The Lord of the Bible?

[Raynor]

But if you put some ideas out on here I might see something they have links to, and in which case I'll stick a reply on.

Well, I would firstly reffer to my post #247:

- the saviour, a godly being is sent to rekindle the hope in good; he is "despised" [or put whatever word fits you] in two of the most powerful kindgoms of Men, (Gondor + Rohan); he sacrifices himself so that evil may not prevail and returns to seal the the faith of the incarnation of evil; one of his inner circle, who for a time fell to temptation, repents;
- the King of Men returns to what might be called the holliest [or significant, or whatever] city of Middle-Earth; he heals the wounded and calls back the humans from the dead
- of all the human race, the only two ones who are allowed into the "kingdom of heaven" are the humble ones ("Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" - Matei 3:5)
- the saviour is tempted by the power of evil, who promises all the riches of the world; he goes up the mountain, carrying a tremendous burden; for a while, a faithful one carries that burden for him.

Some refferences to the likes of the figures of Noach and Mary would also come handy, for the sake of the discussion, though I don't consider them to be "core contingency".

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Just because there is no parallel to another religion doesn't make it a parallel in Christianity:

I wouldn't necessarily say that the only foundation for calling it a Christian parallel is that there are no parallels to other religions; some existing Christian ones do stand trial.

it could be no parallel at all.

A religious message which is entirely new, independent of any previous revelation? It would strike me as very full of "vanity", if I can so use the term. Or would you say there is no religious message at all? Either case, I am looking forward to your arguments.

Your proposed parallel doesn't strike me, at least not yet.

I agree it's not the best one, to be mild .