/lit/ - Literature

What are the best studies on Nietzsche before Walter Kaufmann?

>>23240867
No they didn't. Nietzsche didn't say one wrong word about Christianity. The only Christians who dismiss Nietzsche's writings are those young in the faith or those too hardheaded and closed off to reality that they've stopped caring about the truth of Christ altogether a long time ago. Nietzsche understood the consequences of what Jesus did better than almost every theologian in Church history. He knew the Christ he rejected, and he was honest and explicit in his rejection of Christ. Nietzsche rejected Christ because he couldn’t believe in a God who offers universal forgiveness. For a lot of Christians, it's easy to just dismiss him outright because of that rejection, but he saw clearly what they fail to recognize or willfully ignore. They can demonize Nietzsche all they want, but as Christians, they agree with his definitions of Jesus Christ and his sacrifice for us more than they disagree with him. While Nietzsche would ultimately reject Christ because of such definitions, as Christians, they confess them (or at least should confess them) as true more than we disagree with him.

Nietzsche locates the violence not coming to us from God’s side of the house but to God from our side of the house. We killed him. We stabbed him with our steely knives. We invented new rituals and traditions, new atonement festivals, and cleansing waters of atonement. Jesus was killed by us. Jesus was OUR sacrificial victim. Jesus provided an alternative to the whole history of human sacrifices. Instead of more violence and death, he offered himself as a one-time, all-time atoning sacrifice for the sin of the world; past, present, and always. Instead of violence, he pronounced forgiveness, and so we killed him for it.

Nietzsche didn’t reject Jesus Christ’s sacrifice. He rejected the forgiveness that accompanied Jesus’ sacrifice. Nietzsche could not accept that Jesus died to convert murderers into forgivers. That’s why Nietzsche rejected Christ. Therefore, Nietzsche has much to teach us about the reality of being baptized sinners. We confess our belief in a Christ that we simultaneously reject because he takes from us the very thing we assume we cannot live without, our sacrifices. And yet, despite our refusal to accept Jesus as the Christ, he shows us grace and mercy, setting us free so that we may confess: Yes, I pulled my knife out too. I drove the blade up to the hilt. And yes, it’s true; I reject your forgiveness of others even while I beg you to forgive me. But because you sent your Spirit wrapped in words that converted my heart, I believe.

Nietzsche was so close to Christ that he stood in the shadow of the cross. But he rejected the divine victim because the forgiveness stretched out on Golgotha was an unacceptable alternative to human history, to our sacred violence and deicidal sacrifice in particular.

>you must fight and overcome yourself for greatness
>be like water
Which one is right?

if he was so smart why couldnt he think of a way to have a good life?

>promotes aristocratic radicalism
>becomes philosopher with the widest mass appeal
What did he mean by this?

>wants to exterminate ill-constituted people
>talks about Rangordnung all the time
>thinks women should just produce children and stay away from higher culture
>talks favourably about indian caste system
>pro slavery and exploitation of working classes
Tell me again, how did progressive and liberal interpretations of him prevailed?

>>23073265
He bitches about Shakespeare but he has not touched genius or virility

>There is no good and evil, there is only power and those too weak to seek it.

Was he right?

What lessons did you learn from him?

It's as the title said. How do I go about another author's work being quoted in a text. (The picture is somewhat related.)
How would I go about this?

Method 1: I immediately jump toward said quoted author and read their material afterward returning to the book I was originally reading.

Method 2: I write down said authors and get to it "later"

I won't accept "not reading them" and just blasting ahead feeling like a fraud.

What are your views on this subject?

Where is will to power? Where are the interactions for it to emerge? Oopsie doodle they don't exist because reality is one object and no matter the outcome, it's always will to power :3

What the fuck is a "Left-Nietzschean"?

>>22964425
Neither, fuck em both
>>22967705
Based lol

Is master morality a good thing according to Nietzsche or not?

>>22945094 >>22942990 >>22941131
what does becker being a jew have to do exactly with his theories & arguments? are only kikes allowed to propose unconventional areligious existentialist thought?

ITT: Overhated authors

He makes me angry

Post authors that are/were, at best, midwits. Starting off with the king of midwits:

>>22799936
>No intelligent person is going to see in this statement some interesting or original ide-ACK

>*invents w r i t i n g like this*

why hasn't anybody made the connection between the übermensch and autism? if we eugenically bred out the health conditions spergs suffer from while keeping things on the spectrum, we would undoubtedly evolve into a superior man.

It seems like he just says controversial/highly contested shit without any justification, takes it as assumed, and then talks about the implications of it. What am I missing? Why is he taken seriously?

>dude im sad so GOD IS DEAD
all he needed to do was to start lifting to realize christ is king
i cant believe they took atheist neckbeards like this seriously back then