Nietzsche is not referring to religion but Christianity/Platonism. It is a common misconception that he opposed religion. He did not. It is not a rejection of aspects of Christendom or aspects of Christianity, it is a reject of the whole of it, from claims of eternal fixed truths and order to the meaning and purpose of man and life to faith in Christ.
Granted. Nietzsche believed Man was a creature of the earth with no further potentials than what the earth offers. To make matters worse Man was subject to eternal recurrence where everything eternally repeats. Why pick on Christianity? He must have felt that it was more guilty through its effects he experienced as Christendom than any other path. Nietzsche indeed did reject the otherworldly.
The path would no longer be sacred if you did not have faith that it was not of man. Both Nietzsche’s ‘no’ and ‘yes’ are sacred because of faith in man. Herein lies the difference.
True. The atheist has faith IN Man. The educated believer has documented the hypocrisy of the human condition proving that there is nothing to have faith in other than the psychological tendency to turn in circles resulting in both the greatest compassion and the greatest atrocities depending upon which way the wind is blowing.
Now this may be a satisfactory response to those who are individuals, but man Nietzsche says, is by nature a herd animal and so there is still need for religion, for a path to be followed. Like the old religion, Platonism, it is to be invented by the philosopher:
Yes, the majority are content to be atoms of the Great Beast living in Plato’s cave with “wretched contentment.” Jesus wasn’t a philosopher nor was Buddha. They were men. As atoms of the great beast we don’t know what that means.
But unlike the religion of “thou shalt” it is a religion that has as its goal “I will”:
Sounds like Thelema. This would open a can of worms but for anyone interested, read how Nietzsche influenced Aleister Crowley. Demonic influences is a delicate subject and should not be taken lightly.
It is a religion for creating individuals, for the creation of creators, for self-creation, for self-mastery, for self-rule, for self-governance.[/quote]
“IN a recent work, Henri Nouwen emphasizes the essence of spirituality in a most succinct fashion: “To whom do we belong? This is the core question of the spiritual life. Do we belong to the world, its worries, its people and its endless chain of urgencies and emergencies, or do we belong to God and God’s people.”
This is our difference F4. You consider yourself a creature of the earth so belong strictly to the World and its concerns. I consider myself dual natured. I have a lower animal part and an undeveloped higher part capable of conscious evolution so as to become human with the help of grace. In that sense I am one of God’s people. We have chosen our paths.
-- Updated Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:16 pm to add the following --
I've asked myself if I can be more than a useful idiot. Have you asked yourself? Simone suggested what is necessary for an individual to do in society for socialism to prosper. You find it insulting. This is the majority opinion and another reason why socialism cannot work.
I said "impertinent" question. What I who am a nobody with no influence whatsoever have done with my life is irrelevant. I am never insulted by some other nobody who is another philosopher in a discussion group.
I have been aware for some time that you are a sincere searcher and bedazzled by Simone Weil.
Would you be surprised that society works because most ordinary people work for others for no reward or very small rewards in small ways, simply pegging away in small ways?
Have you ever been involved in road rage?
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace