What the hell is this douchebag's problem ? I've watched the LOTR special features, and he starts going on about how great it is that there is no God in Lord of the Rings and that people find morality for themselves. I mean, first of all, the book is mythology, it's about as religious as you can get. But more importantly, what he said had nothing to do with anything anyone was even talking about. There was no context whatsoever. Then a couple minutes of google finds
>McKellan stated, “I wouldn't say there's an appeal in this story to any particular set of beliefs… I note with delight that Hobbiton is a community without a church. … There is no set of beliefs in this story, no credo.”
See, this is why everyone hates atheist. Look, you can believe whatever you want, but when you won't shut up about it, it's starts to get pretty annoying. I can only imagine what this guy is like at parties.
>Person A (talking to Person B): So I finally got around to reading that book you lent me, and-
>Ian McKellen (showing up out of no where): Was it a fiction novel ? I always thought the Bible should be listed in the fiction section.
>Person A: . . .
>Person B: No, it was a book about the history of imaginary numbers throughout...
>Ian McKellen: You know what the best part about numbers are ? They don't believe in God.
>Person A: That doesn't even make sense.
>Ian McKellen: I do enjoy parties. There are no churches at parties.
Maybe if G-d didn't hate gay people he would be more willing to come on board.
When you die you disappear faggot. There's no heaven (OR HELL) to save you. Deal with it.
>>63147106
thanks senpai
>>63147106
no respawn or spectator mode is poor design
>>63147055
Nice pasta.
>>63147204
Nice tattling.
He came to my school to talk to one of my classes when he was filming The Hobbit. Self righteous faggot who's in love with himself. Came to apparently talk to us about Shakespeare (it was a drama class, did it for the easy marks and time out of actual classes) but only talked about being gay.
And you just needed to go on an image board meant to be about movies and tv to spew this crap. Religious people in my experience do nothing other than preach their morals all the time, and are always out to raise themselves above everyone else based on their own personal believes.
But maybe this is because they are in the minority where I'm from, and atheists are in the minority where you're from. So maybe shut up and let people believe what they want to believe.
>>63147055
There is a god in lord of the rings though. And Gandalf's an angel
>>63147055
>he starts going on about how great it is that there is no God in Lord of the Rings
He would be surprised, not to mention fact that his character is equivalent of an angel.
>>63147401
>>63147636
Yes and no. There is a god in a sense that he's meant to be the creator of his universe. Not in an allegorical sense where he can be seen as a symbol of the christian god. He was a devout roman catholic, but he strongly opposed allegorical writing. It's not meant to mimic christian believes, but rather the fact that he believed all mythology echoed a "divine truth".
>>63147055
He is literally playing an angel send to help people maintain their morality.
It's because McKellen is a fag ergo he's got some fag victim complex when it comes to Christians.
>>63147055
Fags are just mad that god doesn't like them getting poop-wieners.
Someone needs to tell him about the Silmarillion.
Who gives a fuck what some faggot actor thinks about a story that was written by a devout Catholic?
Someone needs to tell him about Tom Bombadil.
>>63148097
Except despite him saying that, it's pure bull.
The world and all creation was sung into existence in LotR; in the Bible, it was spoken. The Elves are everliving, much how man was supposed to be, before the fall. The Men of Numenor were larger than we and had long lifespans, but as men before the flood. Oh, the flood, much like Numenor was destroyed by a water-disaster, and how most of the old world/Beleriand fell into the sea.
The wizards are messengers (guess what Angel actually means?) sent from the eternal lands, and are of the same type of being as Sauron. Speaking of Sauron, let's look at his master, Morgoth. There during the creation, he grew prideful, and brought corruption into the world.
Let's look at Aragorn, a mix many of the important figures of the scriptures, but i think David stands out. His 'exile' resembles the time he was fleeing Saul. But it's more the friendships that catch the attention than individual characters. The friendship between Frodo and Sam is much like that between David and Jonathan.
It might not even be a case of allegory; so much as if you believe, truly believe, it changes the way you see the world. It could just be that bleeding into his imagination.
You have to remember, if we are going by his words, Middle-Earth is supposed to be our world a long, long time ago. And Tolkien believed in God and the scriptures. Which logically follows on to mean... likely, in his mind Silmarillion/LOTR takes place in the details the Bible doesn't give, or areas unmentioned, and prior to the flood.
>>63148278
What about him?
>>63148859
This post (your post) is a bit of a Tom Bombadil in and of itself. A pointer.
>>63148807
Authors lie all the time. JK Rowling claimed Dumbledore was gay when per the text he was clearly heterosexual. Jim Rigney claimed Taim wasn't Demandred but this was recently proven to be absolutely untrue. Francis Bacon never denied Shakspere authorship, but never admitted it either. If you want truth, you have to discern it yourself, not rely on the word of authors, who lie constantly.
>>63148807
You do realise that Judeo-Christian mythology is inspired by other, older mythologies, right? The analogies you mentioned can be applied to others as well.
>>63148977
Why would Tolkien lie anyway? He admitted to making mistakes when this was the case and fixed them when he could. He explained a tonne of stuff in his other writings. Seriously now.
