According to the leading Jesuit, the Devil in only a symbol

  • Thread starter Thread starter steph03
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And if one reads the articles carefully, the Jesuit is not saying this. The context is wrong.
 
Did they quote him correctly?
The told us that the pope didn’t beleive there is a devil. Some time later videos with the pope talking about the existence of devil was uoloaded on youtube.
I don’t trust journalists anymore
 
jesusmademe said:
Did they quote him correctly?
Click to expand...
No they didn’t imho. He only said that as far as we are concerned the devil exists only in evil deeds and is not personified. Which is not necessarily heretic. A good Christian does not know the devil personally, only recognizes him in bad deeds done by himself.
Considering the ammount of …fantasy… built these days around the chied of demons, now no longer evil but some cool guy, or a nasty cop, I think I get why Fr. Sossa wanted to de-personalize the devil, mind us.
The devil is being a cool person in our daily culture. Time to ditch him and count him by his parts.
I am for once with the Jesuits on this.
 
According to another Jesuit, Pope Francis, the Devil is real, as is Hell.
 
One of the lies the devil wants us to believe is that he is not real!
 
Mary888 said:
He only said that as far as we are concerned the devil exists only in evil deeds and is not personified. Which is not necessarily heretic.
Click to expand...
Why is that not heresy?
Saying that Lucifer ain’t real sounds like heresy.
 
“exists as the personification of evil in different structures, but not in persons, because is not a person, is a way of acting evil. He is not a person like a human person. It is a way of evil to be present in human life,”
Click to expand...
This sounds like an explanation of the time that Jesus said to Peter, “get behind me Satan”. Peter wasn’t possessed, but the Gospel author used this somewhat peculiar phrasing anyway.
 
Last edited:
The biggest achievement of our enemy is that he convinced most people (and even the leading Jesuit) he doesn’t exist.
 
Please note this was apparently misinterpreted. His spokesperson later said: “to say the devil symbolises evil is not to deny the existence of the devil.”
 
Could sonething have been lost in the translation/interpretation of what he said?

Cuz this sounds like the stuff man-made churches are built on.
 
When he convinces people of this it is a danger. This is because people are unable to attribute evil to the devil, and so it is easy to despair and lose faith in God due to bad things happening, because there is nobody to attribute them to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top