Were the Valar “demoted” at the end of the Second Age?

[Landroval]

Oh, really?

It would have been much kinder on your part to just give or link to the specific definition of evil instead of expecting me to chase or guess what you had in mind.
1. Morally bad or wrong; wicked: an evil tyrant.
2. Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful: the evil effects of a poor diet.
3. Characterized by or indicating future misfortune; ominous: evil omens.
4. Bad or blameworthy by report; infamous: an evil reputation.
5. Characterized by anger or spite; malicious: an evil temper.
1 is a circular definition, it doesnt leave us none the wiser; 2 and 5 are unacceptable since 2 doesnt apply in all cases since something harmful can be good and something pleasant (or constructive) can be bad and 5 can be applied to both good and evil persons (but in itself doesn't define them).

I see. Well it doesn’t get much easier than that.

You can’t start with a hypothesis that is not true and then draw any supportable conclusions from it, relevant to our discussion.

Aren’t we talking about what happened after the Music? Wasn’t Melkor a Vala? Aren’t the Maiar simply lesser Valar? Were they incapable of making mistakes also? What about Melian’s descendants? They had angelic heritage. Could they make mistakes? Where do you draw the line? I draw it immediately under Eru.

This doesn't help at all your previous statement that "If mistakes aren’t part of the theme then no one can make mistakes" - first because Men are not bound by the music and second because new things are continuously introduced by Eru, beyond the initial Themes.

Were there no other options? Shouldn’t they have tried something else?

Again, is it anywhere stated that a better course of action was available? Or that the valar were wrong in dealing this way?

So, according to you, Tolkien went straight from eagle shaped clouds to actual eagles without any explanation.

So, according to you, Manwe puffed up numerous eagle-shaped clouds for the heck of it?

Originally Posted by HoME V, The Fall of Numenor

There follows a 'scenario' in which Sorontur King of Eagles is sent by Manwe, and Sorontur flying against the sun casts a great shadow on the ground. It was then that Elendil spoke the phrase ("Behold, the eagles of the Lord of the West are coming with threat to Numenor ")

On the other hand they must have been awfully big since their wings were “grasping the sky”

Thorondor alone had a wing span of 30 fathoms.

I also wonder why the Valar would hold any cousels if the decision would be made by Eru anyway.

Eru gave his plan in the Ainulindale and the valar carried it out; after they entered Ea, the valar had little if any means of contacting Eru by themselves (save Manwe).

For Manwe was free from evil and could not comprehend it

This part is clearly addressed in Osanwe kenta:
Manwe could not by duress attempt to compel Melkor to reveal his thought and purposes, or (if he used words) to speak the truth. If he spoke and said: this is true, he must be believed until proved false; if he said: this I will do, as you bid, he must be allowed the opportunity to fulfill his promise.
Of the risks of doing otherwise, I reffered to previously.

If releasing Melkor was a good idea, then wasn’t capturing him in the first place a bad idea?

That action was sanctioned by Eru, according to the Silmarillion.

Please don’t put words in my mouth, Landroval.

I am not; you are arguing against yourself when you say we should look at the greater picture since the quote you gave concerning Manwe in Myths Transformed is part of a cohort of other profound changes, concerning which Christopher said:""It seems to me that he was devising – from within it – a fearful weapon against his own creation". Not to mention that in the same text, Manwe is praised as the wisest being.

Wouldn’t it be easier for Men to learn a lesson if they knew what that lesson was?

The lesson was quite easy for most of those who were oppressed by the numenoreans; there is a God .

But why can’t we judge the results of actions that were taken?

And by what standards can we judge them? We don't have their knowledge, nor their wisdom. If you argue that the valar should resort only to actions that have immediate positive results, we will have to agree to disagree. Most, if not all, of us have to take difficult decisions that affect us or the others; those decisions shouldn't be avoided just because their immediate/visible result is not positive; it is the same with the mandate of the valar.

[CAB]

This will be my last post on this thread Landroval (at least for a while). We don’t seem to be getting anywhere. As I said before, I do respect your opinion and defense of Manwe.

