Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[GWH]

Repeating the same nonsense over and over will never make it true. Heb 6:4-6 lists profound religious experiences. But a person can experience the outward blessings, community, and truth of the gospel without being truly saved.

Note what the author of Hebrews says in verse 9, "Though we speak in this way, yet in your case, beloved, we feel sure of better things—things that belong to salvation." This shows the writer is separating true believers from your hypothetical group.

God preserves those He truly saves. Scripture teaches that genuine believers cannot be snatched from Christ's hand. If someone completely turns away from Christ (apostasy), it proves they never possessed true saving faith to begin with.
Galatians 5:4 exposes you Arminian "saved by works" version of the gospel as being false. Paul uses strong rhetorical warnings to shake people out of your legalism, contrasting the two mutually exclusive paths of grace versus law.

God said "we are saved by grace", but you say no "we are saved by faith". So you reject Gods grace, and forget that faith is entirely a gift from God rather than a humanly generated work or ability. You make your faith a work, to earn salvation. That's pure Arminianism

Repeating nonsense does not make it true, but meditating on Scripture you ignore might be enlightening.
If the writer of Hebrews thought apostates could only be a hypothetical group, then he would not have wasted
so much ink warning against apostasy. The possible groups include:

a. normally loving people who have rare moments when they act uncharacteristically (Phil. 3:12-16)
b. immature Believers, who are making progress–you should have known them a year ago! (1Cor. 3:1-3, Eph. 4:11-15)
c. truthseekers who have not yet learned the correct interpretation of God’s Word (1Cor. 6:9-11, Eph. 5:8-9)
d. pseudo-Christians (Matt. 7:21, 1John 2:19), who affirm Jesus as Messiah but rejects His Lordship
e. apostates or heretics (1John 2:19, Heb. 6:4-6), who once believed but became blasphemous or foolish and ship-wrecked their faith (1Tim. 1:19-20).
f. atheists, who may imitate divine love without glorifying the One whose power makes it a golden rule rather than merely a pyrite suggestion.

Regarding faith, the crucial point is that God will not force sinners to receive His gift of salvation;
they must satisfy His condition of faith through wanting to have it.
God initiates/offers/gives; sinners may cooperate/accept/receive--or not.

 

[OMC]

Regarding faith, the crucial point is that God will not force sinners to receive His gift of salvation;
they must satisfy His condition of faith through wanting to have it.
God initiates/offers/gives; sinners may cooperate/accept/receive--or not.

Brother, please, The problem with that statement is that Jesus and the apostles explicitly deny that faith begins in human desire or human willingness;
Scripture teaches that no one can come unless the Father draws (John 6:44), that no one seeks God (Rom 3:11), that the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit (1 Cor 2:14), and that the flesh profits nothing (John 6:63).

If sinners must “satisfy a condition” by wanting salvation, then Jesus’ words about human inability collapse, Paul’s teaching that faith is “not of yourselves” (Eph 2:8) collapses, and the Spirit’s role in giving life collapses.

The biblical pattern is consistent: God does not force anyone, but He creates faith in those He calls — He opens Lydia’s heart (Acts 16:14), grants repentance (Acts 11:18), appoints people to eternal life who then believe (Acts 13:48), and causes us to be born again (John 1:13; 3:8).
In other words, sinners do not “cooperate” with grace; grace creates the very cooperation it requires.
If salvation depended on human wanting, then the decisive cause of salvation would be human desire — but Jesus says the decisive cause is the Father’s giving: “All that the Father gives Me will come to Me… and I will lose nothing but raise it up on the last day.” That is not an offer; that is a guarantee.

 

[GWH]

Brother, please, The problem with that statement is that Jesus and the apostles explicitly deny that faith begins in human desire or human willingness;
Scripture teaches that no one can come unless the Father draws (John 6:44), that no one seeks God (Rom 3:11), that the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit (1 Cor 2:14), and that the flesh profits nothing (John 6:63).

