Why I will read Nietzsche.

[MongolTurk]

I suppose it's partly mindset, but my environment serves as my tangible proof or justification of faith. I believe in Jesus Christ because of my circumstances and the world around me. The perfect conditions for life miraculously/coincidentally existing serves as tangible proof of God, I can touch the things around me, there must be a creator, I find it ridiculous that things would so perfectly come together by chance or by nothing or whatever it is that atheists believe.

As for why I choose to believe in the Christian God rather than the Muslim one or the Jewish one, the Bible simply makes more sense and is more believable. Islam claims Jesus was a prophet who spoke the truth but also denies his claims of being one with the Father.

Try and get closer to Jesus rather than reading your emo Nietzsche nonsense and he may give you more reasons to have faith in him. He works in subtle but effective ways, I prayed to him before shooting up heroin and told him that I would change one day and he got me caught/forced me to quit within an hour.

 

[romanstock]

I am very abstract and visual internally so I have an easy time understanding his allegorical and symbolic language. Won't start with Thus Spoke Zarathustra though.

Watch this 10/10 vid or at least the start of it to understand how deep and difficult he is to understand.

 

[HarrierDuBois]

Watch this 10/10 vid or at least the start of it to understand how deep and difficult he is to understand.

I watched the vid, I'm mirin his intellect hard, he has answers to questions one hasn't even begun to conceptualize in most cases. Insane. Looking forward to reading him.

 

[barettrealrx]

I am a Christian. I wear a cross and proclaim to follow Jesus Christ. My faith however is hollow, only an abstraction of itself. If someone were to tell me "Explain why you're Christian" or "Rationalize your faith", I realized that I cannot do such a thing. I can not rationalize or argument for my faith, and by that extension I do not have any tangible faith. Saying one believes when one has no tangible deep faith is worse than not believing at all, because at least the second group is not lying to themselves.

Then I came to a conclusion, Friedrich Nietzsche is most likely the most intelligent denier of God and attacker of Christianity that has ever set foot on earth. So if I want to rationalize my faith, the best way to do so would be to stand eye to eye with the most intelligent opponent of the idea I desire to defend, by doing this I either lose and submit to his ideals (which would at least be tangible argumentative ideals), or when facing this man my brain is forced to develop tangible counterarguments and ideals defending and explaining why I do believe. I'm convinced the only way for me to find peace within the stability of my Christian faith is to go up against this iron man of its opposition. I either lose or I win, either way I will be able to know why I think the way I do.

Also @TechnoBoss which is the best order to read them in? I heard everyone agree that Thus Spoke Zarathustra is the final boss however.

Read Graham oppy

 

[barettrealrx]

Read Graham oppy

And Sobel reading a philisopher wh o didnt specialize in religion isnt gonna helpy you tbh

 

[UrGirlsMcm]

JFL What a retard Nietszsche doesnt deny God you probably also think hes a nihilist

 

[HarrierDuBois]

JFL What a retard Nietszsche doesnt deny God you probably also think hes a nihilist

From what I gathered he's a proto-existentialist. He attacks Christianity which is what I want to dissect.

 

[UrGirlsMcm]

From what I gathered he's a proto-existentialist. He attacks Christianity which is what I want to dissect.

Didnt even know what existential meant had to google but I agree

JFL at people with higher IQ than me not being able to understand Nietzsche. He attacks Christians because he believes they have robbed Europeans of their Master morality liberalism and communism all these gay egalitarian beliefs derive from Slave Morality Christian values.

 

[chucky]

theres more life lessons in my shitposts than neitzche and the bible put together, no walls of text needed

https://looksmax.org/members/chucky.65247/#latest-activity

 

[HarrierDuBois]

theres more life lessons in my shitposts than neitzche and the bible put together, no walls of text needed

https://looksmax.org/members/chucky.65247/#latest-activity

"Welcome to ignore faggot" really is higher IQ than Nietzsche and the bible yes.

 

[sam12344343]

I am a Christian. I wear a cross and proclaim to follow Jesus Christ. My faith however is hollow, only an abstraction of itself. If someone were to tell me "Explain why you're Christian" or "Rationalize your faith", I realized that I cannot do such a thing. I can not rationalize or argument for my faith, and by that extension I do not have any tangible faith. Saying one believes when one has no tangible deep faith is worse than not believing at all, because at least the second group is not lying to themselves.

Then I came to a conclusion, Friedrich Nietzsche is most likely the most intelligent denier of God and attacker of Christianity that has ever set foot on earth. So if I want to rationalize my faith, the best way to do so would be to stand eye to eye with the most intelligent opponent of the idea I desire to defend, by doing this I either lose and submit to his ideals (which would at least be tangible argumentative ideals), or when facing this man my brain is forced to develop tangible counterarguments and ideals defending and explaining why I do believe. I'm convinced the only way for me to find peace within the stability of my Christian faith is to go up against this iron man of its opposition. I either lose or I win, either way I will be able to know why I think the way I do.

Also @TechnoBoss which is the best order to read them in? I heard everyone agree that Thus Spoke Zarathustra is the final boss however.

Religion always had to adapt to science. Why after when Darwin's theory of evolution came out religion had to claim the world being created in 7 days was metaphorical etc. etc. If Christianity was true religion would have never had to adapt to the knowledge we know about the world today and science would be explaining religion not contrasting it. So it is either Christianity is a fallacy or the science is wrong. That being said Religion is a great tool for keeping humans sane

 

[Blackout.xl]

@Blackout.xl

You wished for my return, and your wishes were answered.

 

[Imretarded?]

