Saga The Immaculate Conception -- Terrific or Terrible

Bad not as super horrible as midichlorians or as stupid as a healthy as a horse woman in her mid 20's dying of heartbreak quicker than anyone would of say kidney failure but bad.

 

I'm referring to the idea that the Bible says that Christ is the Son of God and then when Christ appears, it turns out that the Bible was off and he was the son of Satan. Just as the prophecy says that Anakin might have been created by the Force, but could be the creation of a Sith Lord.

Why? The Jedi have faith in the Force because they are trained and raised to trust in the Force. That's what a leap of faith is. They had faith in Anakin right up to when he turns, because they have faith that he will make the right choice between his duty and himself. After he turns, they do lose faith. Then the children are born and they have faith in them. And Obi-wan's message to the other surviving Jedi was to trust in the Force. That if there is a light at the end of the tunnel, it will make itself known. It is what Qui-gon taught him.

QUI-GON: "All right. Another solution will present itself. I’ll check back."

They trust in the Force to present solutions to impossible situations. Qui-gon put faith in the Force that they could find a way off of Tatooine and he saw it in Anakin.

QUI-GON: "Our meeting was not a coincidence. Nothing happens by accident."

Lucas himself said that he hesitates to call the Force God within "Star Wars". He didn't want to go that far, but he just wanted to explore the mystery of the universe and how things sometimes work out in mysterious ways.

MOYERS: The psychologist Jonathan Young says that whether we say, "I'm trusting my inner voice," or use more traditional language--"I'm trusting the Holy Spirit," as we do in the Christian tradition--somehow we're acknowledging that we're not alone in the universe. Is this what Ben Kenobi urges upon Luke Skywalker when he says, "Trust your feelings"?

LUCAS: Ultimately the Force is the larger mystery of the universe. And to trust your feelings is your way into that.



MOYERS: In authentic religion, doesn't it take Kierkegaard's leap of faith?

LUCAS: Yes, yes. Definitely. You'll notice Luke uses that quite a bit through the film--not to rely on pure logic, not to rely on the computers, but to rely on faith. That is what that "Use the Force" is, a leap of faith. There are mysteries and powers larger than we are, and you have to trust your feelings in order to access them.

--Time Magazine interview, 1999.

But the Jedi don't know that he was created by the Sith. They only believe that they know, not in what they don't know. They have faith in him up to a point and then lose faith in him, but they still trust the Force to prove another solution and it did.



That faith ultimately pays off.



You're asking to explain how faith in the Force makes sense, when you yourself don't believe. That's your problem.

 

It didn't hurt anything either in any way and made it far more interesting.

The whole point is that Lucas set it out in a very powerful way to make Darth Vader far more important than he was ever meant to be. In story progression Anakin Skywalker didn't become Darth Vader as much as Vader became Anakin. When they merged it totally changed the story of Luke that was being told.

Shaping the Jedi Order as taking only younglings for training and that Anakin at 9 was far too old and only something extraordinary would allow him to enter the Order was what Lucas saw as best for his story. That Anakin had the Chosen One and prophecy attached plus his power is what made him the best choice for Sidious. It also plays out with Luke's story since he isn't just some guy but the son of Darth Vader.

So then who is Vader's father? It can't just be some guy so by connecting it to the Force itself then the entire Skywalker line is now central to the balance of the Force that Lucas was exploring.

 

I don't know if it's just that which is his problem. After all, I don't really "believe" myself. But I can still understand what faith is, how it works, and what makes it so powerful. I guess I'm kind of like Indy at the end of Temple of Doom:


"Now you see the magic of the 'rock' you bring back."


"Yes, I've seen its power."

Yes, the stone turns out to literally have magical powers. But that's not what Indy and the Shaman are talking about. They're talking about what the stone represents. It represents the power of love, and unity, and family. That's what the entire movie is about.

Faith is about more than believing in higher beings and miracles. Everyone has faith in something, even atheists like me. Everyone imposes their own meaning onto the world through sheer force of belief. Otherwise, there would be no point in living--because, objectively speaking, everything is meaningless.

 

That's a good way to put it.

 

Firstly, faith in Jesus actually only has any meaning as faith in Jesus as son of/aspect of God. The concept of faith in Jesus without that context is a non-concept - it has no meaning. Faith in Jesus is faith in Jesus as faith in God. Secondly, that faith in Jesus is of a future event, something that is yet to come to pass.

