Posted on 06/08/2011 9:34:29 PM PDT by Shalmaneser
Why is that?
^^^^^^^^^^
When Ayn Rand is right she is very right!
And...Yes, parts of her philosophy are flat out wrong. That can and should be acknowledged without discarding and discounting everything that is true. True is true and will **always** be true. Truth can not be made to disappear simply because wrong also exists.
How absurd.
Equating Rand to Satanism? Let alone LeVay’s cult version of Satanism?
Maybe if you are naive enough to buy into the mythology, but LaVey was a hoax who started a cartoonish cult that was in vogue for a short period of time (No really, the Rolling Stones were counted as fans)...and later in life, fans of metal music, and a certain Dungeon and Dragons crowd picked up on the imagery of it. He is not influential. He essentially mixed ideologies from Darwinism, and a bunch of -isms, including even Calvinism, and mixed it with Aleistor Crowley and Alice Bailey mumbo jumbo. If a real Satanic church exists - he isn’t it, and likening Ayn Rand to that legacy is even more far fetched.
Within hours(?) of signing up. Expect to be under the microscope for months.
You noobs think you're a big deal, don't you? If you had any integrity, you would name names instead of trying to have us follow a link of dubious origin.
Your premise is shaky and your conclusion is, well, retahded.
Time for the Kitties!!
IB4TZ!
Take a look at
Again, welcome to Free Republic, and have a good time.
I find it hard to reconcile Rand's moralistic streak - obvious in her non-fiction writings, particularly her later ones - with the claim that Rand was a proto-Satanist. Don't Satanists want to obliterate all moral judgments?
Good god man give it a rest!
Be prepared for criticism......
Your post will come under close scrutiny......
N00Bs who post the first thing after joining FR usually don't fare too well.......
Good luck....
It won’t be around long enough to have a good time.
IMHO...
You’re absolutely right. I think it every time I see fawning over this or that book or author.
Christians must remember their faith, and if they do, they will not be so caught up in this or that non-Christian ideology or philosophy. Then someone will say “but that’s blind belief”. No, I’m simply saying to take things with a grain of salt, digest them (intellectually), then in your daily prayers and meditations, take some time to analyze this new ideology or philosophy, and validate it against Scripture. Of course, in order to do that, one has to be quite familiar with Christian doctrine. Then again, we should be that, anyway. Over time, we will come to see where our secular works differ with the word of God. Of course, in the mean time, in our zeal to think that some ideological author has happened upon some magical cure for our problems, we can very easily mislead ourselves, which is why Christians need to study the Bible and consult properly ordained pastors. And if we hear unsound doctrine, doctrine that, try as we might, we can’t escape the fact that it seems to be flawed, find another. Because as sure as Jesus is truth, the word of God is perfect. In the Bible is everything we need to meet life’s challenges. And every man, in his conscience, must come to terms with God. This is why people change congregations or even denominations. Bible study is the most important study we shall ever undertake.
It is neither my premise nor my conclusion. I did not write the article. I only posted it.
There is no need to attack me personally. I am sorry you found the ideas in my first post to be offensive. I did not realize that criticism of Ayn Rand's ideas was forbidden here.
Lighten up on the newbie.
First Things is a well respected Catholic opinion journal. There is nothing new here. Rand’s atheism has always been criticized by Christians. See Whittaker Chambers in National Review in 1957:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/222482/big-sister-watching-you/flashback
What would Christ/God think of someone who prays, tithes and does charitable works due to guilt, hedging their bets on whether there's an afterlife and/or to feel superior to others?
Rand clearly speeks to these types of people and her opinion of them is just as low as Christ's would be.
Rand deals with government forcing one to give what they earn at the point of a gun. Government is us - the people.
Jihad on behalf your your God, whether by beheading the infidel or having government force one to obey the tenets of your God is wrong, un-Christian and not what Jesus taught us.
I can make the same case you do that Rand is laying the blueprint to follow Christ's admonition to render to Ceasar what is Ceasar's and to God what is God's...
Christ wants us to come willingly to his Father out of love, not guilt, superiority or bet-hedging.
If we then force the unenlightened to come to God via the point of gun (social justice) they are not saved and neither are we.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with being saved and recognizing that Rand correctly pointed out the dangers of a collectivist government and a theocracy.
Regards.
The link works just fine. First Things is a conservative Christian Magazine which is often cited here on the Religion Forum. Personal insults like the one you hurled above are generally not accepted here. It is true, however, that nasty responses like that are quite common on the Religion Forum after criticisms are leveled against another religion. In fact, your response bolsters the case made in the article that Any Rand's philosophy really is a religion!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.