|
But in creating Arda already flawed by incorporating Melkor's themes Eru increases the likelihood that the Children will choose evil - its more likely you will fall on uneven, unstable ground than on level, solid ground. So, by incorporating Melkor's themes He takes away complete freedom from the Children. Evil is already inherent in Arda from its making. This is why within Arda no-one has true free will, because circumstances, including innate evil in the matter of Arda, will affect their choices.
When you say Eru would allow evil to come into the making & to exist, you state that He has a choice in that. Is He then responsible for His choices? He is not forced to allow evil into the Music, or into the making. And the idea that He allows it in order to bring about ultimate good is simply to say that the End justifies the means - anything is acceptable if the end result is 'good'. But is that the case? Isn't it actually the case that the end is a result, a direct consequence, of the means employed?
The question still remains - If Eru, motivated by a desire to bring about the Good, (& even if He knew that it was the only way to achieve the Good), allows Evil into existence, is He not responsible for the suffering that results along the way to the good? Does Eru's desired end absolve Him of all the suffering His children go through in bringing it about? Eru Himself does not suffer. In Christianity God does suffer through His incarnation & death, but that is for a different reason. Christ suffers to save us from a fate we have brought on ourselves. If Eru incarnates & suffers it would be only 'just' - why should He be the only one who doesn't suffer as a consequence of His choices?
|