Anakin/Vader has not only not fulfilled his prophecised 'destiny', he has - as far as the Jedi can tell (and as far as I can tell) - helped to bring about the darkness and imbalance he was supposed to oppose. So that, on any number of levels it makes no sense to argue that the Jedi were right to have faith in Anakin. No sense.

Neither from their own perspective, nor from an OOU perspective. Because, when you argue that they are right to have that faith, you are arguing that they are right to have that faith in Anakin as if he were of the Force; the Force here being an active agent. However, from your own previous argument in this thread...Anakin may not be conceived by the Force, and also Anakin is acting entirely of his own will...and so cannot be seen as acting for the Force as if he were an aspect of it (as an active agent) - or, more explicitly, that the Force is not commanding Anakin's actions, is not responsible for Anakin's actions as an active agent in the universe.

Which is summed up by the more succinct argument - it makes no sense to argue that the Jedi were right to have faith in Anakin as being of the Force, the Force here as an active agent in the universe if Anakin is not of the Force and nor is the Force acting through Anakin as an active agent in the universe. It is self-explanatory.

Oh...but hang on......do I sense a change in the argument? You have, up to now, been arguing that Anakin is making his own choices ....that the Force is not acting as an agent in the universe...but here you seem to hint at something different. Let's see where this goes....

So....here we have you (and Moyer and Lucas) sneaking in the Force as active agent (God) in the universe. However...perhaps the well-read Lucas is not familiar with Kierkegaard's Leap of (actually to) faith, and the argument it represents. Kierkegaard was aware that Christianity was fundamentally paradoxical, and that looking at it purely with reason one would never accept it; so that a leap to faith is required to accept Christianity.

Maybe Lucas does understand this but.....is this leap against reasoned intuition really what we see in the movies? Lucas suggests it is so, citing the example of Luke trusting the Force over the computer system; but is this a leap to faith, is it counter to reasoned intuition? Actually he has experienced the Force earlier in the movie. The previous attempts to hit the target (computer guided) have failed. This isn't a leap to faith of the nature that Kierkegaard was discussing.

and....ultimately the movies that he is describing here (the OT) are not about faith..but we'll get to that in a minute.

To your first point; I will repeat that it makes no sense to argue that the Jedi were right to have faith in an individual as equivalent to faith in the Force as faith in that individual being an active agent of the Force if none of those descriptions in any way describe the individual in question.

To your last point I have a couple of things to say. That I don't have faith is, I can assure you, no problem (that you have previously claimed not to within discussions...but can make this argument..... ????)

Secondly....you only highlight that I, as a person who does not have that faith, could perfectly accept the OT...yet you claim the PT added nothing in terms of religious motif. That simply does not add up. Or...to put it another way, my lack of faith was in no way a problem in terms of accepting the OT...but according to you, thanks to the PT it now is a "problem".

This is exactly it.The whole point was to re-define the story as being about Anakin, and to make it more "epic"...which to me does harm the original movies, and their immediacy and simple humanity.

 

The Jedi were right to have faith in him up to the point when he turned. The faith in the Force is correct in the end, because they put their faith in Luke and he in turn does the impossible.

And it doesn't matter. Anakin is born with free will. He is not born to be evil, nor to be good. He is who he is because of how he was raised and how he was trained. It would be wise to say to not trust him, if all the prophecy said that the Force needed to be balanced by the Chosen One. But here it states that the Chosen One will bring balance by destroying the Sith. That is the incentive to trust him, regardless of his birthright.

But Luke only chooses to use the Force because Obi-wan tells him to use it. Obi-wan is acting as the voice of the Force, as Lucas described it in the Rolling Stone interview from 1977.

Paul Scanlon: Do you have agreements with the principal characters?

George Lucas: Yes. All the actors except Alec Guinness. We may use his voice as The Force – I don't know.

--Rolling Stone interview, 1977.

So in that moment, Lucas has Obi-wan as the voice of the Force speaking to Luke and telling him to trust him and use the Force. It isn't just mere intuition, because Luke's intuition is to use the computer. But Obi-wan, who has become a divine spirit, is telling him to have faith in him and the Force.

He is only an agent in what he does, not because of his birthright. He is not born to do evil, nor to do good. He just chooses to do what he does, based on the factors surrounding his life and everything that happens.

I apologize if I have made an presumption, but given the things you've said yourself over the last year or so that we've been discussing this, it is easy to make an assumption.

