|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Lord of the Rings vs. The Bible
|
lilyswinburne
Shipmate
# 12934
|
Posted
I am seriously trying to read the entire Bible this year, but am put off by all the OT violence. It occurred to me last night that the Lord of the Rings (which I read *religiously* and repeatedly as an adolescent) is actually much clearer about the nature of evil and why the bad guys deserve death. I just can't understand why the God of the Bible allows such acts as David's killing and foreskin-scalping of 200 Philistines - what did they do that was wrong? Are they the Orcs of the Bible? If so, that plot thread is not very clear.
Then I wondered, in terms of some sort of daily devotional reading, if I wouldn't be better off with the Lord of the Rings than the Bible. Would reading a bit of the Lord of the Rings every day make me a better person?
Posts: 112 | From: California | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
I think of two responses.
(a) To your last question: Yes. I wish we could talk many people into reading LOTR.
(b) Reading Tolkien's work is not a substitute for reading the Bible. There are noticeable differences between the two. Tolkien is not writing directly about our world. He is writing of a fictional reality heavily influenced by the Anglo-Saxon "Genesis" and so by "Paradise Lost". In LOTR, many of the enemies are not human, do not look human, and the good guys kill them without compunction. (There are a few examples the other way.) This does not match our ordinary life, not life in Biblical times. When Samson kills Philistines, he knows perfectly well these are human beings. There are no Orcs in the Bible.
As for David's exploits: Many characters in the Old Testament do things we cannot admire, and it is not always clear God approves of their actions either.
Posts: 860 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
There is an old thread here called, This is in the Bible- but it stinks. IMHO---
It might help you get more perspective on some of the stuff you find in the Bible.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 16861 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
foreskin-scalping
This coinage gives a new perspective to the expression, dickhead.
Posts: 6878 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
Some thoughts on the OP:
1. The Bible isn't a book. It's a whole set of writings, spanning ages and places and genres, intended for a variety of audiences. While you can argue that there's a "plot" (i.e., God's creative, sustaining and redemptive love for humankind and involvement in the human story) running throughout, that's more of a theological observation than a literary one. The individual books do not speak with one voice.
2. Context is everything. If you're a scraggly, beleagured ethnic/religious minority constantly being invaded or enslaved or otherwise put in danger of disappearing as a people, you will perceive extraordinary instances of military success despite long odds as signs of God's special providence; and you'll tend to view hostile or culturally aggressive non-members of your people not only as your enemies but enemies of God. So what is obviously genocide in our 21st century perspective might well have been interpreted as the just "wrath of God" by the victors and their descendants.
3. Related point: Scripture is often descriptive, not perscriptive -- in other words, descriptions of military and other atrocities are not an ipso facto divine benediction upon such things. And even if your particular theological p.o.v. pushes you into a corner where you have to conclude that God initiated/approved of this or that Bad Thing because the Bible appears to say so -- to paraphrase Martin Luther, we aren't God, and God in God's wisdom and sovereignty can do things that we humans shouldn't. Deus absconditus (the God "hidden" in what seem to be ungodly situations) and all that.
4. One can argue that the level of theological in and moral insight rises as Judaism progresses -- the earlier parts of the Bible may portray God and God's activity in the world in very concrete, simplistic, anthropomorphized ways, while prophets like Isaiah and NT writers like Paul show a much more sophisticated understanding of God.
5. Try to think of the Bible less as a manual of rules and more a set of thought-provoking stories that raise good, challenging questions about "life, the universe and everything." If you read Jewish commentaries on the OT, for instance, you'll see that questing, questioning spirit regarding the Law -- how does one best love God and love one's neighbor?
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 5881 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Nigel M
Shipmate
# 11256
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
Would reading a bit of the Lord of the Rings every day make me a better person?
It probably depends which set of characters you most identify with, lilyswinburne! Wizards, Hobbits, Kings of the North, Balrogs...
Ditto the bible.
Posts: 2271 | From: London, UK | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilyswinburne
Shipmate
# 12934
|
Posted
My point is, if I were a person with no cultural knowledge of either the Bible or the Lord of the Rings, I would prefer to read the Lord of the Rings, since the violence in LOR is clearly directed against evil, and not against people who just happened to be designated "enemies" for some mysterious reason.
My theological point of view is that the Bible is a myth, and there are better myths.
Posts: 112 | From: California | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilyswinburne
Shipmate
# 12934
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nigel M:
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
Would reading a bit of the Lord of the Rings every day make me a better person?
It probably depends which set of characters you most identify with, lilyswinburne! Wizards, Hobbits, Kings of the North, Balrogs...
Ditto the bible.
Pardon double post - I identify with Gandalf! Especially when he struggled with the Balrog.
Perhaps I should switch from the Ship to a LOR board!
