/lit/ - Literature

Have Nietzscheans eve refuted him?

>>14238929
We don't need to religion is based on faith not logic, obviously.

>>14238952
Nietzsche isn't based on logic, either.

>>14238958
Whose this?

>>14238960
But you need to use logic to determine which interpretation of your religion is correct.

If you read the book, you would know Nietzsche isnt trying to debunk Jesus, he is debunking the Orthodox interpretation of Christianity

>>14238960
False.
>>14238929
He was a retard.

>>14238979
4 posts in and the Christards are already at eachothers throats

>>14238979
Good argument, thanks for proving that >>14238960 is correct

>>14238929
nietzsche is unfalsifiable

>>14239017
Is it because nobody is retarded enough to try and falsify being Optimistic and Affirming about life?

>>14238958
>Anglo-nigger IQ
Just offer this faggot tea. It's the ubermensch.

>>14238978
>But you need to use logic to determine which interpretation of your religion is correct.
No I don't, the one I believe is the correct one.

>>14239121
Does that also mean that the religions other people believe are correct?

>>14238929
Sorry OP you won't find any Christians itt being able to make any arguments against him. Nobody can argue against something that is true.

>>14239103
who is it?

>>14239124
No their beliefs are mistaken at best, more likely they have been deceived by Satan.

>nietzsche thread
>pure anger

120 years later. And youre still mad.

>>14239143
>>14239121
>>14238960

t. Trolling Atheist

A real Christian would have said this >>14238979, even though it is just as much of a Non Argument

>>14239134
The Eternal Anglo.

>>14239156
>Trolling Atheist
Absolutely not, faith is the central tenet of Christianity, anyone who needs logical arguments to convince them to believe is totally missing the point.

>>14239201
Wow you're really committing.

But what I wanted was a real Christian to respond to Nietzsches Criticisms of St Paul

>>14239227
LOL whatever.

Nietzsche is more devastating to Christians than Dawkins or Harris could ever hope to be.

Because his arguments aren't just appeals to emotion. And like was said here >>14238978. He isn't trying to debunk Christianity as a whole, just the Mainstream interpretation of Jesus's teachings, because he knew there was a much deeper meaning to them

>>14239227
1. Faith without works is dead.
2. It requires basic logic (let's just call it critical thinking) in order to work for God
3. Therefore faith without logic is dead

>>14239265 was meant for >>14239201

>>14239227
Why do people still use bait meme pics?

>>14239360
Why do people still follow Christianity desu

>>14239256
>Because his arguments aren't just appeals to emotion.

they literally are

>>14239378
Nietzsche literally defends slavery and the subjugation of women retard

>>14238960
It wasn't always. During the Crusades, people literally went to war over their beliefs, suggesting they weren't beliefs at all. The argument changed to belief and faith which is why Christians lost control over Western culture.

Can anyone defend Orthodox Christianity from Nietzsche? Normally Orthodoxytards are very vocal on this board

>>14239381
> an incel freak who gets cucked by his friends no less than 3 times defends slavery and the subjugation of women

>>14239265
>2. It requires basic logic (let's just call it critical thinking) in order to work for God
What? Why?

>>14239622
>duude nietzsche was an Incel duude just trust me he sounded like one duude

it still dosent refute his criticisms of christianity, however

>>14238960
>religion is based on faith not logic
Ahem

>>14239762
Lol, people are still responding to the troll

>>14239121
>>14239156
>>14239227

>>14238958
Based. Chesterton mogs Neetzsche super hard.

>>14239767
Can you give a brief overview of his refutation of Nietzsche

>>14239763
Trolls aren´t real, famalam

>>14239643

Unless you're getting your orders directly from an intermediary (who you also have faith in) then what works you choose to do (or not do) is up to your discretion.

>>14239780
No.

>>14238929
>The 'Kingdom of Heaven' is a condition of the heart
not wrong
>not something that comes 'upon the earth' or 'after death
wrong

>>14239780
>This, incidentally, is almost the whole weakness of Nietzsche, whom some are representing as a bold and strong thinker. No one will deny that he was a poetical and suggestive thinker; but he was quite the reverse of strong. He was not at all bold. He never put his own meaning before himself in bald abstract words: as did Aristotle and Calvin, and even Karl Marx, the hard, fearless men of thought. Nietzsche always escaped a question by a physical metaphor, like a cheery minor poet. He said, "beyond good and evil," because he had not the courage to say, "more good than good and evil," or, "more evil than good and evil." Had he faced his thought without metaphors, he would have seen that it was nonsense. So, when he describes his hero, he does not dare to say, "the purer man," or "the happier man," or "the sadder man," for all these are ideas; and ideas are alarming. He says "the upper man," or "over man," a physical metaphor from acrobats or alpine climbers. Nietzsche is truly a very timid thinker. He does not really know in the least what sort of man he wants evolution to produce.
Nietzsche BTFO.

>>14240035
>Nietzsche had some natural talent for sarcasm: he could sneer, though he could not laugh; but there is always something bodiless and without weight in his satire, simply because it has not any mass of common morality behind it. He is himself more preposterous than anything he denounces. But, indeed, Nietzsche will stand very well as the type of the whole of this failure of abstract violence. The softening of the brain which ultimately overtook him was not a physical accident. If Nietzsche had not ended in imbecility, Nietzscheism would end in imbecility. Thinking in isolation and with pride ends in being an idiot. Every man who will not have softening of the heart must at last have softening of the brain.
How will that kraut ever recover?

>>14238929
“Christians” haven’t refuted Anti-Christ because there’s essentially nothing to refute. Nietzsche states that the fundamentals of Christianity are peak slave morality and calls it bad as a result. There’s nothing to be refuted because it boils down to Nietzsche simply having a distaste for the religion.

>>14240035
>>14240040
Chesterton errs here. He claims that Nietzsche wants nothing, but he makes it very clear what he does want. Nietzsche's criticism of christianity is that it makes nihilism of the world by projecting the world onto something else, a higher existence. Have we all not felt the rise of nihilism in our world? Does it not all seem like everything here is fucking trash? This value judgement, that thrle world is worthless, is the final conclusion of Christian values. Chesteron doesn't get this because he is too Christian, he is too locked up in his bad conscience and ressentiment which denies the world, which inflicts pain on himself to atone.

>>14240945
>Does it not all seem like everything here is fucking trash?
Same reason the architecture is shit. We have psycopaths ruling us, because power is not hereditary.

Wouldn't Nietzsche be refuted if life after death is real, according to the Christian sense? Nietzsche is only correct in a purely materialistic universe.

>>14238929
>Shits on the old greek philosophers
Really, man? The fuck?

>>14241814
Yes he would be refuted, there's no reason to bother with his philosophy unless you agree with the premise that God is dead.

>>14241860
Exactly. Nietzsche is a binary. He's either totally right or totally wrong, because all of his thought rests upon a single premise, the idea that the universe is totally materialistic. If that is correct then Nietzsche is the most correct philosopher of them all.

>>14238929
>reading nazi literature
yikes

>>14241904
>the idea that the universe is totally materialistic.
And since you can't verify that and tell us about your results, he is unfalsifiable. You make a good point. You must either simply accept or disagree with his main premise. All else follows from there.

>>14238929

>What is a dispensation

Literally walked in 0% revelation

>>14238929
yeah, he's dead

>>14240035
Jenseits doesn't mean beyond.
Kys

>itt: faggots that don't read Nietzsche try and define him based on christian reactionary copes

>>14238958
Chesterton has a pretty shallow critique of Nietzsche. I could understand if he was strawmanning him to shoehorn in Catholic theology but his shit's retarded even for Catholic theology.
Nietzsche's critique of Christianity is pretty apt, but I think most Christians would console themselves he doesn't hate Christians as much as he hates Germans and Kant. I doubt you're going full Muslim warlord because Nietzsche commended it, so Christians not dropping the entirety of their religion in face of a few criticisms is hardly surprising either. I'd find it even less surprising if they conceded the point that in suffering there is immortality.

