Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Raynor
If you are arguing for this, of if you are arguing from the _position_ of atheism, then our discussion is at a dead point; continuing it would mean to talk about something else.
|
If atheism is the trouble, I can continue his argument for him. I am not atheist.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davem
Sorry, but I can recognise Christian propaganda when I hear it.
|
If Christianity is the trouble, I can continue his argument for him. I am not Christian.
This entire discussion smacks of, not intolerance for religion, but intolerance for opinion based upon its own congenital biases.
If it is believed that a Christian cannot argue without his words being tainted with Christian bias, or that an atheist cannot argue without his words being tainted with an atheist bias, or that a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Taoist, a Wiccan, a Hindu cannot view the world without a strictly idealistic bend, surely it is a logical conclusion that a man cannot write prolifically without his works being imbued with the same biases from which he, as a person, suffers?
If we cannot agree that objectivity is a possibility within debate, how can we possibly be arrogant enough to believe that objectivity is possible within a novel? Every experience you've had, every day you've lived, every breath you've taken becomes a part of you. A writer, though he may take what he believes and turn it upon its head for the sake of a story, has still written something that has come from the very beginning: him. A writer may be a writer, but everything created by him is created in his own image. This writer was not simply a Christian writing a book with secret Christian meaning. He was John Tolkien, and he wrote because he was a writer. If we are to take him at face value when he states that the book was not consciously a Christian book, it must be accepted that if there are Christian biases within it, they are there by accident.
But to say that they do not exist at all is the very same level of folly as to claim that they are blatantly apparent.
If it begins to appear that your opponent in your debate cannot seem to admit that he may have something to learn, perhaps it is best to step back and view one's own words thus far; it may be time to take one's own advice.
Now onward.
I would like to view the Bible through the lens of The Lord of the Rings. I want to learn more about all religions, but it seems easiest to start with the religion of my parents, the religion of most of my friends, the religion I grew up submersed, be it conscious or not, within.
Saruman has been labelled as a sort of a Judas figure within the story. This interests me. Who was Judas, who was Saruman, and what attributes do they share? Why has this connection been made?