[Kalessin]

Gothmog, thanks for your insights [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

In reference to your comment about Melkor being the beginner of evil. I do not dispute this, I only dispute where the ability to begin the evil came from. In my view that ability came from Eru

Well, I can only go back to Tolkien's words here - both the contextual writing and the narrative itself. At no point is it stated or even intimated that "the ability to begin the evil came from Eru". As I said earlier, Tolkien clearly comments on the apparent contradiction - that Evil can arise from Good - as a recurrent theme, but never addresses it directly.

... to have a "Darkness" within and still be "Good" showes that Good is the more powerful side.

This doesn't follow, certainly not as an a priori statement, and again is not evidenced in the work itself. Tolkien clearly states - and the narrative bears out - the motif of Evil defeated by Evil (itself). It is not necessarily the case that Good is more powerful - it is not the Good that defeats the Evil. It is simply that Evil is ultimately self-destructive. Indeed, without this self-destructive element Evil might well prevail. There are a number of moments where, if Morgoth (or later Sauron) had not made critical mistakes, the battle would have been over and the dark victory complete. You could, I suppose, argue that this in effect means Good is more powerful, but it seems to me a leap of interpretation.

(with reference to 'light and dark') ... I have said that Tolkien was using what he concidered to be the Truths Behind Christianity and other Religions and Mythologies. You say that Christianity is an effective model, I say that many Religions can do the same as these Truths lie behind many belief systems.

I guess I am wary of attempting to place a comprehensive rationalisation (especially a somewhat modern one) over what is an unfinished mythos. To look for a neat and universal causal framework when the author himself acknowledges "contradiction" as a central theme. And the idea that "Christianity and many other religions share" a Godhead in which light and dark coexist is highly contentious - I would expect it to be challenged by those to whom faith is more central. As moral, or philosophical, paradigms, "Pride goeth before a fall" and 'the dominance of Yin thereby becoming Yang' are not at all related, and are rooted in explicitly different worldviews. I suppose I'm just hesitant to attempt to combine these, along with Tolkien's possible themes, or his concept of divinity, into a very modern and inclusive interpretation.

However, I agree (yay [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] ) that religion is not part of the culture of the races in the narrative, for the reasons Gothmog mentioned. I'm not sure who was asserting that, it's clearly not the case.

Peace [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]