Religion in Middle Earth?

[Firawyn]

Both, I suppose, though correcting grammar is allowed if it is accompanied by a point relating to the conversation at hand.

Ahhhh...that's the loophole. Noted. :*D

 

[HLGStrider]

Support your neighborhood grammar police! Without them people start writing like everything is a text and that just drives me crazy. . .I can 1337 speak when need be, but there is a time and place for everything, people. . .and now the mod is off topic too. Whoops. . .umm. . .using magic cat powers I command this post to appear to be on topic!

 

[Firawyn]

Support your neighborhood grammar police! Without them people start writing like everything is a text and that just drives me crazy. . .I can 1337 speak when need be, but there is a time and place for everything, people. . .and now the mod is off topic too. Whoops. . .umm. . .using magic cat powers I command this post to appear to be on topic!

Very on topic Elgee....now, how about those Angels? ;*)

 

[Mithrandir-Olor]

What I mean is. Lewis may say he believed in "God" and "Jesus" what he believes about how they are and why they did what they did is entirely wrong in my view.

Finding out he was a Calvinist explained allot.

 

[Mithrandir-Olor]

Barley, if I didn't know any better, I'd think you were watching my every move (or post, more accurately).


ON TOPIC NOW -

Have you ever seen the movie Timechanger?

In summery - A man from 1890 write a paper about how human beings know good and evil without the God factor at all. Then he is sent into the future where God is no longer that...what's the word...revered. He's shocked by how people act and treat each other with the God factor removed.


So that said - how can the races of Middle Earth, as realistic as they can be, function so honorably and (pardon the pun) godly, when there seems to be no God figure to speak of?

By nature, humans (and dwarves, hobbits, elves, etc) are fallible. How can they realistically be expected to be that good without a moral plum line defined by some form of religion?

God is known in Middle Earth, but ther eis no organized Religion, as what who Hates organized religion that's what I love about Tolkien's mythology.

 

[Troll]

Have you ever seen the movie Timechanger?

In summery - A man from 1890 write a paper about how human beings know good and evil without the God factor at all. Then he is sent into the future where God is no longer that...what's the word...revered. He's shocked by how people act and treat each other with the God factor removed.


So that said - how can the races of Middle Earth, as realistic as they can be, function so honorably and (pardon the pun) godly, when there seems to be no God figure to speak of?

By nature, humans (and dwarves, hobbits, elves, etc) are fallible. How can they realistically be expected to be that good without a moral plum line defined by some form of religion?

As a faithless person, I'm always amused when people talk about a world without gods as inevitably more brutal and unpleasant than the present one.

I invite anyone to look into ancient China (prior to the Tang, basically) for an example of a society that got along just fine without any commonly-accepted gods or religion to speak of.

 

[Mithrandir-Olor]

What makes you think China ever lacked Religion?

The Chinese always believed in Shangdi, he's imbedded into their very language.

 

[Firawyn]

As a faithless person, I'm always amused when people talk about a world without gods as inevitably more brutal and unpleasant than the present one.

I invite anyone to look into ancient China (prior to the Tang, basically) for an example of a society that got along just fine without any commonly-accepted gods or religion to speak of.

I'm with Mithrandir on that one.

A society does not necessarily need someone they call "God" to still act as if they do. The Chinese people, back to ancient times, worshiped the Emperor as if he were their god. Who was ruling China at any given time determined whether or not their country was morally corrupt or not. The people followed the lead of the Emperor as to what was acceptable or not.

Egypt was another example of this. The Pharaoh was treated as the peoples' god, even though they had many of 'gods' that they worshiped. It is human nature to look for some sort of moral leadership. I can't think of a single example of a society that lacked in some sort of god, be it in name or not.

Troll, you call yourself faithless. My question to you is the following: How do you, as a person, decide what is acceptable behavior in you daily life?

 

[Troll]

The concept of shangdi, or "Heaven," in Chinese culture is not remotely analogous to that of God in Judaeochristian culture, nor did the Chinese actually worship their Emperor on an individual basis. The Emperor's status as Son of Heaven was institutional, not personal, and his role in Confucian society was to represent the entire Middle Kingdom as the "father" towards whom all subjects could engage in filial conduct. Even the Emperor was bound by Confucian ideals, which were nonreligious despite appealing to the concept of "Heaven" as a representation of harmonious conduct. The idea of Heaven mostly exists for the Emperor to have something to be filial towards, not as an active force that exerts law or justice; the latter is the role of the government.