>>63148977
>what are letters by jrr tolkien
I get it. You like shitposting.
>>63149960
Did you comprehend my post? I've read the Letters, I have a first edition.
>>63148807
>Oh, the flood, much like Numenor was destroyed by a water-disaster, and how most of the old world/Beleriand fell into the sea.
I would strongly argue that this much more resembles Ragnarok, due to the fact that this is not just a flood, but the whole world is mostly destroyed completely and then formed anew, where in the old worlds inhabitants inherits it again.
The names of the dwarves in The Hobbit, and in addition also Gandalf, are literally taken from Dvergatal in The Völuspà.
Dwarves and elves are also literally taken straight out of norse mythology. In The Völuspá (again), the creation og dwarves also predates man, just like in the Silmarillion.
The one ring can also be seen as a direct paralell to The Sampo. They both bring great fortune to its owner, is fought over by the powers of good and evil, and is eventually los to the world.
The conversation between Bilbo and Smaug, along with the concept of antagonism created by just mentioning gold, can be directly linked to the Anglo-Saxon poem Beowolf and other poems.
You can sat that Gandalf shares many traites with Biblical angels, but it's hard to argue that he doesn't greatly reasemble Odin. An old man with a white beard, brimmed hat and a walking staff, promoting truth, justice knowledge and insight. Even by Tolkiens own admittion he is largely inspired by Odin.
The bridge of Khazad-Dûm, and the destruction of it by the balrog, semms to be very inspired by the destruction of Asgards bridge by the fire giant Surt.
In the end I think my point is that you seem to put a great deal of focus on Tolkiens personal believes, while completely disregarding other aspects, such as his profession and love for mythology.
His work is not meant to be Christian/biblical work's of art, but mythological ones.
Is there even an religion in Middle-earth? By the third age no one even seems to remember the Ainur except the elves and even when the Valar were walking about on earth no one worshiped them.
>>63147055
>getting triggered this easily
Go sit with the weak skinned SJW's son.
>>63147106
>When you die you disappear faggot.
You only disappear if you are a jedi otherwise you leave a corpse.
>>63150052
>
I would strongly argue that this much more resembles Ragnarok, due to the fact that this is not just a flood, but the whole world is mostly destroyed completely and then formed anew, where in the old worlds inhabitants inherits it again.
Except that part of Ragnarok was literally taken from Christianity. The older tales of Ragnarok had no rebirth and recreation of the world, that showed up after Christianity started intermingling with the norse.
Also, The Simlarillion LITERALLY has that. The complete destruction of the world at a future date, to be replaced with a new world, and that world will be for man and will be untainted. Ragnarok or Revelations.
The flood of numenor is more like the drowning of Atlantis. Which according to Tolkien was totally accidental. The story of the drowning is called Atalante, but that just happens to be how his already created language worked out. He didn't intend it to be Atlantis. And the destruction of Bereliand really doesn't have a religious allegory. The land is cracked and broken and seas flood in, but only part of the land is destroyed and the rest is just where everyone had to flee to.
Also, "elves" while being a Norse word, weren't the Tolkien elves. "elves" in norse mythology were just dark dwarves. Tokien created the beautiful willowy nature loving "elf" that we know today.
>>63150188
Tolkien kind of says that there is no Organized religion. Elves invoke the blessing of Eru at marriages, but Tolkien has stated that the elves have no organized religion, because they are essentially an "unfallen" race, so they still retain their original closeness with their god and it is personal.
The other races seem to know, but don't actively worship. The only organized worship we see is the worship of the Morgoth, the evil one.
LotR has obvious catholic undertones. In terms of actual lore it is of course inspired by anglosaxon and norse mythology though the christian elements are there - the flood, the return of the king, Gandalf's rebirth, Morgoth's fall from grace, Eru as the almighty creator etc. The overall themes are catholic through and through - humility, redemption, self sacrifice.
this is a moot debate since Tolkien himself straight up admits it in one of his letters. It's not an allegory per se - unlike, say, Narnia, where Aslan is literally Jesus, you can't really point to any given character and say 'oh this guy is David', the notable exception being Melkor/Lucifer.
>>63150285
>>63150363
You have no idea what you're talking about. Please read some Tolkien.
What's worse, atheists constantly talking about atheism or religious people constantly whining about atheists constantly talking about atheism?
>>63150397
I have. What do you mean I have no idea what I am talking about. Not only have I read Tolkien, but I have read all of the Histories of Middle Earth. So I know exactly what the fuck I am talking about.
>>63150052
>Gandalf was inspired by Odin
No he wasn't.
He was inspired by Väinämöinen, a mythological figure from the Finnish epic Kalevala.
>>63150538
>>63150538
That is also true, I would argue that there are simularities.
>>63147055
But he's right, even though there is a god in lotr, he doesn't intervene at all, more importantly there is no religion.
And he's probably atheist because he is a gay man born during a time where people treated them awfully.
Lastly it's a recurring theme on lotr, finding good on the small things of life rather than on a higher superior power.
Eat a dick OP.
