!!'Lord of the Rings' scares yarmulkas off Fckn Jew Film Academy!!
White_Bloke.
It must have really stuck in the craw of the Fckn Jew Bastards who run the Acadamy Jew-ards
to have to confer even _one_ award on the Peter Jackson movie 'Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship
of the Ring' (for a good review of same see here: http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/movie75.htm )
Guess they all consoled themselves by showering thier resident attack dogs(the niggas) with
an award or three!
How different a magnificent white,Xian,Euopean epic like LOTR is from the usual crap that gets
dished up by these Fckn vermin!( http://www.hoffman-info.com/spielberg.html )
Undoubtedly, these Q'aballah-reading scum were _shivering_ in their collective matzoh-balls about
offending the _legion_ Of Tolkien fans and had to palm off an award or two to shut them up!
(what the _hell_ is 'best cinematography'?)
However, their _day_ is coming! We are now awake up to your plans, JewBoys!
http://www.ptialaska.net/~swampy/illuminati/zion.html
----
White Bloke
=================================================================
"If the British soldiers on the beaches of Normandy in 1944
could have looked forward to the end of the century and seen what
England had become, they would not have bothered to advance
another 40 yards up the beach"
(David Irving)
================================================================
Janet Cone
white...@whitepower.com says...
> Undoubtedly, these Q'aballah-reading scum were _shivering_ in their collective matzoh-balls about
> offending the _legion_ Of Tolkien fans and had to palm off an award or two to shut them up!
> (what the _hell_ is 'best cinematography'?)
>
> However, their _day_ is coming! We are now awake up to your plans, JewBoys!
> ----
> White Bloke
Excuse me? What planet are you from?
Or did you forget to take your medication today?
pmhi...@mfx.net
He's not from a planet. Any planet. Just a bad dream like the bogeymen who live under small children's
beds & only move about in the dark. And there's no known medication to cure the disease he has.
Yours in the north Maine woods,
Pete Hilton aka The Ent
--
A person is free only in
the freedom of other persons.
W. Berry
David Gehrig
<< snip mewlings of an anonymouse >>
Well, let's just take a look at what J. R. R. Tolkien thought of
Nazi racial theories, and especially so-called "Nazi culture."
From his letter of 25 July 1938 to Rutten & Loening Verlag
in response to their request if he were "arisch" (aryan).
They needed this information to publish his books in pre-war
(nazi) Germany. (From "The Letter of J.R.R. Tolkien")
His answer
"Thank you for your letter..... I regret that I am not clear
as to what you intend by arisch. I am not of Aryan extraction:
that is Indo-iranian; as far as I am aware none of my
ancestors spoke Hindustani, Persian, Gypsy, or any related
dialects. But if I am to understand that you are enquiring
whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret
that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people."
he continues on...
"I have been accustomed, nonetheless, to regard my German name
with pride, and continued to do so throughout the period
of the late regrettable war, in which I served in the English
army. I cannot, however, forbear to comment that if impertinent
and irrelevant inquiries of this sort are to become the rule in
matters if literature, then the time is not far distant
when a German name will no longer be a source of pride."
--
@%<
TradeSurplus
"Argus Tuft"
"White_Bloke."KKK" <white...@whitepower.com> wrote in message
news:wQdo8.17588$To6.5...@e420r-atl1.usenetserver.com...
:
:
: It must have really stuck in the craw of the Fckn Jew Bastards who run the
Susan Cohen
Janet Cone wrote:
> In article <wQdo8.17588$To6.5...@e420r-atl1.usenetserver.com>,
> white...@whitepower.com says...
>
> > Undoubtedly, these Q'aballah-reading scum were _shivering_ in their collective matzoh-balls about
> > offending the _legion_
Bwhahaha! There's someone who doesn't get out much.
Like any s-f group has that much power, & certainly not in mere numbers.
> Of Tolkien fans and had to palm off an award or two to shut them up!
> > (what the _hell_ is 'best cinematography'?)
> >
> > However, their _day_ is coming! We are now awake up to your plans, JewBoys!
> > ----
> > White Bloke
>
> Excuse me? What planet are you from?
>
> Or did you forget to take your medication today?
You are too kind. It's obvious just from the question "What the
hell is "Best Cinemaphotography?" that he's a mere ignoramus.
Then again, I also detect an unwillingness to be enlightened,
which would indicate actual stupidity....
Susan
SugarPill
David Gehrig wrote:
>
> White_Bloke. wrote:
>
> << snip mewlings of an anonymouse >>
>
> Well, let's just take a look at what J. R. R. Tolkien thought of
> Nazi racial theories, and especially so-called "Nazi culture."
The Catholic church sided with the nazis, so lets see
the enemy of my enemy is my friend and so the friend
of my enemy is my enemy.
Lord of the rings undermines the Christianity, it shows
the falsity of total power forged in Mordor, the 'One to
rule them all'. The hellish Orks are not dissimilar
from the torturers of the inquistion, the pursecution
of people for no other reason than they didn't hold the
faith akin to the pograms, witchtrials, burning of heretics.
Tolkien was speaking about what we have lost, the
spectacle that society has become in blindly following.
When the white wizard falls under the spell (for fear
that good will lose and he will die), so life of
service is acceptable even if it is evil. What are
the children molested by preist scandal?
Tolkien goes to the heart of what's wrong with religion.
His personal religiousness has nothing to do with it,
just as an asian elephant can paint a pictue that
people pay good money for. Art, culture is not in the
hands of the makers, so it cannot imply subserviance
to the makers beliefs. More clearly, just because
Tolkien may have been a creationist????, doesn't mean
he has produce a work of fiction that indicates
that creationism is more than fiction, or some
how right creationism is when the lord of rings
is so clearly anti-collective blind worship.
Morals backed by reason flow from this book
and now film. As to Tolkiens Christianity,
I am not convinced, wizards are too much
like the druids.
AC
wrote:
>
>
>David Gehrig wrote:
>>
>> White_Bloke. wrote:
>>
>> << snip mewlings of an anonymouse >>
>>
>> Well, let's just take a look at what J. R. R. Tolkien thought of
>> Nazi racial theories, and especially so-called "Nazi culture."
>
>The Catholic church sided with the nazis, so lets see
>the enemy of my enemy is my friend and so the friend
>of my enemy is my enemy.
The Church didn't side with the Nazis per se, no more than the Swiss
did. There was complicity in some national churches, there was
anti-Semitism (especially with Pius IX), but the Church never came out
and said "We're with the Nazis". What was done (or not done) in the
Vatican in 1930s and 1940s was wrong, but let's not cross the line
here.
>
>Lord of the rings undermines the Christianity, it shows
>the falsity of total power forged in Mordor, the 'One to
>rule them all'. The hellish Orks are not dissimilar
>from the torturers of the inquistion, the pursecution
>of people for no other reason than they didn't hold the
>faith akin to the pograms, witchtrials, burning of heretics.
I would imagine Tolkien would reject your notion completely. Even a
cursory reading of the Akaballeth will show that the greatest sin was
a rejection of the Creator. Sauron was attempting to set himself up
as the Ruler of Middle Earth in defiance of the Valar, who were the
rightful rulers of Arda. Their right ultimately derived from Eru
(God), and thus Sauron was defying God's will.
>
>Tolkien was speaking about what we have lost, the
>spectacle that society has become in blindly following.
>When the white wizard falls under the spell (for fear
>that good will lose and he will die), so life of
>service is acceptable even if it is evil. What are
>the children molested by preist scandal?
Again, though this is an institutional problem, it isn't as if the
Vatican has stood up and shouted "We like priests molesting kids".
The failure has been in ignoring and hiding the problem.
>
>Tolkien goes to the heart of what's wrong with religion.
>His personal religiousness has nothing to do with it,
It doesn't? He stated himself that it was a fundementally "Catholic"
work. You can't reject that, but you can't reject that he said it,
and that there are Christian elements throughout the entire mythology.
>just as an asian elephant can paint a pictue that
>people pay good money for. Art, culture is not in the
>hands of the makers, so it cannot imply subserviance
>to the makers beliefs.
Yes, you are free to read anything into any work that you like. Where
your problem appears to lie is in arriving at your own point of view,
and then foisting it back on the author, claiming it to be the
"Truth(tm)". That is faulty reasoning.
> More clearly, just because
>Tolkien may have been a creationist????, doesn't mean
>he has produce a work of fiction that indicates
>that creationism is more than fiction, or some
>how right creationism is when the lord of rings
>is so clearly anti-collective blind worship.
Please explain this. I'm not to sure what you are trying to say.
>
>Morals backed by reason flow from this book
>and now film. As to Tolkiens Christianity,
>I am not convinced, wizards are too much
>like the druids.
Then I suggest you best pick up a copy of the Silmarillion. The
Istari were Ainur, an angelic order made by Eru (the Creator) before
Arda. They were the same type of being as Sauron and the Balrog.
They were not pagan priests, nor do they resemble them in any way that
I can see.
---
AaronC
mkruczek
<pmhi...@mfx.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:3CA1A2BA...@mfx.net...
"The only acceptable substitute for brains is silence."
-Solomon Short
mak
SugarPill
AC wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2002 10:23:19 +1100, SugarPill <h...@like.Im.telling>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >David Gehrig wrote:
> >>
> >> White_Bloke. wrote:
> >>
> >> << snip mewlings of an anonymouse >>
> >>
> >> Well, let's just take a look at what J. R. R. Tolkien thought of
> >> Nazi racial theories, and especially so-called "Nazi culture."
> >
> >The Catholic church sided with the nazis, so lets see
> >the enemy of my enemy is my friend and so the friend
> >of my enemy is my enemy.
>
> The Church didn't side with the Nazis per se, no more than the Swiss
> did. There was complicity in some national churches, there was
> anti-Semitism (especially with Pius IX), but the Church never came out
> and said "We're with the Nazis". What was done (or not done) in the
> Vatican in 1930s and 1940s was wrong, but let's not cross the line
> here.
Appologetics may wash for some institutions but it's
like a car salesman passing off a used car as new
because he doesn't know about washing machines,
nor did the fridge salesman, and of course his
father used do the same. The points *you* miss is
that killing and persecting jews was founded
on christian doctrine perpetutated *by* the church.
That survival of the church demanded that communism
from russia failed. This from a instution that
now tries to makeout it preachs tolerance, but it
seems the only sacrifice every made by the chruch
is jesus dying on the cross so that they never
have to follow his example. If the catholic church
had been so bigoted it wouldn't exist now!
Whether the communists, or the mogals, or the renassiance,
if the church hadn't played on fear for power
people who have found islam to satisify their fear.
So don't please imply that the church is 'good'
when even now it undermines democratic constitutions
by getting tax funds and funding for it's schools.
Whilst churches compete with private businesses
and don't pay tax then they aren't playing fair. IMHO.
Render under ceaser!
>
> >
> >Lord of the rings undermines the Christianity, it shows
> >the falsity of total power forged in Mordor, the 'One to
> >rule them all'. The hellish Orks are not dissimilar
> >from the torturers of the inquistion, the pursecution
> >of people for no other reason than they didn't hold the
> >faith akin to the pograms, witchtrials, burning of heretics.
>
> I would imagine Tolkien would reject your notion completely. Even a
> cursory reading of the Akaballeth will show that the greatest sin was
> a rejection of the Creator. Sauron was attempting to set himself up
> as the Ruler of Middle Earth in defiance of the Valar, who were the
> rightful rulers of Arda. Their right ultimately derived from Eru
> (God), and thus Sauron was defying God's will.
I don't dispute that Tolkien was a christian, in fact he
seems to be telling the story of English protestants and
the mordorian catholic Europe. Just as Star wars tells
the story of jewish persectution. The argument is however
false coming from christians that select good morals
from the Bible yet miss the bad morals about women
raped, slavery, war, etc. You condemning me for
selecting the moral out of context, now that's a joke.
As for tolkien saying he would reject the notion, maybe,
but completely, I don't agree. He, guessing, would
more likely argue that religion without reason was
his point, that religion that is self-serving is evil,
that religion that cannot question itself is evil.
But the question for every religious person should
be if religion is unreasonable would you nolonger believe,
I believe Tolkien would say yes, the book inasmuch says
this, I believe You wouldn't. For me that is the
spin off of british protestantism, the catholic
church was right, protestantism would lead to atheism
because people like me would see the unreasonableness
of religion.
>
> >
> >Tolkien was speaking about what we have lost, the
> >spectacle that society has become in blindly following.
> >When the white wizard falls under the spell (for fear
> >that good will lose and he will die), so life of
> >service is acceptable even if it is evil. What are
> >the children molested by preist scandal?
>
> Again, though this is an institutional problem, it isn't as if the
> Vatican has stood up and shouted "We like priests molesting kids".
> The failure has been in ignoring and hiding the problem.
A institutional character not restricted to just catholicism, in
fact the failer is much like the cops killing a
innocent man and then covering over the crime.
The point is that cops don't pledge to be infalliable.
If the church will keep on about having the truth
and *not* stressing they could be wrong then it only
a matter of time before a preist coversup heinous
crimes because the church cannot do wrong. That
comes from Tolkien imho, that unquestioning faith
in your own belief (and applies to atheists as well)
is the real evil. Tolkien produced a fictional
tale, a moral story, of adversity and how one's
most closely held beliefs can be your undoing.
Gandolf, or the elf queen of the forest, when offered
the ring (ultimate power) reject it. Just as
many fundamentalists preaches in the US are found
to accept it, and so become debased by the money
gifts they weekly demand of the faithful. There
is a moral and it's bigger than tolkien, it
was the British compromise to keep religion
from spliting the Monarchy. That religious
tolerance is accepting that your faith maybe
wrong, and in return civilisation and therefore
your future comfort is assured because the
history of religious wars is well documented.
Anyway, Sauron was just misunderstood, someone
early on in his life should have pointed out
that magic was a curse as well as a gift.
>
> >
> >Tolkien goes to the heart of what's wrong with religion.
> >His personal religiousness has nothing to do with it,
>
> It doesn't? He stated himself that it was a fundementally "Catholic"
> work. You can't reject that, but you can't reject that he said it,
> and that there are Christian elements throughout the entire mythology.
So? Oh please provide the quote? And deal with the
resonance with the British compromise. For surely
your not arguing that I should accept that there
are christian elements to the mythology (I do,
christian is a myth to me), but that you don't
accept the British elements.
