bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Knapp's Portrait Contributed by...Someone":
They finally have the Nate Bourman paper up at the WELS essay site--the one on the origin of the terms SJ and OJ.
I just perused the Bourman paper on the history of the term OJ and SJ, and did a search on the name Knapp. Nothing. Another thing that's missing is the entire p. 6 (lines 91-122)! I doubt the missing page mentioned Knapp.
Here's a statement: "They may even argue that the forgiveness of sins is not the same as justification." I've never heard anyone make that claim. The BoC says that the forgiveness of sins is the same as justification, according to my recollection. However, this statement comes out of the confusion caused by UOJ since the UOJers say someone is justified and forgiven but doesn't benefit thereby.
The whole Texas conference on UOJ turned out to be a circling the wagons, and dodging issues. Bourman asks us to believe that UOJ came fully formed out of Walther's head in 1872, and didn't come from Knapp and the many Halle U graduates and Knapp readers in the Synodical Conference.
Another example is when Ichabod says that UOJ is 99% on the way to universalism, Schleicher writes a paper on the differences, but neglects to admit there isn't a whole lot of difference. Also, he writes about universalist churches with their strange doctrines, but this is all irrelevant.
Once again Mequon graduates show their dependence on their indoctrination. On the universalism paper, Schleicher listed in the bibliography: "Seminary Dogmatics Notes, cf. the Seminary mimeo company."
http://scdwels.wordpress.com/essays-papers-presentations/
Justification by faith alone since the Reformation: the use and emergence of “objective” and “subjective” in relation to justification.
---
Words for Today
When I find a fellow who clearly hasn't learned anything new since leaving school, I'm reminded of the old saying, "Even the best soil becomes exhausted by constant tillage!"
(I.R. Penworthy)
