[mark12_30]

The first N posts: Character oriented. Some quick notes, although I don't think the meat is really here, and I don't want to get bogged down.

the Balrog - Satan;{or} Melkor-Satan

Melkor gets my vote.

Saruman/Grima - Judas

Hmmm. Not quite; although Grima is a better possibility than Saruman. I'm still mulling this one over, and could be prevailed upon to expound... for Fea in particular, if she asks us nicely, preciousss. The other treasonous varmints to consider are Smeagol/Gollum, and, Denethor. Hoom. Smeagollum is worth some more thought-- after some more homework. EDIT: Actually, Boromir is also worth considering. (My poor Boromir!) (end edit)

Gandalf the White resurrection

Well, yes, but not the resurrection of Jesus. There are several resurrections in the scriptures. This is worth taking a closer look at later. Remind me.

Elrond - Jesus?

Again, not the similarity I would have focused on-- although Elrond's role in healing, preaching, history-linking, and counsel is certainly notable, it doesn't shout "redeemer" to me. Maybe "prophet." Healings happened under more hands than Jesus' alone. Elrond reminds me more of Elijah & Elisha than he reminds me of Jesus. .

Originally Posted by Mansun

Another important comparison is the ending to the LOTR - Gandalf passes into the far green country where the undying lands await. Does this not ring bells as to where Jesus ends up when he has done his tme on earth? Tolkien was a devout Christian I can imagine.

The very word paradise, means garden. This is a whole interlocking, interlacing theme throughout scripture. It probably also shows up in other myths-- I can't speak to that; but I can definitely speak to the scriptural theme. More later if folks are interested.

Now, post number 8:

Originally Posted by Feanor of the Peredhil

Though I hadn't noticed the correlation between Elrond and Jesus before... I usually see Jesus in Aragorn. The child, raised by his mother and one not his father; one who did great things for his lands; one with compassion, with the hands of a healer; one who descended into the terror of the lands of the dead to bring those there into light; one who compelled strength and hope into those around him; one that was loved and trusted by nearly all; one willing to die so that others could live; the King that Returns.

Could hardly have said it better myself. I tried, about ten years ago, and this is stil posted on my old website:

From an obscure-- but ancient and royal-- lineage, a prince rises. He keeps his lineage secret. He is faithful to a fiancee (1) and a life-vision (2) that he has had since he was a very young man. He carries a sword (3) before which the darkness gives way; he has a name (4)-- the Heir of Isildur-- which the darkness fears. After numerous journeys, skirmishes and battles (5) with the darkness, in which his character is proven practically fautless (6), he travels--- three days (7)--- on the paths of the dead, bringing a spiritual, ghostly host with him when he emerges (8); fights a battle beside them against the darkness; he then releases the souls from their bondage to go in peace.(8) He continues against the darkness until he is at the very gates of the kingdom of darkness. At this point in time, the kingdom of darkness is defeated (granted, not by the prince directly, but he is there when it happens.) All of Middle Earth is released from the authority of Sauron.(9) (However, there are pockets of resistance left over that must be cleaned up. In a similar vein, we are released from the authority of Satan; his power is broken; but there are still battles to be fought.) The prince then returns to the seat of his fathers(10), claims his throne, sits in judgement, and then marries a bride (11) (a bride that has the heritage of eternal life, although she chooses to forsake it and become mortal. The parallel fails there.) Together, they reign in peace over a prosperous and joyful kingdom. (12)

1. The church, not formed yet during Jesus' ministry, but clearly foretold.
2. To win the Kingdom back so that he can marry the bride.
3. The Word Of God.
4. The Name of Jesus.
5. The ministry of Jesus.
6. The sinlessness of Jesus.
7. "Just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale..."
8. The "Harrowing of Hell"-- release of Hell's captives.
9. Satan defeated by the cross and resurrection of Christ-- destruction of Satan's power.
10. Minas Tirith-- Jerusalem.
11. The church.
12. The post-millenial reign with the church (after the judgement.)

Originally Posted by Fea

And why must each borrowed character have only one place in a story? Does there really have to be just one Satan? Why not multiple? Why not several heroes? Why not several Christ figures?

A very, very perceptive point-- especially since, in the Old Testament, there are a bunch of them. They are not allegories (achoo.) They are imperfect Types. ONe aspect of their life forecasts a specific trait of the messiah. Obviously the Types have their faults (otherwise they'd be sinless.) However, taken together as just Types, the Types give a cumulative portrait of the expected one. Off the top of my head,
Biblical OT Messianic TYPES:
Adam-- the first of a new race. (Christ is the first (and firstfruits) of the New Creation..)
Noah: End of the old creation, beginning of the new. (According to Paul, a symbol of baptism -- passing through death to new life.)
Isaac: (The Son of promise, (almost) sacrificed. Redeemed.)
Joshua: (Ushers in a new kingdom. Jesus is named after Joshua.)
David as Shepherd. David as worshipper. David as King. Solomon as King. Daniel. Jonah. Hoseah. I'm missing some. Anyway you get the point. More than one forecasting Type is not only allowed, but required to form the broader picture.
So Fea's question is extremely perceptive, and yes I'd be happy to elaborate. Bottom line, I see three main pre-messianic Types, each forecasting a different Messianic aspect. Aragorn forecasts the kingly aspect, Gandalf the prophetic aspect, Frodo the sacrificial aspect. And no, none of them are complete picture in and of themselves; but taken together, the picture begins to form-- as it does with the OT types.

