The atrocity of the Akallabêth

[Raynor]

Unless, of course, Eru had removed him as had been done with Morgoth.

Which disregards that:
- all the ainur are supposed to stay within Ea until the end
- Eru must respect the free will of his created beings
- Melkor is the foremost candidate for an exception; the effects of him staying in Ea and regaining power are incomparable to Sauron doing so

But its not convincing anybody.

So far, I believe you are the only one who remains unconvinced of their veracity. If don't have an actual counter-proof, your argument is fallacious.

Eru may have shown such 'concern' as you state, but he also slaughtered many thousands of his children, innocent as well as guilty

I have presented my case concerning the marring of all the un-faithfuls in Numenor. I am looking forward to rebutals.

allowed many evil Numenoreans to survive in mainland colonies.

In a situation of power which is incomparable to what has been before.

So the possibility that the bodies may not have been seen makes the killing more acceptable?

That was not my point. I have simply pointed out the unlikelyness of your theory.

I'm sure, for instance, that destruction of the Fleet alone would have had the desired effect, without killing the civilians.

You disregard the fact that killing people _in_land_ by lightning strikes had no effect either; or that Sauron was still in Numenor, more of a ruler than before, above a people he tainted with his power. That situation would simply have removed all obstacles in Sauron's path, as he was already musing how to go about his business, now that the Edain were out of his way. Destroying only the fleet would have actually helped Sauron. He was glad about it.

I do not accept that any children on the Island can be held to have been guilty enough to justify their deaths while Nuemnoreans who actually did go along with the attrocities were spared by virtue of their being on the mainland.

Those on the mainland, unlike those on the island, weren't under Sauron's continuous, ever increasing, corruption.

Have to say that the most effective way of taking away someone's free will is to drown them.

I have asked you what would you have done better, if someone continues to kill and oppress, and will do so as long as he/she lives. So far, you have only nitpick at my presentation of the situation, without pointing out to any other better solution. The One's responsibility is not only to save the aggressors (the best way he can), but the victims too.

Isn't that how they justified burning heretics & witches?

False analogy; in the situation of heretics and witches, the blame rested on their accusers. There was no real reason, religious or otherwise, to do so. The burden of proof has not been observed in fact. With the numenoreans, the evidence were in the day light, while there still was light. So, what is the answer to my initial question?

Destroy the fleet, spare the civilians.

In addition to what I have answered before to this theory, I would also note that the center of world-wide oppression would still be left - Numenor.

Eru intervened & killed people. Innocent & guilty.

I am aware that the younger those people, the lesser their fault (although their marring might be just as strong). For this, I propose we consider: the "mother" situation I presented to Lal; beyond all, the fact that Eru can turn any divine punishment into a divine gift.

You're making him out almost to be the helpless victim of circumstances beyond his control.

These circumstances are beyond his control, if he is to guarantee free will.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Raynor

Which disregards that:
- all the ainur are supposed to stay within Ea until the end
- Eru must respect the free will of his created beings
- Melkor is the foremost candidate for an exception; the effects of him staying in Ea and regaining power are incomparable to Sauron doing so

So exceptions are possible?

In a situation of power which is incomparable to what has been before.

As would Numenor without its Fleet.

Those on the mainland, unlike those on the island, weren't under Sauron's continuous, ever increasing, corruption.

So the Children of Numenor were more 'evil' than fully grown Numenoreans on the Mainland?

I have asked you what would you have done better, if someone continues to kill and oppress, and will do so as long as he/she lives. So far, you have only nitpick at my presentation of the situation, without pointing out to any other better solution. The One's responsibility is not only to save the aggressors (the best way he can), but the victims too.

If that was the 'best' he could do, I'm not impressed.

False analogy; in the situation of heretics and witches, the blame rested on their accusers. There was no real reason, religious or otherwise, to do so. The burden of proof has not been observed in fact. With the numenoreans, the evidence were in the day light, while there still was light.

So burning them alive would have been ok if there had been proof? Its not that burning someone alive is wrong in & of itself, only if you have no evidence?

I am aware that the younger those people, the lesser their fault (although their marring might be just as strong). For this, I propose we consider: the "mother" situation I presented to Lal; beyond all, the fact that Eru can turn any divine punishment into a divine gift.

And you're still saying its ok to kill 'evil' children.

These circumstances are beyond his control, if he is to guarantee free will.

Killing someone does not guarantee their free will.