>
> >just as an asian elephant can paint a pictue that
> >people pay good money for. Art, culture is not in the
> >hands of the makers, so it cannot imply subserviance
> >to the makers beliefs.
>
> Yes, you are free to read anything into any work that you like. Where
> your problem appears to lie is in arriving at your own point of view,
> and then foisting it back on the author, claiming it to be the
> "Truth(tm)". That is faulty reasoning.
It is not my 'problem' it is you belief that cannot fathom
why I do not believe. I do not disagree with tolkiens
religion, I just disagree that a moral work of fiction
is anything other than that. Tolkien didn't write a
piece of fiction to compete with the Bible if he
is as religious as you say, so your literalisation
of the works is faulty. I am doing no more than *you*
bringing my beliefs to the work, it's that how art
works, art isn't great if there is only one true ring
of truth to it? Why is the Lord of the rings so sucessiful?
because it has many audiences each with the same
conumdrums, morals, in their religions (or philosophies).
Tolkien says that he wrote this book to reconnect
people with a lost mythological british past,
a past with pagan traditions. The trees elves, the
magic, the druids, these are NOT Christian themes
but PAGAN.
>
> > More clearly, just because
> >Tolkien may have been a creationist????, doesn't mean
> >he has produce a work of fiction that indicates
> >that creationism is more than fiction, or some
> >how right creationism is when the lord of rings
> >is so clearly anti-collective blind worship.
>
> Please explain this. I'm not to sure what you are trying to say.
I'm saying that a humble (or good) author doesn't tell his
readers what they should believe. If a pagan author
work a book he whould write about what he knows,
in context to what he believes, therefore those
views *would* come through but not because he
thinks the reader should believe them or become
a pagan, rather that he should tell a good story.
Tolkien wasn't writing for just Christians, he
actually says he was writing for the British lose
of their past, a pagan past before romans and thus
Christianity. Yes some of that christianity comes
through, but then some of that christian moralality
comes from the greeks pagans that influenced
the writers of the bible (and those greeks on
back throught the oral histories, the sagas etc).
>
> >
> >Morals backed by reason flow from this book
> >and now film. As to Tolkiens Christianity,
> >I am not convinced, wizards are too much
> >like the druids.
>
> Then I suggest you best pick up a copy of the Silmarillion. The
> Istari were Ainur, an angelic order made by Eru (the Creator) before
> Arda. They were the same type of being as Sauron and the Balrog.
> They were not pagan priests, nor do they resemble them in any way that
> I can see.
No, what are tree elves, what is the yuletide but the
origin of the renamed christmas festivals, a romp around
the trees, getting drunk and eating to much, British traditions
before Romans (and thus christianity) every came to mother england.
What is 'renamed' Easter but a harvest festival that pagans tribes
of Britain have celebrated. You do Tolkien a disservice
because this was what he wanted to take remind Britian
of the lost sagas, the lost languages of pre-christianity,
the lost culture.
>
> ---
> AaronC
The Enlightenment
> AC wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 28 Mar 2002 10:23:19 +1100, SugarPill <h...@like.Im.telling>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >David Gehrig wrote:
> > >>
> > >> White_Bloke. wrote:
> > >>
> > >> << snip mewlings of an anonymouse >>
> > >>
> > >> Well, let's just take a look at what J. R. R. Tolkien thought of
> > >> Nazi racial theories, and especially so-called "Nazi culture."
> > >
> > >The Catholic church sided with the nazis, so lets see
> > >the enemy of my enemy is my friend and so the friend
> > >of my enemy is my enemy.
> >
> > The Church didn't side with the Nazis per se, no more than the Swiss
> > did. There was complicity in some national churches, there was
> > anti-Semitism (especially with Pius IX), but the Church never came out
> > and said "We're with the Nazis". What was done (or not done) in the
> > Vatican in 1930s and 1940s was wrong, but let's not cross the line
> > here.
>
> Appologetics may wash for some institutions but it's
> like a car salesman passing off a used car as new
> because he doesn't know about washing machines,
> nor did the fridge salesman, and of course his
> father used do the same.
The above is pure nonsense. I'll have to igonore it.
> The points *you* miss is
> that killing and persecting jews was founded
> on christian doctrine perpetutated *by* the church.
Which chruch are you talking about?
Its drawinmg a long bow. Jewish and Rabbinical attitudes towards
"Gentiles" are equaly appaling and utterly racist. When Jews have
obtained dominance they have frequently mistreated and discriminated
against christian minorities.
http://www.jerusalemites.org/crime_christ6.html
"The modern Jew is the product of the Talmud..."
"Babylonian Talmud", published by the Boston Talmud Society, p. XII
The Jews refer to the remainder of Earths inhabitants, the non-Jewish
peoples, as "Gentiles", "Goyim". Let's see what the Jewish Talmud
teaches the Jews concerning the non-Jewish majority, i.e. those who
are not part of Jahve's "Chosen People":
"The Jews are called human beings, but the non-Jews are not humans.
They are beasts."
Talmud: Baba mezia, 114b
"The Akum (non-Jew) is like a dog. Yes, the scripture teaches to honor
the the dog more than the non-Jew."
Ereget Raschi Erod. 22 30
"Even though God created the non-Jew they are still animals in human
form. It is not becoming for a Jew to be served by an animal. Therfore
he will be served by animals in human form."
Midrasch Talpioth, p. 255, Warsaw 1855
"A pregnant non-Jew is no better than a pregnant animal."
Coschen hamischpat 405
"The souls of non-Jews come from impure sprits and are called pigs."
Jalkut Rubeni gadol 12b
"Although the non-Jew has the same body structure as the Jew, they
compare with the Jew like a monkey to a human."
Schene luchoth haberith, p. 250 b
"If you eat with a Gentile, it is the same as eating with a dog."
Tosapoth, Jebamoth 94b
"If a Jew has a non-Jewish servant or maid who dies, one should not
express sympathy to the Jew. You should tell the Jew: "God will
replace 'your loss', just as if one of his oxen or asses had died"."
Jore dea 377, 1
"Sexual intercourse between Gentiles is like intercourse between
animals."
Talmud Sanhedrin 74b
"It is permitted to take the body and the life of a Gentile."
Sepher ikkarim III c 25
"It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians
belong to the denying ones of the Torah."
Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425. 5
"A heretic Gentile you may kill outright with your own hands."
Talmud, Abodah Zara, 4b
"Every Jew, who spills the blood of the godless (non-Jews), is doing
the same as making a sacrifice to God."
If you point with one finger 3 fingers point back.
> That survival of the church demanded that communism
> from russia failed.
Duh? Becuase communism wanted to destroy the influence and authoristy
of the churches as an institution.
> This from a instution that
> now tries to makeout it preachs tolerance,
What are you taliking about?
> but it
> seems the only sacrifice every made by the chruch
> is jesus dying on the cross so that they never
> have to follow his example.
Jesus wan't sacrificed by the church. He did it of his own free will.
so the story goes. Get your facts right before a rant.
> If the catholic church
> had been so bigoted it wouldn't exist now!
> Whether the communists, or the mogals, or the renassiance,
-Communist exploited fear. The Soviet communist used terrors to kill
millions of people to consolidate power. They destroyed the
democratic white russians.
-Monguls were a race of nomadic invaders. They were to be feared.
-The renaisonce was a discovery of knowledge, sicience and art that
precipitated the reformation (of religion)
> if the church hadn't played on fear for power
> people who have found islam to satisify their fear.
Islam swept christianity out of Nth Africa, Conquered Byzantine Greece
and Anatolia (now called Turkey), they conquered india and imposed
mogul mulsim rule on the Hindus takeing away their right of slef
determination; the hindus wern't liberated till the brish came. Islam
destroyed buddhism in Afghanistan and the east, They were at the
gates of Vienna twice and they dominated the Balakans forceing
Christians to give over children to become muslims soldiers
(janisaries), the Barabary cost pirates were muslims opperating with
state sanction and capatured villagers of cornwall and ireland as well
as eurpean sailors as slaves. Wherever they went they imposed a
special poll tax on non muslims. If you couldn't pay it was slavery
or death or conversion for you. Many converted. Islam conquered
spain and wherever it went dominated administration untill it was
thankfully thrown out.
Islam was to be feared in relatiy and it won even though the crusades
slowed it a bit. How could you practice appologetics for its applaing
record?
> So don't please imply that the church is 'good'
It is an institution with good intentions, merely a relfelction on
people.
> when even now it undermines democratic constitutions
> by getting tax funds and funding for it's schools.
As do muslim, jewish and Budhist schools.
> Whilst churches compete with private businesses
> and don't pay tax then they aren't playing fair.
Where is this?
Dylan Bryan-Dolman
> > seems to be telling the story of English protestants and
> > the mordorian catholic Europe.
So the Protestants are the good guys here? Much of northern European
anti-Semitism can be laid directly at Martin Luther's door.
Gary
So, what is wrong with being anti-semitic?
>
>
SugarPill
The inquistion did target jews? Pious the IV? wasn't
an anti-semit!
Both churches are happy to demonise groups to win
power and support, they did it to the jews, the
arabs (crusades), orthodox christians (Balkins)
and countless indigeous peoples around the world
in the great expansion of European Imperialism.
I'm not saying the church is anti-semitic, I'm
saying christianity is a evil tool use by evil
doers who are never held to account and offer
paulty appologises centuries too late when
they start demonising groups that don't hold
their beliefs, jews, humanists, communists,
capitalists, whoever get's in their way (now
homosexuals).
Deborah Nyob
>So the Protestants are the good guys here? Much of northern European
>anti-Semitism can be laid directly at Martin Luther's door.
European antisemitism was alive and well centuries
before Luther.
Deborah
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Aris Katsaris
"SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
>
> > I would imagine Tolkien would reject your notion completely. Even a
> > cursory reading of the Akaballeth will show that the greatest sin was
> > a rejection of the Creator. Sauron was attempting to set himself up
> > as the Ruler of Middle Earth in defiance of the Valar, who were the
> > rightful rulers of Arda. Their right ultimately derived from Eru
> > (God), and thus Sauron was defying God's will.
>
> I don't dispute that Tolkien was a christian, in fact he
> seems to be telling the story of English protestants and
> the mordorian catholic Europe.
LOL! Tolkien was a *Catholic*!
> Anyway, Sauron was just misunderstood, someone
> early on in his life should have pointed out
> that magic was a curse as well as a gift.
His "life"? He was one of the angelic spirits that pre-existed
the world. "Magic"? We're talking power here and it's
irrelevant whether it's magical or otherwise... Sauron's powers
were natural to him. He just misused them.
> > It doesn't? He stated himself that it was a fundementally "Catholic"
> > work. You can't reject that, but you can't reject that he said it,
> > and that there are Christian elements throughout the entire mythology.
>
> So? Oh please provide the quote?
"The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and
Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision.
That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to
anything like 'religion,' to cults or practices, in the imaginary world. For
the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism."
A letter by Tolkien in 1953 to Father Robert Murray, a Jesuit priest.
> For surely
> your not arguing that I should accept that there
> are christian elements to the mythology (I do,
> christian is a myth to me), but that you don't
> accept the British elements.
He based Shire on England if that's what you are talking about.
> Tolkien didn't write a
> piece of fiction to compete with the Bible if he
> is as religious as you say, so your literalisation
> of the works is faulty.
But the works are set in a basically Christian universe. He
even wrote a long passage where the elf Finrod and the human
woman Andreth end up discussing the salvation of men through
the incarnation of God.
Aris Katsaris
SugarPill
Aris Katsaris wrote:
>
> "SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
> news:3CA38AF5...@like.Im.telling...
> >
> > > I would imagine Tolkien would reject your notion completely. Even a
> > > cursory reading of the Akaballeth will show that the greatest sin was
> > > a rejection of the Creator. Sauron was attempting to set himself up
> > > as the Ruler of Middle Earth in defiance of the Valar, who were the
> > > rightful rulers of Arda. Their right ultimately derived from Eru
> > > (God), and thus Sauron was defying God's will.
> >
> > I don't dispute that Tolkien was a christian, in fact he
> > seems to be telling the story of English protestants and
> > the mordorian catholic Europe.
>
> LOL! Tolkien was a *Catholic*!
Fallacy, no catholic has every criticised the church.
What better way to criticise the catholic church that
to write a piece of 'moral' fiction.
>
> > Anyway, Sauron was just misunderstood, someone
> > early on in his life should have pointed out
> > that magic was a curse as well as a gift.
>
> His "life"? He was one of the angelic spirits that pre-existed
> the world. "Magic"? We're talking power here and it's
> irrelevant whether it's magical or otherwise... Sauron's powers
> were natural to him. He just misused them.
Imaginative rebuttal that summedup sounds remarkable like
"you can't imagine".
>
> > > It doesn't? He stated himself that it was a fundementally "Catholic"
> > > work. You can't reject that, but you can't reject that he said it,
> > > and that there are Christian elements throughout the entire mythology.
> >
> > So? Oh please provide the quote?
>
> "The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and
> Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision.
> That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to
> anything like 'religion,' to cults or practices, in the imaginary world. For
> the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism."
>
> A letter by Tolkien in 1953 to Father Robert Murray, a Jesuit priest.
Tolkien wasn't perfect because when I read the lord of the
rings it reinforced my atheism. You see the morals good
('fundementally religious and catholic work') is not
monopolied, as you or tolkien believe, by christianity.
morals in fact are the product of people, many morals
in the sagas of the pagan empires of roman and greece
can be found in modern catholicism. Morals evolve
from the interactions of intellected open minded
individuals, many christian believe this (they see
that God set it in motion) whereas as a rational
humanist see moral wholely emerging as the need
requires for fair sustainable civilisation.
>
> > For surely
> > your not arguing that I should accept that there
> > are christian elements to the mythology (I do,
> > christian is a myth to me), but that you don't
> > accept the British elements.
>
> He based Shire on England if that's what you are talking about.
He based the linguistics of pre-christian languages
of Europe.
>
> > Tolkien didn't write a
> > piece of fiction to compete with the Bible if he
> > is as religious as you say, so your literalisation
> > of the works is faulty.
>
> But the works are set in a basically Christian universe. He
> even wrote a long passage where the elf Finrod and the human
> woman Andreth end up discussing the salvation of men through
> the incarnation of God.
