Is Eru God?

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

OK, here's one for you all to consider:

Is Eru God? Please note that the question isn't, "Is Eru the god of Middle-Earth?" (he pretty clearly is) but, is Eru the Elvish name for God (Jehovah)?

There's a lot hanging on this question: if you believe that Eru is God, then you are saying that the moral "rules" of M-E are Christian. If you believe that Eru is not God, then those "rules" are something else.

I did a search for threads on this topic but kept getting messages that the search terms I used (Eru, God, is eru god, what is eru) are "too common": so obviously there's a lot of material out there already. If you know of a thread post it here please so we can all review it.

[Bêthberry]

Oh, two votes already. Here I was thinking that, if no one actually votes, what could then ensue would be a discussion of the void. But I guess people have now chosen to avoid that possibility.

[Folwren]

Is there going to be no explaining why they voted thus? Estelyn, why did you say no? Lommy. . .why yes? I'm only waiting to vote until I can put my thoughts into words so that I could explain.

-- Folwren

[Estelyn Telcontar]

No.

Eru Ilúvatar is not the God of the Christian Bible (nor the Jewish Yahwe of the Old Testament).

Yes, both create the worlds in which their creatures live, including the sentient creatures. Yes, both are good. There are quite a few other comparisons as well.

However, the most important, decisive difference is this: The God of the Bible seeks a personal relationship with his created people. From the very beginning, he establishes contact and reveals himself to them (walking with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden). He continues to reveal himself to individuals and then chooses a people to be his representative in the world - the people of Israel. He reveals himself in the word, spoken and later written, given to humans but intended for transmission as the revelation of his will. Finally, he reveals himself in his incarnation as a man.

Nowhere in Tolkien's works (with the exception of the possible look ahead in the "Athrabeth") do we see Eru attempt to contact his "children". The only ones of his creation whom he speaks with are the Ainur - mostly the Valar, but we do not know what was involved in the return of Gandalf, so that is still a possibility. Eru keeps his distance - he does not enter Arda. From what we see, at least, there is little or no knowledge of him among Men. And even the Elves, who are apparently more "religious" than the other races, do not address him directly. They pray to the Valar.

Eru is not God. And quite frankly, I wouldn't trade creators with the people of Middle-earth!


[edit: Cross-posted with Folwren. Obviously, the first word of my post is in answer to Fordim's question, not hers.]

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

Originally Posted by Folwren

Is there going to be no explaining why they voted thus? Estelyn, why did you say no? Lommy. . .why yes? I'm only waiting to vote until I can put my thoughts into words so that I could explain.

-- Folwren

Let me add my voice to Folly's: please give an explantion to your vote:

*coughsHookbilltheGoombacoughs*

[Thinlómien]

Sorry for not giving reasons...

I thought that since Tolkien was a christian and he said that ME was the same world we live in, wouldn't it just be logical that the god was same also?

[The Only Real Estel]

I vote no thanks largely to Estelyn’s arguments. I was going to vote “yes” without much thought to it or, more than likely, not vote at all because; frankly, I don’t have much time to research the subject.

But I think Estelyn is entirely right. There are parallels, perhaps the largest one being that they both created a world, but, again, as Esty pointed out, Eru at no time seemed much interested in a personal relationship with his creation.

There’s my explanation, & thanks to Esty for doing all the work of expressing it.

[Gurthang]

I was going to vote Yes. That was until I read Esty's post. Very nice points, Estelyn.

I'd like to add to, and somewhat reiterate, what she said. First, that Eru does not seek a personal relationship, which is the core of Christian belief. The main difference then is the fact that God became incarnate and walked among us. It is debatable that Eru's presence was in Middle-Earth for a short time(s), but I think I've just heard that somewhere else on the 'Downs (I know I've never read it myself).

But here's another difference. God is a Trinity. Eru is not. You could say that Eru is more like the Father within the Trinity, but you cannot say he is the Son or the Spirit. But even saying that Eru is like the Father is wrong, because the Old Testament tells us that God was active in the world, long before Jesus' birth. Whereas Eru is very 'stand-offish'.

