Im not denying that this approach can improve quality of life . My contention is that lying to people about reality does not help them , even if it improves their quality of life . All it can do is mask symptoms , not help resolve the root cause . <| sep |> It has been built on the backs of whites too . this election has been one huge deflection by the 1 % dividing us along races , technological , religious and educational levels . and tricked millions of people with their real agenda It ' s the 1 % of the 1 %. there will be a few crumbs sure the ones their dogs don ' t snatch up first . <| sep |> We retain the old nature until we die . We can follow the flesh or follow the new nature given by the Spirit . However , any inability to not follow after the Spirit does not effect our salvation whatsoever , which is a free gift . I agree with all of this ! To be safe , I will clearly state that I adamantly disagree with salvation by works . I don ' t believe that people earn their salvation by merit , or that Christians can lose their salvation . And I ' m not saying that a person who leads a carnal life must be 100 % forsure not a real Christian . But yes , Paul is still warning people that they may not be saved ! May being the key word here that ' s the kind of warning we ' re talking about . There are lots of carnal Christians who are still Christians , but there are also lots of unsaved people who merely think themselves Christian if I need to provide example scenarios , I will but I hope we don ' t need to debate on this point . If the infinitely glorious and almighty Holy Spirit comes into you . and yet somehow nothing changes ? That ' s a big problem . You ' re either really adamant about resisting the Spirit within you . or He just wasn ' t in you in the first place . Either is possible . That ' s the message I ' m arguing for . Sorry if my earlier responses sounded too deterministic . I haven ' t addressed the exegetical side of our disagreement , and I haven ' t been referencing scripture . Your link was thoughtprovoking for sure . But I just want to make sure we ' re on the same page about each others ' positions before we do any clashing on whether or not the passages in contention really refer to my position or not . With that , do you ascribe to free grace theology ? My understanding of FG is basically sanctification never necessarily follows salvation . If you do , please forgive any ignorance on my end . I ' ve never discussed at length with someone who ascribes to FG before about their theology , so correct me as much as necessary .