The MI6 Community Religion and Faith Discussion Space (for members of all faiths - and none!)

11011131516108

Comments

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I didn t understand that claim at all.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think the unsubstantiated claim of an afterlife is potentially very harmful and has very often been in the past and is still nowadays. It leads to hatred, to the oppression of women, gays, young children, it gives illegitimate powers to men who know nothing but their own dogmas, it hinders the progresses of science when it's not hostile to it. A fairytale can only ever be good if one is conscious of its fictitious nature.

    Simply believing in God or an afterlife doesn't have to directly lead to hatred and malice. It's true many religious groups spew unnecessary hatred towards women, gay people, etc., but just being a theist doesn't have to directly relate to that. This is why I shy away from organized religion; they almost always have stipulations I don't like and find wrong. But the belief of God, afterlife, or whatever else doesn't automatically make someone hateful. That's just ignorant.

    It doesn't automatically make them superior or even good people, either. I've seen a lot of folks in my days who were pretty cold, rude, hateful people, but thought that was immediately erased/forgiven by going to church for an hour on Sundays.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I think I'll gracefully follow the lead of @Mendes4Lyfe and bow out of this thread for a while now.

    That would be a crying shame. The debate this far has been pretty respectful from both sides, well towards each other that is. God deserves no respect so hasn't received any. It would be a shame to bow out of it old son.

    I'd genuinely sooner listen to what your arguments are for believing in a God as I believe (there's that word again! Perhaps I'm totally wrong but at least I'm basing it on evidence) you are an intelligent and articulate man and your bravery in even stepping into the ring is to be respected even if what you believe is not.

    In any event you shouldn't be dismayed as it us who are in the minority:

    https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-believe-in-God-2

    Those figures should give you heart as after all that many people can't be wrong can they?

    And at least believing in God isn't as preposterous a notion as thinking Gardner's NSF is a good book so why not stick around and fight on if you genuinely believe?

  • Posts: 15,234
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think the unsubstantiated claim of an afterlife is potentially very harmful and has very often been in the past and is still nowadays. It leads to hatred, to the oppression of women, gays, young children, it gives illegitimate powers to men who know nothing but their own dogmas, it hinders the progresses of science when it's not hostile to it. A fairytale can only ever be good if one is conscious of its fictitious nature.

    Simply believing in God or an afterlife doesn't have to directly lead to hatred and malice. It's true many religious groups spew unnecessary hatred towards women, gay people, etc., but just being a theist doesn't have to directly relate to that. This is why I shy away from organized religion; they almost always have stipulations I don't like and find wrong. But the belief of God, afterlife, or whatever else doesn't automatically make someone hateful. That's just ignorant.

    It does not lead them to hatred, but it often does. or to other things. At the core, the belief is unjustified, until at least it is demonstrated to be true... which has not been. Even the kindest, harmless happy clappy Christian participates in a scam (albeit unknowingly) and has been indoctrinated to a degree. He is still deluded, and that in itself is very harmful. You don't have to go as far as burning scientists as witches: you just need to disregard scientific discoveries or spreading ignorance to children.
  • Posts: 12,524
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I think the unsubstantiated claim of an afterlife is potentially very harmful and has very often been in the past and is still nowadays. It leads to hatred, to the oppression of women, gays, young children, it gives illegitimate powers to men who know nothing but their own dogmas, it hinders the progresses of science when it's not hostile to it. A fairytale can only ever be good if one is conscious of its fictitious nature.

    Simply believing in God or an afterlife doesn't have to directly lead to hatred and malice. It's true many religious groups spew unnecessary hatred towards women, gay people, etc., but just being a theist doesn't have to directly relate to that. This is why I shy away from organized religion; they almost always have stipulations I don't like and find wrong. But the belief of God, afterlife, or whatever else doesn't automatically make someone hateful. That's just ignorant.

    It doesn't automatically make them superior or even good people, either. I've seen a lot of folks in my days who were pretty cold, rude, hateful people, but thought that was immediately erased/forgiven by going to church for an hour on Sundays.

