Iluvatar made Melkor evil?

[Artanis]

markedel, do you mean the foreword written by Christopher Tolkien? My Sil edition is 1998 HarperCollins, and I can't find it either.

[Rían]

from JRRT:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet some things there are that they [the Ainur] cannot see, neither alone nor taking counsel together; for to none but himself has Ilúvatar revealed all that he has in store, and in every age there come forth things that are new and have no foretelling, for they do not proceed from the past.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Tar-Palantir
Perhaps the Ainur didn't know, but Ilúvatar did didn't he? And if they have no foretelling, it is because Ilúvatar didn't tell.

What do you think?

Oh, definitely - that was the point of the quote, I thought - the Ainur didn't know all, because they only heard the music, but there was more than the music that Ilúvatar "has in store", and of course, Ilúvatar knew it all.

BTW, does your keyboard work with those special characters?

[Rían]

from the Westminster Confession of Faith (as quoted by Tar-Palantir:
I. God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.

Wow, I really like that, and for TWO reasons - one is that I happen to agree with it , but also - it is written in such a beautiful style! That reminds me of some things in Tolkien's letters, where he talks about the beauty of language:

from letter #163:"It has always been with me: the sensibility to linguistic pattern which affects me emotionally like colour or music;"

.
And then a rather humorous part, where he is discussing some people that criticized the parts where he wrote more formally (he obviously disagreed and thought the differing language styles were an important part of the storytelling):

But take an example from the chapter that you specially singled out (and called terrible): Book iii, 'The King of the Golden Hall'. 'Nay, Gandalf!' said the King. 'You do not know your own skill in healing. It shall not be so. I myself will go to war, to fall in the front of the battle, if it must be. Thus shall I sleep better.' ..... I know well enough what a modern would say. 'Not at all my dear G. You don't know your own skill as a doctor. Things aren't going to be like that. I shall go to the war in person, even if I have to be one of the first casualties'.

What a difference in tone, don't you think?

[Rían]

Artanis, I'm glad you can't find it in your edition either, I was thinking maybe I was just totally brainless and couldn't see it.

Oh, BTW - funny timing - on the way home from school today, my 6 year old asked, out of the blue, if I thought that the devil made Joseph's brothers do the mean things to him that they did (the story in Genesis, where they sell him as a slave, etc). So I answered that I thought that the devil didn't MAKE them do it, but perhaps he put the thought into their heads, but they could have decided that that was a bad choice and chosen not to do it, but because they had already been thinking angry thoughts about Joseph and not trying to fix those angry thoughts, that it made it much easier for them to make that bad choice.

Interesting - is he on Entmoot reading this thread while I'm asleep?

[MasterMothra]

hmmm. interesting.
lets say, for arguments sake, that i was clairvoyant and i knew that a catastrophic event was about to transpire( mass murder or such). i had the power to stop it before it happened, but instead chose to let the chips fall as they may. would i be just as much to blame for my decision not to intervene, or would i be justified in my actions under the "free will" assumption?

[Rían]

MM, I think that perhaps you have just read the last couple of posts. If you read thru all the posts on this thread (quite a few, I know, but it's a pretty complex topic), you'll get a pretty clear idea of what many of us would answer. I feel that I have already answered that one, at least - would you like to take a scan thru my posts (if you haven't already) and get back to me?

[MasterMothra]

my post was just a general response, rian. it wasnt directed to anyone in particular. i found your posts interesting. this thread has taken a turn toward religeon. my post was to simplify the whole discussion. replace myself with eru and comment truthfully. i think that christians wont want to do this because instead of inserting eru, they will insert god. and they dont want to say that god is responsible in any way because it goes against what they believe. i have no such problem because god is not an issue in my life.

very interesting topic though, nice to read.

[Rían]

Originally posted by MasterMothra
my post was just a general response, rian. it wasnt directed to anyone in particular. i found your posts interesting. this thread has taken a turn toward religeon. my post was to simplify the whole discussion. replace myself with eru and comment truthfully. i think that christians wont want to do this because instead of inserting eru, they will insert god. and they dont want to say that god is responsible in any way because it goes against what they believe. i have no such problem because god is not an issue in my life.

very interesting topic though, nice to read.

Wait, please - I really meant that I think our previous posts addressed your issue. Did you get a chance to read thru them, and if so, do you agree?

