Sir Knight - do you not pray the Apostle’s Creed each Sunday with the rest of your Catholic brothers? I’ll elaborate in a moment.
You can’t use scripture to invalidate scripture. It’s not possible. Where there is apparent contradiction it can only imply a human error in interpretation or misunderstanding by the reader with respect to the intent of the human author. Generally, the problems come in when one forces a “fundamentalist” & “literal” reads of scripture. I suggest that you are making a literal interpretation that is in error.
Ask yourself how can anything exist without the grace of God? Nothing can exist onto itself without God creating it & permitting it to continue to exist. We may just have a semantic impasse here as to what is meant my the term grace. There are some existing Catholic controversies in this area (Controversies on Grace). But rather than getting all wrapped around the axle on complex interpretations of the semantics of grace I suggest that if one take a simple “awesome” view of God. From there we all can all admit that whatever “exists” or will exist is subordinate to God’s will and His permission. That puts all but atheists on a common theological ground and on “the same side”. That should take ego out of it too - as well as hidden agendas that often lurk in these forums. So from here we have a mutually “friendly” basis to expand on. The assumption is we all seek the same good end objective and trust in God. But God help the person willfully seeking to trip others through insincere motives.
From this assumed perspective of common faith in God it should be intuitively obvious that God never does anything that operates to diminish Himself nor invalidates a universal truth. We can safely assume that whatever appears inconsistent with His Truth & His Nature implies an absence of full knowledge or a mystery yet to be resolved or revealed. One might also ask how important such a small thing really is though to one’s own faith?
I don’t personally have the time to go scan the full scriptural repository to exhaustively prove to you how it is not a contradiction that a person in hell may “appear” to have an impossible “compassion” for the living. All I need say is that God has complete control and dominion over all creatures above and below (heaven, earth and hell). He can order a soul to state any truth he wants to reveal no matter where it is disposed without contradicting Himself. So I only need point to another scripture that makes a similar contradiction to your position to make the case that you are the one in error. Recall from your Apostles Creed (we Catholics should be saying every Sunday) and from scripture that Jesus descended to Hell after His death. He did this to claim His absolute lordship and authority over every matter in heaven, earth and the underworld.
[quote=From the Vatican]…
Christ went down into the depths of death so that "the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live."484 Jesus, “the Author of life”, by dying destroyed "him who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and [delivered] all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong bondage."485 Henceforth the risen Christ holds “the keys of Death and Hades”, so that "at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth."486
Do you imagine that God through Jesus can not enter into the Hell he created and remain completely unscratched, holy and undefiled and full of all grace? So do you still deny that it is not easily within God’s power to command a corrupt soul to speak in the semantics of human relationships and remain truthful even in Hell; and to recollect a familial relationship (that was probably selfish in life)?
Do you deny that God has dominion over Hell & has the power to freely enter into it unscathed and fully Holy and can order vile and corrupt souls to speak truthfully? I didn’t think so.
Do you really want to deny that Jesus descended to Hell as fully Holy as if its a contradiction to scripture? Hell is not mightier than God.
So how do you not find it within God’s ability to command a fallen soul to speak in the manner he did if it brings glory to God & manifests scripture? Also consider, outside a fundamentalist perspective the scripture writer may have been speaking through literary imagery as well.
Personally I don’t worry too much about these smaller details of scripture. But the bigger issue that alarms me here is that you seem to be actively fixated in holding a fundamental view as if to find evidence that either serves to diminish God or makes a case that He lied. It’s very dangerous to play the devil’s advocate here.