Quote:
Originally Posted by pelagius
Chino, I am going to have to part ways a little bit. Indy may be right, but its not obvious that he is right. It depends what Alma means by the phrase "Knoweth All Things." Make a case from Alma that he didn't include experiential knowledge in "knoweth all things." If you can show that from Alma, then Indy is right. It matters not what Bloomberg says (unless, of course, Bloomberg was doing exegesis on Alma 7 and finds evidence that Alma doesn't include experiential knowledge in the phrase "Knoweth All Things" -- Remember, SIEQ's original post is about Alma's theology or what we can figure out about Alma's theology not necessarily what is the correct or true theological position), it matters what Alma meant (which may or may not be recoverable).
|
Canonical criticism is a legitimate form of exegesis. It's not inappropriate to interpret this in light of other passages like Heb 2:17-18. I get what you're saying though.