If sinners must “satisfy a condition” by wanting salvation, then Jesus’ words about human inability collapse, Paul’s teaching that faith is “not of yourselves” (Eph 2:8) collapses, and the Spirit’s role in giving life collapses.

The biblical pattern is consistent: God does not force anyone, but He creates faith in those He calls — He opens Lydia’s heart (Acts 16:14), grants repentance (Acts 11:18), appoints people to eternal life who then believe (Acts 13:48), and causes us to be born again (John 1:13; 3:8).
In other words, sinners do not “cooperate” with grace; grace creates the very cooperation it requires.
If salvation depended on human wanting, then the decisive cause of salvation would be human desire — but Jesus says the decisive cause is the Father’s giving: “All that the Father gives Me will come to Me… and I will lose nothing but raise it up on the last day.” That is not an offer; that is a guarantee.

The problematic part of tulipism is that if God/Love (John 3:16, 1John 4:7) were going to create faith, He would do so in everyone.
Otherwise, there is no way to avoid the heresy of implying God hates or disfavors those without faith (Rom. 2:6-11).

The solution is to harmonize relevant Scriptures. For example, John 6:44 says no one can come unless the Father draws,
and John 12:32 says Jesus will draw all.

Another example, 1Cor. 2:14 says the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit, and 1Tim. 2:3-4 says it is God's will for all to learn the truth and be saved.

The consistent pattern can be stated thusly: God initiates/offers grace (Eph. 2:8a);
sinners may cooperate/through (IF) faith (Eph. 2:8b)--or not (Deut. 30:19, Matt. 23:37, Rom. 2:4-5).

Beware the most false/heretical teaching on CC!

 

[OMC]

The problematic part of tulipism is that if God/Love (John 3:16, 1John 4:7) were going to create faith, He would do so in everyone.
Otherwise, there is no way to avoid the heresy of implying God hates or disfavors those without faith (Rom. 2:6-11).

The solution is to harmonize relevant Scriptures. For example, John 6:44 says no one can come unless the Father draws,
and John 12:32 says Jesus will draw all.

Another example, 1Cor. 2:14 says the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit, and 1Tim. 2:3-4 says it is God's will for all to learn the truth and be saved.

The consistent pattern can be stated thusly: God initiates/offers grace (Eph. 2:8a);
sinners may cooperate/through (IF) faith (Eph. 2:8b)--or not (Deut. 30:19, Matt. 23:37, Rom. 2:4-5).

Beware the most false/heretical teaching on CC!

Your objection assumes that if God gives faith sovereignly, He must give it universally, otherwise He “hates” or “disfavors” those who remain unbelieving — but Scripture never equates non‑election with divine hatred, nor does it treat God’s universal love (John 3:16; 1 John 4:7) as identical to His elective grace.
Romans 2:6–11 teaches impartial judgment, not universal regeneration; God judges all by the same standard, but He is free to show mercy as He wills (Rom 9:15–18).
Your harmonization collapses because you treat “draws all” (John 12:32) as “regenerates all,” even though Jesus explicitly says in the same discourse that only those given by the Father come, and all who come are raised (John 6:37–44).
Likewise, you treat “God wills all to be saved” (1 Tim 2:4) as “God decrees all to be saved,” ignoring Paul’s own distinction between God’s revealed will (what He commands) and His decretive will (what He accomplishes).
The pattern you propose — “God initiates, sinners may cooperate or not” — is simply the old synergistic model Scripture repeatedly denies: the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit (1 Cor 2:14), the flesh profits nothing (John 6:63), no one can come unless drawn (John 6:44), and those drawn will come and will be raised (John 6:37–39).
Your system tries to preserve human autonomy by redefining “draw” as “enable,” “grace” as “offer,” and “faith” as “cooperation,” but Jesus and Paul treat faith as God’s gift, not man’s contribution (Eph 2:8–9; Phil 1:29).
The danger is not “TULIPism,” but any teaching that makes salvation hinge on human willingness rather than divine mercy — the very error Paul calls “another gospel.”

 

[Lanolin]

Jesus was willing to draw anyone --whosoever believeth -- but the believe part was meant to be believing in God and what He has done - and He does not perform a miracle for everyone on demand.