You think that it is wrong to have faith in something, because you suspect something that may or may not be true. That for you the Jedi are wrong to have faith, because you seem to think that it is wrong to have it regardless of Anakin being created by the Force or the Sith. If it is one, it is wrong. If it is the other, it is still wrong. The end result, in this case, is far more important than the beginning. This is presumption on my part, but given the nature of what we've discussed, you can understand my assumptions.

 

I'm indifferent to it being done once with Anakin, aside from saving us the time of having to meet Anakin's father too, it didn't really have that much affect on the story. And I can chalk strange things up to The Force. I wouldn't care to see it repeated in the future though.

 

This is some of the most meaningless nonsense I think I have ever read. "The Jedi were right to have faith in him up to the point when he turned"??? Let's put that into perspective; the Christians were right to have faith in Jesus until the end of days came and no-one was saved...in some oddly recorded future history. If the faith was in him to do something,and he did the opposite (not just didn't do it), how on Coruscant can it be argued they were right to have faith in him?

You still don't get this? You argument has been that the Jedi were right to have faith in Anakin,as faith in the Force that it will put everything right. If Anakin was not created by the Force and is acting independently of the Force then their faith in him as faith in the Force, that it will put everything right is entirely misplaced. It is self-evident

So...you are admitting that you (along with Myers and Lucas) are here inserting the Force as God into the story...thankyou for that, at least.

But, this is weak. When he hears the voice Luke says "Obi-Wan?" When he sees his mirage on Hoth he, again, says "Obi-Wan?" And it is as Obi-Wan that the visage always speaks...unless you wish to argue that the Force (as God) lies and does not know what will occur.

The voice and ghost of Obi-Wan are exactly those things; the voice and ghost of Obi-Wan.

Indeed...so how can it be right for the Jedi to have faith in him, as faith in the Force, that it (the Force) will put everything right?

The only presumption you made which is incorrect is that my not having faith is a problem.....I find it odd that someone who argued that they are not a person of faith should make this argument...

Nope. You are side-stepping the issue, trying to have your cake and eat it. You argue that Anakin's tale is all about choices...but also argue that the Jedi were right to have faith in him, as faith in the Force that it (the Force....as an active agent through Anakin, in other words) will put everything right - even berating me for the 'problem' that I don't have such faith.

You also claimed that in terms of having faith in Anakin, as faith in the Force, that it (the Force as active agent) will put everything right would not be affected by whether or not Anakin was created by the Force. I disagree, for all the reasons that I have given.

 

Because up to when he turned, he could still make the right choice. Knowing that there was always a potential risk that he could become a problem didn't deter them from bringing him into the Jedi Order, after learning of his feats at Naboo. Nor when they were uncertain of him during Act II of ROTS. Their faith in him may have waned, but they still believed in him to do right and that was right on their part to put faith in him. After he turns, losing faith in him, is understandable and acceptable. But before then is very important.

No, it isn't misplaced. Because they don't know that he isn't created by the Force. So they have every right to believe in because we don't know for certain if he was or wasn't. If Lucas had stuck to his plan to have it be expressed and then went out revealed it to the Jedi, then you'd have a stronger argument. But regardless of being created or not by the Force, he still has the choice to do as he was foretold or not to.

Obi-wan as the voice of the Force isn't God telling Luke what to do. It is an audible version of what Qui-gon says about hearing the will of the Force. That when a Jedi learns to quiet their mind and listen, they can hear the Force guiding them. The part that warns them of dangers lurking around the corner. The part that is trusting their instincts to do something that is otherwise impossible to overcome. That is what Obi-wan telling Luke to trust him and use the Force was. At that point in 1977, he wasn't sure if he would have Guinness return or not for the next two films. If it would be a one off thing, or a full time deal.

By the point of TESB and ROTJ, Lucas had figured out what the Force ghost would be. That it would be the spirit of a Jedi speaking to the living. But in the summer of 77, Lucas hadn't thought that far ahead yet.

Because Anakin ultimately chooses to do the right thing and does so because his son survived childbirth and would reach him.

I said that I believe in things, but that doesn't mean that I go out and worship. I believe that it is possible for things to happen beyond our control and that sometimes one would need to rely on faith. If you are someone who doesn't have that, then regardless of little faith or total faith, then the concept might very well be lost on you.

