News |
Hope
July 27, 2004
Submitted By salean
Comment on This
Email to a Friend
Digg This
HOPE
All through Lord of the Rings there is a theme of hope. With the help of my Youth Bible I have prepared this um thing, I hope you enjoy it.
In Lord of the Rings there seems to be little hope left for any of the characters, in Return of the King especially. Hope seems to have failed in every possible way. Yet despite this the characters keep going, till the bitter end. What made them keep going? In the Two Towers film Sam's little speech sums it up nicely. `Folk in those stories, they were holding onto something.' And then when he goes on to say `There's some good in this world, Mr. Frodo, and its worth fighting for.' A very relevant addition of Peter Jackson's.
There are examples of this sort all over the world. I was reading my Youth Bible and found this story.
`El Salvador suffered a devastating earthquake in 1986. Thousands of people were hurt and killed, and many buildings were destroyed. Carlos, Raphael and Cecilia, like most people, were initially overwhelmed by the suffering and destruction. Soon, however, they organised their church youth group to help. They began by sweeping and mopping floors at their church, which sheltered 300 refugees. Then they expanded into day care, tutoring and health-care. Seeing the amazing results of their work kept the young people going, even when they felt tired or overwhelmed.
They saw their work as the Christian Challenge. Although the earthquake disaster eventually passed, they continued to help the victims of their country's civil war. Their belief in Jesus gave them the strength to keep going.'
I thought that was an interesting story and it set me thinking about links to Lord of the Rings. These people kept going, just like the characters in Lord of the Rings. What were they holding onto? Two things. Jesus, and the thought that they could make a difference.
This little bit of hope was all they needed. Just like Sam's speech gives Frodo hope. The people of Gondor had given up hope but the arrival of the Rohirrim gave them hope. Against all hope Sam says to himself "I'll get there if I leave everything but my bones behind. And I'll carry Mr. Frodo up myself, if it breaks my back and heart."
`There is always hope.' That line is not only relevant to Haleth, whom it was spoken to, but millions of people across the world. In your Christian life you will come across many hard times, when it feels like God has forsaken you and there is nothing more you can do. Remember these things. God will never leave you, no matter what you have done. Remember all these people, who have seen far worse than you and kept going. Think of what you are holding onto and ask God to give you strength and hope.
In the Bible there are many more examples of this and I could not name them all but if you want you could look them up when you are down. This is just something I felt God was telling me to do so I hope it has been helpful to you, reader.
Comment on This
Email to a Friend
Digg This
Get more information on this article's topic here:
The Reading Room :
Critical Viewpoints :
Reader Comments
... 26 Comments
I'm a Christian too, and just wanted you to know that I too feel that hope is one of the more important themes in LOTR. And that is why it's so prevalent in my stories.
Comment by Calime - July 27, 2004 @ 11:08 AM
Good observation! I think that hope definately is a strong theme in LotR, and lots of other literature for that matter. It's important in real life too, and Tolkien's use of it makes LotR that much better. People can relate to LotR because it has everyday themes. I think it helps them to realize how powerful hope can be. You can go a long way when you have something good to hope for at the end, like Sam and Frodo.
And I think everybody knew that already, but I felt like saying it anyway, please don't hate me.
Comment by Shire_dweller - July 28, 2004 @ 12:48 PM
I'm a Christian of St. Joseph's Church in Vancouver, Washington. Yeah. This stuff's pretty true. O course there's hope because without hope or faith, what would we live for.
Comment by Witch-King-of-Angmar - July 31, 2004 @ 11:25 AM
Sorry, people, I didn't want to rate it because I'm really bad at deciding what deserves a 5 or a 4 or so on. I would much rather just comment. But I'll attempt to rate anyway.
Comment by Shire_dweller - August 1, 2004 @ 5:56 AM
Okay, I can't seem to go back and edit my comments, so I guess I'll give it a 4-ish.
Comment by Shire_dweller - August 1, 2004 @ 5:58 AM
I've been on holiday.
Thanks for commenting on this. I just suddenly wrote in one morning and I thought I'd post it on here. Thanks again.
Comment by salean - August 5, 2004 @ 1:55 PM
so true! That is so true.
Comment by elvendream - August 12, 2004 @ 6:17 PM
A few months I wrote something very similar to this. I am impressed with this piece that you have written. It is true, Hope is something that constantly through the series seemingly missing, a tremendous lack of hope. Yet, as Galadriel stated in the Fellowship of the Ring, Hope remains while company is true. And, for the most part, the company remained true. So, therefore, though we do not see it throughout the course of the series, there is yet the element of Hope still present.
I enjoyed your piece profoundly...
Linwe Estel Celebrindal
krispys777@yahoo.com
Comment by linwecelebrindal - November 5, 2004 @ 12:31 PM
I really liked this! You're very right!
Comment by lotrobsessed - January 21, 2005 @ 11:01 AM
Thank you all for your kind words. It just came to me and I thought I should write it down.
