If you believe that Becker's exegesis of this text is correct, then you must now cease from denying that you believe in "universal salvation", for the author clearly states that his view is against those who oppose "universal justification"; i.e., he embraces universal justification. Unless you are going to insist that "universal" doesn't mean "all-encompassing" (every man, woman and child that has existed, does currently exist and will exist", and that "justification" doesn't mean "declared righteous" as did Luther, Chemnitz, Calvin, Knox, Edwards, Owen, et AL, then the conclusion that you embrace "universal salvation" is inescapable and incontrovertible.
You are quite right that the early Reformers (Lutheran anyway), while affirming Universal Atonement, spoke only of justication by faith alone not Universal Justification. Those in LCMS who uphold the Brief Statement say Luther, Chemnitz, Speratus, etc. taught the concept of Universal Justification (I will spare you from their numerous citations). They say there was no need of a Universal Justification formulation until Arminians began teaching that men are justified in view of foreseen faith.
On this point, I disagree with them because the Book of Concord clearly teaches against "foreseen faith." I don't see any new heresy that would require a new formulation. With respect to their thesis of two justifications: Objective (Universal)/Subjective (Justification by Faith Alone), I have requested more scriptural support from them. In any event, it will remain a thesis until it receives unanimous approval by the Lutheran Church.
Scripture teaches Christ has atoned for the sins of all men. On the basis of that atonement, can we say that God has objectively declared all men righteous apart from faith? Or, would that go beyond scripture?
To frame the question in a form that the Reform can relate to, are the elect declared righteous before Regeneration? What say you?
