2,5⭐️, höchstens

Okay, Nietzsche was really angry. It is quite obvious that the book is a tirade against Christianity, so the content is not surprising.

Some approaches are interesting, such as the treatise that the church is the opposite of the gospel by establishing an organized church with a priesthood - which is actually what Jesus wanted to leave behind. But all the further arguments for it completely miss the point and he just gets worked up about priests and so on.

I didn't have the feeling that he actually had anything to say to me as a Christian, but I shudder at the consequences of his morality and ethics. Besides, he calls Swabians the "best liars in Germany"

Anyone should have a broad and unbiased view of religion and regime when approaching anything related to this work, including my own review. So if you truly have an academic spirit, please read on! :)

Anyone who reads Nietzsche without understanding him, his life and his thoughts will easily come to... absurd conclusions. (Hitler is one of them). Therefore, I will talk gently about this work according to my own understanding.

First of all, remember that Nietzsche is the founder of existential philosophy. Existential philosophy re-evaluates all views on ancient philosophy (especially philosophical schools that focus only on exploring the principles of the operation of the universe and human life), emphasizing that philosophy should not and cannot be divorced from everyday life, and that "There is no world other than this world" (Nietzsche). More specifically, existential philosophy elevates the ontology of existence itself - each person, or each individual, is a unique personality and has its own mission. Nietzsche proclaims those truths in an abstract, allegorical way, and he criticizes Christianity because Christianity "obscures" the natural instincts of the ontology of existence, elevates "false" values and is far from the world.

Secondly, Nietzsche uses his strong and fierce language to condemn Christianity for using all means to make the entities of existence become weak, lose their emotions and desires to live in the present life, only care about living for a false world, with the ignoble purpose of serving the needs of the ruling classes in this religious system.

Thirdly, Nietzsche points out the fallacies and contradictions existing in the system of religious teachings and the "preconceived notions" of Christianity, with sharp, concise and to-the-point language.

However, we need to realize one thing: this is not the language written by a crazy person (psycho) obsessed with religious hatred. Nietzsche himself was born into a family of pastors, Nietzsche once received the sacrament in the church, he is more familiar with the Bible than many people, and uses the very words of the Bible that he loves as evidence for his premise: the religious doctrine system itself is contradictory.

We also need to recognize another thing: Nietzsche is not an atheist and anti-Jesus, nor is he a "true anti-Christian" in the strict sense. He only rejects the absurd, false system of religious teachings and the failed, burdensome church system. He himself highly values the image of Jesus, proclaiming that Jesus is "the first and only Christian". Nietzsche does not think that the Christian system is wrong, but has been "misunderstood" and "made to be misunderstood" by those with ignoble purposes.

This book will indeed cause a lot of controversy. However, if we read it with an objective and reference eye, completely unbiased and academic, we will see the very high, very high purpose of Nietzsche: to revive the noble values of the human ontology, to affirm the infinite ability that humans can achieve (through concepts such as the will to power and the Superman - Ubersmench). That is also the reason why, although it sounds strange and bold, Nietzsche has boldly said: "God is dead".

Read in Dutch.

There are many clever insights that have become common place in the meantime.

These insights offer valuable perspectives and have had a significant impact on various fields of study.

However, when it comes to Nietzsche's criticism on religion, it can be argued that he focuses on secondary issues.

Rather than addressing the fundamental tenets and beliefs of religion, he seems to zero in on certain aspects that may not be as central.

This approach may limit the depth and comprehensiveness of his critique.

Perhaps a more in-depth analysis of the core elements of religion would have provided a more profound and meaningful contribution to the discussion.

Nonetheless, Nietzsche's ideas still hold some merit and continue to be a subject of debate and study.

It is important to consider both the strengths and weaknesses of his work when evaluating his views on religion.

Friedrich Nietzsche is a philosopher who launched a frontal attack on the idealist thesis of the existence of values of universal validity that are realized in the historical process.

He argued that there are no such absolute and objective values. Instead, values are created and determined by individuals or groups. Nietzsche believed that traditional moral and ethical values were often used to suppress and control people, rather than to promote their true freedom and self-realization.

