...

[`Tinki`]

"Iluvatar didn't just know ... he created all. If he created all and knows the ending, then that in itself negates any free will at all. I don't think Iluvatar actually knew the ending because he gave the Valar free will."

I think it was implied at in the quotes; "And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, for can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devisings of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined."

From the Ainulindale, in The Silmarillion

Since all the characters exercise choice as a result of free will and since Iluvatar created all of them, and the implication above....

"That is the paradox of prophecy. If you know ahead of time, everything that will happen then where is the free will? If everything is predestined to happen, then where is the choice? If you know the future then what of your free choice? Are you predestined to decide not to interfere? If you know you do interfere then you'll also know the result ahead of time because it can't be changed."

Iluvatar knows in the Omniscient sense. And He lives outside the reality of the universe He created. All the rest do not know . According to how I see it :)

And how do you account for unthinking calamity? So far we've just focused on the decisions made by people. What about earthquakes and tornados and collapsing bridges, caves and buildings? You haveto know those things ahead of time as well. This isn't just an individual, psychological profile on people or the choice of right and wrong. This could be simply a choice of which way to take to work.

Very hard indeed to understand. As for me, I can pm you on this subject if you like.

"In such an existence you only have the illusion of free will. It only feels like free will due to ignorance of the future. There is no randomness. Everything is going to happen as it happens. Even the creator has no free will since the creator's decisions are accounted by the knowledge of what will be. Go back a step. The pure existence of that universe was known before it existed."

Iluvatar created his Middle Earth peoples to NOT have all knowledge. Contentment in who they were and what they did was enough for them. The Creator had to have free will or He couldnt transform it to others of His creation. He used His will t make a choice to be the ultimate Good standard. He made the universe to have randomness for all who lived in it. Again, I boggle to imagine what Omniscience really is.

EDIT: And again I am between posts:) Alrighty then. Thanks for stimulating my grey cells (however few that remain).

[Tamirien]

I'm not dismissing the quotes from the book et al, but since I don't agree with Tolkien's philosophy at its root level then I see those as plot holes in his writings. He's trying to mesh incompatible philosophies. That's like mixing oil and water.

`Tinki` wrote:

`Tamirien` wrote: And how do you account for unthinking calamity? Very hard indeed to understand. As for me, I can pm you on this subject if you like.

Harlan Ellison penned a teleplay (unfortunately rewritten by other authors) for the original Star Trek called "The City on the Edge of Forever." A brief synopsis ... during the exploration of a phenomenon, McCoy is drugged with a medicine that produces psychotic behavior and he jumps through a gateway in time (The Guardian of Forever) and alters time. Kirk and Spock have the gateway replay events and jump in just before the point where McCoy did. Spock had recorded both timelines and determines where the split happened. The essence is that in the alternate timeling a young lady who Kirk met was the head of a peace movement that prevented U.S. entry into WWII and allowed Germany to win (they developed the A-bomb first). In the original timeline she is killed in an automobile accident. At the end of the story, when McCoy and Kirk meet, Kirk prevents McCoy from saving the lady. She dies in the accident and the original timeline is reestablished.

That's what I mean about unthinking calamity and how it relates to future events. A great person (either evil or good) may be removed by a bolt of lightning (real lightning, not mythos-packed, deity-thrown, smite-the-offender lightning). They could have changed events but didn't because they weren't there. Someone who knows future events must know those types of calamities as well since they are part of the equation. (this was a detail to the counter point about knowing being separate from controling).

This story is also great for pointing out the foibles of "good and evil". Most people would consider letting a person die as an evil act. The woman by all accounts was a good woman with good ideals.

[Banhorn]

Tolkien takes specific steps to differentiate his mythology from Judeo-Christian belief and avoids some of the deeper philosophical pitfalls in the process. In that process, he makes it clear that Melkor is evil.

Iluvatar says to the Ainur in the beginning of the Ainulindale, “And since I have kindled you with the Flame Imperishable, ye shall show forth your power in adorning this theme, each with his own thoughts and devices, if he will.” The Flame Imperishable grants free will, so Melkor’s deeds and desires are his own.