However enough people saw/witnessed the miracles Jesus did and ended up believing.

God grants salvation we can't conjure it up or imagine it if that's what you mean. We can't take it or buy it, it needs to be given so we can receive, we can ASK for it though.

We can call and cry out to Him, but it's His prerogative to answer whoever He sees is humble enough to receive salvation. Some people claim they asked for something and never got it, when they might have already had it in them all along.

It really is a mystery why God made humans weak so that they would rely on Him and not their own understanding. If He made everyone know Him from the outset we would all be in Heaven or Paradise already. This is why Paul preached the Athenians/gentiles wanted to know God, they kind of knew He might exist but they called Him the 'unknown God'

It was the Jews/Hebrews who were already chosen to have this special relationship with God at first in the covenant He created with them (and no other people) to make the nation of Israel, but even Jacob (who later became Israel) had to wrestle with God to receive it. His hip bone was placed out of joint as a result of this 'wrestling' i.e he was humbled.

 

[lrs68]

When Jesus teaches “forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us,”
He is not describing a saved person losing salvation, but the daily relational fellowship of a child with his Father; He is talking about parental forgiveness, not judicial forgiveness.
Judicial forgiveness — the forgiveness that removes condemnation — is settled once for all at the cross (“There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus”), and Jesus explicitly says His sheep will never perish and cannot be snatched from His hand.
The warning in the Lord’s Prayer is about the hypocrisy of a believer refusing to forgive while asking God for relational cleansing — it is about broken fellowship, not broken salvation.
If rejecting forgiveness could undo justification, then Christ’s once‑for‑all sacrifice (Heb 10:14) would be conditional, the Spirit’s seal (Eph 1:13–14) would be fragile, and Jesus’ promise to lose none of those given to Him (John 6:39) would be false.
“Sins must be forgiven to be forgotten” is true — and for the believer, they were forgiven at the cross, and God says He remembers them no more.
The Lord’s Prayer warns against a hardened heart, not a lost salvation; fellowship can be disrupted, but the Father never disowns His child.

No, we still need to repent and the Lord's Prayer is a daily prayer that includes us seeking forgiveness + giving forgiveness. But a couple Verses later Jesus says if you don't forgive then you won't be forgiven. There's no condition connected to being snatched away because those who have Christ as a Shepherd will forgive others. And if they don't then Christ is not their Shepherd.

 

[OMC]

No, we still need to repent and the Lord's Prayer is a daily prayer that includes us seeking forgiveness + giving forgiveness. But a couple Verses later Jesus says if you don't forgive then you won't be forgiven. There's no condition connected to being snatched away because those who have Christ as a Shepherd will forgive others. And if they don't then Christ is not their Shepherd

Brother, you’re trying to make forgiveness the proof of salvation instead of the fruit of salvation, and Jesus’ warning in Matthew 6:14–15 does not teach that a believer can lose forgiveness but that an unforgiving heart reveals an unregenerate life — the same truth He gives in Matthew 7:21–23, where people call Him “Lord” yet were never known by Him.
Yes, repentance is real, and yes, the Lord’s Prayer is a daily pattern of confession and forgiveness, but none of that makes forgiveness a condition for “not being snatched away”; it simply shows that those who truly belong to Christ walk in His Word (Matt 4:4; Luke 4:4) and therefore forgive because His Spirit is in them.
The point is not that forgiveness earns salvation, but that refusal to forgive exposes the absence of salvation, because Christ’s sheep hear His voice and follow Him — and an unforgiving heart is the clearest sign that someone is not following the Shepherd at all.