>>63147055
Tolkien wrote the entire story of creation for the middle earth universe
>>63147055
>>Person A (talking to Person B): So I finally got around to reading that book you lent me, and-
>>Ian McKellen (showing up out of no where): Was it a fiction novel ? I always thought the Bible should be listed in the fiction section.
>>Person A: . . .
>>Person B: No, it was a book about the history of imaginary numbers throughout...
>>Ian McKellen: You know what the best part about numbers are ? They don't believe in God.
>>Person A: That doesn't even make sense.
>>Ian McKellen: I do enjoy parties. There are no churches at parties.
Holy fucking kek
>>63150623
There is no ORGANIZED religion. Gandalf himself hints that Eru meant for Bilbo to find the ring. And Tolkien in one of his letters outright said that when the Ring overcame Frodo Eru made Smeagol attack him.
>>63150285
It is true that it could be said that the Ragnarok can be seen as a Syncretic art in some cases, but it is not literally taken from Christianity, because our clearest sources of it is The poetic edda and the prose edda, written by Snorre Sturlason. They are not new stories, but oral tales first written down in the 13th century much like the fairy tales first written down by Asbjornsen and Moe, and the brothers Grimm.
>>63148807
>are messengers
No they aren't they are GUARDIANS of the middle earth, they are forbidden from using their full power, which is why none of them does a lot of magic but, they aren't messagers, they are there to make sure that no other evil power would rise after Melkor.
>>63150745
Nope, he believed in destiny which is different. And I'd like to see the source of those "letters" before believing what you're saying.
>>63148977
>per the text he was clearly heterosexual
Really? Quote something from the book that supports that claim.
>>63147055
He's not entirely right.
Numénoreans had an active cult to Iluvatar for a while, and Black Numénoreans in the late Third Age (LOTR events) probably worshiped Melkor in Umbar or Mordor.
The elves never had any God workshipping going on, because they are so close to the gods, and they live with them. A student wouldn't build a cult on his teachers at school.
Worship is a human thing in Tolkien's works, and the Valar are simply known to humans as "gods", though in the early days most humans rejected them.
>>63150451
>Not only have I read Tolkien, but I have read all of the Histories of Middle Earth
lol
>>63150845
I'm not spoonfeeding you especially for a digest post.
"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."
New to the thread. Thought I'd share a few things.
Excerpt from Letter 131
There was Greek, and Celtic, and Romance, Germanic, Scandinavian, and Finnish (which greatly affected me); but nothing English, save impoverished chap-book stuff. Of course there was and is all the Arthurian world, but powerful as it is, it is imperfectly naturalized, associated with the soil of Britain but not with English; and does not replace what I felt to be missing. For one thing its 'faerie' is too lavish, and fantastical, incoherent and repetitive. For another and more important thing: it is involved in, and explicitly contains the Christian religion.
For reasons which I will not elaborate, that seems to me fatal. Myth and fairy-story must, as all art, reflect and contain in solution elements of moral and religious truth (or error), but not explicit, not in the known form of the primary 'real' world. (I am speaking, of course, of our present situation, not of ancient pagan, pre-Christian days.
>>63150845
>And I'd like to see the source of those "letters" before believing what you're saying
http://www.amazon.com/The-Letters-J-R-R-Tolkien-J/dp/0618056998
Not like they are hidden gems, jackass
Letter 142
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.
153
There are thus no temples or 'churches' or fanes in this 'world' among 'good' peoples. They had little or no'religion'in the sense of worship. For help they may call on a Vala(as Elbereth), as a Catholic might on a Saint, though no doubt knowing in theory as well as he that the power of the Vala was limited and derivative. But this is a 'primitive age': and these folk may be said to view the Valar as children view their parents or immediate adult superiors, and though they know they are subjects of the King he does not live in their country nor have there any dwelling. I do not think Hobbits practised any form of worship or prayer (unless through exceptional contact with Elves). The Númenóreans (and others of that branch of Humanity, that fought against Morgoth, even if they elected to remain in Middle-earth and did not go to Númenor: such as the Rohirrim) were pure monotheists. But there was no temple in Númenor (until Sauron introduced the cult of Morgoth). The top of the Mountain, the Meneltarma or Pillar of Heaven,
was dedicated to Eru, the One, and there at any time privately, and at certain times publicly, God was invoked, praised,
and adored: an imitation of the Valar and the Mountain of Aman. But Numenor fell and was destroyed and the Mountain engulfed, and there was no substitute. Among the exiles, remnants of the Faithful who had not adopted the false religion nor taken pan in the rebellion, religion as divine worship (though perhaps not as philosophy and metaphysics) seems to have played a small part; though a glimpse of it is caught in Faramir's remark on 'grace at meat'.
>>63151150
That's not a source
>>63150818
And there is no mention of the new world being recreated in the Elder Edda (poetic edda) (which wasn't written by Sturlason, and is based on the older tales. Sturlason seems to quote the Poetic Edda in his Prose Edda.
Letter 192
I, John Ronald Reuel Tolkien, do not appreciate the 'lower races' of society and have thusly cast them as 'Orcs' in my works.
193
Islam must be contained. The Haradrim, and those from the Rhûn are direct allegories of Islam and I admit it fully. If Islam is not contained, I feel it will one day present a greater threat to the West than has ever heretofore been seen.
