Would he really apply the limited discourse argument to John 6??
This is Jimmy Akin attempting to explain the Universe of Discourse in defense of Roman Catholicism's "understanding" of the Scriptures.
When someone is speaking or writing, he has in mind a set of things (a universe) about which he is talking (discoursing). Anything that is part of that set is in his universe of discourse. Anything that is not part of that set is not.
For example, when many modern readers approach Romans 3:23, where Paul says "all have sinned," they assume he is referring to every member of the family of Adam. This is reinforced when they turn to Romans 3:10-"None is righteous, no not one." They wonder how Mary can fail to be a sinner.
The problem here is that the universe of discourse has been misidentified. It can't be the entire family of Adam. If it were, Jesus would be included, for we have quite a clear statement in Luke 3:23-38 that Jesus is a son of Adam, yet he was sinless (Heb.4:15).
Further, Paul is clear that there is a time in each person's life when he has not yet done any wrong. Paul comments on how Jacob and Esau, when they were yet unborn, "had done nothing either good or bad" (Rom. 9:11).
Thus Paul's universe of discourse is not the whole human race but a subset of it that includes exceptions for at least some individuals-such as those too young to commit personal sin and those who play a unique role in the history of salvation. Because of the passage's restricted universe of discourse, one cannot say that the text requires Mary to be included in the class Paul is talking about. If there is an exception for Jesus, the Second Adam, there can be an exception for Mary, the Second Eve.
===================================================
This is the type of torture the Roman Catholic has to apply to the Scriptures to justify their dogmas.
If Jimmy understood the simple matter of context then he wouldn't have to torture the Scriptures in such an abusive manner.
If Jimmy also