That argument is a complete fallacy. It begins with a false premise and deteriorates from there.
While it is true that anybody who has committed sin can repent and be forgiven, as the thief on the cross demonstrates, anyone who presumptuously sins like that, counting on obtaining forgiveness and using that as a license to sin, is NOT saved.
That is spitting in the face of God and trampling underfoot the blood of Christ.
Anyone with that mentality is not saved and not ever likely to be saved.
Get real, people relapse all the time. See my earlier comment to xzins where I’ve given an example where this can be possible “in innocence” – such as memory loss.
A believer does not murder. Anyone who murders is not a believer. Another false premise on your part.
Nonsense.
People relapse. People make mistakes all the time. Please get that very clear. See earlier post.
What’s your next reason/excuse for rejecting Christianity?
LOL, hold on to your horses here; don’t get carried away. You haven’t provided any answer capable of holding water to any of the anomalies I brought out to the “absolutes” you’ve claimed so far. Get back to that tribal example, and show me how such a person, is saved. If you manage to do so, tell me why faith in your dogma which the aforementioned tribal hasn’t ever heard of, is necessary for “salvation”.
So don’t go about cheerfully checking off any list before your homework is complete.
Planning on sinning expecting that you can just go in for forgiveness later is what you were addressing.
I responded adequately to that.
Don’t move the goalposts and claim the answer isn’t adequate because it didn’t address something else you were wondering. If you have a different question, by all means pose it, but don’t be so intellectually dishonest and lazy as to claim the first one wasn’t answered because you didn’t like the answer.