Lord Melkor Rightful Master of the Fates of Arda

Acolyte Hookbill The Goomba refered to C.S. Lewis earlier, I thought that when I had a chance I would say something more about it, but one thing drives out another as they say, and well, maybe it was better so because the course of the thread seems to have evolved into an even more appropriate setting for what I was to suggest, which is:
C.S. Lewis wrote a fantastic book called "The Screwtape Letters".
I think it was his best.

"Insult the devil, that proud spirit, and he will flee from you, for he cannot bear to be mocked." (paraphrase) [too lazy and not vain enough and not good enough at computers to get it right.

[Thenamir]

It was, any way, part of my Grand Design from the begining to switch characters and then tear my own arguments apart .

How many guises do you wear, Neithan? An intellectual, a philosopher, a buffoon, a drunkard, and an insufferable snob...have I missed any?

If you wish to announce who and what you are finally, and then point out what you were trying (unsuccessfully) to do, and the deficiencies in our responses, please do so under your own nick. The admins here take a very dim view of people who register multiple nicks here to get "under our radar".

On the other hand, I would be most pleased to hear an explanation of exactly what you hoped to accomplish, and the way in which you would tear down your own arguments. There is something to be said for learning to properly debate against a "devil's advocate", or perhaps in this case, "Morgoth's advocate."

If only it hadn't been done so often here before...

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Originally Posted by Neithan Tol Turambar

C.S. Lewis wrote a fantastic book called "The Screwtape Letters".
I think it was his best.

"Insult the devil, that proud spirit, and he will flee from you, for he cannot bear to be mocked." (paraphrase) [too lazy and not vain enough and not good enough at computers to get it right.

He begins his introduction to STL with two quotations

'The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to text of scripture, is the jeer and flout him, for he cannot bear scorn. - Luther.'

and

'The Devil, the proud spirit, cannot endure to be mocked. - Thomas Moor.'

It is also interesting to note that STL was addressed to Tolkien.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Hookbill the Goomba

It is also interesting to note that STL was addressed to Tolkien.

And that he didn't like the book apparently - because he didn't think true evil should be treated that lightly.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

To davem: I agree with your last post (not the last short, the long one). I was not speaking of the moral point of view, nor about the state where the good and evil already exist (where the setting of narfforc's wonderful story takes place), I was speaking of a state where evil does not exist at all, saying that such a state would be theoretically possible (the original question concerned "unspoiled" Ainur - I was trying to show that in Ainulindalë, evil does not have to exist until the "fall" - concretely, Melkor's fall. At the beginning there is one choice of evil, the model situation of "fall", before which everything was good, then the evil can repeat until the eschatological Second Music, where "...the themes of Ilúvatar shall be played aright, and take Being in the moment of their utterance, for all shall then understand fully his intent in their part, and each shall know the comprehension of each...". The time between, where evil exists, is the moment where everyone can learn, grow, make moral choices as you said, and so on. For more comparison, cf. my signature, for example ).

[davem]

Ok, so, Arda 'renewed', when the Music shall be played aright, is effectively a consequence of the 'Fall' resulting from Melkor's rebellion? The First Music could not have been played aright, because the capacity for moral choices was not within the Ainur. If Arda was not to be inhabited by a bunch of robots, or 'Yes-men' the Children of Eru (including the Ainur), had to be placed in a position where they would need to make moral choices - ie, where their allegiance to the Good was not simply a consequence of not having any alternative, but where they have known Evil & had the option to ally themselves with it. Hence, at the end, those who participate in the Second Music will sing the themes aright, not because they don't have anything else to sing, but because they will have chosen in full awareness to sing the right themes.

Which, if I'm right, requires not only Morgoth's rebellion, but all the suffering which takes place. Evil has to be fully known & each potential participant in the Second Music must make a choice in full knowledge (ie not out of fear of Eru, or willful ignorance, or desire for reward).

Or in short, if Morgoth hadn't existed, Eru would have had to create him......

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

More or less, yes. The thing I'd point out is:

Or in short, if Morgoth hadn't existed, Eru would have had to create him......

Not actually. If we speak of persons only, then he wouldn't have to create Morgoth - he only would have to create any free-willed person. It could have been an Elf, or a Man (as in the Bible), who would make the first "falling step". The only prerequisite for it would have to be free will to choose even evil. The prerequisite, as we can deduce, Eru gave already to all the Ainur. He said: "Now play some variations in terms of this theme." Melkor was the one who chose to play "outside" of the theme. But even if all Ainur played according to the theme and created a 100% perfect world (mountains where they should be, seas where they should be etc.), the first Elf/Man could still choose evil, and he will be the first "Morgoth". Because they have free will, the possibility existed.

If you want it in plain English: from the moment when a being capable of do good/evil exists, evil (and good in the meaning as you presented it before, as opposite of evil) exists. Singularity (Eru - "the One") does not allow contradictions, because everything is good (!in the meaning I presented here all the time) for it. The second being can cause things the One does not "like" (said very, very vaguely; for using terms for transcendental things is vague at best, but for our purposes let's take it like that, this is not our subject now). As long as the Eä exists, the One can choose how to interact with the Creation (if ever), e.g. in Christianity we have the example that God interacts very much with the Creation, and even is himself the one who completely turns the tide for the Creation by choosing to lead its path from self-destruction (which would result if the Creation were left to itself) to Redemption. In Middle-Earth, the matters are less clear, because Eru intervenes very scarcely - or maybe he does more, but we are not told about it, so this is left to speculation. But what we know for sure even for Middle-Earth is that at one moment, finally, there is the eschatological "Cut!": "Then he raised up both his hands, and in one chord, deeper than the Abyss, higher than the Firmament, piercing as the light of the eye of Ilúvatar, the Music ceased." There is the End of Eä, and after that, there is the Second Music - as I said earlier - and yes, here I'd quote you,
"Hence, at the end, those who participate in the Second Music will sing the themes aright, not because they don't have anything else to sing, but because they will have chosen in full awareness to sing the right themes."

[davem]

So Eru must permit not only the possibility, but also the actuality of Evil. Evil cannot simply be obliterated by Eru (because that would obliterate free will too, & all but guarantee that the Second Music would go the way of the First), but must be rejected (or accepted) by each individual. While the capacity to choose evil exists within any of the Children Eru must permit the existence of evil - until each has made a free choice one way or the other.

Eru 'needs' evil to exist as a possibility, an option. Hence, it seems to me, it is too simplistic to say that Eru 'hates' evil, he may do - but he also needs it because without it the Children would not be able to choose the Good/Eru freely, in full knowledge. Evil is necessary in that sense, & hence so is Melkor/Morgoth - not necessary for what he does, but for what he is.