Sal
Comment by salean - March 30, 2005 @ 8:09 AM
I totally agree with you (that's why I'm "Estel"- sin. hope). Middle-earth is undoubtedly deeply rooted in Christianity and hope is the most important thing which makes us strive for making this world a bit better. Good folk in LotR have an unfailing hope even in darkest times for three reasons:
1). Their love for the others
2).Their awareness of the power of good
3). Their belief in an eternal, blessed afterlife, as Gandalf says to Pippin in PJ's film "The journey doesn't end here. The death is just another path. One that we all must take. The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back and all turns into silver glass and than you see: white shores and beyond a far green country in a swift sunrise".
Thanks for your text! It's really heartening!
Comment by Estel_Thorongil - August 5, 2005 @ 9:03 AM
The complete story of Tolkien's was completely inspired by the word of God. I wish it was more know in that perspective. I know people see the little meanings in the story but how much to they see as being inspired by God to reach the younger generations today that this type of story would appeal to. (and some of us that love fantasy). I feel that The LotR movies could be great tools in the youth ministries at Churches.
Comment by kdclevinger - August 7, 2005 @ 8:36 PM
Lord of the Rings is a message from God. It tells of events to come. No, I don't mean there'll be a Ring of Power or anything, I mean that an evil will come in the smallest and most innocent form, and it will fool all into thinking it's good (the beast). And all fate will rest in the hands of an unlikely person, probably thought to be evil or weak. And that person will sacrifice all they have (like Frodo did) to save the Earth from darkness. See the connection? '_'
Comment by MerewenCelebrindal - March 22, 2006 @ 7:05 PM
very nice,my precious.
Comment by karanahobbit/elf - May 11, 2006 @ 2:37 PM
AWESOME!! I just wanted to say that I really apreciated this - I'm a christian to and I really admired your openess of your faith. keep loving the lord.
Alatriele vardamire
Comment by Alatariel_Vardamir - July 12, 2006 @ 4:08 PM
Having only a little bit of hope just happens to be a good plot device in such a story.Too much hope and the dramatic impact is lessened,no hope and the story is over before its begun.In our world hope takes relative form-hope changes from one person to the next depending on their situation,one person may hope to survive the next day without starvation,and another may hope that after they die,there is some kind of eternality to their existence.Limited hope for the majority of the people within our 'real world' is not in fact a plot device,it is a measure of how unfair,unpleasant and selfish the majority of humanity is.I believe that we are capable of so much better.
It has long been thought that religions provide a good framework or model for a better form of human behaviour.The process is a sort of conditioning with the reward being an assurance of hope,usually that the individual will achieve some kind of eternal life for themselves,therefore the motivation for believing is often a selfish one.It is also believed that by giving this assurance men are moved to greater things,through hope,such as you quote above.
Is it then a fact that all those who achieve things that are 'humanitarian',that are for the good of humanity,are simply people driven by the desire to be rewarded with eternal life?Well of course this is not the case,there are many people of no faith who achieve noble,compassionate humanitarian aims with no promise of reward,and there are many people of faith whos 'noble,humanitarian' aims turn out to be motivated by even more than the personal desire for eternal life,they were looking for more worldly rewards for their actions.
What drives those of no faith that achieve these things,do they get rewarded regardless of their faith?What is their 'calling' as you christians would say?
It is more attractive to look on those who can be capable of incredible humanity with no promise of reward as a model for the future of humanity.Though i dont dispute that good is achieved by people such as you mention,i truly believe that the humanity would have come through in spite of it.We've had thousands of years of religions and yet some of the most enlightened and humanitarian things have been achieved,at least in my country of england,in a time when we have moved away from christianity and opened our minds to different ideologies.Looking back to a time when the church held sway i can see very little actually being done for the good of humanity,rather i can see a lot being done for the good of the few-when the vikings invaded churches on the british mainland in the 9th and tenth centuries they had rich pickings because the church had been receiving material payment in return for absolvement from sin.The church supported the crusades,a bloody land grab and slaughter where all principle players were motivated purely by greed and personal gain,there was absolutely nothing humanitarian about the crusades,the 'hope' of these knights was for riches,land and power.The church did nothing and said nothing during the holocaust,to such an extent that it was questionable as to whether they were against it or supported it.
It seems an inbuilt part of the christian ideology that whatever history tells us about the underhand and self serving nature the church has displayed through the ages,christians are incapable of critisism,i suspect that this is indoctrinated within the ideology,and so is a form of control.Ultimately christians have to invent elaborate reasons to convince themselves that these aberrations are actually for the good.
Back to middle earth,no assurances were given to man as to his fate beyond death,Morgoth used this to his advantage many times to bend men to his will,that is clearly something that i recognise in organised religion,and as it happens,history proves me correct.
I do not dispute professor tolkiens christianity,i do not dispute the existance of a god.Belief predates christianity and even judaism.There is belief in middle earth,though it is not a monotheistic belief,and people dont appear to be guided in their faith by massive bloated organisations led by people who have no more right to be standing in the front dictating than any other gathered there.There appears to be no making of great edifices,temples,huge buildings that glorify in wealth and power,exept in the case of the numenoreans when they began to worship morgoth,and this parallel is not lost on me.