Chinese folk religion varies widely from place to place in China, and varied even more in the past, while historical philosophies such as Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism differ in their level of mysticism but are united in their lack of moral instruction based on the power of a God or retributive justice in an afterlife or even life. The Mandate of Heaven explains the rise and fall of the fortunes of the ruling dynasty based on the ruler's filiality towards Heaven (i.e. the expectations of a Confucian ruler fulfilling his duties to the society), but the attitude of the commoners isn't governed by Heaven. Rather, filiality is the key to social harmony.

If you want to get more modern, the People's Republic of China of today has a completely functional and economically thriving society despite being explicitly atheistic. People there refrain from murder, stealing, and other crimes because of fear of the state, not fear of God.

I don't know enough about Egypt to address anything about it.

Ethical behavior is not predicated on any religious predilection. As for myself, I define acceptable conduct based on what A) will not result in my arrest and B) will promote the most positive relationships between myself and the others with whom I interact. This overlaps with seven of the Ten Commandments, generally speaking. Editorially, I think this says more about the social origins of religion than about the religious origins of society.

Considering point B, it's a bit ironic that I am making this post at all, considering that my explaining my point of view is guaranteed to elicit a negative response from you all; I apologize for that. However, I felt it would be appropriate to explain myself before withdrawing from the conversation. I understand that the theistic worldview defines its gods as necessarily eternal and their rules as universally applicable to all places, peoples, and times. As such, I doubt that I can contribute anything further to this discussion and apologize for challenging your worldview.

 

[Firawyn]

Troll,

You don't need to apologize (I wasn't offended, anyhow, can't speak for anyone else). Your answer was concise, diplomatic, and respectful. I only get offended when someone replies in a manner which can be interpreted as nothing more or less than defensive and rude.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I realize we haven't interacted before (I'm an veteran TTFer, though these days I rarely reply to any posts), but you can expect "karmatic" behavior from me, if you get my meaning. If you are respectful, I will be so in return. If you act like total arse, I will defend myself. Simple as that.

Back on topic...

As for myself, I define acceptable conduct based on what A) will not result in my arrest and B) will promote the most positive relationships between myself and the others with whom I interact.

So far as point A goes, I will point out that (peeked at your profile) you live in the US. This country was founded on biblical principles, and therefore what laws exist that, if broken, result in being punished judicially, are based on Christian ideas. Unless you can find some hole in that argument, that I would point out that the first part of your definition of acceptable conduct is grounded on Christian principles.

Point B...not much I can argue on that point. I agree with the guideline, I use it myself. My only counter-point on that note would be that, again, as you are living in the US, many of your friends and associates very likely use the same or similar definition of social conduct, and likewise, are presenting themselves in a "Godly" manner.

Whether or not you choose to recognize the origin of your behavior choices as a Christian one, the argument stands. Who we are, all of us, is largely influenced by our environment. Whether or not you choose to acknowledge a higher power, you are still unavoidably influenced by it.

Regards,
Fir-

 

[Troll]

This country was founded on biblical principles, and therefore what laws exist that, if broken, result in being punished judicially, are based on Christian ideas. Unless you can find some hole in that argument, that I would point out that the first part of your definition of acceptable conduct is grounded on Christian principles.

The country was founded on Enlightenment principles and has always been an explicitly secular enterprise, as put forth in the First Amendment. Even the phrase "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is adapted from a letter by the humanist John Locke. A great many of the founding fathers were atheistic (Thomas Paine), deistic (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison), or otherwise irreligious or heterodox (Ben Franklin). Hamilton's religiosity varied wildly throughout his life, though he was openly irreligious from 1777-1792. Adams thought there was something to Christianity, but that it had been "misused in the service of superstition, fraud, and unscrupulous power." Of the "key seven" founding fathers, only John Jay was religious in a way that put any stock in the Bible.

Considering the diversity of immigrants that made up its early colonists and the myriad interests represented at the Constitutional Convention, it cannot be claimed in good faith that this country was founded on any common principles at all - other than, perhaps, a general sentiment that Britain could shove it, though even this was only ever professed strongly by about 1/3 of the population. If there are any principles at all on which America could be said to be founded, they are probably capitalism and indecision.

