Logical Question on "Steadfast" - Where Luther's Gospel Is Rarely Heard

But Frosty Bivens says UOJ is the Chief Article.
The Book of Concord must be wrong.

1. 

   Stephen Kramer
   February 21st, 2014 at 02:27 | #1

   Reply | Quote

   Sven,

   I’ve been following this discussion with interest, but I’m not sure of something. You are quite offended that someone says you are teaching justification without faith. But I thought that was the whole point of Universal Objective Justification–that it is a universal gift of God and pronouncement of forgiveness on everyone. As Prof. Bivens (WELS) says in his essay: “If justification is universal, it must also be objective; sinners have been forgiven whether they believe it or not.” (www.wlsessays.net/files/BivensMessage.rtf‎)
   
   Whether they believe it or not. That means… even if they don’t believe it, right? Even if they don’t have faith?
   
   
   I don’t see how what you are saying you don’t say is compatible with what Prof. Bivens does say. I’m actually WELS and I know you’re not, but I don’t think that your confession here would be acceptable in the WELS. As Prof. Bivens writes: “justification is universal; sinners have been forgiven whether they believe it or not.”
   
   
   What am I missing? Also, I think you may have been too harsh on Mr. Meyers. Taking his words and actions in the kindest possible way, if he comes from a WELS background he may be expecting that your confession of the doctrine is compatible with the WELS confession of the doctrine (that justification is universal and sinners are forgiven even if they don’t believe it), since the doctrines share the same name and WELS/ELS and LCMS folks all seem to be in agreement on it in this discussion.
   
   
   I stand ready to be corrected if I’ve missed something! I was surprised by the harshness of your words, but it is quite possible that I am missing something and it’s all reasonable.

***