Is Eru God?

[Lalwendë]

No. God is God and I believe because we cannot know exactly what 'God' is, how can we know if a fictional God is the same? Eru might well be the God of Arda, or the God of the Elves, or the God of the Elves and the Numenoreans, or the God of some Elves and some Numenoreans and some other beings. Some in Arda believe Eru is God. Others no doubt, do not; this does not make them wrong, only different. Just as in our own world there might or might not be God, and He or She or It may mean very different things to different people. Even (especially?) amongst Christians God is not always the same. God is not always even a Trinity.

Eru is the only 'good' God we are aware of in Arda, given to Arda by Tolkien. I say 'good' because a) that is sometimes debatable, and b) some worship other 'Gods', e.g. Sauron, and their 'God' may also be perfectly 'good' to them.

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

No. God is God and I believe because we cannot know exactly what 'God' is, how can we know if a fictional God is the same? Eru might well be the God of Arda, or the God of the Elves, or the God of the Elves and the Numenoreans, or the God of some Elves and some Numenoreans and some other beings. Some in Arda believe Eru is God. Others no doubt, do not; this does not make them wrong, only different. Just as in our own world there might or might not be God, and He or She or It may mean very different things to different people. Even (especially?) amongst Christians God is not always the same. God is not always even a Trinity.

Eru is the only 'good' God we are aware of in Arda, given to Arda by Tolkien. I say 'good' because a) that is sometimes debatable, and b) some worship other 'Gods', e.g. Sauron, and their 'God' may also be perfectly 'good' to them.

Well, I don't really say that I agree with much of that. But that's another fish in a larger sea, and really doesn't have much to do with Tolkien.

I will say that your statement here:

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Some in Arda believe Eru is God. Others no doubt, do not; this does not make them wrong, only different.

is certainly not correct as far as I can see. If Eru is God, then he is God. If someone believes that, then they are right. If someone does not believe that, then they are wrong. They are believing that Eru is not God when he is.


Also, I just thought of this when I was reading Fordim's original question.

Originally Posted by Fordim Hedgethistle

There's a lot hanging on this question: if you believe that Eru is God, then you are saying that the moral "rules" of M-E are Christian. If you believe that Eru is not God, then those "rules" are something else.

I do believe that the Christian moral rules hold true in Middle-Earth. It would make perfect sense for Tolkien to hold the same sense of right and wrong in Middle-Earth as in his own beliefs, regardless of whether Eru is God. If that were the primary question, then I would have said YES.

[Formendacil]

Yes.

Completely, definitely, and totally.

The Legendarium, from the Ainulindale down to the fall of Sauron was intended to be the history of this world, in a somewhat distant time B.C. This same world which, in Tolkien's faith, is under the dominion of God. Therefore, if the world in that time was under the dominion of Eru, then Eru must be God.

Eru and God are intended to be one and the same.

And I personally feel that no amount of "personal opinion" on the matter changes it. If you accept the existence of Frodo, Sam, and Gollum in Middle-Earth, you have to accept the existence of Eru- as the Judeo-Christian God within the story.

Do as you wish in real life, but within the confines of the story you have to, in my opinion, accept Eru, as presented, as God, if you are going to accept it at all.

[dancing spawn of ungoliant]

Is the question: do you think that Eru is God? Or is it: do you think Tolkien thought that Eru is God?

If it's the first one, I can say 'no' right away. Eru is just too far from the God that I know. Esty and Gurthang make some excellent points about that.

If the poll is about the latter one, I say that I don't know (where's that option, anyway ), and I understand Kuruharan's opinion that the question may be "unanswerable".

[Cailín]

This post is most unhelpful. Just a warning.

I agree with Kuru here. This might be just an unanswerable question. To discuss this, we'd first have to establish who God is, for even 'the Christian God' can have many different meanings. And taking all things in consideration, Eru is fictional and therefore cannot be our God, since God is arguably fictional, but then again, he might not be.

I think Esty gave quite an adequate explanation why Eru is unlike our God. There is also evidence that might point towards Eru being like our God. Except that there is no our God.

And since I have read quite a few times on the Downs that Tolkien hated allegories, I don't think he intended Eru to be the elvish name for God. He might have just - being catholic himself - been unable to conceive a world not having a Creator and therefore inserted Eru to make Middle Earth more real in his view.

But as I said, I don't know.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Cailín

And since I have read quite a few times on the Downs that Tolkien hated allegories, I don't think he intended Eru to be the elvish name for God. He might have just - being catholic himself - been unable to conceive a world not having a Creator and therefore inserted Eru to make Middle Earth more real in his view.

Ah, but it's not an allegory- it's a (fictional) history. Of this world.

Therefore, if Tolkien believed in this world having a God- which he did- then that same God would have existed during the time of the fictional history.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Gurthang

Well, I don't really say that I agree with much of that. But that's another fish in a larger sea, and really doesn't have much to do with Tolkien.

Why not? Tolkien himself created the conceit that the works were translations from other works. So how do we know whether we are reading the view of the translator or the original writer? And how do we know that the original writer was correct in their view of Eru? Arguably we are only seeing the views of the Elves (and they were a huge influence on the Hobbit writers), and how do they know the 'truth' about Eru any more than anyone else in Arda? It reminds me of how school history books in different eras or different countries can address the same 'facts' in different ways. It's all about primary and secondary sources and to what extent they are trusworthy.

