I’m going to have to hand it to you, you’re on the mark but you don’t seem to be able to grasp the difference between an Armenian and a Calvinist.
First, there is no discord between being called to be 100% sold out to Christ, to the point that you are making the effort to be Holy just as Christ is Holy, and your point that to say that we have no sin in our lives is deception. In fact, I’d say that understanding that we have sin in our lives, and seeking to repent from that sin, is part of being Holy because it requires us to humble ourselves before God.
Then again, you stated that there was a problem with Christ saying that some of those shown in Hell knew Him when they were on Earth. You jump to the conclusion that they must have been Christians, but the text doesn’t say that, it simply says that they knew Him. Slight, but important, difference there. No evidence that those shown were Christians, just that they knew Christ on earth.
Your next quote, however, is a real gem because you took it out of context. The passage is clearly meant to be understood that Christ was referring to social Christians who, like the seed who fell among thorns, accepted the Gospel but let the cares of this world rob them of their salvation. They, literally, turned their backs on God because they would rather live in the World than live a life devoted to God. The passages you mention are true, but they speak to God’s power to hold and preserve us, not to our willingness to remain in God’s protection. Big difference there.
Robes, now there’s one that I haven’t seen addressed before. Okay, so are our robes purchased by Christ’s sacrificial blood and kept clean from sin by our constant effort to remain Holy (confessing sin when we’re aware of it and repenting of it) or are they bought by the righteous acts of the Saints? Here’s a hint, you’re right about the righteous acts of the Saints, but those acts are the Saint’s desire to remain Holy just like Christ. The problems that were reported (dirty robes, crumpled robes, missing robes) are a reflection of sin in the believer’s life, even to the point of the believer turning their back on Christ.
Finally, the last point you make speaks more to the idea that a person can return to their old sins than anything else. Personal, first hand experience speaking here, but that is a very, very definate possibility. Backsliding is not only possible, but if a person dies while they are backslidden, they cannot enter into Heaven due to their sins. It’s the same reason that suicide is a ticket straight to hell, it’s intentional murder with no repentance.
I agree with your other point though, we need to test everything, no exceptions, before accepting it as true. I consider this that testing. I can be a little harsh at times, but considering that you’re trying to be a Berean about this, I can respect that.
Jmouse did not jump to that conclusion. That's what the text of the document SAID.
The document says that there were Christians in hell because of sin in their lives and that her mother would be saved and die right away otherwise she'd fall back into sin and be lost.
That clearly puts it in the works based salvation category.