I'd reason that Tolkien meant for Iluvatar to be akin to God, and to be the god of Middle-Earth, but he did not make him the same God.

Originally Posted by Estelyn Telcontar

Eru is not God. And quite frankly, I wouldn't trade creators with the people of Middle-earth!

I agree completely.

[Eonwe]

well, ill add my two cents.

i've always seen the "creation" of middle-earth/arda as two separate parts. (i don't know if this is how its supposed to be viewed, though i makes sense to me.) the first part is the three themes of music. in this section, Eru acts very much how I've always though God would. (except in teh judgment of melkor.) He is involved and active. there is more personal relationships, as he raises up manwe to combat melkor's cacophany. you could kind of see it as god and the angles here.

the next part is kind of wierd. he shows the ainur the vision of teh world, and then creates it. the valar go down into it and dwell there, along with their mia, and melkor. here it is kind of passed on to Manwe and the Valar. they become sort of like teh "god's", with their angles being miar. but you can't really make a comparision between them and God, i suppose.

it seems to me that Eru gave a "gift" to the Valar: to fastion arda into waht it was in the vision. i guess they can do whatever they want with it (ei. lets make a mountain range here, put some lamps there, etc., as the vision was rather vague, if i recall correctly.) Eru doesn't really have much to do with it, except in extreme matters, such as the destructino of Numenor.

so i would have to conclude that Eru doesn't act as "God" for middle-earth. i guess maybe he could for whatever region he dwells in with teh ainur.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Sorry for not justifying my vote yet, I've not had time yet... but here goes.

This is how I see it: Middle Earth was supposed to be a new mythology for England and (not meaning to sound pompous or high and mighty) therefore this world. Therefore, I think that as Eru created Middle Earth (and hence this world) that he is supposed to be Tolkien's showing of God in the creation.
Doubtless, I'm wrong.

[Kuruharan]

As much as I would like to vote, I can't. I've just spent some time rereading relevant passages in the Letters. Estelyn makes excellent points, however, Tolkien seems ambiguous on the subject. He repeatedly uses the word "God" (capitalized) to refer to Eru (as one example of this ambiguoity.) He also uses the phrase "true God" a number of times.

I think there may be a reason why he did not write about a more involved creator.

The Incarnation of God is an infinitely greater thing than anything I would dare to write.
-Letter 181 author's emphasis

He seems to have been afraid of writing a mischaracterization. I think he wanted the parallel (or maybe "similarity") to be there but didn't want to push it too far.

I think the question is unanswerable.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

Reason for voting yes follows the line of:
"If it looks like a duck and talks like a duck,
chances are it's a duck."

The Silmarillion beginning makes it clear that Ea is
monotheistic, and the valar are essentially angelic
spirits, so Eru is God. Of course, being a
pre-Christian world Eru is a more generalized deity.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

As much as I would like to vote, I can't... I think the question is unanswerable.

Chicken.

[The Only Real Estel]

Posted by Fordim in his opening post:

Is Eru God? Please note that the question isn't, "Is Eru the god of Middle-Earth?" (he pretty clearly is) but, is Eru the Elvish name for God (Jehovah)?

Posted by Tuor of Gondolin:

The Silmarillion beginning makes it clear that Ea is
monotheistic, and the valar are essentially angelic
spirits, so Eru is God. Of course, being a
pre-Christian world Eru is a more generalized deity.

Given what you said, Tuor, it sounds like you are agreeing that Eru was the god of Middle-Earth.

[Lalwendë]

No. God is God and I believe because we cannot know exactly what 'God' is, how can we know if a fictional God is the same? Eru might well be the God of Arda, or the God of the Elves, or the God of the Elves and the Numenoreans, or the God of some Elves and some Numenoreans and some other beings. Some in Arda believe Eru is God. Others no doubt, do not; this does not make them wrong, only different. Just as in our own world there might or might not be God, and He or She or It may mean very different things to different people. Even (especially?) amongst Christians God is not always the same. God is not always even a Trinity.

Eru is the only 'good' God we are aware of in Arda, given to Arda by Tolkien. I say 'good' because a) that is sometimes debatable, and b) some worship other 'Gods', e.g. Sauron, and their 'God' may also be perfectly 'good' to them.

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

No. God is God and I believe because we cannot know exactly what 'God' is, how can we know if a fictional God is the same? Eru might well be the God of Arda, or the God of the Elves, or the God of the Elves and the Numenoreans, or the God of some Elves and some Numenoreans and some other beings. Some in Arda believe Eru is God. Others no doubt, do not; this does not make them wrong, only different. Just as in our own world there might or might not be God, and He or She or It may mean very different things to different people. Even (especially?) amongst Christians God is not always the same. God is not always even a Trinity.

Eru is the only 'good' God we are aware of in Arda, given to Arda by Tolkien. I say 'good' because a) that is sometimes debatable, and b) some worship other 'Gods', e.g. Sauron, and their 'God' may also be perfectly 'good' to them.

Well, I don't really say that I agree with much of that. But that's another fish in a larger sea, and really doesn't have much to do with Tolkien.

I will say that your statement here:

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Some in Arda believe Eru is God. Others no doubt, do not; this does not make them wrong, only different.

is certainly not correct as far as I can see. If Eru is God, then he is God. If someone believes that, then they are right. If someone does not believe that, then they are wrong. They are believing that Eru is not God when he is.


Also, I just thought of this when I was reading Fordim's original question.

Originally Posted by Fordim Hedgethistle

There's a lot hanging on this question: if you believe that Eru is God, then you are saying that the moral "rules" of M-E are Christian. If you believe that Eru is not God, then those "rules" are something else.

I do believe that the Christian moral rules hold true in Middle-Earth. It would make perfect sense for Tolkien to hold the same sense of right and wrong in Middle-Earth as in his own beliefs, regardless of whether Eru is God. If that were the primary question, then I would have said YES.

[Formendacil]

Yes.

Completely, definitely, and totally.

The Legendarium, from the Ainulindale down to the fall of Sauron was intended to be the history of this world, in a somewhat distant time B.C. This same world which, in Tolkien's faith, is under the dominion of God. Therefore, if the world in that time was under the dominion of Eru, then Eru must be God.

Eru and God are intended to be one and the same.

And I personally feel that no amount of "personal opinion" on the matter changes it. If you accept the existence of Frodo, Sam, and Gollum in Middle-Earth, you have to accept the existence of Eru- as the Judeo-Christian God within the story.

Do as you wish in real life, but within the confines of the story you have to, in my opinion, accept Eru, as presented, as God, if you are going to accept it at all.

[dancing spawn of ungoliant]

Is the question: do you think that Eru is God? Or is it: do you think Tolkien thought that Eru is God?

If it's the first one, I can say 'no' right away. Eru is just too far from the God that I know. Esty and Gurthang make some excellent points about that.

If the poll is about the latter one, I say that I don't know (where's that option, anyway ), and I understand Kuruharan's opinion that the question may be "unanswerable".

[Cailín]

This post is most unhelpful. Just a warning.

I agree with Kuru here. This might be just an unanswerable question. To discuss this, we'd first have to establish who God is, for even 'the Christian God' can have many different meanings. And taking all things in consideration, Eru is fictional and therefore cannot be our God, since God is arguably fictional, but then again, he might not be.

I think Esty gave quite an adequate explanation why Eru is unlike our God. There is also evidence that might point towards Eru being like our God. Except that there is no our God.

And since I have read quite a few times on the Downs that Tolkien hated allegories, I don't think he intended Eru to be the elvish name for God. He might have just - being catholic himself - been unable to conceive a world not having a Creator and therefore inserted Eru to make Middle Earth more real in his view.

But as I said, I don't know.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Cailín

And since I have read quite a few times on the Downs that Tolkien hated allegories, I don't think he intended Eru to be the elvish name for God. He might have just - being catholic himself - been unable to conceive a world not having a Creator and therefore inserted Eru to make Middle Earth more real in his view.

Ah, but it's not an allegory- it's a (fictional) history. Of this world.

Therefore, if Tolkien believed in this world having a God- which he did- then that same God would have existed during the time of the fictional history.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Gurthang

Well, I don't really say that I agree with much of that. But that's another fish in a larger sea, and really doesn't have much to do with Tolkien.

