I watched this after listening to a Calvinistic review, and while I'm not a Calvinist per se, (I don't think regeneration precedes faith,) and while I agreed with a lot more of what they were saying than I expected, yet if this is the best argument for Arminianism, I want nothing to do with it.
Because while I'm glad that they weren't preaching sinless perfectionism, that you can't out sin God's grace and that repentance is absolutely necessary, in the first place they make the audacious claim that Augustine invented Once Saved, Always Saved, (or Eternal Security,) that you can't trust anything he says because he was a Manichean Gnostic for ten years prior to his conversion and that no one in the early church had ever held to Eternal Security prior to him, (giving you the impression that according to these experts that the church would be such a better place had Augustine never converted.) Then they say that he became the top theologian of the Roman Catholic Church, (despite its rejection of grace by faith alone along with Eternal Security,) his teachings would have been forgotten had it not been for an Augustinian monk, (HELLO!) named Martin Luther, than taken even further by John Calvin.
Then they make another claim that you should reject Eternal Security because the majority of church denominations reject Eternal Security, (such as the ever leftward drifting United Methodist Church being sited as the second largest denomination in America,) then suggesting that you should instead accept everything John Wesley and Arminianism teaches (such as Conditional Salvation/Security instead of Eternal Security or Perseverance of The Saints,) without even half of the scrutiny that they displayed towards Augustine, Luther and Calvin, as if Wesley was really saved and the Reformers were not. Which is tragically ironic considering that they claimed that you can't be sure if anybody's truly saved until Judgement Day or until you die.
Obviously I agree that the Gospel is for everyone, that God doesn't control everything like a puppet master, (making him essentially the author of all evil,) that willfully living a sinful lifestyle after you're saved is dangerous and that eternal security is not eternally guaranteed by a mere profession of faith without any shred of repentance, (falling more in line with Cheap Grace, Easy Believeism or in Dr. Michael Brown's own words, Hyper Grace,) I cannot support this one thing near the end of the documentary, where they make the claim, (with Joe Schimmel presenting bible verses such as 2nd Peter, James 5 and 1st John 1:9 yanked out of their context no less,) that Jesus only died for your past sins, but not for your future ones.
And this is the point where the whole thing falls apart for me because if Jesus only died to atone for my past sins, but not my future sins, give me one good reason to believe He died for any of my sins.
Again it's logically possible that if you have free will and have been genuinely saved that you could walk away from Salvation, but ultimately it's theologically corrosive because it goes against Jesus' own claims that "It is finished." John 19:30 (NIV) and that He would be, "with you always, to the very end of the age." Matthew 28:20 (NIV) Not to diminish the "clobber passages" as Joe Schimmel calls them, but to show that if Jesus didn't die for all sins, He would be a liar and an incompetent messiah, making the old sacrificial system referred to in the book of Hebrews, (which incidentally also had sacrifices for unintentional sins,) look more appealing than the new system under Christ, the very fulfillment of the old covenant!
Ultimately I believe that this Documentary won't lead to a revival of Christianity in the West as it's creators hope, but instead to a kind of fear based theistic nihilism wherein it's adherents will spend the rest of their lives hoping that they haven't out sinned God's grace and that if they fall that Jesus will be at the bottom of the black pit of sin in their lives with a net instead of letting them splatter on the ground.