Hell : an analysis of some major twentieth century attempts to defend the doctrine of hell
This thesis examines some major attempts made during the twentieth century to defend the doctrine of hell in the light of charges made against it. It aims to provide a survey of major statements of the doctrine, evaluate the coherence of the various arguments involved, and then determine what is the most adequate and coherent defence of the doctrine. The second and third chapters provide a backdrop to the rest of the thesis, detailing the traditional model of hell as presented in the works of St. Augustine and Jonathan Edwards, and then examining the modern reaction against hell as eternal retributive punishment. Chapter four addresses the question of whether Karl Barth was a universalist, and concludes that because he cannot logically avoid the charge of universalism, his theology is not able to provide an adequate defence of the doctrine of hell. The Roman Catholic theologians Hans KĂŒng, Karl Rahner, and Hans Urs von Balthasar are examined in the fifth chapter. They provide a wealth of information on topics dealing with hell, and although hopeful that there will be a universal outcome in the eschaton, they defend the possibility of hell. The sixth chapter looks at the impact and influence of C.S.Lewis'
Gray, Tony J.
Hell ; Christianity ; History of doctrines
Hell : an analysis of some major twentieth century attempts to defend the doctrine of hell. This thesis examines some major attempts made during the twentieth century to defend the doctrine of hell in the light of charges made against it. It aims to provide a survey of major statements of the doctrine, evaluate the coherence of the various arguments involved, and then determine what is the most adequate and coherent defence of the doctrine. The second and third chapters provide a backdrop to the rest of the thesis, detailing the traditional model of hell as presented in the works of St. Augustine and Jonathan Edwards, and then examining the modern reaction against hell as eternal retributive punishment. Chapter four addresses the question of whether Karl Barth was a universalist, and concludes that because he cannot logically avoid the charge of universalism, his theology is not able to provide an adequate defence of the doctrine of hell. The Roman Catholic theologians Hans KĂŒng, Karl Rahner, and Hans Urs von Balthasar are examined in the fifth chapter. They provide a wealth of information on topics dealing with hell, and although hopeful that there will be a universal outcome in the eschaton, they defend the possibility of hell. The sixth chapter looks at the impact and influence of C.S.Lewis'
hell analysis major attempt defend doctrine hell examines major attempt_make defend doctrine hell light charge make aim_provide survey major statement doctrine evaluate coherence various argument involve determine adequate coherent defence doctrine second_third provide backdrop rest detail traditional_model hell present_work augustine edwards examine modern reaction hell eternal retributive punishment address_question whether karl_barth universalist conclude logically avoid charge universalism theology able_provide adequate defence doctrine hell roman_catholic theologian hans karl_rahner hans examine fifth chapter provide wealth information topic deal hell although universal outcome defend possibility hell sixth look_impact influence