1. You are wrong 2. People don't understand Ayn 3. People interpret Christianity differently
Which do you choose?
Completely incompatible,...
Then someone obviously doesn't understand Ayn or interprets Christianity completely differently than you.
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
Ayn Rand wrote:There is a great, basic contradiction in the teachings of Jesus. Jesus was one of the first great teachers to proclaim the basic principle of individualism -- the inviolate sanctity of man's soul, and the salvation of one's soul as one's first concern and highest goal; this means -- one's ego and the integrity of one's ego. But when it came to the next question, a code of ethics to observe for the salvation of one's soul -- (this means: what must one do in actual practice in order to save one's soul?) -- Jesus (or perhaps His interpreters) gave men a code of altruism, that is, a code which told them that in order to save one's soul, one must love or help or live for others. This means, the subordination of one's soul (or ego) to the wishes, desires or needs of others, which means the subordination of one's soul to the souls of others.
This is a contradiction that cannot be resolved. This is why men have never succeeded in applying Christianity in practice, while they have preached it in theory for two thousand years. The reason of their failure was not men's natural depravity or hypocrisy, which is the superficial (and vicious) explanation usually given. The reason is that a contradiction cannot be made to work. That is why the history of Christianity has been a continuous civil war -- both literally (between sects and nations), and spiritually (within each man's soul).
From a letter to Sylvia Austin dated July 9, 1946, in Letters of Ayn Rand, p. 287
I think that is a question worth seeing clearly. We all struggle with that conflict all our life. It is a conflict that only a sociopath completely escapes.
lostindc wrote:I use to have questions and concerns regarding the philosophies of Rand but I learned to:
1. Shelve these issues until another time. 2. Listen to leadership and trust they know what is right (it is great, I do not have to read on the subject anymore! More time for scrap-booking, facebooking, and shoving my head full of sugar-loaded foods! Yum!). 3. I now realize my difficulties with Rand are not founded in anything related to Rand but rather my failings as a person (e.g. not being faithful enough to the Rand movement).
I no longer follow her teachings having decided to instead follow a life of sin and debauchery.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
Equality wrote:...the fundamental idea of Christianity is altruism...
I'm curious. Is this a known fact within Mormon doctrine? If so, then Mormons who are Ayn Rand objectivists need some straightening out.
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
I think this is just another case of religious syncretism to be honest. When two worldviews meet, one will at least be affected one way or another. In this case, your family members are no different than the Muslims in Northern India who have adopted a lot of Hinduism into their belief system.
Ayn Rand has a lot that appeals to Latter Day Saints, her emphasis on rugged individualism mixes in with Free Agency in appealing ways. Given the political climate in which Obama gets charged with “schoolyard Marxism”, her back story of growing up in a Bolshevik state and rejecting it in favor of America (New Zion) has the ring of a testimony to it, a Saul to Paul type conversion.
lostindc wrote:To be an Ayn Rand supporter is akin to being a selfish asshole and in no way compatible with Mormonism. Yes I have resorted to ad hominem.
In the words of the great Mopologist "It is not Ad hominem logical fallacy to call a selfish asshole a selfish asshole." Rand is a selfish person, her entire philosophy was/is put yourself first in all situation. Her philosophy is not compatible with the Gospel of Christ in any degree.
Why is it that 40-50% of the Mormons on my Facebook either spew Randtardisms and/or push the book? The people of Mormonism are so @ssbackwards it is ridiculous.
Show those idiots this:
"Ayn Rand, is an acknowledged source for some of the Satanic philosophy as outlined in The Satanic Bible by Anton LaVey."
huckelberry wrote:I am sorry but this quote"definitely incompatible" is definitely not what I said. adding,, Zeezrom, I might be misunderstanding your reply here.
So sorry, Huck! I was rushed and didn't read it completely. How embarrassing. Now I understand.
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
I think this is just another case of religious syncretism to be honest. When two worldviews meet, one will at least be affected one way or another. In this case, your family members are no different than the Muslims in Northern India who have adopted a lot of Hinduism into their belief system.
Ayn Rand has a lot that appeals to Latter Day Saints, her emphasis on rugged individualism mixes in with Free Agency in appealing ways. Given the political climate in which Obama gets charged with “schoolyard Marxism”, her back story of growing up in a Bolshevik state and rejecting it in favor of America (New Zion) has the ring of a testimony to it, a Saul to Paul type conversion.
Excellent. Thank you
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
Equality wrote:Ayn Rand's philosophy is completely incompatible with Christianity. Mormons who love Rand must either reject fundamental components of Objectivism or they must reject fundamental components of Mormonism.
I fully agree. Objectivism denies our altruistic instincts as human beings.
the letter quoted in this thread poses a conflict between individual soul and altruim. I agree with your comment that the comment seems to deny our altruistic instincts which I think should remain an important part of a whole person. I would like to expand the phrase from instinct to potential of a creative free individual. Altruism is worth little without it involving real whole people and free souls are grossly deficient without caring for and connecting with others.
Ayn Rand can sound as if she sees one half of the human self at war with the other half.