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:02 PM
Having only a little bit of hope just happens to be a good plot device in such a story.Too much hope and the dramatic impact is lessened,no hope and the story is over before its begun.In our world hope takes relative form-hope changes from one person to the next depending on their situation,one person may hope to survive the next day without starvation,and another may hope that after they die,there is some kind of eternality to their existence.Limited hope for the majority of the people within our 'real world' is not in fact a plot device,it is a measure of how unfair,unpleasant and selfish the majority of humanity is.I believe that we are capable of so much better.
It has long been thought that religions provide a good framework or model for a better form of human behaviour.The process is a sort of conditioning with the reward being an assurance of hope,usually that the individual will achieve some kind of eternal life for themselves,therefore the motivation for believing is often a selfish one.It is also believed that by giving this assurance men are moved to greater things,through hope,such as you quote above.
Is it then a fact that all those who achieve things that are 'humanitarian',that are for the good of humanity,are simply people driven by the desire to be rewarded with eternal life?Well of course this is not the case,there are many people of no faith who achieve noble,compassionate humanitarian aims with no promise of reward,and there are many people of faith whos 'noble,humanitarian' aims turn out to be motivated by even more than the personal desire for eternal life,they were looking for more worldly rewards for their actions.
What drives those of no faith that achieve these things,do they get rewarded regardless of their faith?What is their 'calling' as you christians would say?
It is more attractive to look on those who can be capable of incredible humanity with no promise of reward as a model for the future of humanity.Though i dont dispute that good is achieved by people such as you mention,i truly believe that the humanity would have come through in spite of it.We've had thousands of years of religions and yet some of the most enlightened and humanitarian things have been achieved,at least in my country of england,in a time when we have moved away from christianity and opened our minds to different ideologies.Looking back to a time when the church held sway i can see very little actually being done for the good of humanity,rather i can see a lot being done for the good of the few-when the vikings invaded churches on the british mainland in the 9th and tenth centuries they had rich pickings because the church had been receiving material payment in return for absolvement from sin.The church supported the crusades,a bloody land grab and slaughter where all principle players were motivated purely by greed and personal gain,there was absolutely nothing humanitarian about the crusades,the 'hope' of these knights was for riches,land and power.The church did nothing and said nothing during the holocaust,to such an extent that it was questionable as to whether they were against it or supported it.
It seems an inbuilt part of the christian ideology that whatever history tells us about the underhand and self serving nature the church has displayed through the ages,christians are incapable of critisism,i suspect that this is indoctrinated within the ideology,and so is a form of control.Ultimately christians have to invent elaborate reasons to convince themselves that these aberrations are actually for the good.
Back to middle earth,no assurances were given to man as to his fate beyond death,Morgoth used this to his advantage many times to bend men to his will,that is clearly something that i recognise in organised religion,and as it happens,history proves me correct.
I do not dispute professor tolkiens christianity,i do not dispute the existance of a god.Belief predates christianity and even judaism.There is belief in middle earth,though it is not a monotheistic belief,and people dont appear to be guided in their faith by massive bloated organisations led by people who have no more right to be standing in the front dictating than any other gathered there.There appears to be no making of great edifices,temples,huge buildings that glorify in wealth and power,exept in the case of the numenoreans when they began to worship morgoth,and this parallel is not lost on me.
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:02 PM
Having only a little bit of hope just happens to be a good plot device in such a story.Too much hope and the dramatic impact is lessened,no hope and the story is over before its begun.In our world hope takes relative form-hope changes from one person to the next depending on their situation,one person may hope to survive the next day without starvation,and another may hope that after they die,there is some kind of eternality to their existence.Limited hope for the majority of the people within our 'real world' is not in fact a plot device,it is a measure of how unfair,unpleasant and selfish the majority of humanity is.I believe that we are capable of so much better.
It has long been thought that religions provide a good framework or model for a better form of human behaviour.The process is a sort of conditioning with the reward being an assurance of hope,usually that the individual will achieve some kind of eternal life for themselves,therefore the motivation for believing is often a selfish one.It is also believed that by giving this assurance men are moved to greater things,through hope,such as you quote above.
Is it then a fact that all those who achieve things that are 'humanitarian',that are for the good of humanity,are simply people driven by the desire to be rewarded with eternal life?Well of course this is not the case,there are many people of no faith who achieve noble,compassionate humanitarian aims with no promise of reward,and there are many people of faith whos 'noble,humanitarian' aims turn out to be motivated by even more than the personal desire for eternal life,they were looking for more worldly rewards for their actions.
What drives those of no faith that achieve these things,do they get rewarded regardless of their faith?What is their 'calling' as you christians would say?