Phew! I'm only on post number 8 ?!?!? Moving on. Post number 10:

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Gandalf died to save his companions from the balrog. Because of this, and because his quest was not yet fulfilled, he was resurrected. Jesus died and came back to save mankind from their sins. I'd say this is a significantly different motive. It is a resurrection, but not 'The' resurrection.

Correct. Neither is Aragorn's emerging from "three days in the belly of the" paths of the dead. Neither is Frodo's being stung into unconsciousness by Shelob, waking up to hellish torture, and then waking up again at the call of a loved one's voice. Neither is Frodo's being lifted off of Hellish Mount Doom, unconscious, and borne off by eagles to sit on Aragorn's makeshift throne at the field of Cormallen. However, they make pretty good Types. Not allegories; no-no-no, don't go there! But Types? Yes. Highly applicable Types.

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Preaching and counselling was not everything Jesus did in his life, so I don't see the connection. I'm not knowledgeable enough about the bible to tell whether one of the prophets of the old testament could have a similarity to him.

I believe Macalaure was referring to Elrond here? In which case, I've already agreed with him. Very Elijah-Elisha-ish. Now, this begs the question: Did Tolkien steal Elijah-Elisha from the bible and squeeze him into the pages earmarked for Elrond? Hardly. More on this later.

Post 12, from Boromir88, and I paraphrase: :

...egads, don't use the word allegory

To which I also agree. Tolkien didn't want to shove anything down anybody's throat; that wasn't his style. No allegories. Allegories Nyet.
Post 13, Fea: You make me smile.

Originally Posted by Gurthang'sPost14

Now, as far as specifics are concerned, I can see some. There could be strong cases made that Gandalf, Aragorn, and even Frodo were Christ-like. A case could even be made that Elrond was also. I wouldn't initially make that connection, but links between the two do exist. Although, I don't think any of them could really be said to represent Jesus.

Amazing. And I've never lectured Gurthang. Ever!

Originally Posted by Gurthang'sPost14

Although, I do say otherwise about Melkor. He, in my mind, exactly represents Satan. Sauron does also. Their aspects of being good at one time, falling into evil, often appearing likeable or pleasant, but deeply desiring to hold and corrupt everything sounds extremely close to the story of Lucifer that I've heard. In my mind, Melkor and Sauron directly represent Satan.

Melkor I've already agreed about. While Sauron comes close, he's too vulnerable to tactical defeat via physical destruction of the Ring. Melkor (versus Earendil) on the other hand, was a spot-on Foreshadowing..

Originally Posted by LalwendePost15

You can't deny that things such as his faith will have had an influence but at the higher, deeper level in forming archetypes to work from

Aaaahhh, now we come to it. Archetypes and myth. Hold that thought. And kudos to Lal for bringing it up.

I suppose we could say that some of the characters that seem Biblical could equally be from similar archetypes found in say Norse myth.

Yes; but read On Fairy Stories and read Mythopoeia, to see that Tolkien believed all myths point to the One True Myth.

The point is that the mind is a big old stew and influences definitely come through, but Tolkein did not intend them as allegories of certain Biblical characters.

Mustn't say the a-word. Agreed. No allegories here.

Originally Posted by TheOnlyRealEstel_post16

No, Tolkien didn't "effectively steal" anything from the Bible because he wasn't trying to. As others have said, Tolkien seemed to be a firm believer in leaving things up to the mind of the reader (applicability rather than allegory) instead of leading their minds to a certain point. Not that there's anything wrong with that, per se.

That said, I think you can draw many similarities (obviously). There are several reasons for this - the most obvious being that you can find similarities anytime, even when there aren't any. But also, I think there are parallels that are in Tolkien's books, whether he meant them to be or not. You can not be so devoted to something (his faith) without it seeping into what you do.

In my opinion, this agrees quite nicely with most of the above, except perhaps my enthusiastic, specific, one-to-one endorsement of Melkor as Satan. But Estel isn't done yet:

I agree. I don't quite see the Balrog=Satan line of thought either. Considering there were mainly Balrogs, I'd think they represented more the "fallen angels" that followed Satan when he was cast out. Of Sauron & Melkor, I'd say that Melkor more directly paralleled Satan because he was cast out by Illuvator & really was the beginning of evil in Tolkien's world. Sauron was simply a pawn of his (though a powerful one).

Another agreement.

However, in the interest of a good night's sleep I think I will pause here at Post 16. Grace and peace, all.