>>14242681
Shit second paragraph was for >>14238929

>>14238929
No.

There is nothing to argue with is there is no substance to his arguments, he is too controversial to get to grips with, he's the outcome both enlightenment and romantic thinking and is torn in two, he is egotistic and yet genorous, anti Christ and prophet, appollos and Dionysus l, he abhors organised religion and praises innovation yet descends from mount Sinai with new commandments and the doctrine of the ancient eternal wheel
His pessimism crushes him one minuit down to a blind biological surge out of the abyss and the next moment he's floating on the clouds reaching his hand out to helpless man raising him to godhood, he sees the masses as no better than prey for the strong yet is too much of a sensitive soul to not reveal their salvation, he despises the phychologists who crawl in and around man as if he was a swamp, yet psychoanalizes his opponents away

Christianity rightly taught is the very anti toxin to the illnesses he believes it unleashed on man, I'll leave it to you to figure out why

>>14240035
Not a single correct sentence in all of this. To be this stupid AND be fat should bar you from getting published.

>>14239562
I've only read part of Twilight of the Idols but from the look of it he's got the idea in his head that people who live in peak "healthy" worldliness wouldn't go for something like Christianity (Orthodoxy). While it's certainly true that gigachads might not ever consider it due to being too busy being chads, that's an unfortunate fact for them rather than a refutation of the faith. Tons of powerful and successful people have been Orthodox saints. Unless I'm misunderstanding him that's my issue, he falsely believes it's all about jealousy which is understandable considering his position in life

>>14243217
t. triggered neetzschian

>>14243317
>jealousy
Ressentiment*

>>14242999
There's no substance to Christianity after Darwin. The body is the source of it all, and it is constantly evolving towards something, that something being power.

>>14238929

yeah. james blew him out 1700 years ago, but his assault is more on the institution of the church

jung wrote about the listlessness of the modern spiritual man and how the meaningless, dry, bleak, blind church that simply goes through the motions with hollow words and no understanding is basically a graveyard for that kinda person and it really made nietzsche's criticisms make sense

just live it and let the fruits of the good works you were made for in Christ Jesus justify His philosophy and ministry

>>14239991
It cant be both dumbass. And you should actually read the whole book, because neech explains why

>>14242637
Basically this whole thread. I dont think a single Christian here has actually read The Antichrist

>>14240035
>Nietzsche doesn't define his life's purpose by being "Happy" or "Pure"

So?

>>14241966
>having a leap of faith to believe in Nietzsche
Now I saw everything.

>>14241966
>>14243974
>And Christianity is unfalsifiable because no scientific tests can be conducted to prove that the metaphysical world exists

>>14243989
Neither philosophy or religion is subject to the law of falsification unless it chooses to be
Science is not philosophy and not all concepts are scientific concepts

>>14244002
Then calling Nietzsche unfalsafiable isnt a refutation of his Philosophy

>>14244012
Not that anon. I don't think it was an attempt at refutation, just an observation. Although I disagree with the other anon's characterization of believing materialism as a leap of faith. It seems like the null hypothesis.

>>14240945
>>14242681
Chesterton doesn't address that particular point in the quoted passages, but it does miss the point of Christianity. It's not all centered around the next world, Christian morality is coming to love God and fellow man, in this world. Holiness is being in union with God is heaven is worth pursuing, and death, even for the saints, is still a loss. There's an attention to a coming world because this one is sinful and mortal, not because it is bad of itself. Recognizing sin and entropy isn't making the world worthless, but something to be remade all the higher.
>>14243784
Also true. Nietzsche's critiques work for Christianity as lived by most, but wither in the face of saints or holy men of any creed.

>>14238929
> 3 Don’t you know that we will judge angels? Why not ordinary things?
God put things to choose, and he tell us to choose, so we need to make some judgedment

about hell in this earth, can happen but in MY personal experience, it's always my fault
but the moments of peace, of happiness you can experience, they are totally worth it, and those moments are a gift from God, cause i dont know what i do to have them, and when i try, it's not the same

life's weird, but beautiful

>>14244891
"Do ye not know that the Saints shall judge the world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge even the smallest matters?"

Unfortunately, not merely the speech of a lunatic... this frightful impostor then Goes on to say:
"know ye not that we shall judge Angels? How much more things that pertain to this life?"


- Nietzsche, The Antichrist

>>14245151
what's his point there? do not judge?

>>14245151
>>14245154

"Who put him to death, who was his natural enemy?" - this question flashed like a lightning stroke. Answer: dominant Judaism, its ruling class. From that moment, one found oneself in revolt against the established order, and began to understand Jesus as "In revolt against the established order". Until then, this militant, this nay-saying nay-doing element in his character had been lacking; what is more, he had appeared to present the opposite. Obviously, the little community had not understood what was precisely the most important thing of all: The example offered by way of dying, the freedom from and superiority to every feeling of "ressentiment" - a plain indication of how little he was understood at all!

All that Jesus could hope to accomplish by his death, in itself, was to offer the strongest possible proof, or example, of his teachings in the most public manner... but his disciples were very far from forgiving of his death - though to have done so would have accorded to the Gospels in the highest degree!

On the contrary, it was precisely the most Unevangelical of feelings, of revenge, that now possessed them. It seemed impossible that the cause should perish with his death: "recompense" and "Judgement" were now necessary - yet, what could be less evangelical than "recompense" and "punishment" and "sitting in Judgement"?


(continued)

>>14245205
Once more the popular belief in the coming of a Messiah appeared in the foreground; attention was riveted upon an historical moment: "the Kingdom of God" is to come, with Judgement upon his enemies... But in all of this there was a wholesale understanding: imagine the Kingdom of God as a "last act" a "mere promise". The Gospels had been, in fact, the incarnation, the fulfilment, the realisation of this "the Kingdom of God".

it was only now that all the familiar contempt for and bitterness against the Pharisees and theologians began to appear in the character of the Master - Jesus was thereby turned into a Pharisee and Theologian himself!

On the other hand, the savage veneration of those completely unbalanced souls could no longer endure the Gospel doctrine, taught by Jesus, of the equal right of all men to be the Children of God: their revenge took the form of ELEVATING Jesus in an extravagant fashion, and thus separating him from themselves. Just as, in earlier times, the Jews, to revenge themselves on their enemies, separated themselves from their God, and placed him on a great height. The one God, and the only Son of God were both products of ressentiment...

>>14245205
>>14245224
-Nietzsche, The Antichrist.

One of my favourite chapters of the book

>>14245205
>>14245224
This literally sounds like Nietzsche refuses to take Jesus at his own word. Time after time in the Gospels Jesus refers to himself as the "Son of Man," who is, time after time, equated with God Himself.

I mean, consider the Gospel of Mark, which contains by far the least references to the idea of Jesus as God. It still has THIS sequence, Mark 2:23-28:

>One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. The Pharisees said to him, “Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”

>He answered, “Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.”

>Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

"Lord of the Sabbath" is an extremely explicit claim to being the God of Israel, whose day was the Sabbath Day. It's an overt claim by Jesus that the "Son of Man" is God.

