Neitzsche on Christianity, Research Paper Example

Nietzsche’s criticisms on Christianity take on a number of angles and attacks.  While not everything in Christianity is attacked, notably that of the person of Jesus Christ in his lifetime, nearly all aspects of Christianity and especially that of Christian morality is attacked. Nietzsche saw it as false and as a religion which protected the weak and harmed the strong individuals.

False Nature of Christianity

Perhaps the root of Nietzsche’s criticisms can be seen within the false nature of Christianity, according to Nietzsche. When all of the angles of criticism are considered from him, it can be seen under his grip of this belief, which asserts that Christianity is false, which relates to one of his most popular phrases.

One of Nietzsche’s most popular phrases is asserted to the false nature of Christianity.  Nietzsche’s “God is dead,” which has been seen in a number of his works, such as The Gay Science and Thus Spoke Zarathustra, relates the false nature of Christianity to its source: the living God, Jesus Christ.  It can be seen as the root of Nietzsche’s lack of belief and respect for Christianity.

“God is Dead”

The term is grounded within science and the reality of religion for Nietzsche.  In comparing it to Buddhism, the nature of Christianity can be seen in Nietzsche’s inherent respect for the two religions:

Buddhism is a hundred times more realistic than Christianity: posing problems objectively ad cooly is part of its inheritance, for Buddhism comes after a philosophic movement which spanned centuries.  The concept of “God” had long been disposed of when it arrived.  Buddhism is the only genuinely positivistic religion in history.[1]

The assertion that God is dead is said to be disposed of with the onset of Christianity. Thus, when God had died, so too had Christianity.

The death of God is inherent to Nietzsche’s rejection of the truth of Christianity.  If God had died, as Jesus Christ had died, then there can be no objective truth in the matter for Nietzsche.  Thus, if there is no God or Jesus Christ, then there is no construct or reality upon which to have the Christian faith.

The assertion of the death of God also has roots within history and culture.  Secular society in Europe had contributed to the ability for those to rid themselves of the “need” to believe in God.  While this is inextricably linked to moral ideals, which will be discussed, this is still grounded in the rejection of the truth of God, as Nietzsche holds that he is dead.  If God is dead and society has progressed in such a manner in which belief is not needed, the latter element is wholly relevant to the lack of truth in the Christian faith.  That is, according to Nietzsche, if there is no objective reality in God as he is dead, and society has progressed passed a need in that, then Christianity is further objected.

Science also plays a part in this as well.  Scientific advancements have allowed humans to move past their need of God and faith as a whole.  Thus, combined with culture and society, and the increase in autonomy in regards to this and scientific achievements and advancements, Christianity is further proved to be false.

Jesus Christ

Nietzsche holds that Jesus Christ is in fact dead, of course.  But this is not to say that he undermines everything that Jesus stood for.  In fact, many have seen Nietzsche as having a respect for the human being that was Jesus Christ.  In this line of view, Nietzsche is seen as being critical of how his life and what he stood for has been distorted throughout religion and in the minds of people.

Nietzsche holds to the connection of Jesus to his actual life experience.  As Nietzsche stated, Jesus was a “free spirit” who was oriented towards the experience of life, rather than toward “any kind of word, formula, law, faith, dogma.”[2]  From this he declares that Jesus is “one whose appearance seems like that of a Buddha on soil that is not at all Indian.”  Thus Nietzsche does not hold that Jesus is the person or the fanatic that is known to and distorted by the traditions of the Church.[3]

Nihilism

The death of God leads Nietzsche to relate his outlook on nihilism.  Nihilism removes value from all things and asserts that life has no purpose.  Thus, from Nietzsche’s belief in the lack of truth in Christianity, and the death of Jesus Christ and God in scientific and cultural views, Nietzsche clings to nihilism in the face of Christianity.

The role of nihilism places a profound depth in the moral philosophy of Nietzsche.  Nietzsche does not hold to the objective reality, and thus the objective truth, of God or the Christian faith.  Thus, as there is no objective reality in life and certainly not in regards to Christianity or God, one is free to choose their own perspective, known as perspectivism, in Nietzsche’s perspective that can be seen to be labeled as nihilism.

Nietzsche believes that individuals should disregard Christianity and God in order to find perspective in their lives.  In Nietzsche’s nihilism, nothing has this overriding objective truth.  Hence, one should rely on their own perspectives.  One is thus able to recognize truth in respect to perspective, rather than to adhere to God or a Christian faith that has no objective truth, and thus no meaning, according to Nietzsche.

