Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Nietzsche critique on Christianity
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Nietzsche critique on Christianity
Friedrich Nietzsche certainly serves as a model for the single best critic of religion. At the other end of this spectrum, Jonathan Edwards emerges as his archrival in terms of religious discourse. Nietzsche argues that Christianity’s stance toward all that is sensual is that grounded in hostility, out to tame all that rests on nature, or is natural, akin to Nietzsche’s position in the world and his views. Taking this into account, Edwards’s views on Christianity should be observed in context targeted at those who agree with his idea, that G-d is great and beyond the capacity of human reason.
Edwards reaffirms for his audience G-d’s Spiritual and Divine Light. This light imparted to the soul by G-d, is of a different nature from any that is obtained by natural means (Edwards, 214). Edwards spells out that his sermon was not intended to address the men who believe solely in life’s natural condition and the anger of G-d. Spiritual light is also something that cannot be witnessed by eye, only by “due apprehension of those things that are taught in the word of G-d.” It is at this juncture that Nietzsche wholeheartedly agrees, affirming that the ‘Kingdom of Heaven’ is a condition of the heart and is not something that emanates from death or comes ‘upon the earth’ (Nietzsche, Sec. 34).
However, Nietzsche debunks Edward’s idea of sin, claiming it as a contrivance used to invoke fear in the believers of Christianity and to denote ruling power to the Priest (Nietzsche, Sec. 49). Nietzsche proceeds to deride the value system of Christianity, spelling out what he sees through the will to power as definitions for happiness, good, and bad (Nietzsche, Sec. 2). For Nietzsche, happiness is the feeling bolstered by power: “that a resistanc...
... middle of paper ...
...y, according to Nietzsche, still exists as part of certain individuals’ subconscious states. Since that individual has a preconceived notion of it in their mind before they achieve a higher state of being, it provides light at the end of the tunnel to fuel their mental digression. Pity too must be a product of that individual’s emotional state. For people who desire self-pity, the idea of Christianity offers them closure, a rationalized conclusion, at the end of the pathway of the individual’s subconscious. In their eyes, the idea of Christianity affords them some level of higher status within their community, which they would not otherwise be able to attain. Christianity rationalizes for the individual his state of depravity. Had this individual been able to see reality from the get-go, achieve some modicum of societal power, they would not require self-pity today.
The problem of evil arguably the most personal and haunting question in apologetics. No heart is untouched by the sting of another’s words and the ultimate display of evil, death. For some, like Elie Wiesel in his autobiography Night, the full scope of human evil is unbearably clear as they are faced with the full measure of human evil. This reality of evil often leads to two responses: “since there is evil, there cannot be a god” or “if there is a god, he cannot be loving or powerful, or worse, he enjoys evil.” By exploring the nature of evil, developing loving, Christian responses, and historical evils like the persecution of the Jews, the problem of evil and the hope depicted in scripture comes into focus.
Jonathan Edwards captured his audience’s attention by using descriptive analogies and extensive imagery. These images create a feeling of despair within these followers of God due to an extreme fear of the possibility of hell. He also uses an emotional appeal, allowing his audience to first be overcome by an overwhelming feeling of despair. At the end of this excerpt however, he will fill these Puritans with a sense of hopefulness, provided by the promise of eternal life in return for faithfulness. His persuasive techniques are specific to a certain type of audience or reader, so these methods may not be effective on all who encounter
"Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God," Edwards used phrases and parallelism that could simply move his listener or reader. Edwards described his view of a vengeful God and the consequences of sin with such strong emotion and vividness that it was sure too shaken up most, if not all of those who had the privilege of hearing or reading it. Edwards clearly portray an image of a fearful and powerful God in relation to a simple and weak man. Edward's dialect was very mighty and yet handled with class and ease. Edward's words were potent and astonishing and he was sure to shaken anyone who came across them.
Wagner is not however the corruptor. He, in Nietzsche’s eyes sadly has found himself among the common man, indoctrinated by Christianity in the face of meaninglessness. Nietzsche’s portrayal of his former friend then takes on a more sympathetic tone. Wagner, as evident by Nietzsche’s early praise and admiration, is the most shining example of both, our best chance at post-Socratic salvation in art as well as a depiction of the destructive power that the illness of ...