 

[GWH]

Your objection assumes that if God gives faith sovereignly, He must give it universally, otherwise He “hates” or “disfavors” those who remain unbelieving — but Scripture never equates non‑election with divine hatred, nor does it treat God’s universal love (John 3:16; 1 John 4:7) as identical to His elective grace.
Romans 2:6–11 teaches impartial judgment, not universal regeneration; God judges all by the same standard, but He is free to show mercy as He wills (Rom 9:15–18).
Your harmonization collapses because you treat “draws all” (John 12:32) as “regenerates all,” even though Jesus explicitly says in the same discourse that only those given by the Father come, and all who come are raised (John 6:37–44).
Likewise, you treat “God wills all to be saved” (1 Tim 2:4) as “God decrees all to be saved,” ignoring Paul’s own distinction between God’s revealed will (what He commands) and His decretive will (what He accomplishes).
The pattern you propose — “God initiates, sinners may cooperate or not” — is simply the old synergistic model Scripture repeatedly denies: the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit (1 Cor 2:14), the flesh profits nothing (John 6:63), no one can come unless drawn (John 6:44), and those drawn will come and will be raised (John 6:37–39).
Your system tries to preserve human autonomy by redefining “draw” as “enable,” “grace” as “offer,” and “faith” as “cooperation,” but Jesus and Paul treat faith as God’s gift, not man’s contribution (Eph 2:8–9; Phil 1:29).
The danger is not “TULIPism,” but any teaching that makes salvation hinge on human willingness rather than divine mercy — the very error Paul calls “another gospel.”

My understanding of justness is based on obvious logic. I trust you do not mistreat your kids the way you deem God to do humanity.
Condemning to eternal hell without any opportunity to repent/go to heaven is obviously hateful! Does Scripture need to state the obvious?! Showing mercy only to some sinners is NOT judging by the same standard!

I treat/judge "draw" in John 12:32 and 6:44 by the same definition/standard.

No, your accusation collapses, because I do NOT treat John 12:32 and 1Tim. 2:3-3 as meaning that God decrees all will be saved!
What I DO treat is that Scripture repeatedly indicates the pattern you oppose: “God initiates, sinners may cooperate or not”.

My treatment preserves human accountability for sin, whereas yours makes God responsible for sinner non-repentance
and implicitly impugns/demeans God's love and justness.

Saving faith is God's condition or what God requires as the human (non-meritorious) contribution. Otherwise, humans are robots.

So a danger and heresy is indeed TULIPism!
Judaizing is another false gospel.

 

[OMC]

My understanding of justness is based on obvious logic. I trust you do not mistreat your kids the way you deem God to do humanity.
Condemning to eternal hell without any opportunity to repent/go to heaven is obviously hateful! Does Scripture need to state the obvious?! Showing mercy only to some sinners is NOT judging by the same standard!

I treat/judge "draw" in John 12:32 and 6:44 by the same definition/standard.

No, your accusation collapses, because I do NOT treat John 12:32 and 1Tim. 2:3-3 as meaning that God decrees all will be saved!
What I DO treat is that Scripture repeatedly indicates the pattern you oppose: “God initiates, sinners may cooperate or not”.

My treatment preserves human accountability for sin, whereas yours makes God responsible for sinner non-repentance
and implicitly impugns/demeans God's love and justness.

Saving faith is God's condition or what God requires as the human (non-meritorious) contribution. Otherwise, humans are robots.

So a danger and heresy is indeed TULIPism!
Judaizing is another false gospel.

Brother, the way you dismissed the correction — by implying your position was “obvious logic,” by suggesting my view makes God unjust, and by framing your interpretation as morally superior — is not how Scripture teaches believers to respond to correction; Proverbs says, “A wise man listens to rebuke,” while only the fool “despises instruction” (Prov 9:8–9).
You weren’t accusing God, you were accusing me, but you did it in a way Scripture warns against: using human logic as the standard of divine truth and treating a fellow believer’s text‑anchored correction as if it were morally corrupt.
Your claim that eternal judgment is “obviously hateful,” that mercy to some is unjust, and that my interpretation “impugns God’s love” ignores the plain statements of Scripture — that all deserve wrath (Rom 3:19), that God has mercy on whom He wills (Rom 9:15), and that no one comes unless drawn (John 6:44).
And when you say saving faith is “the human contribution,” you contradict Paul directly, who says salvation is “not of yourselves… lest any man should boast” (Eph 2:8–9). Brother, I’m correcting you because Scripture commands us to “rebuke those who contradict” (Titus 1:9), and because your tone toward correction was not only dismissive but unbiblical.

