Iluvatar made Melkor evil?

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
I think in Tolkien in regards to Morgoth's actions and how much Eru is to blame for that is not so difficult as we make it out to be and even in our own world of belief in this. Eru created the Valar to serve him. He gave them free will, and once free will is in place, I guess predestination would then play a smaller role, because then the choices that are made determine the outcome of events. Eru started out never anticipating evil, the same as our own God with Satan. God created Satan, so is God to blame for that evil? Eru created Morgoth, is Eru to blame for that evil?

Well put SGH. You express yourself better than me. Thank you.

[Lief Erikson]

I agree with you, RÃ*an. God sent his only son onto the cross to bring us back to where we should have remained. Eden went wrong, and evil began. On the cross, Christ opened up the way for evil to end for each one of us, that we need not be slaves to it any longer.

God is the root of all goodness in our lives, and the devil is the root of all the evil. God started all of the blessings humanity is blessed with, like imagination, wit, intelligence, etc. The devil captured us in his grip, so that we cannot help but do evil, and he made it enslave us, becoming part of our nature. We often think, before we accept Christ into our hearts, that we're fine people. Remember Scrooge in The Christmas Carol confronting the spirits "I may have made mistakes, but that cannot be me. I'm a reasonable man." He was a slave to his own sin, carrying a chain of it around with him wherever he went, even without seeing it. A chain of slavery, which Christ wants to unlock and throw off. And when it was done for Scrooge, he realized fully its existence and was joyful at his recovery.

The devil used free will to destroy us, and God uses free will to bring us back. We have a free will, and if we choose to come back to him, now we can.

[Lief Erikson]

Well, I realize that the above post is entirely about the real world, not about Tolkien at all. I don't see any Christ dying for our sins in the Silmarillion, although I could be simply missing it. So I think that this answers the problem of good and evil in the Christian religion, and through this I've largely been going from the perspective that this and Tolkien's views in the Sil are the same. If this answers your question for Christianity, please tell me.

If this answers your question for Tolkien, I'd be surprised .

[Lief Erikson]

Okay, this is my view of predestination:

Predestination to people that believe in it is the belief that we don't have any free will, but are God's puppets. That everything is known by God and thereby destined by him. And if everything is destined by him, then we don't have any ability to change it.



This is the view that I have been trying to disprove, by my examples which demonstrate that God can know what is going to happen, and yet this does not go against free will. It wasn't him that decided for you what you were going to do, simply because he knew what your choice would be. He can plan in advance, knowing what people are going to do, and he can use people and events to work his own ends.

Any questions?

[Rían]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
and if I recall correctly, I believe it was stated that NOT all the history was in the music... I'll try to find the reference .

such fun to quote myself...

This is the passage that I was thinking of, right after Ilúvatar showed the Ainur a vision of the Music :

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.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Tar-Palantir
But if I had to pin-point a theology for Tolkien in middle-earth I would have to classify it as Pelagian. Pelagianism has man as morally neutral with the ability to choose to be either good or evil. In Pelagian thought, man is not corrupt, but corruptible. That sure seems the case in the Sil. I see the characters as corruptible, but not inherently corrupt. Ever notice that there is very little crime in middle-earth?

I've never heard of Pelagianism *runs to check dictionary* and it's actually in my dict! How interesting! So we have a Mr. Pelagius to thank for that one, ok.

Well, just for fun (ie, not at all in an argumentative manner, but for the fun and interest of discussion ) I'll say that I disagree, because of what is written in ****drum rolls***** Book 10 of the HoME series - Morgoth's Ring!!!! **cheers of admiration from ardent MRing admirers SGH, Artanis and RÃ*an)** (see aforementioned Athrabeth thread ) (just kidding)

Anyway, in the lengthy notes following the Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth section, it speaks of a dimly-remembered fall for the race of man, and the consequences in terms of death, etc. Very interesting read. The three of us, however, mostly discussed the Athrabeth proper, which is an incredibly beautiful and moving piece of writing. I hope you have access to it, you would probably find it interesting.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
and SGH, your example of the car wreck, etc. are more difficult for me to understand. There is no free will involved here on the part of the person who was killed. I'll have to muse on that one awhile... I have some thoughts, but again, they are hard to formulate into sentences that you can type.

