That's all good, nice, and well, but you avoided answering the questions. May I suggest why? It shows how illogical your doctrine is. Here, I will repost it, for others to see how irrational and illogical the doctrine you're proposing is. Feel free to try and answer the questions, they are serious. Stop avoiding them because they don't line up with your doctrine. Tell me "yes" or "no" to each of the questions, and let me know why they are or are not saved. I want to get a full view of your works salvation.
Has anyone even considered how arbitrary SeaBass' works based salvation is? Let me explain something to you, and also ask SeaBass something.
If someone accepts Christ and one opportunity(a good work) presents itself and the person does it, is he saved(and dies after)? SeaBass, you will say, "Yes." Right?
Now, if the same person has the opportunity presented to do a good work and doesn't do it, and dies, is he saved? SeaBass, you will answer, "No." That is, if you hold true to your works salvation. If you say, "Yes." then works are arbitrary. If you say, "No" that means that God requires perfection after one is saved (Why did Christ come again?).
Now, lets push this example even further. Say "Joe" accepts the Lord and has one year to live. Through out the year he is presented two opportunities to do good works. He does the first but doesn't do the second work. Is he saved, after the year is up and he dies? If you answer "Yes" then everyone is saved, because we will all unintentionally do a good work, out of who we are and the fruits of the Spirit. If you say, "No, he is not saved" then what you are saying is, again, that God requires perfection. To which I reply, "Why was Jesus sent again?" Oh, and if you say, "Yes" you've also shown that works are arbitrary because he did one and didn't do one.
PS: Is there a ratio of good works to missed good works to be saved? 50/50? 100% good works, with no missed opportunities? Who can do that?