However, you seem to think that I am attacking Manwe. This really isn’t true. The main point I have been arguing is that he is capable of making mistakes. Not that he is evil, stupid, an unfit leader, etc. Just capable of making mistakes. Is that really so terrible or unlikely?

Originally Posted by Landroval

It would have been much kinder on your part to just give or link to the specific definition of evil instead of expecting me to chase or guess what you had in mind.

Your right. I thought that you may be interested in that discussion, but I probably should have.

Originally Posted by Landroval

You can’t start with a hypothesis that is not true and then draw any supportable conclusions from it, relevant to our discussion.

But this was in regards to your hypothesis.

Originally Posted by Landroval

This doesn't help at all your previous statement that "If mistakes aren’t part of the theme then no one can make mistakes" - first because Men are not bound by the music and second because new things are continuously introduced by Eru, beyond the initial Themes.

But I believe that mistakes were part of the theme. I think everyone but Eru can make mistakes. Here is a question I would ask. (But I won’t answer you here, if you wish to reply. I think I am going to start a new thread based on this question.) How could beings that were bound by fate live along side those who weren’t? How could this work? To me it doesn’t seem possible.

Originally Posted by Landroval

Again, is it anywhere stated that a better course of action was available? Or that the valar were wrong in dealing this way?

I don’t remember such a statement. But did he have to write such a thing? It seems like simple logic to me. I don’t think we should have to throw common sense out the window just because we are dealing with the Valar.

Originally Posted by Landroval

So, according to you, Manwe puffed up numerous eagle-shaped clouds for the heck of it?

No, it was a warning. A warning that did have some effect. Note those who “fell on their faces” and “would repent for a season”. If you were a Numenorean at this time, wouldn’t you be intimidated by such signs coming from the west? I would. The great number of clouds that came just as the fleet was to set off was a final warning. Final warnings tend to be “louder” than earlier ones. Really Landroval, if those were real eagles, why didn’t they attack? The voyage took almost forty days. Did they just hover overhead the whole time? Did they continue flying east, and so leave the fleet behind? Did they actually attack the Numenoreans without this being mentioned?

Originally Posted by Landroval

Eru gave his plan in the Ainulindale and the valar carried it out; after they entered Ea, the valar had little if any means of contacting Eru by themselves (save Manwe).

I don’t see what difference this makes. The big decisions were made (or decreed) by Manwe. Manwe had access to Eru. If the decision would come from Eru what was the need for debate? How would it matter what conclusion they came to? Were they going to influence Eru? I really doubt it.

Originally Posted by Landroval

This part is clearly addressed in Osanwe kenta:
Manwe could not by duress attempt to compel Melkor to reveal his thought and purposes, or (if he used words) to speak the truth. If he spoke and said: this is true, he must be believed until proved false; if he said: this I will do, as you bid, he must be allowed the opportunity to fulfill his promise.
Of the risks of doing otherwise, I reffered to previously.

If Manwe had to take someone’s word (especially if that someone is as powerful and evil as Melkor) in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence, then it sounds like he had a weakness to me.

Originally Posted by Landroval

That action was sanctioned by Eru, according to the Silmarillion.

Exactly. It was a good idea. The questionable idea was Melkor’s release, which according to the Silmarillion, and the quote you gave earlier, was Manwe’s idea.

Originally Posted by Landroval

I am not

I am afraid you did. You accused me of dismissing a statement just because I didn’t like it, immediately after I said I don’t disregard such statements. If my tone in the following post was umm...a little less cordial than it should have been, then I apologize, but this is the reason why. Anyway, at this point I would like to forget about it. You have a lot to say Landroval and I hope we can continue to debate (on other threads of course ) in a friendly manner.

Originally Posted by Landroval

you are arguing against yourself when you say we should look at the greater picture since the quote you gave concerning Manwe in Myths Transformed is part of a cohort of other profound changes, concerning which Christopher said:""It seems to me that he was devising – from within it – a fearful weapon against his own creation".