Well I never noticed that interpretation, I brought my
own beliefs to my reading of it. It goes back to my
view of it as a text of pre-christian Britian, of
the many facets that christianity has absorded from
the older pagan societies. Yes, there maybe selectable
facets that come solely from a truely kosher jesus
philosophy, but when you look objectively at christianity
you see many morals, stories from pagan mythology
remade in the bible (socrete death for example)
and you see the way in which christianity has
absorded local cultures in all parts of the world
mixing dogma with local traditions, e.g. what is
christmas but the old yuletide pagan festival of
tree worship, drinking and eating to much (historically
condemned by christians, banned, until they realised they
weren't going to stop it). p.s. now consumed by consumerism.
>
> Aris Katsaris
White_Bloke.
More to the point.......what planet are _you_ from?
> Or did you forget to take your medication today?
Did you? Ohhh...I forgot......yr already brain-washed by the ZOG-zombie machine; so...
guess u don't need any medication?!
White_Bloke.
> Janet Cone wrote:
>> In article <wQdo8.17588$To6.5...@e420r-atl1.usenetserver.com>,
>> white...@whitepower.com says...
>>
>> > Undoubtedly, these Q'aballah-reading scum were _shivering_ in their collective matzoh-balls about
>> > offending the _legion_ Of Tolkien fans and had to palm off an award or two to shut them up!
>> > (what the _hell_ is 'best cinematography'?)
>> >
>> > However, their _day_ is coming! We are now awake up to your plans, JewBoys!
>> > ----
>> > White Bloke
>>
>> Excuse me? What planet are you from?
>>
>> Or did you forget to take your medication today?
> He's not from a planet. Any planet. Just a bad dream like the bogeymen who live under small children's
> beds & only move about in the dark. And there's no known medication to cure the disease he has.
Nor is there any to cure _yr_ affliction, boyo!
So....we'll be taking _NO_ prisoners!
Get it?
If not: http://www.texasbestseminars.org/Turner.htm
> Yours in the north Maine woods,
> Pete Hilton aka The Ent
More like Pete Hilton the ZOG-zombie!
...and _another_ one bite the dust!
SugarPill
Sorry, I re-read this and I just can't believe your dishonesty.
Elves are pagan folklore. The lord of the rings is basically
a pagan universe, the languages are basically pre-christian
european, your immoral ineptness reinforces my view that
christianity is the last great refuge of liars.
>
> Aris Katsaris
White_Bloke.
> White_Bloke. wrote:
> << snip mewlings of an anonymouse >>
<THe usual rspns when u haven't got a rat's arse of an argument!>
> Well, let's just take a look at what J. R. R. Tolkien thought of
> Nazi racial theories, and especially so-called "Nazi culture."
Yes, let's......
> From his letter of 25 July 1938 to Rutten & Loening Verlag
> in response to their request if he were "arisch" (aryan).
> They needed this information to publish his books in pre-war
> (nazi) Germany. (From "The Letter of J.R.R. Tolkien")
> His answer
> "Thank you for your letter..... I regret that I am not clear
> as to what you intend by arisch. I am not of Aryan extraction:
> that is Indo-iranian; as far as I am aware none of my
> ancestors spoke Hindustani, Persian, Gypsy, or any related
> dialects. But if I am to understand that you are enquiring
> whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret
> that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people."
> he continues on...
> "I have been accustomed, nonetheless, to regard my German name
> with pride, and continued to do so throughout the period
> of the late regrettable war, in which I served in the English
> army. I cannot, however, forbear to comment that if impertinent
> and irrelevant inquiries of this sort are to become the rule in
> matters if literature, then the time is not far distant
> when a German name will no longer be a source of pride."
And this proves?
This matter has been raised in other threads before...Tolkien was a reclusive Oxford Don
who relied on the ZOG-controlled Brit media(ever hear of a cunt called Beaverbrook?)
for his information on NS Germany. He never visited NS Germany..so, couldn't
form his own conclusions.
As they say...[i]knowledge--->[ii]obsservation----->[iii]deduction!
Whatever, JRRT was an _implacable_ opponent of 'modernism'...(as were all the Inkling Society)
which, is to say,just another name for Yid-controlled ZOG-ism!
------
Josep
news:3CA4F46D...@like.Im.telling:
>
>
> Aris Katsaris wrote:
>> > I don't dispute that Tolkien was a christian, in fact he
>> > seems to be telling the story of English protestants and
>> > the mordorian catholic Europe.
>>
>> LOL! Tolkien was a *Catholic*!
>
> Fallacy, no catholic has every criticised the church.
> What better way to criticise the catholic church that
> to write a piece of 'moral' fiction.
First of all, my apologies for the crossposting to the other groups (I am
writing from rabt). I suppressed the crosssposting in my last response,
but someone likes to heat things up.
Well Mr. Sugarpill
1) Tolkien *was* a Catholic. Face it, man. Reality does not change
because you don't like it.
2) Moral fiction is a tipically Catholic genre, specially during the
Middle Ages
3) Many Catholics have criticised the Catholic Church. Some have been
burned alive, some have been despised, some have had their theories
accepted, and some have left the institution
4) I have nothing against discussing implications of real world religion
in LOTR, but please keep the flamethrowers away. We have enought stuff
here in rabt to start a bonfire with. If you do not believe me, try to
start a thread with the heading: "Balrogs have wings: ultimate proof".
The actual contents of the post are irrelevant. Beware the bullets.
5) Atheists tend to be people who rely on reason and therefore use
arguments in discussions. Calling somebody a liar because he states a
fact that is common knowledge and easily proved is not the best way to
use arguments
6) Crossposting is a very bad habit.
For most of the aforementioned points, Mr./Mrs. Sugarpill, you are
welcome to my killfile. Please make yourself at home, because you are
going to stay there for a looong time.
Pep
PD: I will be so daring to reccomend the rest of the rabt members to
proceed likewise
Aris Katsaris
"SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
>
>
> Aris Katsaris wrote:
> >
> > But the works are set in a basically Christian universe. He
> > even wrote a long passage where the elf Finrod and the human
> > woman Andreth end up discussing the salvation of men through
> > the incarnation of God.
>
> Sorry, I re-read this and I just can't believe your dishonesty.
> Elves are pagan folklore.
Sure, so what? Centaurs come from greek pagan folklore but were
still used in the christian allegory of Narnia by C.S. Lewis, or the
Discworld books of atheist Terry Pratchett.
> The lord of the rings is basically
> a pagan universe,
It has One God, a rebellion of angels, it includes the basically
Judeochristian concept of the Fall of Man, the completely
Christian concept of the incarnation of God to save mankind
and redeem the world...
The only basic difference from orthodox Christianity is that
death is seen as a gift.
> the languages are basically pre-christian
> european,
> your immoral ineptness reinforces my view that
> christianity is the last great refuge of liars.
Wow, given that I am not a Christian, I find that a quite interesting
comment to make!
I'm not a Christian, Sugarpill. I just recognize that LoTR is set
in a Christian universe. Other stories are set in pagan universes
and I can enjoy them equally well, but this one is set in a Christian
one.
Aris Katsaris
White_Bloke.
> David Gehrig wrote:
>>
>> White_Bloke. wrote:
>>
>> << snip mewlings of an anonymouse >>
>>
>> Well, let's just take a look at what J. R. R. Tolkien thought of
>> Nazi racial theories, and especially so-called "Nazi culture."
> The Catholic church sided with the nazis, so lets see
> the enemy of my enemy is my friend and so the friend
> of my enemy is my enemy.
'sided' with them......or just refused to buy into the
ZOG-Holohoax bullshit? As did the: ICRC, MI6, most of FDR's
cabinet and _many_ prominent Brit establishment(military/political)
figures...not even war-criminal Winnie bought it to start with.
Even now, we have _no_ substantive ENIGMA intercepts, courtesy of Bletchley Park,
to establish its veracity. And, yet, we are supposed to believe that
the Germans were quite confident relying on ENIGMA for major military
communications, but were not prepared to rely on it for
details of supposed Yid-evaporations!
Know why? Because it _never happened_!
Got that...._NEVER_ happened...it was a technical, historical and
scientific _impossibility_ http://www.codoh.com/found/found.html
> Lord of the rings undermines the Christianity, it shows
> the falsity of total power forged in Mordor, the 'One to
> rule them all'. The hellish Orks are not dissimilar
> from the torturers of the inquistion, the pursecution
> of people for no other reason than they didn't hold the
> faith akin to the pograms, witchtrials, burning of heretics.
I'd say they're much more like the satanic scum rspnsbl
for the murder of 20+million Christians in the JewSSR
http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-occupiedgovernments-USSR.html
(no prizes for guessing the ethnicity of the aforesaid satanic scum......!)
> Tolkien was speaking about what we have lost, the
> spectacle that society has become in blindly following.
> When the white wizard falls under the spell (for fear
> that good will lose and he will die), so life of
> service is acceptable even if it is evil. What are
> the children molested by preist scandal?
> Tolkien goes to the heart of what's wrong with religion.
> His personal religiousness has nothing to do with it,
> just as an asian elephant can paint a pictue that
> people pay good money for. Art, culture is not in the
> hands of the makers, so it cannot imply subserviance
> to the makers beliefs. More clearly, just because
> Tolkien may have been a creationist????, doesn't mean
> he has produce a work of fiction that indicates
> that creationism is more than fiction, or some
> how right creationism is when the lord of rings
> is so clearly anti-collective blind worship.
Get it right, idiot.....Tolkien was a strong opponent of
modernism. The whole Sauron/Mordor milieu represents modernism
in its ugliest form...jsut like we got to-day.....multi-culturalism,
globalisation, insidious control, lack of morality and decency
in both public and private life &c &c!
> Morals backed by reason flow from this book
> and now film. As to Tolkiens Christianity,
> I am not convinced, wizards are too much
> like the druids.
Clearly, u don't even know this much!
The 'wizards' were sent from Valinor with a specific purpose.
Also, they were non-human. Indeed, non-elvish.
They were, in fact, angels who assumed human form....a
concept perfectly compatible with Xianity
For a serious discussion of LOTR's relationship
to Christianity, you could do no better than:
http://www.faithandvalues.com/channels/rings.asp
and, in particular, http://www.leaderu.com/humanities/wood-classic.html
-----
Aris Katsaris
"SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
>
> Aris Katsaris wrote:
> > "The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and
> > Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision.
> > That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references
to
> > anything like 'religion,' to cults or practices, in the imaginary world. For
> > the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism."
> >
> > A letter by Tolkien in 1953 to Father Robert Murray, a Jesuit priest.
>
> Tolkien wasn't perfect because when I read the lord of the
> rings it reinforced my atheism.
<shrug> So what? It wasn't a book meant to make you Christian.
It wasn't even a Christian allegory. It just had christian symbolism
and elements in it. From some of the dates (25 December, 25 March)
to the Eagle's song to other smaller tidbits throughout...
> > > For surely
> > > your not arguing that I should accept that there
> > > are christian elements to the mythology (I do,
> > > christian is a myth to me), but that you don't
> > > accept the British elements.
> >
> > He based Shire on England if that's what you are talking about.
>
> He based the linguistics of pre-christian languages
> of Europe.
Language has very little to do with religion, I think... Sindarin
was partly based on Welsh, Quenya on Finnish, but then again
Adunaic and Khuzdul(Dwarvish) had linguistic similaralities with
Hebrew (not a European language).
> > But the works are set in a basically Christian universe. He
> > even wrote a long passage where the elf Finrod and the human
> > woman Andreth end up discussing the salvation of men through
> > the incarnation of God.
>
> Well I never noticed that interpretation, I brought my
> own beliefs to my reading of it.
Have you even read that text? It's in "Morgoth's Ring", volume
10 of History of Middle-earth, and it's quite obvious I think. It's
not supposed to be just an "interpretation" about what they are
discussing...
Aris Katsaris
Holly Salter
The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
Protestants.
REmember that Adolf was a Catholic
Gary
>
>Sorry, I re-read this and I just can't believe your dishonesty.
>Elves are pagan folklore. The lord of the rings is basically
>a pagan universe, the languages are basically pre-christian
>european, your immoral ineptness reinforces my view that
>christianity is the last great refuge of liars.
>
>>
>> Aris Katsaris
Well, who invented it????
Aris Katsaris
"Gary" <gtu...@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:3ca50adb....@news.cogeco.ca...
Be careful with your snippage there. You made it seem as if I was
the one who wrote the stuff above. I didn't.
Aris Katsaris
Gary
I apologize.
>
>
AC
wrote:
>
>
>Aris Katsaris wrote:
>>
>> "SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
>> news:3CA38AF5...@like.Im.telling...
>> >
>> > > I would imagine Tolkien would reject your notion completely. Even a
>> > > cursory reading of the Akaballeth will show that the greatest sin was
>> > > a rejection of the Creator. Sauron was attempting to set himself up
>> > > as the Ruler of Middle Earth in defiance of the Valar, who were the
>> > > rightful rulers of Arda. Their right ultimately derived from Eru
>> > > (God), and thus Sauron was defying God's will.
>> >
>> > I don't dispute that Tolkien was a christian, in fact he
>> > seems to be telling the story of English protestants and
>> > the mordorian catholic Europe.
>>
>> LOL! Tolkien was a *Catholic*!
>
>Fallacy, no catholic has every criticised the church.
>What better way to criticise the catholic church that
>to write a piece of 'moral' fiction.
First you have to prove LotR is meant to criticize the Church. Then
you can try to go beyond. But since you have not proven the former,
so the latter is just bad logic.
>
>>
>> > Anyway, Sauron was just misunderstood, someone
>> > early on in his life should have pointed out
>> > that magic was a curse as well as a gift.
>>
>> His "life"? He was one of the angelic spirits that pre-existed
>> the world. "Magic"? We're talking power here and it's
>> irrelevant whether it's magical or otherwise... Sauron's powers
>> were natural to him. He just misused them.
>
>Imaginative rebuttal that summedup sounds remarkable like
>"you can't imagine".
You just don't know what you're talking about. Sauron was an angelic
being. That is part of the mythology. The fact that you refuse to
acknowledge says more about you than anything else.
---
AaronC
AC
<kats...@otenet.gr> wrote:
>Have you even read that text? It's in "Morgoth's Ring", volume
>10 of History of Middle-earth, and it's quite obvious I think. It's
>not supposed to be just an "interpretation" about what they are
>discussing...
