The atrocity of the Akallabêth

[Tar-Telperien]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

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.

I might as well respond to this, too. Melkor's shame didn't arise as a result of anyone's responsibility. It came about because Eru matter-of-factly told him that his course of action would fail. Whether or not it was your fault that your desire to do something would fail, wouldn't you feel ashamed and angry about being informed of that in front of your peers?

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by lmp

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'.

This only works if we project particular concepts of the meaning of 'Holy' onto the Valar. As Tar-Telperien says, the Valar were indeed flawed. As is shown in the topic of this whole thread. The Valar created Numenor and gifted it to favoured Men but did not account for the possibility that Men might, under the influence of Sauron or under their own steam, wish to break the Ban. The only way they could then get around this was by appealing to Eru who had sent them into Arda to remain in Arda for good. If Eru made them then he made all of them with the possibility of making errors of judgement and mistakes. And there is also Aule's little rule-breaking exercise in sub-creation when he made Dwarves.

I suppose we could say that Holy means 'perfect' in Eru's mind, but then this would clearly have to mean that 'perfect' in Eru's mind was not our concept of 'perfect', it was one that included the ability to make mistakes and learn.

Originally Posted by lmp

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.

If wanting to find out how this world was forged it makes sense to go right back to its earliest stories, its creation myths, tales of the times before Elves, Men and Rings. Otherwise we are running the risk of looking at the creation myth of Tolkien's world as viewed through the interpretations of creation given by generation upon generation of descendents.

Aside from that, what is Elrond actually saying here? Is he saying that evil was at a later stage imposed upon certain Ainur? If so, who by? If Eru created everything then he also created evil? Did he put it into Melkor? Or is he saying that good/evil was simply not an issue when Eru created his Gods?

Remember:

no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me