Once Saved Always Saved

Let me be clear, the idea of "Once Saved Always Saved" does not allow for the argument that if you were ever a good Christian you are thusly considered a good Christian all your life. Rather, it is the case that such individuals were never saved. From the position of eternity: you can only be saved or not saved. Allow me to be clear, I am arguing in favor of the second point of Five Point Calvinism: Unconditional election. At the time you are born, and prior to your birth, God knows exactly how you will act and exactly what the end result of your life will be. You may struggle with your faith and ultimately become and atheist. However, that does not at any time imply that you were Saved. You were always going to lose your faith and become an atheist. Likewise you might be born a heathen and through some events find a faith in God and become saved and die saved. You were you were only saved once and it was before you were born. Once you were saved, you were always saved. Once Saved Always Saved. There is strong Biblical support for this: * Romans 9:15-16: "For he says to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.' So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy." * Ephesians 1:4-5: "even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will," * Ephesians 1:11: "In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will," You argue that from a utility point of view OSAS is immoral, and though it is a tangent, allow me to rebut that as well. You argue that OSAS implies that a person can, as a "saved" person just say 'screw it and do whatever immoral things they want'. However, if that is the case then they were never really saved in the first place. I will further argue (note that this argument is not principle to the topic at hand) that belief of temporary salvation is more immoral than OSAS. What if a person becomes saved, yet, you have a good idea that they will, in due course, backslide and lose their salvation? I argue that in such a case a moral action would be to put a bullet in their head after they accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. They will promptly go to heaven. Whereas you will need to quickly ask for forgiveness for this act. But, overall, this would be morally acceptable. You would very directly be turning what is only a temporary salvation into a permanent one. Where are Andrea Yates' children? Heaven or Hell? If they had been allowed to grow up beyond childhood, would this result have been assured? Could they have backslid? If you accept that idea of temporary salvation you must accept that Andrea Yates' actions were moral, that the murder of her children was, given the situation, a better result than allowing them to be corrupted and sent to hell forever. You are saved once, before you are born. The elected will go to heaven, they are saved once and saved always. Furthermore, the idea of temporary salvation is not only extra-biblical but completely immoral.