Is Eru God?

[Lalwendë]

So Fordim now says we are voting about whether Eru is the God, not just Tolkien's God? That's what I've been arguing about all along. Good. It's clear that Eru is influenced by Tolkien's interpretation of God (amongst many other things; we must not forget that Tolkien had other influences besides his own take on Catholicism), but then Tolkien's interpretation of God is in no way shared by everyone! Even amongst Catholics I know, they would have a different view of 'God' to that put forward in the character of Eru. I especially do not like the saying that Eru is the Christian God, as that is an incredibly sweeping statement.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by davem

quoting Tolkien and the Great War, on the TCGB

(p 122) Rob Gilson: I like to say & to hear it said & to feel boldly that the glory of beauty & order & joyful contentment in the universe is the presence of God....GB Smith was closely attentive to Tolkien's vision & in some measure shared it....Smith saw no demarcation between holiness & Faerie.

Not appropo of the discussion here, but this makes me wonder about the "allegory" or symbolism in Smith of Wootton Major. Shippey says Smith is Tolkien and I seem to recall most of the discussions on the Downs assume that as well. But perhaps that is an autobiographical fallacy once again?

If Smith = Tolkien, can we say Tolkien = Smith?

or, if Eru = God, can we say God = Eru ?

[Gothmog]

burrahobbit:

You do realize that equivalent means "the same as"? Right? Is equal to?

Due to my lack of skill in English, this might have come out wrong. But according to my dictionary (I checked) equivalent is translated likvärdig/motsvarighet which can be meaning both equal to and (this is hard to explain!) corresponding to. I might have used the word in a way not intended, but what I meant to say is that Eru has become the correspondence to God in ME, but not God. Eru can be compared with God as they are both the Creator of "their" world and the highest power, but they're not the same. Hope that cleared things up and sorry for confusing you with my inferior language proficiency.

[Roa_Aoife]

Hold the phone, people. You want to argue how compatible Eru is with everyone's personal veiws of the Christian God?!?!? *deep breath*

So, just let me clarify, given the evidence provided (ie. the quotes from Tolkien, his own writings, etc,) can we all agree that Tolkien most likely viewed Eru as God?

The problem with the arguement that is developing is that it will never end. Everyone, even Christians, have different veiws of God. I have seen two Christians argue the nature of God, both throwing bible verses at each other, with out ever reaching a conclusion. That's why we so many different sects, (Baptists, Calvinist, Methodists, Lutherans, etc, and don't get me started going down the list of different Catholic sects.)

My word, people, are we here to discuss Tolkien's works or personal philosophy? If it's the latter, we'll be arguing till Kingdom Come. (Religious reference definitely intended.) That is, you'll be arguing, because there's no way I'm getting dragged in to that.

And no Fae, I've made it clear that I'm not Tolkien at least twice in this thread.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Originally Posted by Roa_Aoife

And no Fae, I've made it clear that I'm not Tolkien at least twice in this thread.

It was rethorical and not directed to you personally. First note that I'm a smart-alec, but then remember that behind the dry humor, I have a point.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Roa_Aoife

My word, people, are we here to discuss Tolkien's works or personal philosophy? If it's the latter, we'll be arguing till Kingdom Come. (Religious reference definitely intended.) That is, you'll be arguing, because there's no way I'm getting dragged in to that.

Exactly. Tolkien clearly believed Eru=God (the 'version' he believed in). Simply saying 'Well, Eru isn't at all like God, so there!' is running away from the real issue. Tolkien is saying some very definite (& perhaps very uncomfortable) things about God. Aren't they worthy of consideration at least? Do we learn anything at all about God from what Tolkien says about Eru?

Should we put Tolkien in the dock?

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Roa_Aoife

The problem with the arguement that is developing is that it will never end. Everyone, even Christians, have different veiws of God.

But surely there is merit in discussing both how Tolkien's portrayal of Eru affects our own personal spiritual beliefs and how such personal beliefs affect our response to Eru and, in many ways therefore, our approach to the world that Tolkien has created? It doesn't have to be an argument if people are prepared to acknowledge and respect that other hold beliefs different to their own.

And it seems to me, in this regard, that the points made by davem in his long post above are central to the discussion in this regard. The points that he makes concerning suffering, together with wider points concerning the nature of good and evil, are a large part of the reason why neither Eru nor the Christian God (in the broad sense) fit my conception of God (assuming that there is such a being).