According to Nietzsche, this is how one is able to find meaning in regards to morality.  In the words of Nietzsche, “He who has let God go, clings all the more strongly to the belief in morality.”[4]  By releasing all ties to God or the Christian faith, according to Nietzsche, one releases these barriers towards finding perspective in their life, on the road to finding meaning in moral ideas.

Attack on Christian Morality

Some of Nietzsche’s most passionate criticisms on Christianity resonate against the moral issues in which Christianity perpetuates.  Upon the lack of basis in which Christianity exists, Nietzsche aggressively attacks the fundamental ideas of Christian morality.  He sees Christianity as a type of slave morality and devoid of true capabilities within the subject of morality, power, and autonomy.

Slave Morality

Nietzsche proclaims his charges against morality in Daybreak.  Here he criticizes not only Christianity, but also utilitarianism and Kantianism.  Here Nietzsche wants to not necessarily abolish morality, but to reevaluate them under a more naturalistic source of value in his views.

The master-slave morality finds meaning within Nietzsche’s characterizations of society.  Originating in Greece in the time of Homer, Nietzsche creates the strong-willed man as the master morality, and the slave casted into that of the slave morality.  The master-slave morality is thus that of oppression and reaction to it, where the slaves react to it unfavorably.  This creates a number of repercussions within the society as a whole, where the strong and weak coincide in this struggle.

His account of slave morality permeates a number of targets.  Modern Europe is one instance in which the master and slave morality exists.  Furthermore, he sees historical bases for the master and slave moralities that were perpetuated, such as in ancient Greece and Roman empires.

The Christian Slave Morality

Beyond all of these examples, of course, Nietzsche demonstrated that Christianity perpetuated this slave morality in which he speaks.  Christianity was one example in which the slave morality perpetuated and exists today, according to Nietzsche.  For Nietzsche this morality has distorted modern culture and affecting others, such as its hold and effect on those within modern Europe and beyond.

Nietzsche recognizes the moral code of Christianity.  In Christian morality those who are good, kind-tempered, and not aggressive are those who are good.  In other words, he is not feared.

Yet as Nietzsche recognizes, this was originally not the case.  The strong and noble man, one in the aristocracy, this man was good.  Those that did not share these qualities were referred to as bad.  Yet in Christianity there is no such thing, as Christianity has turned their backs on the master morality that Nietzsche desires.

The Central Attack Against Christian Morality

Within good will and humility in Christianity, Nietzsche detects a great deal of malice.  That is, those who cultivate humility merely cloak their weakness and nourish resentment against those who are stronger than themselves.  Those who are inferior harbor feelings to humiliate and harm those who are superior to them.  Nietzsche sees the wish to punish as that which produces evidence of the hidden malice which is found in Christianity.

Nietzsche views the individual in Christianity as a sick individual.  Such as in the previous point with regards to malice, the individual harbors feelings of torment onto others and himself.  Nietzsche also holds that the individual rejects sensuality and life as it is, in the face of adhering to these standards.

The sick individual is also deeply affected by pity.  In regards to the suffering of others, Nietzsche holds that pity is an infection.[5]  As a temptation, it is to be resisted at all costs.  As an infection, it is a kind of poison to the compassionate man who is infected by the suffering of others.

Nietzsche also extends the sick individual in Christianity to the morality of concern for others in general, which he sees as another sign of weakness.  Nietzsche sees concern for others as a dynamic in which the sick individual cheers himself up by the misfortune of others. That is, a man is built up by consciously being aware of the misfortunes of others.

The result of Nietzsche’s aggression towards Christianity is thus evident.  He saw it as a religion in which the weak were protected.  From previous points that have been made in this discussion, Nietzsche held that the strong were not able to truly be strong, as they were held to these weak capacities of morality.

Thus Christianity captured the essential aspects of the slave morality.  A morality represented full of weakness, wrongful care and pity for others, and observed in a God who has died, according to Nietzsche, it was a perfect example of a slave morality.  This slave morality for Nietzsche captured these weak tendencies which served to perpetuate these unfortunate moral standards.

The Higher and Lower Man

There has been a great amount of literature on Nietzsche in regards to his conceptions of the higher and lower man.  In keeping with his slave and master moralities, he viewed the higher and weaker man in regards to that of strength and weakness, respectively.  The higher and lower man ultimately finds meaning in his works and especially in his conception of Christianity as a whole.

The lower man in Christianity is protected within the religion.  Nietzsche had a hatred of this, whereby Christianity served to protect the weak.  Instead of them finding strength in order to find a true sense of morality, Nietzsche found these individuals protected in an unfortunate and weak concept of morality.  He saw Christianity as a religion for the weak, for their protection and glorification.