I am a Christian. I wear a cross and proclaim to follow Jesus Christ. My faith however is hollow, only an abstraction of itself. If someone were to tell me "Explain why you're Christian" or "Rationalize your faith", I realized that I cannot do such a thing. I can not rationalize or argument for my faith, and by that extension I do not have any tangible faith. Saying one believes when one has no tangible deep faith is worse than not believing at all, because at least the second group is not lying to themselves.

Then I came to a conclusion, Friedrich Nietzsche is most likely the most intelligent denier of God and attacker of Christianity that has ever set foot on earth. So if I want to rationalize my faith, the best way to do so would be to stand eye to eye with the most intelligent opponent of the idea I desire to defend, by doing this I either lose and submit to his ideals (which would at least be tangible argumentative ideals), or when facing this man my brain is forced to develop tangible counterarguments and ideals defending and explaining why I do believe. I'm convinced the only way for me to find peace within the stability of my Christian faith is to go up against this iron man of its opposition. I either lose or I win, either way I will be able to know why I think the way I do.

Also @TechnoBoss which is the best order to read them in? I heard everyone agree that Thus Spoke Zarathustra is the final boss however.

What arguments did you develop if any?

 

[Blackout.xl]

All religions are man made and don’t make any sense at all. Agnostic atheism is the most rational one.

Just be a decadent materialist with a feminine mentality theory. Omg omg omg there’s too much suffering as I’m not chad therefore nothing exists but my futile efforts to be socially accepted in my advanced years of mediocrity omg omg

Do yourself a favour and crash out

 

[HarrierDuBois]

What arguments did you develop if any?

Haven't started yet. Still waiting for his books on the delivery as well as reading other literature atm.

 

[Blackout.xl]

Religion always had to adapt to science. Why after when Darwin's theory of evolution came out religion had to claim the world being created in 7 days was metaphorical etc. etc. If Christianity was true religion would have never had to adapt to the knowledge we know about the world today and science would be explaining religion not contrasting it. So it is either Christianity is a fallacy or the science is wrong. That being said Religion is a great tool for keeping humans sane

It never was 100% literal and isn’t 100% metaphorical. It’s a mix and always has been. To assert it was 100% literal is to basically discredit the existence of multiple religious communities within early Christianity itself that were more esoteric and spirituality based rather than being dependent on hard interpretations of scripture.

Infact you don’t even get the take everything literally at face value mentality until you get to Protestantism which didn’t come for hundreds of years after Christianity got up and started as a major movement. You fell for the modernist cope

 

[moreroidsmoredates]

Just be a decadent materialist with a feminine mentality theory. Omg omg omg there’s too much suffering as I’m not chad therefore nothing exists but my futile efforts to be socially accepted in my advanced years of mediocrity omg omg

Do yourself a favour and crash out

All religious people say the same thing

Muslims and christians are all convinced of their own religion. Blocks all evidence that can contradict and debunk their beliefs.

 

[Blackout.xl]

All religious people say the same thing

Muslims and christians are all convinced of their own religion. Blocks all evidence that can contradict and debunk their beliefs.

Damn people have personal conviction and put actual weight into their beliefs? Who knew. Archaic I know

They’re as convinced of god as you are convinced of injecting roids into your veins being enough to make up for decades of mediocrity and substandard incompetence yet I don’t see you smashing your vials on the floor

 

[moreroidsmoredates]

Damn people have personal conviction and put actual weight into their beliefs? Who knew. Archaic I know

They’re as convinced of god as you are convinced of injecting roids into your veins being enough to make up for decades of mediocrity and substandard incompetence yet I don’t see you smashing your vials on the floor

Dnrd

 

[Imretarded?]

Haven't started yet. Still waiting for his books on the delivery as well as reading other literature atm.

You should read books on the evidence for evolution or the god delusion by Richard Dawkins, it's a compilation of many theological arguments for god and his refutation of them.

I dont think Nietzsche will give you much of what you are looking for. His work is mainly focused on finding meaning in an athiest world.

The whole reason he made his works was because of the big influence scientific works darwin developed.

 

[Blackout.xl]

Dnrd

another day, another cope.

 

[laaltin]

dnrd, philosophy is a cope for not getting your dick wet in your oneitis pussy

 

[sam12344343]

It never was 100% literal and isn’t 100% metaphorical. It’s a mix and always has been. To assert it was 100% literal is to basically discredit the existence of multiple religious communities within early Christianity itself that were more esoteric and spirituality based rather than being dependent on hard interpretations of scripture.

Infact you don’t even get the take everything literally at face value mentality until you get to Protestantism which didn’t come for hundreds of years after Christianity got up and started as a major movement. You fell for the modernist cope

Do you believe evolution to be true ?

 

[sam12344343]

It never was 100% literal and isn’t 100% metaphorical. It’s a mix and always has been. To assert it was 100% literal is to basically discredit the existence of multiple religious communities within early Christianity itself that were more esoteric and spirituality based rather than being dependent on hard interpretations of scripture.

Infact you don’t even get the take everything literally at face value mentality until you get to Protestantism which didn’t come for hundreds of years after Christianity got up and started as a major movement. You fell for the modernist co

I never once claimed it was 100% literal but nonetheless literal or metaphorical what they believed back then doesn't align with what we know today. Hence my point still stands. You also brought up Protestantism for the "taking everything at face value ". So did Catholics believe in evolution and science etc etc ? Even if they did the fact that there are multiple denominations and interpretations of the religion shows gods holy book to be vague and therefore flawed. But I thought you believed in a perfect god ? So why would God's self revelation be so vague and flawed.