Replies

The nature of altruism really isn't selfless. Most so called selfless acts have a vested self-interest which causes them not to be altruistic. The kindest thing one can do for another also makes the beneficent individual feel good about himself.

I question your statement that, " It is not possible under andy circmstances for an Objectivist to be a Christian, nor for a Christian to be an Objectivist" is also not true. You imply that an Objectivist could never be charitable.

I suspect an Objectivist Christian would be the person that does not lie to himself about the true nature of the charitable acts he chooses to do even in Christ's name.

Your typos seem to reveal some anger regarding your feelings about Objectivism. You'll feel much better if you just let that hatred go and try to think more objectively.

There is one typo: andy = any. "jesus" and "his" are deliberately not capitalized. It is generally considered rude as well as pointless to do this kind of nitpicking. If you have an argument, make it. I see that you don't. Your post is almost entirely made up of misunderstandings, misinterpretations and ad hominem.

I have nothing against Objectivism. See my homepage.

You imply that an Objectivist could never be charitable. I imply no such thing. You have inferred it, and you are mistaken. Charity can be selfish -- properly understood. Jesus' view is actually closer to Kant's: he admonishes people from taking satisfaction of the kind you write of in charitable work. Nevertheless, Rand would be horrified at the thought that an Objectivist could be a Christian. If you had ever read any of her writings, you would know this. Read my other posts, which quote her at length if you want to disabuse yourself of your silly ideas about Rand.