Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Formendacil
However, within the confines of the painting, within the image, is there any reason to say that it is NOT as much God to the painted man as God Himself is to me?
What you seem to be saying, Master Davem, is that it is not possible for Man to write about God. I would put forward that this is a false premise. Man has been writing about God for thousands of years. He's the main character in the Bible.
|
But your picture is not a picture of God
qua God, but a representation of your
image of God, which is your invention.
I suppose a Christian would say that the Bible is not a case of men writing about God, but of God telling Men about Himself. As to whether its actually possible to write about God, according to many mystics it simply isn't (cf The Cloud of Unknowing & Dioysius the Areopagite). Even if Tolkien meant Eru=God, we are still free to question whether he was right in his portrayal, so we can question his depiction of the Deity - just as we could question whether your painting of God is a fitting depiction - I may think its completely wrong (a Muslim or Jew, for instance, would find it blasphemous, as their faith rejects all graven images). So Eru, as an idea of Tolkien's, is open to question. Would God behave like Eru? I think that would require some pretty heavy proof.