If Nietzsche's ubermensch (or the "extraordinary man", in Crime and Punishment--by the way, the word for "extraordinary" here can also be translated as "transcendent") is someone, like Mohammed or Napoleon, who destroys all values to make way for values he created, then isn't Jesus Christ the greatest ubermensch who ever lived? Like with every "extraordinary man", Great bloodshed and pain were required to bring about his values (he predicted, "I do not bring peace"), but unlike with all the other ubermensch, this bloodshed and pain was wrought on his followers (starting with him). Yet more than any other man he destroyed all the old values and imposed his own.
Isn't that exactly what he did? Passion, specifically love, was what all his values were engendered by, and he wrought destruction on the old values that were almost sensible (love your friends, hate your enemies).
No, because Jesus has been standardized literally to death. This is what Nietzsche refers to when he says that God is dead.
The core value of the ubermensch is risk, and the core anti-value of the ubermensch is the average. Jesus has become the ultimate average. He became the ultimate status-quo, static, weak and boring. Being a christian, at least in the west, is just about the least risky thing you could possibly be.
Being a ubermensch is about the exact opposite. It is about accepting risks, regardless of whether they can kill you. It is all about the idea that if you never take risks, nothing can make you great, no matter how much you talk. Also, the opposite is true: if you take risks, nothing can marginalize you, certainly not the so-called 'critics' who hide behind the safety of their own words
But in Christ's time, being a Christian was hardly without risk, and it's him we are discussing. Furthermore, you're brining up his values being nearly ubiquitous as a mark against him; in fact, that is precisely what makes him an ubermesnch, someone who destroys the old values and *imposes* his own. Someone who just creates his own values would hardly be an ubermensch, or else Nietzsche himself would be the superman.
I'd also say the being a sincere Christian in the West is getting more and more demonized. The only acceptable variation of Christian will eventually be: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bWHSpmXEJs
>But in Christ's time, being a Christian was hardly without risk, and it's him we are discussing
I wasn't talking about then, I'm talking about being a christian now. Being a christian is novle when you're in a colleseum and you're about to be eaten by lions. In that case, holding on to your faith is admirable and praiseworthy. Being a christian isn't admirable when it's the default and the average that a system tries to ebforce onto a society. It is in fact this standardization that has effectively killed Christianity
>I'd also say the being a sincere Christian in the West is getting more and more demonized
Bitch please. Preach your holy word in Saudi Arabia, and then come back and tell me how horribly oppressive the West is to your religion. That is, if you survive the trip.
>I wasn't talking about then, I'm talking about being a christian now. Being a christian is novle when you're in a colleseum and you're about to be eaten by lions. In that case, holding on to your faith is admirable and praiseworthy. Being a christian isn't admirable when it's the default and the average that a system tries to ebforce onto a society. It is in fact this standardization that has effectively killed Christianity
What does this have to do with the topic?
>Bitch please. Preach your holy word in Saudi Arabia, and then come back and tell me how horribly oppressive the West is to your religion. That is, if you survive the trip.
You can't even practice Christianity in Saudi Arabia legally. But there are over a million Christians there.
>What does this have to do with the topic?
Everything, as the whole core of the ubermensch is about deviating from the average, regardless of the damage or risk involved. Following a doctrine, especially one of the most widely spread, most mainstream doctrines on the planet, is just about the least risky thing out there.
As Nietzsche would say, there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross
They died following someone. They didn't die for themselves. If they had some actual guts, they would have created their own beluef systems and gave up their lives for them. That would have made them truly sublime.
The martyrs are admirable, but slightly mistaken in this regard
>"If X, then why are my Orthodox views proved correct, especially considering my pre-prepared argument constructed specially for this thread, Y?"
literally every fucking thread. fuck off back to /r/orthodoxchristianity
>everyone should be an ubermensch
Ah, that would literally be impossible. And nonsensical. There would be no old values at all to destroy if every single person were completely destroying the values of their time and building their own on the ashes, it would the Hobbseian idea of man's natural state.
That's literally what an ubermensch does. He destroys the old values and imposes his own on humanity, he doesn't just keep them to himself.
>They didn't die for themselves. If they had some actual guts, they would have created their own beluef systems and gave up their lives for them. That would have made them truly sublime.
That doesn't sound sublime at all, it sounds extremely narcissistic.
>REEEEEEEEEE AN INTELLIGENT CHRISTIAN STARTED AN INTERESTING THREAD REEEEEEEEE
calm down, anon.