I think that Tolkien wisely left the question quite open to interpretation with no definite answer. Yes there are indications which could equate Eru with a Christian God, but equally there are indications that Eru is nothing of the sort. To apply any God from our world to Tolkien's world is applicability, it may even verge upon allegory. Either way, if Eru is not unique to Himself, then this is not a Secondary World.

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Why not? Tolkien himself created the conceit that the works were translations from other works. So how do we know whether we are reading the view of the translator or the original writer? And how do we know that the original writer was correct in their view of Eru? Arguably we are only seeing the views of the Elves (and they were a huge influence on the Hobbit writers), and how do they know the 'truth' about Eru any more than anyone else in Arda? It reminds me of how school history books in different eras or different countries can address the same 'facts' in different ways. It's all about primary and secondary sources and to what extent they are trusworthy.

I think you misunderstood. The point I would disagree with you on has to do with Absolute Truth and our knowledge of God through the Bible. Seeing as these are more a religious debate than a Tolkien discussion, I chose to not start down that tangent.

But I do agree with you that each writer's point of view is different, and therefore we cannot wholy point to who Eru exactly was.

[Gothmog]

I say Eru is not God. He is a God, but not the .

As christian, it's obvious that Tolkien's view of a god is that of the Christian/Jewish(/Muslim/Buddhist etc. as all gods are the same according to many people) and he's been influenced by that of course. Because of his attempt to create a complete mythology, he needed a creator and a story of creation. And what is more natural than get inspiration from the Creator he believed in?

But if you say that Eru is God, you say that Tolkien tried to describe God through Eru Illuvatar and as Kuruharan wrote in his post, Tolkien wouldn't like to compare something of his own creation with something as complex and beyond expressions as God. I think Tolkien had too much respect towards God to write about him in his books.

Unconscious of it, Eru might have become an equivalent to God, or at least can be regarded as such by people. It's obvious, as we are discussing it right now. But if the question is, did Tolkien mean Eru as God, I say no.

Fordim:

There's a lot hanging on this question: if you believe that Eru is God, then you are saying that the moral "rules" of M-E are Christian. If you believe that Eru is not God, then those "rules" are something else.

I think you're simplifying things a bit here. I don't believe Eru is God, but I do believe that the moral rules of M-E are Christian. Tokien, as Christian and Catholic, had certain views of what was moraly correct and what was to consider "bad". The eternal battle between Good and Evil. These opinions are reflected in his work. But most moral rules aren't specific Christian rules, but more of common sense and a worldspread moral code. Killing is bad. So is torture, betrayal, lies, greed etc. Helping others, sacrificing oneself for someone or something etc is considered good.

One thing that I find interesting in the comparing of Eru and God is what that make Valar. Angelic beings you say, but to me Manwe seem to have more power than any archangel of the Christian religion. He's more of a semi-god. M-E is his kingdom, not Eru's domain even if Manwe subordinate to Iluvatar. There's no equivalent in Tolkien's religion.

Also intersting is Melkor's role as the fallen angel, becoming the Dark Lord. In this case, there's a lot of similarities with Christianity and Satan's fall. He was one of the greatest angel's, one of those with most power and one of those closest to God, but was hungry for more power. Exactly like Melkor. They both fell and became to metaphor of Evil.

And there ends my oversized discussion. Wake up again! I vote NO

[Kuruharan]

Chicken.

Tis better to be a correct chicken than an incorrect dogmatist (even though I will wildly alternate between conditions from time to time...okay maybe from moment to moment.)

[Mithalwen]

I just about agree with Gothmog so won't repeat. If by God you mean a supreme creating being the answer is yes. But if that capitalisation you assign him exclusively to the Christian tradition then no. But personally I think it a little arrogant of the believers to define and lay claim to god (rather like the bacteria in the petrie dish laying claims on the scientist) and so since monotheists by definition believe in one god, that rather implies that Allah, Yaweh and God are one and the same and so the answer is yes.

Eru is really more of a divine clockmaker - sets the thing in motion and watches rather than getting personally involved. Which is more or less my perception of God these days so I could say yes but it is clearly not what Fordim means so it goes back to no...

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

And yet, Mith you have failed to put your vote where your mouth is....why the reluctance to weigh in with an actual "Yes" or "No"?

As to your view of Eru as "setting things in motion" without actually "getting involved", how do you explain what happens at Mount Doom when Gollum "slips" into the Fire? Tolkien himself was quite clear (in the Letters somewhere) that there was the direct intervention from 'outside' at that point....

[Gothmog]

But Fordim, doesn't your own excellent poll say that Gollum slipped? If we listen to the majority...

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Fordim Hedgethistle

And yet, Mith you have failed to put your vote where your mouth is....why the reluctance to weigh in with an actual "Yes" or "No"?

.

Surely it is the most honest and natural course of action for an agnostic?

[Folwren]

I voted no, and for those who are keeping close tabs on this - I'm working on my reasons offline.

-- Folwren