BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too

Subject: Is L. Of Rings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Art Thieme
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 06:05 PM

The title of the thread: Is The Lord Of The Rings Offensive to many fundamentalist Christians the same way Harry Potter seems to be?

I've loved the Lord Of The Rings for 40 years. For at least 25 or 30 of those years I've read the whole or selected parts of it each year. There are "dark lords" and "orcs" and "wizards" and magic galore in those books. This was way back before the so-called silent majority and long before fundamentalists and other minority groups learned that, like labor unions, there was power in the union of like-minded individuals who got together, stood their ground, and empowered themselves and their movement's tenets. Democracy was interprited to mean that, even if you only had one more than 50% of people on your side, you and your group got to take ALL the marbles home with you--and the gloves, bats and balls to boot. George Bush even got to take all those and more home with him EVEN THOUGH he he lost the American election. Now he is giving America away to his mega-rich supporters..

(Sorry, I've made my own thread creep even before starting the train.)

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 06:15 PM

(Yeah, but it's good thread creep... )

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: SharonA
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 06:17 PM

To answer your question: yes. So is just about any similar fantasy novel (my folks even had trouble with C.S. Lewis and the Narnia books). So is any science fiction.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: mousethief
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 06:17 PM

I'm confused. What was the question again?

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 06:25 PM

My kids were at the proper age to read "Lord.." and I read it also, wearing out a set. One of the not so many books that appeals to a wide age group. The kids are in their 40s now. I read all the books on sorcery that I could find when I was a kid, and saw all of the Bela Lugosi, etc. movies. I blame them for leading me into the sciences for my livelihood. I believe those kinds of literature help to shape an inquiring mind.
In spite of the ignorant and narrow-minded, I think the movie version will make a big splash. Already sales of the books are jumping. They will help form another generation of kids with a good percentage of inquiring minds. Haven't read the Potter books, but they seem to be good for the youngest readers.
Thread creep here too- It's a good thing that Powell is there to toilet train and tell Bush what to do.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 06:29 PM

When a thread about creeps starts of with a thread creep what sort of direction is up?

There's always a clash between a theory of democracy in which majorities have the power to do what they want, and one in which minorities have rights which can't be over-ridden. Including miniorities of one.

Of couyrse Lord of the Rings isn't about democracy in any case. The only place where you could say there's some kind of democracy is The Shire - and that's not a democracy, it's a well functioning anarchist enclave.

Since The Lord of the Rings is full of magic and doesn't make any overt referances to Abrahamic religion (ie Judeo/Christian/Isamic), and Tolkien was a believing and practicing Catholic, I imagine there is bound to be a lopt of flak from certain sorts of fun-damn mentalists, but so what?

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 06:33 PM

"Is The Lord Of The Rings Offensive to many fundamentalist Christians the same way Harry Potter seems to be? "

Is there anything besides the frigg'n Bible that isn't to those zelots?

And really, who besides them gives a flying tinkers cuss??? They can take a good long leap, as far as I'm concerned...

idiots...

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: SharonA
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 06:44 PM

Clinton asks: "Is there anything besides the frigg'n Bible that isn't [offensive] to those zealots?"

Not much, Clinton, not much. They do like the Reader's Digest! : D

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Burke
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 06:53 PM

I've read the other thread & now this one & feel really compelled to make a point.

It is basically impossible to say what fundamentalists as whole believe because they simply do not speak with one voice. We all know that the Catholic Church has it's official teachings that not all Catholic's really hold to. Well, that central organization to give you the official teachings just does not exist for fundamentalism. There are Christian Denominations that more or less hold to the general ideas of fundamentalism, but to a one, they are not centrally controlled & cannot define the teachings of their local preachers, much less the person in the pew. They prove this by splitting constantly over seemingly trivial matters.

There are indeed leaders who speak & seem at various times have more or fewer followers, but their power comes from their ability to persuade.

So the answer to the question here is, that some do object. Others look on LotR's as Christian fantasy & happily incorporate it into whatever else they are doing. For a number of years I attended an independent, evangelical church. We had a discussion group on LotR's & Narnia that was completely positive about the books. Even more so on the creation story in Silmarillion.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Mark Clark
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 07:13 PM

Art, I too have read “There And Back Again” many times including readings to our daughter, Kate. I made up different voices for all the characters and we both always looked forward to the reading at bedtime.

As for fundamentalist Christians, I don't think I know any. I think the term itself is an oxymoron since fundamentalists never seem to espouse any theology that Christ might recognize. They are to Christianity as Al Qaida is to Islam. The KKK views itself as a Christian organization as did the Nazis.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Art Thieme
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 07:45 PM

Look kids, this is just such a sad state of affairs if only because we've got to live togather in this world while we are at odds with one another. It is dumb and stupid to give each other a hard time on this. We must live and let live and respect the desires of others -- their needs for themselves. As I've said before, I'm an atheist secular Jew and I probably only say that because my mother was a Jew and Hitler would've cremated me alive only beause of that fact. (Dad wasn't.) My wife is a Jehovah's Witness and she and her friends KNOW all the f-ing answers. (Some just need to have certainty I guess.)
I've seen sad and terrible problems when the kids NEED other things in their lives---things that are natural to desire if one is true to the STRONG urges of one's "wisdom body"--as Joseph Campbell called it ---the natural searching force to break out on their own hook that young folks exhibit.--- It's inherant, as I see it, in most people to go their own ways--read their own books, venerate things as they view it---not as others force them to see it. And it should be o.k. and not a threat when they look to so-called "heathen" religions, witchcraft, or maybe occult or shamanistic societies. If freedom of religion is more than an ideal, we must make room. It's in their interest and our own.

As I said, it's just a wondrous story--imagination made beautiful in it vividness and it's complexity. It will be fantastic to see it on the screen IF it is done well.

May the hair on your feet grow long. And if you want to dye it pink and gel it and spike it or pierce your little toe and cultivate your foot fetish---so be it.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Murray MacLeod
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 08:14 PM

Mark is right, Fundamentalist Christianity is indeed an oxymoron although not for the reason he gives.

Christianity is not some easy, feelgood, touch-feely, hey let's all be pals together, luvya babe system of beliefs.

If ypou are indeed a Christian you believe the following articles of faith.

A. Tou were conceived in sin and you are a sinner.
B. Christ was born the Son of God and died to save you from the consequences of your sins
C. If you do not accept Christ as your Savior, and do not truly repent of your sins, you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven (which in effect means you will rot in Hell)
D. Christ was crucified and rose again on the third day, and HE WILL RETURN AGAIN, at the time of the Second Coming. The Second Coming is fundamental to Christian belief. This is when you will be judged.

That pretty much sums it up.
Christianity is Christianity is Christianity.

Do I believe? Ask me on my deathbed.

Murray

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 09:01 PM

Gee whiz, didn't we already go round on this last week- and the week before-and the week before-and

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Robin2
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 09:14 PM

Art,

From the trailers I've seen, this is going to be one amazing movie! These books have been my top favorites for over 20 years, and I always told Hubby, NO ONE could do them justice. (Remember those horrible attempts about 15 years ago?..shudder) The previews I have seen, I've been able to identify exactly what part of the book, down to exact passages in dialoge...

Here's hoping... I have correctly brainwashed all of my children, so we are all going together to see it...how's that for good upright Christian values?

Robin

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Brían
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 09:37 PM

I actually found both The Chronicles of Narnia and The Lord of the Rings to have very conservative messages. The notion I believe Frodo had of always having a Shire that stayed the same to return to sounds to me like the 50's American Ideal tha many Christian Conservatives hold dear. C. S. Lewis, by the way, was a theologian. The Last Battle is actually a description of Armageddon for children. Read his Screwtape Letters if you want to see Radical Right-Wing Christian arguments.

That being said, I do remember both stories fondly. The president of the art school where I earned my useless degree suggested I read The Lord of the Rings in an effort to get me to "lighten up".

I rather enjoy Thread Creep.