I'm certain that I never said outright that the Force would literally fix things. Just that by trusting in the Force, whatever will happen, will be the spark that leads to things turning around. In this case the spark is Luke. As to having faith in Anakin, as I've said, regardless of how he was created, he still does what he was foreseen to have done. The Force as an active agent is only in that certain events occur that leads into other events, but each course of events is determined by that person's choices. The Force can present the path, but that person still has to choose to follow that path or follow a different path. And as I've said repeatedly, that faith would only be problematic if the Jedi knew for certain that he wasn't created by the Force.

 

It wasnt the most interesting choice to make Anakin be conceived by midi-chlorians but it doesnt ruin Star Wars for me. Especially after Palpatine saying that Plagueis could influence the midi-chlorians to create life in Episode 3. It kind of implies heavily that Plagueis made Anakin, in my opinion.

 

Okay,let's try another way of making this point. Let's say that I believe, have faith, that Leeds United are going to win the FA Cup. I'm so convinced that I go to the bookies and put a bet on them to do so. Turns out they don't. Then my faith in them to do that was misplaced. To the point that they are knocked out I may still have that faith, but their not doing so is the evidence that my faith was misplaced. My faith in Leeds United to win the FA Cup is not right. It is wrong, misplaced, in error.

Shifting sands. Your argument is that they were right, on the basis that faith in Anakin is equivalent to faith in the Force - not that they were right from their perspective at the time. (and, indeed, you revert to this argument later in this very post)

Cobblers. It was the voice of Obi-Wan. Luke reacts to it as the voice of Obi-Wan...some ridiculous use of a throwaway line from a brief question will not alter that. "Obi-Wan?"

But...you said it was all about choice.....in what way did the Force ensure that he did what he did?

So...you're not a person of faith but...you believe you have to have faith in...something? Am I understanding you correctly?

But I suppose that is by the by, the more cogent point is that you say that my lack of faith is the problem....but it was not for the OT; which rather suggests that, despite your protestations otherwise, the religious content/symbolism/motif is drastically altered between the OT and the PT.

But you are still arguing that the Force will "literally fix things", because in this argument you give it the context of active agent.

So...tell me, what laws impose these limitations upon the Force? Who imposes these restrictions upon what the Force may or may not do?

 

That's essentially what I was saying. They were right to put faith in him up until he turns. But the Jedi still have faith in the Force.

I wasn't shifting anything.

I'm not saying it wasn't Obi-wan. I'm saying that the point was that the sequence was designed around the idea that the Force was more or less talking to Luke, using Obi-wan's voice. At the time the film was being made, that was where Lucas was at. It wasn't until he got Guniness back on board, that he figured it out to being that it was just Obi-wan.

Not in a direct, overt manner as in "Anakin, you will kill Darth Sidious." and he goes out and does it. It was more subtle. Certain things that would seem like random coincidences would in turn be the Force subtly manipulating things.

"It's about a young boy leaving his world and going off into the unknown, to a great adventure. [...] Star Wars carries that story on to what happens after you leave and in this particular case, there's a slightly more classic edge to it, in that the fates are there to kind of help Luke realize that, in certain cases you don't have choices. You know, if you choose not to fight evil, eventually it'll just push you up into the wall and you just don't have a choice. It's an inevitability that you can't escape from. And in this particular case, he's torn between what he really wants to do; which is go off and join the academy and fight for the Rebellion and have excitement; but then he's also committed to helping his uncle, and to help his uncle build his farm, and his uncle's raised him, he's like his father, and he has his obligations to help put the homestead together."

--George Lucas, ANH DVD Commentary.

Minor things like the Stormtroopers arriving at the farm, while Luke is gone looking for Artoo. Or Vader is overseeing the Imperial fleet when the strike team arrives and Luke comes with them, after he refuses to go looking for his father. You know like in the original "Clash Of The Titans", we see Zeus provide materials for Perseus, but doesn't force him to do what he does with them. He lets his son decide to use them for good or for ill, but he puts the path before him.

What I'm trying to say is that you don't seem to be the type of person that would just believe wholeheartedly in the idea of something beyond normal kin. And that if that is the case, then it is hard to understand something like this.

No, you are arguing that. I'm saying that having faith in the Force means that the Jedi have to have faith that things will get better. Not that the Force will do that, which is why you're saying. I'm saying that the Force will provide a solution, not enact said solution.

I didn't say or imply that at all.

