By the way, MM, if you want to use that emoticon, just right click on it, and select “copy image location.” Then paste that location into your post.
Or if you select “save image as,” you can save the image to your computer.

Hee Hee Hee… I’ll Do it. Thanks!

Time for my “observations” - in keeping with the thread topic.

The technical term is emoji - pronounced e·mo·ji. It’s defined this way:

My favorite is Zombie E.mo.ji

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSmd-ivQmVClmKrtVi8x6SaNkLic7B1PCgHcBw1aZwb8fZJCg6ZC92JKpI

Did you know there’s a popular Deep Purple song, called Soldier of Fortune

The word “with” in this context means that in at least one matter, URPilgrim is of the same or similar mind with me.

I bring this up because I think the word “with” is used in this same sense in John 1:1.

“The Logos was with God” does not mean that He dwelt in God’s vicinity (though He may have). It means that the Logos was of the same mind as the Father, not merely in one or a few matters such as may be the case with URPilgrim and me, but the Logos is of the same mind as the Father in EVERY respect. So He is ABSOLUTELY WITH God."

Whew!! When I saw you (Paidion) quoting me I thought oh sh… I’m in trouble now.

Well like you I’m “with” Paidion on that too…

(robin)
Ahhhh … I rest my case, as yet I knew, full well, that this would, indeed, be the case … just a lot of silly stuff, purposefully intended to distract.

This, the currently most active posting, on this so-called “Evangelical Universalism” forum …
That is, there is … NO evangelical effort, herein … and, obviously, there is no …NO attempt to even whisper at Universalism… THERE IS NO WAY OF DOING SO WITHOUT A TOTAL DEPENDANCE UPON PAUL’S EPISTLES …
That someone, suggests, that I’m inordantly and mistakenly focused on Pauline epistles … only, goes to show you, the depths of their confusion.

The main purpose of this site, is to distract … round up any stray truth seekers, gather them in, into this sham, and then distract, distract, distract …
That, I touched on a nerve, here, by supposedly “insulting” the main “characters” by calling things as they, truly, are … “sucking” … is only confirmed,
by all the random, and silly responses … That is, dear readers, truth seekers, you are being “taken” for a ride … this aint NO evangelical forum, this aint NO site that, truly, advocates Universalism … this is just a sham, and a shame …you are being taken, and distracted; and shunted aside from the evangel of Paul, your Apostle, THE apostle to the nations; you are being sold a bill of goods … A void, an empty place, a vacuum … a subtle “sucking”… by empty-voices. WAKE UP! This is being done, on purpose, a very diabotical purpose…This is not the place for true spirtual edification … it’s a void, a vacuume, a place of “empty-voices” and “knowledge, falsely-named” (1Tim 6:20)

You dont “need” to debate and comprehend OT stuff, nor any of those other also-ran authors of the NT … you, only, need, to read your Pauline epistles … WAKE UP!

Well robin… I get a distinctly strong sense you are about to take your bat and ball and shaking the dust off your sandals, leave… don’t let the door hit you on the way out, because if anything “sucks” it has been your self-righteous attitude amply demonstrated!!

You win I’m totally convinced it’s OK to be a Soldier of Fortune, as long as one takes time - to focus on the Pauline epistles - in their spare time.

As far as, “just a lot of silly stuff, purposefully intended to distract.” You do realize - of Course… that the Holy Fools tradition…is a valid historical, Christian tradition… that arose from the Eastern Orthodox branch of Christianity Which should be OK and acceptable. As long as Holy Fools (and P-Zombies - this also applies to you) take time - to focus on the Pauline epistles - in their spare time.

Excuse me for a minute, while I address the P-Zombies:

Imagine a conference of leading theologians and scholars, from the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant traditions. And some theologian gave a talk, that we should just focus on the Pauline epistles. What do you think the reaction of the other theologians would be?

Imagine the same theologian gave a talk at a universalist conference and said we should just focus on the Pauline epistles. Would the audience reaction be any different, then that of the first conference?

But truthfully, people get on a soap box here sometimes.

