God Can Deliver the Damned From Hell?
#1
Just perusing through the Catholic encyclopedia and came upon this. I'm floored...

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

Quote:In itself, it is
[-]
  •
Reply
#2
A following sentence:

Quote:But now theologians are unanimous in teaching that such exceptions never take place and never have taken place, a teaching which should be accepted.

You should not take statements out of context.

Reply
#3
Sounds pretty heretical to me.
Reply
#4
Wow.

A few sentences later they seem to clarify themselves...but taken at face value that is definitely false.
Reply
#5
Bonifacio Wrote:Sounds pretty heretical to me.

Yes, but it immediately shows that view to be false.

It says that because it is discussing the topic logically, and comes to that issue of the eternity of hell and shows it is eternal, but says "In itself..." it does not limit God from liberating souls, then it shows that to not be the case.

The article outlines the concept of hell quite well.
Reply
#6
LaRoza Wrote:A following sentence:

Quote:But now theologians are unanimous in teaching that such exceptions never take place and never have taken place, a teaching which should be accepted.

You should not take statements out of context.

But the error seems to be "self-contained" within the sentence because it starts with the words "In itself,...". I don't think Stevus erred in this regard, based on how the sentence is constructed.
Reply
#7
LaRoza Wrote:
Bonifacio Wrote:Sounds pretty heretical to me.

Yes, but it immediately shows that view to be false.

It says that because it is discussing the topic logically, and comes to that issue of the eternity of hell and shows it is eternal, but says "In itself..." it does not limit God from liberating souls, then it shows that to not be the case.

The article outlines the concept of hell quite well.

But then it seems to suggest that God can liberate souls from Hell --- isn't that a contradiction --- it's as if God is arbitrarily allowed to change Himself.

Not that Hell = God, but .... you get my drift.
Reply
#8
Stephanos Wrote:
LaRoza Wrote:A following sentence:

Quote:But now theologians are unanimous in teaching that such exceptions never take place and never have taken place, a teaching which should be accepted.

You should not take statements out of context.

But the error seems to be "self-contained" within the sentence because it starts with the words "In itself,...". I don't think Stevus erred in this regard, based on how the sentence is constructed.

I think it is discussing the topic, not given a list of facts.

It is like:

Quote:Christ said that those who are without sin to throw the first stone. In itself, it seems that we are not to reprimand or punish any sinner. But as it is shown, it is the Church's duty to protect the faithful and as a shepard protects the sheep from the wolves, the Church has the duty to remove those who are a grave danger to the faithful.

Reply
#9
Stephanos Wrote:
LaRoza Wrote:
Bonifacio Wrote:Sounds pretty heretical to me.

Yes, but it immediately shows that view to be false.

It says that because it is discussing the topic logically, and comes to that issue of the eternity of hell and shows it is eternal, but says "In itself..." it does not limit God from liberating souls, then it shows that to not be the case.

The article outlines the concept of hell quite well.

But then it seems to suggest that God can liberate souls from Hell --- isn't that a contradiction --- it's as if God is arbitrarily allowed to change Himself.

Not that Hell = God, but .... you get my drift.

It is saying that on the basis of what was written before that, not after. And God can do anything, but God is rational and thus can be understood using logic (although it is vastly inferior to revelation).
Reply
#10
Quote:
Christ said that those who are without sin to throw the first stone. In itself, it seems that we are not to reprimand or punish any sinner. But as it is shown, it is the Church's duty to protect the faithful and as a shepard protects the sheep from the wolves, the Church has the duty to remove those who are a grave danger to the faithful.
OK I see what you mean, I think. I'm not fit to argue Theology, by any means.

But is the above quoted from NewAdvent as well? Is that just an argument or sentence construction they use alot?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)