>>14245258
I think youre misunderstanding Nietzsches point.
The Gospels were written by the disciples (some of them in the second generation of disciples)

not by Jesus himself

Rene Girard provides the greatest critique available against Nietzschean thought. Girards essay "Dionysus versus the Crucified" (which is how the late Nietzsche signed his essays and letters), dismantles all post-Nietzschean thought by criticising their tendency to mystify and mythologise his thought.
God is Dead - all post-Nietzsche apostles love to claim, yet they all seem to forget the next line..."and we have killed him".
The death of God requires the birth of a new myth/pantheon.

I've posted this a hundred times but the collective curiosity and intellect of this place has really dropped in the last few years.

>>14245273
But what on Earth can Nietzsche know about Jesus apart from what's in the Gospels and Paul's epistles? Nietzsche suffers from being caught up in the 19th Century's desire to hunt around for a "historical Jesus" apart from the Biblical account. But there really IS no other account. Josephus mentions Jesus but even he doesn't go into detail about him. You kind of have to base what we know about Jesus on the New Testament. You've got to take it or leave it.

>>14245281
God is dead and we have killed him isn't the birth of a new myth.
>New struggles. -- After Buddha was dead, they still showed his shadow in a cave for centuries -- a colossal, horrible shadow. God is dead, but given the way people are, there may still be caves for millennia in which his shadow is displayed. -- And we -- we must still defeat his shadow as well!

>>14244881
>Chesterton doesn't address that particular point in the quoted passages, but it does miss the point of Christianity. It's not all centered around the next world, Christian morality is coming to love God and fellow man, in this world. Holiness is being in union with God is heaven is worth pursuing, and death, even for the saints, is still a loss. Recognizing sin and entropy isn't making the world worthless, but something to be remade all the higher.

Nietzsche would go on to say that this still denies life. Nietzsche is not a mere critic of the church, though, some have taken him this way, and in this respect, I think it has made some christians more like their christ. He wants the end of Christian morality. Not the end of God, nor the end of morality per se. He is for Dionysus, he is for the spiritual side of man. But what he wants to replace with the worship of god, and love, is the will to power.

Nietzsche believes that the concept of sin itself, and the notion that love of the fellow man is the highest good, takes what makes man man, and inverts it. For the saints, for those truly saintly whom give up everything earthly for the divine pity.. Christianity is their cure for the world. We all know Father Zosima's tragic beauty. But for most men, this is impossible. For most men, Christianity amounts to nothing but a self-laceration, and a vow to believe in an afterlife, for the purpose of apologizing to the self, for being weak.

Most men, despite Christianity's 2000 years of age, fail to really believe in love the way their Christ did. Most have never had a profound moment of pity for the world.. you know the one, where you realize that every other human on this planet is a pathetic and weak lump of pain and fear, and it soothes you. It feels better than the fleeting pleasures of the flesh, because it was of the soul! Most Christians are hateful, they spit on their fellow man for being a slightly different creed or tribe, they recoil at sickness and madness, they scowl at the petty thief.. What kind of Christianity is this? What kind of god teaches love, and then practices hate?

Everything about this causes sickness in man. He feels guilt at pleasure, but can't stop wanting it. He feels guilt at his anger, yet can't stop feeling it. Why would he even want to live at all. Everything becomes worthless, all of this world, all of its pain, it's all HIS fault, he is full of sin, and god is punishing him! And then something happens, even more tragic to this christian man. Oh, the Christian! How I pity the christian!

>>14245424
He stops believing in his god. The one reason he had to inflict so much pain on himself, was the first he threw away! Now, this is when life starts to appears truly worthless. The christian of old, the one who would get down on his knees, and not wince when he tried to talk to god. When he wasn't so embarrassed, so ironical, at least he would imagine all of his enemies burning in the hellfire, and his life in heaven. But what does the common man have? He has nothing. Nihilism. So what is the cure? For man to simply FORGET? To perform CPR on god? No, I don't think so. For I think he will stay dead. I think as long as men are science obsessed materialists he will stay dead.

>>14238929
>have people ever refuted retarded late 19th century Bible scholarship
Yes they have. You can read many book son this. Basically anything after WWI.
Also you can additionally read the texts that come after, you know, like the epistles and the acts of the apostles. Or even the end of the gospels, as everything happening after the resurrection.

>>14245281
>The death of God requires the birth of a new myth/pantheon.
which is the overman, and the overman's entire premise is that he does not need for god. That he falls so deep into nihilism, the great down-going, that he comes out on the other side. Because the value judgement, "all is worthless" is just another value judgement in itself, and is therefore worthless.

>>14238958
literally who?

>>14245291
Nietzschefgs are mentally ill. They will claim having a new revelation about Jesus independent of the apostles.
Muhammad did the same in the 7th century, claiming all the disciples were lying about everything while he had seen the real Jesus (who of course was Muslim).

>>14245314
If you take Girardian mimetic theory into account it certainly does. Particularly when you take into consideration Nietzsche's and, by extension, Heidegger's desperation to revitalise pre-Christian sacrificial paganism (evidenced by his signing "Dionysius")

>>14245424
>He wants the end of Christian morality. Not the end of God, nor the end of morality per se. He is for Dionysus, he is for the spiritual side of man. But what he wants to replace with the worship of god, and love, is the will to power.

And in this Nietzsche shows his utter banckruptcy as a thinker.

Even from the position of reductionist materialism, his weakness is glaring. "Will to power" is the natural instinct of man. That is just a common sense observation. Nowadays you can mostly observe how societies driven primarily by it look like in prisons. Because every society, Christian or not, that had developed past a small-scale gang of thugs had (again, a common sense observation) to develop an increasingly elaborate system of morality, which at the root served one purpose: to suppress that "will to power" and foster "cooperation" instead. And fostering cooperation ALSO self-evidently requires condemning pleasures of the flesh and base passions, like anger, and postulating their inferiority to virtue. Greeks and Chinese philosophers did so independently and without any need to belief in God. Because duh, if your "morality" cannot even forbid men from following whatever selfish impulse or fit of temper may strike them at any given moment, of what use for fostering cooperation it can possibly be? Therefore Nietzsche's "philosophy" is anything but. What he mistakes for wisdom is patently societally destructive insanity.

And that is just going from the weak position of materialism, where there is really no truth but only practicality.

An actual philosopher would have been concerned not about whether Christianity makes people feel bad, but about whether it is true.

>>14238929
Doesn't Nietzsche require an individualistic conception of humanity? An easy refutation is simply to articulate the sorts of behaviors that would make for an ideal community, as opposed to a strong individual. There's no objective reason for privileging the individual over his tribe.

>>14245452
Muhammad dosent claim the disciples were lying retard. Actually James the Just, in his epistle, tells his followers to submit fully to god.
And Muhammad says that the disciples of Jesus were Muslims

Ironically, it was St Paul who claimed to have his own private revelation about Jesus, that only he saw, then he goes and opposes the teachings of James and Peter regarding circumcision. Fuck I hate Christians so much im so glad I left that religion

>>14245424
Also this. Nietzsche was basically a spiritual NeoPagan, not an Atheist.

>>14245205
>>14245224
This is a good chapter actually

>>14245452
I wish there was a cure for Christard stupidity

>>14239027
they wouldn't last long, affirming those values
but what if bodies so retarded might could be intentionally propagated by the state, by certain factions?

>>14245752
Oh no, I wonder (((who))) could be spouting life-denying propaganda to the dissatisfied youth of today?