Brían

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Mark Clark
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 10:49 PM

Well I thought the Rankin-Bass animation of The Hobbit was pretty good. One problem with all the Rings films is they always ran out of budget before achieving their goals. You could tell that some accountant had pulled the plug and told them to distribute whatever they had in the can. A film that does justice to Tolkien would have to be many separate films each several hours long.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: catspaw49
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 10:58 PM

Looks to be a great pic! As to the Fundy's.......Well, Paw and Cletus are real good Christian old boys and I don't think they'd find a thing wrong with it. Matter of fact they might even add a chapter or two, having had some "Ring" experience with the Magnetic Ass-Healing Ring. Ya' see.................

Paw's flatulence when combined with his passion for 'shine and hot wings used to be a big problem for him whenever his roids would flare up....so to speak...and it got to the point that little rubber donut pillows and Preparation H just weren't doing the job anymore. Clete's 6th wife was into all the weird and wacky cures so Cletus was always coming to Paw with his suggestions that he'd heard from her. When Cletus told Paw about acupuncture, he disappeared for about two weeks and I'll be damned if anyone could find him.

The Reg Boys too had their share of wacky cures for everything from the Great White North of Canada, but most of them involved bear grease and other vile and foamy liquids. Then it happened. The whole lot of them were watching my TV down in the den one night and had been subjected to at least nine hours of infomercials while they slugged down Iron City. I had learned from experience to unplug the phone and hide my credit cards on these nights which only took place when Karen was gone. I'm still paying for that quonset hut in the Aleutian Islands and I have the complete collection of Pan Flute Favorites so I have learned, albeit slowly. I think the one that finally got me was the "Great Michigan Getaway Weekend" which they bought and gave to Karen and I for an anniversary present. It was a month before I found out that they had billed it to my Visa and when we went for "rest and relaxation" in beautiful Michigan, it turned out to be clapped out motel run by a Pakistani in downtown Flint, just across from a closed GM factory.

I guess it was about 5:30 AM when Cletus woke me up and said they had the cure for Paw's hemorrhoids. This was more than I wanted or needed to know at 5:30 so after verifying that it wouldn't cost me anything, I said have at it and went back to sleep. When I woke up about 7 I had one of those vague feelings of dread. You know what I mean? Nothing was wrong that I could think of and yet I just felt the world was going to come after me that day. It turned out to be Old Man Rafferty instead....but I'll come to that.

The "boys" arrived back at my place about noon having already left when I woke at 7. They were lugging some huge electric motors into my garage and looking about for tools when I walked in and asked what the hell was going on. Cletus then launched into their "cure" and the reasoning behind it. It seems they had watched an infomercial about the "healing power of magnetism" and saw immediately that this was the way to fix Paw's 'roids. Slowly it all began to come together for me and I began to wonder how in the hell these guys could even remember how to breathe!

In any case, they'd picked up the motors from out back of Bernie's Electrical Supply and were now going to remove the large magnets inside. They idea was to cut a slit in Paw's rubber donut, insert the magnets, and then duct tape the thing back together. I noticed that Buford had an old jockstrap (with cup) that they evidently were going to use to strap the magnets to Paw's ass, again using liberal amounts of duct tape. Listening to Cletus explain all of this and their newfound theory made me begin to question my own existence, as though I really didn't exist in the world I had come to know, but was simply a bit player in a leftover Rod Serling story.

Things started going downhill pretty quickly as the magnets were removed and now were flying across my garage, affixing themselves to various steel things....like my van, my lawnmower, my golf clubs, and a little steel reinforced concrete rabbit that someone had once given us as a joke. I figured that I was going to be better off if they'd finish up somewhere else so I suggested they take all the stuff and head for the pleasant little roadside picnic area on the edge of the village where they could finish rigging Paw up and with any luck, I'd never know anything more about it. After removing the magnets, scratching the hell out of my van, breaking off the head of a 5 iron and the left ear of the rabbit, they left. The picnic area was only about a half mile off, just a bit down Rt.664 and I told them to let me know how it all worked out.

Curiosity is a terrible thing sometimes and about an hour later I grabbed my Weimaraner and his leash and set out as though I were just walking the dog. As I turned on 664 I saw the Boys all walking towards me from the little picnic grove. Paw's ass seemed to be a bit large and he was walking funny, but from a distance I could tell they must have done a good job circling his ass in magnets because outside of a slight limp and a big bulge at the rear of his bibs, Paw looked pretty normal. Then it happened. Trailing the others, Paw walked past Old Man Rafferty's mailbox, a new heavy duty steel one to foil the kids with cars and bats. He first slowed, stopped, then flew backwards and before you could say "dumbfuck" he was hanging from his ass on the mailbox. Ol' Man Rafferty was washing his aging Electra deuce and a quarter and looked up to see what was happening. By that time, Cletus, Buford, and the Reg Boys all were tugging on either Paw or Rafferty's mailbox and though they got him off the mailbox was smashed in and the pole was a goner.

Well I tell you, Rafferty came flying down the drive, gravel spitting up from his shoes, and swearing a blue streak. Paw was laying about 10 foot up the drive where he'd landed after the force of being ripped from the mailbox sent him sailing through the air. Rafferty bent over him and started yelling in his face and Paw was trying to stand up but being weighed down by the Magnetic Ass-Healing Ring. I got up there and tried to get Rafferty to calm down some as the others stood around looking bewildered. Rafferty started blaming me for allowing such "dumbass shitkickers" to stay here and how I should let them rot somewhere else. Before he could say another word, things continued to deteriorate. Paw had gotten to his feet about 15 feet from the Buick and there was a loud clanging thump as one of the hubcaps flew off and affixed itself to Paw's rump. Rafferty grabbed the hubcap and started pulling for all he was worth swinging Paw round and round in a circle. The hubcap folded and broke loose and Paw landed by the side of the road while Rafferty began to rage about his rump-sprung hubcap and twisted mailbox. I got out my checkbook and with a stern look to Cletus asked how much this would cost to keep from calling the police. The sight of my checkbook calmed Rafferty down and my Weimaraner had gone over to the side of the road and was licking Paw's face. Rafferty calculated a sum which I figured was enough to buy a new set of tires and an exhaust system for the Buick and build a brick mailbox, while forcing me nearer to bankruptcy.

Cletus and the rest were circled around me as I handed Rafferty the check and when I turned to go, I saw Paw had gotten to his feet again and was bent over stroking Jaeger's head. The dog has always had a soft spot for Paw and when I whistled for him he reluctantly came back up the drive. Bending over to pick up his leash, I heard Cletus say, "Aw Sheeitt!" Right then I couldn't imagine how things could get worse, but I looked up just in time to see Paw lifted from his feet and his ass attach to the exhaust stack of a passing Peterbilt. I watched as the truck roared off, Paw flailing around and in a blind spot where the driver couldn't see him, and the dumbass Reg boys waving "bye-bye" as the Pete rounded a curve down by the Hopewell place.

We found Paw at the truckstop at Rt.37 and I-70 where the driver had stopped for fuel. When we arrived, the Magnetic Ass-Healing Ring was nowhere to be seen and Paw was sitting on a bag of ice trying to cool the burns from riding 27 miles on an exhaust stack. But I tell you what.....Perhaps it was the scar tissue from the burns that did it, but Paw hasn't had trouble with 'roids since then. Maybe there is something to the power of magnetism and the Great Magnetic Ass-Healing Ring

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Celtic Soul
Date: 28 Nov 01 - 11:14 PM

I regularly listen to WAVA in the Washington D.C. area (for those not here, it is a Christian radio station). I do so not only because I enjoy some of what they broadcast, but also to keep a finger on the pulse of the extremists.

I heard that many in the Fundamentalist corner have no issue with J.R.R. Tolkiens work, as he was himself a (in their words) "devout" Christian. On "The Don Croh Show", they had a guest who wrote a book called "Harry Potter and the Bible". Evidentally, this man makes the comparisons and somehow justifies why Tolkien is better than Harry Potter. Why Tolkiens wizards are better than those in the Harry Potter books I do not personally know (as I will not spend the money to buy this book, and do not myself see a great distinction), but there it is. Same thing for C.S. Lewis. He was a Christian, and so his use of magical creatures, witches, and sorcery is somehow OK as he was himself a Christian.