What is noteworthy about the way in which he denounces God is that it differs from the typical atheistic argument in which the lack of objective evidence for a God is put forth as a challenge. In asserting that “God is dead” what Nietzsche is in fact conveying is the view that the Christian God cannot serve as the source of objective moral principles. He believes that the western world is over-reliant on religion for its morals and expresses fear that were religion to disappear, the lack of a higher moral authority would create a world where nihilism ruled supreme. Therefore, Nietzsche’s goal was to re-evaluate human values at their core, going deeper than commonly accepted Christian values and culminating in the concept of the “will to power”. The “will to power” is what he saw as the fundamental driving force of all humans, claiming that “A living being wants above all else to release its strength; life itself is the will to power” (Aphorism 13) and that “all animals… strive instinctively for an optimum combination of favourable conditions which allow them to expend all their energy and achieve their maximum feeling of power” (3, Aphorism 7). Nietzsche advocates that only after abandoning God can people begin to realize the worth of the material world and work towards revaluating the values which can be considered as good and
Throughout Edwards’ works, his genuine relationship with God and his desire to know his Creator on a deeper level are passionately displayed. His influence on American society always directs the audience’s attention back to the One who is Lord of
Although the main theme of this sermon was the Anger of God, this sermon is meant to depict the relationship between the Holy God and sinful man. First of all, Edwards describes the natural condition of man as being bleak. He says that God’s fury “burns against them”, that God’s “glittering sword is whet, and held over them, and the pit hath opened its mouth under them” (196). What he means by this is that “unconverted men” are in a standing with God that is precarious (196). They have not yet fallen under the judgment of God, but could at any given time be swallowed whole by the wrath of God. He continues to picture this situation by describing a man as “walk[ing] over the pit of hell on a rotten covering, and there are innumerable places in this covering so weak that they will not bear their weight, and these places are not seen” (197). The general reason that man is in this state is because his wickedness is great. Edwards believes that man in his natural state is completely sinful. He states that “There are those corrupt principles, in reigning power in them, and in full possession of them, that are seeds of hell fire” (196). He shows that every man has nothing but evil inside of him, and can do nothing to rid himself of it. All of this evil makes a man “as it were heavy as lead, and to tend downwards with great weight and pressure towards hell” (199). He also believes that man’s righteousness is weak, and anyone that relies on his good works to earn his way into a relationship with God is destined to fail. He says that all of the good deeds that a man could do would keep him out of hell just as much as “a spider's web would have to stop a falling rock” (199).
Where Kant’s system is based on a set of principles or duties, Nietzsche’s system is based on virtue. Nietzsche is critical of Christianity in general and its evaluation of morality. In the reevaluation of values, he shows how the characteristics of morality in Christianity are more prohibitive of living virtuously than those of Ancient Greece, which include strength, confidence, sexuality, and creativity. In Christianity, those values are pity, shame, asexuality, and humility. The set of values of Ancient Greece is considered Master Morality and the values of deontology is considered to be Slave Morality. Master morality is a step in the right direction for morality but still not the
This confirms Nietzsche's negative view of religion / Christianism. Nietzsche said that religion shouldn't How can religion not be an 'end-in-itself' for religious believers? A counter-argument to this would be to say that religion as an instrument is not a religion.
Trip, D. (1999), “The Christian view of suffering” [Online], Exploring Christianity. Available from: http://www.christianity.co.nz/suffer4.htm [Accessed 18 April 2008].
This ailment began with man’s fear of punishment after the creation of communities. The shift from a free roaming beast to a self-aware community member subdued their natural will to power by imposing restrictions on instinctual actions. Man then became self-critical when turning these aggressive drives inward. However, to understand Nietzsche’s view of a “bad conscience” to be negative would be inaccurate. It is through this morality that man conquers his inner struggle. Accordingly, by turning guilt upon himself man creates an avenue towards self-sovereignty which gives mastery over the self and personal values. Nietzsche states, ‘The “free” human being, the possessor of a long unbreakable will, has in this possession his standard of value as well: looking from himself toward the others, he honors or holds in contempt; and just as necessarily as he honors the ones like him, the strong and reliable…” (2:2:37). This passage suggests morality of custom can be broken, allowing humans to say “yes” to life affirming values they desire. This self-ruling ideal furthers the assumption that Nietzsche does not think Christian morality of itself is wrong, but instead it is the inaction of man. Christian slave morality plays an important role in the concept of bad conscience. Thus, Nietzsche has an aversion to the immediate results of this conscience but deems it crucial for man to become
This piece of work will try to find the answer to the question ‘In Nietzsche’s first essay in the Genealogy of Morals, does he give a clear idea of what good and bad truly are, what they are based on and what his opinion of those ideas is’. It will give a more simplistic overview of his first essay, it will also go into greater detail of what he claims good and bad truly are, and finally look at what he is trying to prove with this argument.
Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morality reflects upon and questions the progression of human morality. An excerpt from the “Preface” of Genealogy of Morality on page 393, suggests that the value placed on what is considered “good” or “bad” is susceptible to evolution; there are no absolute truths in a meaning, only a will to power. Nietzsche’s philosophy is often saturated with dismantling assumptions, absolutions, and arbitrations. In this sense, when people confine their morality to assumptions and absolutions they conform to one power, one perspective, one will that wishes to dominate. This philosophy is communicated by imploring what Nietzsche says about the creation of truth in On Truth and Lies in a Non-Moral Sense and the concepts of good
The Will of Power by Friedrich Nietzsche, in which Nietzsche stated, “Christian morality is slave morality.” which refers to the way that Nietzsche compared Christian morality and slave morality which referred to the utility system of morality. In this essay, I will be explaining the actual intent argument that Nietzsche was making, as well as comparing how the master and slave morality compared to Nietzsche’s Ubermensch theory as well.
Edwards and Wesley spoke heavily on their views of God to their congregation, but their approaches toward the subject differed. Edwards’s writing could portray a harsh tone to some of his congregation, but in actuality that’s not the case. The authors worrisome tone could be compared to overprotective parents.