    I think it's arrogant and silly for a theist or atheist to fancy themself as superior to someone simply baser on religious belief or lack thereof. Ultimately, someone being a theist or atheist does not really effect my feelings about them; what does it how they behave and what their characteristics are. Both sides are plenty capable of having good and bad traits. I just think it's silly to say "you're bad because you don't believe in God" or "you're bad because you're religious".
  • Posts: 15,234
    I don't say someone is bad if he's religious. I'm saying if he's good it is in spite of his religion. I would daresay that even benign believers contribute to a degree to the toxic aspects of their faith by legitimizing it. See my comment above.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I don't say someone is bad if he's religious. I'm saying if he's good it is in spite of his religion. I would daresay that even benign believers contribute to a degree to the toxic aspects of their faith by legitimizing it. See my comment above.
    Probably true. It's important to keep in mind that many people (religious or not) aren't all that logical. They tend to gravitate to what 'feels' right rather than what is actual fact or verifiable. Many people aren't skeptical by nature either. Rather they choose to accept what they are told at face value by friends, family and others. Therefore they are indeed susceptible to disinformation and persuasion, as well as charlatans. While I can't know for sure, it's possible that these folks are more likely to be led astray by the unsubstantiated claims, promises and dogma in religion.

    Others however are very logical and yet subscribe to religious teachings and belief. They consciously seek out and find much of value in the spiritual texts, fables & their life lessons. I'm not sure how people like this reconcile their religious pursuits with the inaccuracies inherent within it. I can only imagine that they choose to ignore the elements that they know to be inaccurate and focus on the aspects which inspire them.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,348
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I think I'll gracefully follow the lead of @Mendes4Lyfe and bow out of this thread for a while now.

    That would be a crying shame. The debate this far has been pretty respectful from both sides, well towards each other that is. God deserves no respect so hasn't received any. It would be a shame to bow out of it old son.

    I'd genuinely sooner listen to what your arguments are for believing in a God as I believe (there's that word again! Perhaps I'm totally wrong but at least I'm basing it on evidence) you are an intelligent and articulate man and your bravery in even stepping into the ring is to be respected even if what you believe is not.

    In any event you shouldn't be dismayed as it us who are in the minority:

    https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-believe-in-God-2

    Those figures should give you heart as after all that many people can't be wrong can they?

    And at least believing in God isn't as preposterous a notion as thinking Gardner's NSF is a good book so why not stick around and fight on if you genuinely believe?

    Well, thank you for the vote of confidence, Wiz. I might still pop in and out but I think I've said nearly all I can say on this debate.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Thanks for the post. I've often suspected this may be the case, as per my thesis above.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    You're one of the good ones, @Dragonpol, so don't be discouraged. You stepped up to the plate when others of your side retreated (and created the damn thread in the first place), and that counts for a lot. I would perhaps be more at peace with religion and believers if more acted as you did, but that's not the world we live in and so we push on.
  • edited July 2017 Posts: 1,469
    I'd edited my post to delete most of it for now, but I'm putting this back in so the post after mine makes sense:
    One other thing I wondered, not having read many of the Ian Fleming books--did he make Bond an atheist? I think DC's Bond would be an atheist, maybe Connery's too, but maybe Moore or Lazenby's would be Catholic or with another old denomination--but Bond is such a swinging guy--would he really belong to any church?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited July 2017 Posts: 28,694
    @Thrasos, I don't think Bond outright ever declares a religion in the books that I know of, but there are times when issues of faith and spirituality do come up. In Live & Let Die Solitaire tells him that she has foresight, and knew intensely inside of her that Bond would come, as if pre-destined, to save her from Mr. Big in New York. Now, an atheist would likely scoff at that idea and shout it down as a poor and traumatic woman's delusion, but Bond surprisingly takes her at her word and seems to trust in her senses and the spiritual plain she is tapping into, whatever it may be.

    And of course in Goldfinger, when Bond thinks he's about to die with a woman beside him, he worries about how he will explain the situation to Vesper wherever it is that he's going, implying that he is thinking of where we'll end up after he dies. It also implies that he no longer views Vesper as a dark or sinful woman, which is interesting to comprehend as we wonder what make him cool to her over time and think that she'd end up in heaven as opposed to elsewhere; he probably attached sympathy to her, as she was just an innocent being manipulated by worse characters behind the veil.

    Casino Royale has Bond mention the idea of good vs. evil and God vs. Satan as he questions his own morality and actions in life, but no real statement is made on his side of what he believes. He just makes note of how we use God to symbolize good and Satan evil, without picking a side or delving into his belief system either way.

