Analysis Of Nietzsche's Exegesis Of Christianity

Nietzsche was a revolutionary author and philosopher who has had a tremendous impact on German culture up through the twentieth century and even today. Nietzsche's views were very unlike the popular and conventional beliefs and practices of his time and nearly all of his published works were, and still are, rather controversial, especially in On the Genealogy of Morals. His philosophies are more than just controversial and unconventional viewpoints, however; they are absolutely extreme and dangerous if taken out of context or misinterpreted. After Nietzsche's death it took very little for his sister to make some slight alterations to his works to go along with Nazi ideology.

Nietzsche is widely known as a critic of religion. In fact, he talks in depth about morality in regards to religion in his essays about the genealogy of morals. But the problem is not within religion itself or within morals. The problem is involved in the combination of the two to create society’s understanding of morality through a very religious lens. In fact, Nietzsche has criticism for almost any set of morals constructed by a group of individuals and meant to be applied to society as a whole. True morality, according to Nietzsche, requires a separation from these group dynamic views of morality- or at least a sincere look into where they originated and why they persist- and a movement towards a more introverted, and intrinsically personalized understanding of what morals mean in spite of the fact that “the normative force to which every member of society is exposed, in the form of obligations, codes of behavior, and other moral rules and guidelines, is disproportionally high” (Korfmacher 6).

“we were dealing with strange ideas...[a] moral breakdown that has been going on for two decades. One by one all of our traditional moral standards went by the boards, or were so disregarded that they ceased to be binding…We found our great cities and the control of much of our industry and commerce taken over by strangers, who stacked the cards of success and prosperity against us” (Document 1).

Christianity had become the enemy of life and nature and the church has stifled its followers by turning them into closed minded and weak humans. Nietzsche ultimately believed that religion creates a concept of anti-natural morality which damages our development as humans quite

We have now come to the fourth and final book of Mere Christianity. In this book, the author takes us to the place in our Christian growth where we begin to rely more heavily on the power of God and less on ourselves to become the being that God originally intended for us to be — a son of God. He begins with an explanation of the difference between “making” and “begetting”.

Nietzsche strongest argument was that, “Human nature is always driven by “the will to power””, but religion will tell one otherwise, saying that one should forbid their bad desires. Nietzsche is quite critical in particular towards Christianity since it was stated as the religion of slaves and pity by Nietzsche, caused by limiting one’s personal development since they were too obsessed with the treasures of the afterlife. Having said that, Nietzsche also referred to Buddhism as the nihilistic and the “desire for nothingness” religion, however he does praise certain aspects of the Buddhist teaching in comparison to Jesus’. Last but foremost, Nietzsche proves Socrates death to be at the hands of the acceptance of slave morality. For those who practice religion are guaranteed to fall as a slave rather than to become their own master due to all the restriction and standards set up by God. I simply do agree with Nietzsche due to all the evidence connecting back to each and every religion and philosophers. One must strive to reach and achieve their desire in order to be satisfied with one’s life. As people say, “no pain, no gain”, therefore one must live through all the suffering to accomplish greatness in their lives and make the most out of the given life. One can conclude, the practice of religion led many to the acceptance of slave

While Nietzsche’s standpoint of the master morality can be viewed in the lifestyle of people today, it is not a morality that need be accepted or strived for as a sense of power or accomplishment in life. The Bible teaches that as we lose our live for Jesus we will find it (Matthew 10:39). Submitting to God is not an act of weakness, rather an honor and gain as we lose ourselves in Him and find our true selves. The Bible says that we were made in God’s image and likeness, and we were given dominion over the earth (Genesis 1:26). Nietzsche’s master morality appears to be just that, an attempt to gain dominion. Since Nietzsche did not believe in God, which is the way to salvation and eternal life (Romans 10:9), it is safe to assume that he was serving the god of this world and his ways, which have always been to try to copy or be like God (Isaiah 14:13-14). Nietzsche had knowledge about God but decided to turn away from him. Because of this, Romans 1:28 -29 shows that he, among other things would be arrogant, boastful heartless, and invent ways of doing evil, which to me is exactly what his whole master-slave morality portrays. Had Nietzsche just turned from his wicked ways and submitted to the One and only true God, he would have found the peace, love, and true authority with out death.