Holy shit all of the Christians in this thread are coping so hard. Fuck Christians, you are all such dumb fucks and have no right to exist.
None of you will never be anywhere near as morally and spiritually initiated as Jesus was, your entire religion is a joke and revolves around nothing but making fun of Jesus dying on the cross.
Fuck all of you, the one thing that keeps me going in this life is knowing that your religion is slowly dying out and being replaced by Islam. The sooner Christianity is gone the better off the world will be

>>14245258
>b-b-but Jesus said something that could be interpreted as him being a God in the flesh

No. Fuck you and fuck the church for spouting this psyop

>>14245618
This hits the nail on the head.
Nietzsche's critique of Christian morality - more specifically, the restraining of vices, which, as you point out, is common to creeds worldwide, and which Nietzsche so ignorantly calls life-denying - is ultimately very short sighted, because he is only concerned about how HE feels trapped by it, and doesn't take in account how it is necessary for the cooperation of the group. Now, I will concede to him that a majority of christians, and the Christianity that is commonly seen practiced by the masses, is hypocritical, and it enters the territory of herd manipulation. Had he stopped here, I would agree with him completely. But he goes beyond to say that the fundamentals are wrong, and here he falters hard.
In the end, Russel's critique of Nietzsche is correct, as shallow as it seems (fitting, since Nietzsche is shallower than he seems): he was a NEET loser who wishes he was a Chad. All of his though talking is pure cope, and even cowardice. It's so easy to hide behind words while your sister wipes the diarrhea off your ass for the 5th time that day. Maybe this is what truly happened during the horse incident, maybe he saw a MAN exerting his WILL to POWER over the world, and little Nietzsche felt so emasculated that he had a mental breakdown.

>>14245828
but he didnt write anymore after that started happening

>>14245734
Apostles met in council in Jerusalem and agreed on everything. Paul never claimed to have another revelation. He had a single particular vision, the episode of the road of damas, which neither him nor anyone else considers to have any doctrinal content. He learned everything from disciples he met both before and after conversion.
As for Muhammad, he really goes against all disciples. Every single one confirmed text. If only (among many other things) by refusing the execution, death and resurrection, which every single Christian and all apostles insisted on.
>this is the part, here you try to sneak in a word about Thomas and his 'gospel', a later text of unknown origins, incomplete, and not indicative of anything considering Thomas is present in the acts of the apostles to confirm the above
I can't fathom the depth of memetics you need to delve into to desperately try to recapture some heretical movements that were btfo in the very first century.
What's next? You'll move up to Neo-marcionism? Crypto-ebionites?

>>14245880
>Thomas Gospel
>"Later" text

oh nononononononoononononoonnonononononononononoononnonnoonono

not even worth debating with someone who gets all his information from Church propaganda. Thomas gospel was written before John was

Scholars agree that the majority of the new testament texts (especially the Gospels) were comprised by multiple people and were pseudepigraphal.

I get it, when the scholars agree with what the Orthodoxy says it must be true, but when they disagree it must be false because muh traditions

>>14245880
Im not even a Muslim either, Im just saying that Muhummad has just as much of a claim to revelation as Paul did. Neither of them actually knew Jesus in person.

by the way, Christians still haven't told me how the Kingdom of Heaven is something that is inside you AND is something that comes to earth on the day of Judgment AND somewhere you go after you die

>>14245917
Why does it matter? Most people don't actually agree with Catholic mishmash teachings except for a few internet Larpers. Their shit religion will die eventually

>>14245205

Terribly primitive and badly written and, moreover, redundant. Derivative of general anticlerical thinking, particularly what is pejoratively called "Gnostic", without doing it any favors. Sullying bitch.

>>14245917
God works in mysterious ways, bro :^)

>>14245930

>>14240035
this is retarded. christfags could read kierkegaard or augustine, or even st. terese, and they read fatterton and think it is deep. what an embarrassment

>>14245935
>every time there is a contradiction in Orthodox teachings

>>14245917

The two aren't as contradicting as you might think.

Jews: "Theres no way Jesus can be the Messiah, he didnt establish the Kingdom of Heaven on earth"

Jesus: "What you are looking for has already come, you just dont see it"

Christians: "hE iS gOiNg tO cOmE a SeCoNd tImE aNd dO iT, i pRoMiSe"

>>14245953
Three*

Could you explain how?

>>14245962
it's a divine mystery bro :)

>>14245967
Based retard

>>14245917
>Tolstoy and Jehovah's witnesses are just like vague cultural Protestantism right?
Niqqa you gonna get abducted by a cult you this dumb

>>14245917
You can't have the beatific vision during this life, so it really will be within you when contemplating God, which only comes after death.
You can try all you want to stop after the sermon of the mount and pretend the week before the resurrection and everything after didn't happen, but how plebeian do you need to be to imagine a psychological framing is some sort of grand revelation. This is on par with self help theosophy.
>dude, Christianity is like, a state of mind
The efficacious death and resurrection, needed mediation for the contemplation of God, is the prime interest.

>>14246002
Why is the Kingdom of Heaven inside me then? Are you saying that when I die im going to go inside myself?

>>14246006
Oh but wait during the day of Judgement, is Jesus going to pull the Kingdom from inside me and place it on the earth?

>>14245828
>a majority of christians, and the Christianity that is commonly seen practiced by the masses, is hypocritical, and it enters the territory of herd manipulation
Literally true about all of the religions everywhere ever.
NEETzche was literally complaining that 75% of religious people were just like him lmao.
>>14245791
>None of you will never be anywhere near as morally and spiritually initiated as Jesus was,
>implying that christians don't know this
lmao
>>14245734
>Nietzsche was basically a spiritual NeoPagan
>not an Atheist.
but anon those are the same thing
>>14245618
Great post, but with a few caveats
>condemning pleasures of the flesh
Christians dont do this, maybe some proddie sects do, but christians in general don't. The just slapped some sensible regulations on it and thats all.
>anger
Christians hold that anger is virtuous as long as it remains within the bonds of reason. Pacifism is a heresy.
>>14242681
>I'd find it even less surprising if they conceded the point that in suffering there is immortality.
Jesus is an eternally existent being who took on the pains of this world, so in a sense we can connect to eternity suffering in Christ.
>>14241904
That's good news because materialism is very unlikely to be true.
>>14240945
>Nietzsche's criticism of christianity is that it makes nihilism of the world
It's good to know that NEETczhe's argument is basically a strawman then.
>Have we all not felt the rise of nihilism in our world?
Yes we did, paralelled with the rise of atheism and materialism.
>Does it not all seem like everything here is fucking trash?
Fuck no. There are lots of great things that are totally worth it, the trick is not making any of them the center of you life, because that pllace belongs to God only.
Chesterton understood that and he lived a life full of pleasure and fun. He was a happy fat man who probably had a better qualit or life then NEETczhe because he wasn't a selfobsessed shut-in.
>This value judgement, that thrle world is worthless, is the final conclusion of Christian values.
Yeah, no, that's the final conclusion of materialism. Christianity is not materialism.
>Chesteron
>denies the world
lol no
>>14239381
yeah because he resents women because they saw how weak he was and didnt wanna give him any vagina

>>14239256
>Nietzsche
>devastating to Christians
lol you're delusional
the cope of a person who cant into christianity is not devestating at all for people who can into christianity

>>14245791
None of them have actually read him, and the ones who have read him poorly. They have no hope of understanding anything he wrote because they possess, as Nietzsche said, a "disease of the eye" which can't be refuted.

>>14246012
hehlo apologist guy. maybe you can tell me what the Kingdom of Heaven is? since every other Christian is struggling so much

>>14245924
>delusion, the post

>>14238929
Cringe

>>14245962
>>14245967

The world ceasing to exist proper when you die since it is Ontologically subordinate to you.

>>14246023
It's God himself you smoothbrain lmao.
You didn't even try to understand, did you?
>>14246020
>if somebody disagrees with NEETczshe that must mean they couldn't comprehend him
Imagine being so sad that you idolize a selfish incel who died after the first time he paid for a hooker.

