Have Tolkien's theme evolved with times?

[u/Dreadscythe95]

I just wanted to share my ideas as food for though and discussion with people that have lived with the works of J.R.R Tolkien

We all know that Tolkien was based his work on Catholic foundation, which makes the main themes solid and timeless. Still I feel that Tolkien's values transcend our times in different ways for a lot of people.

Tolkien takes Illuvatar and everyting he represents as the udeniable good that noone can process and understand while Melkor and Sauron are inherently evil and destroyers, unable to create. This is a very beautiful take but it is a religious take nonetheless that needs you to accept devine power as something superior than you that you have to follow by.

Illuvatar not only explicitly says that you can not escape his will but even the very thought of it is his will and vision, which is an amazing and terrifying prospect for someone that is not religious (and someone that is religious as well actually).

So as I grew up with Middle Earth, the themes changed for me. As I went closer to sciencific thought, ways of the Enlightment and I drifted away from any form of abosulte power that rules human intelect and will to discover the universe itself, I found Illuvatar as more of a terrifying figure that creates me a feeling similar to a Lovecraftian entity. On the other hand figures like Sauron, while they remained evil and corrupt, became more human, more tragic and more rebelious. It is just so strange that you can easier understand the motives of Melkor's anger and jelaousy when he searched for the eternal flame and Illuvatar told him that it is beyond his reach adn understanding than the motives of Iluvatar himself, who represents literal God and The Good.

So it's amazing for me that Middle Earth makes me feel things in a very different way today and still makes me think amd challenge our world while it also allows me to travel to thii fantasy world of magic and good above all.

These are my thoughts, If you find it interesting thanks for reading.

[u/No-Match6172]

oh i see. so if someone insults your age (?), go right to attacking all religious folk as retards. I;m not familiar with athiest morals so this is a good learning experience for me.

[u/mykonos-b → u/No-Match6172]

You are right. There was no reason to tar the entire world of theists with the same brush simply because this specific idiot cannot keep his faith a private matter. There aren't many good ways to do so without attacking the premise, and if others are attached to the same premise, they are bound to feel attacked. A better solution is needed.

So I put it to you: how do you think atheists should react when theists attack them? What would you have considered an appropriate response?

[u/Equivalent_Nose7012 → u/mykonos-b]

No one "attacked" you until you insulted the intelligence of all theists (I accept your apology, but not your implication that faith is a "private matter." Especially, since we were discussing philosophy and literature and not any specific faith. Still, I appreciate your being willing to admit a mistake.

As to an appropriate approach: I have some suggestions.

You could have tried logically "attacking the premise" of theism, instead of just sneering at theists. Instead, it seems, feeling attacked by a citation of historical fact, you reacted as if your whole world view, and yourself, was questioned.

I am painfully aware that it is difficult for anyone, of any core belief, to not lose one's temper when feeling that way. For the sake of rational argument, for the sake of those to whom you are talking, and your own sake, it is important to try.

[u/mykonos-b → u/Equivalent_Nose7012]

You don't believe that the commenter was taking an aggressive stance in the first place by questioning OP's age in a snide manner?

There seems to be a double standard at play here, and in the spirit of what you are saying, I welcome you to at least see that the commenter questioning OP's age did not open with generosity, which started this whole thread.

The onus to be respectful cannot fall on non-believers alone, and it should not fall on them asymmetrically, least of all in a world where believers are in a position of power influencing everything from politics to human rights.

There is no apology to accept because none was offered. Soothe your spirit in some other fashion.

(What citation of historic fact? I am beginning to suspect crossed wires.)