Now I would say that it hasn't taken a turn towards "religion" - the thread was originally about a religious issue, although concerning the "religion" of Middle Earth (ie, where there is a Being, Eru, that is a supreme, uncreated being, He created angels, and etc.) In discussing this issue, we have used examples of the Christian religion, and in these examples, I believe that a valid response may be found for the question posed in your initial post.

I'm sorry if you misunderstood me - it's so easy to do on Internet discussion boards, where you can't see my expression or hear the inflection of my voice. I didn't mean to be mean, I really thought there was a valid answer to your question in previous posts. Does that make sense? I would like it very much if you would check the posts and respond. Thanks

[Rían]

ps - and I did say that the God of the Christian faith "took responsibility" for creating free will, which allows for the possibility of evil. See if you can find the post I have to run off to soccer games now, I'll check back later and look forward to your post.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by MasterMothra
my post was just a general response, rian. it wasnt directed to anyone in particular. i found your posts interesting. this thread has taken a turn toward religeon. my post was to simplify the whole discussion. replace myself with eru and comment truthfully. i think that christians wont want to do this because instead of inserting eru, they will insert god. and they dont want to say that god is responsible in any way because it goes against what they believe. i have no such problem because god is not an issue in my life.

very interesting topic though, nice to read.

Well, this thread is not suppose to be nor will it turn into a topic about religion cause then it will be closed. I don't mind allowing a little leverage for off topic discussion as long as it stays within the perimeters of the thread topic which this has done so far.

[Lief Erikson]

Well then, you'd better close it.

The whole issue in the beginning was predestination. It was labeled as a Silmarillion discussion because it was about Eru and the Silmarillion in the start. The question was about Middle Earth predestination, and since predestination in Middle Earth can so easily be substituted with predestination in real life, it became a hot topic, discussing both Christianity's predestination and Tolkien's, which are both so similar to each other that they are nearly inseparable.

I personally would prefer it greatly if you didn't close it. If you want to move it to General Messages, you can. Your the moderator, so use your best judgement as to which place this topic should be in.

MasterMothra, I think you're making a few mistakes about the Christian religion. Humanity fell at the garden of Eden. Because of free will, he let it fall. He won't make all of our choices for us, and make them right, and neither will he simply make us do the big choices right. He won't force us into anything, but will let us decide for ourselves. Because humanity fell, sin entered into human nature. Therefore, it isn't our nature to do right all the time, as God originally planned it would be.

However, he isn't going to simply let his creation remain in this awful state to which, through its own folly, it has descended to. He let it fall because of free will, but instantly he began planning how to bring it back to him, if he hadn't made the plan already. He sent his son to die on the cross, that we might come to him and have sin removed from our nature, just as it was before. Therefore, although he allows us to commit evil because it would destroy the "us" of us to prevent this evil, he makes provision for us.

The sin that exists is our fault, but God leaves the door open for sin in each person to be wiped away. He is working for a better thing than we have chosen for ourselves.


Well, this is the Christian theology, and I think that it is that that you were addressing. As far as Eru is concerned, predestination to me is pretty much the same: nonexistant. However, one difference between Tolkien and the Bible which someone pointed out earlier on in this thread is this: In Tolkien's world, humanity and the elves never had one enormous fall. We don't see Sam, Frodo, Aragorn, Gimli, or any of the good characters sinning. Therefore in Tolkien's world there was no need for Eru to send his son to die on the cross, everyone was good anyway. Humanity was corruptable, just like it is in the Bible, but it doesn't start out corrupted. Isildur wasn't guilty until he chose to take the Ring for himself, and so on. In Tolkien's world, some people and elves sin and fall from goodness, but they don't start out damned unless they turn to goodness.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Well then, you'd better close it.

The whole issue in the beginning was predestination. It was labeled as a Silmarillion discussion because it was about Eru and the Silmarillion in the start. The question was about Middle Earth predestination, and since predestination in Middle Earth can so easily be substituted with predestination in real life, it became a hot topic, discussing both Christianity's predestination and Tolkien's, which are both so similar to each other that they are nearly inseparable.

I personally would prefer it greatly if you didn't close it. If you want to move it to General Messages, you can. Your the moderator, so use your best judgement as to which place this topic should be in.

Lief, I would prefer not to close it or move it. As long as the discussion stays on a track toward Tolkien and the Silmarillion pertaining to Iluvatar and Morgoth, I see no problem. We can compare these things I think to Christian theology without it being a heated debate. I think we can make comparisons and discuss these comparisons. I don't think anyone in this thread is trying to turn it into a religious debate as much as we are trying to get inside Tolkien's head and see where he was coming from with this. we have talked about how he disliked allegory, but we also know that he was a very religious man and I think his feelings on that subject influenced his writing.

