![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
![]() |
#3 | ||
Spectre of Capitalism
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Battling evil bureaucrats at Zeta Aquilae
Posts: 987
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
Wow. Nice post, Legolas.
I am not the Tolkien Scholar that you seem to be, with the quotes you so aptly provided, but I do think I can answer some of your questions on some philosophical level. In any transgression, whether falling from the grace of the Creator, or getting a parking ticket, the transgressor can only receive absolution and forgiveness from the ultimate authority. The fact that you pay your parking fine and then go free is not the point -- you are still "guilty" of having committed the crime, you have merely endured the punishment for that crime. Nor is it a matter of having the matter tried in court and being found "not guilty" of the parking violation -- in that case, you are found to have *never committed the crime* to begin with, and so you have no need for restoration and redemption. The only way to be redeemed after having been found *guilty* is to be "pardoned" by the giver of the law, or by his appointed surrogates. If you appeal to the Governor of your state and ask for a pardon for your parking ticket, only he has the authority to grant that pardon. The pardon means that, regardless of the fact that you were indeed guilty parked in a red zone, you are to be treated as if the crime had never occurred, as if you are innocent. The question then becomes, why does the Creator not grant such pardons as a matter of course? And the answer is, He cannot pardons all such cases, because that would be the same as not having the law to begin with. Why have a law if violators will always be pardoned? Why indeed. Laws are made, whether in the human realm or the higher realms, to restrain certain actions which will harm the greater good. In the case of Eru, he sets boundaries upon Creation, within which the Valar have free will to act, because Eru, being all-knowing, knows which actions are likely to result in the greatest possible good for His creation. To violate those boundaries means to step away from the greatest possible good to something lesser - and the only reason a being would do that is becuase he/she/it is not interested in good for all, but only in his/her/its own "good", at the expense of others. The laws exist as a guide within which the "righteous" (for lack of a better word) will voluntarily remain, and to reveal the one(s) who are acting in selfish interest without regard for the consequences. This then becomes the definition of "evil", i.e. acting to benefit or please oneself reagrdless of the damaging consequences to others" -- in one word, "selfishness." But back to the main question -- how does a tainted spirit become good again? Tolkien made it so that all Melkor would have to do was place himself voluntarily back within the boundaries he had violated. The problem with Melkor was that he, like Satan in the Christian tradition, wanted to be numero uno. He didn't want to serve Eru's purposes, he wanted to BE Eru. His journeys into the void to find the Flame Imperishable were made to set himself up as a potential rival for Eru's position. He was not trying to find "another way", he wanted to be THE way, aggandizing power unto himself and crushing all who oppose. He did not want to submit to Eru's definitions of "good" and "evil" (by the boundaries He set), he wanted to be "evil" (to have all creation please and serve his whims) and escape the personal consequences. To the question of "Is there another way out of evil," again, the bounds of the law and the release from the consequences of violating that law are the sole province of the law maker. Eru says that he only need submit to Eru's authority and he will be free to act -- he will be "forgiven". Melkor's reply, to misquote Dante, "Better to reign in the Void than to serve in Valinor." At all times it was his choice to continue in his rebellion -- at any time he could have chosen to stop rebelling and serve. I suppose you *could* say that there is another way out of evil, and that is to overpower the One who lawfully calls you evil and then change or abolish the law. Melkor found out the hard way that his arms were too short to box with Eru. Quote:
Quote:
As for the Ring's effect on characters, it seems to have more influence on those, like Melkor and Sauron, who desired power to dominate the wills of others. The hobbits, being a quiet and peaceful folk, seemed to have the greatest resistance to the Ring's evil becuase they were not raised to desire to rule over others. They were pretty much a live-and-let-live society. Aragorn had a pretty good handle on his destiny, but did not desire to rule as a tyrant, but as a great freeing benevolence. He was confident within himself, and thus was less affected by the Ring than Boromir, who (in my opinion)appeared to be a bit less confident in his leadership, and wanted the Ring to "shore up" his ineffectiveness. Gandalf more than any knew the corrupting power of the Ring in advance, and so actively resisted it. Galadriel, well, she had some rebellious "history" way back around the time of Feanor and the Doom of Mandos, and might have been more tempted to the power than some. Just my two cents worth, folks. Feel free to counter, riposte, and flame away!
__________________
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. ~~ Marcus Aurelius |
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |