니체의 예수 해석에 내재된 갈등* - 『안티크리스트』의 바보(idiot)와 어린이 해석을 중심으로

초록

In The Antichrist, Nietzsche’s portrayal of Jesus has been subject to various interpretations. Josef Hofmiller interpreted Nietzsche’s depiction of Jesus in The Antichrist as blasphemy resulting from mental illness, while Jörg Salaquarda reinterpreted the term “idiot” applied to Jesus as that of an “apolitical man,” thereby dispelling the accusation of blasphemy. Similarly, Christa Acampora also interpreted Jesus as a non-agonistic figure. However, Walter Kaufmann focuses on the dual aspect of Nietzsche’s Jesus. He points out that when Nietzsche observed Jesus from an external perspective, there were elements of a “political hero,” while at the same time, Nietzsche’s true concern ― Jesus’s inner state ― was that of an “idiot.” In other words, regardless of Jesus’s intentions, his actions inevitably appeared heroic. Andreas Urs Sommer also notes that in an age where the law governed both the public and private spheres without distinction, Jesus’s behavior ― beyond the bounds of conventional sense ― was unavoidably political in its context. Therefore, this paper criticizes the view that Nietzsche in The Antichrist interpreted Jesus as merely a “target of blasphemy” or as an “apolitical man,” and instead argues ― through the discussions of Gilles Deleuze and Johann Figl ― that Nietzsche projected onto Jesus a Romantic conception of the child inherited from Ralph Waldo Emerson. From the death of this childlike Jesus, Nietzsche developed his thoughts on anti-substantialism and neutrality.

키워드