    I'm sure those more versed in the books could come up with more examples beyond these, but in my own reading these are the major religious points or elements that come up. Either way I don't think we'd be able to say just what Bond is or what he believes. As a man who kills people quite regularly, men he fully admits are probably alright and only serving their countries as he is England, he must surely wonder at times if his sins will land him in hot water or if there is any truth to eternal punishment for too many wrongs.

    Bond doesn't seem the type to go to confessions and spill his guts (he'd be sharing classified government secrets with the church if he did anyway), but he also doesn't put his nose up to superstition either at times. In Live & Let Die he comments about how weak minded the negroes under Mr. Big must be to believe what he says (about being the returned form of Baron Samedi), but he also notes how superstitious his own countrymen are as well, implying in a derisive manner that they aren't too different in the end. This could be a sign that he views the literal interpretation of the bible as balmy, but later on this viewpoint clashes with his feelings of Solitaire, who he seems to believe to have true foresight, as mentioned above. Even as he races to save her near the end of the book, Bond imagines her sensing him coming, wondering if she knows he is on his way.

    So I sense a tug of war in Bond, really, when it comes to belief. Sometimes he seems to be free from superstition or the belief in outrageous things, but other times what he sees or who he meets makes him get a new perspective and those experiences change his view of life immensely forever afterward. His torture at the hands of Le Chiffre made him reevaluate his entire life and where he morally stood, as well as if good and evil were just made up constructs we devise to make ourselves feel like we know who we're fighting. That is inextricably tied to faith and religion, which often deals with the right and wrong of the world and how one should act, so we can see that Bond thinks of these things at times.

    Bond is a very self aware man and knows what he's doing, so he has to wonder from time to time how his actions and life choices would stack up if God's pearly gates were real. Would his killing for queen and country be seen as a positive defense of his fellow man, like his killing of Drax to stop the bombing of London, or would his more morally foggy kills, like those he had to complete to get his Double-O licence, drive him further to hell on the side of bad? Where does his killing stand in the end, more on the side of protection or cold and inhumane murder? Bond's mind changes so much on so many things, so again it's hard to say either way what he really settles on. In Casino Royale for example, he points out that Le Chiffre thought himself the hero of his own story as he tried to kill his villain in the form of Bond, but Bond shortly says that he wasn't a villain at all and that was how he knew men's experience of morality didn't fall into a recognition of their own evil. We usually see only good in what we do, and that fogs things up. Yet at other times Bond is very down on himself and doesn't seem to hold himself as anyone worth celebrating or honoring as a hero at all, saying the Double-O title is a glorified one that only says you kill in cold blood, something he doesn't enjoy carrying on his back. At the end of the book he also derides the notion of him fighting "Red Indians" like some Hollywood cowboy, again showing that he doesn't portray himself as the glorious protector of innocents, a label so many fashion to those of his employment.

    If I had to guess, from what I know of Fleming's Bond, I'd say he'd be against a literal interpretation of the bible, but I think he also wouldn't close himself off to the notion that there is a final decider at play in the world that chooses where men stand at the end of it all. He wouldn't be a church goer and he wouldn't pray at night with rosary beads, but there are times on his missions that he will say a quick word to will himself to live on through a trial and pray for his safety or another's in a way that isn't implied to be ironic or derisive, showing that he holds stake or importance in the practice. His unique and complex job has made him come face to face with the layers of morality, which probably make him more critical of the very black and white "do this, not that" nature of the bible, but as I stated before he must wonder where he stacks up between a trip to heaven or imprisonment in hell, and that is intensely tied to religion and the notions expressed in the text. At the end of the day I think he'd confess that he just doesn't know either way, and, like most things that worry or bemuse him, he would strike it to the back of his mind and live his life the best way he saw fit at the time, trying not to over think or overanalyze himself for fear of losing precious time.
  • Posts: 1,469
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, thanks for your reply--it was very interesting to read, and well written! You answered the questions well. I "should" read the Bond books (I've only really read CR in the last several decades), but I haven't devoted much time to reading lately, preferring movies for entertainment.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Thrasos wrote: »
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, thanks for your reply--it was very interesting to read, and well written! You answered the questions well. I "should" read the Bond books (I've only really read CR in the last several decades), but I haven't devoted much time to reading lately, preferring movies for entertainment.