In TPM, Qui-gon said that they're meeting was not an accident. Nothing happens by chance. In this case, the implication is that the Force pushed them together, but they still had to choose to do what they did. Qui-gon and Shmi could have easily said no to Anakin racing for the parts. In TESB, the hyperdrive could have worked at Hoth and the Falcon could get away and meet with the fleet. In TFA, the TIE Fighters could have missed the ship that Rey and Finn were heading to, thus preventing them from going after the Falcon instead.

It isn't laws and restrictions enforcing this and that.

 

This is a form of oxymoron....if my faith in someone or something is a faith in them to perform a particular action, and they fail to perform that action (the performing the action is the thing I have faith in) then there is no way I can be said to be right to have had that faith. It makes no sense to say that.

You are constantly dancing, dancing on shifting sands. Your argument was that the Jedi were right to have faith in Anakin, as faith in the Force, that it will put things right. You then shifted that argument to the Jedi being right to have faith in Anakin from their perspective; you changed the argument. You highlighted how much you have done this by reverting to your original argument at the end of the very same post...

And now you use your own conjecture (invention) as argument. Luke reacts to the voice as the voice of Obi-Wan. It is the voice of Obi-Wan. There is no credit for Alec Guinness as the voice of the Force....

Luke wasn't at the farm because he was out searching for R2, who had gone looking for Obi-Wan. Here you argue for the Force as active agent which is not relevant to the OT. From the OT I have no reason to believe that there is an active agent (God) manipulating events and presenting paths; I have only to follow the actions of the characters to understand how this or that thing happened.

Errmm...yeah,when I say that Iam not a person of faith I mean exactly that; I don't have a belief in some consciously active super-entity which interferes with events. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by 'not a person of faith', which appears to mean ..'somebody who believes in faith' ??

And again I will make the point that...the way the OT tells it's story, my not being a person of faith is not a problem. It apparently only becomes a problem when PT ideas are imposed onto it....which kind of backs my point up that the PT introduces, through the notions of Chosen One/prophecy, an obviously denominational religious motif.

You are now arguing that the Force will interfere to "provide a solution" as an active, conscious entity. But, to have faith in Anakin, as being equivalent to having faith in the Force...though Anakin is not created by the Force, nor does the Force act through him (ie he is not an active agent of the Force) is nonsensical. All that you could say is that the Jedi (in that case) would be right to have faith in the Force...but that isn't what you originally argued (and again,here, you have danced about the shifting sands, switching fromthe Jedi being right to having faith in Anakin, to them being right to have faith in the Force only).

You didn't say or imply that at all?

"The Force as an active agent is only in that certain events occur that leads into other events, but each course of events is determined by that person's choices. The Force can present the path, but that person still has to choose to follow that path or follow a different path."



These are limitations on the agency of the Force. Who, or what, has imposed these limits? You don't understand the question?

 

This is the best way to look at it. Great way to erase the midichlorian plot device from SW too. I see it as Qui Gon and the Jedi put too much stock in midichlorians, trying to back up their belief with some scientific evidence. Palpatine knew it was all bogus and used it to tell Anakin some BS story about stopping people from dying to seduce him to the darkside.

And don't even waste my time telling me what's in the friggin' cartoon or what Lucas said in an interview. "Canon" outside of the movies is meaningless and he flip-flops too much to take anything he says seriously. Besides, if he can change the entire meaning of the force from one trilogy to another, it can be brought back again just as easily.

 

So Luke does all the legwork, faces his father and changes his heart, has the courage to take on the Emperor head-on, but Anakin gets credit for bringing balance to the force with the sneak attack shot from behind?

 

Qui Gon: "I've encountered a vergence in the force. It is POSSIBLE he was conceived by the midichlorian.."

Palpatine: "Darth Plagueis was a Dark Lord of the Sith so powerful and so wise, he could use the Force to influence the midi-chlorians to create life."

Yoda: "A prophecy that misread, could have been."

It is never set in stone in any of the films. This is an area Lucas was likely going to elaborate on in his Episode 7 through 9 story.

...the midichlorian concept goes hand in hand with the OTs treatment of the force.

 

That's why I said that it is fine up to that point. They're still not wrong to have put that faith in him, because he ultimately does perform that task. It just took longer than anticipated.

I have not shifted the argument. Having faith in the Force is not the same thing as having faith in Anakin. And even when he has fallen, the Jedi still trust in the Force because they are trained to do so. That's why when the twins are born, Yoda and Obi-wan believe this to be a sign from the Force. That one or both might be the one to destroy the Sith.

