Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tar-Telperien
Are you sure that that's not just humans' opinions? From the Athrabeth, it is made plain that Men, even the Edain, had fallen into a belief that Death was an "abominable" punishment brought on for evil deeds Men committed in their early history. There was almost no way they could find the strength of mind to look at it neutrally. It always carried an aura of punishment or "Doom" for them. So naturally this worked into their justice systems, which are human constructions.
|
Ah, I see I didn't make clear what I meant. Death itself is not evil, of course not. It's simply the fate of Men.
Killing, however, is evil, unless the killed one is evil, because it violently severs hroa and fea, and this is not meant to be. There isn't even a difference between Elf, Man, Dwarf or whatever in this sense, I think.
Let's put it differently. Evil is defined as rebellion against Eru's will. Eru's will was so far that Men, or Incarnate Beings in general, shall not kill each other (again, only if innocent). Now Eru
does kill innocent people. Does this now mean that Eru's will is inconsistent? Can Eru rebel against himself?
Just trying to understand this.
Quote:
|
I am not so sure that what Eru did with Númenor is bad, when one looks at the alternatives. Would leaving "innocent women and children" alone with Sauron have been any better of a solution!?
|
I think Eru's goal in destroying Númenor was to eliminate the evil/rebellion that spread from it. If we agree that he wasn't omnipotent (bear with me, but why isn't almighty=omnipotent?), then it's quite possible that he wasn't able to sort out the innocent and the guilty ones in the process. Leaving anybody to Sauron isn't even a real alternative, I'd say.