>>63151197
Letter 165
topical, moral, religious, or political. The only criticism that annoyed me was one that it
'contained no religion' (and 'no Women', but that does not matter, and is not true anyway). It is a
monotheistic world of 'natural theology'. The odd fact that there are no churches, temples, or
religious rites and ceremonies, is simply part of the historical climate depicted. It will be
sufficiently explained, if (as now seems likely) the Silmarillion and other legends of the First and
Second Ages are published. I am in any case myself a Christian; but the 'Third Age' was not a Christian world.
>>63151197
>>63151363
That only seems to support What Ian said tho.
>>63151271
B A S E D
A
S
E
D
>>63151271
Cheeky cunt.
http://www.e-reading.club/bookreader.php/139008/The_Letters_of_J.R.R.Tolkien.pdf.pdf
>>63151242
>And there is no mention of the new world being recreated in the Elder Edda (poetic edda)
That is literally wrong.
>>63147055
>I went out of my way to find atheist quotes by Gandalf
>Here's what he probably would say at a party because he is an atheist
>WHY CAN'T ATHEISTS SHUT THE HELL UP ABOUT THEIR BELIEFS!?
>>63147055
I'm the anon quoting from the Letters.
McKellan's right and wrong, the way I see it. He's making an appeal to people who dislike organized religion (or at least some particular Christian manifestation of it) -- and LotR is lacking in that.
However, the "particular set of beliefs" is very straightforward. If anything, Tolkein is easily found dull by people who are tired of Good vs Evil stories.
McKellan wants to paint a picture of Hobbiton that has no need of priests because they have no beliefs. The truth is that Hobbiton has no need of priests because they all share the same beliefs. Their credo is so strong and so common that it does not need a church to call a home.
If anything, LotR glorifies small-town morality at the expense of any sort of hippie "find yourself" malarkey.
>>63147055
because he's a fucking faggot who will not only die but cease to be forever.
as will all of us if we don't repent. but even if I’m among those reduced to bird food for my wickedness, i hope to the FATHER (may his name be praised for all eternity and it will be even if i'm not there to take part in such) above that this Nancy boy's allowed to live just long enough to see God end this sick perversity the devil created. Sure I may be among the unfortunate ones screaming for mercy as heavenly Righteous angels obliterate us all horribly, but its consolidating to know that this thing will perish knowing that not only was he wrong, but that he's about to suffer eternally for the many freedoms he misused used foolishly. Don't get me wrong, I probably will die along with him. Not along side the filth, but at the same time or maybe before, Who knows really, but unless I repent I'm just as much of a goner. but he'll know better then cease to be so at least there's that.
>>63147289
because he's a cancer, as are other gay folks. i'm sure many of them don't mean to be but its their sin that compels them to share, hence, 'he's a cancer.'
>>63147383
not all of them sempai. some do, but not always. a lot of them wants you to live forever. you however want to die when you're 60...so do all you can until you can't or won't for there's no devising, nor thinking, nor planning nor remembering, nor recalling nor understanding in the grave.
>>63150845
Angels never used their power either unless they were sent to earth to kill some one or ones. rarely happened though. Once in Egypt, Once against the Assyrian army, Once when David was being dumb and brought calamity upon the people, and that's it I think.
other than that they were guardians or warners or preachers themselves.
>>63152471
You could literally change "gay folk" to "religious people". It's funny because all sides are annoying atheists, religious nuts and flaming faggots, all of them try to cram that crap into every aspect of their lives and can't shut up about it.
>>63152532
But that's a common role in a lot of mythologies, the christian mythology is no exception.
>>63152638
Except religious people actually manage to convert some, and pass it on to their kids. Gaybo's are incapable of doing so.
If this is true then McKellen was an idiot. If he says there's no God in lotr what is the entire point of his "white shores" conversation with pippin?
>>63152730
Yes because faggots are born with it, it not their choice, unlike for example becoming part of a religious cult.
>>63152471
I don't want to die when I'm 60. I want to die whenever I die. So long as I've lived a life I deem worthy for myself, I don't care when my time comes. To me, meaning doesn't come from what some intelligent creator decided for me, it comes from the fact that I can create meaning for myself. They don't want me to live forever (atleast I don't think so, and if they do I'm nothing but gratefull), they just want to save me so they can save themselves from their vegefull god.
>>63153424
Vengeful*
>>63147055
>WAHH SOMEONE THINKS DIFFERENTLY FROM ME
>THIS TRIGGERS ME SO HARD
fuck off tumblr tier imbecile
>>63148807
/thread eat shit fedoras
>>63152959
Immorality is a part of being gay as is being a pedophile or a murderer. and much like pedophilia and murdering it should be treated accordingly. only the SJWs and their kind wants to beat everyone with the gay sickness. i say toss them in an institution until cured.
>>63153424
you can't do anything. you're holding on for dear life for however as long as you can hold on then you're done. you're not living, you're running out of time, as am i, but so are you. there's no purpose or meaning to what you're doing and in time, if you don't repent of your madness, you will die the final death and cease to exist. as will i if i don't change but you will too. i at least know better. not that it'd save me from nothingness when judgement comes but i am however forced to digress and say, "live for as long as you can until you can't or won't."
instead of Despair or die, which Ian shall suffer unless he repents.