Not true. In both examples each person had a choice.

[Rían]

You're absolutely right, SGH - what I meant (and obviously didn't express well at all) was they were not choosing an evil conduct - they made a morally neutral choice (go home this way or that way, etc. vs. I think I will kill someone, but I'm not responsible, because God made me with the ability to consider killing someone). I still had my brain in the "responsibility for choice of evil conduct" line of thinking. Sorry!

[markedel]

Tolkien does mention man's primieval fall in his introduction to the sil.

[Lief Erikson]

I know, but we're simply ending up discussing some of these things anyway, even though they aren't Tolkien related, because they are related to the issue.

I still haven't had anyone who believes in predestination respond to my examples. Does anyone out there think that Mike killed Cathy? Besides RÃ*an ? Artanis?

[Human#3.141592653]

But doesn't free will imply the possiblity of randomness?
(And one could go on about what is random is the comsic sceme, but for the sake of this argument, random is defined as not attached to a higher will's choice, be they Godlike or the will of an ameba.(SP?))

Say that you are at a cross roads and you must choice a way. Strait ahead, to the left or right, or back the way that you had come. Or you could stand still. You could also cross into the fields.

For the sake of argument, Eur exists. Then He (or it) would, in his finite knowledge, know all the avible choices. He would know where you could go from there, and once there where you could go from that point, and so and so forth. Every possible choice and choice there after he would know. In his infinite knowledge he would know your character and by previous decidsions, could guess at which one you would take.

And he would probably be right.

But, and here's the kicker, HE WOULD NOT KNOW FOR SURE WHICH ONE YOU WOULD CHOICE UNTIL YOU HAD MADE YOUR CHOICE.

I thought that's how free will worked. If you decided to explode on the spot, or shout out "CHEESE!" for no apperent reason, it's probably not something Eur intended you to do.

My point is simply this: Eur was/is, theoritically, just as in the dark about what is going to happen as all of his little creatures-

if-

and only if-

He truly gave them free will.

Otherwise, it doesn't count.

[Lief Erikson]

Well, it looks to me as if you don't understand the argument of foreknowledge. It sounds more as though you're describing some extremely mentally powerful alien than a God who knows all ends. Sure, God knows all of the possibilities, just as you say. God knows what you might do, but God also knows what you will do. Knowing what you will do doesn't mean that he made the decision for you. All that it means is that he has more power than you're giving him credit for.

You see, Human pie, God doesn't exist within time as you know it, and very possibly not within any time at all. That is the flaw in your reasoning. He created time as it is in human perspective, and he doesn't have to exist within it. If he doesn't exist within it, than he isn't ruled by it, which means that he doesn't go along with every human, but can see the beginning, middle and end of all things at once. Time is simply another layer of the universe which he created. From the Christian standpoint, that is how he can make prophesies through prophets in the Bible, and that is why he could say when he arose into heaven that he would be coming back 'soon.' Humans back then, from their limited reference point wouldn't call hundreds of years 'soon.'

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Lief Erikson
I still haven't had anyone who believes in predestination respond to my examples. Does anyone out there think that Mike killed Cathy? Besides RÃ*an ? Artanis?