 

[GWH]

Brother, the way you dismissed the correction — by implying your position was “obvious logic,” by suggesting my view makes God unjust, and by framing your interpretation as morally superior — is not how Scripture teaches believers to respond to correction; Proverbs says, “A wise man listens to rebuke,” while only the fool “despises instruction” (Prov 9:8–9).
You weren’t accusing God, you were accusing me, but you did it in a way Scripture warns against: using human logic as the standard of divine truth and treating a fellow believer’s text‑anchored correction as if it were morally corrupt.
Your claim that eternal judgment is “obviously hateful,” that mercy to some is unjust, and that my interpretation “impugns God’s love” ignores the plain statements of Scripture — that all deserve wrath (Rom 3:19), that God has mercy on whom He wills (Rom 9:15), and that no one comes unless drawn (John 6:44).
And when you say saving faith is “the human contribution,” you contradict Paul directly, who says salvation is “not of yourselves… lest any man should boast” (Eph 2:8–9). Brother, I’m correcting you because Scripture commands us to “rebuke those who contradict” (Titus 1:9), and because your tone toward correction was not only dismissive but unbiblical.

Yes, I thought the example of parents treating their children the way you view God as treating humanity would correct your dismissal of favoritism, but since you do not admit that giving one bad child a reward and spanking the other child forever is unjust, I am at a loss for words other than to suggest applying Pro. 9:8-9 to yourself.

If you want to discuss why tulipism is NOT "text-anchored", please meet me on the thread I sponsor where that is a main topic per the OP: Resolving Problematic Interpretations of Scripture.

It seems problematic to view someone who views God as all-loving and just as a "brother" of someone who believes that God loves and favors only some with election while hating the rest and providing them no opportunity to repent, but you are merely the latest in a long line of tulipists we have encountered on CC, which is why I created the thread for discussion of that topic so I would not need to reinvent the wheel so to speak. Hope to see you post there, and we can begin with the OP.

 

[HeIsHere]

Saving faith is God's condition or what God requires as the human (non-meritorious) contribution. Otherwise, humans are robots.

So a danger and heresy is indeed TULIPism!
Judaizing is another false gospel.

All I can say is Amen ... so sad the way TULIPism has infiltrated the minds of so many.

 

[GWH]

All I can say is Amen ... so sad the way TULIPism has infiltrated the minds of so many.

Yes, and at first I thought better of OMC, but if he is open to discussion on the "Resolving..." thread, hope you will join in.

 

[OMC]

Yes, and at first I thought better of OMC, but if he is open to discussion on the "Resolving..." thread, hope you will join in.

I am and Ive been waiting lol

 

[lrs68]

Paul is documented by Luke in the Book of Acts as stating God created man with the ability to seek after and find God. It's true that Paul also said that man doesn't do that. But this Doctrine about man not being able to seek God should he want to proves man has the inate ability to do so and isn't as incapable as the Tulip Doctrine proclaims.

This also proves free will that man can and is able to seek God but man refuses to.

 

[Journey_man]

Repeating nonsense does not make it true, but meditating on Scripture you ignore might be enlightening.
If the writer of Hebrews thought apostates could only be a hypothetical group, then he would not have wasted
so much ink warning against apostasy. The possible groups include:

a. normally loving people who have rare moments when they act uncharacteristically (Phil. 3:12-16)
b. immature Believers, who are making progress–you should have known them a year ago! (1Cor. 3:1-3, Eph. 4:11-15)
c. truthseekers who have not yet learned the correct interpretation of God’s Word (1Cor. 6:9-11, Eph. 5:8-9)
d. pseudo-Christians (Matt. 7:21, 1John 2:19), who affirm Jesus as Messiah but rejects His Lordship
e. apostates or heretics (1John 2:19, Heb. 6:4-6), who once believed but became blasphemous or foolish and ship-wrecked their faith (1Tim. 1:19-20).
f. atheists, who may imitate divine love without glorifying the One whose power makes it a golden rule rather than merely a pyrite suggestion.