It is quite clear that the fellow in question has not closely read
LotR, and knows virtually nothing of the other works. His hilarious
interpretation of who Sauron was is an example.
---
AaronC
AC
wrote:
>Sorry, I re-read this and I just can't believe your dishonesty.
>Elves are pagan folklore. The lord of the rings is basically
>a pagan universe, the languages are basically pre-christian
>european, your immoral ineptness reinforces my view that
>christianity is the last great refuge of liars.
Tolkien stated himself that Elves represented beings in an "unfallen
state". LotR is not a pagan universe, since the Elves and Numenorians
all recognized the existence of a single creator named Eru. Your
ignorance of this subject is only more clearly shown with each
ignorant post. Please go read the Silmarillion at the very least
before you say any more. All you've shown is that at least one
atheist is married to ignorance.
BTW. I'm an agnostic, and doubt very much that the Judeao-Christian
God exists. But I am also learned enough in Tolkien's mythology to
know that your ignorance is almost absolute.
---
AaronC
AC
Christianity in general has a terrible history of abuse of the Jews,
which ultimately culminated in the Holocaust. There were just as many
Protestant Nazis as well as Catholic Nazis.
---
AaronC
AC
I have knowledge that anti-Semites tend to be paranoids, I observe
that you appear to show this trait, therefore I deduce that you are a
paranoid.
As far as I'm concerned, the wrong people were burned at Auschwitz.
---
AaronC
A Tsar Is Born
(From "The Letter of J.R.R. Tolkien")
>
> > His answer
>
> > "Thank you for your letter..... I regret that I am not clear
> > as to what you intend by arisch. I am not of Aryan extraction:
> > that is Indo-iranian; as far as I am aware none of my
> > ancestors spoke Hindustani, Persian, Gypsy, or any related
> > dialects. But if I am to understand that you are enquiring
> > whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret
> > that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people."
>
> > he continues on...
>
> > "I have been accustomed, nonetheless, to regard my German name
> > with pride, and continued to do so throughout the period
> > of the late regrettable war, in which I served in the English
> > army. I cannot, however, forbear to comment that if impertinent
> > and irrelevant inquiries of this sort are to become the rule in
> > matters if literature, then the time is not far distant
> > when a German name will no longer be a source of pride."
>
>
> And this proves?
> This matter has been raised in other threads before...Tolkien was a reclusive Oxford Don
> who relied on the ZOG-controlled Brit media(ever hear of a cunt called Beaverbrook?)
> for his information on NS Germany. He never visited NS Germany..so, couldn't
> form his own conclusions.
> As they say...[i]knowledge--->[ii]obsservation----->[iii]deduction!
> Whatever, JRRT was an _implacable_ opponent of 'modernism'
What the letter says is that Tolkien detested a country that made
"race" a qualification for anything, and spent its time persecuting
and denouncing loyal citizens over such criteria.
That, at any rate, was common knowledge, and at least Hitler made
little attempt to conceal it. Undoubtedly his arguments appealed to
many outside Germany; Tolkien, however, like Celebrimbor, saw what the
words meant and despised their maker at once and entirely.
I doubt he'd be happy that admirers of his works are twisting them for
similarly specious and bigoted purposes.
(I rather enjoyed Cat Lady's absurd gloss on the movie, though.
Thanks. At least she notices that Tolkien got the idea for the Ring
from Wagner.)
> =================================================================
> "If the British soldiers on the beaches of Normandy in 1944
> could have looked forward to the end of the century and seen what
> England had become, they would not have bothered to advance
> another 40 yards up the beach"
> (David Irving)
> ================================================================
Yeah, that's what he thinks.
The British soldiers followed orders; it was a point of pride to them.
They would have done so whatever insights as to the future had come to
them.
Parmathule
atsar...@hotmail.com
AC
Born) wrote:
>> =================================================================
>> "If the British soldiers on the beaches of Normandy in 1944
>> could have looked forward to the end of the century and seen what
>> England had become, they would not have bothered to advance
>> another 40 yards up the beach"
>> (David Irving)
>> ================================================================
>
>Yeah, that's what he thinks.
>The British soldiers followed orders; it was a point of pride to them.
>They would have done so whatever insights as to the future had come to
>them.
Well, considering that Nazi Germany had more to do with the fading of
the might of the British Empire than anybody else, the above quote is
both terribly inaccurate and pretty much ludicrous. I'm a bit of a
student of Churchill, and believe me, he called the Nazis what they
were, thugs. And their vile, bastard children in the white
supremacist movement are no different.
---
AaronC
Dylan Bryan-Dolman
> "Dylan Bryan-Dolman" <DylanBD*SPAM*B*GONE*@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >northern European anti-Semitism can be laid directly
> >at Martin Luther's door.
>
> The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
> Protestants.
>
Germany is a Lutheran country. Martin Luther's religious writings are
viciously anti-Semitic, and kept bigotry thriving in the north long after
the Inquistion had lost steam and the Catholic church had lost territory.
The role of the Catholic church in WWII itself is something else again.
Flame of the West
> Elves are pagan folklore.
At first perhaps, but not Tolkien's Elves. They are part of a
Catholic universe, as Aris has pointed out.
> The lord of the rings is basically a pagan universe,
I suggest you read the Silmarillion (even just the first part)
before saying something like that.
> the languages are basically pre-christian european,
I'm not sure it's correct to describe Welsh and Finnish as
"pre-Christian". Both languages existed both before and
after the conversion of their respective countries.
> your immoral ineptness reinforces my view that
> christianity is the last great refuge of liars.
As Aris points out, he is not Christian. I have found him to be
better informed about Christianity than most non-Christians.
You OTOH are appallingly ignorant and bigoted toward us.
--
-- FotW
Reality is for those who cannot cope with Middle-earth.
AC
<DylanBD*SPAM*B*GONE*@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Holly Salter <verb_preced...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> "Dylan Bryan-Dolman" <DylanBD*SPAM*B*GONE*@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >So the Protestants are the good guys here? Much of
>> >northern European anti-Semitism can be laid directly
>> >at Martin Luther's door.
>>
>> The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
>> Protestants.
>>
>> Remember that Adolf was a Catholic
>
>Germany is a Lutheran country. Martin Luther's religious writings are
>viciously anti-Semitic, and kept bigotry thriving in the north long after
>the Inquistion had lost steam and the Catholic church had lost territory.
Better to say that parts of Germany were Protestant. Other parts were
Catholic. Austria, for instance, is largely a Catholic country, as
well as many parts of eastern Germany.
---
AaronC
Gary
<DylanBD*SPAM*B*GONE*@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Holly Salter <verb_preced...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> "Dylan Bryan-Dolman" <DylanBD*SPAM*B*GONE*@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >So the Protestants are the good guys here? Much of
>> >northern European anti-Semitism can be laid directly
>> >at Martin Luther's door.
>>
>> The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
>> Protestants.
>>
>> Remember that Adolf was a Catholic
>
>Germany is a Lutheran country. Martin Luther's religious writings are
>viciously anti-Semitic, and kept bigotry thriving in the north long after
>the Inquistion had lost steam and the Catholic church had lost territory.
Again, what is wrong with anti-semitism?
roly
Nothing. Remember A-rabs etc are Semites.
Dylan Bryan-Dolman
>
> Nothing. Remember A-rabs etc are Semites.
Well this suggests a partial answer to Gary's question -- the use of muddled
terminology for the hatred of an undefinable category tends to generate
hopelessly irrational behavior.
AC
The same thing that was wrong with black slavery. Both are based upon
certain conceptions which are neither bourne out by fact or logic. In
the case of anti-Semitism, it is enlarged by the notion of the Jews
being somehow fundementally different both racially and
intellectually. Anti-semites are masters of setting up straw men (as
we see from Nazi propaganda from the 1930s and from the nonsense in
the Arab press) based on largely invented stereotypes. It is mind set
based upon fear, ignorance and hatred.
That, in short, is what is wrong with anti-Semitism.
---
AaronC
Flame of the West
> The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
> Protestants.
Only the ignorant ones do. It's false.
> REmember that Adolf was a Catholic
In adulthood, he was not.
SugarPill
So Tolkien studied the ancient langauges of pre-christian
Europe, read the sagas of the Norse, and other northern
tribes and he is not also a bigot for imposing christianity
upon those tribes just as history did. Just as christianity
imposed itself on indigeious cultures around the world,
but taking from the cultures and claiming them as christian.
If I'm am a bigot then so is every christian that has
every uttered the words God made it all.
The dishonesty is that you all (however expert) is to
deny that elves are a pagan (pantheist nto atheist)
folklore. Why is that so hard for you to do, why is
so hard to get Christians to admit that a christmas
tree, eating to much and drink to much, is not a
christian festival but the pagan one. Where in the
Bible does it say you should eat and drink excessively,
be joyfull in worship a tree! Until you guys get off
you scantimonious theft of pagan iconigraphy then
maybe we can have a reasonable discuss of Tolkien
crime of plagorising pagan cultures.
SugarPill
I didn't notice the crossposting, sorry.
Elves are pagan mythology, for christians to openly
admit the christianess of the lord of the rings and
deny the pagan element is a lie, IS THE LIE.
Tolkien studied pre-christian northern languages
and sagas, NOTE PRE-CHRISTIAN. His life of studies
were mostly PRE-CHRISTIAN.
Much of European Christianity comes from the paganism,
just as you don't find christmas trees in the coptic
church, just as you find many s.americian indigeious
cultures mixed in with s,americian catholicism.
The staggering thing is the christians in here
fundemental intellectual insecurity, I recognise
that Tolkien was a christian, I even recognise that
the lord of the rings has some christian ideas.
But it's like a the pope popping pills that used
darwins theory of evolution to verify their potency
and then him declaring that evolution was inaccurate.
It has been the lie throught the ages that christian
claim the universe as theres, that other cultures
are there because god created it all, even if those
other cultures fought to defend their own gods
claims to the universe.
I flicked on the TV during Easter and caught the
Roman overload of Isreal saying that there was
no such thing as 'miracles' when hearing jesuses
miracles, walking on water. This is incorect and
the *lie* because romans were pagan pantheists
and believe in such things as the oracle.
Christians prove their faith is a lie because
they defend it with lies.
SugarPill
Aris Katsaris wrote:
>
> "SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
> news:3CA4F46D...@like.Im.telling...
> >
> > Aris Katsaris wrote:
> > > "The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and
> > > Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision.
> > > That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references
> to
> > > anything like 'religion,' to cults or practices, in the imaginary world. For
> > > the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism."
> > >
> > > A letter by Tolkien in 1953 to Father Robert Murray, a Jesuit priest.
> >
> > Tolkien wasn't perfect because when I read the lord of the
> > rings it reinforced my atheism.
>
> <shrug> So what? It wasn't a book meant to make you Christian.
> It wasn't even a Christian allegory. It just had christian symbolism
> and elements in it. From some of the dates (25 December, 25 March)
> to the Eagle's song to other smaller tidbits throughout...
The elves were pagan symbollism, Tolkien studies the sagas
of pre-christian societies, why won't you admit this??
SugarPill
SugarPill wrote:
>
> Aris Katsaris wrote:
> >
> > "SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
> > news:3CA38AF5...@like.Im.telling...
> > >
> > > > I would imagine Tolkien would reject your notion completely. Even a
> > > > cursory reading of the Akaballeth will show that the greatest sin was
> > > > a rejection of the Creator. Sauron was attempting to set himself up
> > > > as the Ruler of Middle Earth in defiance of the Valar, who were the
> > > > rightful rulers of Arda. Their right ultimately derived from Eru
> > > > (God), and thus Sauron was defying God's will.
> > >
> > > I don't dispute that Tolkien was a christian, in fact he
> > > seems to be telling the story of English protestants and
> > > the mordorian catholic Europe.
> >
> > LOL! Tolkien was a *Catholic*!
That's unjust Catholics do criticise the Church in fiction.
> >
> > > Anyway, Sauron was just misunderstood, someone
> > > early on in his life should have pointed out
> > > that magic was a curse as well as a gift.
> >
> > His "life"? He was one of the angelic spirits that pre-existed
> > the world. "Magic"? We're talking power here and it's
> > irrelevant whether it's magical or otherwise... Sauron's powers
> > were natural to him. He just misused them.
> >
> > > > It doesn't? He stated himself that it was a fundementally "Catholic"
> > > > work. You can't reject that, but you can't reject that he said it,
> > > > and that there are Christian elements throughout the entire mythology.
> > >
> > > So? Oh please provide the quote?
> >
> > "The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and
> > Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision.
> > That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to
> > anything like 'religion,' to cults or practices, in the imaginary world. For
> > the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism."
> >
> > A letter by Tolkien in 1953 to Father Robert Murray, a Jesuit priest.
> >
> > > For surely
> > > your not arguing that I should accept that there
> > > are christian elements to the mythology (I do,
> > > christian is a myth to me), but that you don't
> > > accept the British elements.
> >
> > He based Shire on England if that's what you are talking about.
> >
> > > Tolkien didn't write a
> > > piece of fiction to compete with the Bible if he
> > > is as religious as you say, so your literalisation
> > > of the works is faulty.
> >
> > But the works are set in a basically Christian universe. He
> > even wrote a long passage where the elf Finrod and the human
> > woman Andreth end up discussing the salvation of men through
> > the incarnation of God.
>
> Sorry, I re-read this and I just can't believe your dishonesty.
> Elves are pagan folklore. The lord of the rings is basically
> a pagan universe, the languages are basically pre-christian
> european, your immoral ineptness reinforces my view that
> christianity is the last great refuge of liars.
>
> >
> > Aris Katsaris
SugarPill
Muddled terminology, you've tried reading the Bible...
SugarPill
Flame of the West wrote:
>
> Holly Salter wrote:
>
> > The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
> > Protestants.
>
> Only the ignorant ones do. It's false.
>
> > REmember that Adolf was a Catholic
>
> In adulthood, he was not.
You have evidance, or is this your hope.
SugarPill
Dylan Bryan-Dolman wrote:
>
> > SugarPill <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
> > > I don't dispute that Tolkien was a christian, in fact he
> > > seems to be telling the story of English protestants and
> > > the mordorian catholic Europe.
