/lit/ - Literature

like lole just take some things from Nietzshce and some from JC

>>13884353
Easily.

Nietzsche was a pathetic, hypocritical pseud who is beloved for generations by pathetic, hypocritical pseuds because he patted them on the back and said "Just do whatever bro, find your own meaning haha" and demanded nothing from them, exposed them to no harsh truths, failed to impart any real knowledge at all. Nietzsche is pessimism for optimists "Duuuuuude, like nothing matters man so it aaaaaaal matters".

Religious people are essentially the same type of delusional, head in the sand simpletons. They're one and the same with a different coat of paint, both bumbling through life thinking their beliefs will save them from death.

Read Lev Shestov. He does.

>>13884353
Of course, Nietzsche himself said Jesus was an example of the Übermensch. Nietzsche took issue with the development of Pauline Christianity and the subsequent institution of the church. That being said some of Nietzsche's criticism of Christianity is flat out wrong and probably only served rhetorical purposes.

>>13884415
Right. Christ is the will to power. Life triumphing over death.

>>13884415
I'm well aware that Nietzsche thought highly of Christ himself compared to his followers, but I was talking about the religion of Christianity as a whole. How was he wrong exactly? Can you point out to literature that expound on this that I can read for myself? Thanks.

>>13884381

Do you have any idea what Nietzsche actually wrote?

>>13884379
Based and mosleypilled

>>13884353
Yes. Nietzsche called Christ "the one true Christian." It is easy to see why too; Jesus took the conventional religious dogma of the time and flipped it on its head, went his own way with his own morality and ideas about the world, and then had the wherewithal to teach others about why he felt what he believed was more valuable. There is a good amount of wisdom in many of his parables. In many ways you could view Jesus as a proto-Ubermensch.

What Nietzsche really detested was Christianity, not Christ. The story of Jesus, a man who went his own way, got twisted into another iteration of an oppressive organized religion based on slave morality, and in fact it became even more effective at stifling the will of man. That's why Nietzsche always rails against Paul; whatever Jesus might have said that was useful was distorted into "Bro just keep your head down, just go to church bro, don't question your status, trust me bro haha it'll all pay off in the afterlife please bro"

It is interesting to me that Jesus called himself the Son of Man, not the Son of God. I know this has a wider context within the biblical narrative, but to me it almost implies that man is the equivalent to God, and that Christ's divinity came from within, not from an otherworldly plane. But ironically, instead of becoming a symbol of the potential divinity resting inside you (and inside all things, for that matter), the cross became the symbol of Jesus himself within you - just believe and be modest / pious and you're set. As if the power of Christ's teachings rattled things so much that his symbol had to be changed from one of man to one working in conjunction with the Judeo-Christian God.

The only belief system I've personally found that maybe kind of sort of has the two ideologies in coexistence with one another is pantheism / panentheism, and Spinoza kind of acts as a bridge between divine belief and Nietzschean belief. But my interpretations and meanings will wildly differ from others - just as both Christ and Nietzsche intended.

>>13884444
>UHHHH MARX NEVER SAID THAT
>UHHHH NIETZSCHE NEVER SAID THAT
>UHHHH THE BIBLE NEVER SAID THAT
Every time

>>13884475
But Nietzsche did never say that, Anon.

>>13884475
Take your pills, Anon.

>>13884485
>>13884492
Keep crying pseud morons

>>13884475
>Misrepresent, literally lie about what someone wrote
>Somehow imply this does not invalidate your argument

Go see a doctor

>>13884501
see
>>13884499

>>13884499
>>13884475
You aren't well.

>>13884505
I'm fine, it's really pathetic you try to imply people are sick to disagree with you

>>13884504

>>13884522
Tell me what happened to you. Let me help.

>>13884552
Go back to tumblr with your "who hurt you" bullshit.

I don’t need to, N. already did. He signed his last letters “the crucified.”

>>13884560
That was an alegory, you fuckin schizo

>>13884522
>>>13884505
>I'm fine, it's really pathetic you try to imply people are sick to disagree with you
If this isnt bait it means you literally just entered a conversation with people who have read Nietzche to at least some degree to audaciously assert your completely uninformed interpretation and completely ignore (perhaps involuntarily) the fact that everyone can tell you have no idea what you're talking about. It's as if you've convinced yourself you understand Nietzche and thus become intolerant of any suggestion that you might not so you visciously assert your ignorance like a bully. You're use of the words "pathetic" and "pseud" are blatant projections.

>>13884602
I didn't read your post but I can assume it's pompous pseud posturing, fuck off.

>>13884555
You gonna cry?

>>13884618
You're the one who can only communicate in passive aggressive pseud replies, you wet vagina.

>>13884601

>implying that allegory as a form isn’t inherently reconciling the two levels of meaning

Fuckin midwit.

Christ is the Übermensch
>elaborate on that
no

>>13884613
>I didn't read your post but I can assume it's pompous pseud posturing, fuck off.

>>13884353
N already did in The Antichrist.

>>13884560
He probably meant Dyonisus, though.

>>13885011
Christ and Dyonisus are the same.

>>13885022
Not really.

>>13885022
yes yes and jesus and krishna are the same too we know...

>>13884353

The version of Christianity Nietzsche hated was very specific and doesn't represent the substantial body of thought, especially in contemporary non-American circles. But then I don't live in pre-war Germany so who knows.

The whole purpose of modern religious circles is that they are based on cultivating a community and living according, the loneliness inherent in Nietzsche's work is there by design.

If you imagine Christ as an iconoclast who taught radical love free from the societal constraints of the day then there's certainly some overlap.

Have I been understood? Dionysus vs the Crucified!