Regarding faith, the crucial point is that God will not force sinners to receive His gift of salvation;
they must satisfy His condition of faith through wanting to have it.
God initiates/offers/gives; sinners may cooperate/accept/receive--or not.

The writer of Hebrews didn't waste ink in vain. The warnings are not proof that a truly regenerate believer can lose their salvation; rather, they are the protective guardrails that ensure the elect persevere to the end.

God decrees the end (the final salvation of the elect) and also decrees the means to that end (faith, obedience, and responsiveness to warnings). When a true believer reads a warning (e.g., Hebrews 6 or 10), the Holy Spirit uses it to produce holy fear, repentance, and renewed vigilance.

A sign warning of a deadly cliff ahead is not proof that you will fall off; it is the very tool that causes you to walk carefully so that you don't fall.

The visible Church includes everyone who professes faith, attends church, and participates in the sacraments. It contains both true believers and hypocrites. The invisible Church consists only of the elect—those truly born again by the Holy Spirit.
When someone "falls away," they are departing from the visible church. They are revealing that they never possessed true, saving faith in the first place (1 John 2:19).

Some people experience a superficial, emotional, or intellectual stirring (like the rocky soil in the Parable of the Sower). They look Christian for a season but lack root. The warnings expose those whose faith is fake, while simultaneously pruning and strengthening those whose faith is real.

I see another member has already corrected you on your final point, so I have nothing further to add.

 

[GWH]

The writer of Hebrews didn't waste ink in vain. The warnings are not proof that a truly regenerate believer can lose their salvation; rather, they are the protective guardrails that ensure the elect persevere to the end.

God decrees the end (the final salvation of the elect) and also decrees the means to that end (faith, obedience, and responsiveness to warnings). When a true believer reads a warning (e.g., Hebrews 6 or 10), the Holy Spirit uses it to produce holy fear, repentance, and renewed vigilance.

A sign warning of a deadly cliff ahead is not proof that you will fall off; it is the very tool that causes you to walk carefully so that you don't fall.

The visible Church includes everyone who professes faith, attends church, and participates in the sacraments. It contains both true believers and hypocrites. The invisible Church consists only of the elect—those truly born again by the Holy Spirit.
When someone "falls away," they are departing from the visible church. They are revealing that they never possessed true, saving faith in the first place (1 John 2:19).

Some people experience a superficial, emotional, or intellectual stirring (like the rocky soil in the Parable of the Sower). They look Christian for a season but lack root. The warnings expose those whose faith is fake, while simultaneously pruning and strengthening those whose faith is real.

I see another member has already corrected you on your final point, so I have nothing further to add.

Re Hebrews: Yes, I understand tulipists think warnings are the means God uses to ensure perseverance but do not imply the possibility of committing apostasy/ignoring the sign, illogically enough. At least have the willingness to use "repudiate" instead of "lose", so we will disagree about the same thing.

We also understand that y'all believe those who commit apostasy/choose to drive over the cliff were never saved,
but in that case you have no logical grounds for confidence that you are saved/will never decide to repent of saving faith
until you die without having changed your mind and gone around the sign.

 

[OMC]

The writer of Hebrews didn't waste ink in vain. The warnings are not proof that a truly regenerate believer can lose their salvation; rather, they are the protective guardrails that ensure the elect persevere to the end.

God decrees the end (the final salvation of the elect) and also decrees the means to that end (faith, obedience, and responsiveness to warnings). When a true believer reads a warning (e.g., Hebrews 6 or 10), the Holy Spirit uses it to produce holy fear, repentance, and renewed vigilance.

A sign warning of a deadly cliff ahead is not proof that you will fall off; it is the very tool that causes you to walk carefully so that you don't fall.

The visible Church includes everyone who professes faith, attends church, and participates in the sacraments. It contains both true believers and hypocrites. The invisible Church consists only of the elect—those truly born again by the Holy Spirit.
When someone "falls away," they are departing from the visible church. They are revealing that they never possessed true, saving faith in the first place (1 John 2:19).

