Jordan Peterson

As far as I'm aware, Jordan Peterson is a high humanities intellectual with a constant reading appetite. The more one ventures into the realms of the humanities, most namely the realms of literature, philosophy, history and politics, and psychology, you'll start to notice them all weaving together in an interconnected mass. Studying a literary idea will lead you to a psychological idea, and if you dive into the depths of that psychological principle you'll get some historical examples which then go back to philosophical principles that political leader adopted. If you run that treadmill for long enough, you'll start to notice two psychological "threads" start to emerge. The first, a dark, sinful and destructive thread that leads from Rousseau and Freud and Marx through many negative and destructive movements and events as the sin nature has expanded its influence, and then the impact of Christian thinkers with the same intellectual gifts, such as C.S. Lewis (most notable), Tolkien, Spurgeon, the author of "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God", John Calvin, etc.

The problem with the arena of ideas is that unbelievers can have good, Christian-conforming ideas, and Christians can have bad ideas that still emerge from our sin natures that cause problems nonetheless. But the 5 disciplines of the humanities exist in Christ's shadow, as we groan with the Creation as we wait for Christ's return. It's basically "how do we deal with the ideas that the Holy Spirit and the Bible are giving us and use them to solve our problems? How do we psychologically survive our wait for Christ's return? What are the best methods to spread the Gospel and how can we get human beings to accept it? (on the Christian end of things) How do we exploit Christian ideas and twist them to the sin nature's advantage? What is the best psychological state to be in to earn God's favor? What is the best psychological state to be in to overcome God?" (on the sin nature end of things)

To live in the post-cross age is to live in an era of constant psychological assault. The 5 disciplines of the humanities are basically the 5 disciplines of copium. They shift the sands of this psychological assault to examine it, the psychological assault from without that unbelievers experience from Christian ideas, and the psychological assault from within that Christians as they struggle to obey Christ's commands.

Such an entrance to the arena of ideas is not what I wanted when I signed up to get an English degree - I simply wanted the expertise for production writing, not being forced to examine my own areas of psychological assault in order to make slow and grinding progress. Holding money hostage behind psychological development is an act of utmost cruelty for children of abuse. But I have diverted.

Based on this discovery, I believe that Jordan Peterson has formed his identity and expertise around his knowledge of the 5 disciplines of the humanities. He seems to be very gifted in those areas if his writings and YouTube videos are any indication. His intellectual ideas help his followers and adherents cope with their suffering. But the more that Jordan Peterson continues his examinations, the closer he moves toward the Cross, for the easiest passage through life is submitting to this world's rightful authority (Jesus Christ) and thus embracing suffering on His behalf.

Thus, Jordan Peterson is in agony. His identity is about reducing the pain and suffering of others, and to do so he must accept the teachings and ideas of God. Human beings were designed to live in communion with God and to believe and live the truth of God's Word. On the other hand, at the Cross his entire purpose is obliterated. He wants to help people live their best lives, but in Christ we are called to give that up and sacrifice our comfort and achievements on behalf of God's purposes. He is a master of an interconnected web of ideas, and yet Christ calls him to accept simple truths. And yet he cannot escape it, because the arena of ideas always leads back to the cross. Christ's salvation moved the battle lines from God battling everyone to between our ears, and so we groan with the weight.

The solution is to stop studying the humanities and start living our lives and praying, letting God in on what He is putting us through, submitting to the cross and its simple answers. But Peterson is handcuffed by the chains of fame and reputation, and perhaps even his own intellectual ingenuity. Joy is not truly found through study and examination, but by submission and simplicity, and subjecting your emotional stability to the power of your finite mind can only lead to misery. Your mind will not be enough to satisfy your emotional needs, only good relationships with God and others can do that.

If this man can somehow overcome these obstacles, I believe the Lord may use his intellectual abilities for profitable theological examinations.

Ecclesiastes 12:11-13 said:

11 The sayings of the wise are like goads, and like nails firmly fixed are the collected sayings that are given by one shepherd. 12 Of anything beyond these, my child, beware. Of making many books there is no end, and much study is a weariness of the flesh.

13 The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God, and keep his commandments, for that is the whole duty of everyone.

Click to expand...

zippy2006 said:

He "was not following us," and was therefore not a follower of Christ. This is precisely Peterson, who has done "mighty works" in Christ's name. Even the sheer number of young people who have turned from nihilism and suicide on account of Peterson is sufficient.

Click to expand...

Has Peterson ever claimed the name of Christ? To my knowledge, he has not. He is a brutal humanist that speaks on his own authority.