I had more or less given up posting in this thread (and also the evolution thread, and all the political threads), it is so frustrating not to be able to express myself properly, as I could have done much better if this discussion were held in Norwegian! But when I'm named, I can't resist the temptation. OK, here we go:

Of course I don't think that Mike killed Cathy. We all agree about that, don't we? If predestination exist, none of us have any responsibility for our actions, and if it doesn't exist, we are responsible. In neither cases Mike is to blame. But I think predestination might exist for the world (I'm speaking of Tolkien's world now) on a large scale, in the sense that the great lines of history is unfolded as designed by Eru, and still there is room for individual actions on a smaller scale, which is not deviced or foreknown by Eru in advance, but still contributes to Eru's glorious plan. Within this theory every thinking creature are responsible for their actions, which is not foretold or known, and the actions and their consequences may sometimes seem evil, and indeed are on a small scale.

And even if you believe in foreknowledge/predestination in a small scale, I really think you cannot compare Eru to Mike, as Eru is the creator of the world (funny to talk about Eru in connection with humans who have names like Mike and Cathy, not at all Middle-Earthy) and had His knowledge of the killing of Cathy already at the time of creation, because that's how he created it, whereas Mike has to be told by the murderer-to-be.

Right now I don't want to say anything about our own world, which is even more complicated to talk about than ME. Other than that I certainly don't believe in predestination, and I'm not a Christian. But religion and philosophy in general are extremely interesting stuff.

Puuuh .... this is hard work! Now I must return to the work I'm paid to do.

[Tar-Palantir]

I just read about twenty posts, so forgive me if its all a big jumble. There are a couple of things I wish to address.

Someone, I think Lief, defined those who believe in predestination as turning men into robots. This is simply not the case. Here is the classical definition of predectination from the Westminster Confession of Faith:

[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.]

Notice the three clauses:
1. God is not the author of sin.
2. Violence is not offered to the will of the creatures.
3. The contingency of second causes is not taken away.

What does this mean? It means whatever comes to pass was ordained to come to pass, but done so in a way that does no violence to man's will, neither does it make God responsible for sin, neither does it mean that things are going to happen with or without secondary causes.

God ordains the means as well as the end. If SGH dies in a car accident because she wore no seat-belt, was it her time to go? Yes. Would she have died with the seat-belt on? Probably not. But remember the means are ordained as well as the end. And, yes, she was foolish in not wearing her seat-belt. I will continue to wear mine, thank-you.

God created Satan fully knowing that Satan would do evil. How can an omniscient God learn anything? If God one day realizes that Satan will do evil, when the day before he didn't know it, then we must concede that God is not omniscient. What will happen tomorrow that he didn't know about? A God who learns anything (including the future) is not omniscient.

[Tar-Palantir]

The difficulty we have in understanding this is we cannot seem to reconcile the idea of predestination and man's will. But notice once again please that in the classical definition of predestination, the two ideas are not in conflict. Predestination does not make men robots. God has decreed whatsoever comes to pass both in man's will and through man's will, not against man's will or in spite of man's will.

This is illustrated many times in the scripture, the most notable case being the crucifixion of Christ. Every single individual who acted in that heinous crime acted freely without any coercion from God. God did not MAKE them do it. They are even held responsible for that act. Fifty days after the fact we hear the words of the Apostle Peter:

"Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: "

Determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God... 'Determinate' means that which determined. God's counsel or God's decree was what determined both the outcome and the means to the outcome.

Again, only a few short days later we read the prayer of the early church to God in which they mention the crucifixion and have this to say:

"For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. "

What did they do? They did whatever God's hand and God's counsel had determined before to be done. Does this mean they all acted as little robots? No. They all acted freely. Does this seem contradictory? Maybe at first glance, but I think we are not appreciating the majesty and transcendency of God. He is that much higher than his creation. As Tal Bachman might say, "He's so high..... so high above me, He's so lovely..." LOL

[Tar-Palantir]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
such fun to quote myself...

This is the passage that I was thinking of, right after Ilúvatar showed the Ainur a vision of the Music :

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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?

[Lief Erikson]

Well, we are at a difference of opinion, although I suppose that the difference is immaterial to either of our faith. I don't believe in predestination, that God intended things to be this way, largely because of the existence of evil. He didn't ordain any of the sins, or the fact that some people fall into sin. A God would not preordain a Christian to fall away from him into sin, or are you suggesting that he preordained everything except sin? To me, you still cannot have a loving God, sin, and predestination.

