First it was only those who believed in the Trinity. You are avoiding your inconsistency by confusing being an individual judge of someone, whose heart you may not know, with making a judgment based upon the premise that what they profess it accurate of their belief.
And thus, if you believe the Bible and its gospel, you can say that if one believes they will be saved because they are good enough, or trust in a false god, then they cannot be saved.
I am being consistent as was Jesus when he used the Greek word “Trogo”, which means to eat or chew 12 times in describing the Eucharist.
Likewise, if your really do believe Jn. 6:53,54 is referring to the literally the actual consuming the real flesh and blood of Christ, then you MUST concludes that those who do not have no life in them, and cannot have eternal life.
You are not being consistent with the ramifications of your literalistic position, nor did the Lord use “Trogo” 12 times in describing the Eucharist. The word is used only 6 times, that being for "eats" or "eating" as in "in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking," (Mat 24:38) while esthiō, or more precisely its aorist stem phag-, is used for "eat" in Jn. 6, and no distinction is made btwn the two here except as "eats" versus "eat."
The fact is that consuming human flesh, even in part, to gain their qualities is pagan, and foreign to Scripture. Likewise the idea of physically consuming food to gain spiritual life and eternal life is flatly contrary to Scripture and the gospel of John.
And which clearly uses figurative language for Christ many times leading up to Jn. 6, while such language is often used for eating, as already briefly shown in a previous post
I have already examined and dealt with arguments for the literal position much more here and here , could go into this further here by God's grace, but since Scripture is not the supreme authority for truth, but Rome is, and thus objective examination of it to determine the veracity of Rome's doctrine is discouraged, then any discussion should begin with you convincing me that the magisterium of Rome is necessary for assuredly knowing Truth on faith and morals.
To judge who is saved or not seems to me to go completely against the spirit and letter of the Beatitudes, for I doubt one can be “blessed in poor and spirit” while sitting in judgement of others.
It seems so many RCs as well as many nominal Prots take the Beatitudes as the supreme definition for what a Christian is, like as atheists invoke "do unto others...", however both require a foundational theological basis which defines such things as in what being meek means, so that it is not opposed to Christ using a whip, and when being a peacemaker is right, versus creating division which Christ also came to do.
And thus, contrary to the idea that judging who is saved or not based upon what they believe is completely against the spirit and letter of the Beatitudes, we see the Lord condemning souls for making souls "twofold more the child of hell than yourselves," (Mt. 23:15) and Paul likewise calling a man a "child of the devil," based upon him being a false prophet, and another a whitewashed wall. (Acts 13:10; 23:3) And warning that those who preach a false gospel are accursed. (Gal. 1:6-9)
Which you are if you take Jn. 6 literally, as that must require you (as well as all who do so) to consider those who do not take it literally as being spiritually dead, and headed for Hell. Which lost condition i believe most RCs and many Prots are in, due to never having a real day of salvation of personal repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus to save them as damned + destitute sinners, which day of salvation i myself as an RC did not have until in my 20s. But which i pray all have and then keep the faith.