He proposed a new concept of "will to power," which emphasized the importance of individual strength, creativity, and the pursuit of power. According to Nietzsche, only by exercising one's will to power can one overcome the limitations of traditional values and create a new and more meaningful life.

Nietzsche's ideas had a profound impact on modern philosophy, literature, and culture. His critique of traditional values and his emphasis on individualism and creativity continue to inspire and challenge thinkers today.

I truly and deeply like his ideas and thoughts regarding Christianity and Western culture. However, it is his style that troubles me to a great extent.

Firstly, he is misogynistic without any justifiable reason. He demeans women out of context on several occasions. I mean, really, Friedrich? That was completely unnecessary!

Secondly, the entire book seems as if an angry person is shouting right in your face. Some of his thoughts lack proper argumentative support. I have the feeling that he could have done better in this regard.

Not to mention his sort of superiority complex. Come on, my friend, you are as German as the people you speak ill of.

Skipping ahead to the part where he believes that Jesus was the only true Christian. That is indeed an impressive thought, though.

Overall, while there are aspects of his work that I appreciate, his style and certain attitudes really detract from the overall value of his ideas.

Las convicciones son prisiones. Los convencidos no ven bastante lejos, no ven por debajo de sí...

Cuando en mi primer año de preparatoria tuve mi primera clase de filosofía, supe que esta me acompañaría siempre y que la atesoraría sin descanso alguno, sin piedad y con entrega. Es por eso quizá que disfruté a ese nivel de este libro, de la filosofía de un hombre con pensamientos tan duros y radicales que, guardados en un cerebro como el suyo, no eran suficientes, necesitaban más y ser gritados.

Ciertamente, no he de olvidar mencionar que sí, no estoy de acuerdo en todo lo que él dice. Sin embargo, tiene puntos interesantísimos y algunos que sí que comparto. Ah, pero soy tan débil a la filosofía que no pude evitar apreciarlo con esta intensidad. Sí, hay cosas que no puedo compartir, pero también hay cosas que son imposibles de rebatir. La filosofía es un mundo vasto y complejo, y aunque no pueda estar de acuerdo con todo, siempre puedo aprender y expandir mis horizontes.

"Las convicciones son prisiones. Los convencidos no ven bastante lejos, no ven por debajo de sí..."

Nietzsche's attack here on Christianity is not an attack on religion in general but an attack on the direction that religion has taken, known by the men of religion for reasons far removed from true religion. I am not a good reader of philosophy, but my professional impression of Nietzsche's view is a replica for those who use religion to subjugate people.

Nietzsche believed that Christianity had become a tool for the weak to oppress the strong. He argued that the values promoted by Christianity, such as humility, charity, and forgiveness, were actually a way for the weak to gain power over the strong. According to Nietzsche, true strength and greatness should be celebrated, not suppressed by religious dogma.

However, it is important to note that Nietzsche's views were not without controversy. Many people disagreed with his radical ideas and saw them as a threat to traditional values and beliefs. Nevertheless, his work had a significant impact on philosophy, literature, and culture, and continues to be studied and debated today.

A wild rant against Christianity?

Well, let's just say it's an interesting take. Imagine the Roman Empire as Plato's Republic. It's a bold concept, to be sure. And then there's the idea of St. Paul being the villain of history. That's quite a controversial claim.

But perhaps the most astonishing part is the transformation of Jesus into a prototype for Camus' "Stranger". How does one make such a leap?

It seems this rant is determined to turn traditional views of Christianity on their head. Whether it's a valid or just a wild flight of fancy, it certainly makes for an engaging read.

One can't help but wonder what the implications of these ideas are. Do they offer a new perspective on Christianity, or are they simply a means of provoking thought?

Either way, it's clear that this rant is not for the faint of heart. It challenges our preconceived notions and forces us to consider Christianity in a whole new light.

One of Nietzsche's most powerful creations

In this book, Nietzsche reaches the evaluation of values in his philosophy. It is very concise and to the point, but at the same time profound and sharp. It is a type of book that does not allow for many interpretations.

