Agreeing to disagree?

I read this excerpt on Dr. James Galyon's site 2 Worlds Collide:

Johnny Hunt notes in the foreword to the book Whosoever Will: A Biblical Theological Critique of Calvinism,  “As Baptists, we all know that we have Calvinists and non-Calvinists within our ranks. I believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is highly exalted when we can acknowledge our differences but join hands around a gospel-centered message to proclaim its truth to the nations.”  He adds, “What I have come to love most about theology is the capacity to agree to disagree but to do it in the spirit of Christ.”

Pasted from <http://drjamesgalyon.wordpress.com/>

Christ said "I am the way the truth and the life." Truth appears to be losing its appeal around the globe as I read more and more statements by "Christians" such as the "…capacity to agree to disagree but to do it in the spirit of Christ."

The dictionary defines truth as

1. Conformity to fact or actuality.

2. A statement proven to be or accepted as true.

3. Sincerity; integrity.

4. Fidelity to an original or standard.

Pasted from <http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Truth>

Truth, facts, fidelity, standards, these are not ambiguous words or categories. These words carry with them the sense that there are no options. An analogy would be speed limits, they are what they are. If you exceed them your wrong.  As Aristotle is often claimed to have said, "A is A."  A fact is a statement about the reality of something. To say that the reality spoken of may be something other than what it is  disqualifies it from being categorized as truth or fact or any category of certainty. To say a standard is a measure of certainty and then say that it may not be all that certain removes it from the category of standard. Truth is a factual statement about the actuality of reality. To say that there may be different perspectives, or ideas, concerning the statement removes the category of truth. Truth, standards, fidelity are black and white issues. They are either what they are stated to be or they are not part of the categories of thought that they claim.

It is just so with statements like, "…What I have come to love most about theology is the capacity to agree to disagree…in the spirit of Christ." Christ never accepted a half-hearted, mistaken, similar, or closely related belief in what He taught. He himself asserted you were either with Him or against Him. He gave no options concerning belief in His "theology." If you do not believe the "son of man" is the Messiah, the Christ, the Savior, then good luck: It's awfully warm where you're headed. 

Postmodernism's subtle insinuations into so much that now passes for Christianity has silenced many of those claiming to be followers of Christ. They are getting ever more afraid to say with authority to those preaching "a different gospel" that's not TRUE.  Instead they waffle in the politically correct quick-sand by saying things like "agree to disagree."

Personally I don't agree to disagree with anyone. If I'm wrong prove it. If not, then, I will "shake the dust off my sandals," so to speak,  and that will be the end of it. Either I believe true-Truth, as Francis Schaffer called it, or I am in error. There is no either or when it comes to eternity. If my beliefs are wrong then I'm in trouble.

My Calvinist belief is that God has elected those He chose to be the Bride for His Son. My job is to tell as many people as I can about that because I haven't a clue as to who is elect and who isn't. Another aspect of my Calvinist belief is that God is Sovereign in this transaction and there is no way I can "win" anyone to Christ. I tell them the Gospel and God either changes them so that they can have the faith to believe;  Or not!

Somewhere I read this: " We’ve got just enough God to give our lives a kind of spiritual tint without so much God as to interfere with our running the world as we damn well please." Now, that is truth.