I'm a partisan, not a shill. There's a pretty significant difference. A shill in that case would be someone who is pretending not to be Orthodox or Christian, and probably posing as an atheist.
The term comes from when a grifter is running a game like three-card Monte, and they have an accomplice who pretends to just be someone interested in the game, and they have the accomplice win a lot of money to b8 others to play.
He's just an Orthodox Christian explaining how it is in a knowledgable way.
Why do people who spam meme-philosophers get a pass but when an educated Christian wants to talk theology there's always a chimpout?
It's a small, but vocal minority. I've found most atheists on this board to be very loving of Christians. Just as with Christians, some atheists derive pleasure from love, some derive pleasure from hate.
Gratitude, presumably. Nietzsche loved the Greek religion because he said it was built on gratitude. His hatred of Christianity was specifically his believe that it stemmed from resentment, which he saw as the antithesis of gratitude.
>Nietzsche did not demur of Jesus, saying he was the "only one true Christian". He presented a Christ whose own inner life consisted of "blessedness in peace, in gentleness, in the inability for enmity." There is much criticism by Nietzsche of the organized institution of Christianity and its class of priests. Christ's evangelism consisted of the good news that the kingdom of God is within you. "What are the 'glad tidings'? True life, eternal life is found—it is not promised, it is here, it is within you: as life lived in love...." " 'Sin', every kind of distancing relationship between God and man, is abolished - precisely this is the 'glad tidings'. "The 'glad tidings' are precisely that there are no more opposites...." Nietzsche does however explicitly consider Jesus as a mortal, and furthermore as ultimately misguided, the antithesis of a true hero, whom he posits with his concept of a Dionysian hero.
There is. Nietzsche thought that it was resentment driving it though, because he quotes Tertullian and Aquinas (both very, very Latin theologians) as talking about how those in heaven will get to watch the suffering in hell for their pleasure (however, Nietzsche fabricated the quote by Aquinas). Nietzsche also saw Western theology as anti-material (which is kind of was, due to Plato's influence on it), which to Nietzsche is a form of ingratitude.
But properly speaking, Christianity is very grateful. Gratitude is the primary impulse of Christianity. Think of all the gratitude you owe society for your culture, your language, your lifestyle, your comforts, your existence, all that has been done over thousands of years...well, Christianity is basically that gratitude expressed for wellspring of reality itself, the gratitude owed is so overwhelming that it is quite impossible for us to express it or even feel it.
Thus Spoke Zarathustra is a fine introduction to Nietzsche, and he says his later works are only intended for those who have thoroughly explored Thus Spoke Zarathustra.
The reason some people have trouble with it, when they haven't read Nietzsche's later works, is because Nietzsche alludes very significantly the Bible, Homer and Heraclitus. It's critical that you're familiar with them before you read TPZ.
He might say that, but really I think someone should read his other works and Zarathustra last. It's not exactly an easy book to understand. You have to know what ideas he's trying to get at.
At the very least, read Heraclitus, since you read all that is left of him in one sitting
Even if you read the rest of Nietzsche, you will still miss stuff if you don't read Heraclitus, who was probably more influential on Nietzsche than any other thinker.
If you ever decide to read the Bible, I strongly urge you to read the NT first, and to read the Orthodox NT (if you google Orthodox New Testament PDF, the first link will have it).
Jesus' values were not Christian values. Or at the very least not the values of Christians. Jesus never converted the Roman empire either, mind you. At the time of his death his followers were little more than an ascetic Jewish cult.
The true Christian Ubermensch was Constantine.
Sure thing, champ.
But Constantine didn't convert the Roman Empire, he just legalized Christianity. He didn't create any new values and impose them, in fact he was a pretty ruthless ruler in the pagan tradition, and converted because he was in the habit of asking different gods for help for things, and asked the Christian God (whom he probably didn't know much about) for help at a battle, along with a ton of other gods. But he saw the fiery cross in the sky and therefore thought it must be the Christian God who helped him. It also helped that his mom was Christian, tho. Anyway, so he legalized Christianity and became a catechumen, though he did not get baptized until his deathbed (because he wanted to make absolutely sure every single sin was washed away before he died).
>he did not get baptized until his deathbed (because he wanted to make absolutely sure every single sin was washed away before he died).
Can't I just do the same and get into heaven despite living a life of fornication and vice?