We can keep the debate comparatively. As long as that is done, it belongs in this forum. If the debate becomes a religious war lacking any reference to Tolkien, then the thread will be closed, but I see no need for it to go in that direction.

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Lief Erikson
However, one difference between Tolkien and the Bible which someone pointed out earlier on in this thread is this: In Tolkien's world, humanity and the elves never had one enormous fall.

But I believe they did have a fall. Tolkien actually mentions the fall of Men in his letters. According to the Athrabeth in Morgoth's Ring, Men fell in the Elder days long before the Edain came to Beleriand. Their 'sin' was to turn away from Eru and to start worshipping Morgoth. There was also a second fall, when the Numenoreans began their rebellion against the Valar, aided and encouraged by Sauron. In both occasions Eru took direct action into the world.

The Elves also had a fall, though perhaps on a smaller scale: The rebellion of the Noldor against the Valar while leaving The Undying Lands.

Therefore in Tolkien's world there was no need for Eru to send his son to die on the cross, everyone was good anyway. Humanity was corruptable, just like it is in the Bible, but it doesn't start out corrupted.

The whole of Arda was corrupted by Morgoth, resulting in Arda marred. In the Athrabeth it is said that Eru will eventually heal the marring by descending into the world, but still remain outside. Some of the Elves believed Men and Elves would live together in Arda remade, after the end of the world. A very strong parallell to Christianity here, IMO.

[Lief Erikson]

Well, possibly that is a strong parallel to Christianity. But I don't think that the fall of those men turning to Morgoth or the fall of the Numenoreans were on the scale of man's fall in the Garden of Eden. I said that they were corruptable, didn't I?

When man fell in the Garden of Eden, it infected all of humanity with sin. These individual falls in Middle Earth and Numenor weren't necessarily on the scale of contaminating all of the human race. The guilty were destroyed, while the innocent prevailed, and justice was done.


Sister Golden Hair, that's fine with me if you don't move or close this thread. I personally like it more where it is, anyway.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Lief Erikson
Well, possibly that is a strong parallel to Christianity. But I don't think that the fall of those men turning to Morgoth or the fall of the Numenoreans were on the scale of man's fall in the Garden of Eden. I said that they were corruptable, didn't I?

When man fell in the Garden of Eden, it infected all of humanity with sin. These individual falls in Middle Earth and Numenor weren't necessarily on the scale of contaminating all of the human race. The guilty were destroyed, while the innocent prevailed, and justice was done.

Hi, Lief!
Actually, I agree with Artanis here, that the mysterious fall far back in the past did seem to infect all of humanity - it caused a change in the entire nature of humanity - they actually believed that they were immortal in some distant past, and then were changed as the result of some catastrophic event to be afflicted with death. Kind of like the Tree of Life in Genesis - God prevented Adam and Eve from eating from the Tree of Life after they sinned, so that they would not be immortal in a sinful state (at least that's how I understand it). Instead, He allowed death, and then Christ overcame death, etc. I don't know if that makes sense or not, I'm kinda tired and may not be expressing myself well. But check out the Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth section, in the appendicies, and see if you agree. In fact, Tolkien was starting to get frustrated with it, because he thought it was turning into a "parody" of Christianity.

I totally agree about the fall of the Numenoreans, though - that was a sin local to a people group, and not afflicting the human race as a whole.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally posted by RÃ*an

But check out the Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth section, in the appendicies, and see if you agree. In fact, Tolkien was starting to get frustrated with it, because he thought it was turning into a "parody" of Christianity.

Alas, I don't know quite where to find it. I've looked in my Silmarillion appendices, but it isn't there. In which appendices is it?

[Artanis]

It's in Morgoth's Ring, HoME vol 10.

[Lief Erikson]

I don't understand your abreviation. What is HoME?

[Lefty Scaevola]

History of Middle Earth, the 12 volune set of JRRT's note and drafts edited and annotated by Christopher T to show the development of the The middle earth stories over a period of around 60 years.

[Rían]

If you go to a bookstore, look for "Morgoth's Ring" on the binding - that's what will catch your eye - I didn't even realize at first that it was part of the HoME series. There are quite a few notes, etc. after the Athrabeth proper, and several on the "fall" alone, so be sure to keep looking until you find them all. Good luck!