You to convince folks to just focus on the Pauline Epistles.
Someone else that the Seventh Day Adventist’s position on alcohol, is the only correct one. And that folks partaking in moderation, will get addicted. And that God is really non-violent.
Someone else that Christ (i.e. as traditional Christianity understood him) is a myth and all we need to to listen to some Yale professors experiments, on social psychology and fear
Someone else is a “self-proclaimed” prophet and all other Christian interpretations (and religions), are work of demons.
Etc.

Wouldn’t it be interesting to get the first 4 mentioned into a room and have them talk among themselves, on the most important element of Christianity

But those on soap operas tend to plug up their ears and ignore evidence to the contrary .

Hum. I wonder what those 4, in the hypothetical conference, would be saying to each other?

Hey Robin… would you happened to be associated with The Way International or some ultra-dispensationalists group who think that they know it all and are sent to straighten all us poor lost sheep? I seem to be picking up some really narrow thinking on your part.

You know what? I got curious. And I thought I would see what the Protestant gotquestions.org/ site had to say, on the Pauline Epistles. They are staffed by Protestant theological volunteers. Here’s a Q and A at What are the Pauline Epistles?. I found this part of their answer interesting:

And if you are curious about the Way International mentioned previously, read the Got Questions answer at What is The Way International?. I’ll just quote this part from their answer:

Oh boy! Am I usually that ornery with people?
If I am, go ahead and tell me out front. I’ll change my ways by the grace of God.

No way Paidion, I was only pulling your leg.

But I think that robin has his tie on too tight… He needs to lighten up a little and enjoy the life that Father has blessed him with.

“Also-ran” authors of the New Testament? My mind boggles.

Universalism is all over the New Testament. It would be a rare page of the New Testament that did not teach universalism. Even if the only scripture we had was (for example) the Gospel according to St. John, we could still be 100% assured of the truth of universalism.

I do think the recorded words of our Lord, as in the Gospels, have some bearing on this and other subjects. (That is known as an 'undertatement") Paul did not invent Christianity. And he may have been wrong about some things, or at minimum, mis-interpreted on some things.

It is true that well-meaning folk, excited by this or other doctrinal issues, will try to find support - often really stretching the idea of interpretation - in the O.T. Some Trinitarians do this, as do some UR people, looking for hints to bolster their belief. But still, the O.T. is valuable for reproof, for edification, for illustrating truths of the Christian life, etc.

I do agree that, as someone said, the best introduction to the O.T. is the book of Romans!

No, I don’t think limiting ourselves to Paul - great Rabbi though he was - is sufficient for us to have the ‘full counsel of God’.

“Wake up” quotha!

DaveB said:

Very possible

Probably fruitless to comment, but you are a defiant one. Rudeness appears to be your specialty. Your arrogance and inflammatory remarks create a self made barrier that immediately turns your audience off to what you have to say. I know I have ignored 99% of your posts due your defiant nature. You can put me in ignore, no need to respond to this.

Here’s the problems I have with Robin’s claims:

If Paul’s letters are the most important gospel elements, then why didn’t Paul himself state that somewhere? (and if he did, can you show me where?).
How come none of the church fathers (including those advocating universalism), emphasize the Pauline Epistles over everything else?
Can you show me one major Chruch body, contemporary theologian or universalist site - that advocates this?
Rather then just saying it is, has Robin attempted to build a solid case, by theological or philosophical reasoning? At least, I can respect the poster on alcohol and God and violence. At least, he did provide references and authorities, to back his claim.
What is the basis for Robin’s claim? God told him? The Koran and Book of Mormon, is based upon the same claim. Has Robin laid out any credible credentials, to substantiate his claim? I can respect someone who knows Koine Greek, theology and philosophy (i.e. Paidion), is affiliated with a solid, historical tradition (i.e. Geoffrey), or has a substantial basis of knowledge (i.e. Jason). At least, they try to build solid cases and use sound reasoning.

So tell me, Robin. Why should anyone here, buy into your claim?

From sunilbali.com/:

I’m a dispensationalist free gracer. I love reading Paul.

2¢

I’m a non-dispensationalist, historic pre-millenialist enabling gracer. I also love reading Paul.
But most of all, my desire is to read in the memoirs of Christ what the Son of God had to say, and make it my aim to do (by the enabling grace of God) what He told his disciples to do in Matt 5, 6, and 7 as well as elsewhere.