    @Thrasos, I very much recommend reading the books, not only for their fine quality but also because they let you into who Bond is more than anything else out there. They will only make you understand and/or like him more, for his flaws and merits. I had only read a few of the books many years back, but now I'm running through all of them in order on this very forum with some members in a separate thread. Very enlightening and fulfilling, well worth it.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    jesus-in-this-exercise-you-just-need-to-let-yourself-24701678.png
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I think I'll gracefully follow the lead of @Mendes4Lyfe and bow out of this thread for a while now.

    That would be a crying shame. The debate this far has been pretty respectful from both sides, well towards each other that is. God deserves no respect so hasn't received any. It would be a shame to bow out of it old son.

    I'd genuinely sooner listen to what your arguments are for believing in a God as I believe (there's that word again! Perhaps I'm totally wrong but at least I'm basing it on evidence) you are an intelligent and articulate man and your bravery in even stepping into the ring is to be respected even if what you believe is not.

    In any event you shouldn't be dismayed as it us who are in the minority:

    https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-believe-in-God-2

    Those figures should give you heart as after all that many people can't be wrong can they?

    And at least believing in God isn't as preposterous a notion as thinking Gardner's NSF is a good book so why not stick around and fight on if you genuinely believe?

    Well, thank you for the vote of confidence, Wiz. I might still pop in and out but I think I've said nearly all I can say on this debate.

    Well you could answer the question about baby cancer but I guess those of us on this side of the debate have to accept that none of your are bold/foolish enough to even try to defend this.
    @Thrasos, I don't think Bond outright ever declares a religion in the books that I know of, but there are times when issues of faith and spirituality do come up. In Live & Let Die Solitaire tells him that she has foresight, and knew intensely inside of her that Bond would come, as if pre-destined, to save her from Mr. Big in New York. Now, an atheist would likely scoff at that idea and shout it down as a poor and traumatic woman's delusion, but Bond surprisingly takes her at her word and seems to trust in her senses and the spiritual plain she is tapping into, whatever it may be.

    And of course in Goldfinger, when Bond thinks he's about to die with a woman beside him, he worries about how he will explain the situation to Vesper wherever it is that he's going, implying that he is thinking of where we'll end up after he dies. It also implies that he no longer views Vesper as a dark or sinful woman, which is interesting to comprehend as we wonder what make him cool to her over time and think that she'd end up in heaven as opposed to elsewhere; he probably attached sympathy to her, as she was just an innocent being manipulated by worse characters behind the veil.

    Casino Royale has Bond mention the idea of good vs. evil and God vs. Satan as he questions his own morality and actions in life, but no real statement is made on his side of what he believes. He just makes note of how we use God to symbolize good and Satan evil, without picking a side or delving into his belief system either way.

    I'm sure those more versed in the books could come up with more examples beyond these, but in my own reading these are the major religious points or elements that come up. Either way I don't think we'd be able to say just what Bond is or what he believes. As a man who kills people quite regularly, men he fully admits are probably alright and only serving their countries as he is England, he must surely wonder at times if his sins will land him in hot water or if there is any truth to eternal punishment for too many wrongs.

    Bond doesn't seem the type to go to confessions and spill his guts (he'd be sharing classified government secrets with the church if he did anyway), but he also doesn't put his nose up to superstition either at times. In Live & Let Die he comments about how weak minded the negroes under Mr. Big must be to believe what he says (about being the returned form of Baron Samedi), but he also notes how superstitious his own countrymen are as well, implying in a derisive manner that they aren't too different in the end. This could be a sign that he views the literal interpretation of the bible as balmy, but later on this viewpoint clashes with his feelings of Solitaire, who he seems to believe to have true foresight, as mentioned above. Even as he races to save her near the end of the book, Bond imagines her sensing him coming, wondering if she knows he is on his way.

    So I sense a tug of war in Bond, really, when it comes to belief. Sometimes he seems to be free from superstition or the belief in outrageous things, but other times what he sees or who he meets makes him get a new perspective and those experiences change his view of life immensely forever afterward. His torture at the hands of Le Chiffre made him reevaluate his entire life and where he morally stood, as well as if good and evil were just made up constructs we devise to make ourselves feel like we know who we're fighting. That is inextricably tied to faith and religion, which often deals with the right and wrong of the world and how one should act, so we can see that Bond thinks of these things at times.

