OK, while I've been packing, my mind has wandered in unusual directions.
Despite my participation in Christian discussion groups on the internet for the last six years, it is only upon entering the world of conversational blogdom in the last few months that I've heard the phrase "It's a Gospel issue" used frequently.
Now I had previously understood this to mean that "This doctrine is so important, that if you step outside of the orthodox understanding, you have stepped into heretical territory."
Now I'm told that "a gospel issue" isn't actually about being heretical, but it's about an idea that is so "dangerous" that it compromises the spreading of the Gospel. Fair enough, I can live with that definition if I've misunderstood. But my first question is how do other people define "gospel issue"?
Secondly - and more importantly to me - if "a gospel issue" is about compromising the spreading of the Gospel, how do we determine what is a "gospel issue" and what isn't? It seems to me that we can make almost anything "a gospel issue" if we use the slippery-slope argument. But then that makes every little jot and tittle of someone's doctrine a "gospel issue".
What do you mean by this term and what are your standards for determining what is and what is not "a gospel issue"?