Although Iluvatar says that “no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite,” that doesn’t require that the outcome of creation be predestined. He taught the Ainur parts of the theme according to their nature, called them together to begin the Great Music, then “sat and harkened” as they sang until Melkor’s discord threatened to drown out the first theme. Three times he rose up, going from ‘smiling’ to ‘stern’ to ‘terrible to behold’, and twice he introduced new themes that wove in the best notes from Melkor’s discord. That discord is not a part of the original theme, but it enhances it through an improvisational, collaborative mechanism. The Ainur feel less like instruments of Eru’s will and more like his children (i.e., offspring of his thought). They aren’t his equal, but he treats them as individuals.

The Ainur chose to inhabit Ea on the condition “that their power should thenceforward be contained and bounded in the World, to be within it for ever, until it is complete, so that they are its life and it is theirs”. The World doesn’t spring into being complete. Those Ainur who become the Valar must labor to realize the vision of the Great Song and to prepare it for the habitation of the Children of Iluvatar--and be bound to its fate. The Valar, Melkor, and their followers fought many battles that built and destroyed many lands before the Firstborn awoke. While the original theme is Iluvatar’s, the labor and the stakes are the Valar’s.

These elements are unique to Tolkien’s mythology: Free Will is apparent. Creation is an evolving, collaborative, elaborative act among Iluvatar and the Ainur. The struggle between Good and Evil is constrained within a world where both sides have real stakes in the outcome.

So what of Melkor? He has free will. He is not just trying to exercise his creative urges or rebelling against authority; he is actively working to dominate, corrupt, or destroy the work of his peers. That sounds like evil to me.

So what of Aule? The Valaquenta’s description of Aule draws a clear line between his kind of disobedience and Melkor’s: “Both [Melkor and Aule] desired to make things of their own that should be new and unthought of by others, and delighted in the praise of their skill. But Aule remained faithful to Eru and submitted all that he did to his will; and he did not envy the works of others, but sought and gave counsel. Whereas Melkor spent his spirit in envy and hate, until at last he could make nothing save in mockery of the thought of others, and all their works he destroyed if he could.” Aule has the spirit to create without the desire to dominate or possess, things Tolkien clearly illustrate as attributes of Evil.

There’s one other tweak Tolkien makes in Ainulindale that I particularly like: the Valar appear as human or have human attributes because they saw the Children of Iluvatar in the vision before creation and were delighted with this surprise Iluvatar introduced as the third (unknown to them) theme. This mythology is his own, albeit drawing from many existing traditions, and he tries to avoid both serious and superficial pitfalls apparent in those sources. Just nevermind that Eru has hands to raise up during the Great Song!

[rpassmor]

I think you all think too highly of Melkor.

Illuvatar is able to kill off whatever he chooses, this has precedence. However, he chooses not to stop Melkor, and remove his ill creatures.

Or, are you saying the power of Melkor equals Illuvatar? If not, please explain why Illuvatar chose to allow Melkor to continue his ill deeds?

I don't see him being checked. I see him being taunted by his father "try if you might, but you'll only prove me right." Sorry, but I find his fatherly guidance a bit counterproductive..

By the time he is placated in front of Manwe, his path has already been set. Jealousy is a powerful poison.

I do see that Tolkien closes the loop left open in certain real world religions, but I see him closing it differently. I see Melkor being chosen to do ill deeds..thus serving a purpose of the all mighty, thus...not evil. (how else will people show their grace and valor?)

Yes, he needs to be stopped, his creatures killed. But even the orcs..should they be hated because of what they do? Or should they be killed because they need to be. They don't know any better..they were bred to do one thing.

Much like the conversation about Gollum in Moria. Also like Faramir's thoughts of the "evil men."

Ultimately, the source of evil goes to the highest power, as they ultimately have the choice to stop or allow it to continue. Was melkor that source?

Should we be apologetic to the ones doing evil...or the all mighty who turns his eye to the world, as the evil is being done?

[`Tinki`]

I bow out, as graciously as possible in this discussion. I have stated my understanding, and it works for me :)

[TolkienOtaku]

My understanding as to why Morgoth was not destroyed is that the Children of Illuvatar need opposition in all things. Without darkness, we would not know how wonderful light is.

In my opinion, Illuvatar knows every possible outcome for every conceivable action made in the universe. He leaves it up to his Children, however, to decide which outcome becomes reality.

