If the Gospel is so simple why is it so confounded for some? I am thinking, really, about all of the craziness surrounding whether or not one system or another is actually a “saving” system. It is one thing to be confused about things, like Peter in Galatia, and another to say that Christians who might be confused about their system is on their way to hell. And yet this is exactly what some folks do. The ensuing behavior that this kind of approach produces usually is one of back-biting and cariacture . . . I can only imagine how much this must grieve the LORD.
The “Gospel message” is not a formula, it is a person! To appropriate salvation does not involve having all of your “salvation t’s crossed and i’s dotted,” instead it entails that a person simply place their faith in Him — that’s it! And every Christian, who is “orthodox and evangelical” in their belief has believed this.
Now, post conversion, there certainly is secondary reflection by the church on what has actually happened (and even led to, theologically) at the moment someone entered into a relationship with Jesus Christ (“ingressive”); but none of this reflection changes the fact that ALL Christians believe that faith in Christ alone is what actually served as the instrument of appropriating salvation in Christ, in the first place.
If everything I am describing is true, then to condemn other folks to hell, simply because they might disagree with me on the post-conversion secondary reflection stuff done by the church is really the wrong way to go. If we really believe the “Gosepl” is simple (as far as appropriating it), then we won’t elevate our secondary level reflections to an first order level; which confuses the two levels, and raises secondary reasoning on the Gospel to a level of “Saving Orthodoxy.”