Is Eru God?

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by alatar

At a time when the average height may have been five feet (1.5 meter), seven feet (2.1), which we see even today, may have seemed to be gigantic. When I meet 'Merican football and basketball players, I feel dwarfed though I am over 2 meters in height. Anyway, I would have to see the bones to believe that actual giants existed. My point is that 'giants' can exist without the intervention of angels.

Fair enough, and had we no record of Goliath's height, I'd have to conceed. But we do know it.

1 Samuel 17:4 (New International Version)
4 A champion named Goliath, who was from Gath, came out of the Philistine camp. He was over nine feet* tall.
*Hebrew was six cubits and a span (about 3 meters)

For comparison purposes.

Tallest Man
The tallest man in medical history for whom there is irrefutable evidence is Robert Pershing Wadlow. He was born at Alton, Illinois, USA, on February 22, 1918, and when he was last measured on June 27, 1940, was found to be 2.72 m (8 ft 11.1 in) tall.

For us, a man near 9 ft is an amazing oddity. Goliath was over 9 ft, and he came from a whole tribe of people like that. Something was clearly different.

Originally Posted by alatar

Do we know if angels can 'cloak themselves in flesh?' I remember that there was an angel that wrestles with a human, and so I guess that it is possible…
Anyway, I see no reason nor mechanism by which angels mate with humans.

Again, this is recorded in scripture.

1 The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. 2 "My lords," he said, "please turn aside to your servant's house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning."
"No," they answered, "we will spend the night in the square."
3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. 4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
Genesis 19:1-5

The angels deviated from their original plan, ate, washed their feet (a Hebrew tradition), and were capable of being raped by the locals. If they could be raped, it stands to reason they could also have sex willingly, and therefore reproduce.

Originally Posted by alatar

Understood. My point is that these 'conversations' may not be what they appear, and that God is making some point by showing a 'discussion' is taking place. At times they are utilized as a literary device to have (I assume) a 'question and answer' theme, if that makes sense.

While I do not deign to argue divine revalation, I will point out the Tolkien, as a Catholic, would have accepted these passages as wholly true and literal.

Originally Posted by alatar

And surely an omniscient omnipresent etc God has no 'need' for angels.

Fair enough, but He would have no need for humans either. As to why both were created, I have no idea. Why should Eru bother creating anything at all? Why create the Music? Why should God create humans who would only turn away from Him time and again? That's deep theology, and not a question anyone could really answer here with out getting waaaaaay off topic.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Roa_Aoife

Fair enough, and had we no record of Goliath's height, I'd have to conceed. But we do know it. For comparison purposes. For us, a man near 9 ft is an amazing oddity. Goliath was over 9 ft, and he came from a whole tribe of people like that. Something was clearly different.

Understood, but as I question a person's ability to reliably judge height (especially at a distance), the lack of a universal standard of measure (unlike the meter, a 'span' could in theory vary), some skepticism as to when Goliath was measured (before he was killed, he was an enemy; when killed by David, there is the possibility that Goliath's height was inflated), and the lack of any evidence of this large race ever existing (though with the finding of 'hobbit' bones, I'm willing to concede that we just haven't uncovered anything yet), I will have to stand by my original argument. Even if we had a race of humans that averaged over 3 meters, this characteristic does not verify spiritual DNA. Occam's razor would suggest that if we were to encounter such a race that we might posit that they are "sons of angels" without evidence if we believed in such things.

It'd be better than just admitting that they are tall and we short.

The angels deviated from their original plan, ate, washed their feet (a Hebrew tradition), and were capable of being raped by the locals. If they could be raped, it stands to reason they could also have sex willingly, and therefore reproduce.

Disagree. The actions of the mob do not impart sexuality to the angels. For example, I may see a movie with an attractive woman. I may say that I would really like to kiss her. This does not give this electronic image flesh and blood lips.

While I do not deign to argue divine revalation, I will point out the Tolkien, as a Catholic, would have accepted these passages as wholly true and literal.

Many people accept their scriptures as "wholly true and literal," yet vary greatly on exactly what that means. Isn't this the reason that religions have many sub-divisions? And some people, even those skilled, do not always interpret a particular passage correctly.

Fair enough, but He would have no need for humans either. As to why both were created, I have no idea. Why should Eru bother creating anything at all? Why create the Music? Why should God create humans who would only turn away from Him time and again? That's deep theology, and not a question anyone could really answer here with out getting waaaaaay off topic.