It is more attractive to look on those who can be capable of incredible humanity with no promise of reward as a model for the future of humanity.Though i dont dispute that good is achieved by people such as you mention,i truly believe that the humanity would have come through in spite of it.We've had thousands of years of religions and yet some of the most enlightened and humanitarian things have been achieved,at least in my country of england,in a time when we have moved away from christianity and opened our minds to different ideologies.Looking back to a time when the church held sway i can see very little actually being done for the good of humanity,rather i can see a lot being done for the good of the few-when the vikings invaded churches on the british mainland in the 9th and tenth centuries they had rich pickings because the church had been receiving material payment in return for absolvement from sin.The church supported the crusades,a bloody land grab and slaughter where all principle players were motivated purely by greed and personal gain,there was absolutely nothing humanitarian about the crusades,the 'hope' of these knights was for riches,land and power.The church did nothing and said nothing during the holocaust,to such an extent that it was questionable as to whether they were against it or supported it.
It seems an inbuilt part of the christian ideology that whatever history tells us about the underhand and self serving nature the church has displayed through the ages,christians are incapable of critisism,i suspect that this is indoctrinated within the ideology,and so is a form of control.Ultimately christians have to invent elaborate reasons to convince themselves that these aberrations are actually for the good.
Back to middle earth,no assurances were given to man as to his fate beyond death,Morgoth used this to his advantage many times to bend men to his will,that is clearly something that i recognise in organised religion,and as it happens,history proves me correct.
I do not dispute professor tolkiens christianity,i do not dispute the existance of a god.Belief predates christianity and even judaism.There is belief in middle earth,though it is not a monotheistic belief,and people dont appear to be guided in their faith by massive bloated organisations led by people who have no more right to be standing in the front dictating than any other gathered there.There appears to be no making of great edifices,temples,huge buildings that glorify in wealth and power,exept in the case of the numenoreans when they began to worship morgoth,and this parallel is not lost on me.
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:03 PM
Having only a little bit of hope just happens to be a good plot device in such a story.Too much hope and the dramatic impact is lessened,no hope and the story is over before its begun.In our world hope takes relative form-hope changes from one person to the next depending on their situation,one person may hope to survive the next day without starvation,and another may hope that after they die,there is some kind of eternality to their existence.Limited hope for the majority of the people within our 'real world' is not in fact a plot device,it is a measure of how unfair,unpleasant and selfish the majority of humanity is.I believe that we are capable of so much better.
It has long been thought that religions provide a good framework or model for a better form of human behaviour.The process is a sort of conditioning with the reward being an assurance of hope,usually that the individual will achieve some kind of eternal life for themselves,therefore the motivation for believing is often a selfish one.It is also believed that by giving this assurance men are moved to greater things,through hope,such as you quote above.
Is it then a fact that all those who achieve things that are 'humanitarian',that are for the good of humanity,are simply people driven by the desire to be rewarded with eternal life?Well of course this is not the case,there are many people of no faith who achieve noble,compassionate humanitarian aims with no promise of reward,and there are many people of faith whos 'noble,humanitarian' aims turn out to be motivated by even more than the personal desire for eternal life,they were looking for more worldly rewards for their actions.
What drives those of no faith that achieve these things,do they get rewarded regardless of their faith?What is their 'calling' as you christians would say?
It is more attractive to look on those who can be capable of incredible humanity with no promise of reward as a model for the future of humanity.Though i dont dispute that good is achieved by people such as you mention,i truly believe that the humanity would have come through in spite of it.We've had thousands of years of religions and yet some of the most enlightened and humanitarian things have been achieved,at least in my country of england,in a time when we have moved away from christianity and opened our minds to different ideologies.Looking back to a time when the church held sway i can see very little actually being done for the good of humanity,rather i can see a lot being done for the good of the few-when the vikings invaded churches on the british mainland in the 9th and tenth centuries they had rich pickings because the church had been receiving material payment in return for absolvement from sin.The church supported the crusades,a bloody land grab and slaughter where all principle players were motivated purely by greed and personal gain,there was absolutely nothing humanitarian about the crusades,the 'hope' of these knights was for riches,land and power.The church did nothing and said nothing during the holocaust,to such an extent that it was questionable as to whether they were against it or supported it.
It seems an inbuilt part of the christian ideology that whatever history tells us about the underhand and self serving nature the church has displayed through the ages,christians are incapable of critisism,i suspect that this is indoctrinated within the ideology,and so is a form of control.Ultimately christians have to invent elaborate reasons to convince themselves that these aberrations are actually for the good.
Back to middle earth,no assurances were given to man as to his fate beyond death,Morgoth used this to his advantage many times to bend men to his will,that is clearly something that i recognise in organised religion,and as it happens,history proves me correct.
I do not dispute professor tolkiens christianity,i do not dispute the existance of a god.Belief predates christianity and even judaism.There is belief in middle earth,though it is not a monotheistic belief,and people dont appear to be guided in their faith by massive bloated organisations led by people who have no more right to be standing in the front dictating than any other gathered there.There appears to be no making of great edifices,temples,huge buildings that glorify in wealth and power,exept in the case of the numenoreans when they began to worship morgoth,and this parallel is not lost on me.
