The Lord of the Bible?

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by davem

I haven't been admonishing anybody. I was asking for someone to put forward these Christian elements - & I asked repeatedly because for a very long time people were demanding the 'right' to do that & not actually doing it.

The point is, davem, that you persist in stating your personal objection to the basis of the discussion when I think that all involved acknowledge and accept that objection. Regardless of that personal objection of yours, there are people who still wish to discuss possible parallels with the Bible. It is perfectly possible to do so without accepting that LotR is a uniquely Christian book or that it reflects the "One True (Christian) Myth" or that Tolkien intended such parallels. Equally, it is perfectly possible to do so without sermonising (as I am sure that those here who might otherwise be inclined to do so will appreciate).

Originally Posted by davem

To qualify as a Books thread surely there needs to be serious debate, with evidence cited, quotes provided, justification offered for points made & an absence of whining about being criticised. The fact that it involves Christianity & the Bible doesn't grant it special treatment in a forum dedicated to serious analysis of Tolkien's works.

As I see it, the thread is now starting to move towards more serious debate of the issues raised and hopefully will continue to do so, if you will let it. Debate does not become serious only when davem considers it to be so. A discussion does not become worthy of the Book forum only when davem deems it to be so. A parallel does not become a parallel only when davem accepts it (and nor, in my opinion, does it require an exact identity of features for it to be validly drawn).

As for "whining about being criticised", there is a difference between debating points of disagreement and ridiculing the views and opinions of others. You, in my assessment, have over-stepped the mark on a number of occasions (and unfortunately continue to do so).

Your objection is noted. Let's move on.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

If he had still got poular support and one of the brothers had held onto Gondor he would have used diplomatic means to win them over, but even had he not had popular support, I doubt he would have gone 'steaming in'.

And if a diplomatic resolution had not been possible?

Of course, the point does not arise because, within the context of the story, Aragorn does have a divine right to rule (as evidenced by his "hands of a healer") and this is readily recognised and accepted by his putative subjects. (There was also the small matter of having saved their City from almost certain doom. )

EDIT: Cross-posted with Mister Underhill, whose final warning will, I hope, be heeded by all concerned.