I can tell you that I personally know at least one Pagan who went that path partially *because* of "The Chronicles of Narnia", but that will never make the airwaves.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 01:21 AM

I'm offended by thread titles that are so confusing that they pique my interest, even when I'm trying to get some work done. I refuse to read Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter though, just so I can have an informed opinion. I DO wish I had some of your meds tho' Spaw. These carrot sticks aren't makin' it!

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 04:32 AM

The Shire sounds like 50s America? In that case 50s America must have been distorted out of recognition in the films and books and all that.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: GUEST,John Gray / Australia
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 07:34 AM

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: sophocleese
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 08:12 AM

I think communist and feminist critiquies of L.O.R might find more problems than fundamentalist Xtian critiques. I enjoy the books. I have the tapes of BBC production which I love to listen to and which my children have heard and enjoyed.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Grab
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 08:50 AM

I'll second Clinton. Who cares? They are the minority by some way, so they have _no_ rights over the rest of us. Sod'em (and Gomorrah too, if they want...)

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Mrrzy
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 09:05 AM

I thought the Nazis were atheists, not Christians!

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: kendall
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 09:10 AM

What is heaven? being one with the creator. What is Hell? being apart from the creator. All else is commentary.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: GUEST,John Gray / Australia
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 09:53 AM

catspaw49, enough of this Magnetic Arse-Healing Ring stuff. It imperils people who live alone like me. I laughed so long and loud I nearly lost my breath. My Sri Lanken neighbour came over thinking I was being done away with. The thought of ol' curry breath doing mouth-to-mouth on me was enough to revive me but I nearly carked it.
And De Silva has gone home thinking there's something sus' about a bloke who sits in front of a monitor gasping for breath.

JG/FME

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 10:32 AM

Ohmygawd....THANK YOU JOHN!!!! Not for the compliment, although I do honestly appreciate it, but for that image of "curry breath mouth to mouth"...........oh man, that one is definitely usable!!!

Thanks for all John...........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: SharonA
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 11:04 AM

Murray says: "Christian is Christian is Christian"

Well, Murray, the fundamentalists (or fundamentalist-pretenders, as John Hardly called them in another thread) think so, and think that anyone who disagrees with the list you made is going to burn in hell (see Murray's post of Nov. 28, 8:14pm, above). But Christians of many denominations would disagree with one or more of your articles of faith, particularly (D) the Second Coming issue; even among the fundiees, the debate rages as to whether Christ is to come at the beginning, middle or end of the End Times, and whether judgment occurs then or upon one's individual demise.

Even (C) the acceptance of Christ as Savior means different things to different denominations. And don't even get me started on (A) the "original sin" vs. pure-of-soul-newborns issue.

By the way, some people who consider themselves to be Christians do have an "easy, feelgood, touch-feely, hey let's all be pals together, luvya babe system of beliefs."

And some Christians would disparage a deathbed-conversion plan as a "fire escape"!

Sharon (an ex-fundie born-again-heathen)

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 11:11 AM

So Sharon, where does that leave a guy like Ol' Man Rafferty? He goes to church and has one of them fish on his Buick, but I don't think he was imbued with Christian kindness in his treatment of Paw.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: SharonA
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 11:19 AM

Beats me, spaw. I'm no longer in the business of predicting whether someone goes to heaven or hell; I gave that up quite a while ago!

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 11:27 AM

Well Sharon, either place you go, if you go on Delta it doesn't matter, 'cause you'll change in Atlanta.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: SharonA
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 11:34 AM

ar ar ar!

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Mark Clark
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 11:42 AM

I don't object to people thinking I'm going to Hell, I just don't want them to create another one here on earth for the living.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: mousethief
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 11:56 AM

The Nazis were neither Christians nor Atheists (remember "Ein Reich, Ein Gott, Ein Fuehrer"? No? Well that WAS one of their slogans), according to their own propaganda. Hitler despised Christianity as a weak religion, and the official "ology" of the Nazis was the Norse -- although they sided with the giants and not the gods!

CS Lewis was NOT a theologian, and was the first to admit it. He was a "popularizer" of Christianity the way Carl Sagan or Stephen Jay Gould is a "popularizer" of astronomy and biology, respectively. By profession he was an english professor.

Murray, if that is your definition of Christian, then count me out, because I don't buy the "conceived in sin" thing. That's a distortion of the teaching of the early church made by Augustine and perpetuated by Anselm and then the Reformers. If you're looking for a set of "fundamentals" to determine the content of Christian belief, why not use the one the Church herself wrote, 1700 years ago? I refer of course to the Nicene Creed.

As for LOTR, or Narnia, or Harry Potter, I don't see how you can read any of them and come away with a desire to be evil or to reject God. They all clearly delineate between good and evil, and come down quite clearly on the side of Good.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: wildlone
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 12:12 PM

If you want to read a realy good book with stories of incest,rape,murder and genocide Click here
dave

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 12:18 PM

And if you want to read about the insanity of man Click Here.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Naemanson
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 12:43 PM

Whew! I've lost track of this thread. What was the question?

Oh yeah! Is The Lord Of The Rings Offensive to many fundamentalist Christians the same way Harry Potter seems to be?

I can't really say because I only know a few "born-agains" and they are careful not to espouse their mythology around me. Christianity has a lot to answer for, both good and bad, and for me the bad outweighs the good. However, I truly believe in the basic laws provided in the Bible and hold to them as a formula for a good life. Until the "Christians" in this world decide to follow those 10 commandments then I will stay away from any gatherings of that faith.

The LOTR and Harry Potter are entertainment pure and simple. Anyone finding more than that needs to get a life. I read the trilogy to my older daughter when she was young and it is a part of her life that she will always treasure. I have read TLOTR more times than I can count and will be starting my second read of Harry Potter soon. TLOTR uses language to paint some wonderful pictures and clearly tells a story of good versus evil. Harry Potter is fascinating because of the J. K. Rowling has used language to match the style of the books to the age of the characters.

I have read C. S. Lewis and find him imaginative and fun as well. I was always under the impression he was a theologian. What is the official definition of "theologian" anyway? Carl Sagan may have been a popularizer of science but he was also an astronomer.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: The Walrus at work
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 01:40 PM

"...Is The Lord Of The Rings Offensive to many fundamentalist Christians the same way Harry Potter seems to be?... "

I do hope so

mousethief,

I thought the slogan was "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer", (surely "Ein Gott" would be contrary to any "Norse" beliefs as the -pre Christian- Norse were polytheistic). As an aside, Himmler, it seems, was in favour of Islam as a religion (he was very much impressed by the SS "Handshar"(sp?) Division {Bosnian/Croat}).

Walrus

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Wolfgang
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 01:55 PM

Walrus, you're right with the slogan. 'Handschar' would be the German spelling of that division, but there might be other spellings in English.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: GUEST,revisionist
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 01:57 PM

Sorry, but the last time that I checked, bush WON the election.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: mousethief
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 02:48 PM

Revisionist, you should check more frequently. Bush won the presidency, and the electoral college vote, yes. But he got fewer votes in Florida than Gore.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: SharonA
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 02:50 PM

Only because Gore didn't ask for and receive a recount of the entire state of Florida. See the article I posted on the subject in the "Dumbya's Star Chamber" thread.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Steve in Idaho
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 02:57 PM

Another one of these - and I promised Joe I wouldn't - Loved the Hobbits and the stories - could care less about zealots and their opinions -

And Spaw may not be the best farter on the Cat - I DO have a certificate from the VA that I won the runoff contest held in 1994. Or was that runout contest? Farted twinkle twinkle little star while dancing on one foot.

