It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I thought it was from the 60s, but this seems to be the article here:
http://www.unz.org/Pub/Encounter-1971jul-00008
You can get all of Encounter magazine (1953-1990) online in .pdf file form at the above site. Well worth reading. I have a few of the print editions too. They're very collectible these days and contain brilliant writing from many famous authors and poets including our very own Kingsley Amis.
Right off the start there's a HUGE fallacy: the Flood has never been proven and in fact there's no physical trace of a world Flood and of migration of all the species of animals on earth from a big boat. There are however many myths of world Flood, but that's no indication that there was one at any point in history, especially since there's no physical evidence for it. It indicates however the possible existence of an initial myth that evolved and was modified in various cultures. None of them of course could work in reality. Including the very naive Biblical myth.
And of course even if proof of said flood did exist there's a world of difference between saying it happened and saying God made it happen to punish us.
The problem with having evidence for religion is that then the faith aspect would shrink. Those who choose to have faith in what they can’t see is basically why some people are religious and some aren’t. It’s a comfort to many people, including some people very close to me in my life, and I would never ridicule them for their beliefs since they don’t impose them or use them in harmful ways. I myself come from a Christian background, and my own faith has been tested many times, to where I feel unsure about a lot of things. You don’t need to even belong to a religion to believe in God, which sometimes people forget. I definitely have my issues with organized religion.
Many Christians will say atheists don’t believe because they are too prideful or don’t want to take responsibility. Many atheists say Christians shouldn’t believe because there is no evidence and it’s a waste of time. I respect both sides, especially because I know plenty of good people who are both Christian (or have a different religion) and atheist - or agnostic. I hope in the Community, and the world in general, we don’t allow our spiritual beliefs to divide us too badly.
Of course. We're not even arguing God yet. The Flood did not happen to begin with. We'd know by now if it had.
@patb The text cares about propaganda and reinforcing faith. Not truth.
Any chance of some 'evidence' from someone reputable who doesn't have a blatant vested intetest?
Well, everyone has got saying their piece quite fairly, have they not? I have delivered this thread when many said from the very outset that it was simply impossible for it to exist. I suppose that's something.
@Dragonpol I am asking for reliable evidence. What you showed is twisted evidence that are not followed by the ones presenting them but arranged to fit their agenda and their preconceived ideas. They reach a conclusion before analyzing the data.I'm glad you came up with something about the Flood as I studied myths and I know a thing or two about this particular one. It's now been debunked and has been since a long time. I've seen the tomb of Merlin that does not mean Merlin existed.
I thought you were supposed to have a degree in law?
Ask yourself if evidence from a source so clearly compromised would stand up in court?
Would a jury consider eviidence from Fred in defence of Rose as credible?
Yes, I've got a Masters conversion course degree in Law. No, it would not stand up in court I'd imagine but Atheists providing sources on the evidence of Biblical claims are very hard to find.
Another talking snake. Not sure how much more evidence you need.
Oh and such flood would have created massive amounts of archeological evidence: lots of corpses, traces of migrating animals, what have you.
I understand that so far you cannot back up your claim? Forget me, forget I'm an atheist, my personal opinion is irrelevant. Has your claim met its burden or proof?
But I thought you said you had the archaeological evidence?
If you are basing your conclusions entirely on the link you posted from a Christian website don't you agree that doesn't show much intellectual rigour?
Given believing in God is a pretty monumental step given the implications for your soul and eternal life I would've assume you'd search out multiple sources to make sure you could make an informed decision?
You said there was archeological evidence proving many events in the Bible. The first link you share talks about the Flood. If you think it did not proved the Flood... Why provide said link?
Well, fair enough.
Well I'd say so. And thus the Flood claim is so far unsubstantiated.
It will remain so. I don't have a degree in the relevant discipline.
In any case we can all agree that the content of a Christisn apologist's website can hardly count as scientific consensus or demonstration beyond any doubt of the veracity of a Biblical claim.
Of course, if you love Duran Duran, you would not see an issue with this.
If at least they had done their homework and gathered the evidence, analyzed and came up with intellectually honest arguments. But then they'd have to say: the Bible is a holy book but it's highly unreliable history and most of the events in it are fabricated.
It's not saying God doesn't exist. Just that this god does not.