I think comparing Peterson's work with C.S. Lewis's work (who did claim the name of Christ, multiple times) and Terry Eagleton's body of work could be a productive exercise. Most specifically, I'm thinking of Reason, Faith, and Revolution for Eagleton and Mere Christianity for Lewis. Lewis was the "most unhappy convert in all of England" when he came to accept the Gospel, but he turned his intellectual prowess to examining Christianity and theology, and using the Bible's cache of answers to provide insight into the problems of his day.

Conversely, Eagleton is a Catholic Marxist who doesn't claim the name of Christ to back his writings. Catholicism is easier to accept for high intellectuals because it promises works-based salvation, or gives credence to works, which is easier for them to swallow. This allows the high intellectual to believe that their teachings benefit others and thus they contribute toward their salvation. It's understandable why this belief system has an appeal for Peterson and his family. In addition, modern intellectualism will frequently deny the Reformation and equate Christianity with Catholicism in order to blame Christians for the Crusades.

Paidiske said:

Invite him on here, to CF? That is the last place I'd invite someone who isn't sure of their faith. There's far too much here that would give people plenty of good reason to walk away.

Click to expand...

This is a problem that needs to be fixed. If this site doesn't provide information that allows people to settle issues of faith and come to believe the Gospel, we have basically failed in our mission and should close down this site right away.

What here, in your view, would cause people to walk away from the Gospel? I've dedicated years of college study and years of my life posting in order to solve online forum problems. I'd appreciate it if you'd allow me to know what's going on so I can give it a shot.

The Liturgist said:

That’s true, although @Paidiske is right in that CF.com is a bit of a place of mixed messages, and there are even atheists on the forums who subtly critique Christianity. I love ChristianForums but its not ideal for someone who is in the position of needing to see authentic Christianity in all of its beauty, in order to free themselves from the religious embrace of Jungian philosophy.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure why the Jungian doctrine of the shadow is opposed to Christian teachings. In fact it's a useful tool: we must accept harsh truths about ourselves, bring the sin nature out into the light so it can be exterminated. We must accept the sin nature inside of ourselves instead of suppressing it. There's also the pattern of the hero's journey, which can be shortcut by just believing the truth.

Earlier someone mentioned the idea of believing something because it's useful, not because it's true. The Gospel is not useful for anyone. It is counterproductive to usefulness, and that is also true for Peterson. It is not useful for him to confess faith in Christ.

The Liturgist said:

Actually you raise a valid point. I would be satisfied if he confessed the Nicene Creed (since merely affirming the Resurrection does not exclude certain heresies such as Arianism; in that a Mormon and a Jehovah’s Witness could both say the Resurrection happened, yet they are not Christians. For full Christianity, one really needs to agree with the Nicene Creed - it is after all the Symbol of the Faith and is also part of this website’s Statement of Faith

Click to expand...

I agree that would be satisfying to remove all doubt, because intellectuals like Peterson mealy-talk a lot to throw ideas around and try on beliefs for size as thought experiments.

Jesse Dornfeld said:

He claims he is a Christian and then he gets all emotional when people press him on if he believes in God (which is not even as big of a claim as believing in the resurrection of Christ). One time when he was on the Joe Rogan podcast he said he was agnostic about the resurrection and that's about as close as I have seen him get to saying he believes in the resurrection of Christ. Agnosticism does not save anyone. In fact, it's possible to believe in the resurrection and not be saved. Satan believes that, but he is described as the evil one.

Click to expand...

Intellectuals don't like to be pressed about their personal beliefs. They just want to throw ideas and information for intellectual exercises to improve their mental performance. Beliefs seem to be a hinderance to them because they lock them into prejudices about the thought experiments they are presenting. I've pressed a lot of professors about what their personal beliefs are and angered about as many.

In doing so, they have missed the point of information: it's not just to spin your mental wheels for the sake of spinning them or for your own amusement, it's to decide on the correct nature of beliefs based on the nature of reality, then to decide how to feel based on those beliefs, and then allow those feelings to inspire action. Thus intellectual training can be a hinderance to proper personal growth.

Peterson's popularity is ironically because he bucked that trend and actually developed a lot of his beliefs, which he then turned into emotions and actions. The agony is that he hasn't developed his spiritual beliefs, and his failure to develop those has led to his intellectual power in other areas, so now he has a walking contradiction going on, and the human mind isn't designed to handle contradictions, and so on. Also, a podcast is an intellectual environment and so he would expect to be treated like an intellectual.

Sunflower39 said:

Only God knows what’s in his heart

Click to expand...

This is true. It is possible that Peterson believes the Gospel, but that he is afraid to confess it because it could alienate his followers. He probably doesn't want to emotionally hurt them in any way. However, Peterson's dedication to honesty and his willingness to buck public opinion for the sake of it before suggests that he is still struggling and being very honest about it.

Anyway, I don't know why this got so long, but I'm sorry that it did. Wasn't what I intended lol.

The Liturgist said:

martyrdom is an instant pathway to spiritual success.