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:03 PM
Having only a little bit of hope just happens to be a good plot device in such a story.Too much hope and the dramatic impact is lessened,no hope and the story is over before its begun.In our world hope takes relative form-hope changes from one person to the next depending on their situation,one person may hope to survive the next day without starvation,and another may hope that after they die,there is some kind of eternality to their existence.Limited hope for the majority of the people within our 'real world' is not in fact a plot device,it is a measure of how unfair,unpleasant and selfish the majority of humanity is.I believe that we are capable of so much better.
It has long been thought that religions provide a good framework or model for a better form of human behaviour.The process is a sort of conditioning with the reward being an assurance of hope,usually that the individual will achieve some kind of eternal life for themselves,therefore the motivation for believing is often a selfish one.It is also believed that by giving this assurance men are moved to greater things,through hope,such as you quote above.
Is it then a fact that all those who achieve things that are 'humanitarian',that are for the good of humanity,are simply people driven by the desire to be rewarded with eternal life?Well of course this is not the case,there are many people of no faith who achieve noble,compassionate humanitarian aims with no promise of reward,and there are many people of faith whos 'noble,humanitarian' aims turn out to be motivated by even more than the personal desire for eternal life,they were looking for more worldly rewards for their actions.
What drives those of no faith that achieve these things,do they get rewarded regardless of their faith?What is their 'calling' as you christians would say?
It is more attractive to look on those who can be capable of incredible humanity with no promise of reward as a model for the future of humanity.Though i dont dispute that good is achieved by people such as you mention,i truly believe that the humanity would have come through in spite of it.We've had thousands of years of religions and yet some of the most enlightened and humanitarian things have been achieved,at least in my country of england,in a time when we have moved away from christianity and opened our minds to different ideologies.Looking back to a time when the church held sway i can see very little actually being done for the good of humanity,rather i can see a lot being done for the good of the few-when the vikings invaded churches on the british mainland in the 9th and tenth centuries they had rich pickings because the church had been receiving material payment in return for absolvement from sin.The church supported the crusades,a bloody land grab and slaughter where all principle players were motivated purely by greed and personal gain,there was absolutely nothing humanitarian about the crusades,the 'hope' of these knights was for riches,land and power.The church did nothing and said nothing during the holocaust,to such an extent that it was questionable as to whether they were against it or supported it.
It seems an inbuilt part of the christian ideology that whatever history tells us about the underhand and self serving nature the church has displayed through the ages,christians are incapable of critisism,i suspect that this is indoctrinated within the ideology,and so is a form of control.Ultimately christians have to invent elaborate reasons to convince themselves that these aberrations are actually for the good.
Back to middle earth,no assurances were given to man as to his fate beyond death,Morgoth used this to his advantage many times to bend men to his will,that is clearly something that i recognise in organised religion,and as it happens,history proves me correct.
I do not dispute professor tolkiens christianity,i do not dispute the existance of a god.Belief predates christianity and even judaism.There is belief in middle earth,though it is not a monotheistic belief,and people dont appear to be guided in their faith by massive bloated organisations led by people who have no more right to be standing in the front dictating than any other gathered there.There appears to be no making of great edifices,temples,huge buildings that glorify in wealth and power,exept in the case of the numenoreans when they began to worship morgoth,and this parallel is not lost on me.
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:03 PM
Having only a little bit of hope just happens to be a good plot device in such a story.Too much hope and the dramatic impact is lessened,no hope and the story is over before its begun.In our world hope takes relative form-hope changes from one person to the next depending on their situation,one person may hope to survive the next day without starvation,and another may hope that after they die,there is some kind of eternality to their existence.Limited hope for the majority of the people within our 'real world' is not in fact a plot device,it is a measure of how unfair,unpleasant and selfish the majority of humanity is.I believe that we are capable of so much better.
It has long been thought that religions provide a good framework or model for a better form of human behaviour.The process is a sort of conditioning with the reward being an assurance of hope,usually that the individual will achieve some kind of eternal life for themselves,therefore the motivation for believing is often a selfish one.It is also believed that by giving this assurance men are moved to greater things,through hope,such as you quote above.
Is it then a fact that all those who achieve things that are 'humanitarian',that are for the good of humanity,are simply people driven by the desire to be rewarded with eternal life?Well of course this is not the case,there are many people of no faith who achieve noble,compassionate humanitarian aims with no promise of reward,and there are many people of faith whos 'noble,humanitarian' aims turn out to be motivated by even more than the personal desire for eternal life,they were looking for more worldly rewards for their actions.
What drives those of no faith that achieve these things,do they get rewarded regardless of their faith?What is their 'calling' as you christians would say?
