Christ in Middle Earth

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Attalus

But that would mean that they would have a divine nature, which is demonstrably false. They are people who take on redemptive tasks, as happens quite often, but suffer to varying degrees (Frodo much, Aragorn hardly at all). They are treated sympathetically, but not worshipfully. In point of fact, Frodo ultimately failed, to be redeemed by Gollum's irrational act. This is not Christlike.

No, no, then I have to agree with Attallus, Beren. I don't think we can argue that Frodo (who ultimately fails), Gandalf (who isn't resurrected in the same sense that Chtrist is), or Aragorn (who though a promised king returning does not do so with judgement in his wain on eternal souls) are meant to be read as Christ incarnate in the story.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

I think Aragorn in Bree showed the way that Jesus was treated by the the Pharisies and Sadjucies (sp on both).

[Attalus]

TD, being eyed with mild suspicion by insular rustics is not on the same level as being scourged and crucified, no matter how sensitive one is.

[Beren3000]

I see your point, Attalus. I think I, too, will have to agree. Maybe it's as you say: these characters are rather "character types" of Christ.
Just to answer one thing:

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

Aragorn (who though a promised king returning does not do so with judgement in his wain on eternal souls)

I would remind you that one of the first things that Aragorn did as new king was to judge Beregond for his deed.

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Beren3000

I see your point, Attalus. I think I, too, will have to agree. Maybe it's as you say: these characters are rather "character types" of Christ.
Just to answer one thing:

I would remind you that one of the first things that Aragorn did as new king was to judge Beregond for his deed.

True, but that's good kingcraft....he didn't judge his eternal soul.

[Elemmírë]

Sorry for breaking in on the conversation, guys... I haven't been paying enough attention to this as I should...

Originally Posted by inked

That noted, Beren3000, I think if you try to push the applicabilities to identity or allegory, you do a disservice to Tolkein's intentions. He often revoked the idea of allegory as something he detested whenever he detected it. But he spoke of how applicability was often confused with allegory. It is not that there is not resemblance, just not identification of character as in a=b.

I think this is an important concept to understand, and agree with everyone who has said that while there may be similarities, in no way are any of the characters supposed to be identified as Christ.

That being said... anyone agree with me that Finrod is a Christ figure, at least as much as if not more than other characters mentioned (with the possible exception of Gandalf). I am not obsessed... I am not obsessed... I am not obsessed... Oh, what the hell. I'm obsessed.

[Beren3000]

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

True, but that's good kingcraft....he didn't judge his eternal soul.

Enter: Symbolism

Originally Posted by Elemmire

That being said... anyone agree with me that Finrod is a Christ figure

This has been mentioned earlier in the thread. I think SGH would agree with you on that
But I don't seem to get it: Finrod didn't exactly sacrifice for Beren or anything: he was bound to accompany Beren by his promise to Barahir. Whether or not he lost his life on that quest is, I think, his own problem!

[Elemmírë]

Originally Posted by Beren3000

This has been mentioned earlier in the thread. I think SGH would agree with you on that
But I don't seem to get it: Finrod didn't exactly sacrifice for Beren or anything: he was bound to accompany Beren by his promise to Barahir. Whether or not he lost his life on that quest is, I think, his own problem!

I know SGH mentioned it. I was wondering if it had been said more recently.

First of all, I don't think that the Oath itself was of any major importance. I have no real doubts that he would not have helped Beren even had there been no oath. Beyond that, he was not bound to accompany Beren, I don't think, but merely bound to aid him... I think an oath like that could have been open to interpretation if he had been more interested in saving his own life.

Of course, there's more to it than just the sacrifice, or I wouldn't have brought it up again. Of course I would have, who am I kidding?

There's the resurrection theme. I can't ignore the words, "But Finrod walks with Finarfin his father beneath the trees in Eldamar."

Possibly more, actually.

Indeed they believed at first that Felagund was one of the Valar, of whom they had heard rumour that they dwell far in the West; and this was (some say) the cause of their journeying. But Felagund dwelt among them and taught them true knowledge, and they loved him, and took him for their lord...

The idea of a teacher and of "true knowledge" is an undeniable parallel, methinks.

[Beren3000]

Good points, Elemmire! I've never looked at it this way before. I thought you voiced your interest in Finrod only in the "Men of the Sil." thread, apparently I was wrong!

[Maerbenn]

Originally Posted by mewhmag

didn’t Tolkien write somewhere:

“The Incarnation of God is an infinitely greater thing than anything I would dare to write.”

Originally Posted by Beren3000

Where did he write that?

He wrote it in a draft of a letter to Michael Straight (The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, no. 181; not dated; probably January or February 1956).