/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16527793]

>DUDE JUST BEE URSELF LMAO

[Anonymous No.16527873]

another christfag filtered by polish royalty

[Anonymous No.16527918]

>DUDE JUST DON'T BE YOURSELF

[Anonymous No.16527939]

>>16527873
Nietzsche admired Christ, you fucking retard. He loathed Christianity as a religion, because it was fundamentally Jewish in its origins and therefore tainted. He drew heavily from Schopenhauer, who was his whole inspiration for philosophy.

>>The sublime founder of Christianity had necessarily to adapt and accommodate himself, partly consciously, partly, it may be, unconsciously, to this doctrine(Judaism); and so Christianity is composed of two very heterogeneous elements. Of these I should like to call the purely ethical element preferably, indeed exclusively, the Christian, and to distinguish it from the Jewish dogmatism within which it was founded. If, as has often been feared, and especially at the present time, that excellent and salutary religion should completely decline, then I would look for the reason for this simply in the fact that it does not consist of one simple element, but of two originally heterogeneous elements, brought into combination only by means of world events. In such a case, dissolution would necessarily result through the break-up of these elements, which arises from their different relationship and reaction to the advanced spirit of the times. Yet after this dissolution, the purely ethical part would still be bound always to remain intact, because it is indestructible.

[Anonymous No.16527942]

*BECOME URSELF LMAO

[Anonymous No.16528967]

>>16527939
No, anon, YOU are the retard.

>He loathed Christianity as a religion, because it was fundamentally Jewish in its origins and therefore tainted

WRONG. He thought the old testament was SUPERIOR to the new testament:

You may already surmise that I have no fondness for the ‘New Testament’; it troubles me that I stand almost alone in my thorough distaste for this highly esteemed, this far-too-highly esteemed portion of what is collectively called ‘the scriptures’; (for two thousand years popular taste has been quite the contrary of my own); but what does it matter? ‘Here I stand! I cannot help myself’ – I have the courage to confess my ‘poor taste’.

The Old Testament – now, that is something quite different! Let me express my admiration for the Old Testament! I find within its pages great men, a heroic landscape and one of the rarest things in the world, the incomparable naivety of the strong heart; further still, I find a people.

In the New Testament, on the contrary, I find nothing save petty sectarianism, rococo of the soul, arabesques and fancy touches, nothing but convent-air, to say nothing of an occasional breath of bucolic sweetness which clings to the epoch (and to the Roman province) and which is more Hellenistic than Jewish. Meekness and braggadocio cheek by jowl; an emotional garrulousness that almost overwhelms; passionate hysteria, but no passion; an embarrassing amount of gesturing; here manifestly good breeding was entirely lacking. How dare anyone make so much fuss about their petty failings as do these pious little fellows! No one cares a straw about it – let alone God.

(Genealogy of Morals essay 3 s. 22)

>He draws heavily from Schopenhauer

Nietzsche rejects Schopenhauer's ethics:

Schopenhauer was consistent enough: pity negates life and renders it more deserving of negation.

Pity is the practice of nihilism. To repeat: this depressive and contagious instinct crosses those instincts which aim at the preservation of life and at the enhancement of its value. It multiplies misery and conserves all that is miserable, and is thus a prime instrument of the advancement of decadence: pity persuades men to nothingness! Of course, one does not say “nothingness” but “beyond” or “God,” or “true life,” or Nirvana, salvation, blessedness.

This innocent rhetoric from the realm of the religious moral idiosyncrasy appears much less innocent as soon as we realize which tendency it is that here shrouds itself in sublime words: hostility against life. Schopenhauer was hostile to life; therefore pity became a virtue for him.
Aristotle, as is well known, considered pity a pathological and dangerous condition, which one would be well advised to attack now and then with a purge: he understood tragedy as a purge. From the standpoint of the instinct of life, a remedy certainly seems necessary for such a pathological and dangerous accumulation of pity as is represented by the case of Schopenhauer

(Antichrist s. 7)