Agreed. But my point was that in Arda, Manwe is King. He runs the place, with some help. So if we assume that there's a reason for Arda in the first place (unknown to us), then maybe we can say that Manwe and his tribe were created as caretakers so that Eru could get in some golfing . In the Christian world, to me it seems that angels aren't exactly needed.

[Legolas]

Angels have carried out actions just as the Valar did. Neither are absolutely necessary. Both still exist in their respective texts, and carry out actions in the name of God. I think I've missed where this tangent started...what point are you trying to make?

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Roa_Aoife

He would have no need for humans either. As to why both were created, I have no idea. Why should Eru bother creating anything at all? Why create the Music? Why should God create humans who would only turn away from Him time and again? That's deep theology, and not a question anyone could really answer here with out getting waaaaaay off topic.

Actually, I must strongly disagree with this one particularity, although, Roa Aoife, you and I line up pretty much on everything else. There is a reason trumpeted loudly throughout the Bible why God created it all. He wanted creatures to love and to be loved by. Everything, absolutely everything originates and hinges on this most central aspect of who God is, according to the Hebrew and Christian traditions. This is NOT way off topic because precisely the same motivation is to found in Eru. Why else does anyone create anything? For the sheer love (and joy) of seeing the thing do what it was meant to do, which in the case of God/Eru, was delight in all that is/was/shall be.

Originally Posted by alatar

But my point was that in Arda, Manwe is King.

I think it would be more appropriate to say that Manwe is Viceroy in Arda, and Elbereth/Varda Viceroyess (if there's such a word).

[alatar]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

He wanted creatures to love and to be loved by. Everything, absolutely everything originates and hinges on this most central aspect of who God is, according to the Hebrew and Christian traditions. This is NOT way off topic because precisely the same motivation is to found in Eru. Why else does anyone create anything? For the sheer love (and joy) of seeing the thing do what it was meant to do, which in the case of God/Eru, was delight in all that is/was/shall be.

Not sure if this places me in the skeptic, cynic or 'just to be a pest' group, but why does an omniscient being have need or a want of anything? It's like God is 100% and yet isn't complete or needs something else.

I think it would be more appropriate to say that Manwe is Viceroy in Arda, and Elbereth/Varda Viceroyess (if there's such a word).

Maybe someone can help me out here with some back up text, but I thought that Manwë was Eru's CEO.

Originally Posted by Legolas

I think I've missed where this tangent started...what point are you trying to make?

Point!?! As can be seen in my SbS posts, any point that I happen to make can be attributed to random chance...

Anyway, this tangent (or at least the one in my mind) started when I pondered foreknowledge in Arda and in the Christian world. After that, we looked at angels/ainur, and then other minutia.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by alatar

Not sure if this places me in the skeptic, cynic or 'just to be a pest' group, but why does an omniscient being have need or a want of anything? It's like God is 100% and yet isn't complete or needs something else.

Who knows, but the question is equally valid for the Catholic God as it is for Eru, and is so is a factor proving the sameness of the two.

Maybe someone can help me out here with some back up text, but I thought that Manwë was Eru's CEO.

Tolkien definitely states that Manwe was Eru's Vicegerent. I don't think the term CEO is ever used.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Who knows, but the question is equally valid for the Catholic God as it is for Eru, and is so is a factor proving the sameness of the two.

Much agreed.

Tolkien definitely states that Manwe was Eru's Vicegerent. I don't think the term CEO is ever used.

I was just being facetious . My point is that Arda has a Boss/King/Viceregent/CEO/etc. Does the Christian world have the same? And doesn't the Bible state who the prince of this world is?

And to go off on another tangent: In Arda, we have the drowning of Númenor - the Gift taken back. I used to think of this event as a shadow for the Noachian Flood, but more detailed analysis would show that these two events aren't very similar.

In Arda, only a specific island is destroyed. Though survivors, on boats, leave Númenor before the drowning, they do not have to take anything but the tunics on their backs and any artifacts that they might treasure - the rest of the world and all of the flora and fauna therein are not threatened. Elendil's family, loyal to the Valar and respecting the Ban, leave as it is prudent (they are threatened by the King's men) and not because Manwe tells them that it might be a good idea. Many other differences can be cited, and so maybe only I thought that the two were concordant somehow.