>
> So the Protestants are the good guys here? Much of northern European
> anti-Semitism can be laid directly at Martin Luther's door.
The catholic church had a long history of persecuting jews,
muslims, pagans, long before Luther split the church.
Anyone who went against doctrine was against God, that
applied before and after Luther. But thanks to Luther
we atheists can decide our own religiousness.
AC
wrote:
How is your being a bigot cast in dispersions on any other human being
out there. As it is, all you've proven to me is that atheists are
every bit as capable of being possessed by prejudice as any other
group. By no means to the religious have a monopoly on muddy,
intellectually starved thinking.
>
>The dishonesty is that you all (however expert) is to
>deny that elves are a pagan (pantheist nto atheist)
>folklore. Why is that so hard for you to do, why is
>so hard to get Christians to admit that a christmas
>tree, eating to much and drink to much, is not a
>christian festival but the pagan one.
Because, while Elves may have been based upon certain pre-Christian
Nordic and Celtic mythical beings, Tolkien's interpretation and
subcreation turned them into a version of humanity untainted by
original sin.
> Where in the
>Bible does it say you should eat and drink excessively,
>be joyfull in worship a tree! Until you guys get off
>you scantimonious theft of pagan iconigraphy then
>maybe we can have a reasonable discuss of Tolkien
>crime of plagorising pagan cultures.
Ahh. So it is plagiarism, is it. Do you know what plagiarism is?
Please give me your definition. I think before we discuss this
further you best lay out your terms of reference.
---
AaronC
AC
wrote:
Or some of your posts...
---
AaronC
AC
wrote:
>
>
>Flame of the West wrote:
>>
>> Holly Salter wrote:
>>
>> > The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
>> > Protestants.
>>
>> Only the ignorant ones do. It's false.
>>
>> > REmember that Adolf was a Catholic
>>
>> In adulthood, he was not.
>
>You have evidance, or is this your hope.
Even if Hitler was a Catholic until the moment he stuck the pistol to
his head, so what? If Hitler being a Catholic casts a dim light on
Catholics, than Soviet's being atheists sure does some major damage to
your apparent cause.
---
AaronC
AC
wrote:
Yes, Luther brought reform to the Church, as well as hundreds of years
of some of the bloodiest war that Europe was to see until 1914.
---
AaronC
inge
>
>
> Germany is a Lutheran country.
Tell that to the Bavarians. Have your escape pod ready.
inge
--
"I hold it to be the inalienable right of anybody to go to hell in his
own way."
- Robert Frost
===
<http://home.foni.net/~lyorn> -- Stories, RPG & stuff.
inge
>
>
> Yes, Luther brought reform to the Church, as well as hundreds of years
> of some of the bloodiest war that Europe was to see until 1914.
The whole mess should have been settled with the Augsburger
Religionsfrieden in 1555. But some people just can't leave well enough
alone, especially if they hope to get a piece of the action...
inge
--
"I hold it to be the inalienable right of anybody to go to hell in his
own way."
- Robert Frost
===
<http://home.foni.net/~lyorn> -- Stories, RPG & stuff.
===
To send me priority mail, replace 'wildwusel' with 'lyorn'.
Aris Katsaris
"SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
>
> Aris Katsaris wrote:
> >
> > <shrug> So what? It wasn't a book meant to make you Christian.
> > It wasn't even a Christian allegory. It just had christian symbolism
> > and elements in it. From some of the dates (25 December, 25 March)
> > to the Eagle's song to other smaller tidbits throughout...
>
> The elves were pagan symbollism,
I beg your pardon? Symbolising what?
They were elements of earlier pagan religions/mythologies, yes. But
they were inserted by Tolkien into a christian universe, but if they are
symbols of anything in his work (I'm not that sure they were, any
more than dwarves were "symbols" of anything), they are symbols
of something based on Christianity: namely an Unfallen people.
> Tolkien studies the sagas
> of pre-christian societies, why won't you admit this??
Ofcourse he studied them, when did I refuse to admit this?
But what does this have to do with anything?
Aris Katsaris
SugarPill
Atheism, is the lack of god not religion. Atheism has not a doctrine,
atheism is not a religion. Sects of buddhism that believe
Buddha was only a teacher are atheisms. Just as a Hindu is
pantheist. Note, a-,pan-,mono-,theism. Communism was the
doctine of Russia. Hitler was a christian, does this mean
the Holocaust was down to Quakers? For such generalisations
are clearly incorrect, Christianity did influence Hitler,
as it did influence and validate the crusaders or the
men of the inquistion. But nowhere has atheism per se influence
diddly squat, it's what atheists actually hold true that
does. I am a rational humanist, if I killed millions as
a rational humanist then rational humanism is brought into
doubt (as wrong or misleading or evil). Communism has been
found to be flawed, so to many had christianity, because
even though the ideals are quite good (to some) they are
invariable brought into disrepute by people blindly (or not
so blindly) abusing the authority they hold dear. This
is a warning to every rational humanist to likewise watch
themselves for misuse of their power. However just as there
is a flaw in communism, so there could be flaws in christianity.
But that is another debate.
>
> ---
> AaronC
SugarPill
Of course not. But your constanting attacking the messager rather
the message underlines you need to distract from the lie
that elves are not pagan folklore of northern pre-christian Europe,
that Tolkien was studied pre-christin European languages,
pre-christian mythology and the lord of the rings *is* for
the most part pagan in origin. I have said that tolkien was
a christian, that some of the morals are christian, but
that some of christian morals were pagan before jesus or
moses.
Dwarfs killing orcs to steal gold from dragons is
*not* christian morality quite the opposite, it however
was viking morality before christianity took over.
Many cultures remember the vikings sacking churches
for gold.
AC
wrote:
>
>
>AC wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2002 08:31:50 +1000, SugarPill <h...@like.Im.telling>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Flame of the West wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Holly Salter wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
>> >> > Protestants.
>> >>
>> >> Only the ignorant ones do. It's false.
>> >>
>> >> > REmember that Adolf was a Catholic
>> >>
>> >> In adulthood, he was not.
>> >
>> >You have evidance, or is this your hope.
>>
>> Even if Hitler was a Catholic until the moment he stuck the pistol to
>> his head, so what? If Hitler being a Catholic casts a dim light on
>> Catholics, than Soviet's being atheists sure does some major damage to
>> your apparent cause.
>
>Atheism, is the lack of god not religion. Atheism has not a doctrine,
>atheism is not a religion. Sects of buddhism that believe
>Buddha was only a teacher are atheisms. Just as a Hindu is
>pantheist. Note, a-,pan-,mono-,theism. Communism was the
>doctine of Russia. Hitler was a christian, does this mean
>the Holocaust was down to Quakers? For such generalisations
>are clearly incorrect, Christianity did influence Hitler,
Just as much as pre-Christian Germanic symbolism did. Hitler, like
all such people, used whatever symbolism would gain him what he
desired; namely absolute power. Napoleon used the French Revolution.
Charlemagne used Classical Rome. Alexander the Great used the gods of
Greece, and was himself to become something of deity to men like
Julius Caesar. This is a pattern of history which has been played out
time and time again. Religion is only one type of symbolism.
>as it did influence and validate the crusaders or the
>men of the inquistion. But nowhere has atheism per se influence
>diddly squat, it's what atheists actually hold true that
>does.
Atheism is as much a matter of faith as any other "religious"
principle. Atheism, like other religions, has by its nature, been
convenient to certain people desiring power. The Communists have used
it in much the same fashion as Hitler used Christianity, to create
scapegoats.
---
AaronC
SugarPill
So just because people didn't accept power they must be christians???
Sorry but I don't agree, peoples all over the world are unwilling
to do the unethical when asked, people all over the world
though time have stop themselves from living wrongful lives.
The vikings had ethics whilst they slaughter christians,
so did christians as they slaughted the Incas. As to the
subcreation, pagan sagas have gods, Thor, Odin, a underworld,
vanhalla, etc. The subcreation can be seen as much as pagan
as christian, they have lived alone side each for hundreds
or years, and paganism long before that.
Tolkien wanted to revive the lost culture of the past
and did an excellant job, yes he could easily believe
that what was good was also naturally not against
catholicism. But that doesn't mean that thw dwarfs
avarice for gold that they dug so deep is purely
a christian moral. Pagans would have understood excess.
Pagans would have had stories to explain why people
should obey the ethics.
Tolkien pickup on the underlying morality that
existed in pagan pre-christian Europe, that
Christians inherited from their forefathers.
Just as we inherited maths/science from the
Greeks, law and government from the romans.
Pantheism for the most part societies.
> >
> > > Where in the
> > >Bible does it say you should eat and drink excessively,
> > >be joyfull in worship a tree! Until you guys get off
> > >you scantimonious theft of pagan iconigraphy then
> > >maybe we can have a reasonable discuss of Tolkien
> > >crime of plagorising pagan cultures.
> >
> > Ahh. So it is plagiarism, is it. Do you know what plagiarism is?
> > Please give me your definition. I think before we discuss this
> > further you best lay out your terms of reference.
The sagas are pagan texts, nowhere in the christian theology
(bible) do you find elves, dwarfs, fairies, but in the
stories and oral histories of pagan cultures *you do*.
Thus the argument that elves, dwarfs are playing in
a christian universe when they very characters
intrinsically form a pagan universe is a lie. Queen
Mag etc, it begs the question why so many I have talk
to have such a hard time understanding the basic
mass iconigraphy of the Lord of the Rings is more
saga than Biblical tale. Wrongly citing peoples
work, no a whole culture history!, is plagurism.
A habit of christians overcome with the power of the
one true...
> >
> > ---
> > AaronC
SugarPill
YES!!! Just as *you* can't say the good germanic symbolism
wasn't taken up by christians. Paganism issn't any more
evil than Islam (stoning adultury), all faiths have
problems.
>Hitler, like
> all such people, used whatever symbolism would gain him what he
> desired; namely absolute power.
YES. The conquests of the Americas was symbolic of christian
righteousness.. etc. etc.
> Napoleon used the French Revolution.
> Charlemagne used Classical Rome. Alexander the Great used the gods of
> Greece, and was himself to become something of deity to men like
> Julius Caesar. This is a pattern of history which has been played out
> time and time again. Religion is only one type of symbolism.
Every culture has cannibalised their religious edicts,
that's why there so wishy washy. What are the religious
right in the US?
>
> >as it did influence and validate the crusaders or the
> >men of the inquistion. But nowhere has atheism per se influence
> >diddly squat, it's what atheists actually hold true that
> >does.
>
> Atheism is as much a matter of faith as any other "religious"
> principle. Atheism, like other religions, has by its nature, been
> convenient to certain people desiring power. The Communists have used
> it in much the same fashion as Hitler used Christianity, to create
> scapegoats.
Rubbish, name some atheist doctrines? Just as you
would name some theist doctrines. atheism is a
sign post of don't go here.
But lets say your right, that science is a religion,
science is atheistic, the law is atheistic, secularism
is, government is, the constitution of the US say
it cannot establish religion, Atheism! Atheism is
too general a description, just as saying the Pope
is holding to theistic doctrines (what he's holding
to hindu precepts!). You error sir is you use of
a generalisation to mean the specific.
Which atheism? buddhism, humanism, rationalism,
animalism, communism?
Did you know pantheist romans called the christians
atheists as they throw them to the lions!
>
> ---
> AaronC
rand mair fheal
> Holly Salter wrote:
>
> > The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
> > Protestants.
>
> Only the ignorant ones do. It's false.
vatican ii
> > REmember that Adolf was a Catholic
>
> In adulthood, he was not.
stalin was seminary student before renouncing all gods except marx
therefore everything he did was in the furtherance of the
russian orthodox church
even killing all those priests
SugarPill
Aris Katsaris wrote:
>
> "SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
> news:3CA63B40...@like.Im.telling...
> >
> > Aris Katsaris wrote:
> > >
> > > <shrug> So what? It wasn't a book meant to make you Christian.
> > > It wasn't even a Christian allegory. It just had christian symbolism
> > > and elements in it. From some of the dates (25 December, 25 March)
> > > to the Eagle's song to other smaller tidbits throughout...
> >
> > The elves were pagan symbollism,
>
> I beg your pardon? Symbolising what?
>
> They were elements of earlier pagan religions/mythologies, yes. But
> they were inserted by Tolkien into a christian universe, but if they are
> symbols of anything in his work (I'm not that sure they were, any
> more than dwarves were "symbols" of anything), they are symbols
> of something based on Christianity: namely an Unfallen people.
Wait 2 seconds..
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=mythology
first item...
http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~cherryne/mythology.html
So I throw the google dice and it contradicts *you*.
rand mair fheal
> christian festival but the pagan one. Where in the
> Bible does it say you should eat and drink excessively,
> be joyfull in worship a tree! Until you guys get off
> you scantimonious theft of pagan iconigraphy then
> maybe we can have a reasonable discuss of Tolkien
> crime of plagorising pagan cultures.
and there are only thirteen states in the usa
because thats how many stars and stripes are on the great seal
study some linguistics
words have no intrinsic meaning
only those meanings a community speakers wish them to have
AC
wrote:
>> > Because, while Elves may have been based upon certain pre-Christian
>> > Nordic and Celtic mythical beings, Tolkien's interpretation and
>> > subcreation turned them into a version of humanity untainted by
>> > original sin.
>
>So just because people didn't accept power they must be christians???
>Sorry but I don't agree, peoples all over the world are unwilling
>to do the unethical when asked, people all over the world
>though time have stop themselves from living wrongful lives.
>The vikings had ethics whilst they slaughter christians,
>so did christians as they slaughted the Incas. As to the
>subcreation, pagan sagas have gods, Thor, Odin, a underworld,
>vanhalla, etc. The subcreation can be seen as much as pagan
>as christian, they have lived alone side each for hundreds
>or years, and paganism long before that.
What are you talking about? I said their roots were in mythology, but
there nature as written in the mythology was as beings that had not
suffered from the original sin.
>
>Tolkien wanted to revive the lost culture of the past
>and did an excellant job, yes he could easily believe
>that what was good was also naturally not against
>catholicism. But that doesn't mean that thw dwarfs
>avarice for gold that they dug so deep is purely
>a christian moral. Pagans would have understood excess.
>Pagans would have had stories to explain why people
>should obey the ethics.