    Bond is a very self aware man and knows what he's doing, so he has to wonder from time to time how his actions and life choices would stack up if God's pearly gates were real. Would his killing for queen and country be seen as a positive defense of his fellow man, like his killing of Drax to stop the bombing of London, or would his more morally foggy kills, like those he had to complete to get his Double-O licence, drive him further to hell on the side of bad? Where does his killing stand in the end, more on the side of protection or cold and inhumane murder? Bond's mind changes so much on so many things, so again it's hard to say either way what he really settles on. In Casino Royale for example, he points out that Le Chiffre thought himself the hero of his own story as he tried to kill his villain in the form of Bond, but Bond shortly says that he wasn't a villain at all and that was how he knew men's experience of morality didn't fall into a recognition of their own evil. We usually see only good in what we do, and that fogs things up. Yet at other times Bond is very down on himself and doesn't seem to hold himself as anyone worth celebrating or honoring as a hero at all, saying the Double-O title is a glorified one that only says you kill in cold blood, something he doesn't enjoy carrying on his back. At the end of the book he also derides the notion of him fighting "Red Indians" like some Hollywood cowboy, again showing that he doesn't portray himself as the glorious protector of innocents, a label so many fashion to those of his employment.

    If I had to guess, from what I know of Fleming's Bond, I'd say he'd be against a literal interpretation of the bible, but I think he also wouldn't close himself off to the notion that there is a final decider at play in the world that chooses where men stand at the end of it all. He wouldn't be a church goer and he wouldn't pray at night with rosary beads, but there are times on his missions that he will say a quick word to will himself to live on through a trial and pray for his safety or another's in a way that isn't implied to be ironic or derisive, showing that he holds stake or importance in the practice. His unique and complex job has made him come face to face with the layers of morality, which probably make him more critical of the very black and white "do this, not that" nature of the bible, but as I stated before he must wonder where he stacks up between a trip to heaven or imprisonment in hell, and that is intensely tied to religion and the notions expressed in the text. At the end of the day I think he'd confess that he just doesn't know either way, and, like most things that worry or bemuse him, he would strike it to the back of his mind and live his life the best way he saw fit at the time, trying not to over think or overanalyze himself for fear of losing precious time.

    Broadly I agree with a lot of your points.

    However I would point out that at the time at which the Bond novels were written society was still largely in the grip of awed reverence to religion. Even if Fleming had been rampantly atheist he wouldn't have wanted alienate his readership by having Bond make any blatant anti God statements.

    I don't remember ever reading anything definitive either way about Fleming being religious although his 'I shall not waste my time in trying to prolong my days. I shall use my time' epitaph suggests someone more concerned with wringing every last moment of joy out of life rather than someone just kicking their heels waiting around on earth before the main event.

    If Bond was anything I would assume he would be a C of E batispms/weddings/funerals man. I can't think of anything less Bondian than every Sunday him slipping into a pair of sandals and sauntering down to church to sing praise to the Lord.

    Sadly the evidence is pretty scant in either direction. Bond does have musings on good and evil and what happens after death but these subjects are not the exclusive preserve of the religious so rather inconclusive. Yes he does seem to think that there are 'more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our philosophy' but that is not to say he is religious merely an inquisitive thinker.

    The passage from GF when Bond thinks he might be in heaven is written definitely tongue in cheek by Fleming with Bond bumping into ex girlfriends all over the place which suggests he didn't take this crap too seriously.

    The most reassuring passage though for me is when Bond is in Dr No's obstacle course and facing certain death. He contemplates just lying down and dying but then chides himself and shouts 'Get on you bastard. These are just cuts and bruises.'

    If he were religious in any meaningful way he would have either offered a prayer for salvation or just given up, curled into a ball and left it to 'faith'.

    But he realises no one is going to help him but himself. A lesson for us all there methinks.
  • Posts: 15,234
    I don't think Bond (or Fleming even less) was atheistic but the passages where he thinks or talks of godly matters he often has a frivolous attitude towards them. And his personal complete disregard of the eight commandment would have been frowned upon by pretty much every Christian in the UK.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I think we could all agree that Bond would never be the type to practice his faith, but would instead merely ponder similar concerns that those of the faith would, though not often. I can't imagine that the Church of England would ever want to see a man such as himself in the pews, what with his lively and unrepressed sexual appetites, his drinking, smoking and gambling habits, and the not-so-small order of his killing for the dead empire.

