Posted on 01/03/2017 2:22:39 PM PST by fishtank
I was an atheist until i read “The Lord Of The Rings”
by Fredric Heidemann
December 16, 2016
I grew up in a loving, comfortable atheist household of professional scientists. My dad was a lapsed Catholic, and my mom was a lapsed Lutheran. From the time that I could think rationally on the subject, I did not believe in God. God was an imaginary being for which there was no proof. At best, God was a fantasy for half-witted people to compensate their ignorance and make themselves feel better about their own mortality. At worst, God was a perverse delusion responsible for most of the atrocities committed by the human race.
What broke the ice? What made me consider God’s existence a real possibility? The Lord of the Rings. I was a young teenager when I first read the Tolkien tomes, and it immediately captivated me.
(Excerpt) Read more at wordonfire.org ...
Any type of “Con” attracts costume-bedecked obsessives who fully expect everyone surrounding them to dig their oddity just as much as they do. If you go as a fan, prepare to be a little embarrassed. If you go as a cultural anthropologist, prepare to be amused.
You must have watched the animated Ralph Bakshi cartoon that came out in 1978. I don’t blame you. It was pathetic.
At the Council of Elrond, Frodo tried, strongly, to give the one Ring to Aragorn.
Nope. I meant those jaw-droppingly boring big budget movies.
This clip pretty much summed up my feelings about them:
(Warning: Language)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GorLBm35ZkE
Or this ...
Peace,
SR
With the same mission. Gnaw on a turkey leg, drink, and watch the games.
I respectfully disagree, on two points:
1) He is not the most unsung hero, in the book or in the film.
In the book, The Field of Cormallen is devoted to him as much as to Frodo, and to no others (including Meriadoc, Peregrin and Aragorn). He becomes the mayor and the most celebrated person in the Shire after the war, while Frodo is virtually forgotten. He alone, along with Frodo and Bilbo, is allowed to go to The Undying Lands among mortals (with the special exception of Gimli).
In the film, Peter Jackson went out of his way to aggrandize Samwise, who was portrayed as selfless and heroic, and to diminish Frodo, who was portrayed as fragile and even petty; both portrayals were more exaggerated and less nuanced compared to their characters in the books.
2) Samwise possessed the ring for a very, very short time, and did so in full awareness of his danger.
Bilbo and Frodo both possessed the ring for literally years, and each held it for most of that time without knowing its great inherent danger.
I appreciate Sam as a character very much, and I would agree that, in many ways, he is an exemplar of the ordinary Christian, but he is not the most apt Type of Christ in the trilogy.
I argue there are three:
Gandalf, who died to save others, and was resurrected in glory.
Frodo, who literally carried the burden of the world on his shoulders, and suffered indescribably for doing so.
Aragorn, who lived the life of a humble exile only to become the long-promised returning King after fulfilling his prophetic mission.
Since this is not an allegory, none of these is a perfect type; that was not Tolkien’s intent.
However, he acknowledged that his Christianity informed his writing, and certain aspects of the Messiah are reflected in each of these characters.
(For what it is worth, I have read the entire Lord of the Rings, cover to cover, over two dozen times, and I have been studying the Bible from age five.)
It is what I strive to be in my writing as well. (One has to aim high.)
Agreed! Sam is my favorite character because he had great character.
Sam gave up the Ring without even being asked. He volunteered it. It literally held no attraction for him. He never used it, was never tempted by its power, and never thought for an instant about keeping it for himself. Not even Galadriel, Elrond, or even Gandalf -- themselves all ring-bearers -- could boast such spiritual purity.
And yet Tolkein claimed he didn’t like allegory.
One of my sons gave me a good book for Christmas.
Tolkien’s Ordinary Virtues...Exploring the Spiritual Themes of the Lord of the Rings
Author is Mark Eddy Smith and the book has numerous chapters From Simplicity to Love with references to Christianity and the Tolkien books. Only 141 pages and here is the final paragraph....
We are written into the Book of Life. It is not a list of names, nor a laundry list of naughty and nice, but a story, one we will someday be able to read in full. There must be a first time for reading it, a time when the ending is uncertain, and that is were we find ourselves now, but one day we may get the chance to read it in full, not just our own part, but everyone’s and everything’s, and maybe we will discover in the pages of that book the true story of Sam and Frodo,and their friends. We will have an eternity to read it over and over again, and we will never grow weary of reading it.
Bilbo and Frodo had the ring for years. They had a very long time to be corrupted and to fight and overcome that corruption. Sam had it for a very short time. He did give it up when Frodo asked him for it but I thought the text suggested Sam was tempted by it. Sam was a great hero but his task was less than carrying the weight of the world. Frodo was on a journey toward and an example of the perfected virtues (Prudence, Temperance, Justice, Courage, Faith, Hope, Love) Sam was his disciple and witness and on the same journey. While I think one might say that Sam reaches the same level of excellence as Frodo, I can’t see this as greater spiritual purity.
I thought Tolkien was instrumental to CS Lewis’s Christian conversion.
I read the Hobbit and the trilogy twice. First in high school and then again in my twenties. I think perhaps I will read it again once I retire.
Presently I concentrate mostly on non-fiction reading.
Tom Bombadil felt no ill effects from the ring, and Aragorn had no interest in taking it (knowing full well what it was).
Not even Tolkien himself ever adequately explained Tom Bombadil. But his immunity to the One Ring may have arisen out of the fact that he was so flighty it simply had no mind in which to settle. I don’t think that he measures up to Sam or Frodo in terms of his spirituality. He just seems to be a more masculine version of a wood sprite, albiet one whose apparent frivolity may mask hidden powers.
Frankly, I am at a loss to explain his capricious approach to the dread of the One Ring. I suspect he simply refuses to take Evil seriously.
Ugh!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.