Yes, profound changes that were never completed. I have little doubt that, given enough time, Tolkien would have changed the story to the point that it was much closer to your point of view. But he never got there. If we simply accept all his later statements and try to fit them into the Silmarillion we get serious problems. He didn’t get the chance to go back and change all the stories. I don’t want to disregard all the published (completed) work because of ideas he was playing with, ideas that were still changing when he died. We can’t know what his full intent was, we have to use what we’ve got.

Originally Posted by Landroval

And by what standards can we judge them? We don't have their knowledge, nor their wisdom.

At what point does one become above all questioning? If someone down the street from me, who I know is smarter that I am, and who I believe to be a moral person, does something obviously wrong, do I just say “well, who am I to question him”? Of course not. Where do we draw the line? Aragorn, Galadriel, Gandalf, Manwe? This is another line I put just under Eru. I think, for many, this line doesn't exist at all.

Originally Posted by Landroval

If you argue that the valar should resort only to actions that have immediate positive results, we will have to agree to disagree.

No, I absolutely agree that they had the long term in mind.

Originally Posted by Landroval

Most, if not all, of us have to take difficult decisions that affect us or the others; those decisions shouldn't be avoided just because their immediate/visible result is not positive; it is the same with the mandate of the valar.

True. I agree. My problem is that some of the (both immediate and long term) results seem to have been things that the Valar would have absolutely tried to avoid, and probably could have.

Ok, the primary long term goals were achieved. I think we agree there. But there was tremendous bloodshed and suffering along the way. I imagine you have to agree with me there. So, if the Valar acted as they did to get where they did (which was the successful reaching of the long term goal) then didn’t they have to plan for all this suffering and bloodshed to happen? Or maybe the long term goal was reached in a way unforseen (by the Valar, not Eru), which is my opinion. Or did the Valar make decisions based solely on Eru’s will without utilizing any of their own wisdom? I don’t think you have ever given your opinion on this (although it sounds like maybe you are leaning towards the last option).

I personally don’t believe that the Valar would willingly cause great suffering for Eru’s children. What is your opinion? Would they do this to fulfill Eru’s design? It did happen so it must have been part of Eru's plan, right?

[Landroval]

Well, then I guess we will have to leave the fun on this for another time ... To address your last paragraph:

I personally don’t believe that the Valar would willingly cause great suffering for Eru’s children.

Not for the sake of suffering itself, absolutely.

Would they do this to fulfill Eru’s design? It did happen so it must have been part of Eru's plan, right?

Yes, I believe so; reffering to another issue, the mortality of Men, Tolkien stated in draft letter #212:

A divine 'punishment' is also a divine 'gift', if accepted, since its object is ultimate blessing, and the supreme inventiveness of the Creator will make 'punishments' (that is changes of design) produce a good not otherwise to be attained

It's been great debating with you CAB. See you around .

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by CAB

Wow Gordis, that almost sounded like sarcasm. I know you didn’t mean it that way though. (2nd smiley)

No, no sarcasm. Sorry if it sounded that way.

I had a previous (and rather recent) experience with a discussion turning into philosophical/theological dispute. It was on another forum, but the topic was similar: 'were Melkor's actions a part of Eru's design?".
I learned that such debates never lead to an agreement, because there is Tolkien'e early POV, there is rather different later Tolkien's POV, there is Christian POV which some equal with Tolkien's later POV, and the personal POV's of all the people involved. The debate becomes a catastrophe, and leads to hurt feelings of some who really take this to heart.
I simply feel that I:
1. don't care enough to participate and
2. I am out of my depth here.

As simple as that.

For me, this isn’t the real issue though. The problem I have is with giving absolute credence to a few quotes while (apparently) disregarding (or at least undervaluing) all the opposing evidence found in Tolkien’s works. I think we have to use Tolkien quotes + story + logic to come to any real (or if real is impossible, then “reasonable”) answers.

I fully agree. I think that letters can't be accepted as the absolute revelation. They were written to a given person, with their own beliefs, who often knew very little of Tolkien's world. Often the story retold in Letters is simplified, made more acceptable to the person in mind.