Although I will admit that many reject this theory upon the basis that it does not seem logical, I see the primary reason for rejecting it is because it is not Biblical. One must assume Eternal Security before reading the passage, or, they must read Eternal Security into the passages that they use to prove it.The Eternal Security doctrine is the "once saved, always saved" doctrine that so many people have trouble believing, because it just doesn't sound logical.
I noticed that you emphasized the word SEALED as a case for your argument. May I underscore that the word "seal" in itself makes no allusion to a doctrine of unconditional security whatsoever? It does speak of security which cannot be denied, but nowhere does the word itself define the extent of that security. The word "seal" in itself does not give us the mode in which we are sealed, nor does the word itself give any indication whether the seal can be broken or not. You may charge that this is clarified by the clause "until the day of redemption," since I see that you have taken the liberty to change the term "unto to read, "UNTIL. It is not warranted to change the English unto to until, or to translate the Greek "eis" as "till," or "all the way to the day of redemption." It is plain to see by your statements that you believe the seal is guaranteed through to the day of His coming, but this being sealed until the day of redemption is not in your Bible (as far as I have seen in the translations available to me.) This perpetuated error stems from a misinterpretation of the ambiguous "unto" of the King James version and by not looking at the Greek. All major versions of the Scriptures since the KJV, and the unanimous consensus of the Greek scholarship of our day goes against this interpretation. Most translate this as "for the day of redemption." The idea of the passage being that we were sealed with a view to the day of redemption. The passage does NOT say that we are guaranteed this sealing all the way to the day of redemption, or are sure of our arrival at this designated end. The possibility of grieving the Holy Spirit, which is the "Seal", implies that this passage is meant as a warning and not as a passage of assurance as you and most Eternal Security proponents demand. This verse admits the possibility of grieving the Holy Spirit, which implies that there is a real danger and that this seal can be broken.Upon receiving Christ as my Savior, I was SEALED with the Holy Spirit until the day of redemption (Eph. 4:30; II Cor. 1:22),
Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children; And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savor. But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be named among you, as becometh saints; neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which is not convenient: but rather giving thanks. For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Eph. 5:1-6.
But there have been more quoted than just these.Consequently, they misplace Hebrews 3:6, 14; 6:1-5; 10:26-33; Rev 13:12; 12:17; 22:14, etc. into the Church Age, instead of the Tribulation.
This is true. It is not our works that save us. THIS is what separates us from the religions of the world, ALL OF WHICH say "you are saved/redeemed/favored-by-God(s)/nirvanah-ed/etc by DEEDS." And yet, we still have the problem of what Jesus said:"Not everyone who says to Me 'Lord! Lord!' shall inherit the kingdom of God, but those who DO THE WILL OF THE FATHER!" If "doing the will" does not equate to salvation, then what? Well, it perfectly harmonizes with what we said before. And what Jesus said, "You will know them by their fruits".*sigh* no the ones that don't get in will have said to them, "depart from me I NEVER KNEW YOU." You don't get into heaven based on works. That is UNBIBLICAL.
How in the world does this apply here? Someone on another post said that the "never knew" is applicable like an annullment, where it is as if the marriage had never happened.It's once saved always saved.