Thanks for the quote, Hookbill.

How about a god who, having the ability, stops needless suffering? Sure, I know that a little suffering does me some good, as I, as an adult, have the ability to understand and therefore gain wisdom from the ordeal. But what about children? What about those that live out a mean short life full of pain and sorrow then end up dead. Where's the point in all of that? Some might say that these little ones are to suffer that I may learn something, but that, to me, is just whitewash.

As a father, I know that there are times when my children must learn via pain - the burned hand, the skinned knee, the bruised heart. But there are times when I must intervene, as the child may not survive the lesson (i.e. swallowing poison), and so there is no point to allowing the rebellion to continue. Maybe there are more strong-hearted fathers out there who allow their children to explore free will to death, literally, but me - I want to save all of them. Anyway...

And what is good? I've never been comfortable when confronted with, purportedly, moral absolutes, as I've always noticed that there's an asterisk next to the "thou shall not..."

Note that I'm not after any particular religion or creed here, but just trying to make a point:

• Thou shall not kill...except when unbelievers get in the way.

• Thou shall not eat each other...except when stranded in the Andes.

• Incest is bad...except when consolidating power via a monarchy.

• etc

So what is good? When we act in conformity with our community's needs and expectation? When we promote the survival of our genes (and the genes of those like us - a possible explanation of altruism)? Anyway.

Life under Melkor would not be good. He was all about power, and the only way to know that you're in control of another, as indicated by George Orwell, is to make the other miserable. That way, you know that they do your will and not their own, which would be to escape misery. Eru and Manwe allow for a possible good life. I can do what I want - seek happiness - to the limits that the world allows, knowing that Melkor, Sauron or one of his spawn will be trying to hedge me in.

Melkor could have been good, but he sought to interfere with others' abilities to explore their freedom, and did not want to establish a border with some compromise.

Thing about lewis was his tendency to adopt extremes - he flips from 'The idea of God makes no sense, & belief is irrational' to 'The idea if God is the most sensible thing in the world, & belief is an entirely logical response.'

Its this 'extremism' that is the problem. Lewis never seemed able to simply admit 'Er, you know what - I can't explain that. It doesn't make sense. In fact, it seems unfair. However I trust that things will make sense in the end.' His 'explanation' as given by Hookbill, works up to a point, but it doesn't cover every base - which Lewis seems to imply it does.

Another reason Sauron is not due praise and adoration: He, like Gandalf, had Gollum in his grasp. He interrogates the wretch, then sends him out into the world to hunt for the Ring, hoping that the trail left by this one-thought-desire creature will lead him to his Precious. He even put a fear on the creature that Gandalf wasn't able to break with his pyrotechnics. Yet...

Unlike Gandalf, didn't the Eye see that Gollum would have a part to play in the end game? Did Sauron see this, yet remain hopeful that things would still 'fall' in his favor?

Gandalf knew; Sauron blew (it).

A bit of a change of topic here, but does anyone else findit slightly uncomfortable that Tolkien connected atheism and Morgothism in Morgoth's Ring?

"Morgothism" is not connected to atheism. Morgoth was a nihilist. He could personally never be an atheist because of his knowledge of and direct contact with Iluvatar; and anyone who worshipped Morgoth would consider him either God or the rightful ruler in defiance of God--obviously not atheistic beliefs either. Someone who imitated Morgoth's "philosophy" (at least, as much as it was outwardly discernible; he did not preach like a prophet, as far as I know) would be adopting a nihilistic ethos, not an atheistic one. Incidentally, I think nihilism is probably the only appropriate outlook for a being like Melkor, originally absolute in his rights and unmatched in potential, but ultimately utterly frustrated and diminished by his own inflexibility and intolerance of boundaries.

Relevant text from Myths Transformed:

I doubt Sauron ever thought of such a possibility, as seen later in the decisions he makes. If he had considered this possibility, he would have made sure nothing would ever come into Mordor unwanted.

He probably thought that Gollum would never come close to repentance and would never lead anyone into Mordor, but would instead try to kill the Ringbearer and hide himself with the Ring somewhere, where he would eventually, sooner or later, be discovered by Sauron's minions.

Too much self-confidence...

What's even sadder about Morgoth, at first First amongst all of Eru's creations, is that, when he goes to Fëanor's door in attempt to woo Curufinwë to his cause, when the creator of the Silmarils realizes that Morgoth wants the gems for himself - and that he too is one of the Valar (jailers in Fëanor's mind) - Fëanor slams his door in the most powerful Vala's face like a so much unwanted door-to-door salesperson.

How humiliating! He didn't even know enough to stick his foot in the door...

Poor Melkor, all he really wanted was to be loved.