The Lord of the Bible?

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

It is also a shaky argument which in order to accept ourselves, we first have to accept that Christianity is the only acceptable belief and that all others are just 'little copies' of it, and their followers are really just Christians.

Why this?
The way I understand it, which could certainly be wrong, the "One True Myth"-Theory just says that there is an amount of truth in every myth and religion and the "One True Myth" itself isn't equal to Christian Myth or any other, and it is approachable from Christianity as well as from every other one. Other myths and religions aren't copies of Christianity, but each contains a different component of the Big one.

And, of course, if Tolkien wanted the Lord of the Rings to point to this true myth, then it is no wonder that people find application in it, regardless of their religion.

It is also an idea put forward in a quite obscure text which Tolkien would not have considered would even be read by many (if any) of his fans - so my argument is that how would he have expected anyone to know, let alone accept this argument and system of interpretation.
...
Really, if we are hoping to pinpoint any Primary World 'messages' that he wants to put to readers, shouldn't we only be focussing on those texts he intended for us to read? If said messages can only be vaguely supported in principle by papers he determinedly did not publish or make otherwise generally available (and lecture notes are not such documents), then can we truly say that he wanted those messages to be read in that way?

I don't see why there shouldn't be elements or messages in it that Tolkien didn't expect people, or at least not the majority of people, to understand. He was also writing a book he himself would want to read, after all.