[Lord of Angmar]

It seems to me that you are basing this on assumption since Eru never uses his power for evil.

I find it very unlikely that Eru would use his power to go against his own plan. But hey, you look at God your way and I'll look at God my way.

Sorry if you don't see what I'm trying to say. It is as clear as day that you believe Eru has an evil component

My dear Nils, I'm afraid you are still misinterpreting. We do not believe that Illuvatar is evil or has an evil 'side' or 'component'. We are merely stating that he comprehends evil and can understand the various facets of the evil mind. There is a difference between knowing evil and acting on evil, and we are simply saying that since Iluvatar is the creator of the world then the idea of evil originated within him.

I believe I accurately described this and said I disagreed with it when I said:

Each being is not some part of Eru's personality.

I am aware of the fact that I am basing my view of this on Tolkien's other writings that you don't believe hold much water.

It is not that we don't think that Morgoth's Ring does not 'hold water', it is just that it is no more or less definitive in answering our question than is the Silmarillion, so neither of us cannot be proven entirely right on the origin of orcs or on several other points that have differences between Morgoth's Ring and the Silmarillion.

Furthermore, it is perfectly fine to believe that each of the Ainur does not reflect a certain part of the mind of Eru. Arguments can be made for both sides, but we are not arguing against you. We are rather arguing for our belief in the context of this debate. You have not provided this thread with any textual argument that the differences in personality among the Valar are due to the creation of their own personalities.

What I am saying is - and I am not trying to sound harsh or overbearing - I think you have approached this debate from the wrong perspective. Breaking down each and every one of our entries line by line and picking it apart will not do anything for you or for us. The point here is not to win the debate so much as to glean new understanding of Tolkien's world from the debate. I do not think you are getting the 'Big Picture', as it were, of what others are saying.

In my mind, that 'Big Picture' can be crudely summed up like this:

1. Iluvatar is not 'evil'.
2. Iluvatar fully comprehends evil as an entity within his world, and understands the working of an evil mind, just as he understands all other facets of life and thought within the world that he created.
3. Melkor could not see past his own deeds and could not fully comprehend his own evil. He was, as Nils states, in a 'fallen' state.
4. Orcs, being corrupted Children of Iluvatar, cannot act in any manner that is not considered 'evil' by the incorrupt, but that does not mean that they cannot be redeemed. While they are 'inherently' moved to evil deeds, they are, by and large, the victims of harsh circumstance, and thus (probably) subject to redemption in the afterlife.

[ August 02, 2003: Message edited by: Lord of Angmar ]