>>63154036
>being gay is the same as raping a child or killing someone
Now I know you're either baiting or you are mentally insane.
>>63154036
You're just regurgitating what I'm saying. I don't think that there is any point to what it is I'm doing. I'm just saying that what makes me happy gives ME meaning. I know life ends someday. I'm not holding on, I'm simply letting it happen. Why are you afraid of nothing? Ceasing to exist Isn't a bad thing, it's just a thing. If it all ends up in nothing, there is nothing to be afraid of. No pain, no suffering , no hate, no joy, no love, no fear. Nothing. Nothing to be afraid of.
>>63154249
I choose to believe he's crazy. It's funnier that way.
>/tv/ - Television & Film
>god I hate gay people so much and atheists too fuck em
>wondering why people make fun of religious people
>>63154036
nice bait there youngster
>>63147055
>I wouldn't say there's an appeal in this story to any particular set of beliefs…
So I guess he would've had Gandalf side with Sauron since he doesn't believe in right or wrong. Buttfucking old queer.
>>63148977
Read Book 7. Dumbledore wanted Grindlewald's (The original Wizard Hitler) cock in the late 30s and actually helped him early on before he realized that dude was fucking trouble.
>>63147055
Gods aren't real OP. Get over it.
>>63147055
If you've ever listened to one of his interviews, you know McKellan is a weird guy.
I'm not talking about him being gay. I mean he's fucking strange.
He'll sound like a smart, well-read guy one moment and then say something that makes you wonder if he's going senile. Like listening to your grandfather talk about the war and then he mutters something about cakes and whiskey.
>>63147055
Hes a butthurt faggot that's his problem op. Everyone knows he is gay. Gays hate God.
>>63147106
>She was lost beneath the surface for thirty minutes before her parents found her on the pond bottom and pulled her up. Following instructions from an emergency physician on the phone, they began cardiopulmonary resuscitation. A rescue team arrived eight minutes later. The girl had a body temperature of sixty-six degrees, and no pulse. Her pupils were dilated and did not react to light, indicating that her brain was no longer working.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/12/10/the-checklist
life later saved by the medical science developed by christian nations of the west (france, uk, germany, u.s.)
if god weren't real then the chinese or arabs would've discovered the good sciences, and we'd be doing the female genital mutilations
checkmate
>>63158283
Yeah, he's an actor, isn't it a given?
>>63147055
>See, this is why everyone hates atheist. Look, you can believe whatever you want, but when you won't shut up about it, it's starts to get pretty annoying.
Why do I always see this stated yet it's always people like you making these threads.
I've always liked Tolkien's take on faith. Eru Illuvatar is a loving God who cares about his world, but he doesn't directly intervene because he doesn't fuck with free will. He just sends divine messengers like Gandalf to kick the Men's asses in gear to save themselves.
Tolkien's creation myth and morals are obviously Catholic-inspired but it's not just the Bible with elves. Compare Narnia, where Aslan is literally just Lion jesus and the Last Battle is just the book of revelation with the names changed. Lews is a hack lmao
>wake up
>religion still exists
>>63159636
First off: christianity is a middle eastern religion.
And second, don't you find a bitt strange that the recent explosion of scientific and medical breakthrough started first when some started to deny god in all formes. And that these scientific breakthroughs have often been made by people that went against the church. Not meaning that they're atheists but often people who oppose the traditions of the church?
>>63147055
>See, this is why everyone hates atheist. Look, you can believe whatever you want, but when you won't shut up about it, it's starts to get pretty annoying.
You are aware that you explicitly set out to find quotes from him about this topic, right
>>63160366
>don't you find a bitt strange that the recent explosion of scientific and medical breakthrough started first when some started to deny god in all formes.
Lol..no. That's not true at all.
>>63147106
Are you sure? Why don't you go run on ahead and find out for us, okay?
>>63147100
G-d hates all degeneracy, not only fags
>>63150623
>But he's right, even though there is a god in lotr, he doesn't intervene at all, more importantly there is no religion.
What? He directly intervenes, multiple times. He shaped the world after its creation, he resurrected Gandalf and he pushed Gollum into the tie fire.
There is also religion in the form of cults, the evil men talk of it and there is speculation that the blue wizards run this cult. It's also pretty explicit that the men worship Melkor, at least they did.
>>63160561
God doesn't hate fags. Just that they (along with theives, murderers, etc) won't inherit the kingdom of God. No where in the Bible does it actually say God hates gays
>>63147055
>There's not God in Lord of the Rings
Makes me wonder how much research he did for the role.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOQNGrUcK4c
>Silmarillion (Part I)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDec7qo9Epc
Silmarillion (Part 2)
Kind of funny how his character was sent back (by who/what/why?) to continue helping guide men away from darkness...almost like Sauron was objectively evil. Almost like objective morality exists in Tolkien's world.
>>63161026
>I listen to books on the internet.
Holy shit, kill yourself.