But, predictably, davem and I are at odds on the following issue:

Originally Posted by davem

Simply saying 'Well, Eru isn't at all like God, so there!' is running away from the real issue.

Simply because I don't accept Eru and/or Tolkien's God as my God does not mean that I am running away from the issue. On the contrary, his portrayal of God in Middle-earth, combined with his other writings (Letters etc) and fuelled by the many discussions that I have participated in here on this issue, have caused me to think very deeply about my own spiritual beliefs and attitude toward God, good and evil etc. I have not come to share Tolkien's beliefs nor have I been struck by any sudden revelations, but that does not mean that the process has not been useful (to me at least).

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Although Tolkien said that God was far too complex for him to put into words, I think it is plain that Eru is supposed to be God. The story of Ainulindele (sorry if I've spelt that wrong) bares similarities to some Biblical accounts. Firstly, creation being an offspring of Gods thought is a concept I have heard and bares resemblance to the Ainur. Also the way the Ainur sing to Eru is like onto how the Angels sing onto God, and also Melkor's discord is like Satan's rebellion.
I do not claim to be any great Tolkien scholar, or even Bible scholar, but these things seem to jump out at me. So from this I gathered that Eru was, in Tolkien's intentions, God. *shrug*

[davem]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Not appropo of the discussion here, but this makes me wonder about the "allegory" or symbolism in Smith of Wootton Major. Shippey says Smith is Tolkien and I seem to recall most of the discussions on the Downs assume that as well. But perhaps that is an autobiographical fallacy once again?

If Smith = Tolkien, can we say Tolkien = Smith?

or, if Eru = God, can we say God = Eru ?

I don't know if its relevant that Tolkien chose the name Smith for the central character in his final original story - he didn't use Gilson or Wiseman for other characters. Certainly GB Smith's death lead him to state that 'something has gone crack', & he was deeply affected by his fellow TCBS-ite's death. IT confirmed that 'the Immortal Four' were anything but.

I suspect that Tolkien found himself in a very difficult position as regards his own faith. Certainly a 'Gentle Jesus, meek & mild' type of God was out of the question after the Somme, so Tolkien would have been in the position of either rejecting God altogether, or coming up with a version of God that he could accept/believe in who was both a loving, compassionate Creator but who, at the same time, could allow (& bring good out of) suffering & horror.

Why doesn't Eru intervene to prevent the suffering of His children in Middle-earth? That's as difficult a question to answer as 'Why didn't God intervene to prevent the suffering of Tolkien's generation in WW1?' Why did Eru choose Frodo to undertake an imossible task that would break him & end his life? Why would God stand back & allow the deaths of two out of Tolkien's three closest friends - friends who, like himself, were serving that same God, attempting to do His work by bringing the English people back to Him?

Tolkien believed God is a loving creator, with the best interests of his Creation at heart & with a deep love of His children, yet He stands back & allows them to suffer - why? Tolkien, it seems, never could answer that one - though he spent 60 years of his life attempting to do so through the means of his legendarium. In the end, while he couldn't provide an answer, what he did was to restate the question, lay it bare, confront us all with the mystery. The 'answer' he does offer: 'Its about Death, the inevitability of Death', Death is the 'Gift' of Eru to Men, & while we may not appreciate that 'Gift' now, in the end we will, & even the immortals will envy us for it' is not convincing, & its not what we get from reading LotR. What we get from LotR is not the 'satisfaction' that comes from recieving a pat answer to the mystery of existence, but rather the kind of satisfaction that the Hobbits got from 'seeing everything laid out fair & square with no contradictions'.

Tolkien sets out the mystery of our place in Creation, confronts us with the way things are. Eru doesn't intervene to prevent the sufferings of His children in Middle-earth, & God doesn't intervene to prevent our sufferings here. Both Smith & Gilson died horribly, & their potential was never achieved. Fact. Frodo was chosen to perform an impossible task & he lost his life as a direct result. Fact. The easy option would have been athiesm - but that let's God off the hook. Tolkien wouldn't do that, take that 'easy' option. Tolkien places God firmly in the driving seat, in the position of ultimate responsibility, & says 'This is how it is!' God/Eru exists, is an inescapable fact, & yet there is horrible suffering & waste.

There is a lot of speculation among the peoples of Middle-earth as to why 'bad stuff' happens, but we're never given a convincing, definite answer - because Tolkien was just a man, & didn't have one to give.