[R.R.J Tolkien]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

From what I have read above, nothing seems to me like Tolkien could not have seen the "old" stories (=Genesis etc.) as metaphors, in the same sense many modern (=including in his time) Christians/Catholics see them. The Letter 96 quoted above seems to me would make perfect sense exactly in such a case.

Could be yes. However given he said the same of Jesus and the Crucifixion [events he said were actual history] it lends to the opposite. I think post 4 indicates that was his belief. Plus the fact he and the inklings held to the historical reality of the garden of eden and the fall.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

I mean, the idea is, most people don't really think about it unless you intentionally push them into answering a specific question, like: "So were the seven days of creation literal or not?" But majority of believers would not think about it. Both Genesis and the fact that somebody dug up a 65 million year old dinosaur can be true at the same time. Because for example the biblical account doesn't really operate with such cathegories. The Bible is not interested in knowing, or asking you, how many years has it been since the Flood. Its core is in something else, it revolves around the following of God and shows the recordings of other people who followed God in their time, they are now the witnesses for those who read it, who can see themselves as parts of the same story (I am sure Tolkien would have liked that metaphore).

The Inklings however often discussed this issue and thought it over. I agree that many would go along with what you have said, i disagree. But than who cares of me? What did tolkien think?

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

So I really don't think Tolkien would have felt the need to create any "either-or" picture in his head.

that could be very true. But he could also have held to the genesis creation account as the few indicators i gave above seem to suggest.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

The whole misconception that "science" and "religion" are in some way mutually exclusive comes in large part from modern positivist thinking and everything that followed from there. Which, sure, was up and running still in Tolkien's times. But a massive amount of Catholics also at the time - even Catholic priests - were also scientists, including people who made big work in biology, geology, astronomy... all the while when operating not under the "creationist" paradigm (in the sense of the word as it's mostly used now: literal creation in 7 days etc), but under the paradigm of the science at their time.

Well i agree fully, but my op has nothing to do with science, but evolution that anti scientific belief held by many sadly even within the scientific community. Yes most all scientist of the past and the originators of science were Christians. That is because science only makes sense within the biblical worldview, not the atheistic evolutionary worldview.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

The letter 96 quoted above seems to me like showing that Tolkien took Genesis, most of all, as a story. Yes, Gospels are so close to the time of the events they describe that even the geographic details etc we can take as "historical truths"; we can't say the same about the rest. At the same time, if Tolkien imagined Eden as "real" - sure, but such an Eden could have been in Africa a few million years ago, for all practical purposes. The main point is that it doesn't matter where, what matters is that the story is fundamentally true: not in its geographic or chronological cathegories, but it is true always, throughout the history, it is true now, it is true about Tolkien's generation, it is true about current generation. And so on. That's what "myth" is.

Agreed, as the Crucifixion was also a "story" but actual events within history. But i think your right, to Tolkien [not to me] I do agree that just because he held to a literal historical garden of eden, that does not conclude he was a young earth creationist. That is why in my op i said i think he was likely an old earth creationist or ID as other statements seem to indicate he accepted an old earth.