You seem to be missing the point here. Tolkien did not want to revive
lost cultures, any more than Egyptologists want to revive Ancient
Egypt. I think what you are trying to say was that he wanted to
preserve the memory of ancient things, which is true, to a point.
However, while the basis of Tolkien's subcreation was Nordic tradition
(it was, in its beginning, to be an "English" mythology), the
fundemental cosmology is based upon Christian notions. There is a
creator, Eru, who first creates an angelic order, the Ainur, who,
through the Music, create Ea, that is, physical creation.
Your attempt to closely link Tolkien's mythology to Paganism at the
expense of the Christian element displays both bias and ignorance.
The Elves were as much Tolkien's vision of humanity untainted as they
were any pagan motif.
>
>Tolkien pickup on the underlying morality that
>existed in pagan pre-christian Europe, that
>Christians inherited from their forefathers.
>Just as we inherited maths/science from the
>Greeks, law and government from the romans.
>Pantheism for the most part societies.
I never said pagans were immoral, and neither did I say that Tolkien's
mythology did not have its roots in pagan traditions. But what I do
say, and this is backed up by an actual reading of the Silmarillion,
is that they were placed within a very Catholic universe, with a
Satanic figure in the fallen Vala Melkor, who is in all essentials,
responsible for the corruption of most of Creation. There is a
singular creator, Eru, who is essentially the same as the
Judeao-Christian God (or Yahweh, if you dislike the modern motif).
So, in a strange way, you are both right and wrong. Right in linking
Nordic traditions. Wrong in trying to isolate and minimize the
Christian influence.
>
>> >
>> > > Where in the
>> > >Bible does it say you should eat and drink excessively,
>> > >be joyfull in worship a tree! Until you guys get off
>> > >you scantimonious theft of pagan iconigraphy then
>> > >maybe we can have a reasonable discuss of Tolkien
>> > >crime of plagorising pagan cultures.
>> >
>> > Ahh. So it is plagiarism, is it. Do you know what plagiarism is?
>> > Please give me your definition. I think before we discuss this
>> > further you best lay out your terms of reference.
>
>The sagas are pagan texts, nowhere in the christian theology
>(bible) do you find elves, dwarfs, fairies, but in the
>stories and oral histories of pagan cultures *you do*.
>Thus the argument that elves, dwarfs are playing in
>a christian universe when they very characters
>intrinsically form a pagan universe is a lie. Queen
>Mag etc, it begs the question why so many I have talk
>to have such a hard time understanding the basic
>mass iconigraphy of the Lord of the Rings is more
>saga than Biblical tale. Wrongly citing peoples
>work, no a whole culture history!, is plagurism.
>A habit of christians overcome with the power of the
>one true...
Plagiarism is the intentional stealing of someone else's work. What
you are talking about is the incorporation of motifs. The
Silmarillion, for instance, owes a great deal to Finnish mythology,
but it is the context that these images and tales were placed in,
coupled with original narrative and cosmological elements that make
the mythology.
For instance, the Valar were gods in a real sense of the word. They
were the "powers", the rulers of Arda (Earth). Their individual
powers owe much to the Nordic gods. However, the context in which
they are placed, as angelic beings created by Eru (God) and charged
with the governance of creation, is a mixing of two motifs. If this
is your definition of plagiarism, then I cannot argue with it.
---
AaronC
SugarPill
rand mair fheal wrote:
>
> > tree, eating to much and drink to much, is not a
> > christian festival but the pagan one. Where in the
> > Bible does it say you should eat and drink excessively,
> > be joyfull in worship a tree! Until you guys get off
> > you scantimonious theft of pagan iconigraphy then
> > maybe we can have a reasonable discuss of Tolkien
> > crime of plagorising pagan cultures.
>
> and there are only thirteen states in the usa
> because thats how many stars and stripes are on the great seal
And there is a pyramid on the dollar!
>
> study some linguistics
> words have no intrinsic meaning
> only those meanings a community speakers wish them to have
I agree, I as much have argued this is why there is no God.
I do not believe Tolkian commited plaguries pagan cultures,
I believe he set out to try to revive the folklore of
Britian, I however totally disagree with those that believe
he couldn't be a catholic to do this, or that he didn't
see the goodness in what he wrote was not in conflict
with church teachings because it was good (even though
could easily be seen as critical). The lord of the rings
is essentially a book not unlike the sagas, dead mythology.
AC
wrote:
Including Atheism.
>
>>Hitler, like
>> all such people, used whatever symbolism would gain him what he
>> desired; namely absolute power.
>
>YES. The conquests of the Americas was symbolic of christian
>righteousness.. etc. etc.
No, it was a symbol of European mercantilism. Religion may have been
a justification for some (the noncomformists of New England), but
there were just as many people coming to the New World to make
fortunes. Even the brutality of the Spanish had more to do with the
obtaining of wealth than with attempting to convert Indians. Religion
is a useful tool that, in certain hands, can be utilized to great
good, and in others, can be turned into monstrosity. The Atheist
Communist government despises all other faiths, and thus uses its
power to suppress.
>
>> Napoleon used the French Revolution.
>> Charlemagne used Classical Rome. Alexander the Great used the gods of
>> Greece, and was himself to become something of deity to men like
>> Julius Caesar. This is a pattern of history which has been played out
>> time and time again. Religion is only one type of symbolism.
>
>Every culture has cannibalised their religious edicts,
>that's why there so wishy washy. What are the religious
>right in the US?
What I'm saying is the use of cultural symbolism to grab at power is
not reserved to strictly spiritual symbols. Napoleon utilized the
French Revolution, which, was at its core humanist.
>
>>
>> >as it did influence and validate the crusaders or the
>> >men of the inquistion. But nowhere has atheism per se influence
>> >diddly squat, it's what atheists actually hold true that
>> >does.
>>
>> Atheism is as much a matter of faith as any other "religious"
>> principle. Atheism, like other religions, has by its nature, been
>> convenient to certain people desiring power. The Communists have used
>> it in much the same fashion as Hitler used Christianity, to create
>> scapegoats.
>
>Rubbish, name some atheist doctrines? Just as you
>would name some theist doctrines. atheism is a
>sign post of don't go here.
Namely "God does not exist." There's a doctrine.
>
>But lets say your right, that science is a religion,
Science is not a religion, and Science does not deal in the realm of
Atheism. Here is one of the great sins of the Twentieth Century, the
religious right linking science and Atheism, and Atheists essential
belief that somehow they represent an outgrowth of Science. But
Science, fortunately, is as poor an ally of the religious as it is of
the Atheist.
>science is atheistic, the law is atheistic, secularism
>is, government is, the constitution of the US say
>it cannot establish religion, Atheism! Atheism is
>too general a description, just as saying the Pope
>is holding to theistic doctrines (what he's holding
>to hindu precepts!). You error sir is you use of
>a generalisation to mean the specific.
Your error is in assuming that Atheism is somehow a superior belief to
any other. Atheism, like Judeao-Christianity, is a matter of faith
that relies upon a precept which is not falsifiable.
>
>Which atheism? buddhism, humanism, rationalism,
>animalism, communism?
>
>Did you know pantheist romans called the christians
>atheists as they throw them to the lions!
I'm well aware of what the Romans said, since it is area of particular
interest to me.
---
AaronC
rand mair fheal
> atheism is not a religion. Sects of buddhism that believe
yeah
yeah
yeah
somebody does something wrong
and they happen to be christian
its christianitys fault
(hence the necessity pointing out stalin education)
somebody else does something wrong
and they happen to be atheist
atheism had nothing to do with it
> men of the inquistion. But nowhere has atheism per se influence
> diddly squat, it's what atheists actually hold true that
except in the letters among stalin molotov beria et al
on the web courtesy of library of congress
but of course they were all lying
just like christians
when christians say christianity made them do it
theyre telling the truth
when atheists say atheism made them do it
theyre lying
your intellect is astounding
the happy reaper
> > words have no intrinsic meaning
> > only those meanings a community speakers wish them to have
Apart from words like 'mum' and 'dad' which are often remarkably similar
between languages, because they mimic the first sounds a baby makes. Also,
to an extent Onamatopeic words, though there can vary between languages.
There are also demonstrations of certain universal aspects of language I
could show you, but I'd need to be able to draw or speak or make actions,
none of which are possible on here.
> I agree, I as much have argued this is why there is no God.
> I do not believe Tolkian commited plaguries pagan cultures,
> I believe he set out to try to revive the folklore of
> Britian, I however totally disagree with those that believe
> he couldn't be a catholic to do this, or that he didn't
> see the goodness in what he wrote was not in conflict
> with church teachings because it was good (even though
> could easily be seen as critical). The lord of the rings
> is essentially a book not unlike the sagas, dead mythology.
Starting wars all over the placeis a VERY catholic thing to do.
--
www.fastcow.co.uk
www.eurosexuals.co.uk
Peter
Aris Katsaris
"SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
>
> Aris Katsaris wrote:
> >
> > They were elements of earlier pagan religions/mythologies, yes. But
> > they were inserted by Tolkien into a christian universe, but if they are
> > symbols of anything in his work (I'm not that sure they were, any
> > more than dwarves were "symbols" of anything), they are symbols
> > of something based on Christianity: namely an Unfallen people.
>
> Wait 2 seconds..
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=mythology
> first item...
> http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~cherryne/mythology.html
> So I throw the google dice and it contradicts *you*.
Do you even bother to read my posts at *all*? I said they came
from earlier pagan religions/mythologies, YES!!
Where the hell did these links "contradict" me? What statement
did I make that you supposedly refuted?
Please read my posts before responding to them. It'd make for
more useful conversation.
Aris Katsaris
SugarPill
AC wrote:
>
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2002 09:56:02 +1000, SugarPill <h...@like.Im.telling>
> wrote:
> >> > Because, while Elves may have been based upon certain pre-Christian
> >> > Nordic and Celtic mythical beings, Tolkien's interpretation and
> >> > subcreation turned them into a version of humanity untainted by
> >> > original sin.
> >
> >So just because people didn't accept power they must be christians???
> >Sorry but I don't agree, peoples all over the world are unwilling
> >to do the unethical when asked, people all over the world
> >though time have stop themselves from living wrongful lives.
> >The vikings had ethics whilst they slaughter christians,
> >so did christians as they slaughted the Incas. As to the
> >subcreation, pagan sagas have gods, Thor, Odin, a underworld,
> >vanhalla, etc. The subcreation can be seen as much as pagan
> >as christian, they have lived alone side each for hundreds
> >or years, and paganism long before that.
>
> What are you talking about? I said their roots were in mythology, but
> there nature as written in the mythology was as beings that had not
> suffered from the original sin.
Tolkien never uses the owrd original sin, and you have yet
to convince me that christianity is the only religion
that wants it's believers to follow it's religions ethics.
Thus every religion has perfect religious icons, pagans
believed in Gods, their Gods were perfect.
As to elves being perfect, weren't orcs once elves?
Your imposing you faith onto this book, as am I,
we naturally will intrepete things differently,
as to tolkiens mind we shall never know. But the
simple fact that the sagas do play so well amongst
christian seems to imply that christians have kept
some of their pagan heritage from their forefathers.
What is Yuletime.
>
> >
> >Tolkien wanted to revive the lost culture of the past
> >and did an excellant job, yes he could easily believe
> >that what was good was also naturally not against
> >catholicism. But that doesn't mean that thw dwarfs
> >avarice for gold that they dug so deep is purely
> >a christian moral. Pagans would have understood excess.
> >Pagans would have had stories to explain why people
> >should obey the ethics.
>
> You seem to be missing the point here. Tolkien did not want to revive
> lost cultures, any more than Egyptologists want to revive Ancient
> Egypt. I think what you are trying to say was that he wanted to
> preserve the memory of ancient things, which is true, to a point.
> However, while the basis of Tolkien's subcreation was Nordic tradition
> (it was, in its beginning, to be an "English" mythology), the
> fundemental cosmology is based upon Christian notions. There is a
> creator, Eru, who first creates an angelic order, the Ainur, who,
> through the Music, create Ea, that is, physical creation.
Pagans have a creator, what is Zeus? Zeus created unicorns?
What is the oracle?
>
> Your attempt to closely link Tolkien's mythology to Paganism at the
> expense of the Christian element displays both bias and ignorance.
No, your inability to see the mythology as a real religiion
of your ancestors makes you not ancestor worshippor.
> The Elves were as much Tolkien's vision of humanity untainted as they
> were any pagan motif.
Yes, we are all owners of our thoughts. But there can be no
other way, for only humans create gods.
If the catholic church of the 14th century were here now
Tolkiens play on pagan motifs...
>
> >
> >Tolkien pickup on the underlying morality that
> >existed in pagan pre-christian Europe, that
> >Christians inherited from their forefathers.
> >Just as we inherited maths/science from the
> >Greeks, law and government from the romans.
> >Pantheism for the most part societies.
>
> I never said pagans were immoral, and neither did I say that Tolkien's
> mythology did not have its roots in pagan traditions. But what I do
> say, and this is backed up by an actual reading of the Silmarillion,
> is that they were placed within a very Catholic universe, with a
> Satanic figure in the fallen Vala Melkor, who is in all essentials,
> responsible for the corruption of most of Creation. There is a
> singular creator, Eru, who is essentially the same as the
> Judeao-Christian God (or Yahweh, if you dislike the modern motif).
Who is essential also the same as Zeus, or whoever the creator
god ofthe Norse was (Odin, Thor?). You can ignore the similarities
in world religions, but christianity is not the only religion
with a singular creator, or even evil gods, or a hell like
afterworld if you don't obey relgious edicts.
>
> So, in a strange way, you are both right and wrong. Right in linking
> Nordic traditions. Wrong in trying to isolate and minimize the
> Christian influence.
I have never said Tolkien could throwoff his christianity,
I just say that you are wrong to assert that the lord of
the rings is more christian than pagan. Just as it would
be wrong to say that a christmas tree, it's history
and roots, was christian. Yes, today many people believe
it has a place in christian mythology but today it's
more a symbol of the new secular religion of consumerism.
What you regard as a christian universe can be charted
back in to pagan societies of Greece, Roman, and even
back through Judaism to Eygptian mythology, there are
even arguments of Buddhist influences in Christianity.
Buddha did walk the earth some 600 year before jesus.
But more simply, the universe of Gods, evil, angellic
predate even moses coming down from the mountain. Some
even argue a universe of gods, heaven and earth, formed
in when the rulers of the nile created the whole sorry
fiction.
