Does LDS Serve Up a Swanson Frozen Dinner?

[_sock puppet]

When a young teen, I would often pop a Banquet frozen dinner in the oven those days when I had to fend for myself. A couple of triangular shaped pieces of pressed together fish, battered, fried, about 10 tater tots (shout out to Tator), and half a cup of peas. It was all there.

Swanson are now more popular than Banquet. I had probably 3 or 4 of the Swanson Hungry Man's during college.

Even if there was one thing I liked about such--tater tots or maybe the dressing that came with turkey--the rest of it was atrocious. Maybe a bit or two, and the rest hit the trash can.

Holland's talk Sunday, the 'long nights and empty nets' portion in particular, seems to be along the lines, 'if you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding', approach to religion. NOMs beware! Holland says you're going to come up short in your eternal reward unless you buy 'the whole enchilada'.

In another thread currently in progress, there is discussion of how compatible the philosophy of Ayn Rand is with Mormonism, or more broadly, with Christianity. Like most sets of ideas, no two sets are completely compatible. But like the mashed potatoes in the Swanson Hungry Man, I can just toss certain ideas in many sets into the garbage, but keeping others, those that are appealing.

I do like how the Rand letter points out that Christianity, the whole set, sets forth a construct that the best one can do for himself is by doing for others. That seems to be a contradiction of selfishness and selflessness. But I recall a Christian teaching--maybe not a ver batim passage from the New Testament, but taught nonetheless--that one should lose himself in the service of others. Perhaps one starts out doing charitable acts for others, out of selfish motivations, but the deeper he becomes immersed in this charitable service, he loses that selfishness. No time for it, he's too busy focusing on others, their needs, to give thought to himself.

Now, I realize the great Socrates said "the unexamined life is not worth living." Perhaps, but that introspective focus does seem at odds with Christian teachings, that try to extrovert ones' focus on others, not so much inward on self. Even Christian religion calls for meditation time, prayer, to be focused on another being, god, not on one's self.

Back to Rand's Objectivism, it might be quite important to successful Christianity. To be charitable, one does need to focus on the reality outside one's self. One must realize that there is a reality outside himself to break out of complete self-absorption, after all--and eventually lose oneself in service to his fellow man. So that delineation of Objectivism seems quite useful to being charitable, at least at the early stages.

The selfishness of Objectivism as the motivator, like the New Testament aspects of doing charity to save one's self, seems an important motivator for communal progress. Selfishness is a great motivator; without it, a society would have comparative economic malaise.

Is selfishness an end unto itself? Probably not. That's where Objectivism stops short, and Christianity keeps going.

In any event, for me, it does not seem that anyone, not even Holland and the LDS Church, has everything neatly and completely bundled up in a tidy package. There's plenty in the LDS Church's Hungry Man frozen dinner that most, if they think for themselves, will toss in the garbage, where you'll probably find some Ayn Rand ideas too.

[_bcspace]

NOMs beware! Holland says you're going to come up short in your eternal reward unless you buy 'the whole enchilada'.

Isn't this just a given? Do NOMs actually expect to receive a full eternal reward by skirting major beliefs and requirements? That God will just beat them with a few stripes etc. and then they can just waltz in?

[_Yoda]

NOMs beware! Holland says you're going to come up short in your eternal reward unless you buy 'the whole enchilada'.

Isn't this just a given? Do NOMs actually expect to receive a full eternal reward by skirting major beliefs and requirements? That God will just beat them with a few stripes etc. and then they can just waltz in?

NOMs are not convinced that "the whole enchilada" is necessary for eternal reward. It is not about God "beating them with a few stripes". It's about the honest belief that they are not doing anything wrong to begin with, and that God will judge us by our hearts rather than by following "Mosaic law" type requirements.

[_sock puppet]

NOMs beware! Holland says you're going to come up short in your eternal reward unless you buy 'the whole enchilada'.

Isn't this just a given? Do NOMs actually expect to receive a full eternal reward by skirting major beliefs and requirements? That God will just beat them with a few stripes etc. and then they can just waltz in?

NOMs are not convinced that "the whole enchilada" is necessary for eternal reward. It is not about God "beating them with a few stripes". It's about the honest belief that they are not doing anything wrong to begin with, and that God will judge us by our hearts rather than by following "Mosaic law" type requirements.

Mormonism has a strong stripe of Mosaic law type requirements as compared to mainstream Christianity, that's for sure.

[_MCB]

"the whole enchilada" is necessary for eternal reward.

The whole enchilada of beliefs is composed of tortilla, applesauce, habaneros, feta cheese, gummy bears, fresh fried maggots, green tomatoes, coffee grounds, double strength vinegar, gooseberries, peanut butter, liverwurst, whole cloves of garlic-- you get the picture. If you swallow all of Mormonism including all of its prophets, your brain will explode from cognitive dissonance.

It is safer to follow the whole enchilada of works, and forget the rest.

[_zeezrom]

Awww, the memories that Pink Floyd quote gave me. :)

[_sock puppet]

Awww, the memories that Pink Floyd quote gave me. :)

Ah, the double entendre too.

[_sock puppet]

"the whole enchilada" is necessary for eternal reward.

The whole enchilada of beliefs is composed of tortilla, applesauce, habaneros, feta cheese, gummy bears, fresh fried maggots, green tomatoes, coffee grounds, double strength vinegar, gooseberries, peanut butter, liverwurst, whole cloves of garlic-- you get the picture. If you swallow all of Mormonism including all of its prophets, your brain will explode from cognitive dissonance.

It is safer to follow the whole enchilada of works, and forget the rest.

I thought it would be your digestive tract, not your brain, that would explode if you ate that 'whole enchilada'.

[_zeezrom]

Awww, the memories that Pink Floyd quote gave me. :)

Ah, the double entendre too.

My dad listened to "Comfortably Numb" on The Wall at the CD store in the mall with my bother and me. He liked the song so much, he bought the set. Later, he put the CDs in and started listening from the beginning and soon realized he didn't like it at all. I was able to take possession soon after. :)

[_sock puppet]

Awww, the memories that Pink Floyd quote gave me. :)

Ah, the double entendre too.

My dad listened to "Comfortably Numb" on The Wall at the CD store in the mall with my bother and me. He liked the song so much, he bought the set. Later, he put the CDs in and started listening from the beginning and soon realized he didn't like it at all. I was able to take possession soon after. :)

Quite the fortuitous windfall!

At one of my BYU graduations, in my vicinity among the procession line of graduates entering the Marriott Center, there broke out an acapella version of The Wall: "We don't need no education. We don't need no thought control. Teacher, leave those kids alone!" I'd estimate no less than four score of us were chanting away. It was quite the irony for a BYU graduation procession.

Oh yes, I am that much older than you (damn it).