Anyway, the question then is: Is Eru God? The God of the Bible has destroyed mankind, locally and globally at times. Seemingly Eru has only done this once locally. To me YHWH has intervened, not only it little ways, but also on a global massive scale. Eru seems to sit back and watch, taking a less active role, and if he does act, then it may be in some small way (as when it is assumed that he pushes Gollum over the edge).

Is Eru a less stern/punishing God?

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by alatar

My point is that Arda has a Boss/King/Viceregent/CEO/etc. Does the Christian world have the same? And doesn't the Bible state who the prince of this world is?

My understanding is that Lucifer was appointed as Viceregent/Archangel of Earth; thus, his rebellion left Earth in darkness, and thus the need for the kinds of intervention described throughout the Bible.

And to go off on another tangent: In Arda, we have the drowning of Númenor - the Gift taken back. I used to think of this event as a shadow for the Noachian Flood, but more detailed analysis would show that these two events aren't very similar.

Right. I don't see them as similar either. The Numenor saga is more akin to the Atlantis myth, which Tolkien was trying to "correct" as received from traditional myths.

Is Eru a less stern/punishing God?

I see little difference, and see Eru as more involved, as I've explained earlier in this thread, than others seem to believe.

My right clicker isn't working so I can't bring up a quote from a different post. Anyway, davem, Eru is revealed to the people of Middle Earth to a much lesser extent than Yahweh is to us. Nevertheless, the likeness is quite evident to me. In either case, I see a Deity that is not merely a creator, certainly not instinctive as you seem to suggest. Even his creative activity is within the context of his love.

Yes, Helen, wants to. He wants relationship with us puny little bits of self-aware matter. He wants us to last forever, and not merely last but enJoy him forever. Omniscience seems to fit okay with that.

[davem]

Originally Posted by LMP

Yes, Helen, wants to. He wants relationship with us puny little bits of self-aware matter. He wants us to last forever, and not merely last but enJoy him forever. Omniscience seems to fit okay with that.

But surely 'want' implies desire, which implies a lack, that something is felt to be missing in order for a sense of completion?

Such a God may well be Omniscient & Omnipotent, but is Imperfect by nature of missing something.

By contrast, a God who creates because it is His nature to create is not Imperfect in creating things, but is rather expressing His nature fully. This does not deny that such a God would love what He had created (is God's Love separated from His Creativity, or are they 'one' & the same?). Meister Eckhart took the idea of God as Creator so far that he stated that God had not only created all things, but was constantly creating them, that past, present & future (& all things in them) are being created by God, are in a constent state of being created - otherwise they would not exist (ie even the past must be created by God 'NOW'- that is in 'Eternity'- in order for it to exist (or have existed from our perspective) ie, if God wasn't constantly 'creating' the past it would cease to exist & we would have no memory of it.

If any of that makes sense....

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by alatar

Not sure if this places me in the skeptic, cynic or 'just to be a pest' group, but why does an omniscient being have need or a want of anything? It's like God is 100% and yet isn't complete or needs something else.

Once upon a time, "to be in want" meant the same thing as "to be in need", but now, no longer. As currently used, there is a very significant difference between "to want" and "to need". This difference, methinks, is key to understanding lmp's point.

[davem]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

There is a reason trumpeted loudly throughout the Bible why God created it all. He wanted creatures to love and to be loved by. Everything, absolutely everything originates and hinges on this most central aspect of who God is, according to the Hebrew and Christian traditions. This is NOT way off topic because precisely the same motivation is to found in Eru. Why else does anyone create anything? For the sheer love (and joy) of seeing the thing do what it was meant to do, which in the case of God/Eru, was delight in all that is/was/shall be..

My own understanding (& I think this comes through perhaps more strongly in the Legendarium than in the Bible) is that God creates because it is in His nature to create. God is a creator, that is His essence: He creates because creating is what He does.

Of course, He may have other aspects which we don't know of (can't ?? know of) but in terms of His relationship to us (as creatures) He is primarily our Creator, & its difficult to know/experience Him as anything else.

That said, He is also a destroyer of what He creates (in certain circumstances).

So, God (& Eru) creates not so much out of a desire for something to love (which implies a deficit or lack in God) but because He (being a Creator) can do no other - its kind of spontaneous with Him. Hence we're not told anything about Him pre-Creation.

Which is not to say that He doesn't do other stuff as well - its just that the only aspect of Him that we can know, the only 'relationship' we can have with Him is the Creator/Created one.