now. I think you all can clearly see that she takes verses out of context so as to twist them to conform to her false heretical belief of "eternal security". So far, I have posted two passages from Scripture that refutes the "eternal security" doctrine. She has not responded to either passage. There are numerous other passages from Scripture that refutes the "eternal security" doctrine. Here is another..... Galatians 5:19-21- "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."