>>14246023
>every other Christian is struggling so much
That's what Christians do. We struggle and we toil forbthe glory of God. Which is why we will always win in the end.

>>14246031
>it's God himself

Huh, no it's not. Where is that written?
T. Christian

>>14246031
I dont think any other christian has ever said that

>>14246031
Every disagreement is based on misunderstanding in every single thread. No one who disagrees with him ever reaches his higher ideas.

Funny how Nietzscheans complain that the Christian's defense is "lol you just don't get it :^)" yet their defense is literally the same thing.

>>14246031
Nah, in Revelation Jesus talks about a literal Kingdom of Heaven on earth. But in the Gospels he says the Kingdom is within

>>14246033
>we will win in the end even though we have no idea what Jesus means when he says the Kingdom of God is already on earth

>>14246029
Nietzsches definition of the Kingdom of Heaven is cringe but apparently Christians dont have a better one

>>14246062
Duuuude it's a divine mystery xddd

>>14246023
>maybe you can tell me what the Kingdom of Heaven is?
Not the guy you're replying to, but I can.

>>14246038
>God is the source of all that is good
>Heaven is to be in the presence of God
>The Kingdom of Heaven is the community of Saints in the presence of God
Also lmao at you demanding a written source because you can't into philosophy.
>T. Christian
If that's true, educate yourself and fast.
>>14246041
Who cares? Chistianity is not a democracy. Being a good Christian doesn't even require for an understanding of theology all you need is an earnests conversion of the heart and to follow Jesus.
>>14246046
This.
>>14246048
>not understanding the esoteric, the exoteric and the connection between the two
Read a book.
>>14246062
>implying that we need to know
btw we know
>>14246064
see >>14246031

>>14246109
>Not understanding the Esoteric

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHA this is great. Orthodox Christians killed off and labelled all esoteric Christians as "Heretics" and now they are telling me to read a book about the difference between Esotericism and Exotericism.


Also
>Kingdom of heaven is the Community of saints in the presence of God
>Kingdom of heaven is literally God

which one is it pal? Sounds like you are trying to twist yourself into a pretzel defending this definition

>>14246109
>can't into philosophy

Don't blame him, all Christians are garbage philosophers. Because they need to create a philosophy that fits their preexisting worldview, instead of having a philosophy based on what they see

>>14246109
If the kingdom of heaven is to be in the
(Metaphorical) presence of God then does that mean that Nietzsche was correct in saying that it's a state of heart/mind?

>>14246046
NEETians cannot refute this

>>14246196
I think Christians do understand what Neech is saying, in regards to the kingdom of heaven. They will just never believe that St Paul was a Pharisee trying to subvert the Christian movement, because "muh book of acts"

Therefore, Neech must be wrong about his whole philosophy

Why is xtians so dumb in this thread.?

>>14246233
Probably because the Nietzschean side is too. Both are grade school tier for most of the thread. It's hilarious they claim to have read their own arguments when Nietzsche and the Bible would both btfo
daily reminder books > /lit/tards I guess

>>14245911
Peter, the apostles and even the mother of Jesus recognized Paul. Where is your authority?

>>14246006
>>14246011
>2. And how shall I call upon my God--my God and my Lord? For when I callon him I ask him to come into me. And what place is there in me into which my Godcan come? How could God, the God who made both heaven and earth, come into me?Is there anything in me, O Lord my God, that can contain thee? Do even the heavenand the earth, which thou hast made, and in which thou didst make me, containthee? Is it possible that, since without thee nothing would be which does exist, thoudidst make it so that whatever exists has some capacity to receive thee? Why, then,do I ask thee to come into me, since I also am and could not be if thou wert not inme? For I am not, after all, in hell--and yet thou art there too, for “if I go down into hell, thou art there.”11 Therefore I would not exist--I would simply not be at all--unless I exist in thee, from whom and by whom and in whom all things are. Even so,Lord; even so. Where do I call thee to, when I am already in thee? Or from whencewouldst thou come into me? Where, beyond heaven and earth, could I go that theremy God might come to me--he who hath said, “I fill heaven and earth”?12

>3. Since, then, thou dost fill the heaven and earth, do they contain thee? Or,dost thou fill and overflow them, because they cannot contain thee? And where dostthou pour out what remains of thee after heaven and earth are full? Or, indeed, isthere no need that thou, who dost contain all things, shouldst be contained by any,since those things which thou dost fill thou fillest by containing them?For thevessels which thou dost fill do not confine thee, since even if they were broken, thouwouldst not be poured out. And, when thou art poured out on us, thou art notthereby brought down; rather, we are uplifted. Thou art not scattered; rather, thoudost gather us together. But when thou dost fill all things, dost thou fill them withthy whole being? Or, since not even all things together could contain theealtogether, does any one thing contain a single part, and do all things contain thatsame part at the same time? Do singulars contain thee singly? Do greater thingscontain more of thee, and smaller things less? Or, is it not rather that thou artwholly present everywhere, yet in such a way that nothing contains thee wholly?

recently been writing an essay on this topic, particularly defending christianity from nietzsche's critique. i believe nietzsche is correct in his analysis of christianity BUT his analysis only holds for those that hold very traditional theistic notions e.g. death as release from suffering, the transcendent as the "true world" etc. etc.; the point that Nietzsche is making is that these notions do nothing but make us sick, they are born out weakness, they bolster themselves on making others sad, they are a form of slave morality etc.; of course, one can argue that this does not at all matter, perhaps the denial of life is where true redemption lies (see schopenhauer + mainlander). but nietzsche does not care about the truth of value judgements on life; for him, these can never have a truth-value because they necessarily come from the "optic of life" itself, it is life that forces us to make these judgements, and one can't escape the perspective of life to make a proper value-judgement on itself. one can only ask WHICH life is forcing one to make these judgements, a weak and slavish one, or a strong and noble one. it's quite similar to spinoza's dictum that “the conatus with which each thing endeavors to persist in its own being is nothing but the actual essence of the thing itself”. so they both base their ethics on its inseparability from being, life, essence (such that there can be no is-ought distinction); one only judges the MANNER of this being, the directions it takes. so for spinoza, when he analyses suicidal tendencies, the will to death, he does not care at all about the truth value of the judgements leading to those tendencies, he only cares about what it is a symptom of, which would be “weak spirit”, where one is “completely overcome by external causes opposed to their own nature”. similarly for nietzsche, his analysis of christianity shows that it is a symptom of sickness, weak spirit, slave morality etc. etc.

but of course, nietzsche doesn't decry religion itself from this. atheism for him is nothing but the final manifestation of the christian ideal. he is a religious reformer rather than abolitionist, he wants a return to greek religion, a religion that unconditionally affirms life, which boasts a noble morality etc. etc.; the unconditional will to truth is a form of christian truthfulness, he recognises that faiths, myths, errors etc. can be life-enhancing, this is all he cares about.

(1/2)

but this does not necessarily put christianity out of the picture; of course these traditional notions that he critiques are not uncontroversial. for example, i find that kierkegaard is very similar to nietzsche in his critiques + presents an extremely life-affirming christianity (it is incredible how similar their life-affirming religions are), one that does not recognise death as a release from suffering, which does not care about the objective truth of christianity, which puts a focus on the immanent existential and practical possibilities that christianity unlocks instead, which promotes a pragmatism towards everything upbuilding (rather than making suffering a virtue), that wants one to learn from the lily of the field and the bird of the air, those “joyful teachers of joy, who just because they are unconditionally joyful are joy itself”. clearly this is not the life-denying christianity that nietzsche finds. and I believe nietzsche would not at all have a problem with christianity if people actually saw christianity like this. other philosophers and theologians also present a life-affirming christianity too, altizer and tillich for example. nietzsche seeks to give christians self-knowledge of the shameful origins of their religious belief not to abolish religious belief but to reform it; of course for him this is a reform into greek religion but there is no special reason why this can't be done from a christian perspective, something that kierkegaard clearly does,fully affirming immanent life from a christian perspective. this is all nietzsche could ask for.