And you're still not getting what I'm saying. If the Force sounds like Obi-wan, then Luke would still think it is Obi-wan and not the Force. That appears to be what Lucas was thinking about in 1977. It wasn't until later on that he settled on it being just Obi-wan and not the Force using his voice.

It is relevant to the OT because when Lucas was writing ANH, as he had said, the Force is like fate. It pushes Luke into going off with Obi-wan. In this case, Luke could have gotten back home before the Stormtroopers arrived and would have been killed. Artoo could have blown his motivator before he gotten to the Jundland Wastes and Luke would have gotten back in time to be killed. But events went a different way.

Let's just drop this, because there's no way to explain this to you.

It was always a denomination religious motif to the Force, as much as it was Buddhism. That's why Lucas said that it was a combination of different types of religion.

I haven't shifted. Again, having faith in Anakin and faith in the Force are two different things. They have faith in Anakin as a person to make the right choice. The faith in the Force is just something that predates Anakin and continues after he's dead.

I do understand. I'm telling you that there are no limitations imposed. People have free will and are allowed to choose their destiny. The Force can only show, not enforce it. It just is. It is not like Zeus who can hurl lighting bolts to smite his enemies. It can only do what it can do, because that is all it can do.

First off, Lucas isn't in charge. Second, Kennedy has said that they're respecting the PT and are not changing things. Third, Lucas didn't change the meaning of the Force. It has always had a biological component to it, before he wrote the word Midichlorian in the mid 90's. So it is not a matter of flip flopping. The point of the Midichlorians was to show more of what the Jedi understand of the Force and to not only set up Anakin's story, but to illustrate the symbiotic nature of life in "Star Wars".

Obi-wan says in ROTS, that Anakin was to destroy the Sith. In ROTJ, he did that very thing. In TFA, Snoke is not a Sith and Kylo Ren is not a Sith.

 

Lol. So forget all the work Luke did or the fact that he destroyed the Emperor by turning a Sith back to good (essentially destroying both through his efforts). Naw, Let's reduce "bringing balance to the force" down to a sucker punch.

 

Luke never took on the Emperor. Luke was the catalyst for Anakin's return, but Anakin was still the one who destroyed the Sith and brought balance to the Force. It's not about credit, it's about what happened.

 

What? Luke willingly went alone to face both of them. Luke force-grabbed his light saber from the Emperor's throne and swung right at him but was blocked by Vader. If that ain't taking on the Emperor I don't know what is. "What happened" is everyone giving props to Vader for everything Luke did. "Cheap-shot Anakin" FTW I guess.

 

Uh-hu...and,this all comes down to how Lucas decided to redact the movies to be about Anakin. There was, at the time of TESB, no prophecy, no "Chosen One". There was no eons long battle between Jedi and Sith (and the Emperor was not a Sith...). There was no "balance" which the Force had to be put back into.

The story was about Luke's journey, and the redemption of Anakin was derived from that journey;and was only that; his redemption.

What Lucas has essentially done is transform a deductive element into the inductive, and in doing so has obscured a great deal of the original motivation and meaning.

 

In response to the thread title.

The Immaculate Conception -- Terrific or Terrible

Far as I am and was concerned, "the Immaculate Conception" was an audience perception, ignoring at least two other plausible reasons why Shmi couldn't remember engaging in rumpy-pumpy.

Amnesia, getting mind-rubbed. How some people jumped straight to the "how Jesus was born" explanation completely blindsided me.

 

No, he went to face Vader. That was his mission. He met the Emperor and was tainted by him, only then did he attempt to strike him. He didn't "have the courage to take on the Emperor head-on". There was no courage in that scene.

How so? Did Luke destroy the Sith? No. Did Luke destroy the Emperor? No. Luke redeemed his father. That's what he has done. And in doing so, Anakin destroyed the Sith and brought balance to the Force.

?!

 

Nope, no courage willingly facing both of them alone.

No courage trying to strike him down and fighting his father.

No courage to throw down his saber and defy the emporer (something his dad didn't have the cajones to do).

No courage to be willing to die for what he believed in.

But sneak attack from behind? Now that takes guts!

Redeeming his father = destroying a sith. Then Vader sneak-attacks the emperor which he never would have done on his own. Luke took out two birds (sith) with one stone.

Nope, all Luke. He took all the risks to make things right. Vader gets an assist on the goal at best.