Quote:
Well, there's a difference between allowing the possibility of evil, & allowing the presence of evil. Eru, as you say, must allow for the former, but the latter is not necessary.
Eru creates Arda with the 'presence' of evil inherent within it, not just the 'possibility' of it.
|
But once Eru imbued his children with free will, he had to accept the consequences, even though they might exercise that free will in such a way as to give rise to evil. Otherwise, he would be denying them the very free will which he gave them.
Eru created the Ainur with free will. As you say,
davem, this allowed for the possibility of evil. He then allowed the Ainur to be involved in the conception of Arda through their participation in the Music. Melkor chose to exercise his free will in a way that gave rise to the certainty that evil would exist once the "blueprint" of Arda created by the Music was brought into being. But, if Eru were to have prevented that happening (for example by scrapping that "blueprint" and starting afresh), he would have been denying Melkor his free will. He was thus obliged to allow the possibility of evil to become a reality when Arda was created.
Eru also allowed his other children (Elves and Men) and his adopted children (Dwarves) to have free will. Because evil existed within Arda, they had the option to exercise their free will for evil purposes. (They may have been able to do so even had evil not exisited within Arda at its creation, courtesy of Melkor, but that is another issue.)
Why did Eru allow his children free will? Well, it is impossible for us to say, but it seems to me that the whole thing would have been rather a pointless exercise had he not done so. Without free will, the denizens of Arda would have been akin to automatons, simply living their lives according to fixed path which Eru had ordained. And, as
Hookbill has said, they would have had no appreciation of their own innate goodness (and that of Eru), since there would have been no alternative with which to compare it.
So, where does this leave Frodo? Well, since evil existed in Arda, it was inevitable that certain individuals would be required to address the consequences of its presence. Frodo is not the only individual who suffered as a consequence of the existence of evil within Arda. There were, of course, countless others. Some must take at least some responsibility for their own suffering (as a result of the manner in which they exercised their free will), while others are entirely (or largely) innocent, but suffer primarily as a result of the way in which others exercise their free will. Frodo falls into the latter category. Once Sauron created the Ring (exercising his own free will) it was inevitable that someone would have to undergo the hardships that Frodo underwent and suffer the losses that he suffered in order to prevent (or at least try to prevent) Sauron prevailing. Frodo just happened to be that someone.
Or did he? What I find interesting is the way in which it appears that Eru intervenes to help bring about the destruction of the Ring. Eru cannot just intervene willy-nilly, since, by doing so, he denies the free will of those involved in the struggle. But, the way I see it, he does appear to intervene directly on at least two occasions. The first is when Bilbo first finds the Ring, if we are to take Gandalf's statement that it was intended that he find it (and not by its maker) at face value. The second is at Sammath Naur, when Gollum "fortuitously" slips and falls into the Crack of Doom with the Ring.
Now, I can understand Eru's intervention on the second occasion, since Frodo had done all that could have been expected of him. He could not voluntarily destroy the Ring because his free will was effectively negated by the Ring. In such circumstances, it seems justifiable to me for Eru to intervene to prevent Sauron's victory (which would have been inevitable, had Gollum not slipped). Frodo effectively had no free will at that point, so there was no free will for Eru to deny him by intervening.
But what about the first occasion? Admittedly, had Bilbo (or someone) not found the Ring, it would probably have been found by an Orc, in which case it would have swiftly found its way back to its Master. But why choose Bilbo to find it, thus practically ensuring that Bilbo or, more likely, his heir (Frodo) would be the one required to undergo the suffering involved in seeking to destroy it? In this sense, it seems to me to have been ordained by Eru that Frodo would be the one chosen to undertake this task. And this seems to me to be a violation of Frodo's free will. Although he undertook the Quest willingly he really had no clear idea as to precisely how it would affect him (as
davem has said) and, in any event, he probably had no real choice in the matter since, once he became the Ringbearer, it seems unlikely that he would have been capable voluntarily of giving the Ring up. Had he not agreed to undertake the Quest, Sauron would probably have been the victor one way or another.
So the real question for me is why did Eru intervene in the way that he did at that moment when Bilbo was lost in the tunnels under the Misty Mountains? Surely he could have intervened in another way which would have prevented the Ring falling into Orcish hands. Of course, then someone else (one of the Dwarves perhaps, or his heir) would have had to have undertaken the Quest which Frodo eventually undertook (thus effectively denying that person (Dwarf?) their free will). But why did Eru choose Bilbo to find it and, therefore, Frodo to be the one to undertake the Quest of Mount Doom?