(2/2)

>>14238929
God BTFO'd him already.

>>14238929
The son of a Lutheran pastor, Friedrich Nietzsche hated Christianity with a passion that could only come from understanding what it really demanded.The problem with Chrisianity is that it posited a God Who, instead of lording it over humanity in august tyranny became a man in utter obscurity. The incarnate God did not radiate power like a despot,but embraced humility like a slave. This God chose to reveal His love, not His power, and hence to manifest goodness, not greatness. When Jesus did bid his followers to take up their crosses, it was likewise so that they become good not great.
Nietzsche desired greatness more than anything. Indeed greatness was so much better than goodness that truly great should never hestitate to go "beyond" notions of good and evil.
To go far beyond and above the crowd, to squeeze the life form oneself and others for the sake of producing a great political state, great art,great literature, to be as pitiless as Pharaoh in using human slaves to build one's glorious tomb-that was life. If this demanded cruelty then let it be magnificent cruelty. "Almost everything we call "higher culture" ,declared Nietzsche ," is based on spiritualization of cruelty, on its becoming more profound".
cont.

>>14247151
For Nietzsche, putting a premium on greatness was the naturally aristocratic thing to do.The Christian focus on goodness undermined the necessary brurality entailed in greatness. Christian charity towards the weak bent society to the demands of the weak. By contrast the aristocratic rule of the strong for the sake of the strong lifted culture ever higher and this rule entails a kind of brutal indifference and contempt towards the weak. Thus true human cultural greatnesss demands that we return to the beast, a lesson Nietzsche claims that we learn from history.
For Nietzsche, Christianity was a slave religion precisely because Christ demanded that we choose goodness over greatness even to the point of choosing goodness over life itself.But since life is will to power, then Christianity amounted to selfdestruction.
cont.

>>14247156
For Christians, Nietzsche’s call to cast away goodness for great power is the essence of the of Satanic rebellion. This is the important point. In God as contrasted with creatures, goodness and greatness of power cannot be distinguished. They are in in God because God is one. He chose to reveal his goodness fully in Christ, not his power. No doubt Nietzsche would have respected a divine display of rar destructive power as self-revelation but God chose instead goodness without power, the form of an infant , a childwho would grow to be a man and who would mount the cross rather than a throne.In Christ, God’s power was fully hidden, only to be revealed in the resurrection, the lesson from God being that, if we chose goodness even unto death, we will receive eternal greatness. Christianity does indeed, as Nietzsche feared lead to self destruction but only so that the self may be recreated.
But where did Nietzsche lead ? by the time he was forty years old, he started singing his letters “The Anti-Christ”. Within a year after writing The anti-Christ, Nietzsche started losing his powerful mind . The last decade of his life was spent in the darkest corners of madness, detoriating in every way ,at one stretch keeping everyone in the house awake repeating like a hideous drum, “ I am dead because I am stupid … I am stupid because I am dead”. This is greatness?

>>14245281
When I first read Girard he did strike me as an "anti-nietzsche", but I haven't read the essay you mention. Thanks for the recommendation

>>14238929
>The 'Kingdom of Heaven' is a condition of the heart
Yes.
>not something that comes 'upon the earth' or 'after death'.
It's on Earth if it's on my heart, and it will remain after my physical death. There is a reason dead people are 'empty'.

>>14244255
>I don't think it was an attempt at refutation, just an observation. Although
Original anon. You're right, that was only an observation and quite far form an attempt at refutation.

>>14243974
You have to hold some things axiomatic to begin your reasoning, dumdum.

>>14245281
>The death of God requires the birth of a new myth/pantheon.
Which Nietzsche recognizes. You yourself seem to forget the next lines. "How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?"
He recognizes we must find something to replace it God. "Only as creators can we destroy", indeed.

>>14247161
I've read this pasta before. Where did it come from originally?

>>14245618
>Nowadays you can mostly observe how societies driven primarily by it look like in prisons

Do you really think there is any "Nietzschean society"? Really? Come on man. We are still drowning in christian morals without god.

>>14246068
Christian coping is ridiculous. The holy trinity makes no fucking sense at all, despite immense mental gymnastics? Well, that's part of the mystery, that's why you don't get it. :^)

>>14247931
>choosing Nietzsche as your axiom
wew lad

>>14248139
The axiom is materialism, dumb dumb. The reasoning is Nietzsche.

>>14238929
>The 'Kingdom of Heaven' is a condition of the heart — not something that comes 'upon the earth' or 'after death
Damn I really haven't heard this take a million times. Why is it that Germans always present moral platitudes as great discoveries lol

>>14248637
Nietzsche didn't believe in materialism

>>14238958
Chesterton was a fat piece of shit.

>>14238929
The Kingdom of Heaven is an eternal kingdom that transcends the land of mortals. It’s a place that exists and will only be occupied by servants of Christ.

In Job, Job’s friends attempted to find fault with Job, saying that he must have sinned because that’s how God works. God literally comes down in a whirlwind and rebukes them, asking them many question and revealing how little they truly know of God’s ways or His power.

Who are we to question what is and isn’t just? God describes Himself as all just, all good, and all righteous. We are not to do certain things, as those things are not what He wants us to do. When we sin, we are openly mocking and disobeying our Creator. There are, unsurprisingly, punishments for that type of foolishness. It even says that not one person will have an excuse when judgement finally comes. You either accepted Him, or you rejected Him.

>>14246994
Who?

>>14249772
What's the point of living in this eternal kingdom?

>>14246908
>>14246914
Yeah, thats similar to what ive been sayng. Nietzsche was a NeoPagan, not an Atheist.

>inb4 hurr durr tHeY aRe tHe sAmE tHiNg

they arent. No Sam Harris or Dawkins would support Nietzsche's return to Pagan mythology

>>14246421
What things have the Nietzscheans said that wasn't in accord with his own philosophy? Unless
you are implying that his own philosophy was grade school tier

>>14246734
They recognised that he told them he had a revelation from Jesus. Nietzsches argument is that he was just a regular Pharisee trying to subvert the newly formed Christian movement.


Has any Christian in this thread actually read The Antichrist in full?
Most of the arguments you are making, are addressed in it

I think the critical issue here, Christians are saying that Nietzsche is ignoring that Jesus himself spoke of a final judgment and the bringing of a literal kingdom if heaven on earth.


The problem with that is, according to Nietzsche, that it completely defeats the purpose of the Messiah coming the first time. Since, in Jewish mythology, the Messiah was supposed to come to earth, establish the kingdom of heaven, and rule forever. And abolish all Injustice.

But Jesus, obviously, doesn't do this. Jesus does say that the Kingdom is within you, and that the Kingdom belongs to children.

The problem with Jesus then saying that there will be a second coming of the Son of Man, to establish the "real" Kingdom of heaven on earth, is that it defeats the purpose of Jesus's original teaching of the Kingdom of Heaven already being here..

So there are two possibilities to explain this, either:
>Jesus contradicts himself, and was just a crazy rabbi Larping as the Messiah after all

Or

>Quotes about there being a final judgement and second coming of Jesus are fabrications of either the original disciples, OR the later disciples after them. Possibly also disciples who were influenced by the teachings of Paul.