[Lindorieh]

Illuvatar allows evil to exist because he allows for free will. Does that make Illuvatar evil? No. Evil exists because the struggle between good and evil will produce something greater in the end. Both sides of the struggle are needed. But what that end result will be we don't know. If we knew, there wouldn't be much point to existence.

Lindorieh

[Harperella]

Illuvatar acts a lot more like a "blind watchmaker" sort of deity. He's a creator that makes the universe, then sets it to run its course. In this view, it isn't up to Illuvatar to tolerate or punish Melkor's actions, but rather for creation to play out its own drama while Illuvatar has a smoke out back. He'll be back for the closing credits, but he's left it to the Valar to manage the shop while he's gone. The Valar eventually come to the same conclusion, that they ought to leave creation to itself rather than intervening directly. By the time the fourth age rolls around, even the minor maiar are packing up and leaving Middle Earth.

In this context, then Melkor is most definitely evil. He is not "suffered" or in any way directed by Illuvatar, but rather just a more powerful creation who uses his power for evil purposes. Perhaps Illuvatar created him flawed, because he knew that his creation would not be complete without some form of conflict.

If we really stretch the metaphor, we can think of Illuvatar as a gamer who sets up a strategy game. He's a pretty smart gamer, so he's got a pretty good idea how it will play out. He sets up a bunch of "good" pieces, "bad" pieces, and some pieces that might do a bit of either. Then he hits the go button and sees how things work out.

...of course, the game pieces might have a very different view of what is and isn't intended by the creator...

--Harperella

[Galenhir]

For any interested, I highly recommend reading Book X of the History of Middle-earth; aka, Morgoth's Ring. In it, we see that Illuvatar is not ultimately the watchmaker out for a smoke that he seems to be at this point, but prophesied to become deeply involved in his creation. Furthermore, this passage also indicates how powerful Morgoth is. Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth, or the debate of Finrod and Andreth discusses various aspects, but explicitly reveals the prophecy known amongst the Noldor, and faintly whispered amongst only the wisest of Men.

Here is the specific excerpt from the book:

‘What then was this hope, if you know?’ Finrod asked.

‘They say,’ answered Andreth: ‘they say that the One will himself enter into Arda, and heal Men and all the Marring from the beginning to the end. . . . How could Eru enter into the thing that He has made, and than which He is beyond measure greater? Can the singer enter into his tale or the designer into his picture?’

‘He is already in it, as well as outside,’ said Finrod . . .

‘For, as it seems to me, even if He in Himself were to enter in, He must still remain also as He is: the Author without. And yet, Andreth, to speak with humility, I cannot conceive how else this healing could be achieved. Since Eru will surely not suffer Melkor to turn the world to his own will and to triumph in the end. Yet there is no power conceivable greater than Melkor save Eru only. Therefore Eru, if He will not relinquish his work to Melkor, who must else proceed to mastery, then Eru must come in to conquer him.

‘More: even if Melkor (or the Morgoth that he has become) could in any way be thrown down or thrust from Arda, still his Shadow would remain, and the evil that he has wrote and sown as a seed would wax and multiply. And if any remedy for this is to be found, ere all is ended, any new light to oppose the shadow, or any medicine for the wounds: then it must, I deem, come from without.’

[Meneladan]

Evil is not a thing-in-itself, but an absence of some degree of good. This is what Tolkien, as a semi-Augustinian Roman Catholic, believed. Free moral choice is what we are given, even if the course of history is determined.

"Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succor of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after us may have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule."

Our choices really matter, but we do not have the burden of the world on our shoulders - that would break us.

The difference between Aule's choice and Morgoth's choice is this: Aule acted out of love, for a desire to see and teach the Children of Iluvatar. Morgoth acted out of pride and for a desire for glory to be given to himself.

As to Eru Iluvatar, He is indeed YHWH. That is why little is written of him. A Christian just cannot feel comfortable having God as a character in a story, for He is not ours to rule. But as Galenhir points out, the Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth, which CJRT left out of the Silmarillion because he rejected his father's faith, shows exactly what Tolkien was thinking. He is very clear about this in his letters as well.

A reader does not have to agree with the author to understand what the author meant and where the author was coming from.