I spend a lot of time in my articles talking about " Religion ".  Let me give you my definition of what I take religion to be; any scheme of 1. Becoming saved , and 2. Remaining saved , that includes man's work in that scheme.  This would include such teachings as Baptismal Remission, Losing Salvation Theology, Justification By Faith Plus Works ( in God's eyes ), and others.  Another term for this system would be " Religious Humanism ", because, like Secular Humanism,  it depends on man to bring about the ultimate outcome; the salvation of mankind.  In this article, I will demonstrate the paradox ( self -contradiction ) of Religion, and will give three clear Biblical examples where Religion contradicts Biblical exegesis ( out of ) and logical reasoning.  1.  Religion concludes that a lost man is saved, and a saved man is lost.  Ask any Losing Salvation Apologist to give you an example of  someone being saved, and then becoming lost, and  the first answer that you will get will be Judas.  The reason?  1. He preached.  2.  He healed.  3.  He was a disciple.  Our friends have forgotten that lost people can do all of these things ( Mt. 7:22 ).  They prophesied ( preached ), cast out devils, and did many wonderful works ( church attendance, tithing, prayer, etc.) in Jesus name, and yet were never saved.  Our friends across the aisle are also forgetting that at the beginning of Jesus' earthly ministry, and at the very time He chose His disciples, He called Judas a " devil " ( Jn. 6:70 ).  If Judas was saved, then He was a saved devil.  This is an impossibility.  Judas also shares the name " Son of Perdition " ( given by Jesus ) with none other than the Antichrist.  My friends, no one believes the Antichrist can be saved.  The evidence from Scripture proves that Judas never was saved  ( see also Jn. 12: 4-6 ).  Ask any Baptismal Remissionist if Cornelius was saved  before He was baptized in water, and you will get a vague " no".  I say vague because they spend at least five minutes explaining why He was lost in spite of 1. Possessing the Holy Ghost  2.  Speaking in tongues, and 3.  Glorifying God ( magnify ).  This theology assumes that a person can have all these attributes ( attributes of saved people in the New Testament ), and still be lost.  Such a conclusion defies Biblical literacy and common logic.  2.  Religion assumes that words do not mean what their definitions say they mean.  Amillennialists have a definition for the word " 1000 " in Revelation 20, but the definition does not come from a Greek Bible dictionary; it comes from Psalm 50:10 , that says God owns the cattle on a " thousand " hills, an indefinite number.  Had the Amillennialist actually taken the time to look up the definition of 1000 in Revelation 20, He would have found that the Greek word used is the word " chilioi " and is defined as.... 1000, a literal mathematical number.  Our Baptismal Remission friends insist that the definition of the word " for " in Acts 2:38 can mean only one thing, and one thing only; " in order to obtain ".  The Holy Ghost does not reach the same conclusion, however, when He directed Luke to write the Greek word " Eis " here, having at least five different meanings ( into, unto,for, towards, among ) instead of the Greek word " Hina ", which has one meaning, and one meaning only; " in order that " or " in order to obtain ".  The Holy Ghost did not give the Baptismal Remissionists the word they need to teach a certain doctrine, and instead gave us the word that rightly defines the passage.  3. Religion ignores Scripture that would be troublesome to Religion's theology.  If a lost person asks a Baptismal Remissionist " What must I do to be saved ", the Baptismal Remissionist will completely ignore Scripture where this very question was asked and answered ( Acts 16:30 ), and will go to Scripture that asks a completely different question ( Acts 2:37 ).  Why do they do this?  The straightforward answer the Bible gives to this straightforward question does not involve water baptism, and therefore must be ignored.  If you ask a Losing Salvation Apologist what " fall away " means in Hebrews 6, you will get the answer " becomes lost ".  They ( the formerly saved ) have " fallen away " from Salvation.  If you ask these same people if  the One's who " fall away " can be saved again, the answer will be a resounding " yes".  They do not realize at this point that they have rejected the " other part " of  this passage of Scripture; the " impossible to restore " part.  If Hebrews 6 teaches that " falling away " means loss of Salvation, then It certainly also teaches that once you fall away, you cannot be " restored again to repentance " ( be saved again ), since it impossible to be saved without repentance.  These are a few of the inconsistencies that comes with adopting theology that goes to the Bible with a pre-concieved agenda; make the Bible teach my doctrine.  When a person does this, they are destined to find themselves in a theological position that cannot be defended , a " Religious Paradox " , if you will.
Soterio Dia Christos Sola!