Steve

This sure looks like a Jay Leno lead in - or out

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: SharonA
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 03:12 PM

revisionist: Here's a link to that article:

click here

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: SharonA
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 03:16 PM

Sorry; I don't know why that didn't link directly to the post with the article, but look for my post of 19-Nov-01 - 03:24 PM on that thread.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Jim Krause
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 03:27 PM

Ah, well, that takes care of everything. Logging out & going home.
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 03:36 PM

I thought LOTR was FANTASY. I didn't know that was the same thing as religion, theology, faith, or whatever you want to call it. And I don't give a monkey's whether someone is offended by it. They aren't being forced at gun point to watch it. So what's the big deal? I'm damned sick and tired of people who try to tell me what is and is not good for me.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: mousethief
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 03:43 PM

A monkey's what? Inquiring minds want to know.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 04:23 PM

Well, no matter what they say, Harry Potter has sure got a lot of kids reading instead of veging out in front of the TV. Personally, I think that's a good thing. After seeing some of the promos, I definitely plan to see the movie. Gonna read the books, too. And I'm rereading Tolkien in preparation for The Fellowship of the Ring.

Mark, I think we might just luck out with Lord of the Rings. Just a few minutes ago on my magic electric radio, I heard an interview with a movie reviewer who said he hasn't seen the movie yet, but will be seeing a preview in a day or two. He reminded the fellow who was interviewing him that this movie is not the entire LotR, it's The Fellowship of the Ring, the first of the trilogy. And that it's three hours long. The other two, he said, will be equally long. He also mentioned that he understood that the Tolkien estate had a measure of creative control and was watching all phases of the production to make certain that it stayed true to the concept. Sounds promising.

But one thing no movie could ever duplicate is Tolkien's glowingly beautiful writing. Lord, that man could write!

And Murray, "Christianity is Christianity is (etc., etc., etc.)" just ain't the way it really is. You have undoubtedly noted that there are a lot of very noisy people out there who call themselves "Christians." Most of them haven't a clue as to what it's really all about. And many of them have TV shows. My theological beliefs are composed of a mix of open-mindedness, lots of questions, a sense of history, a large dollop of skepticism, and a firm grip on Joseph Campbell's admonition, "Don't confuse metaphor with fact." I go to a Lutheran church with some regularity. I know a lot of Christians, but not just the ones in the church I go to. Not very many buy into your list (I don't know much of anybody who believes in "Original Sin" anymore — and the rest is metaphor). In the church I go to, one "witnesses" not by running off at the mouth and bending someone's ear, but by deeds. It's a pretty socially active church. Most people there seem to believe that the core of the religion is to be found in Matthew 25:35-40. Look it up (click). But — enough! This dead horse has already been flogged into a pile of bloody hash in other threads.

Back to Art's original question: a few years ago, in the small town northeast of Seattle, a group of flamin' Fundies demanded that several books be removed from local libraries (a common spasm among these folks). One of the books was Huxley's Brave New World. A local reporter asked a couple of spokesman for the group if they had actually read Brave New World. One of them said, "No! I don't read trash like that!" The other said, "I read the book, but I couldn't figure out what Huxley was talking about." Typical. Other than taking individual Bible verses out of context and examining them with a microscope, these folks don't read very deeply. Nevertheless, Harry Potter is in deep doo-doo with them. Wizardry, witchcraft, and all that. But since Tolkien is well known to have been one of a group Christian writers (which included Charles Williams, C. S. Lewis, and others — they called themselves "The Inklings."), on that basis they'll probably leave him alone. Maybe.

One of our former pastors (now retired) used to include long quotations from Lord of the Rings in his sermons. Our current pastor was first in line when the Harry Potter movie opened here (she loved it), and she's eagerly looking forward to seeing The Fellowship of the Ring.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 04:29 PM

As far as the LOTR movie goes, I've been following the development for 2 years now or so... Some stuff looks really good, other stuff looks horrible!

I'm at the point new where I'm hopefully pessimistic... that is, I suspect that these movies are gonna suck huge, but I really hope I'm wrong...

I also hope that these movies are the S.Morgensternian "Good Parts" version of LOTR I've been waiting for for years and years... LOTR is best described as Litterary BLOAT...

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Art Thieme
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 06:04 PM

I've always thought that Lord Of The Rings was a direct parallel of World War 2. Tolkien denied it but during that War was when he was writing it I believe. Bombs were falling on his London and the Dark Lord, if ever there was one, was in Berlin. Orcs were running all over Europe too. The Nazgul were abroad.

Often I did school folk shows for kids raised during the Viet Nam era, kids whose parents had taught them ALL war was to be avoided at all costs. They'd all read L.O.T.R. I used to show them that there just might be a war that could be, pragmatically and morally, or at least phiolosophically, correct (even if not spiritually good) to participate in. I'd equate those two wars and then sing the "I Hate War And So Does Elanore--and we won't be safe 'til everyone is dead..." song (tune: "Jesse James") and then do "Ruben James" and "Round and Round Hitler's Grave" (tune: "Old Joe Clark") to show how someone (the Almanac Singers) could change their minds in different circumstances when presented with a new reality.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Murray MacLeod
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 07:43 PM

Sharon, Alex et al. sorry, but that is how the deal goes down. I personally do not believe I have huge trouble with the whole concept of "belief" , but that is the stark reality of Christianity.

Sometimes I feel that Blaise Pascal had it right, like, "what the hell, you are gambling what, sixty, seventy years against eternity? Hey it's a good bet"

Somehow I just can't make that bet.

Murray

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Naemanson
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 07:55 PM

I am worried about a trend in the above posts. Several of them have made comments that they don't care what the fundamentalists think. This may be an error. When you don't pay attention to what the fundamentalists are doing you could end up with an Iran or Afghanistan. The religious right includes plenty of people who would happily deny women the right to work (or anything else) if they could somehow circumvent that pesky Constitution. They have their homophobia, their concern about family values and all the proof that they need that this country is going to the dogs if they don't take action. Be very afraid if theyever come up with a charismatic leader who can pull them all together.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 09:57 PM

Good point, Naemanson, and all too true. This is why I get my neck in a bow when people start saying "Christians say -- " and then they quote somebody like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, or someone else of that stripe. Those bozos don't speak for me -- or a lot of other people. When people of any religion or denomination get the half-assed idea that God has called them to be soldiers in a holy war, crusade, jihad, or whatever they want to call it, look out!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 10:01 PM

Constitution?

I don't have a constituion....

But I do see yer point...

;-)

"this country is going to the dog"

May I remind you that the internet is INTERNATIONAL... broaden yer scope eh!

heh!

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 10:22 PM

Perhaps, Arty T.

the question should be.....
Is this the appropriate "web-place" for your question to be?

Such questions two years ago...Would Have offended thee

They always offend me!

Where is the MUSIC connection - come on post it, the great songs etc.?????

However, to answer your question -

The modern world holds a TREMENDOUS debt to Tolken because his personal invitation to C.S. Lewis to attend "philosophical" discussions which, in turn, led to the conversion of one of this centuries greatest Christian philosophers and appologists. Tolken was ALREADY a CHRISTIAN

JOE....another call for a breathalizer on the MC!!

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 10:31 PM

When I studied Tolkien our professor let us substitute a song or painting for one of our papers. My roommate played the guitar and we put some of Tolkien's poems to music. "I Sit Beside the Fire" "In Every Wood In Every Spring"

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Murray MacLeod
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 10:41 PM

What is an "appologist"? Enquiring minds need to know.

Murray

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: ddw
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 11:16 PM

Alex,

Don't know if you saw it, but PBS ran a very interesting program about four or five years ago tracing the Christian aspects of the Nazis. They did borrow a lot of imagry from Norse mythology, but they also had "spiritual camps" for their leaders, particularly the SS officers, which were heavily steeped in Christianity. A good portion of the "teaching," it seems, was to use the old saw that "it was the Jews who killed Christ" to justify some of the party's worst atrocities.

It's been quite a while since I saw it, so I'm fuzzy on the details, but their interpretation was that the Nazis were just as based in Christianity as the KKK and some of the more militant militia groups.

I may have that program on tape. I'll look over the weekend and post more on it if I can find it.

cheers,

david

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Art Thieme
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 11:33 PM

Garg,

I generally work with WHAT IS rather than what the ideal would be. (If that makes me a politician, so be it.) All is often not as I'd prefer it -- same as you. I'd prefer more music threads that I could add to if what they want happens to be what I've got to give back. But if that ain't happening, and there is a topic opened in another thread---rather than CREEPING away from their topic, I, for once, chose to create a separate thread that had a question that had occurred to me as a tangent to the other.
Sir, if you will look at my last post in this very thread, it shows graphically, how I sought to bring music to this discussion with my educational shows in learning situations as well as within this best of all possible Mudcat situations--given the real-world parameters involved.