It is more attractive to look on those who can be capable of incredible humanity with no promise of reward as a model for the future of humanity.Though i dont dispute that good is achieved by people such as you mention,i truly believe that the humanity would have come through in spite of it.We've had thousands of years of religions and yet some of the most enlightened and humanitarian things have been achieved,at least in my country of england,in a time when we have moved away from christianity and opened our minds to different ideologies.Looking back to a time when the church held sway i can see very little actually being done for the good of humanity,rather i can see a lot being done for the good of the few-when the vikings invaded churches on the british mainland in the 9th and tenth centuries they had rich pickings because the church had been receiving material payment in return for absolvement from sin.The church supported the crusades,a bloody land grab and slaughter where all principle players were motivated purely by greed and personal gain,there was absolutely nothing humanitarian about the crusades,the 'hope' of these knights was for riches,land and power.The church did nothing and said nothing during the holocaust,to such an extent that it was questionable as to whether they were against it or supported it.
It seems an inbuilt part of the christian ideology that whatever history tells us about the underhand and self serving nature the church has displayed through the ages,christians are incapable of critisism,i suspect that this is indoctrinated within the ideology,and so is a form of control.Ultimately christians have to invent elaborate reasons to convince themselves that these aberrations are actually for the good.
Back to middle earth,no assurances were given to man as to his fate beyond death,Morgoth used this to his advantage many times to bend men to his will,that is clearly something that i recognise in organised religion,and as it happens,history proves me correct.
I do not dispute professor tolkiens christianity,i do not dispute the existance of a god.Belief predates christianity and even judaism.There is belief in middle earth,though it is not a monotheistic belief,and people dont appear to be guided in their faith by massive bloated organisations led by people who have no more right to be standing in the front dictating than any other gathered there.There appears to be no making of great edifices,temples,huge buildings that glorify in wealth and power,exept in the case of the numenoreans when they began to worship morgoth,and this parallel is not lost on me.
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:03 PM
Having only a little bit of hope just happens to be a good plot device in such a story.Too much hope and the dramatic impact is lessened,no hope and the story is over before its begun.In our world hope takes relative form-hope changes from one person to the next depending on their situation,one person may hope to survive the next day without starvation,and another may hope that after they die,there is some kind of eternality to their existence.Limited hope for the majority of the people within our 'real world' is not in fact a plot device,it is a measure of how unfair,unpleasant and selfish the majority of humanity is.I believe that we are capable of so much better.
It has long been thought that religions provide a good framework or model for a better form of human behaviour.The process is a sort of conditioning with the reward being an assurance of hope,usually that the individual will achieve some kind of eternal life for themselves,therefore the motivation for believing is often a selfish one.It is also believed that by giving this assurance men are moved to greater things,through hope,such as you quote above.
Is it then a fact that all those who achieve things that are 'humanitarian',that are for the good of humanity,are simply people driven by the desire to be rewarded with eternal life?Well of course this is not the case,there are many people of no faith who achieve noble,compassionate humanitarian aims with no promise of reward,and there are many people of faith whos 'noble,humanitarian' aims turn out to be motivated by even more than the personal desire for eternal life,they were looking for more worldly rewards for their actions.
What drives those of no faith that achieve these things,do they get rewarded regardless of their faith?What is their 'calling' as you christians would say?
It is more attractive to look on those who can be capable of incredible humanity with no promise of reward as a model for the future of humanity.Though i dont dispute that good is achieved by people such as you mention,i truly believe that the humanity would have come through in spite of it.We've had thousands of years of religions and yet some of the most enlightened and humanitarian things have been achieved,at least in my country of england,in a time when we have moved away from christianity and opened our minds to different ideologies.Looking back to a time when the church held sway i can see very little actually being done for the good of humanity,rather i can see a lot being done for the good of the few-when the vikings invaded churches on the british mainland in the 9th and tenth centuries they had rich pickings because the church had been receiving material payment in return for absolvement from sin.The church supported the crusades,a bloody land grab and slaughter where all principle players were motivated purely by greed and personal gain,there was absolutely nothing humanitarian about the crusades,the 'hope' of these knights was for riches,land and power.The church did nothing and said nothing during the holocaust,to such an extent that it was questionable as to whether they were against it or supported it.
It seems an inbuilt part of the christian ideology that whatever history tells us about the underhand and self serving nature the church has displayed through the ages,christians are incapable of critisism,i suspect that this is indoctrinated within the ideology,and so is a form of control.Ultimately christians have to invent elaborate reasons to convince themselves that these aberrations are actually for the good.
Back to middle earth,no assurances were given to man as to his fate beyond death,Morgoth used this to his advantage many times to bend men to his will,that is clearly something that i recognise in organised religion,and as it happens,history proves me correct.
I do not dispute professor tolkiens christianity,i do not dispute the existance of a god.Belief predates christianity and even judaism.There is belief in middle earth,though it is not a monotheistic belief,and people dont appear to be guided in their faith by massive bloated organisations led by people who have no more right to be standing in the front dictating than any other gathered there.There appears to be no making of great edifices,temples,huge buildings that glorify in wealth and power,exept in the case of the numenoreans when they began to worship morgoth,and this parallel is not lost on me.
