Another Gospel?

Lately it seems that more and more disagreements are no longer regarded as error but as “another gospel.” I understand the implications various positions have on defining terms and presenting an overall theological scheme but it appears that increasingly disagreements are pictured as foreign to Christianity (i.e., another gospel). This goes beyond “unorthodox” and even “heresy.” I don’t remember this occurring so much a decade ago (perhaps I was not paying attention), but I was wondering if those who unleash this accusation realize that they are stating their opponent in the debate are not saved or that one can be saved and believe another gospel. Is it just me, or has the BB declined over the years?

 

There was a time when this wouldn't have been tolerated on this board...or perhaps I'm just remembering the past in a better light....who knows. I recall debates between breathern (even Calvinism/Arminianism debates, although they were often heated). And I recall people getting banned more for breaking this rule than for trolling. But like I say...maybe I'm looking back with my rose-colored glasses on.

 

Nah… I’ve been around here awhile. I knew this wouldn’t take off (we’d have to make it a bit more Calvinistic vs. the world for that to happen). So the thread was doomed from the start.

Using terms like “another gospel” on this forum is a way of saying another person is not saved without being so overt that one is banned. I think the longer you are here the more you will realize that this board is for many their secret sin, so taking away this from their vocabulary would be more than they could take.

I'm finding the biggest thread killer is Scripture. Takes all the opinion right out of the fight.

BTW, I meant to comment on this statement…:thumbs: From a connoisseur of sarcasm...good job. :smilewinkgrin:

 

“When giving treats to friends or children, give them what they like, emphatically not what is good for them.” - Chesterton