>>13884471
Good post.

>>13884471
honestly a top tier post. thanks anon

>>13884471
Perhaps the most disgusting take on what it makes to be a Christian I've ever read. Repent

>>13885022
>>13885030
tokugawa ieyasu was Jesus christ, its right in his name Ieyasu- Iesus.

>>13884471

Though I agree with everything you say Nietzsche says, are you sure this is what he actually says? The only way one of his paragraphs ends in agreement with its beginning is if it's long enough to contradict itself twice. Besides, I think Paul and the Church have been "retroactively debunked" by Plato enough that Christology, rather than Doctrine, would be obvious to one looking for God, rather than looking to observe sociocultural norms. So Nietzsche seems redundant to the whole thing.

>>13884381
/r/atheism tier

>>13884471
There are still some Christians who kind of get it. Christ is God and Christ is within you - those who believe this fervently are halfway there. At the church I go to the pastor has begun to talk frequently about how everything we need is already within us. The other day he pulled me aside and said he believed I was going to receive revelation soon and said "the thing about revelation is that people think of it as more stuff, but it isn't. Instead God is going to uncover something in you that already existed. It isn't going to be a new idea, instead it is going to be fundamental change to the way that you think." It reminded me very much of a post on here in a Buddhism thread about a "non-conceptual realization".
Pastor is the opposite of a hippie too. He's a not very educated hardworking white man who spent a lot of years pastoring in the south. But he's very intelligent despite the lack of formal education and has said things that I've seen a lot of wisdom in even though I'm a judgmental pseud who loves Nietzsche and more mystic takes on the Christ.
Most Christians are delusional imo but some of them are on to something.

Orthodoxy

>>13884353
>Could you ever reconcile the two?

Big brain version:
>>13884471
>>13885206


Small brain version:
The church in Nietzsche's day was "a mishmash of error and violence", as Goethe put it. Nietzsche saw this and thought "It's all corrupt; Christianity has gotta go", but ironically he was closer to the ideal of Christianity than the religious leaders of his time.


The key insight here is that you can't lead a moral life just by following a bunch of rules. The Übermensch is beyond good and evil; in the kingdom of heaven there is no buying and selling, giving or being given in marriage.

>>13884432
how is it benefitial to have an egoist leader?
it makes sense that a leader be bound to slave morality, it is not only benefitial to the followers but the leader on the long run.

>>13884353
JBP tries to, like the dumb faggot cuck that he is.

>>13884353
No; this is made evident by the fact that the end of the "Übermensch" archetype is depressed/resolved in the gratification of primal urges.

One who is selfpropelled, whilst renegating God, selfconsumes unto dissipation, whereas one who is selfpropelled, whilst knowing (that this is made possible by), and being impelled by, God, transcends the world.

Nature's system is selfrecyclical; its operation - selfrecursive; its process - selfconsuming. Within nature, there is no eternal recurrence - there is only spatiotemporal recurrence unto Death.

>>13886269
How so

>>13884353
No. Nietzsche have intellectually destroyed Christianity and anyone who is still a Christian just simply haven't read Nietzsche yet.

>>13887223
>t.hasn't read Jung

Hitler did

>>13887337
Shouldn't you be in rehab?

>>13884471
This is very elegant so it sounds correct but I really see no basis in this. Nietzsche believes most of his followers do not follow christ but he also believes that christ's doctrine is the extenuating of slave morality to its ultimate conclusion. The closest thing to direct praise of christ was in his definition of the ubermensche as "like caesar with the soul of christ" but that really means something different than "christ was good." If anyone can post a passage to disprove this I would appreciate this.

>>13887204
many christfags get mad when you call them out on their castration of their own will. It's pretty hard to admit that you're not able to reinterpret the worldviews that given to you.

many of them get so mad that they insist that worldviews themselves change so that they can live an easier life

>>13886535
Unfortunately observing sociocultural norms and staying within your comfort zone is often conflated with looking for God or living a pious life - or at the very least it was up to the point where Nietzsche was making his observations.
>>13886582
Your pastor sounds based, but I've seen that concept swing all the way to the other side of the pendulum. I used to live in the deep south and there was a group of southern baptists I met who told me that I was going to Hell on the simple basis that I dont accept Christ as God and my savior, even though they said He is still within me. When I asked if a pedophilic murderer who believed in Christ would get into Heaven before me they said yes, also on the simple basis that they accept Christ as the Lord. But like you say, not all Christians are so delusional.
>>13887621
There is a difference between Christ, the parables, and Christ's doctrine as it is practiced. While he didn't necessarily think he was "good," and probably even thought him to be weak because of how he martyred himself with no defense, Nietzsche at the very least respected him for being "the one true Christian," i.e. someone who rejected the institutions of the time, talked of his own interpretation, and then taught it to others, effectively changing the course of history. Granted, Nietzsche probably didn't like that it was taught as a new way of life to follow with the promise of an afterlife rather than a suggestion to people that they could do the same, but again that is largely due to how the apostles transcribed and taught it. It's also why Nietzsche is so intentionally vague - he wants people to look at his work and draw their own conclusions, rather than spell it out for people and just create a new tribe of followers.

>>13885206
Cont.

I'll add to this and say that N really doesn't give much of a shit about Christianity as a religion built about the figure of Christ (who he admires) but as a continuation of Platonic thought, he even goes as far as calling Christianity Platonism for idiots. Had it continued to develop down an Aristotelian path from the middle ages onwards he probably would have been a fan.

You can delve into the development of early Christianity from Dionysius onwards and how it relates to the important Greeks and Platonists, but there's really not much to be gained if you're not an N scholar or really into Christianity.