    If one was to be cheeky, the closest thing Bond has to a god is M. A figure who he holds great reverence and loyalty and faith in, but also one who he at times fears or is intimidated by as he tries to steer his life on healthier paths. See M's urges for Bond to take more time off or to clean himself up at a clinic as the "God" giving his disciple food for thought and motivation for betterment. ;)
  • Posts: 15,234
    M is in many ways a god/father figure. I'd also say that Blofeld is the Satan of the Bond universe. Tiger Tanaka compares him to a Devil with a human face even. In YOLT he even reigns over his own Inferno.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Ludovico wrote: »
    M is in many ways a god/father figure. I'd also say that Blofeld is the Satan of the Bond universe. Tiger Tanaka compares him to a Devil with a human face even. In YOLT he even reigns over his own Inferno.

    Absolutely.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Bond does blindly put his faith in M that his orders are in a good cause, as shown by M's exasperation at the beginning of FYEO so he is as close as Bond gets to religious devotion.

    But probably best we end this metaphor here before the religious jump on it and claim Bond as an allegory for Jesus.

    Doubting Thomas: I'd know if someone had been crucified and risen from the dead. Your hands show no holes and it takes...

    Jesus: Two

    (Black and white flashback to Jesus having nails driven through his hands)
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    What the so called Moses, Jesus and Mohammed had in common: They never wrote down a single word themselves, which is kind of odd if they were so divinely inspired.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Bond does blindly put his faith in M that his orders are in a good cause, as shown by M's exasperation at the beginning of FYEO so he is as close as Bond gets to religious devotion.

    But probably best we end this metaphor here before the religious jump on it and claim Bond as an allegory for Jesus.

    Doubting Thomas: I'd know if someone had been crucified and risen from the dead. Your hands show no holes and it takes...

    Jesus: Two

    (Black and white flashback to Jesus having nails driven through his hands)

    @TheWizardOfIce

    Doubting Thomas: "Made you feel it, did they? [Jesus sits in silence] Well, you needn't worry. The first resurrection is—"

    [God acts and kills Thomas as he stands]


    Jesus: "Yes. Considerably."
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117

    'Do you expect me to talk Pilate?'
    'No Mr Christ. I expect you to die!'

  • If I remember correctly (and my memory is often faulty on details but mostly accurate on general matters) Fleming has Bond's mind drift to matters of religion when he is very close to death -- in the octopus' garden of Dr. No for example. Bond's visit to the godly statues on Kissy's island in You Only Live Twice is the closest he comes to showing any sort of religious sentiment, and he's not faced when imminent peril at that particular point (his visit to Dr. Shatterhand's castle is a day or so away at that point.)

    I haven't bothered to post much in this particular topic thread because I don't really see the point. I have a spiritual life of my own, thank you very much, and it has proven quite helpful to me over the last 20 years or so of my existence on this physical plane.. There's no need for me to defend it to the doubters here -- they're not going to change their minds, and I'm not going to change mine. So what's the point?

    If I may, man's attempt to understand the sacred forces that (to my mind) do exist is very like the parable of the blind men and the elephant. One blind man touches the elephant's ears and declares that an elephant is like a fan, the other touches his trunk and declares that the elephant is instead very much like a snake. A third touches his body and insists that an elephant is like a wall, and so forth. The blind men will never be able to understand the elephant fully from their own limited perspective. So it is with man and the Divine.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,348
    Here's a piece on Bond and religion I wrote some years ago:

    http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/musings-on-james-bond-and-religion.html
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @Dragonpol, I've got it bookmarked so that I can read it in full after I finish the Bond novels in the coming months. Very much look forward to giving it a look.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited July 2017 Posts: 18,348
    @Dragonpol, I've got it bookmarked so that I can read it in full after I finish the Bond novels in the coming months. Very much look forward to giving it a look.

    Thank you. I realise that it's incomplete now, but I did write it back in early 2006 and have found other references since, hence the "musings" title.
This discussion has been closed.