[Gwaihir the Windlord]

If I may offer a comment here on the speculation over what I was actually saying; you can stop nitpicking over it, Nils, I meant exactly what the Lord of Angmar said. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] What I mean is that in this debate over what I meant, the Lord of Angmar is correct.

It seems I have done an inadequate job of explaining myself and defending Gwaihir's viewpoint...

Not at all, Angmar.

It is exactly as I said before. It is probably time to accept the assurance and confirmation of what we (we should after all know) were actually saying; this thread has dragged because of the refusal to do so. I believe a fitting statement here would be something to the effect of 'get over it'.

Debate on what it has been confirmed I meant, however, is of course fine. Since the above section of my post is probably sufficient as a response to most of Nils's posts, I may as well proceed onto what Keneldil had to say (which does tie in with one or two points of Nils also).

Good to see someone other than Nils, Angmar or me in here by the way; I had assumed that people were staying away. Anyway down to a bit more talk.

The simple introduction of the possibility of choice is what opened the wide vista of evil. That does not mean Eru himself made evil choices.

Aargh, not another one.. [img]smilies/eek.gif[/img]. Really, I think I and Angmar have said everything it is possible to say with regards clarification of this. If anyone is still in confusion, as I believe you are, Keneldil, read back a bit. Evil was concieved of and begun in the thought of Illuvatar, but if you can get your head around this (I recognise it may be rather difficult since people seem to be misunderstanding), I never meant that Illuvatar was permeated by evil or ever acted evilly as Nils seems preoccupied with accusing me of. Perhaps this stems from a bad articulation, I don't know, but try and look at recent posts from myself and the Lord of Angmar (particularly the latter, probably [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]) and it's got it down pretty much clearly.

Finally to get back to the original subject of debate, raised again by Keneldil:

The evil is of Melkor's intent, his choice against the will of Eru. Therefore it is his evil, not the Orcs. They had no hand in their own creation, no choice. Evil is not a substance or a stain or a thing to be passed on. It is a choice.

I can see your point, but if you look at the title of the thread it is 'Inherent' Evil. Basically, I take this to mean that Orcs are actually created imbued as it were with evil, rather than their making a choice to be so (which I agree with you they did not do; that is why they are inherently evil in my opinion).

The 'choice' to be evil was, as I implied, Melkor's; it is therefore to him that the blame goes for the evilness of the Orcs. Nonetheless, Orcs I believe to be evil, as whether or not they made the choice to be so (in a sense they can be said to, as while they are naturally bent towards an evil way of thinking, they probably do think independantly and thus the thoughts of evil are theirs), that is what they are if we take the definition of evil to be 'against the purposes of Eru'. If Morgoth was, then they are against these purposes -- i.e. they are against the purposes of Illuvatar in the same way that Morgoth was.

The analogy of 'tools' was raised by someone. If they are tools, then they are still inherently evil. They were created by Morgoth as tools for evil, and are thus against Illuvatar.

So in Arda at least, clearly, they are evil. Evil beings. Created that way by Morgoth, evil under him. However, it is because of the fea argument and sources such as

I nearly wrote 'irredeemably bad'; but that would be going too far.

that it has been raised that a form of redemption for the Orcs exists beyond the Circles of the World, and with Eru. If they have fear, then while they are still evil on earth, redemption in some way -- whether through a 'purging', an enlightenment, an assimilation into the light or something -- probably is for them.

That last quote you raised, Keneldil (one of Nils's actually), which I give again:

If your understanding of that quote from the Silmarillion is correct, then how could there be a 'fallen state'? If no matter what we do, we are following Eru's plan, how could anything we do be outside that plan?

Was in fact due to a misinterpretation. It is a good point though, and you raise a good point after it. Summed up nicely by the concourse of Ulmo and Mandos.

(Ulmo)... 'Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil yet be good to have been.'
But Mandos said: 'And yet remain evil.'

Keneldil, your point is true.

My thoughts (it was from one of my posts that Nils said this) on the 'plan' of Illuvatar are that he does have a plan, and that it is not evil, but that it considers evil and takes it into account. It is through this that the Melkor-reflecting property of Eru is implemented. Evil's impact on the world, on Eru's creation, has been huge; the 'plan' seems to be worked around it. The 'beauty', as Ulmo says, that is brought into Ea through evil can only be a product of goodness, and an overcoming of evil that is the essence of Illuvatar's plan -- of course, an overcoming of evil could not be present in Illuvatar's plan if he had no consideration of evil himself. (What we have been saying, though, is that his consideration of evil is the greatest possible, and goes beyond Melkor's to see the light -- the beauty -- beyond it.)

Lastly, I retract the comment made that Nils was 'parallelling' God to Eru over-much. In fact I no longer think he is, so I apologise.

Right, that's about it from me I think. This thread is a good one, you're right (despite the already-mentioned lagging components of it :rolleyes [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]; should be plenty of material here for your essay at any rate, Angmar.