Posts: 112 | From: California | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
See my sig: quote:
Fantasy is an idea we cling to in order to escape reality. Faith is an idea we cling to in order to have that courage to face it. Simple as that. ~Rabbi Shais Taub
Tolkien wrote LotR as a well-crafted fantasy that speaks to us on different levels. It's well worth reading and even inspiring, IMO. But the Bible was written by people who didn't see their written experiences and reflections as fantasy, but as ideas inspired by God about realities the writers experienced personally or through oral traditions. Reality is there in all its messiness and human failure, and all the things people really have to learn the hard way because no one in this life is going to rewrite people's personalities as if they were characters.
--------------------
The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. ~Douglas Adams
Posts: 18612 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
My theological point of view is that the Bible is a myth, and there are better myths.
A whole number of myths, not necessarily consistent. Genesis chapter 1 is a different creation myth from chapter 2. There are diametrically opposite views of kingship.
Whereas Tolkien is presenting a tidy mythology from one person's perspective.
The Bible presents a whole range of experiences of God of a whole people.
--------------------
Jack: That, my dear Algy, is the whole truth pure and simple.
Algernon: The truth is rarely pure and never simple. Modern life would be very tedious if it were either, and modern literature a complete impossibility!
Posts: 1755 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
My point is, if I were a person with no cultural knowledge of either the Bible or the Lord of the Rings, I would prefer to read the Lord of the Rings, since the violence in LOR is clearly directed against evil, and not against people who just happened to be designated "enemies" for some mysterious reason.
While I think there are plenty of examples in the OT to justify your discomfort, I have to point out that the story you used as an example was not God directing David to collect foreskins. It was that batshit crazy King Saul who did so. True, he was God's anointed king, but nothing in the story suggest this was anything but Saul's dumb idea.
--------------------
When naming your legendary weapon, remember - Everyone has a "Soul Reaper" or a "Dragon's Flame" but what enemy can live down the shame of being slain by the "Fluffy Bunny"? --Original source undetermined
Posts: 25577 | From: Waves and seagulls, football crowds, and churchbells. | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trudy Scrumptious
BBE Shieldmaiden
# 5647
|
Posted
No, God would have been all for killing the 100 Philistines though ... cutting off the foreskins was just Saul's crazy addition to God's deadly plan.
As mentioned elsewhere, I am also in the midst (actually nearing the end) of a read-through-the-Bible-in-a-year project and am having similar problems with it.
--------------------
On Wednesdays I video-blog about writing.
Posts: 6208 | From: Closer to Paris than I am to Vancouver | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
No, God would have been all for killing the 100 Philistines though.
True. At that point in narrative time, if you had to pull a stunt like that you pulled it on the Philistines.
I dunno, it doesn't bother me as much as it used to, because I figure the Philistines had a scroll or two of quasi-historical braggadocio lying around in their own temples gloatingly detailing all the elaborate things they did to the Hebrews, and how they so deserved it because they were nasty, nasty folk. That's just how people wrote in those days. I just kind of work around it.
(However, I will still quickly argue that the character of Saul was developed as becoming more and more batshit as time went on-- as much as everyone agreed the philistines were despicable, I wouldn't be surprised if this little detail was meant to elicit a "Whoa, dude! overkill!"
Either that or there is some culturally specific meaning to collecting foreskins that I am not getting.)
[ 17. March 2012, 20:18: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
When naming your legendary weapon, remember - Everyone has a "Soul Reaper" or a "Dragon's Flame" but what enemy can live down the shame of being slain by the "Fluffy Bunny"? --Original source undetermined
Posts: 25577 | From: Waves and seagulls, football crowds, and churchbells. | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
The world of bronze age man according to the Bible seemed to be one of kill or be killed by enemies and make deals with allies which will last until one side lets the other down and they become enemies.
The Israelites were circumcised as their sign of the covenant with God. The foreskins proved that the people David killed were enemies. The Philistines were such warriors that Saul hoped that David would be killed rather than collect the brideprice for his daughter (1Sam 18:21). Saul had distanced himself from God and so all was not going well for him, while all was going well for David who was loyal to God.
It's interesting that sex and violence seem to be well sought after in movies and books but are often frowned upon in the stories of the Old Testament. The story of David's exploits knocks many others into a cocked hat imv.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 1106 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
...
The Israelites were circumcised as their sign of the covenant with God. The foreskins proved that the people David killed were enemies....
Oh that's a good point. Actually given David's actions later, that was a pretty wise precaution.
Posts: 898 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
The story of David's exploits knocks many others into a cocked hat imv.
Another example of consistent character development. David consistently thinks with his dick.
--------------------
When naming your legendary weapon, remember - Everyone has a "Soul Reaper" or a "Dragon's Flame" but what enemy can live down the shame of being slain by the "Fluffy Bunny"? --Original source undetermined
Posts: 25577 | From: Waves and seagulls, football crowds, and churchbells. | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Tolkien wrote LotR as a well-crafted fantasy that speaks to us on different levels. It's well worth reading and even inspiring, IMO. But the Bible was written by people who didn't see their written experiences and reflections as fantasy, but as ideas inspired by God about realities the writers experienced personally or through oral traditions. Reality is there in all its messiness and human failure, and all the things people really have to learn the hard way because no one in this life is going to rewrite people's personalities as if they were characters.