Everything is sharp. Christianity is fighting against the development and natural growth of humanity. Christianity does not allow the strong to bring forward humanity. It is a false morality, based on weak, not human values.

According to Nietzsche, if there were no Christianity, knowledge would already have reached extremely high heights, because the ancient people had prepared everything for it. The ancient Greeks and Romans had laid the foundation for the age of knowledge, until Christianity simply wiped them out.

If you have a few chronic feelings, browse through this book. But read it if you are open to any philosophy, to broad-minded thinking.

I love Nietzsche, and there is so much I can say about him.

His thoughts are witty, sarcastic, and controversial, which always manage to capture my attention.

I am particularly intrigued by how he begins his book, stating that the reader must have achieved a certain state of consciousness and have experienced "seven solitudes" to truly understand him.

His definition of happiness, "The sensation that power is growing and one resistance has been tamed," is both lovely and thought-provoking.

As the self-proclaimed anti-Christ, Nietzsche puts Christianity in a very negative light. He believes that it wants to annul intellectuality and preys on the weak, making people sick and weakening them to tame them.

Chapter 45 is filled with pure irony, as he takes passages from the Bible and makes sarcastic comments with such geniality that it can only be fully appreciated by reading it.

He also discusses Adam and Eve and how the tree of knowledge is an allegory for the hate of science and the pursuit of the real truth.

One comment that I found extremely interesting is his claim that the Germans are responsible for Protestantism and that if Christianity never ends, they will be to blame. This is a hilarious and genius observation, especially since I am living in Germany and surrounded by mainly Protestant people.

However, there are some things that I don't agree with Nietzsche on. For example, his views on Islamism and anarchism, as well as his rather sexist comment that I choose not to repeat.

Nevertheless, Nietzsche's work is still highly influential and thought-provoking. His appeal to stop counting our years based on the birth of Christ and start counting from the last day of the Christian era is a bold and radical idea that makes me wonder if it will ever come to pass. I, for one, will be waiting to see.

"One must be predestined to the labyrinth."

I must say that, compared to "The Twilight of the Idols", this reading has been very disappointing. I always believed that reading this book would reaffirm my atheism and further ground my arguments, but here Nietzsche (or however it's spelled) focuses on criticizing religion as an institution, especially those who take the path of the priesthood.

I am grateful to this book because it completely awakened my interest in Buddhism, and I have already been researching a lot on the topic. I guess something remains from every book.

The themes of this work must be studied with tweezers, many are delicate, and it is undoubtedly a careful reading...

Although it is complex, it is read quickly (in my case, two afternoons). Perhaps in the distant future I will give it another reread, but for now, other works of Nietzsche (or the old grump) interest me more.

It's important to note that while Nietzsche's critiques of religion are often thought-provoking, they also need to be considered in the context of his own philosophical framework and the historical period in which he lived. Some of his ideas may be controversial, but they can still stimulate valuable discussions about the role of religion in society and in our individual lives.

Moreover, the fact that this book led to my exploration of Buddhism shows how reading can have unexpected consequences and open up new areas of interest. It reminds us that we should approach literature with an open mind and be willing to engage with ideas that may challenge our existing beliefs and perspectives.

In conclusion, while my initial expectations of this book were not met, it has still had a significant impact on my intellectual journey. I look forward to continuing to explore Nietzsche's works and to see where they lead me next.

Solo es otra versión subjetiva de los hechos, tan válida como cualquier otra. This statement implies that there is no one absolute truth when it comes to interpreting events. Each person's perspective is influenced by their own experiences, beliefs, and values. What one person sees as the truth may be completely different from another person's perception.

For example, two people witnessing the same car accident may have different accounts of what happened. One person may focus on the speed of the cars involved, while the other may notice the actions of the drivers. These differences in perception can lead to different interpretations of the event.

It is important to recognize that all versions of the facts are valid in their own way. We should not dismiss someone else's perspective simply because it does not match our own. Instead, we should strive to understand their point of view and consider it when forming our own opinions. By doing so, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the situation and make more informed decisions.