All right, even saying that men are not robots and that they have free will within God's decrees. I notice that within your stated point of view, you didn't mention the existence of evil. To me, if predestination exists, then evil contradicts the idea of a loving God. For what no loving God would ordain something evil, even if there was good in the end. They might, however, permit it. There is a difference between the two.

To me, God knows everything that everyone is going to do with their own free will, and all the choices that they are going to make, from the beginning to the end of history and time. I believe that because of this foreknowledge, he has freedom to work his will. Hence the prophesies, God's sending his son down, and the strange divine references to time in the Bible. Sin entered into the world, and God knew that it would enter, yet he did not stop it because he respected the creatures' involved free choice. But he probably planned before time what to do about this evil action, for in allowing it to happen, he did have responsibility.

I do believe in divine ability to make decisions for the earth, and that God can rule the nations and decide what one does to another. He does this repeatedly during the times of Israel, and simply because we haven't any prophets to say what he's going to do doesn't mean that he has stopped doing it. So yes, in a way I do believe in predestination on a smaller scale, if that is what you call God stretching out his powerful hand and working his wonders upon the earth and its inhabitants.

[Tar-Palantir]

Lief, [All right, even saying that men are not robots and that they have free will within God's decrees. I notice that within your stated point of view, you didn't mention the existence of evil.]

This is true. But this problem exists for the non-predestinarian also, does it not?

Lief, [To me, if predestination exists, then evil contradicts the idea of a loving God.]

If that is true of predestination, then why is not true of foreknowledge? In both cases, God allowed evil, knowing full well of it before it happened, and having all power to stop it. Yet he did not.

Lief, [For what no loving God would ordain something evil, even if there was good in the end. They might, however, permit it. There is a difference between the two.]

Here is the crux. I don't see a difference. If God permits it, he ordained that it would happen, but in a way that makes him non-culpable.

BTW- it is great to be able to discuss such an emotional issue in a non-volatile way. God bless you.

[Lief Erikson]

Thank-you.

Ah, now back to predestination . I think that the reason God permits evil to happen is because to refuse to permit it would be to reject free will. I believe that free will opens up the possibility of evil simply by existing, for otherwise man would not have fallen in the first place. God, I don't think ordained the biting of the apple that he told them not to bite. I think that that was free will. He had the knowledge that they would bite the apple before they bit it, but he also knew that it was their choice to make. It is possible that even before they bit the apple he started working on his plan to redeem humanity and bring it back to itself. Free will is truly what makes us what we are, and although our goal is to have everything we do, speak and think be in tune with God's will, I don't believe that it automatically is. I think, just like you do, that we lost a lot at the Garden of Eden, and Christ dying on the cross was his way of bringing us back. It is possible that he permited sin to exist simply so that we could experience grace, and come to know all the aspects of God, including justice. We wouldn't have to experience justice or grace if we had remained with him as originally planned.

I don't claim to know all the ins and outs of God's purpose, but I think we're both agreed that he knows what is best and is leading us there.

I don't believe in predestination because it means that God did evil, but I think that permitting it is different, because that is allowing us to go our own way and do what we please. Free will was installed in humanity and in angels in the beginning, and it is part of God's plan for us all.

I know that you already agree with most of the theology of this post, but I'm simply trying to explain the difference between evil through free will and evil through God.

[Rían]

Originally posted by markedel
Tolkien does mention man's primieval fall in his introduction to the sil.

I don't seem to have it in my version .. I have a 20-year-old cheapie paperback from Ballantine. I just have a Foreward, and I don't see the reference (but maybe I'm just missing it??)

Anyway, the Morgoth's Ring fall accounts are really interesting, I hope you can read them if you haven't already. Thanks for the info