If you are correct then whats to stop the argument that Tolkien
was in effect undermining the peoples and languages he so
(in my opinion) revered, for he must of to be so caught up in it.
But I disagree Tolkien was not perfect, this is a piece of
fiction, they is no doctrinal necessity that each part of
the book be wholey true to the past or to itself. Only that
it is possible to link and change a imperfect creator into a
perfect creator, which I don't believe because to suggest the
pagans creator God, or the Hindu creator God, for example
is less than perfect because he was overthrown just as
adam ate the apple.
Look you seem to be nitpicking, I really mean that, this is
a piece of fiction and anyone who thinks Tolkien is worthy
of praise would surely welcome that he has such a wide readership.
That he used some christian elements along side pagan is
hardly worth the dispute if it would undermine the author.
But her never said Eru was the christian God, but pagans
may have very well believe that elves watched over their lives.
The motifs mixs so well because they have a common origin,
the folklore of pagan europe predates Christianity. What
you regard as original sin is just emphasis on sinfullness,
that you believe that pagans would never emphasis sinfulness
in small measure says something else besides Tolkien
was talking about christianity. Original sin is heavy tideup
on Catholicism, I saw lots of blood guts, hell and heaven
on Earth (a pagan persepective) in the LotR.
>
> ---
> AaronC
SugarPill
That's the definition of what atheism is stupid.
When we see a rich doctrine that lack creator dieites
we call it a atheism, just as ancestor worship,
animalism, buddhism, humanism, can all be seen
as atheism. It's like saying jews believe in
orginal sin, because jews is a theism.
>
> >
> >But lets say your right, that science is a religion,
>
> Science is not a religion, and Science does not deal in the realm of
> Atheism. Here is one of the great sins of the Twentieth Century, the
> religious right linking science and Atheism, and Atheists essential
> belief that somehow they represent an outgrowth of Science. But
> Science, fortunately, is as poor an ally of the religious as it is of
> the Atheist.
Science does not regard Gods, in fact scientific doctrine
(if you will) is reductionist, Okcam razor etc.
>
> >science is atheistic, the law is atheistic, secularism
> >is, government is, the constitution of the US say
> >it cannot establish religion, Atheism! Atheism is
> >too general a description, just as saying the Pope
> >is holding to theistic doctrines (what he's holding
> >to hindu precepts!). You error sir is you use of
> >a generalisation to mean the specific.
>
> Your error is in assuming that Atheism is somehow a superior belief to
> any other. Atheism, like Judeao-Christianity, is a matter of faith
> that relies upon a precept which is not falsifiable.
Rubbish, a atheist says much like a hindu would,
prove the christian God exists. Atheists just believe
in one less god, how they come to that belief
*is* their religious philosophy. Just as christians
come to their faith by the teachings of Jesus,
so would it be true to say that you could believe
in God without the teachings of Jesus, without
any teachings whatsoever (wouldn't that make you
mystic heretic!).
>
> >
> >Which atheism? buddhism, humanism, rationalism,
> >animalism, communism?
> >
> >Did you know pantheist romans called the christians
> >atheists as they throw them to the lions!
>
> I'm well aware of what the Romans said, since it is area of particular
> interest to me.
Yes, then you'll understand that to be called an atheist
doesn't have anything to do with you actual beliefs
and so is not a doctrine of faith.
My rational humanism brings to the belief that religions
that regard god deities are wrong, flawed.
>
> ---
> AaronC
Jason Atkinson
wrote:
[snip]
Which of Tolkien's works have you read?
Susan Cohen
Dylan Bryan-Dolman wrote:
> > SugarPill <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
> > > I don't dispute that Tolkien was a christian, in fact he
> > > seems to be telling the story of English protestants and
> > > the mordorian catholic Europe.
>
> So the Protestants are the good guys here? Much of northern European
> anti-Semitism can be laid directly at Martin Luther's door.
Hmmmm... no one makes anyone do bad things.
Luther may have been a jerk, Hitler may have used
his words to bolster his own evil - but the bulk of
Protestants - indeed, the bulk of Xians around the
world - disavow such hatred & evil, and insist it has
no place in their Scripture or beliefs.
Susan
SugarPill
rand mair fheal wrote:
>
> > Atheism, is the lack of god not religion. Atheism has not a doctrine,
> > atheism is not a religion. Sects of buddhism that believe
>
> yeah
> yeah
> yeah
>
> somebody does something wrong
> and they happen to be christian
> its christianitys fault
How can christianity be said to have any effect on
christians then, useless you are saying only the
good aspect of a christians life is down to christianity?
>
> (hence the necessity pointing out stalin education)
>
> somebody else does something wrong
> and they happen to be atheist
> atheism had nothing to do with it
No, what your suggesting is like a hindus religion
in denying the christian God is part and parcel of
hinduism. It is not, my rational humanist has nothing
to do with gods existance or their lack of existance.
>
> > men of the inquistion. But nowhere has atheism per se influence
> > diddly squat, it's what atheists actually hold true that
>
> except in the letters among stalin molotov beria et al
> on the web courtesy of library of congress
>
> but of course they were all lying
> just like christians
becuase you guys preach tolerance, listening, etc.
Your not listening, you dictating that my beliefs
have something to do with yours, they have nothing
to do with any god or lack of any god.
>
> when christians say christianity made them do it
> theyre telling the truth
>
> when atheists say atheism made them do it
> theyre lying
You prejudice is stiffling.
>
> your intellect is astounding
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Read a dictionary, atheism is a characteristic
of doctrines in that they lack god.
Confusus was an atheist because his beliefs
lack god deities (he was an ancestor worshipper).
You do not need Gods to have a spiritual life.
SugarPill
Look miss the point, Tolkien if he was being true to
the sagas and languages of pre-christianity would
have not imposed christianity on it. So if you are
correct then what you are saying he is no different
than the conquistors claiming the gold of the Incas
was theirs by right of God. I personally don't believe
that Tolkien was creating a christian backdrop on
which to play out pagan elemental spirits (even
though this in itself is heretical surely). I therefore
am preplexed why you would cast Tolkien in such light.
In fact it is for you to make a substantive case,
bar simplestic reading into of aspect of his work
that are clearly untrue, for example pagans had
gods, they had angle like beings, they had hell.
You find these throughout norse, greek hellianism,
etc. I should have thought it was not bigotry to
glorify Tolkien, a catholic, as a being faithful to
paganism but it seems in the twisted nature of some
fallen christian intolerance is rearing again.
SugarPill
I would not be here if some troll hadn't declared the
lord of the rings a christian work, which I have
battled back to a christian universal backdrop,
and if the trolls we wakeup to themselves faulty as
well.
As to flaming, rather here than how the catholics used to do it.
>
> --
> www.fastcow.co.uk
> www.eurosexuals.co.uk
> Peter
Dylan Bryan-Dolman
> The dishonesty is that you all (however expert) is to
> deny that elves are a pagan (pantheist nto atheist)
> folklore.
Pantheism in Europe is a very modern idea, by far post-dating paganism --
it's basically an invention of the romantics under the influence of eastern
ideas, and has no relationship to the pre-Christian folklore of the region.
rand mair fheal
> > Atheism. Here is one of the great sins of the Twentieth Century, the
> > religious right linking science and Atheism, and Atheists essential
> > belief that somehow they represent an outgrowth of Science. But
> > Science, fortunately, is as poor an ally of the religious as it is of
> > the Atheist.
>
> Science does not regard Gods, in fact scientific doctrine
> (if you will) is reductionist, Okcam razor etc.
the scientific method makes the simplifying assumption
that universe is mechanistic
so that if you recreate a situation in all significant ways
the universe will react in the same way
(or for qm is one of the same limited number of ways)
each time
science does not assume there are no gods
science does not assume there are gods
science does not assume there are no miracles
science does not assume there are miracles
if miracles happen they violate the assumptions of the scientific methods
this does mean miracles are impossible
but rather if they happen you need some other system to understand them
the origin of life (which is distinct from the evolution of life)
cannot be studied scientifically
would you argue life does not therefore exists?
much of human psychology is outside of experimentation
for reasons of ethics and complexity
would you argue we do not think or feel or dream
'did you love your father'
'yes'
'prove it'
science like government should be religion neutral
AC
wrote:
You're building up a strawmen. Tolkien did not create a Christian
backdrop to play pagan myths. His mythology was a secondary creation,
but one of fundementally Christian nature.
>In fact it is for you to make a substantive case,
>bar simplestic reading into of aspect of his work
>that are clearly untrue, for example pagans had
>gods, they had angle like beings, they had hell.
Just out of curiousity, how much of Tolkien's works have you actually
read?
>You find these throughout norse, greek hellianism,
>etc. I should have thought it was not bigotry to
>glorify Tolkien, a catholic, as a being faithful to
>paganism but it seems in the twisted nature of some
>fallen christian intolerance is rearing again.
This does not even make sense.
---
AaronC
AC
wrote:
But he did describe the Elves as unfallen. He also wrote a story
where a mortal women explains to an Elven prince that her people had
fallen under the Shadow and had committed a grave evil.
>
>As to elves being perfect, weren't orcs once elves?
They were corrupted. And Elves were never said to be perfect, but not
to have fallen in the spiritual sense.
>Your imposing you faith onto this book, as am I,
I impose nothing, since I'm not a Christian. However, when the author
openly describes his work as Christian in nature, I would be foolish
to discard it.
>we naturally will intrepete things differently,
>as to tolkiens mind we shall never know.
He wrote a great deal on this subject. Read the Silmarillion and the
Letters of JRR Tolkien. If you have not read either one of these
things then you are coming from a point of ignorance.
>But the
>simple fact that the sagas do play so well amongst
>christian seems to imply that christians have kept
>some of their pagan heritage from their forefathers.
>What is Yuletime.
This is also just silly. To enjoy reading the Eddas does not mean
that somehow you wish to begin leaving offerings to Oden.
>
>>
>> >
>> >Tolkien wanted to revive the lost culture of the past
>> >and did an excellant job, yes he could easily believe
>> >that what was good was also naturally not against
>> >catholicism. But that doesn't mean that thw dwarfs
>> >avarice for gold that they dug so deep is purely
>> >a christian moral. Pagans would have understood excess.
>> >Pagans would have had stories to explain why people
>> >should obey the ethics.
>>
>> You seem to be missing the point here. Tolkien did not want to revive
>> lost cultures, any more than Egyptologists want to revive Ancient
>> Egypt. I think what you are trying to say was that he wanted to
>> preserve the memory of ancient things, which is true, to a point.
>> However, while the basis of Tolkien's subcreation was Nordic tradition
>> (it was, in its beginning, to be an "English" mythology), the
>> fundemental cosmology is based upon Christian notions. There is a
>> creator, Eru, who first creates an angelic order, the Ainur, who,
>> through the Music, create Ea, that is, physical creation.
>
>Pagans have a creator, what is Zeus? Zeus created unicorns?
>What is the oracle?
What does Zeus have to do with it? Again, your ignorance is shining
through.
>
>>
>> Your attempt to closely link Tolkien's mythology to Paganism at the
>> expense of the Christian element displays both bias and ignorance.
>
>No, your inability to see the mythology as a real religiion
>of your ancestors makes you not ancestor worshippor.
What have my ancestors got to do with this? You're making less sense
all the time.
>
>> The Elves were as much Tolkien's vision of humanity untainted as they
>> were any pagan motif.
>
>Yes, we are all owners of our thoughts. But there can be no
>other way, for only humans create gods.
>
>If the catholic church of the 14th century were here now
>Tolkiens play on pagan motifs...
May have lead him to be chastised, or worse. So what? I gather
you're trying to set up some sort of strawman here.
>
>>
>> >
>> >Tolkien pickup on the underlying morality that
>> >existed in pagan pre-christian Europe, that
>> >Christians inherited from their forefathers.
>> >Just as we inherited maths/science from the
>> >Greeks, law and government from the romans.
>> >Pantheism for the most part societies.
>>
>> I never said pagans were immoral, and neither did I say that Tolkien's
>> mythology did not have its roots in pagan traditions. But what I do
>> say, and this is backed up by an actual reading of the Silmarillion,
>> is that they were placed within a very Catholic universe, with a
>> Satanic figure in the fallen Vala Melkor, who is in all essentials,
>> responsible for the corruption of most of Creation. There is a
>> singular creator, Eru, who is essentially the same as the
>> Judeao-Christian God (or Yahweh, if you dislike the modern motif).
>
>Who is essential also the same as Zeus, or whoever the creator
>god ofthe Norse was (Odin, Thor?). You can ignore the similarities
>in world religions, but christianity is not the only religion
>with a singular creator, or even evil gods, or a hell like
>afterworld if you don't obey relgious edicts.
Your ignorance of Norse and Greek mythology is so apparent that I
won't even try to debate the main point.
Since Tolkien had no problems stating that Eru was the same as God, I
have no reason in doubting him. The fact that you find this so
disquieting is fascinating, however.
>
>>
>> So, in a strange way, you are both right and wrong. Right in linking
>> Nordic traditions. Wrong in trying to isolate and minimize the
>> Christian influence.
>
>I have never said Tolkien could throwoff his christianity,
>I just say that you are wrong to assert that the lord of
>the rings is more christian than pagan.
Despite Tolkien's own well documented statement that it was a
fundementally Catholic work?
>Just as it would
>be wrong to say that a christmas tree, it's history
>and roots, was christian. Yes, today many people believe
>it has a place in christian mythology but today it's
>more a symbol of the new secular religion of consumerism.
Now your wandering off into modern secularism? This is just getting
really confused.
>What you regard as a christian universe can be charted
>back in to pagan societies of Greece, Roman, and even
>back through Judaism to Eygptian mythology, there are
>even arguments of Buddhist influences in Christianity.
>Buddha did walk the earth some 600 year before jesus.
So what?
>
>But more simply, the universe of Gods, evil, angellic
>predate even moses coming down from the mountain. Some
>even argue a universe of gods, heaven and earth, formed
>in when the rulers of the nile created the whole sorry
>fiction.
Again, so what?
How does a mixing of motifs undermine anything?
