In order to give you a somewhat clearer answer to your question I'll need to give you some of my other soteriological beliefs, since the issue of a believer's eternal security touches upon, and is interconnected with so many other theological issues. The basic understanding of most appears to be that there are two choices here : the conditional or unconditional eternal security of the believer. However, to make your question more specific, the question would be, "Will any genuine, blood-bought children of God forfeit or lose their salvation subsequent to being regenerated by the Holy Spirit ... and consequently perish in the Lake of Fire? To that question I would say - absolutely not.
There is only one true teaching concerning the eternal security of the believer, and the Free Grace Movement falls short in many ways concerning it's true nature [they, as others, sadly misrepresent the true scriptural teaching ... and give the true representation a "bad rap". So, obviously I wouldn't identify with that camp. In fact, I really don't fit into either of the two basic camps that modern day Christianity, for the most part, is divided into ... Calvinism or Arminianism. It appears to me that 5-point Calvinism has done more damage to Christianity than good due to Calvin's heretical, fatalistic perspective on predestination and God's election to salvation. With that said, God is nevertheless able to use those churches that teach that abomination out of ignorance and save some individuals held captive within those organizations that promote the God-dishonoring 5-point doctrines of T.U.L.I.P.
In my 39 years plus of earnestly sorting through this theological matrix, I would have to say that my overall soteriological perspective is much closer to that held by Arminians than that of the Calvinists... and perhaps that advocated by Classical Arminianism. I would agree that faith precedes regeneration [i.e. - the issue concerning freedom of man's will], and that some type of prevenient grace is necessary in the conversion of unregenerated individuals. However, with that said, in other major points, such as predestination and election to salvation and the eternal security of the believer ... I disagree with all the 'flavors' held within the Arminian camp, and therefore stand in the minority position [and, as a result, am unfortunately often misunderstood by most ... although I'm certainly not alone]. Unlike the Calvinist view on predestination, I don't perceive the Arminian perspective as being heretical, but instead very incomplete.[here I adopt the Molinist perspective on the topic ... and am not an open theist].
Perhaps, I could most closely identify with those articles drafted by Eric Hankin, Pastor of First Baptist Church in Oxford, Mississippi and former vice president of the Southern Baptist Convention. In an interview [also linked below], Eric said he wrote those articles in an attempt to expose those who promote Calvinism - primarily 5-point Calvinism that has infested many of the Southern Baptist churches in recent history. He said he wrote it in such a way that the 5-point Calvinist would not be able to sign on. I could affirm all of his statements concerning predestination and election to salvation with his document as being true, with the caveat of his viewpoint of predestination as being incomplete - i.e. - lacking important components [it's essentially the same as the basic Arminian viewpoint]. Perhaps you might find the following info interesting .....
Eric Hankin's articles are given in this article :
(1) "Non-Calvinist’ Southern Baptists issue statement of beliefs – by Staff"
We deny that this atonement results in salvation without a person’s free response of repentance and faith. We deny that God imposes or withholds this atonement without respect to an act of the person’s free will. We deny that Christ died only for the sins of those who will be saved… We deny that...
theaquilareport.com
(2) "Provisionism in the SBC | Interview with Dr. Eric Hankins" [The Provisionist Perspective - YouTube]
