There is much to respond to and I haven't the time right now. However, this much I have time to respond to now:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lalwendë
Problems only arise when we try to get our heads around the nature of what we read in Tolkien's stories.
|
On the contrary. Problems only arise when we fail to account for all the facts in the text. For example, an emphasis on
"no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me" while ignoring
"There was Eru, the One, who in Arda is called Ilúvatar; and he made first the Ainur, the Holy Ones, that were the offspring of his thought".
'Holy' means 'pure'. Perfect. Flawless. In the beginning even Melkor was holy. Thus, evil, in the Ainulindalë, is equal to 'flawed'.
Also,
"Nothing is evil in the beginning. Not even Sauron was so." Elrond is one of Tolkien's primary truth tellers. He cannot be wrong without doing violence to the story of LotR.
Therefore, evil cannot have its origins in Eru. And "
Melkor was filled with shame, of which came secret anger" - - if Melkor is filled with shame, how can it be that Eru is responsible for Melkor's rebellion? If Eru is responsible for Melkor's rebellion, then Melkor would have no reason for shame.
So account for ALL the text.