Why not? Tolkien himself created the conceit that the works were translations from other works. So how do we know whether we are reading the view of the translator or the original writer? And how do we know that the original writer was correct in their view of Eru? Arguably we are only seeing the views of the Elves (and they were a huge influence on the Hobbit writers), and how do they know the 'truth' about Eru any more than anyone else in Arda? It reminds me of how school history books in different eras or different countries can address the same 'facts' in different ways. It's all about primary and secondary sources and to what extent they are trusworthy.

I think that Tolkien wisely left the question quite open to interpretation with no definite answer. Yes there are indications which could equate Eru with a Christian God, but equally there are indications that Eru is nothing of the sort. To apply any God from our world to Tolkien's world is applicability, it may even verge upon allegory. Either way, if Eru is not unique to Himself, then this is not a Secondary World.

[Gothmog]

I say Eru is not God. He is a God, but not the .

As christian, it's obvious that Tolkien's view of a god is that of the Christian/Jewish(/Muslim/Buddhist etc. as all gods are the same according to many people) and he's been influenced by that of course. Because of his attempt to create a complete mythology, he needed a creator and a story of creation. And what is more natural than get inspiration from the Creator he believed in?

But if you say that Eru is God, you say that Tolkien tried to describe God through Eru Illuvatar and as Kuruharan wrote in his post, Tolkien wouldn't like to compare something of his own creation with something as complex and beyond expressions as God. I think Tolkien had too much respect towards God to write about him in his books.

Unconscious of it, Eru might have become an equivalent to God, or at least can be regarded as such by people. It's obvious, as we are discussing it right now. But if the question is, did Tolkien mean Eru as God, I say no.

Fordim:

There's a lot hanging on this question: if you believe that Eru is God, then you are saying that the moral "rules" of M-E are Christian. If you believe that Eru is not God, then those "rules" are something else.

I think you're simplifying things a bit here. I don't believe Eru is God, but I do believe that the moral rules of M-E are Christian. Tokien, as Christian and Catholic, had certain views of what was moraly correct and what was to consider "bad". The eternal battle between Good and Evil. These opinions are reflected in his work. But most moral rules aren't specific Christian rules, but more of common sense and a worldspread moral code. Killing is bad. So is torture, betrayal, lies, greed etc. Helping others, sacrificing oneself for someone or something etc is considered good.

One thing that I find interesting in the comparing of Eru and God is what that make Valar. Angelic beings you say, but to me Manwe seem to have more power than any archangel of the Christian religion. He's more of a semi-god. M-E is his kingdom, not Eru's domain even if Manwe subordinate to Iluvatar. There's no equivalent in Tolkien's religion.

Also intersting is Melkor's role as the fallen angel, becoming the Dark Lord. In this case, there's a lot of similarities with Christianity and Satan's fall. He was one of the greatest angel's, one of those with most power and one of those closest to God, but was hungry for more power. Exactly like Melkor. They both fell and became to metaphor of Evil.

And there ends my oversized discussion. Wake up again! I vote NO

[Kuruharan]

Chicken.

Tis better to be a correct chicken than an incorrect dogmatist (even though I will wildly alternate between conditions from time to time...okay maybe from moment to moment.)

[Mithalwen]

I just about agree with Gothmog so won't repeat. If by God you mean a supreme creating being the answer is yes. But if that capitalisation you assign him exclusively to the Christian tradition then no. But personally I think it a little arrogant of the believers to define and lay claim to god (rather like the bacteria in the petrie dish laying claims on the scientist) and so since monotheists by definition believe in one god, that rather implies that Allah, Yaweh and God are one and the same and so the answer is yes.

Eru is really more of a divine clockmaker - sets the thing in motion and watches rather than getting personally involved. Which is more or less my perception of God these days so I could say yes but it is clearly not what Fordim means so it goes back to no...

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

And yet, Mith you have failed to put your vote where your mouth is....why the reluctance to weigh in with an actual "Yes" or "No"?

