The problem with the conviction/condemnation dichotomy is that it seems to suggest a view of salvation that we are held guilty, and that God couldn't forgive sin, until Christ came to earth and made a sacrifice according the Law. At that point, simply accepting the sacrifice is sufficient to accomplish one's salvation. This, however, has a couple of problems. Not least of which that it is a legalistic salvation, something outright condemned in the New Testament. As such, I understand your use of "condemn" as "hold guilty" and "convict" as "to demonstrate guilt" with a special reference to law. The former can mean any manner of condemnation, including a self-inflicted one brought on by our nature. The latter can be "to demonstrate guilt," but without any reference to law.
I think the best definition of salvation is union with God, and likewise union with God is the best definition of Hell
. St. Peter asserts that "As all things have been given to us by His divine power concerning life and piety through the supreme knowledge of the one who called us unto His own glory and virtue, through whom the precious and great promises have been given to us, in order that through these you might become participants of the divine nature fleeing the corroption with is in the world in lust" (2 Pet 1.3-4).
St. Peter outlines salvation as actually participating in the divine nature. This is in every text variant I know of, and the variant I used that Christ had "called us unto his own glory and virtue" is also in the vast majority of variants. Most translations tend to place a "by" here, but the Greek lacks a preposition and can go either way, but "to" makes more sense when St. Peter asserts that we are to be
participants of the divine nature.
To do this, we must flee corruption. This corruption exists in the world, and in its turn comes from "lust," or more precisely a strong desire. Thus, we have "corruption" as our principle problem we must flee from in this passage, and what we are running toward is "divine nature."
Christ, likewise, promised that "If anyone thirsts let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water" (Jn. 7.37-38). Here, Christ is the living water, but whoever receives Him, also has an outflow of living water as a result of the salvation.
In John 15, Jesus asserts that He is the true vine, and that Christians are the branches. They in their turn bear "fruit." Specifically, He asserts "I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing." This, again, indicates that salvation is actually participating in the life, and even nature, of God. This sentiment culminates with a prayer later in John, where Jesus prays and says "this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom You have sent...[I pray] that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You, that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me...I in them, and You in Me, tha tthey may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me" (Jn. 17.3,21,23).
Jesus' prayer, then, is that His followers participate in the Trinity.
In this view, we flee corruption to join God. This process means that there isn't some dichotomy we have to resolve between "convicting and believing" and "condemnation." Salvation is like healing, and works like medicine. We gradually get well, and can't really say "We're well" until it's done. In this sense, one can stop the healing process, making verses used to demonstrate a loss of salvation applicable. It can happen with no loss of security. The problem isn't forgiveness, but our recovery.
A similar article on this:
http://www.philthompson.net/pages/library/riveroffire.html
