The Failure of Christianity

Where do I start? I don't think there's anything particularly heretical about what I'm about to say. Because I'm only telling it to one person.

I just came out of mass. After the mass, I was backstage and it suddenly occurred to me that the basis of prayer is of course request: you ask God for "life", and then God gives you "death" - keep asking, and keep being given what you don't want, until you learn to talk to God. So the most important plot in the entire New Testament on the ethical level is Jesus' words in Gezemane: "Not my will, but yours be done." Jesus no longer asks the "Father", but talks to the "Father." Jesus became God after the resurrection, and before the resurrection he was a man. I no longer believe in any homoousion, because on the ethical level, homoousion will turn the entire Christ event into a complete narcissistic drama. Not recognizing the difference between the Father and the Son is to not recognize the absolute difference between God and man, and finally believe that man can "communion" with God. I don't like the mysticism of Teresa and Bonaventura very much, but I like Maimonides and some Kabbalah, because the Jewish people, as an exiled nation, know that man can only "encounter" and "meet" God by chance, and compared with this, "communion" is only temporary and imaginary.

The failure of Christianity is that although the church fathers appropriated and grafted almost all Greek philosophy that could be appropriated and grafted: Logos, Plato, they never completed the separation from Judaism. "Kant and Sade" is right, the victory of Christianity is ultimately the victory of the Pharisees. The world has indeed changed a lot after the Christ event, but all these changes combined are not the earth-shaking changes that the Christ event should have caused. The significance of Jesus' resurrection is not exaggerated, but wasted: if the dead can be resurrected, what law is needed? What is good and evil?

From my point of view, Lacan's interpretation of Romans is too optimistic, and his interpretation of Jesus is too cynical.

Being a sinner or a lamb, between loving the law and having no choice but to devote oneself to the "highest good", is what I call the temptation of psychoanalysis. "Sinners" can only hate themselves and punish themselves simply because of the fact that they are divided, or they can choose to be "saints" and regard the pleasure of the big Other as their own desire. The question is: Can "saints" be made just by "wanting"?

I choose to remain silent on Christology for now. I will only say one thing: Jesus was crucified on the charge of "blasphemy".