Some people experience a superficial, emotional, or intellectual stirring (like the rocky soil in the Parable of the Sower). They look Christian for a season but lack root. The warnings expose those whose faith is fake, while simultaneously pruning and strengthening those whose faith is real.

The writer does not say the warnings are “guardrails to keep the elect persevering.”
He says they are real dangers addressed to people who have genuinely “tasted,” “shared,” “been enlightened,” and are told they can “fall away” (Heb. 6:4–6).
He does not say these people were never regenerate; he says their falling away is tragic because they had truly experienced God’s grace.
Likewise, Hebrews 10:26–29 describes people who were “sanctified” by Christ’s blood yet are warned of judgment if they deliberately turn away.
The tulipist explanation — “they were never saved” — is not in the text; it is imported from a system.
The visible/invisible church distinction is also not in Hebrews; it is a later theological construct used to reinterpret warning passages. Jesus’ parable of the soils does not say the rocky soil was never alive; it says it sprang up, had life, and then died.
Hebrews uses warnings because real believers must continue in faith, not because fake believers need exposing.
The warnings function as genuine calls to perseverance, not as proof that apostasy is impossible.

 

[Journey_man]

Re Hebrews: Yes, I understand tulipists think warnings are the means God uses to ensure perseverance but do not imply the possibility of committing apostasy/ignoring the sign, illogically enough. At least have the willingness to use "repudiate" instead of "lose", so we will disagree about the same thing.

We also understand that y'all believe those who commit apostasy/choose to drive over the cliff were never saved,
but in that case you have no logical grounds for confidence that you are saved/will never decide to repent of saving faith
until you die without having changed your mind and gone around the sign.

We disagree on every point, because we don't believe the same gospel message. You believe in the "saved by works" version version of the gospel, which is man centred and man saves himself by obeying the gospel and remaining steadfast in the faith for the rest of his life.

The Bible doesn't teach that gospel at all, instead the Bible reveals that salvation is of the Lord, it is God centred and not man centred. God is the author and finisher of salvation, we are born dead in our sin and dead people can't do anything to bring about their own regeneration.

When God regenerates a person, He fundamentally changes their heart. God brings that new spiritual life to permanent completion. When someone appears to be a Christian and completely falls away into final apostasy, it means that the person was never truly regenerated. They may have had emotional, religious, or communal experiences in the church, but they lacked saving faith.

Eternal security does not depend on human strength to hold onto God. Instead, it rests entirely on God's power to keep His elect. Passages like John 10:28-29 state that no one can snatch Jesus's sheep from His hand.

 

[dkontner]

I repented at the age of 55, 45 years after being baptized. God granted it.

 

[Journey_man]

The writer does not say the warnings are “guardrails to keep the elect persevering.”
He says they are real dangers addressed to people who have genuinely “tasted,” “shared,” “been enlightened,” and are told they can “fall away” (Heb. 6:4–6).
He does not say these people were never regenerate; he says their falling away is tragic because they had truly experienced God’s grace.
Likewise, Hebrews 10:26–29 describes people who were “sanctified” by Christ’s blood yet are warned of judgment if they deliberately turn away.
The tulipist explanation — “they were never saved” — is not in the text; it is imported from a system.
The visible/invisible church distinction is also not in Hebrews; it is a later theological construct used to reinterpret warning passages. Jesus’ parable of the soils does not say the rocky soil was never alive; it says it sprang up, had life, and then died.
Hebrews uses warnings because real believers must continue in faith, not because fake believers need exposing.
The warnings function as genuine calls to perseverance, not as proof that apostasy is impossible.

None of that is true because it's all based on your man centred Arminian "saved by works" version of the gospel, which makes a mockery of the true "saved by grace" biblically correct gospel.

You Arminians always pluck verses of the Bible out in isolation and out of their intended context then force them to fit your Arminian "man centred" version of the gospel. That way you have something to boast about and you rob God of His glory in salvation.