The second option is the most likely, because the early Christians at the time, were expecting the kingdom to be established, shortly after Jesus's Crucifixion. Paul even says that it would happen "before the first generation has passed away". But clearly, they didn't understand Jesus when he spoke about the Kingdom of Heaven

>>14238958
literally who?

>>14238960
>faith
falling for the faith meme
Its actually the only good argument for God and it still shit.

>>14247151
>>14247156
>>14247161
>Look someone use shadows in a painting, now I must have faith in Jesus.

>>14245151
>>14245205
>>14245224
O shit no wonder this guy makes Christians seethe so badly

>>14238929
>Have Christians actually managed to refute him?
of course not.

also this >>14250768

>>14251212
yeah the atheists seem really calm as usual>>14249428

>>14251227
But he was a fat piece of shit.


Also someone else refuted him in this thread already

>>14251227
he was a fat fucking slob.
opinion discarded

>>14250734
Its a test from God. Nietzsches hermeneutics of the Bible is designed to mill out people who actually understand Jesus's teachings from those who just want to Larp at a church with a bunch of like minded people.

(Matthew 13:10-11)
The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?" He replied, "Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.


Also, Goodluck ever trying to interpret the meaning of Jesus's Kingdom of Heaven solely through the teachings of any Church, they couldn't do it for the past 2000 years, I dont think they will be able to do it in the future. Picrelated

t. Christians reaching maximum cope levels

He was close on the Kingdom of Heaven thing

Technically a kingdom can be a population of any size. Jesus was referring to Himself and certain prophets when he said that more often than the new Jerusalem (which will happen one day, probably after everyone dies as per Isaiah)

Judging a person is not just warning them, God actually says to do judgement and justice several times in the Old Testament. Jesus said that if you judge, you will also be judged with the measure you mete out. Everyone judges in every thing every day, from the cereal you eat for breakfast to the porn you watch, btw ur goin 2 hel1

>>14245424
>Nietzsche would go on to say that this still denies life
And life should be denied.

>>14251561
It could be, but that doesn't answer the problem of "Why didn't Jesus just establish a Global Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, when he arrived the first time" because he obviously had the power to, and he was supposed to, according to Hebrew eschatology.

It could be the case that The Kingdom of Heaven is a place established in the afterlife, in another "dimension". but that would also defeat the purpose of Jesus saying that the Kingdom of heaven is within you, or that it is already here.

(Luke 17:20-21)
"Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is in your midst.""

>>14251596
The Father was done with Israel is why. He said several times he would destroy them just like the heathen and specifically Egyptians if they fucked up, which they did. Jesus would have said He only had the power that the Father gave Him, which by the way is what Satan said.

Something really interesting is that God warns Israel in one of the books of Moses (Deuteronomy I think) that when they decide to be ruled by a king instead of Him the king will do all kinds of messed up stuff basically, what all kings do, and they do exactly that.

It's also something Samuel apparently did not know when he asked for the people of the time, because if he had known the result he probably would have avoided it

And since we're here
>but why did Jesus let Himself die then

There's a line in one of the books of Moses that says the land can only be cleansed by the blood of the righteous

That simple

>>14251596
>"Why didn't Jesus just establish a Global Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, when he arrived the first time" because he obviously had the power to, and he was supposed to, according to Hebrew eschatology.
The Kingdom of Heaven is what comes after the Universe ends. Obviously ending the thing wasn't the plan in 33 A.D.

> but that would also defeat the purpose of Jesus saying that the Kingdom of heaven is within you, or that it is already here
Time and matter in the way we understand it won't exist after the Universe ends, so both are true. In general, you need to wrap your head around the fact that whatever exists outside of time also exists at every given time point.

>>14251703
>every given time point

Not so. Something that exists outside of time would also be something could not interact with it. To do so it would need to be a permanent fixture in all time

>>14251703
>Time and matter in the way we understand it won't exist after the Universe ends, so both are true. In general, you need to wrap your head around the fact that whatever exists outside of time also exists at every given time point.


This right here, this is an actual cope

>>14251714
>Not so. Something that exists outside of time would also be something could not interact with it. To do so it would need to be a permanent fixture in all time
You're confused. Example: the concept of a 'triangle' exists outside of time, and also at every given time point. We can certainly interact with triangles!

>>14251741
>This right here, this is an actual cope
Serious question, is there a non-NPC in the house I can speak to?

>>14245424
This poster has hit the nail on the head I think. The Christians who actually do read Nietzsche, especially The Antichrist, can use his philosophy to become more like, and understand, the original Christ.

Even if you disagree with Nietzsches life affirmation and insist on the denial of Life, nietzsche still manages to put together a very good idea of what Jesus himself was trying to teach. A good example was posted here
>>14250768

>>14238929
He wasn't a systematic philosopher, he need only be defended not refuted.

>>14251781
>concept of triangle exists outside of time, and also at every given time point.

useless proposition, because things in themselves cant be proven or disproven.

Nietzsche's interpretation of the Kingdom of Heaven however, as a state of mind, can be proven by people achieving said state of mind.


>>14251802
You wish

>>14251703
"Jesus said the Kingdom of God is here now but when he says now he actually means at the end of the Universe and at the end of time"

this IS a Cope.

Just admit that Neech was right and that Paul was a seething Pharisee trying to subvert Christianity.
At first he tried to kill off Christianity by persecuting Christians but then he decided that the easiest way to do it was to subvert the religion and turn it into Judaism 2.0

>>14251802
He does need to be refuted because Christians still dont know what the Kingdom of God really means.
If Nietzsche got anything right, it was his hermeneutics of the bible >>14251552

The Kingdom of Heaven is not a difficult concept. People following God's teachings (imperfectly) on earth, those with Him in Heaven, and the resurrected after last judgement.
God is King, the Kingdom of Heaven consists of loyal subjects. More specificity depends on the context. "The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand"? We are called to derve God in this life, and it works as a warning of our mortality as well.
Church Militant, Church Penitent, Church Triumphant- same concept.

>>14238929
Nietzsche doesn't "refute" Christianity, he makes a value judgment on it. He calls Christians weak, sheep-like, slaves, etc. The proper Christian response is simply "okay dude, you do you" and ignore it. Which is exactly what most have done. Others call Nietzsche egotistical in turn, or like Chesterton come up with witticisms like "the world doesn't need more powerhungry sociopaths, but less" etc. etc. Some people will try to make Christianity "strong" and come up with esoteric readings of "turn the other cheek" or "give everything to the poor" or "blessed are the meek" or they'll keep bringing up Christ whipping the money-changers in the temple ("See, Jesus was angry once!").

Christianity recognizes that the world is shit, and the best we can do is be compassionate to each other and keep up the hope that in the afterlife all will be good. Nietzsche, through the will to power, makes a blessing out of a curse and says that the struggle for power is the best response to the shitty state of the world. A struggle Christians will call vain, and Nietzsche will call life-affirming. There are no arguments here in the strict sense, just value-judgments.

>>14252111
Okay but what does Jesus mean here:

And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

>>14251983
>At first he tried to kill off Christianity by persecuting Christians but then he decided that the easiest way to do it was to subvert the religion and turn it into Judaism 2.0
God damn it.. at last I truly see

There's something shady about this (((Saul of Tarsus))) figure.
I never really trusted him when I was a Christian. He never even met Jesus yet he has all the answers and interpretations.. and his source? Trust me bro, I saw him in a vision.

Fuck (((him)))

>>14252111
>>14252149
And I agree with your concept about the Kingdom of heaven being with people who follow the teachings of Jesus, and I believe Neech does as well.