As to your view of Eru as "setting things in motion" without actually "getting involved", how do you explain what happens at Mount Doom when Gollum "slips" into the Fire? Tolkien himself was quite clear (in the Letters somewhere) that there was the direct intervention from 'outside' at that point....

[Gothmog]

But Fordim, doesn't your own excellent poll say that Gollum slipped? If we listen to the majority...

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Fordim Hedgethistle

And yet, Mith you have failed to put your vote where your mouth is....why the reluctance to weigh in with an actual "Yes" or "No"?

.

Surely it is the most honest and natural course of action for an agnostic?

[Folwren]

I voted no, and for those who are keeping close tabs on this - I'm working on my reasons offline.

-- Folwren

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Why not? Tolkien himself created the conceit that the works were translations from other works. So how do we know whether we are reading the view of the translator or the original writer? And how do we know that the original writer was correct in their view of Eru? Arguably we are only seeing the views of the Elves (and they were a huge influence on the Hobbit writers), and how do they know the 'truth' about Eru any more than anyone else in Arda? It reminds me of how school history books in different eras or different countries can address the same 'facts' in different ways. It's all about primary and secondary sources and to what extent they are trusworthy.

I think you misunderstood. The point I would disagree with you on has to do with Absolute Truth and our knowledge of God through the Bible. Seeing as these are more a religious debate than a Tolkien discussion, I chose to not start down that tangent.

But I do agree with you that each writer's point of view is different, and therefore we cannot wholy point to who Eru exactly was.

[Bergil]

To my mind, there are no (or few) "christian morals", or rather, they're little different from everyone else's morals. You do the right thing (because it's right or for a reward CF:Heaven), or you do the wrong thing. In other words, I can't tell whether or not Eru is THAT god or A god, they all look similar.

I didn't vote.

[davem]

There's a downloadable issue of Vinyar Tengwar http://www.elvish.org/VT/VT43sample.pdf which contains Tolkien's translations of the Lord's Prayer & the Ave Maria. Tolkien uses 'Eru' to translate 'God'.

For what its worth - Tolkien seems to have considered the two words equivalent - only really stubborn & awkward people would deny that

However, I'm not sure that actually proves anything, or contributes very much...

[Lalwendë]

Stubborn and awkward it may be, but this only proves that Tolkien used that word in this linguistic experiment as it was as close as he could get in the Elvish language. Translating prayers which clearly meant a lot to him he would have been keen to find an appropriate word in the Elvish language which was similar, but it does not mean that the two concepts/beings are the same thing. He came up with a word for 'Jesus' in the Elvish tongue; we know that the Elves did not have Jesus so does the fact that Tolkien came up with one now mean that Jesus also existed in Middle-earth?

[The Only Real Estel]

To my mind, there are no (or few) "christian morals", or rather, they're little different from everyone else's morals. You do the right thing (because it's right or for a reward CF:Heaven), or you do the wrong thing. In other words, I can't tell whether or not Eru is THAT god or A god, they all look similar.

So you have to look at God as not just a set of morals or else, yes, it is hard to tell whether he is "THAT God or A god."

I would say Middle-earth appeared to be governed by a moral code of some sort. That doesn't mean that it was a set of so called "Christian morals," though. All it means is that it wasn't a society where anything went.

But I would still say that Tolkien did not mean for Eru to be God [Jehovah].

*He did not pursue a personal relationship with what he created.

*He did not appear in ME that I'm entirely aware of, and he certainly never stayed there for any period of time nor made known to others who he was.

*He did not provide a way for all races to go to the Undying Lands.

Those are three examples that I could think of in the short time I had to post this. I still agree with Esty that, although there are certainly a fare share of parallels, Tolkien's Eru was not meant to be "THE God."

[The Saucepan Man]

Is Eru God?

No, of course not. He is a fictional character created by Tolkien as the God of fictional peoples. God in our world (whether He exists or not) is a God of real peoples.

Did Tolkien intend Eru to be God?

The evidence suggests that he did. It is natural that Tolkien created Eru as a reflection or aspect of the God that he believed in. The differences in their respective natures is irrelevant, as Middle-earth is set in a time which predates our own recorded history. And our interpretations of God vary between faiths and also at different stages within the texts of particular faiths (the God of the Old Testament is, for example, very different in many respects from the God of the New Testament).