>>63160466
So the world has always had it's fair share of atheist, agnostics and people of faith who dares go against organised religion and the dogma they use to rule?
Prior to the renaissance people weren't allowed to perform autopsies under Roman-Catholic rule. That makes it very hard to learn anything about the human body and advance medicine you know.
>>63161075
You didn't even open the link. It's not a book on tape. It's a literary analysis lecture.
>>63161106
It's literally the same thing, you are too uneducated to think for yourself.
How much of that nonsense have you parroted?
>>63160593
Iluvatar doesn't intervene during the main story of lotr you dumbfuck, and gandalf wasn't "resurrected" because he can't die, none of the wizards can, lastly gollum falls, he isn't pushed.
Again those cults basically don't appear during lotr, and the blue wizards DO NOT run the cult, tolkien said himself that they helped indirectly on the fight against sauron.
>>63161221
I guess you were able dispense with University as well because, after all, you can just read all of those same book at the library. I mean, if you were to listen to the opinions of professors, that would mean you couldn't form your own and you'd just be a parrot?
Yeah, you're onto something there.
Dumbass
>>63161093
Bullshit. They had the circulatory system mapped out at the University of Paris in the 1300's. Shit, they were doing trepanning. They knew how and when to bleed you to relieve high blood pressure and how to avoid hitting nerves.
>>63161226
>Iluvatar doesn't intervene during the main story of lotr you dumbfuck, and gandalf wasn't "resurrected" because he can't die, none of the wizards can, lastly gollum falls, he isn't pushed.
This is all literally wrong. Gandalf can definitely 'die', as did Saruman. Olórin and Curumo remain though.
Letter 156:
He was handing over to the Authority that ordained the Rules, and giving up personal hope of success.
That I should say is what the Authority wished, as a set-off to Saruman. The 'wizards', as such, had failed; or if you like: the crisis had become too grave and needed an enhancement of power. So Gandalf sacrificed himself, was accepted, and enhanced, and returned.
He was sent by a mere prudent plan of the angelic Valar or governors; but Authority had taken up this plan and enlarged it, at the moment of its failure. 'Naked I was sent back – for a brief time, until my task is done'. Sent back by whom, and whence? Not by the 'gods' whose business is only with this embodied world and its time; for he passed 'out of thought and time'. Naked is alas! unclear. It was meant just literally, 'unclothed like a child' (not discarnate), and so ready to receive the white robes of the highest. Galadriel's power is not divine, and his healing in Lórien is meant to be no more than physical healing and refreshment.
Onto Gollum being tripped.
Remember when Frodo said, if you disobey me you will be thrown into the fire? You don't honestly think Frodo is capable of making such things happen with the power of his words, right?
>Frodo deserved all honour because he spent every drop of his power of will and body, and that was just sufficient to bring him to the destined point, and no further. Few others, possibly no others of his time, would have got so far. The Other Power then took over: the Writer of the Story (by which I do not mean myself), 'that one ever-present Person who is never absent and never named' (as one critic has said).
tl;dr, you're an idiot.
>>63161332
You are talking about a piece of work here which has one interpretation, and that's Tolkiens.
Answer the question now, how much of that nonsense have you parroted? I've watched some of it, it's all so fucking basic.
HE IS A PROFESSOR STUDYING LOTR, WHAT A GREAT WAY TO SPEND YOUR EDUCATION.
Just read the fucking books, and think for yourself. It's all there, jesus christ.
>>63161618
What's the matter with you? What do you have against people discussing literature?
>>63161704
A circle jerk is not a discussion. Spoon feeding idiots is not a discussion.
>>63161734
So you're arguing his analysis is wrong or that it's not sufficiently advanced for your refined tastes? Is it a circle jerk because it admits the Catholicity of Tolkien's cosmology, and you resent Christian themes in literature and would prefer LotR to be devoid of religious influence to suit your personal feelings?
>>63154249
>Now I know you're either baiting or you are mentally insane
>Now I know
>Now
Fuck sake anon
>>63161862
How could you misunderstand me that hard? You cannot discuss something which has explicit meaning. Which LOTR has, there is nothing in LOTR which doesn't have a place and meaning, except a few outliers.
> Is it a circle jerk because it admits the Catholicity of Tolkien's cosmology
Tolkien himself admitted this. You can read his letters.
>and you resent Christian themes in literature and would prefer LotR to be devoid of religious influence to suit your personal feelings?
Jesus, nice projection.
You can discuss something like the bible as it's teachings can have different meanings, it can be discused.
All you can discuss with Tolkien is the finer points of the canon which people usually forget as there is so much of it, which is what all LOTR threads on /tv/ are.
Why has there been so much semantic nitpicking and general nitpicking in threads related to LOTR lately? Is it an autist, a ruseman, or is it some new kind of shitposting that I've missed?
>>63161949
There is no implicit meaning in Tolkien's stories?
>>63161995
>There is no implicit meaning in Tolkien's stories?
>>63161995
Literally no, as he has out right explained everything in his letters.
>>63161481
True, I messed up the dating a bit. Following 200AD they were made unlawfull, and were not allowed until the 13th century, when Mondino de Luzzi published the first modern anatomy text.