In Nietzsche’s aphorisms 90-95 and 146-162 he attacks what he believes to be the fundamental basis of the “slave” morality prevalent in the Judeo-Christian tradition as well as other religions and societies. From the beginning, he distinguishes the two different types of moralities he believes to exist: the “master morality”, created by rulers of societies, and the “slave” morality, created by the lowest people in societies. The former stresses virtues of the strong and noble while looking down upon the weak and cowardly. This type of morality, however, is not as widespread as the “slave morality” that has been adopted by so many religions. Nietzsche looks through the psychology and logic of

In the Anti-Christ, Nietzsche has addressed several religions in effort to counter Christianity. A religion he has used countable times is Buddhism, however his knowledge of Buddhism may have been incomplete. His understanding of Buddhism was based on a nineteenth century European society. With the current western understanding of Buddhism, he may not have labeled it life denying or nihilistic. Nietzsche did not fairly compare Buddhism with Christianity because he was lacking facts and was merely trying to undermine Christianity in order to affirm his philosophies.

In Twilight of the Idols Nietzsche emphasizes that the Christian Church is a false idol. He dares to say, “..God to be an enemy of life..” and, “Life ends where the ‘kingdom of God’ begins..” because he believes that Christian morality is against life itself (Idols, 23). The reason for this is because Nietzsche believes that, “to have to fight against the instincts- this is the formula for decadence: so long as the life is ascendant, happiness equals instinct” which simply means that if one goes against instincts, or an intuitive way of carrying ones life, then as a consequence it will lead to the degeneration of society and intellect while if life is on the rise, happiness must be equivalent to following ones’ instinct (Idols, 15). Because of his belief it is understood that Nietzsche wants one to embrace their instincts. Nietzsche states that a life in which

In his second thesis, Rorty comments on Nietzsche’s attempt to see science through the lens of art, and using life to experience art, in this way he saw that poetry may be a substitute for religion. He believed that using poetry as a substitute for religion would provide more room for individuality than religion, he also thought it would be a better substitute then science which was the goal of the enlightenment thinkers. If the driving motivation behind people’s behavior is not the desire for truth, but rather the desire for happiness, then there is no way to separate the cognitive from the non-cognitive, there is no way to separate the “higher” intellect of a human which pursues things for its

We live in a world marked by a culture of death. the constant manifetations of ruptures with one itself as lonelines, sadness, with no sence, unstopping search of false

Roma and Greece treated guilt more active than Christian. Nietzsche differentiated the morality between Roma, Greece and Christian. He also found that the nature of Roma and Greece was brutal and violent. Nietzsche though the Greek was be adept in forget. They did not beautify their brutal and violent nature. They just chose to forget about it and they believed that was native. However, the northern races also had the same nature, but The Christian just made the nature more civilized. They beautified their nature as the necessity to be rescued. The Christian morality believed “Bad Conscience”. However, in Nietzsche’s opinion, the “Bad Conscience” was not the “voice of God”, it was an ancient and brutal instinct. This instinct was depressed

Friedrich Nietzsche begins with a proposition that there are only two basic types of morality Slave morality and Master Morality. These types of moralities that Nietzsche proposes were initially formed when society was actually made up of masters and slaves. In society masters were completely free and slaves simply did whatever their masters said. Based on their respected situations Nietzsche argues these groups of people came up with two very different types of morality. Of course there are no longer any literal masters and slaves in todays society, however Nietzsche proposes while master and slaves no longer exist, the moral systems they came up with do.

3). In his most basic claims, Nietzsche implicitly negates the possibility of a “disinterested” or “objective” truth. He would not urge so definitively for an affirmation of reality, if he held out for the possibility of fantasy or god. The ‘innocence of becoming’ is a clear example of how Nietzsche, for all intents and purposes, “debunk[‘s]” the relevance of claims made by traditional authorities. In essence, Nietzsche basically nullifies the relevance of societal hierarchy. Not only this, but the further claims made by such a society regarding morality and philosophical thinking, are seen to be – at best – gullible and naïve. The ‘innocence of becoming’ refers to even the lowest classes of society finding power in their status. In lieu of accepting that we are completely alone in the world, Nietzsche asserts that we have a constant need to blame others for our state. It is simply much easier to do than to accept that everything we do has no genuine or reaching consequences. While the ‘innocence of becoming’ is not necessarily an innocent process as those we choose to blame are usually blameless, it is fair to say that we are innocent of it; much like the ‘will to power’ it also works through self-deception. Evidently we are able to commit to life affirmation by essentially taking no responsibility for our weakness. Christianity itself is closely connected with the ‘becoming’ process as in its