This is what it is for me. As long as the real world is as messy and horrible and morally unclear as it is, I really can't quarrel with the Bible reflecting that. In fact I would be suspicious of anything claiming to be God's Word that reflected the world as a more orderly, moral, and just place than it really is. That would say to me "unreality" or possibly "let's stick our fingers in our ears and say la la la together."
Nobody LIKES to read a diagnosis of cancer. But it would be worse to read a diagnosis of (say) acne when in fact the disease was cancer, especially if you suspected as much.
I go to LOTR for different reasons than I go to the Bible. LOTR is escapist fantasy in the best way--we all need to escape sometime, and Middlearth is a decent choice of destination. But when I've got to deal with the real world, give me the Bible. Even (and especially?) the parts I don't "get" yet. Because there's an awful lot of reality I don't get either, and maybe if I grow into understanding more of the Bible, it'll help with the rest of reality as well.
--------------------
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 14360 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Yeah, I was thinking about the moral ambiguity. The Bible (at least the parts we are currently discussing) is like LOTR as scripted by David Lynch or Takashi Shimizu. And I admire those guys.
Also, the Bible is multi-genred-- so you will find your escapist good vs evil catharsis in Daniel and Revelations.
[ 17. March 2012, 23:20: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
When naming your legendary weapon, remember - Everyone has a "Soul Reaper" or a "Dragon's Flame" but what enemy can live down the shame of being slain by the "Fluffy Bunny"? --Original source undetermined
Posts: 25577 | From: Waves and seagulls, football crowds, and churchbells. | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Oh, twiddle my... imagine a literalist version of the Book of Daniel, scripted by Joss Whedon and directed by Gillam. No, Cronenburg!
--------------------
When naming your legendary weapon, remember - Everyone has a "Soul Reaper" or a "Dragon's Flame" but what enemy can live down the shame of being slain by the "Fluffy Bunny"? --Original source undetermined
Posts: 25577 | From: Waves and seagulls, football crowds, and churchbells. | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Yeah! They finally have the special effects to do those bizarro Biblical books justice on film.
And do I remember correctly that there is now a video game based on Revelation? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Nah. Just googled it and I've confused Myst IV and Assassin's Creed, both with Revelations in their full titles.
I'm surprised that some Christian literalist, computer game writer hasn't mined that obvious winner, though. ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. ~Douglas Adams
Posts: 18612 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Yeah! They finally have the special effects to do those bizarro Biblical books justice on film.
Somehow I don't think the movie made of Ezekiel is going to be a blockbuster.
Posts: 22304 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Maybe not, but the people who liked "Naked Lunch" would probably see it.
--------------------
When naming your legendary weapon, remember - Everyone has a "Soul Reaper" or a "Dragon's Flame" but what enemy can live down the shame of being slain by the "Fluffy Bunny"? --Original source undetermined
Posts: 25577 | From: Waves and seagulls, football crowds, and churchbells. | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselm
Shipmate
# 4499
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilyswinburne:
Would reading a bit of the Lord of the Rings every day make me a better person?
I know people who've tried this and there would be some debate as to whether they were 'better'
Perhaps consider this wedding.
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
The Israelites were circumcised as their sign of the covenant with God. The foreskins proved that the people David killed were enemies....
Oh that's a good point. Actually given David's actions later, that was a pretty wise precaution.
Not sure you could call this action a PRE-caution, perhaps 'POSTcaution'? ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
--------------------
carpe diem domini
...seize the day to play dominoes?
Posts: 2523 | From: The Scriptorium | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Yeah! They finally have the special effects to do those bizarro Biblical books justice on film.
Somehow I don't think the movie made of Ezekiel is going to be a blockbuster.
Hang on. Ezekiel has wonderful visual imagery. It even has something like narrative.
It could be a cult art house film if someone wanted.
Now Leviticus would be a challenge.
--------------------
Jack: That, my dear Algy, is the whole truth pure and simple.
Algernon: The truth is rarely pure and never simple. Modern life would be very tedious if it were either, and modern literature a complete impossibility!
Posts: 1755 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
The Song of Songs might make a nice film or perhaps an opera, but it might need an R rating.
Posts: 860 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Adrian Lyne for Song of Solomon, and maybe Morgan Spurlock could take on Leviticus. He did well animating various food rules and regulations in "Super Size Me."
--------------------
When naming your legendary weapon, remember - Everyone has a "Soul Reaper" or a "Dragon's Flame" but what enemy can live down the shame of being slain by the "Fluffy Bunny"? --Original source undetermined
Posts: 25577 | From: Waves and seagulls, football crowds, and churchbells. | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