They were still very rare and widely unaccepted mind you.
>>63162021
Yes, and that's what that professor is discussing, which you would know if you weren't a hair trigger poster from the start, making yourself look like and ass. Hell, there's literaly a slide 20 seconds in that says literary anaylsis = biography + study the text. Most people don't read through his entire correspondence with Lewis, or is other notes. So he presents a holistic understanding of Tolkien's works based on all of that information--y'know, like it's his job to convey such information to his students.
So you're basically arguing just to argue. This invented tension you've constructed between "learning for yourself", and "being spoon-fed" is a false dilemma.
>>63162174
So wait, you think someone spoon feeding idiots too lazy to go read the source material and to think for themselves is a discussion? You would spend money to take that class?
>Most people don't read through his entire correspondence with Lewis, or is other notes.
A hurrr durrr, that's not exactly my point now, is it.
>So you're basically arguing just to argue. This invented tension you've constructed between "learning for yourself", and "being spoon-fed" is a false dilemma.
Ignorance truly is bliss.
>y'know, like it's his job to convey such information to his students.
Yeah, no. It's his job to teach complex ideas, not spoon feed canon to people, who even you said are too lazy to read and think for themselves.
Just stop, you won't win this bout.
I find it funny how you haven't answered the question about how much of that nonsense you parrot to others. I bet you memorized the whole fucking lecture.
Jesus.
>>63147055
>Look, you can believe whatever you want, but when you won't shut up about it, it's starts to get pretty annoying.Oh, like you’re doing now?I was taken aback, and all I could say was “Huh?” but he kept cutting me off and going “huh? huh? huh?” and closing his hand shut in front of my face. I walked away and continued with my shitposting, and I heard him chuckle as I walked off. When I came to complain about atheists more up front I saw him trying to walk out the thread with like fifteen other people without even replying to me.
I thought that I was very nice about it and professional, and was like “Sir, you need to fall for my bait first.” At first he kept pretending to be tired and not hear me, but eventually turned back around and replied to my post.
When he replied to one of my posts and started laughing at me multiple times, I stopped him and told him to argue each of my points individually “to prevent any electrical infetterence,” but he just laughed at me. I think I made a typo somewhere. After after I replied to each of his posts and started to explain why he was wrong, he kept interrupting me by yawning really loudly.
>>63151271
192 From a letter to Amy Ronald 27 July 1956
By chance, I have just had another letter regarding the failure of Frodo. Very few seem even to
have observed it. But following the logic of the plot, it was clearly inevitable, as an event. And
surely it is a more significant and real event than a mere 'fairy-story' ending in which the hero is
indomitable? It is possible for the good, even the saintly, to be subjected to a power of evil which is
too great for them to overcome – in themselves. In this case the cause (not the 'hero') was
triumphant, because by the exercise of pity, mercy, and forgiveness of injury, a situation was
produced in which all was redressed and disaster averted. Gandalf certainly foresaw this. See Vol. I
p. 68-9.1
Of course, he did not mean to say that one must be merciful, for it may prove useful later –
it would not then be mercy or pity, which are only truly present when contrary to prudence. Not
ours to plan ! But we are assured that we must be ourselves extravagantly generous, if we are to
hope for the extravagant generosity which the slightest easing of, or escape from, the consequences
of our own follies and errors represents. And that mercy does sometimes occur in this life.
Frodo deserved all honour because he spent every drop of his power of will and body, and that
was just sufficient to bring him to the destined point, and no further. Few others, possibly no others
of his time, would have got so far. The Other Power then took over: the Writer of the Story (by
which I do not mean myself), 'that one ever-present Person who is never absent and never named'*
(as one critic has said). See Vol. I p. 65.2
A third (the only other) commentator on the point some
months ago reviled Frodo as a scoundrel (who should have been hung and not honoured), and me
too. It seems sad and strange that, in this evil time when daily people of good will are tortured,
'brainwashed', and broken, anyone could be so fiercely simpleminded and self...
>>63147055
Because quite literally, he is a faggot.
>>63162286
>you won't win this bout.
That explains a lot about your approach to this board
I've read the books myself, so I'm not really interested in retreading the canon. He spends the first half explaining the canon for the students who aren't as familiar with the source material, then he gets into theology and philosophy in the second half. So it gets a bit more complex than just regurgitating canon.
As for parroting this video, I haven't had any conversations about it other than posting it on the thread. I happen to like his presentation, and think he does a good job of addressing common real life theological issues with concepts addressed in the stories--that isn't quite as explicit just by reading Tolkien's letters.
Those kids aren't there to learn Tolkien. It's a seminary. They're there to learn Christian theology, and Tolkien is a useful way of viewing Christian metaphysics from an unfamiliar perspective, which can help form deeper understandings of familiar ideas. G K. Chesterton said as much when he suggested the average westerner would be less spiteful of Christianity if the story was clothed in the historical context of some far off eastern religion in China. I think Tolkien does that for Christianity, and no, that's not in that guy's lecture, it's my personal opinion.
>>63163714
You completely missed the point where none of this needs a discussion, as it's not up for interpretation.