And, from the 1796 Treaty with Tripoli:

While 78.5% of Americans today may be Christian of some kind or other, and though that proportion may have been yet greater in centuries past, it is in no wise factual to say that this country was founded on the Bible or on Christianity.

 

[Firawyn]

Well, if we're going to quote people, here's one for you. You might recognize it:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator...

I will not argue with you on the personal beliefs of the founding fathers. You're right on that point. But, that was not what I pointed out in my last post. I said that this country, the United States, was founded on biblical principals. I said nothing about the Founding Fathers.

But, if you're going to bring them up...while they themselves may or may not have had Christian beliefs, they did grow up in England (or at least most of them did, I'm not going to spend half hour looking them up to make sure), and England was a strictly Catholic/Christian country. Those men grew up, most likely, with Christian parents. This brings me back to my original point: who we are, all of us, is largely influenced by our environment. Whether or not you choose to acknowledge a higher power, you are still unavoidably influenced by it.

They were most certainly influenced by a Christian/Catholic upbringing. The values their parents instilled in them carried over to their adult lives, and inevitably into their rebellion and political careers. I realize that the Constitution does not have any mentioned of God, Jesus, the Bible, etc, but the laws that those men drew up were unavoidably influenced by what they believed, what they were taught to believe, was morally right and wrong.

Some more quotes for you:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

"This will be the best security for maintaining our liberties. A nation of well-informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins." - Ben Franklin

"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it [the Constitution] a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests." - Alexander Hamilton

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers. And it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest, of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." - John Jay

"Say nothing of my religion. It is known to God and myself alone. Its evidence before the world is to be sought in my life: if it has been honest and dutiful to society the religion which has regulated it cannot be a bad one." - Thomas Jefferson

Notice that the quotes I've put before you does not show any of the five founders as being overly religious, merely that they all recognize that there is an important place for Christianity in America. I don't really give a rat's arse about percentages. I'm not trying to "convert you", or anything of the sort. That would be rather hypocritical of me, as I've been where you are. I do not consider myself a Christian (in case you were thinking that I was some bible thumping nut). I consider myself a Theist. I believe in some higher, singular power. I don't honestly think that whatever or whomever started life on this planet did so with dumb luck. I don't think humanity is the result of an accident of nature. If it was really that simple, there would be life on other planets. People argue that there's no life on Mars, or anywhere else, because the climate is unable to support any such life. I think that's a pretty lame excuse, as there are creatures on this planet that live in environments that would be instantly fatal to anything other than them. Turning back to my point, if one concludes that life on Earth was indeed not a fluke of nature, then that leaves the lingering question of "How did it happen then?".

I don't have the answer to that question. I am merely certain that there is some higher power, and getting back on topic here, said higher power is often identified as the God of the Christians, and it was on that fact that this country had it's beginnings. Godly influence.

 

[jallan]

I said that this country, the United States, was founded on biblical principals.

That a particular country was founded on Biblical principles has nothing whatsoever to do with Tolkien’s fictional works.

In any case the United States was not founded strictly on Biblical principles, not even on the Ten Commandments. Do you find any state or federal law that ever ruled, “Thou shalt not covet” and had penalties for breaking that law? Do you even find any state or federal law the even ruled “Thou shalt not bear false witness” to be legally binding? In common court practice it was (and is) the custom to swear an oath that one was telling the truth, in despite of Jesus’ purported claim that:

But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne; nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.​

The United States largely followed British Common Law which was, of course, influenced by the Christian Bible, but not entirely based on it. The rules for its government are not in any way based on any Biblical example of government, but mostly on the government of Britain with the inclusion of matters taken from the early government of Athens and Republican Rome and various other sources.

But, if you're going to bring them up...while they themselves may or may not have had Christian beliefs, they did grow up in England (or at least most of them did, I'm not going to spend half hour looking them up to make sure), and England was a strictly Catholic/Christian country.

Within five minutes I found it claimed that of the most of the 1,787 delegates to the Continental Congress were natives of the Thirteen Colonies. Only 9 were born elsewhere. Only two of the 1,787 delegates were born in England.

