| | Regarding #19:
For a Christian such as Richard Jordan, there is a higher proper authority than one’s own mind: God, by his word in scripture and by his spirit in you. Acceptance of the Christian God’s deliverances is profoundly at odds with pride in the Randian sense. To place no authority higher than one’s own rational judgment (Rand’s core of pride) is flatly opposed to the First Commandment as it is construed in the main Christian denominations.
So, too, whoever trusts and boasts that he possesses great skill, prudence, power, favor, friendship, and honor has also a god, but not this true and only God. This appears again when you notice how presumptuous, secure, and proud people are because of such possessions, and how despondent when they no longer exist or are withdrawn. Therefore I repeat that the chief explanation of this point is that to have a god is to have something in which the heart entirely trusts. – Luther
Pride – RC / Faith – RC / Faith – Philosophy
“Faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen.” Hebrews 11:1
“Faith is a living, bold trust in God’s grace.” – Luther
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Faith designates blind acceptance of a certain ideational content, acceptance induced by feeling in the absence of evidence or proof.”
Peikoff – Ominous Parallels
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jordan would claim we have plenty of evidence for the existence and grace of God. Romans 1:17–25
The just shall live by faith. / For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness. / Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. / For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: / Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. / Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. / And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. / Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: / Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature [man] more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
********************
Where Jordan wrote “with the need for a lack of compassion, charity, and humility,” he could be on to some truths about Rand’s philosophy. In Rand’s view, one’s immediate impulses to compassion and charity need to be checked and first cleared for rationality. Still, as you say, Ed, Jordan’s statement goes further and therein fails to accurately represent Rand’s philosophy. As for humility, I would expect Jordan to mean the humility one should have before one’s Creator and Lord over life and death. Rand rightly exposes that need as a false one, which needs to be washed away.
Where Jordan wrote that Rand was “demonstrably anti-religion,” within the context of his entire review, I did not take up any insinuation that Rand was not a supporter of the freedom of religion. Rand’s view is anti-faith, anti-humility, and anti-service; these are the salient modes of her view being anti-religious, as rightly set forth by Jordan.
(Edited by Stephen Boydstun on 4/29, 9:09am)
|
|