On that same tack, I have NEVER EVER seen a folkie adaptation for any of the "songs" of J.R.R. Tolkien that spoke to me. Michael Flanders and Donald Swan did an entire LP on Angel Records of Swan's tunes for those lyrics. It didn't make it for me at all, but it may have succeeded admirably where our British friends are concerned. I do wonder what they might've felt about the efforts of Flanders and Swann as regards those lyrics?!?!

I do suspect, Mr. Gargoyle, that it comes down to, "IF YA CAN'T BEAT 'EM, JOIN 'EM." This ain't brain surgery. It's folk music, for Coyote's sake. And goin' with the proverbial flow is much better for my, and maybe your, blood pressure. ;-)

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Nov 01 - 11:41 PM

Mrrzy, Mousethief, et al ....

One thing the Nazis were not (generally) was atheists. They were a very mystical order indeed, especially at the highest levels, convinced that they were ordained to usher in a new civilization, and that they were serving divine power in so doing. Some of Goebbel's last diary entries indicated that as far as he felt, if the Nazi system fell it would mean not only their own destruction, but the end of the entire Cosmos, the collapse of the whole destiny and future of humanity. That's how far out some of those people at the top were in the Third Reich, and that is not atheism. It's a type of deeply religious insanity.

I don't doubt that Hitler had a low view of the conventional Christianity of his day, and considered it weak, but he had his own theories about higher purposes. He was dabbling in some very odd occult stuff, deriving from many ancient traditions, and he somehow mixed it all together in a bizarre way to support his paranoid state of mind, and saw himself as the one who would bring in a superior spiritual civilization (but NOT a kinder, gentler one!). He was envisioning a warrior civilization ruled by the new elite, the Superman, as he saw it, that would crush and enslave the weaker elements in the human race. It was utter madness in the clothing of supposedly divine purpose.

I'm sure that the rank and file of German soldiers for the most part thought of themselves as conventional Christians. They certainly believed they were representing Christian civilization, especially when fighting the officially atheistic Communist forces of the Soviet Union.

Every German soldier in the regular Army had the words "Gott Mit Uns" on his silver belt buckle (God is with us).

Interestingly enough, however, the SS troops do not appear to have had this slogan on their buckles, but a different one! (checked reference materials on World War II, and I can't quite make out what it says on the SS buckles, but it doesn't say Gott Mit Uns) I'd be very curious to know what it did say...the fact is, the SS was expected to be loyal to one and one thing alone...their Fuhrer! (A grisly new religion in the making.)

The intentions of Himmler and Hitler were to eventually replace the Wermacht (regular army) with the SS Divisions. Hitler did not trust the traditional German Army one bit. He considered them to be wedded to outdated concepts of honour, and to be therefore weak and undependable. He was partly right about that (from his point of view)...some of them tried to assassinate him, and it's a pity they didn't succeed.

My own feeling is that the top Nazis were engaged in extreme mysticism and what could be termed "the black arts", and that they combined it willy-nilly with Christianity or any other religious tradition that they could conveniently use to flesh it out and achieve control over the German people. They were spiritually motivated, but in the most dark and destructive manner imaginable. Like all maniacal destroyers, they had convinced themselves that they were doing it for the most laudable reasons...people are great rationalizers.

I would say the same of the Spanish conquistadors, who in the name of Christ (so they said) committed incredible atrocities all over Central and South America...mostly in pursuit of gold.

Anyone can call himself a Christian or call himself an atheist....the question is, what is his hidden agenda? When confronted with a deranged killer, I don't much care at the time whether he calls himself a Christian or an atheist. He's just a deranged killer with pretensions, that's all.

I have always felt that the Lord of the Rings was an allegorical tale reflecting the World War II conflict, and the Dark Lord was definitely in Berlin...and there was another one in Moscow too.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 12:09 AM

Mr. Art

There are "lyrics" within Tolkien...but I do concur, like you, I could never connect to the muse and turn them into a tune. Something is absent.

However, Rage AGAINST the Storm

There is only ONE DT/MC and if we permit the infidels to over-run its ramparts....there is no other, there is no retreat, there is only Madonna/Cat clones ad-nausium. STAND FIRM!!!

Sincerely,
Your Comrade in Arms
Gargoyle -IDTS

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 01:00 AM

Gargoyle, I think it's only "fundamentalist" Mudcatters who would object to a thread like this. It's downright fascinating.

I'm quite relieved to see that others think I don't have to adhere to Murray's definition if I want to call myself a Christian. Hell, even Jesus Christ might have trouble fitting those criteria.

You know, I don't know if it's fair to make a general statement that Fundamentalist or Conservative Christians would object to Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings. You could say that certain xenophobic Christians do such-and-such, but I think that's about as far as you can go. There are many Christians who are conservative in their beliefs, but they can be very reasonable in the application of those beliefs to real life. Wherever you go, you're going to find idiots. There are fundamentalist idiots, liberal idiots, Catholic idiots, and pagan idiots - and it's unfair to judge any of these groups by the small number of outspoken idiots who pretend to speak for them.

Yes, there are Christians who have trouble with just about any sort of literature other than the Bible, and they generally object to viewing the Bible as literature. I suppose they're looking for answers to their questions, and aren't comfortable with "grey areas." More exactly, I guess you could say they think they've found answers to their questions, and they have a fear of being "confused by the facts" if they are exposed to other information. As we've witnessed with "Harry Potter" and even with the "Last Temptation of Christ," many of these people won't even view a movie for themselves before they join the protest line.

Do we take these people seriously, or do we simply write them off as "idiots"? I dunno. I hate to write anybody off. Incredibly stupid people can also be incredibly dangerous - but I don't think we need to get parnoid about them. I also like to believe that people I once considered "itiots" can often turn out ot be quite remarkable.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Murray MacLeod
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 01:26 AM

Joe, Christianity is all about FAITH. It has NOTHING to do with rationalization.

(Wish I knew how to do Gargoyle's big script. Minus his ubiquitous spelling mistakes, of course)

Murray

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: GUEST,Seonaid
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 02:21 AM

Re Hitler & mysticism -- There's a fascinating little pamphlet called "I Saw Hitler Make Black Magic," written by the late Thane Walker, a psychic who was asked by Hitler asked to join the mind-magic group at Eagle's Nest in the late 30's (Thane told him to blow it out his moustache, and ended up in Nuremburg prison). The booklet was published by a group in Los Angeles called The Prosperos; copies of it might be around somewhere. By the way, on the other side of the channel during WWII, the British occult gang was fighting for the Allies by doing something akin to what Katherine Kurtz described in her book, "Lammas Night." [Hey, you Fundamentalists, don't look at me -- my granny was a Baptist deacon!]

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 02:22 AM

Faith, yes, Murray - but that doesn't mean buying into somebody's itemized agenda. Many believers look on faith as a loving relationship with God, not signing onto a laundry list of beliefs.

I'll buy most of your list (with certain nuances added), but not the idea of people being born sinful. Babies are born into a world full of evil - but you'll never convince me that babies are evil in themselves. What you've listed is pretty close to the list in the Fundamentals of Christian Belief - those principles are a pretty good definition of fundamentalist Christianity, but not of ALL Christianity. Some of us have a different perspective, and we pray and go to church and read our Bibles, and do our best to help our neighbor.

But what's rationalization got to do with it?

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 02:23 AM

1. -- Murray, what you say about Christian beliefs may be true of a small percentage of Christians now. But not the majority. And it might have been true in some aspects historically. But not recently. Christianity is monotheistic, but it is not monolithic, which is why there are so many different denominations. Overgeneralization can't help but miss the mark.

2. -- I think Joe just fed us a reality sandwich. Well said, Joe.

3. -- I flipped on the tube a little while ago and watched a program on the making of The Lord of the Rings. Interviews with the cast and the director, and they showed a few scenes. It looks good. It looks very good!