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:03 PM
Having only a little bit of hope just happens to be a good plot device in such a story.Too much hope and the dramatic impact is lessened,no hope and the story is over before its begun.In our world hope takes relative form-hope changes from one person to the next depending on their situation,one person may hope to survive the next day without starvation,and another may hope that after they die,there is some kind of eternality to their existence.Limited hope for the majority of the people within our 'real world' is not in fact a plot device,it is a measure of how unfair,unpleasant and selfish the majority of humanity is.I believe that we are capable of so much better.
It has long been thought that religions provide a good framework or model for a better form of human behaviour.The process is a sort of conditioning with the reward being an assurance of hope,usually that the individual will achieve some kind of eternal life for themselves,therefore the motivation for believing is often a selfish one.It is also believed that by giving this assurance men are moved to greater things,through hope,such as you quote above.
Is it then a fact that all those who achieve things that are 'humanitarian',that are for the good of humanity,are simply people driven by the desire to be rewarded with eternal life?Well of course this is not the case,there are many people of no faith who achieve noble,compassionate humanitarian aims with no promise of reward,and there are many people of faith whos 'noble,humanitarian' aims turn out to be motivated by even more than the personal desire for eternal life,they were looking for more worldly rewards for their actions.
What drives those of no faith that achieve these things,do they get rewarded regardless of their faith?What is their 'calling' as you christians would say?
It is more attractive to look on those who can be capable of incredible humanity with no promise of reward as a model for the future of humanity.Though i dont dispute that good is achieved by people such as you mention,i truly believe that the humanity would have come through in spite of it.We've had thousands of years of religions and yet some of the most enlightened and humanitarian things have been achieved,at least in my country of england,in a time when we have moved away from christianity and opened our minds to different ideologies.Looking back to a time when the church held sway i can see very little actually being done for the good of humanity,rather i can see a lot being done for the good of the few-when the vikings invaded churches on the british mainland in the 9th and tenth centuries they had rich pickings because the church had been receiving material payment in return for absolvement from sin.The church supported the crusades,a bloody land grab and slaughter where all principle players were motivated purely by greed and personal gain,there was absolutely nothing humanitarian about the crusades,the 'hope' of these knights was for riches,land and power.The church did nothing and said nothing during the holocaust,to such an extent that it was questionable as to whether they were against it or supported it.
It seems an inbuilt part of the christian ideology that whatever history tells us about the underhand and self serving nature the church has displayed through the ages,christians are incapable of critisism,i suspect that this is indoctrinated within the ideology,and so is a form of control.Ultimately christians have to invent elaborate reasons to convince themselves that these aberrations are actually for the good.
Back to middle earth,no assurances were given to man as to his fate beyond death,Morgoth used this to his advantage many times to bend men to his will,that is clearly something that i recognise in organised religion,and as it happens,history proves me correct.
I do not dispute professor tolkiens christianity,i do not dispute the existance of a god.Belief predates christianity and even judaism.There is belief in middle earth,though it is not a monotheistic belief,and people dont appear to be guided in their faith by massive bloated organisations led by people who have no more right to be standing in the front dictating than any other gathered there.There appears to be no making of great edifices,temples,huge buildings that glorify in wealth and power,exept in the case of the numenoreans when they began to worship morgoth,and this parallel is not lost on me.
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:03 PM
Having only a little bit of hope just happens to be a good plot device in such a story.Too much hope and the dramatic impact is lessened,no hope and the story is over before its begun.In our world hope takes relative form-hope changes from one person to the next depending on their situation,one person may hope to survive the next day without starvation,and another may hope that after they die,there is some kind of eternality to their existence.Limited hope for the majority of the people within our 'real world' is not in fact a plot device,it is a measure of how unfair,unpleasant and selfish the majority of humanity is.I believe that we are capable of so much better.
It has long been thought that religions provide a good framework or model for a better form of human behaviour.The process is a sort of conditioning with the reward being an assurance of hope,usually that the individual will achieve some kind of eternal life for themselves,therefore the motivation for believing is often a selfish one.It is also believed that by giving this assurance men are moved to greater things,through hope,such as you quote above.
Is it then a fact that all those who achieve things that are 'humanitarian',that are for the good of humanity,are simply people driven by the desire to be rewarded with eternal life?Well of course this is not the case,there are many people of no faith who achieve noble,compassionate humanitarian aims with no promise of reward,and there are many people of faith whos 'noble,humanitarian' aims turn out to be motivated by even more than the personal desire for eternal life,they were looking for more worldly rewards for their actions.
What drives those of no faith that achieve these things,do they get rewarded regardless of their faith?What is their 'calling' as you christians would say?
It is more attractive to look on those who can be capable of incredible humanity with no promise of reward as a model for the future of humanity.Though i dont dispute that good is achieved by people such as you mention,i truly believe that the humanity would have come through in spite of it.We've had thousands of years of religions and yet some of the most enlightened and humanitarian things have been achieved,at least in my country of england,in a time when we have moved away from christianity and opened our minds to different ideologies.Looking back to a time when the church held sway i can see very little actually being done for the good of humanity,rather i can see a lot being done for the good of the few-when the vikings invaded churches on the british mainland in the 9th and tenth centuries they had rich pickings because the church had been receiving material payment in return for absolvement from sin.The church supported the crusades,a bloody land grab and slaughter where all principle players were motivated purely by greed and personal gain,there was absolutely nothing humanitarian about the crusades,the 'hope' of these knights was for riches,land and power.The church did nothing and said nothing during the holocaust,to such an extent that it was questionable as to whether they were against it or supported it.
