Often we have to deal with associations with
certain words - plus the way someone has chosen to translate a term. Context determines meaning. "Drawn butter" could mean an artistic rendering of a stick of butter, or the butter used on lobster. Someone could be told, after a long portrait session, "You look drawn." That has a double meaning, the source of humor from the time of Genesis.
Some older
terms are simply no longer used, so they have little value. I have never heard
a person say "proffer," so judging that word by context is impossible. The English translation of Knapp uses proffer.
"Offer" can be associated with making a
decision for Christ. I look at the wording employed to see what they do with their terms. J. P. Meyer obviously uses decision language with UOJ.
In legal terms, an insurance company makes
an offer and the client makes a decision. It is easy to fall into that kind of
thinking. God has done His part - what will you do? Arminians (Decision Theology) do this with everything, including their proof that fossils support Creation. "Now that you know the truth about dinosaurs, it is time to make a decision for Christ. Bow your head and pray the sinners' prayer.") The dinosaur conversion does not take the Gospel into account because the Arminians rely on human reason. For them, the Creation is just as efficacious as the Gospel itself.
The marketing and entertainment approach of Church Growth/Emergent comes from the use of human reason, as gurus Olson, Huebner, and Kelm admit.
Sound Lutherans knew that teaching the Means of
Grace will preclude those errors, but all of Lutherdom is shallow on the Means of
Grace, from ELCA on down. Protestantism is almost completely silent on the efficacy of the Word, which is foundational in the Bible and in Luther.
The Catholics use Means of Grace
to designate a limited and partial grace, since Purgatory awaits the faithful. O
joy.
UOJ uses Means of Grace to say that these instruments (Word and Sacrament) describe us as already forgiven, born forgiven. However, right now they are
allergic to admitting what their gurus have taught - that the entire world is born forgiven. Robert Preus quoted Eduard Preuss on that topic, with gushing approval. J. P. Meyer said the same thing in his Ministers of Christ.
General Justification, Objective Justification, and Universal Justification are all expressions of a universal absolution of sin. Each term represents a pronouncement of forgiveness, since the Biblical term "justification" means something different from "atonement" or "expiation" or "redemption."
Try to explain that to the illiterate! General Justification has been dropped because its origin is German and really means "each and every one" in German. OJ and UOJ are better for communicating the false dogma.
OJ and UOJ are missing as terms and also as concepts in the Bible and Book of Concord. They are missing as terms and also as concepts in the post-Concord era, except Samuel Huber introduced the concept, which P. Leyser and Wittenberg repudiated.
The first written evidence--so far--of OJ comes from the Halle theology textbook published by George Christian Knapp. Knapp was lecturing in that regard for many years in German, then published his textbook, translated by Calvinist superstar Woods before the Saxons landed in New Orleans.
The Saxons stuck with German and did not become familiar with English for some time. They would have had copies of Knapp because of Stephan's training at Halle, their Pietism, and the eminence of Knapp as the last of the old-time Pietists.
Rationalism took over Halle in one generation, and rationalism took over Europe. From that point, in the 1800s, modern theologians of the era saw grace as God's universal forgiveness. Some, like Tholuck, called themselves Universalists. Others were close to that position.
The effect of rationalism and furtive Universalism was a constant reminder in modern theology that "one must not make forgiveness or salvation contingent upon faith." That was their definition of God's grace, which makes sense once the Means of Grace are set aside.
UOJ Enthusiasts do not realize that their cheerleading about forgiveness without the Means of Grace is a remnant of 19th century rationalistic Pietism.