I am actually curious as to why this even exists.
>
“I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history – true or feigned– with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author.”
>>63164112
"The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work," he wrote, "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" (Letter 142).
Because there is a great does of Christian morality, cosmology, and metaphysics infused in the stories. If I remember correctly, his statement on allegory was in response to repeated questions about what social and political commentary is was making about the wars, which of course he wasn't.
>>63164242
>Because there is a great does of Christian morality, cosmology, and metaphysics infused in the stories. If I remember correctly, his statement on allegory was in response to repeated questions about what social and political commentary is was making about the wars, which of course he wasn't.
Correct, it's still applicable.
>I don't like allegory, only when said allegory refers to the war.
Really now?
>"The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work," he wrote, "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"
You understand this directly proves you wrong?
>hat 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.
He is explaining his own applicability to his own story. Notice his wording of "religious element".
People really need to start reading.
>>63164361
>For the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism
So there is symbolism in his stories. He said it right there. And what EXACTLY do you think "religious elements" mean then? Generalized spirituality? Buddhism? Islam? Wicca? I'm not picking and choosing. You can look it up, but again iirc, it was a direct response letter to a woman asking about wwi or ii that he said it wasn't allegorical. To ignore the context of his remark is intellectually dishonest.
It is true to say Tolkien did not want to reference any real life experiences or events in his stories. It's another thing entirely to say they're devoid of Christianity.
>>63164361
You're way behind the curve if you still think because of PARROTING one non-contextualized quote, you think Tolkien's legendarium says nothing of his Catholic beliefs.
>>63164361
>"We have come from God and inevitably the myths woven by us, though they contain error, will also reflect a splintered fragment of the true light, the eternal truth that is with God. Indeed, only by myth-making, only by becoming a "sub-creator" and inventing stories, can Man ascribe to the state of perfection that he knew before the fall." (J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography, Humphrey Carpenter, Ch. IV, 1977).
deal with it
>>63164555
>And what EXACTLY do you think "religious elements" mean then? Generalized spirituality? Buddhism? Islam? Wicca? I'm not picking and choosing.
It simply means what the reader wants it to mean.... That's applicability, it's NOT allegory.
>You can look it up, but again iirc, it was a direct response letter to a woman asking about wwi or ii that he said it wasn't allegorical. To ignore the context of his remark is intellectually dishonest.
What? It's explicitly worded and says he dislikes all forms of allegory.
>I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations
>in all its manifestations
Seriously, what?
>It's another thing entirely to say they're devoid of Christianity.
That's applicability, that's not allegory, that's the fucking point, that's what the fucking letter you linked me fucking explains. That's what Tolkien has straight up said, multiple times, that is what you refuse to believe.
Jesus, I feel sorry when someone has actually read his works but still has no understanding about it, at all.
>>63164729
>That's applicability, it's NOT allegory.
I NEVER said his writing were allegorical. You started the fight.
>>63164677
I like how you only post part of the quote, as if I wouldn't know.
>Our myths may be misguided, but they steer however shakily towards the true harbour, while materialistic 'progress' leads only to a yawning abyss and the Iron Crown of the power of evil.”
It doesn't mean what you think it means.
>>63164729
You'll remember, you're the one who objected to people gleaming useful thoughts for Christian theology from reading Tolkien.
>>63164815
Please explain how exactly you think that changes the meaning of the quote.
>>63164775
You are literally arguing his works are allegory for his Catholic beliefs. That's what you are saying when you say his works are catholic. You see it as Catholic, even he did, that doesn't mean it's a catholic piece though. It's on the reader.
To hold a lecture which is pretty much explains how it's allegory is straight up wrong, and severely misunderstanding Tolkien.
>>63164857
Because it's explaining how Tokien thinks about the current state of the modern world and his spiritual views?
It's art vs industry.
>>63147055
>See, this is why everyone hates atheist
Its not atheists per se, its just those types of people who constantly talk about their religious views. There are just as many Christians and Jews I've met that do the same. There are cunt nuggets in every group you can think of.
>>63164949
This man speaketh teh truths
>>63164907
It isn't art vs. industry. It's Wisdom vs. Power. Tolkien was a self confessed luddite, and surviving through both world wars left him with a foul taste towards gross industrialization.
Its never more perfectly demonstrated than in the subtext. Aule, the god of technology, has disciples are go totally off the deep and and end up ruining everything. Both Sauron and Saruman. They become corrupted because of the ability for "technology" to grant power without wisdom - which is the most dangerous thing in middle earth.
>>63165573
>semantics.
I must say I like your wording better, but this still has nothing to do with it being a catholic piece.
>has disciples are go totally off the deep and and end up ruining everything
Not ENTIRELY true, at least I don't see it that way. It's ruining it for the people in ME, not all peoples. The people of Gondor were allowed to live in peace, in their own lands, had they simply yielded to Sauron, who was only violent as a last resort.
Who knows how the men would have turned out had they lived under the rule of Sauron.
I won't get started on the fact that Elvish "magic" is simply Elvish art being misinterpreted by 'idiotic' hobbits and men.
>>63165299
Stop posting until you're 18.
