And Eru Smiled

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Iarwain got to this first, but I would also like to share my disagreement. Here are my reasons.

1. Evil did not co-exist with good in the beginning. No-one was evil from the beginning, after all.

2. Evil is but a corruption of good.

First, of course, good would have to be defined in the context of Arda.
What is good? It is the fact that creation - the ability to create and the fruits of the ability - belongs to Eru alone, and that the Children of Ilúvatar deserve life.
So, in this context, how did evil begin? Melkor desired to be creator himself, and when he couldn’t do so, he defaced creation instead.

It is said that Morgoth’s worst evil was the creation of Orcs. Why? Because he corrupted the works of Eru both on the outside and on the inside. By inducing this race to hate, to disrespect others’ right to live, he removed the Orcs’ right to live.

I know this seems wrong, but have you noticed that nobody has called a truce with an Orc? It is because they’d either kill you anyway if you sue for peace, or that they wouldn’t understand your mercy and fight to the death.

3. Good and evil could not co-exist forever. They are both locked in a battle for survival. The history of Middle-earth is a testimony to that. In the end, one would have to be utterly destroyed, and the other would rule. Considering the history of Middle-earth, and Eru himself, we could see the outcome of such a battle.

So, in conclusion: Evil did not share its beginnings with good, and it would not share its end. There is no balance of good and evil in Arda, except maybe that evil should be non-existent.

Oh, Melkor. You naughty, wayward child.

[Encaitare]

Indeed you are correct... as I said, I tried to get philosophical going on my own opinions and it seems that I completely failed to look at things through the Middle-earth lens.

You're right, Nilpaurion, and looking at it in the context of Tolkien's world I'm realizing that you guys have definitely got it here.

Oh, Melkor. You naughty, wayward child.

lol, indeed. Oh well, there's always one

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Does this wilful act of rebellion put an end to the 'free will' so that, as in the case of Melkor, the rebel can no longer act out of goodness, and is utterly controlled by evil? (SoN)

Well, I think Melkor's consummate fall is not judgment, but foresight. There’s a part in the Gospels where Jesus addresses a group of Pharisees, saying that they could never be saved (or something like that . . . I don’t have exact quotes): I think it’s not that they can’t be saved, but they refuse to. Same as Melkor, perhaps. He is still of Eru. He could be saved. Unfortunately, he’s so consumed with what he wants that he forgot that.

Or perhaps he just no longer comprehends good—cf. Manwë not comprehending evil.

You said "Melkor", Noldo. Noldor don't say that.

Oops.

[Lhunardawen]

Originally Posted by Nilp

Does this wilful act of rebellion put an end to the 'free will' so that, as in the case of Melkor, the rebel can no longer act out of goodness, and is utterly controlled by evil? (SoN)

In the case of Sauron, he has always had the will to refuse Morgoth and remain on the side of the Valar. But he chose power and dominion as Sauron's servant over being "just like everyone else" as a faithful Maia. When Morgoth was overthrown, he chose to continue what his master has begun in him, and he has never been able to retract his steps from the path of evil.

Does this mean that once you become evil, you become evil forever with no hope of redemption? Not so! Sauron had the chance to turn his back from Morgoth's ways and be reaccepted by the Valar, only he has been in too deep with his rebellion that he cannot escape. It's something like what they say about giving the devil a foothold in your heart; once he has stepped in through the door, it would be very difficult to drive him away again. Sauron could return to good if he really wanted to, if he tried his best to get rid of Morgoth's lies and ask for the Valar's pardon (and, perhaps, "salvation"). But he found it too much of an effort, and considered his old ways to be the "easier" road.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

Actually, Sauron seems to have had a genuine (if shallow) repentence
after the War of Wrath.

When Thangorodrim was broken and Morgoth overthrown, Sauron put on his fair hue again and did obeisance to Eonwe, the herald of Manwe, and abjured all his evil deeds. And some hold that this was not at first falsely done, but that Sauron in truth repented, if only out of fear, being dismayed by the fall of Morgoth and the great wrath of the Lords of the West.

==========================
And having just rewatched the movie "Death on the Nile",
the French detective, Poirot, advises the chief planner of the convoluted murder plot:
"Do not let evil into your heart, it will make a home there."

[Iarwain]

I'm surprised at myself and all the others who posted on this thread. I was wandering (as always), and I returned here, to reread my original post. At the beginning, I was fine with what I said, but after getting about halfway through I became somewhat disgusted with myself for making an amazingly reckless statement and failing utterly to back it up.

I said "In the end, we could probably argue (and we will) that all existence is a part of Eru himself." Why should this be? In fact, I disagree with my last-year self and propose that such a statement is foolish to the extreme.

Why?

Eru, however ethical and good, is undeniably lacking in a physical Middle-Earthian presence. In fact, the only instance I can give of actually participating within Arda is in the destruction of Numenor. If everything and everyone within TCE is a PART of Eru, somehow I think he would be more involved.

Iarwain

[littlemanpoet]

On the other hand, I have heard it said once that the entire universe is a figment of the imagination of Eru/God. Which makes it no less real, of course! But of course that's not exactly what you're correcting yourself about.

Perhaps Eru was more involved than it at first seems upon one reading. How many times in all the legendarium isn't there a reference to something "meant to be"? The workings of Eru would, I can imagine, be most subtle and quite invisible to his creatures, even those storied beings in Valinor.

So maybe Eru is passive, or maybe he only seems that way.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Iarwain

I said "In the end, we could probably argue (and we will) that all existence is a part of Eru himself." Why should this be? In fact, I disagree with my last-year self and propose that such a statement is foolish to the extreme.

Why?

Eru, however ethical and good, is undeniably lacking in a physical Middle-Earthian presence. In fact, the only instance I can give of actually participating within Arda is in the destruction of Numenor. If everything and everyone within TCE is a PART of Eru, somehow I think he would be more involved.

Iarwain, please accept my humble apologies for leading this thread on that wild tangent that got mixed in from another thread and would have done well to stay there.

I think that you are correct that "all existence" is not "a part of Eru". There's simply no evidence for it in the Legendarium, and much against it.

Maybe, fellow dead, we could reserve comments on "broken enchantment", "werewolves", "the movie sucked", or whatever, for threads more appropriate to those topics, and leave discussions of Eru on this one. Sound good? Just a suggestion.