The Lord of the Bible?

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Erm, there is no contradiction.

Quite right. Sorry for my daftness. Unequivocal = 'leaving no doubt'. I'm not sure that's possible, precisely because belief and doubt are choices made by people. The best I can promise is evidence as clearly laid out as possible, and each person is intellectually responsible (to the rest of us for those who think that way, and to our Maker for those who think that way) to examine it and come to the best conclusions they can.

Okay: As to Bilbo and the Ring. The points I made before were:

• That Bilbo is not in control of his own will; it takes Gandalf's will overpowering Bilbo's, for the hobbit to begin to come to his senses.
• That Gandalf is powerful and good; we have as yet no indication where his power comes from.

To these should be added the following:

• Bilbo calls the Ring his own: he claims possession. This is a critical point, and we shall see (or already know) how it compares to Frodo and Sam.

This theme of possession is central to Tolkien. Thorin Oakenshield was taken with lust for the Arkenstone and it completely warped his state of mind in regard to the others who had a claim to any of the treasure. Likewise, Tolkien wrote poems, the most appropo being The Hoard, which pretty much states his case quite clearly. In succession, a hoard of treasure is held by Elves, then Dwarf, a Dragon, a Knight, then no-one at all. The Dwarf, Dragon, and Knight are each in turn ruined by their greed for the Hoard. Now for that which is unequivocal in my view: there was a certain teacher in a land by a great sea who taught wisdom to those who would listen. One of the things that he said was:

Do not lay up for yourself treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal;
but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.
For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Even if one doubts the middle of these three lines, the first and especially the third are just good wisdom. They are not exclusive to Christianity, but that's not what I'm trying to show anyway.

Putting it together: Bilbo claims the Ring as his own; he treasures it. His heart is given to it. He tells Gandalf that he had hoped that giving all these other gifts would make giving up the Ring easier, but it does not. Because Bilbo treasures the Ring, going so far as to call it his precious, the Ring owns him. It takes what little will power Bilbo can muster, with a great amount of from Gandalf, to give up the Ring.

The Ring is beautiful and seductive, as well as powerful. Things that have good qualities but are still damaging to us are the hardest things to give up, even though they might be killing us, or in the case of Bilbo, dragging him into a state of undeadness.

It just so happens that the Ring is also evil, and has a will of its own. It is intriguing to me that Tolkien adds this degree of malevolence. It seems obvious that he had to for the sake of the story, but this was the story he chose to tell; it could have been a different story. What is it about this Ring? Why mix the charateristics of beauty, allure, willfulness, and evil? It is because this is precisely the nature of the struggle humans face, every day. Tolkien objectifies it in the Ring, but in real life we find a pull to wrongdoing already inside, right along with the pull to doing good and right. We're a battleground, every one of us. It's part of what's so Real about LotR.

So just to sommarize: the unequivocal theme that harmonizes with a Christian world view in this scene, is 'That which I give my heart to the possession of, enslaves me.' Bilbo is enslaved by the Ring because he insists that it is his. It's interesting, just as an aside, that the quote from 'the teacher' mentions thieving. I make no more nor less of it than just to note it.