Should the reader interpret Eru as God?

Well that, of course, depends upon the individual reader.

Which question are you asking, Fordim?

[Aiwendil]

Is the character of "Deep Throat" from All the President's Men W. Mark Felt?

In other words, I think the question as phrased is purely an issue of convention, definition, and semantics.

[littlemanpoet]

I haven't voted yet, but I'm thinking about it. I have an answer to Estelyn's rather persuasive points, though. Myth is, among other things, the encapsulation of truth as it is known by its progenitors. Thus, the old testament of the bible hints at, but does not reveal a saving Christ Jesus, and gives a limited view of Yahweh. By comparison, the new testament has a filled out revelation of Yahweh God as a clear Trinity.

Tolkien created his myth to predate the old testament; thus, it is no surprise that it presents an even more limited view of the creator. This does not lessen who the creator really is, only the knowledge of the creator amongst his creatures. Therefore, I can see Tolkien deciding that the people of Middle Earth, predating the old testament, wouldn't have knowledge of a creator who wanted a personal relationship with his creatures.

I do think that Tolkien meant Iluvatar to be a picture of the God he worships. The very same Being? Well, yes. If one understands the nature of spiritual reality, all the conventions of writing are subservient to the Truth. Maybe a good story is supposed to be only feigned history, feigned reality, but sometimes the Truth breaks through because of the nature of Truth. That's my thought. Yes. That's my answer... soon as I submit this post.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Which question are you asking, Fordim?

Barrister.

And I note that you've refused to vote.

Solicitor.

[Roa_Aoife]

As much as I would love to get into a philosophical and religious debate, I'm going to avoid those subjects. Simply, I voted yes, because I believe that was Tolkien's intention. Whether or not Eru matches with our idea of God, Christian or otherwise, Eru is most likely how Tolkien veiwed the Christian God. No one ever said he was right or wrong, or what it meant for the people of ME. Tolkien followed the Christian God, so it stands to reason that he formed Eru after his God.

Good arguments to everyone though.

And where's your vote, Fordim?

[Firefoot]

Was Eru based off God? Yes. Do they have strong similarities? Certainly. But are they the same? I would have to say no. There are simply too many incongruencies. One of these, Esty has already explained beautifully. LMP, I understand what you are saying... to an extent. But even in Old Testament times God still did seek out relationships with his people. Abraham, Jacob, David... the list goes on. It was in a slightly different way, granted, but Eru does not even take this step. His contact with his creation is very limited. Eru's interest in Arda seems to be largely with concern to his creation as a whole rather than to the individuals in it.

Another issue I have wrestled around with is that one of the Christian beliefs is that God does not test us beyond our strength. Let's look at Frodo... his Quest was inherently beyond his strength. He was set with an impossible task, one he would be forced to fail at (if you can call it failing. But anyway...). And it's pretty explicit that Frodo was meant to bear the Ring, that it was appointed to him - the "by Eru" is implied. There's a reason God sent Jesus to the world rather than having a sinful being appointed to the (for them) impossible task of saving the world. This is not saying that I think Frodo should have been able to destroy the Ring, nor that there should have been a Christ-figure in LotR. I don't think that. But I do think that it is an indicator that Eru is not the same as the Christian God.

I think this may be one mistake I have made in the past, trying to equate Eru too much with God. It has been something of an assumed thing, but it makes more sense to analyse Eru as an independent being, the god of Arda and a representation, or a depiction, of God, but not God himself. Coming back to the translator conceit, I think a line does have to be drawn. The truth is that Middle-earth is fantasy. Even if it is read as a mythology for our world, that doesn't necessarily make Eru God any more than it makes the Greek Zeus God.

[alatar]

Very short post (unlike my SbS tome ).

I'm with Gothmog, Mithalwen and SpM on this one.

Eru is a God, having no creator, and as far as we know, is omniscient, omnipresent, extra-natural, etc. Eru is not God, as it is incompatible with the Christian God. Think that, like many things, one tends to see/assign personal beliefs to words used by others.

And it's against my beliefs to vote in any Downs poll .