I concede, Tolkien was an Amillennialist

[RamistThomist]

I used to stringently hold that Tolkien was postmillennial because of the earthly victory of the good guys in LOTR--and I still see that earthly victory there. But I confess that his characters and mentality was more amillennial than anything else.

I got this from Doug Wilson

Nobility and the North:

In his great essay "œBeowulf: The Monsters and the Critics," Tolkien said this. "œThe high tone, the sense of dignity, alone is evidence in Beowulf of the presence of a mind lofty and thoughtful" (p. 13).

A bit later, he says, "œOne of the most potent elements in that fusion is the Northern courage: the theory of courage, which is the great contribution of early Northern literature . . . I refer rather to the central position the creed of unyielding will holds in the North" (Monster, p. 20-21)

In this ancient view, defeat is no refutation. This view was picked up and transformed by the Christian vision, but not reversed. Heaven awaits, but earthly history is still grim. We have an early, noble "œamillennialism."

"œNow the heroic figures, the men of old, haeleth under heofenum, remained and still fought on until defeat. For the monsters do not depart, whether the gods go or come. A Christian was (and is) still like his forefathers a mortal hemmed in a hostile world . . . The tragedy of the great temporal defeat remains for a while poignant, but ceases to be finally important" (Monster and the Critics, p. 22).

To my amillennial friends on PB:
I am sorry for the grief I have given if I have been too tenacious for postmillennialism.
I still hold to post-mil, but I appreciate more and more the work that amillers do as well.

Cheers to all!

 

[turmeric]

Maybe he was a historicist as well - notice how Sauron keeps re-surfacing?

 

[cornelius vantil]

jacob i agree while i am commited postmill. myself i have greatly learned from my amill. brethren even at times when the disloge gets fustrating, in the end we all confessing the historic reformed faith

 

[Poimen]

Originally posted by Draught Horse

To my amillennial friends on PB:
I am sorry for the grief I have given if I have been too tenacious for postmillennialism. I still hold to post-mil, but I appreciate more and more the work that amillers do as well.

Cheers to all!

Thanks brother. I personally appreciate your comments here.

[Edited on 4-30-2005 by poimen]

 

[Robin]

Hey Jacob....it takes a man, stepping into a larger world than himself, to talk like that! Bravo!

Now, if we could perhaps persuade you to consider Paul is Amil?

Seriously (but I am being serious) though....Tolkien's letters reveal some remarkable awarenesses he had! (I may have already mentioned this quite awhile back?) His letters to his sons during the war - explaining his reasons for writing LOTR and how they were dealing with the Blitz, etc., impart that the Professor had a sound understanding of Redemptive history - the suffering would only ultimately be intervened by the "Return of the King." (The non-allegorical use of typology is used throughout his writings.)

You'll be way ahead of Mr. Wilson if you read it for yourself:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0618056998/qid



R.

[Edited on 4-30-2005 by Robin]

 

[Puritan Sailor]

If Tolkien were writing to picture Christian faith then I would agree with you Jacob. But he wasn't advancing any Christian typology. He was writing to create a mythology for the English language. We dealt extensively with this in another thread a while back. Notice 2 of my posts quoting Tolkien's own explaination of his story.

http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=3234#pid37417

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Don't worry, Jacob, Roman Catholics are not known for espousing postmillennialism anyway. Just enjoy the LOTR story regardless. Tolkien's account of creation in The Silmarillion has much more problematic theological issues, In my humble opinion. But I love reading that too. Tolkien was a storyteller of the highest order, but for theology, I prefer Bunyan.

 

[Robin]

Originally posted by puritansailor
If Tolkien were writing to picture Christian faith then I would agree with you Jacob. But he wasn't advancing any Christian typology. He was writing to create a mythology for the English language.

Absolutely, Patrick....Tolkien was simply writing and things came out that way (his Biblical scholarship peeking through.) He had a host of themes to pick from: the tree of the King; white rider; Garden of Eden motifs; angelic life; the King sojourning in guise of a pilgrim; healer; warrior...on and on...

It's just great fun to notice the references. Of course they are not coherently (allegorical) pointing to Scripture.

It is far better to search for Paul's eschatology (rather than DeMar's; Gentry's; Wilson's; Tolkien's; Bahnsen's; Riddlebarger's, et al.)



r.