4. -- I'll be interested to see how (if) they handle the songs.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Big Mick
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 02:46 AM

I admit to not reading every post before I wrote this.

Garg..........nice to see you in your curmudgeonly role without the rank, base attacks. Now go take your medicine and get me a Guinness on your way back through the kitchen.

Joe..........loved the fundamentalist Mudcatters remark.......my sinuses won't recover until morning.

I live in an area which is the home to Calvin College and is known for being very conservative and "fundamentalist". It is also known for chasing Kath Westra off to the East coast, hence making me have to love her from afar...........LOL. As you might guess, the Public Pulse section of the paper is full of analysis by these good folks about why the rest of us, the great unwashed are all going to go to hell and so are our children, for watching this. In fact, my "almost 10 years old, DAD!!!" daughter was accosted by one of her classmates and told she was going to hell because The Bible says that is what happens to people that see the movie or read the book. Fortunately the formidable Miss Ciara has been raised to know ignorance when she sees it, and dismissed this little friend.

I guess I want to ask these self righeous and IMHO, idiotic people if they ever read The Arabian Nights, Norse, Roman, or Greek classic mythology, or for that matter comic books, when they were kids. It is a work of fiction for crying out loud. It seems to me it is much more important to teach the wee ones to live honorably and by the codes that we each choose to live by. It is much more important to teach that being judgemental is a fundamental sin in itself. I am not smart enough to understand what makes The Greatest One upset enough to not let me into the clubhouse. But I am smart enough to know that it is more important to live according to the precepts that I have chosen to live by, and to teach my kids the difference between fantasy and reality.

One of our jobs as bards of the modern age, is to expose hypocrisy and idiocy. Where I live, I see a lot of it.

Time to go to bed.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Murray MacLeod
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 03:11 AM

Eationalixation is as irrelevant to Christuanity as it was to the Taliban, Joe. I have played gigs in Unitarian churches (during) "services" and I mean, its rationalization gone mad.

My take on the matter is, accept the "truth" or reject it. ME I reject it. But pleeeze don't go around trying to tailor it to your own personal requirements. Doesn't compute. I know what the Christian doctrine says. So do you.

Murray

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 03:17 AM

Things have changed a bit since the days of St. Augustine.

(Goin' to bed now)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: John P
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 08:26 AM

I find it interesting that the so-called Christians who are so offended by Harry Potter and the LOTR are, in effect, saying they believe magic and wizards and such are real. It seems they are actually giving power to the things they hate. Not real bright, these fundies.

As for a definition of Christianity, I wish our born again President would pull his head out of the vengeful portions of the Old Testament and read the bits about "Thou shalt not kill" and "Love thy enemy" and "The greatest of these is love".

John Peekstok

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: John P
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 08:43 AM

Gargoyle,
There are at least 85 active threads about music right now. Go read them. Don't you have anything better to do with your time than to open threads that are obviously not about music just to bitch about the fact that they are not about music? Get a life, man. Or, if you really want to be part of this thread, how about a discussion of the religious overtones vs. the magical nature of many of Tolkien's poems, and how they might be percieved by fundamentalist Christians?

I can see you are having fun with HTML, but your posts are starting to look like Dr. Bronner's soap bottles or flyers put out by whacko numerologists. Most of us can understand your points without the amateur graphical emphasis.

John Peekstok

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Geoph
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 08:46 AM

For those interested in the "theology" behind LOTR, read Tolkein's "The Silmarillion" (I think I got that right) which deals with the history of early Middle Earth all the way back to its creation.

I am looking forward to the movie, as it appears from the trailers that they got it right this time. However, those purists looking for a word-for-word transcription of the "Fellowship" may be disappointed since that is very difficult when putting a book onto the screen. I think the main problem with the early attempts, besides the fact that they were done very cheaply, is that they treated the subject as a children's story rather than the epic adventure it really is. Too much Disney influence in our culture. Oops, is that a fundamentalist opinion? d8^)

Geoph

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: John P
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 08:52 AM

Re: music for Tolkien lyrics: I thought the music by Flanders and Swan was terrible. It was classical art music. The lyrics are strongly rhythmic in a very primal way and the music missed that entirely. If you've never read Tolkien's poetry out loud, you should try it. I've only written music to one Tolkien song, "The Man in the Moon". I thought it worked pretty well, and have always intended to write more, but I always seem to have other more immediately practical projects in hand.

John Peekstok

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 10:49 AM

Murray, let me get this straight: you aren't a Christian, but you have appropriated to yourself the right to tell everyone here what Christianity consists of? Talk about hubris.

Get off your soapbox and go read some of the church fathers BESIDES Augustine and his croneys.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Naemanson
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 12:26 PM

Alex, I'm afraid I have to side with Murray on this. The writings of the church fathers (not mothers?) tend to be an individualistic interpretation and rationalization of the basic document.

Regarding the actions of the US versus the "Evil Ones" Mr. Bush needs to reread that section of the Bible that says "Thou Shalt Not Kill." There are no subclauses or exceptions. I think we have an oppotunity to look for a new way to pursue justice. We should look for a way other than bombs and machine guns. However, that would not be as politically convenient as the bombs.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Geoph
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 12:51 PM

Ahem, Of course, immediately after that part where "Thou shalt not kill" was inscribed onto the tablets along with the other 14, oops, make that 9 commandments, Moses came down from the mountain and immediately commenced to killing all of those who became Golden Calf worshippers in his absence.

Geoph

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Art Thieme
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 01:27 PM

Garg,

I'll rage against the storm when it's important enough to warrsnt that. -- Like how very similar to a moron George Bush has turned out to actually be after, first, stealing an American election, and then pulling crap very much like Joe Stalin and creating a seeming dictatorship here that threatens to bipass the Constitution, Congress and the judicial system (not to mention We The People in order to set up on-the-spot kangaroo courts that hang people as soon as their self-manufactured tribunals come to their instant verdicts of guilty. Some things are important. Folk stuff, as much as I've dedicated myself to it over the years while striving to make myself a decent sized fish in our little pond, is only a temporary collection of water in a low spot under a viaduct when compared to other more real problems that threaten to swamp us.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 06:37 PM

Naem:

And Augustine isn't? Puh-leeze.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 10:23 PM

Dear Geoph the Biblical scholar.

The Sixth Commandment does NOT read : 'Thou shalt not kill'.

The correct translation from the Hebrew or the Greek is: 'Thou shalt not murder'.

In the Latin Vulgate translation. The author of that translation, Saint Jerome (died in 420), spent much of his career in the Land of Israel, where he consulted frequently with Jewish scholars whose interpretations he often cites with great respect. Even the Septuagint, the old Greek translation of the Bible, translated the commandment with a word that means "murder" rather than "kill." St. Augustine, basing himself on the standard translations, made it clear that the commandment does not extend to wars or capital punishment that are explicitly ordained by God.

Try these sites for explanations of this greatly misunderstood commandment. The agreement is plain amongst Jews, Catholics and Protestants, the meaning is "MURDER."

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/Shokel/001102_ThouShaltNotMurder.html

http://dcwi.com/~faithch/sermons/1998/98.3.1.htm

It is clear within the Bible that there times for killing and war.

Your Humble Servant,
Gargoyle

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 30 Nov 01 - 10:27 PM

Art, Joe and John.....
You are right it IS a good thread.

Sorry the html offends. Learned it here. Will continue.

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Coyote Breath
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 01:29 AM

as a fun-duh-mentalist christian I am offended by all the above except for spaw's contribution. Was that REALLY the result of meds? As a cheese-head, I have relatives with a small dairy farm near Burlington who fit your description of "paw" I wonder if we're cuzzins?!?

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Geoph
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 04:49 AM

"Dear Geoph the Biblical scholar.

The Sixth Commandment does NOT read : 'Thou shalt not kill'." The correct translation from the Hebrew or the Greek is: 'Thou shalt not murder'.

Gargoyle:

Thank you for pointing out the accurate translation. Actually, I am quite aware of the veracity of the above statement. In fact, I almost pointed that out in my post, but was too lazy to support the statement and declined. And besides, I'm not particularly interested in debating theology at this point in my life. Finally, its much more fun to come in with a quick quip and run.

