What is the meaning of Nietzsche's Antichrist?

"Anti-Christianity "of the author of "Antichrist" is not directed at the teachings of Christ, the Savior's authentic idea, but only in the way it was" used "by the priests - the human type against which Nietzsche is filled with sincere indignation, in a sense fully justified. It is undeniable that Nietzsche's "anti-Christianity" grew up in the soil of Christianity itself. The first is unthinkable and unrepeatable without the second, without Christianity as a "practice" and as a form of life, in many cases tearful and even contrary to its authentic idea. And if Christianity, according to Nietzsche, constantly generates and at some stage grows into nihilism, in the form of a life called nihilism, in the reverse order of thought it is quite justified to say that it is through nihilism that it passes so we can return to the authentic understanding of life, expressed by Christ. It is by itself clear that nothing is worth a virtue that has not experienced and did not "know" sin, in sin has not found itself, through victory over sin has not reached itself, to virtue as a suffered denial of sin and "evil"; so in the same way nihilism as "antichristianity" is a failure in sin and in the "abyss", thanks to which the return to Christ is justified, to the "hard ground" upon which the existence of the "non-sterile" of the living person is possible. In this sense, it can be said - in favor of Nietzsche's nihilism, of course - that Nietzsche is deep within himself, but seeking the way for Christ, a Christian-frustrated Christian who in order to reach his "virtue" is compelled to climb so many steep, rocky and hard-to-walk paths, and perhaps many bogs, of which another (other than Nietzsche) would never come out. This is the least because the denial of something is in fact a complete dependence on the denial, it is not a "burning of bridges", but rather the laying of new bridges that are immaculately strong and indestructible.

Nietzsche, with his own thought, heart, and hands, builds such a bridge between himself and Christ, which has cost him a gigantic effort and a "sweat" that has been said at the beginning of Scripture to sow the way of man to God. This painful bridge to God, even if it sounds too "heretical," called by Nietzsche superhuman, constitutes Nietzsche's teachings about the superhuman. Adding "something of himself" to the creation of God called man, removing the human imperfection and weakness at least in the plan of an idea, Nietzsche is not entirely independent both from Christianity and from man as being and as a "nature" that is unthinkable outside The creation of God and the continual instillation of life and power of life. Nietzsche wants to reinforce this vigour in order to become power, and this "overwhelming" that he wants to give to man and whose roots are in man does not contradict the human, but is just something that can grow on the pledge from God he starts. How can we understand the Nietzschean achievement, called "super-human," is it a total denial, reprisal and destruction of man? Nietzsche says - a super-human: this "overpower" is the negation of man, but of his weakness and infirmity; on the other hand, this "man" is a confirmation of man - of his power and vigour but both are present in God's creation, called man. The superhuman is a man in his "superstition", in his majesty and fullness; the superhuman has defeated the "lower" in man - in order to exalt the "upper", "the higher" in it, that is, what is Godlike in man, which is the imprint of God in man.

The cult of holiness is a cult of disease, according to Nietzsche, pacifying his intolerance to holiness, that is, sickness. Reconsider the literal anti-Christian meaning in pro-Christian, given a whim. Sacredness was disease, disease became holiness. There is justification of radicalism in which a saint and a criminal are identified: as far as they are "inseparable and unworthy" available and performed in the genius provocateur. These "great religious and sick people" objectify, so to speak, their experience (either from deeds or only thought) in the face of character figures who can be thought of as "criminals" - or in "criminal" thoughts (speeches). There is a lack of distinction between "responsible" and "irresponsible" "provocateurs." And the religious tradition - at least that of the Eastern and especially of the Russian Church - clearly distinguishes the figure of the saint, because it is first righteous, responsible because it is first righteous, "provocateur". Nietzsche's angry exposures are directed against the whole present-day life that gives birth to the "last man": "the most contemptible man who will no longer be able to despise himself", who turns everything into something small, lives with the "little pleasures" animal. Contemporary are the inhabitants of the "countries of culture" who have borrowed from all peoples and ages, diverse ideals and values. Reducing the person in his weakness and "degeneracy" - "man is something to be overcome" - Nietzsche actually raises man, his power, majesty, nobility, "breeder", that is, what is given to him at birth, but which he managed to suppress, "defile" or at least forgot. The man cleansed from "impurity" is the superhuman as he was probably before the Fall, ignorant of the dichotomy of morality and weakness Adam, the authentic man created by God with love and placed as master of the earth.

Image source: 1, 2, 3