>But I disagree Tolkien was not perfect, this is a piece of
>fiction, they is no doctrinal necessity that each part of
>the book be wholey true to the past or to itself. Only that
>it is possible to link and change a imperfect creator into a
>perfect creator, which I don't believe because to suggest the
>pagans creator God, or the Hindu creator God, for example
>is less than perfect because he was overthrown just as
>adam ate the apple.
The reason some of us have taken umbrage is at your blatant ignorance
on the subject. Your attempt to filter it through other cultures only
proves that you seem determined to deny a simple truth.
>
>Look you seem to be nitpicking, I really mean that, this is
>a piece of fiction and anyone who thinks Tolkien is worthy
>of praise would surely welcome that he has such a wide readership.
>That he used some christian elements along side pagan is
>hardly worth the dispute if it would undermine the author.
>But her never said Eru was the christian God, but pagans
>may have very well believe that elves watched over their lives.
He did say Eru was the Christian God. This is documented. The fact
that you don't know it does not make it less true, it just means that
you have not been aquainted with the fact.
>The motifs mixs so well because they have a common origin,
>the folklore of pagan europe predates Christianity. What
>you regard as original sin is just emphasis on sinfullness,
>that you believe that pagans would never emphasis sinfulness
>in small measure says something else besides Tolkien
>was talking about christianity. Original sin is heavy tideup
>on Catholicism, I saw lots of blood guts, hell and heaven
>on Earth (a pagan persepective) in the LotR.
Define pagan? This is present in most tales from around the world.
---
AaronC
AC
wrote:
>> Your error is in assuming that Atheism is somehow a superior belief to
>> any other. Atheism, like Judeao-Christianity, is a matter of faith
>> that relies upon a precept which is not falsifiable.
>
>Rubbish, a atheist says much like a hindu would,
>prove the christian God exists.
And a Christian could ask a Hindu to prove that Vishnu exists. A
stalemate occurs.
>Atheists just believe
>in one less god, how they come to that belief
>*is* their religious philosophy. Just as christians
>come to their faith by the teachings of Jesus,
>so would it be true to say that you could believe
>in God without the teachings of Jesus, without
>any teachings whatsoever (wouldn't that make you
>mystic heretic!).
Atheism requires faith, it relies upon a fundemental belief that is
not falsifiable.
>
>>
>> >
>> >Which atheism? buddhism, humanism, rationalism,
>> >animalism, communism?
>> >
>> >Did you know pantheist romans called the christians
>> >atheists as they throw them to the lions!
>>
>> I'm well aware of what the Romans said, since it is area of particular
>> interest to me.
>
>Yes, then you'll understand that to be called an atheist
>doesn't have anything to do with you actual beliefs
>and so is not a doctrine of faith.
So, are you an atheist?
>
>My rational humanism brings to the belief that religions
>that regard god deities are wrong, flawed.
But surely, by your own logic, you must understand that your
philosophy is potentially flawed.
---
AaronC
Adam Tissa
>>> >
>>> >Flame of the West wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Holly Salter wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
>>> >> > Protestants.
>>> >>
>>> >> > REmember that Adolf was a Catholic
Well, Catholicism certainly inspired Adolf.
Antisemitism was ( and still is ) a strong current in Catholicsm.
-----------------------------------------------------
/ \ ASCII ribbon campaign
\ / against HTML mail
X and postings.
/ \
\ /
AC
<verb_preced...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>sp...@nospam.com (AC) wrote:
>
>>>> >
>>>> >Flame of the West wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Holly Salter wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> > The Jews seem to blame the Catholic church rather than the
>>>> >> > Protestants.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> > REmember that Adolf was a Catholic
>
>Well, Catholicism certainly inspired Adolf.
>Antisemitism was ( and still is ) a strong current in Catholicsm.
Yes, but one that the Vatican has been trying very hard to expunge,
which is a major change. No one has denied Christianity's serious
problem with anti-Semitism, but virtually all the main stream churches
have been making an effort at reapproachment, and lines of dialog are
now open that would have been unthinkable even before World War II.
It is sad that it took the Holocaust to finally convince Christianity
that its abuses against Jews since Gentiles became the majority in
Christendom could culminate in such a slaughter.
---
AaronC
Joseph Hertzlinger
White_Bloke. <white...@whitepower.com> wrote:
>I'd say they're much more like the satanic scum rspnsbl for the
>murder of 20+million Christians in the JewSSR
>http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-occupiedgovernments-USSR.html (no prizes
>for guessing the ethnicity of the aforesaid satanic scum......!)
Latvians. Latvians were the most over-represented ethnicity among
Bolsheviks.
Joseph Hertzlinger
<white...@whitepower.com> wrote:
>Whatever, JRRT was an _implacable_ opponent of 'modernism'...(as were
>all the Inkling Society) which, is to say,just another name for
>Yid-controlled ZOG-ism!
The elves (anti-modernists who even had anti-dwarf prejudices) were
willing to accept the three rings because those rings were supposedly
able to stop change. In other words, part of the "message" of LOTR is
that anti-modernism could be taken too far.
AC
Hertzlinger) wrote:
JewSSR? Funny, I thought they were mostly Slavs. Stalin had an
opinion of Jews roughly equivalent to your average dead head white
supremacist. They would disagree on a few things, like Communism.
---
AaronC
Susan Cohen
roly wrote:
> "Gary" <gtu...@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
> news:3ca5f350....@news.cogeco.ca...
> >
> > Again, what is wrong with anti-semitism?
>
> Nothing. Remember A-rabs etc are Semites.
But the term "antisemitism" means just what it used for: "Jew - hatred"
It was coined in the late 19th century by a man named Wilhelm Marr
to make his Jew-hatred sound more scientific. The boob you answered
is just such a one.
Susan
Susan Cohen
AC wrote:
> Even if Hitler was a Catholic until the moment he stuck the pistol to
> his head, so what? If Hitler being a Catholic casts a dim light on
> Catholics, than Soviet's being atheists sure does some major damage to
> your apparent cause.
Saying "He was a Catholic" is a far cry from saying "He was a GOOD
Catholic."
Susan
Joseph Hertzlinger
wrote:
>Appologetics [sic] may wash for some institutions but it's like a car
>salesman passing off a used car as new because he doesn't know about
>washing machines, nor did the fridge salesman, and of course his
>father used do the same. The points *you* miss is that killing and
>persecting [sic] jews was founded on christian doctrine perpetutated
>[sic] *by* the church. That survival of the church demanded that
>communism from russia failed.
Are you claiming there is a connection between anti-Communism and
hatred of Jews?
>This from a instution [sic] that now tries to makeout [sic] it
>preachs [sic] tolerance, but it seems the only sacrifice every [sic]
>made by the chruch [sic] is jesus dying on the cross so that they
>never have to follow his example. If the catholic church had been so
>bigoted it wouldn't exist now! Whether the communists, or the mogals
>[sic], or the renassiance [sic], if the church hadn't played on fear
>for power people who have found islam to satisify [sic] their fear.
>So don't please imply that the church is 'good' when even now it
>undermines democratic constitutions by getting tax funds and funding
>for it's [sic] schools. Whilst churches compete with private
>businesses and don't pay tax then they aren't playing fair. IMHO.
>Render under ceaser [sic]!
We have a follower of firefly here.
>I don't dispute that Tolkien was a christian, in fact he seems to be
>telling the story of English protestants and the mordorian catholic
>Europe. Just as Star wars tells the story of jewish persectution
>[sic]. The argument is however false coming from christians that
>select good morals from the Bible yet miss the bad morals about women
>raped, slavery, war, etc.
Are you claiming religious people aren't supposed to learn better?
First, theists are accused of being mindless boneheads and then of
being able to check their premises.
>> It doesn't? He stated himself that it was a fundementally
>> "Catholic" work. You can't reject that, but you can't reject that
>> he said it, and that there are Christian elements throughout the
>> entire mythology.
>
>So? Oh please provide the quote?
Approximate quote from LOTR: "The ring was meant to be found and not
by its maker." God meant it to be found.
In any case, Tolkien's other works showed that Gandalf was an angel.
>Tolkien says that he wrote this book to reconnect people with a lost
>mythological british past, a past with pagan traditions. The trees
>elves, the magic, the druids, these are NOT Christian themes but
>PAGAN.
Paganism has its disadvantages.
"For this 'northern heroic spirit' is never quite pure; it is of gold
and an alloy." --- J.R.R. Tolkien in the essay "Ofermod"
Let's see... A tendency to think anti-Communism and anti-semitism are
connected... A belief that LOTR was fundamentally opposed to
monotheism... Near-total illiteracy... Yes, we have a pseudonym of
"White Bloke."
Joseph Hertzlinger
<bern...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>"The Jews are called human beings, but the non-Jews are not humans.
>They are beasts."
>
>Talmud: Baba mezia, 114b
It doesn't say that. It does say that a Jewish priest is defiled by
contact with Jewish bodies (the remains of people he is responsible
for). In a possibly badly-chosen metaphor, the Talmud then says that a
Jewish priest is also not contaminated by a dead animal.
If Enlightenment wants, we can declare that Jewish priests (and
everybody else) are defiled by his presence even when alive.
>If you point with one finger 3 fingers point back.
Comment is superfluous.
>Islam swept christianity out of Nth Africa, Conquered Byzantine
>Greece and Anatolia (now called Turkey), they conquered india and
>imposed mogul mulsim rule on the Hindus takeing away their right of
>slef determination; the hindus wern't liberated till the brish came.
>Islam destroyed buddhism in Afghanistan and the east, They were at
>the gates of Vienna twice and they dominated the Balakans forceing
>Christians to give over children to become muslims soldiers
>(janisaries), the Barabary cost pirates were muslims opperating with
>state sanction and capatured villagers of cornwall and ireland as
>well as eurpean sailors as slaves. Wherever they went they imposed a
>special poll tax on non muslims. If you couldn't pay it was slavery
>or death or conversion for you. Many converted. Islam conquered
>spain and wherever it went dominated administration untill it was
>thankfully thrown out.
Hmmmm... White Bloke, SugarPill, Enlightenment all have the same
inability to use English...
Aris Katsaris
"SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
>
> Aris Katsaris wrote:
> >
> > Do you even bother to read my posts at *all*? I said they came
> > from earlier pagan religions/mythologies, YES!!
> >
> > Where the hell did these links "contradict" me? What statement
> > did I make that you supposedly refuted?
> >
> > Please read my posts before responding to them. It'd make for
> > more useful conversation.
>
> the sagas and languages of pre-christianity would
> have not imposed christianity on it.
He did not impose "christianity" on a non-christian world. If anything
he allowed non-christian elements to enter a christian universe and made
for them a place therein.
> So if you are
> correct then what you are saying he is no different
> than the conquistors claiming the gold of the Incas
> was theirs by right of God.
Wow, there's a nonsequitur!
> I personally don't believe
> that Tolkien was creating a christian backdrop on
> which to play out pagan elemental spirits (even
> though this in itself is heretical surely).
Have you read the Silmarillion? Have you read the Athrabeth?
Many Christians in the middle ages believed in elves and things
also, you know. The only difference is that those Christians
usually *condemned* these creatures as demonical.
Tolkien has a much nicer attitude giving his elves as much a right
to exist in the world as humans do. And to the dwarves also, given
how Iluvatar (God) "adopted" them as his children too.
It's you who's being the intolerant one here, claiming that the elves
and spirits have no place in a christian universe. Tolkien did not
share such exclusive attitudes.
> In fact it is for you to make a substantive case,
> bar simplestic reading into of aspect of his work
> that are clearly untrue, for example pagans had
> gods, they had angle like beings, they had hell.
Just read the Silmarillion. The Ainulindale is about a rebellion
of angels against One God, infinitely superior to them. The
role of Melkor the deceiver is clearly based on the role of
Lucifer in Christianity.
Look, this matter is simply not under dispute. You've not read
his works so you don't know how christian his universe is. Just
accept this part, please, until you find the time to pick up Tolkien's
books yourself.
Aris Katsaris
Aris Katsaris
"SugarPill" <h...@like.Im.telling> wrote in message
>
> AC wrote:
> >
> > There is a
> > singular creator, Eru, who is essentially the same as the
> > Judeao-Christian God (or Yahweh, if you dislike the modern motif).
>
> Who is essential also the same as Zeus, or whoever the creator
> god ofthe Norse was (Odin, Thor?).
No. Odin and Zeus were finite entities who were once born and could
hypothetically die. Odin *will* die in the Ragnarok devoured by that huge
wolf. If you want a connection between these deities and any of the beings
Tolkien invented, it ought be Manwe you should be comparing them to,
who also had a beginning and finite power.
Eru is One (that's what the name means after all) and Infinite. He's the result
of a monotheistic view of the world, not a "pagan" one.
> You can ignore the similarities
> in world religions, but christianity is not the only religion
> with a singular creator,
Ofcourse not, there's also Islam, Judaism and a couple other religions.
The singular creator is but one in a great list of elements that makes this
a christian world.
> or a hell like
> afterworld if you don't obey relgious edicts.
LOL! Your ignorance is again showing, because that was actually one
of the elements you could have used to claim a difference between Tolkien's
created universe and Christianity: I've never seen evidence of a "hell-like
afterworld" exists in Tolkien's universe. I could argue that such a thing
would be even opposed to some of Tolkien's seeming philosophy in the
rest of his work...
Aris Katsaris
Passenger Pigeon
<h...@like.Im.telling> wrote:
KEEP IT OUT OF SOC.CLUTURE.JEWISH, SCHLEMIELS!
--
William Burke, passeng...@email.com if god wore tshirts
"Many people include in their signatures contact information, and perhaps
a joke or quotation." -- Simon Fraser Go Slugs!
http://www.passengerpigeon.net (not com, not org)
Flame of the West
> Well, Catholicism certainly inspired Adolf.
In what way? Hitler despised Catholicism.
> Antisemitism was ( and still is ) a strong current in Catholicsm.
No, it's not.
--
-- FotW
Reality is for those who cannot cope with Middle-earth.
Flame of the West
> Saying "He was a Catholic" is a far cry from saying "He was a GOOD
> Catholic."
True. Indeed, he was an excommunicate from young adulthood.
Flame of the West
> You are too kind. It's obvious just from the question "What the
> hell is "Best Cinemaphotography?" that he's a mere ignoramus.
>
> Then again, I also detect an unwillingness to be enlightened,
> which would indicate actual stupidity....
I wonder if he's real or if someone is just trolling us in disguise.