Geoph

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: John P
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 07:55 AM

Coyote Breath,
As a fundamentalist Christian, are you offended by Harry Potter and/or The Lord of the Rings? If so, why? And if so, do you think the fact that they offend you means that others should be prevented from reading or viewing them?

John Peekstok

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 10:07 AM

I mentioned on the other thread and I'll mention it again here. I would challenge anyone to read the books within the Bible and those within the Silmarilion and then say honestly which they think is the accepted religion and which is the work of fantasy. Given long enough I reckon someone could come up with enough 'historical proof' for the Silmarilion as well!

No-one has mentioned Denis Wheatley yet either. As a teenager I read all of em (Think they are p"£$ poor now but I was only young then:)). 'The devil rides out' and 'They used dark forces' are the ones I remember - full of Satanism, Witchcraft and Wizardry - but with a Christianity always wins type motto. The later was Nazi/Satanist/Jewish/Christian twoddle at it's complete worse if I remember rightly!

What do the fanatics (they are not Christian, or Muslim, or any other religion in my mind just nutters) think of those? Are they OK because the 'goodies' always win? Makes me wonder how these bigots work!

Cheers

Dave the Gnome
(Gnomism is a religion in its own right btw. Once we have sat for years looking at the same pond we will tollerate anything!)

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Art Thieme
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 10:21 AM

Getting interested in things theological late in life or on one's deathbed is a bit like cramming for finals to my mind. Panic cramming rarely ever does the trick (so to speak). It's like trying to convince yourself you weren't gay all those decades after you've become impotent and Viagra don't work for ya.

Art

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Coyote Breath
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 11:28 AM

John P, naw in reality, very little actually offends me. I am a fun(duh)mentalist human. Or something. And never, never, never, would I EVER try to stop anyone from exploring, or learning, or experiencing, anything (well, as long as it's not harmful and inappropriate to OTHERS)! I love LoTR and I'm sure that when I go to see the Harry Potter movie I'll enjoy it as much as it's artistry allows (I mean if its a rotten film, I won't enjoy it, cinematically speaking.) I have strong beliefs or rather I should say I have strong opinions about many things. I was Joking, fergawdsake. I feel (look out, here comes an opinion!) that there is too much ranting going on in this world. spaw's thing was a giggle to me.

CB

PS I just sent my boxed edition(s) of JRRT's 'Hobbit and Lord of the Rings to my daughter Molly who remembers fondly my reading them to her and her younger sister, lo these many years ago She wants to read them to her daughter. I doubt I'll get them back (sigh)

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: catspaw49
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 11:34 AM

CB, I'm glad you got a chuckle and I thank you for saying so. I agree there is too much ranting and not enough laughing. So if it gave anyone a giggle or two, then I'm happy.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Coyote Breath
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 12:22 PM

hey spaw!I just figured out why I'm sitting here on a Saturday morning jumping back and forth through the Mudcat (well besides I love this site and I have a near cord of firewood to split). It reminds me of the old radio days when we kids would sit around the Fairbanks-Morse listening to "Lets Pretend" and "Grand Central Station" sheesh!

CB

Subject: RE: BS: IsL. OfRings offensive to fundamenta.too
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 01:39 PM

W.C. Fields was anything but a religious man. When he was on his deathbed, someone walked into the room and found him leafing through the Bible.

"Bill, I'm surprised," said the visitor. "I thought you didn't believe in that sort of thing."

Fields answered, "Just looking for loopholes."

Don Firth

Subject: Lord of Rings offensive to fundamentalists?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 07:19 PM

Yeah, I suppose it's not a good idea to look to the Church Fathers for definitive statements, even though there is great value in their writings. They were theologians, and theologians are likely to have their own opinions. Theology is not doctrine - it attempts to bring about an understanding of doctrine, within the context of the current age. That understanding helps people make the faith their own, so that their faith is not just an obedient acceptance of a list of "facts" they are required to believe.

As I see it in this context, "rationalization" is using intelligence to find loopholes in matters of faith, while "theology" is using intelligence to find understanding in matters of faith. The works of the Church Fathers were theology, not rationalization.

Faith does not require abandonment of intelligence. Many religious traditions encourage intelligent questioning and discussion of doctrine. It's only the fundamentalists who are required to check their brains at the door.

As for doctrine, which is the official teaching of a religious group, I think I'd rely on the Nicene Creed of AD 325 as a fairly comprehensive statement. It is shared by most Christian groups. That's not the case with "the Fundamentals" that Murray cited, which come from a series of pamphlets published with oil company money in the early 20th century. "The Fundamentals" are the source of the name "fundamentalism" and they give a pretty good summary of conservative Christian belief. "Mainstream" Christians have trouble with the fundamentals.

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 01 Dec 01 - 09:18 PM

Boy, this thread has wandered. It's not a thread, it's a tapestry. To go back to where it started, when the question was about FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIANS, and then wandered into "Christians," then on to Nazis, I just want to add a simple point. When one of my sons was in High School, he wrote a term paper on the Christian imagery in Lord of the Rings. I thought he made many excellent points... enough that it is one of the few school papers that I saved. I read the Hobbit and the whole trilogy to my sons TWICE when they were kids, and as a christian, I didn't find anything even mildly bothersome. When you start talking about "Christians," it's like talking about "folksingers." Generalizations are comforting, but don't mean a whole lot.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Mark Clark
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 01:26 AM

Christian imagery—that's an interesting idea. Several Tolkien characters are given god-like powers, which character would you say is closest to a creator in the Judeo-Christian sense—the Father person in the Triune Godhead?

I'm guessing that Gandalf would be regarded as a “Christ” figure because of his entry into the netherworld at the hands of the balrog and his subsequent reappearance in a glorified form.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 04:17 AM

I dunno. I read The Hobbit and the trilogy when I was a Catholic seminary student, and didn't get any Christian imagery out of it at all. It was just a good story.

We had to watch Bergman films when I was in the seminary, and then there was all this discussion about characters who were Christ-figures in the movies. I thought the movies were boring, but I was in the minority. I didn't get the Christ-figure stuff at all.

Now, Ingrid Bergman is another story. She was far more interesting. I guess that's why did didn't make it into the priesthood, huh?

Yes, but we'll always have Paris...

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 05:44 AM

I would think Gandalf is more of a druidic (old religion) type of figure, closer to a Merlin perhaps, than to anything found in the Christian mythology.

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Mark Clark
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 09:45 AM

Well, sure. I didn't mean to indicate I thought Gandalf was a Christ figure necessarily, I was just supposing—if one found Christian imagery in “Lord of the Rings”—that Gandalf would be the most likely candidate.

Arguably the most god-like inhabitant of Middle Earth is Tom Bombadil. He seems to have more absolute power than any other character. So much so, that he simply doesn't care what the other characters are doing. He leaves them to play their games, secure in the knowledge that nothing they do will have any effect on him.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Tiger
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 12:05 PM

If it bothers you, don't read it.

Next act!

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 12:12 PM

I read Tolkien about the same time I read The Beowulf - Tolkien was an Old English scholar (or was it Middle English?), and there certainly was a connection there. I didn't find any religious connotations, and I'm glad I didn't. I was reading for fun, and every volume was sheer pleasure.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 12:23 PM

My feeling on all this would be that the Lord of the Rings is shot through with imagery and and patterns of thought that echo traditional Catholicism much more strongly than other varieties of Christianity. Which is what you would expect of a Catholic, of Tolkien's generation especially.

So for example the hymn to Elebereth is very reminiscent of Catholic hymns to Our Lady

Snow-white! Snow-white! O Lady clear!
O Queen beyond the Western Seas!
O Light to us that wander here
Amid the world of woven trees!

Gilthoniel! O Elbereth!
Clear are thy eyes and bright thy breath,
Snow-white! Snow-white! We sing to thee
In a far land beyond the sea.
O stars that in the Sunless Year
With shining hand by her were sown,
In windy fields now bright and clear
We see your silver blossom blown!

O Elbereth! Gilthoniel!
We still remember, we who dwell
In this far land beneath the trees,
Thy Starlight on the Western Seas.