His argument is though, if you actually read the Antichrist, that the Church itself dosent follow his teachings, nor does Paul

>>14252153
I cant tell if its satire or not but this is based and true either way

>>14252153
All the disciples were jews, all the early Christians for a good century or two were ethnic jewish converts.

>>14252162
Its a meme dude. Even Julius Evola made a difference between "Ethnic" Jews and "Spiritual" Jews.

Not all Ethnic Jews have the evil kike spirit

>>14252162
But Saul made Christianity for a religion suitable for the goyim aswell

>>14252171
Yes, he saw an opportunity to subjugate the roman empire to a religion that glorifies meekness.

Coincidentally, The empire collapsed shortly after Christianity was legalised and made the official religion

>>14252168
so why is St.Paul bad then?

>>14252168
I tend to distrust Semites in general. It's a matter of taste. Their religions carry desert with themselves.
I'm a son of European rivers, forests and mountains. Their desert screeching doesn't concern me.

>>14252180
>Their desert screeching doesn't concern me.
It seems like it's kind of the primary thing you define yourself in opposition to, a few kitsch references to muh rivers is cute, but you have no actual spiritual connection to the pre-Christian European tradition in actuality. It's impossible for you to, all that survives is that which was incorporated into Christianity.
Also the area ancient Israel wasn't a desert, it was closer to the landscape of modern and southern Europe

>>14252178
Nietzsche makes a long argument about it in the book OP posted. It is actually worth reading, it is my favourite Nietzsche book, even better than thus spoke Zarathustra, and its much easier to understand and follow.

But basically, Paul exaggerates Jesus, exaggerates the idea of there being a second coming with Judgement and throwing all the people who opposed Jesus into hellfire, and makes Christians resent the people who killed Jesus, which was the exact opposite of what Jesus wanted.
What Neech believes Jesus wanted, was people to completely let go of all resentment and hate towards people who wrong them, which would allow people to obtain the Kingdom of Heaven, as a state of "Childlike bliss"

Someone posted a good chapter here:
>>14245151
>>14245205
>>14245224


And of course, the Epistles of Paul were written before the Gospels, so the Gospels themselves will reflect predominantly Pauls teachings of Jesus

>>14252201
And, I know Muslims make a similar argument about Paul exaggerating Jesus. But the funny thing is, Nietzsche actually blames Paul for the rise of Islam.

Because Islam as a religion focuses solely on the Afterlife, Judgement and Hellfire. Which Neech believed, that jesus taught the opposite

>>14252198
Return to the desert, your echos follow you everywhere you go.

>>14252153
Based

>>14252220
I'm not a jew if that's what you're implying, in fact I'm probably whiter than you (an amerimutt LARPagan)
repent and find Christ, posting your LARP pics won't save you from hellfire

>>14252236
STOP. WRITING. CRINGE. LARPCHRISTKEK.

>>14252236
You're obviously a spiritual Semite, one must be blind to overlook the fact.
And like I said, I'm European.

>muh larping
>muh hellfire
>>>/desert/

>>14252246
Your entire identity is defined by jews

>>14252259
>dass rite, you must follow a jewish god or.. o-or else you're a jew
Bwahahahaha oh wow.
Please cry more

>>14252264
>a jewish god
you don't understand Christian theology at all, no more than you understand the dead and lost beliefs of the actual real pagans (not you)
In another hundred years, another thousand years, there will still be countless people who gain true spiritual fulfilment through God.
and Thor, Wotan etc. will remain a historical triviality,
Nothing more than aesthetic figures, spiritual husks, just like they are today.

Go pray to a placenta or whatever you Vargfags like to do for fun

>>14240035
Chesterton only shows he didn't understand a word of what Nietzsche tried to say about nihilism and the death of God. To me it seems as if Chesterton, who wasn't a fool, is more uncertain about his own faith and tries to unload his doubts onto Nietzsche.

Who cares what Christians think lol. They're babby tier imagination about existence and the universe. Look into metaphysics and nondualism if you have enough IQ for it.

>>14252311
In another Hundred years your shit religion will be completely replaced by Islam. Get ready for it Christkek

I reckon Christians would be pleasantly surprised at this book if they actually read it.
It's highly underrated among Nietzsche readers

>>14239622
>gets cucked by his friends no less than 3 times
Source? Story Time?

>>14239381
You can appeal to that from emotions too.

>>14251585
Based Plotinus

>>14238929
>pretend
That is what christcucks do best tho

>>14252311
Imagine believing this.

>>14238929
Christian here, I've read the Anti-Christ and I came to the conclusion that Nietzsche, like many people with no faith in God, viewed life as a trap designed to win his sympathy although it is not deserving of sympathy. Nietzsche hates life and the people who populate this planet for not being striving, edgy sophisticates like himself.

Really, I would recommend that rather than read Nietzsche, that you go outside, find a girl, fall in love, and lose your virginity. Then you will realize that Love is the ultimate Purpose, and then you will laugh at virgins who read Nietzsche and stay indoors.

>>14252201
>the Epistles of Paul were written before the Gospels, so the Gospels themselves will reflect predominantly Pauls teachings of Jesus
Holy... never knew this.

>>14252870
>Neech: "Christianity is life-denying."
>christcucsk: "n-no u"
wow what a comeback

>Really, I would recommend that rather than read Nietzsche blablablalba
It's an elaborate "have sex" meme.

Are christcucks really this basic?

>>14246184
It's a state of heart in the process of becoming a manifest reality beyond time. Nietzsche was just trying to say that he didn't believe it and therefore Christians are hippies. It's not really logic, it's just an assertion.

>>14245828
>Maybe this is what truly happened during the horse incident, maybe he saw a MAN exerting his WILL to POWER over the world, and little Nietzsche felt so emasculated that he had a mental breakdown.
Lmao

The Kingdom of God is a work in progress right here on Earth (believe in God and do good works) and also the end result of this work on Earth (the Second Coming) but it starts today with you, hence "the Kingdom of God is within you". It's both a state of mind and a state of the world/existence.

>>14252900
yes

>>14252870
>conflates sex with love

You can fall in love with a dead person by reading their words. That's what /lit/ is about.

>>14252900
>Are christcucks really this basic?
And there's nothing wrong with being basic; it's a virtue known as simplicity. You're just mad that other people are enjoying the God-given gift of life, without adding or subtracting from its inherent worth, but living it just as God intended.

NEETzscheans are just upset that that which is doesn't contain whatever it is that they think they want.

>>14252958
Fair point

>>14252960
>other people are enjoying the God-given gift of life, without adding or subtracting from its inherent worth
I agree 100% with this but you don't need YHVH or God how you spiritual Semites call him in order to achieve this.

>>14250681
Paul traveled alongside Peter and the apostles preaching wherever they went and nobody chastised him.
Protestantism is a hell of a mental disease.

>>14252983
I don't know if you do or don't, I'm limited to my experiences of God. However, I was once nearly doomed to sophistication and the absolute death of the soul. So I have two pieces of advice.
>Flee politics and religious arguments, it is all concocted by worldly people to (actually) instill herd mentality, and has nothing to do with goodness, Evola was deceived on this front because he thought that he could influence Italian fascism to be more in line with eternal truths, only to have the reverse happen, and he got influenced by fascism
>Get a spiritual mentor, don't go it alone regardless of your tradition

>>14252149
That the kingdom of god will not be an empire to replace the romans? That's obvious.
>>14252154
It's not particularly convincing, though. Christian thought overwhelmingly agrees that many will fall, even in the Church. Any stronger points about whether the Church or Paul are consistent with the Gospels aren't something he substantiates well.
>>14252201
This begs the question of how he knew Jesus' teaching exactly, and better than contemporaries.
>>14252175
Gibbon you're supposed to be dead.