Nietzsche’s hatred of Christianity is more interestingly grounded in that of the stronger man.  The stronger man in Christianity is regulated to these lower standards of morality.  The stronger man was thus infected with these lower states of morality.

The stronger man is thus undermined in Christianity.  Nietzsche sees this as a vast problem within the morality where Christianity resides.  The healthier type of man is affected by the undermining of strength with the tenets and standards of Christianity.  Ultimately Christianity is, according to Nietzsche, harmful for this type of man, the higher man.  He is ultimately injured in these teachings that Christianity imposes upon him.

Will to Power

Nietzsche’s will to power represents an important place in his moral philosophy.  Each individual, according to Nietzsche, is inflicting his will upon others at all times. In every action one is trying to impart their own will upon another.  Thus, all human beings are egoistic in nature.

The will to power rules out actions that are completely altruistic in nature.  It is also more than just an aspect within psychology.  Rather, it is an ultimate reality that is embedded in the universe.  According to Nietzsche, domination, upward mobility, self-preservation, power, and personal growth are examples of the fundamental elements of the will.  This is everything that the world exhibits in whole.

Result Within Christianity

Christianity has obstructed an individual’s sense of the will to power.  By constructing values that do not allow one to engage in such actions, it thereby limits an individual’s ability to expand one’s power.  Thus one is prevented from the instinctive ways one would normally express his will to power.

Thus within Christianity, we see these distortions in other behaviors.  That is, as a society dominated by such standards within Christianity, violence and such cannot be used by the individual to utilize one’s call to power.  Thus one’s need to rise to the call to power takes on disguised forms, such as love of some other type of control.

Overall within these needs from the individual, Nietzsche further sees Christianity as an obstruction.  Just as he sees Christianity as perpetuating the slave and master morality, Nietzsche believes the biggest travesty is weakening the strong.  This identifies a particular hate from him.

Nietzsche’s hatred of Christianity is exactly in this element.  One’s ability to find power is thwarted in society due to these standards by which one must live.  Thus, just as in regards to the slave morality Christianity represents, according to Nietzsche, Christianity weakens the strong here again by taking these methods away from individuals who are rising to the call of power, to those who are trying to obtain a positive sense of control in their life.

Conclusion

Nietzsche’s criticisms on Christianity take on a significant number of angles.  They can all seem to begin upon the false nature of Christianity.  As Nietzsche holds that God is dead, so too does he connect that with the impossibility of the Christian faith.  In turn, Nietzsche turns away from the hold of the Christian faith and looks at nihilism and perspectivism.  Instead of holding to the false Christian faith from something that has no objective basis, according to Nietzsche, one should find no objective meaning in life, and thus resort to what he believes is important from his own perspective.

Upon these truths Nietzsche finds many barriers implicit in Christianity.  It obstructs one from the will to power and places a number of constraining moral values on the individual.  It ultimately keeps the weak as they are, and weakens the strong, according to Nietzsche.

Bibliography

Hollingdale, R. J., Nietzsche: The Man and His Philosophy (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1965).

Nietzsche, Friedrich, Beyond Good and Evil, trans. Walter Kaufmann (New York: Vintage Books, 1966).

Nietzsche, Friedrich, Daybreak, ed. Maudemarie Clark and Brian Leiter (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997).

Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Antichrist in: The Portable Nietzsche, ed. and trans. Walter Kaufmann (New York: The Viking Press, 1954).

Nietzsche , Friedrich, The Birth of Tragedy, trans. Wm. A. Haussmann (Edinburgh: T. N. Foulis, 1920).

Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Dawn of Day, trans. T. M. Kennedy (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1913).

Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Gay Science, trans. Walter Kaufmann (New York: Vintage Books, 1974).

Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Joyful Wisdom, trans. Thomas Common (New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Company, 1960).

Nietzsche, Friedrich, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, ed. Robert Pippin and trans. Adrian Del Caro (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006).

Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Will to Power, Vol I, trans. Anthony M. Judovici (Ediburgh: T. N. Foulis, 1909).

[1] Friedrich Nietzsche, The Antichrist in: The Portable Nietzsche, ed. and trans. Walter Kaufmann (New York: The Viking Press, 1954), 587.

[2] Ibid., 605.

[3] Ibid., 604.

[4] Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Will to Power, Vol I, trans. Anthony M. Judovici (Ediburgh: T. N. Foulis, 1909).

[5] Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Will to Power, Vol I, trans. Anthony M. Judovici (Ediburgh: T. N. Foulis, 1909).