The Catholic Relief Act in Britain was passed in 1778 allowing Catholics to own land again so possibly you might call Britain “strictly a Catholic/Christian country”. But not until, April 13, 1829, was another Roman Catholic Relief Act passed which removed almost every restriction on Roman Catholics and allowed them to run for parliament. Even Jews were allowed to own land in England before the Roman Catholics.

Your own religion is not to any point. That your supposed facts are not facts is what destroys your argument. And nothing of this has any relation to Tolkien.

... said higher power is often identified as the God of the Christians, and it was on that fact that this country had it's beginnings. Godly influence.

Yes, of course, some people believed that God favored their cause. Some people always do, whatever the cause. Many of the Tories of 1776 also believed that God supported their side. But there were other influences as well which seem to me more cogent. Hatred of what as seen as excessive taxation and of being governed by men who were appointed by a mad king. Hatred of British attempts to support agreements made with native people which interfered with expansionism. If you mean that you believe that the God actually supported the American revolution and did something to make it succeed, well, that is just your own belief and I think should not really be part of this forum.

 

[Mithrandir-Olor]

Actually Perjury is just the "False Witness" rule applied more stricklty. The Commandment was only ever about in a Trial.

Profanity laws are solely base don misusing the 4th Commandment.

 

[jallan]

There are few or any cultures that consider lying in a court case to be proper behavior. “Thou shalt not bear false witness” is just the Hebrew statement of a rule found in every culture in serious matters like court cases.

The 4th commandment actually declares that Saturday is to be the day of rest. Most professed Christians make Sunday, the so-called ‘Lord’s Day’, to be the day of rest instead. This 4th commandment doesn’t even mention profanity. Profanity laws, when they exist, are intended to prohibit foul words in respect to God (or the gods) on any day. They are not connected to the 4th commandment.

Tolkien does not include the story that God created the world in seven days in his legendarium. He claims that the 7-day week was a Númenórian alteration of the Elvish 6-day week, in which the 7th day was assigned to the Valar. Hobbits held a holiday and feast on the afternoon and evening of the 7th day, which Tolkien identifies with our Friday. Friday is also the ‘day of rest’ in the Muslim week.

 

[HLGStrider]

This is off topic, though, guys, so we kind of have to turn it back to religion as it appears/does not appear in Middle Earth or stop talking. If you want to debate this issue further, I suggest private messages, because I'm sure much remains to be seen on both sides.

 

[Mithrandir-Olor]

3rd Commandment I meant.

 

[Ingolmin]

Well, religion is not so prevalent in Middle Earth. Only a few worshipped anyone. These were elves,the Edain later the Dunedain who worshipped Eru. Some even held in awe the the Gods of the West such as the Men of the First Age. While some prayed to Melkor.
Hobbits, people of Rohan, Dunlendings, Druedain etc. did not have a religion since many of them were unaware of the creator of Arda Illuvitar as some came to know about such things only when Elendil arrived in Middle Earth. In the latter days, it had become only a matter of lore.

 

[PaigeSinclaire88]

Offhand: There is no formalized religion at the level of elves, men or hobbits. There is the sensibility of right and wrong, cruel and kind, good and bad, honest and dishonest, "demonic" (Mordor, etc.) and "angelic" (Lothlorien, etc). The whole thing functions without a "God" concept. Very Buddhist. I wonder what Tolkien would have thought of that...

Barley

PS to Fir: glad to see you've "lightened up" in the sig department!

I agree very much with the above statement^

That being said, I do think that each race and region's way of life implies that the each of them have their own religions or things in life they dedicate themselves too.

For instance Hobbits, seem (to me anyways) seem very Pagan and Celtic in their beliefs, the tea sippin, the smoking of the pipes and honestly living a somewhat simple, peasent life. I think they are a representation of the old way of life in England.

Lotherian: seems very angelic and very Buddhist as was stated above.

Rivendell: seem very much like the center of the Elven community and seem to be where not only the royalty live but where meetings also take place. Almost like the Vatican city of the Elven community.

The dwarfs seem to be a representation of a viking like beings. They enjoy mead, and meat and this goes to Tolkiens love of history I think. I think the hobbits and dwarfs seem the closest to historic peoples in my opinion.

Now with that, you have to take in consideration Tolkiens religion and love of history. And I think most of the races embody his views of the world.