Compare tyhis to the mediaeval Salve Regina:

Hail, holy Queen, Mother of Mercy!
Hail, our life, our sweetness, and our hope!
To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve,
to thee do we send up our sighs,
mourning and weeping in this valley, of tears.

Turn, then, most gracious advocate,
thine eyes of mercy toward us;
and after this our exile
show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb Jesus;
O clement, O loving, O sweet virgin Mary.
Pray for us, O holy Mother of God
That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.

Or again compare it to what I think is the loveliest of the Mary hymns, written in the 18th century:

Hail, Queen of Heaven, the ocean star,
Guide of the wand'rer here below:
Thrown on life's surge, we claim thy care -
Save us from peril and from woe.
Mother of Christ, star of the sea,
Pray for the wanderer, pray for me.

Sojourners in this vale of tears,
To thee, blest advocate, we cry;
Pity our sorrows, calm our fears,
And soothe with hope our misery.
Refuge in grief, star of the sea,
Pray for the mourner, pray for me.

To save myself typing out the Elbereth hymn I used a search engine to find someone who had already done that, and found this essay about this very thing, which makes interesting reading (though I'd distance myself from some of the writer's views).

And in relation to Tolkien and "fundamentalists", I would expect that these very aspects of his writing would in themselves be sufficient reason for some varieties of "fundamentalists" to see the book as unwholesome and dangerous.

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: catspaw49
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 12:41 PM

This should surprise no one, but to be the odd man out here, I really never enjoyed Tolkein. I read it because it was the thing everyone was doing and I never had a clue about any of it. My apologies to one and all, but the stuff just seemed completely screwed and I never saw the point. The movie looks equally weird, but cinematic in the extreme so it should do well.

I feel the same about the Bible too so I'm a equal opps dumbshit and adding LotR to the Twain quote pretty well sums it up: "It's not the parts of the Bible and Lord of the Rings that I don't understand that bother me, it's the parts I DO understand."

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 12:49 PM

Among Tolkien scholars, there is a lot of speculation about Tom Bombadil. He and Goldberry are the "odd characters out." They only appear at one point in the story and take no part other than to save the travelers from a couple of bad situations and help them on their way. Yet they are such delightful characters and so finely-drawn that they seem to leave a profound effect on most readers. Ask people to "name your favorite characters in Lord of the Rings," and early in many people's lists, the name of Tom Bombadil appears. Many literary critics analysing LotR say that Tom Bombadil represents Nature. Kind, helpful, happy, aloof, he is essentially immune to what hobbits, wizards, humans, and evil forces do.

Judging from looking at the website and the cast list, apparently Tom Bombadil didn't make it into the movie. He doesn't actually further the narrative, and since they undoubtedly had to cut a lot, I guess they figured he wasn't really essential to the plot. I can understand their reasoning, but it is unfortunate. Tom Bombadil and Goldberry are fascinating characters and a sort of oasis of calm and safety in the Fellowship's dangerous quest.

One can find symbolism in practically anything, and I'd be surprised if Tolkien didn't have a lot of symbolism in mind, but I personally take LotR as what it appears to be: a marvelous epic adventure story. Gandalf? Yeah, I can see that. But to me, since Frodo agrees to take the burden of the Ring on himself, he is the most obvious Christ figure.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: catspaw49
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 12:54 PM

I think the symbolism is what bothers me most......way too much clanging.

Seriously, was there ANY piece of "IN" reading back in the 60's that wasn't just et up with symbolism? I remember discussing "Lord of the Flies" about 4139 times during the decade. Maybe it was just a good peeriod for "Lord" stuff....Ring, Flies, Jim................

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Art Thieme
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 01:11 PM

I think the most God-like character in L.O.T.R. is Gollum. He gets invisible when he chooses. The Christ-like guy is Frodo. He takes over and finds out how to do that too.

MAGIC is nothing more than a group of people having the knowledge and the will and the knowhow to do things that others are ignorant of. DOCTORS in our society are the closer to practitioners of magic than anyone else. Nobody knows how to do the things they can do regularly---after having spent YEARS learning those SECRETS in medical school. Having had several spinal surgeries allowed me to see some of that MAGIC in person when the neurosurgeons on the same floor I was on aimed their lasers THROUGH THE SKULL of someone with a brain tumor. The place INSIDE THAT SKULL where the lasers focused and met and is where the tumor would be blasted into smithereens while making NO ACTUAL INCISION AT ALL. In the old days, somebody who could do those kinds of things, seemingly magical things, was burned at the stake as a witch.

Folks, the ladies of old had the erb lore knowledge to do medicinal things that seemed magical. They were killed off by those who saw bad stuff in that knowledge---people who who had no understanding or tolerance of some pretty amazing and beneficial things.

That's what people now-a-days who are scared out of their wits by lovely fairy tales are doing when they perpetuate those old narrow attitudes and the fears of fear itself.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 01:59 PM

"A sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." -- Arthur C. Clarke.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Mark Clark
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 02:00 PM

Until I saw this thread, it had never occurred to me that “Lord of the Rings” had any deep symbolic meaning. I regarded as a great story and perhaps one of the most intricate and complete mythologies to have been created—certainly by a single intelect. Consider that Tolkien not only created the characters and the plot, he also created more or less complete histories for all the various peoples, languages for each of the peoples and poetry in most of the invented languages.

The idea that Tolkien's work could be offensive to some religious viewpoint had never crossed my mind. It still seems incredible as I think about it now. But, as I try always to be ready to consider new viewpoints, I'm doing my best with this one.

I'm sure sorry to hear that Bombadil was deleted. I think his inclusion is necessary for a full understanding of the forces driving the characters and the nature of Middle Earth itself.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 02:03 PM

I'm not really sure, Mark. I just wasn't able to find Tom Bombadil in the cast list.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 02:16 PM

Uh-oh! I just put "movie" and "Tom Bombadil" in google.com's Advanced Search and came up with this. I did a quick check on a couple of the links and it looks like a pretty interesting site for LotR buffs (I'm be there for awhile).

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: GUEST,Merlin
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 03:25 PM

How can either Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter be offensive? In Harry Potter, he is saved by the love of his parents, and his friends. In Lord of the Rings, the bad guys, Sauron and the Ringwraiths, are pure evil, and get their butts kicked. The Elves are pure good. The good guys are willing to sacrifice everything they care about to destroy this evil. How can this be offensive to people who call themselves Christian, a religion which is supposed to value love and goodness (in my experiance)?

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Hippie Chick
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 03:46 PM

I love the Harry Potter books. It is a great fantasy series and both is imaginative of itself and promotes use of imagination in readers. I am also a Christian, and I have no problems with it. I love the Narnia series, the Wizard of Oz, the Xanth series, The Mists of Avalon, etc. People who are concerned about evil need to lighten up on literature and start looking at a culture and society which sells our jobs overseas and perverts the election process, and......you see where I'm standing,

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 04:28 PM

Don Firth, I think I agree with you. When I was reflecting upon who Tom Bombadil might represent in older mythologies (if anyone), I thought of the Green Man and Pan.

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Art Thieme
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 06:37 PM

The ents are Green Men personified. What about Sir Gawain and the Green Knight?? (And The Clay People in the Buster Crabbe version of Flash Gordon??? And Ming the Merciless?? Hitler maybe? And Thun, king of the Lion Men? and Voltan the fat king with wings and the rest from the Sky City???) This could go on and on... God, Jehovah, and all the other hundreds if not thousands of Masks Of gods (or masks of God)...?

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 06:47 PM

Come to that, I've always been a bit suspicious of Kermit the Frog.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 07:06 PM

It's not easy being green

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 07:11 PM

You missed out Father Christmas, Art. (He always used to wear green till the Coca Cola moved in on him. Check withthe Christmas Carol.)

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Art Thieme
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 07:17 PM

Pan must be Coyote.

Art ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Is Lord of Rings offensive to fundament. too
From: Art Thieme
Date: 02 Dec 01 - 07:20 PM

And in the spanish speaking world, Pan = bread.

In the hip world bread = money.

Art