It seems an inbuilt part of the christian ideology that whatever history tells us about the underhand and self serving nature the church has displayed through the ages,christians are incapable of critisism,i suspect that this is indoctrinated within the ideology,and so is a form of control.Ultimately christians have to invent elaborate reasons to convince themselves that these aberrations are actually for the good.
Back to middle earth,no assurances were given to man as to his fate beyond death,Morgoth used this to his advantage many times to bend men to his will,that is clearly something that i recognise in organised religion,and as it happens,history proves me correct.
I do not dispute professor tolkiens christianity,i do not dispute the existance of a god.Belief predates christianity and even judaism.There is belief in middle earth,though it is not a monotheistic belief,and people dont appear to be guided in their faith by massive bloated organisations led by people who have no more right to be standing in the front dictating than any other gathered there.There appears to be no making of great edifices,temples,huge buildings that glorify in wealth and power,exept in the case of the numenoreans when they began to worship morgoth,and this parallel is not lost on me.
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:03 PM
Having only a little bit of hope just happens to be a good plot device in such a story.Too much hope and the dramatic impact is lessened,no hope and the story is over before its begun.In our world hope takes relative form-hope changes from one person to the next depending on their situation,one person may hope to survive the next day without starvation,and another may hope that after they die,there is some kind of eternality to their existence.Limited hope for the majority of the people within our 'real world' is not in fact a plot device,it is a measure of how unfair,unpleasant and selfish the majority of humanity is.I believe that we are capable of so much better.
It has long been thought that religions provide a good framework or model for a better form of human behaviour.The process is a sort of conditioning with the reward being an assurance of hope,usually that the individual will achieve some kind of eternal life for themselves,therefore the motivation for believing is often a selfish one.It is also believed that by giving this assurance men are moved to greater things,through hope,such as you quote above.
Is it then a fact that all those who achieve things that are 'humanitarian',that are for the good of humanity,are simply people driven by the desire to be rewarded with eternal life?Well of course this is not the case,there are many people of no faith who achieve noble,compassionate humanitarian aims with no promise of reward,and there are many people of faith whos 'noble,humanitarian' aims turn out to be motivated by even more than the personal desire for eternal life,they were looking for more worldly rewards for their actions.
What drives those of no faith that achieve these things,do they get rewarded regardless of their faith?What is their 'calling' as you christians would say?
It is more attractive to look on those who can be capable of incredible humanity with no promise of reward as a model for the future of humanity.Though i dont dispute that good is achieved by people such as you mention,i truly believe that the humanity would have come through in spite of it.We've had thousands of years of religions and yet some of the most enlightened and humanitarian things have been achieved,at least in my country of england,in a time when we have moved away from christianity and opened our minds to different ideologies.Looking back to a time when the church held sway i can see very little actually being done for the good of humanity,rather i can see a lot being done for the good of the few-when the vikings invaded churches on the british mainland in the 9th and tenth centuries they had rich pickings because the church had been receiving material payment in return for absolvement from sin.The church supported the crusades,a bloody land grab and slaughter where all principle players were motivated purely by greed and personal gain,there was absolutely nothing humanitarian about the crusades,the 'hope' of these knights was for riches,land and power.The church did nothing and said nothing during the holocaust,to such an extent that it was questionable as to whether they were against it or supported it.
It seems an inbuilt part of the christian ideology that whatever history tells us about the underhand and self serving nature the church has displayed through the ages,christians are incapable of critisism,i suspect that this is indoctrinated within the ideology,and so is a form of control.Ultimately christians have to invent elaborate reasons to convince themselves that these aberrations are actually for the good.
Back to middle earth,no assurances were given to man as to his fate beyond death,Morgoth used this to his advantage many times to bend men to his will,that is clearly something that i recognise in organised religion,and as it happens,history proves me correct.
I do not dispute professor tolkiens christianity,i do not dispute the existance of a god.Belief predates christianity and even judaism.There is belief in middle earth,though it is not a monotheistic belief,and people dont appear to be guided in their faith by massive bloated organisations led by people who have no more right to be standing in the front dictating than any other gathered there.There appears to be no making of great edifices,temples,huge buildings that glorify in wealth and power,exept in the case of the numenoreans when they began to worship morgoth,and this parallel is not lost on me.
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:03 PM
Oh my,i am sorry,i didnt intend this message to replicate itself ten times,it was me pressing the send button multiple times because i thought it wasnt sending.My intention was not to drown this thread with my opinion as i have,and given the fact that there is no way for me to delete the additional posts that have duplicated here,i hope a moderator will do this and just leave the one(moderator,please help...)
Comment by matt tomatohead - January 16, 2012 @ 9:08 PM