Click to expand...

As far as I am aware, that is a teaching of Islam and not Christianity. The goal of the Christian is to remain alive until Christ's return so that he or she may proclaim the Gospel further. By all means escape the tyrannical governments, hide and proclaim the Gospel underground, live to fight another day.

However, it is better to die than to renounce the name of Christ, because that confuses the unbelievers and is unproductive. The willingness to die for the faith is a witness to the truth.

The Liturgist said:

It’s always useful for us to confess faith in Christ, for our Lord promised to confess before the Father those of us who confess Him before men.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the Jungian philosophers were more interested in worldly achievements and worldly usefulness, which includes the freedom from emotional and physical pain, over any spiritual gains.

The Liturgist said:

Jungian doctrines are based upon the Gnostic heresy, which stands in opposition to twenty centuries of Holy Orthodoxy.

Click to expand...

As much as I respect you and the knowledge and expertise you bring to this forum, I unfortunately come from a evangelical/Protestant/Baptist background. Therefore, I don't speak Christian Orthodox and I only speak English. This is my own intellectual deficiency, which I hope you will forgive me for in time.

My current understanding of Gnosticism is that it is the belief that Jesus Christ was not fully man, which is against the Nicene creed and all Protestant doctrine. Gnosticism also includes the idea that God created "gods" out of his own essence, and variations suggest that human beings can become God through belief and following Christ. The latter is obviously a Satanic doctrine.

Another way of putting it could be that since Rousseau, Freud, and Jung (who was a student of Freud) believed that humans were "basically good" and could beat God through psychological development, it parallels the Gnostic beliefs of self-improvement leading to god status. Maybe?

The Liturgist said:

like all forms of Gnosticism, a kind of intellectual Pelagianism and so contradicts the Protestant soteriological model of Sola Fide.

Click to expand...

Pelagianism is the belief that human beings do not have a sin nature, which is a parallel to Rousseau, Freud, and Jung. Sola Fide, "faith alone", which is the belief that only faith in Christ's sacrifice can save humanity. This makes sense.

Guilt by association.

The Liturgist said:

Specifically I would criticize the doctrine of the shadow for its similarities to the occult practice of tulpamancy

Click to expand...

Tulpamancy is from Buddhist thought. I think that is a stretch to relate that either to Gnosticism or Jung. You would need a series of historical proofs to establish that connection.

I also do not think Jung would call the shadow a friend. All of my readings around that theory suggest the term "shadow" is just a term Jung uses to refer to a dark, sinful, violent, or neurotic part of the mind that is suppressed and appears in various unwanted ways.

The Liturgist said:

the “Hero’s Journey” archetype as being a trite literary theory which, if used as the basis for religious thought, becomes a dangerous fantasia which encourages pride, the most dangerous of the passions, and spiritual delusion.

Click to expand...

I've never seen it used as the basis for religious thought in any modern context, rather as a practical tool to consider for fictional story construction. It's probably a breakdown of what stories appeal to the sin nature of mankind. The unfortunate necessity of making such appeals to the sin nature of mankind in order to make novel sales sufficient to sustain my expenses led me to abandon the practice of novel writing altogether.

Thank you for clarifying. My knowledge of this is probably still atrociously incomplete from your perspective, but at least I have some research paths to explore this in more detail.

The Liturgist said:

With all due respect you haven’t studied the early Church sufficiently.

Click to expand...

I haven't studied it at all. My faith group does not view studying the listings of church fathers as a priority.

I appreciate the information you have given about what you believe, and I may look into it in time.

The Liturgist said:

Forgive me, I was under the impression that Christian Orthodoxy was an ancient form of the Christian faith and not a language…I myself primarily speak English, although like most people with an MDiv I know enough Greek theological terminology to get around,

Click to expand...

That was a bit of a joke. Right now these messages contain a bunch of theological terms and names that I don't understand, and perhaps the average internet user, even someone who has grown up in the church in America, may not be able to follow. Unfortunately, when one is using advanced terms from church history like this among those who haven't studied it, they need to be defined. I honestly had no clue what Tulpamancy and Pelagianism were until I googled them (and then I came up with the wrong definition, which you then had to correct me on). It's like looking at a foreign language.

The average believer in Christ in America is just given an English translation of the Bible, told to come to church every Sunday and Bible Study and small group, and read through said English translation and given the impression that's good enough and you'll be going to heaven, so don't worry about the rest. I was fortunate enough to be given Biblical memorization training. College degrees in theology are for the few who realize that they need them, and that's where the "church father studying" information that you rattle off is located, if it is located in any easy location in the reality that I live.

Thus, many of us do not have theology degrees, and at the moment that unfortunately includes myself, although I fully intend to start a masters' program soon and get a "MDiv" of my own, if you will. I accept full responsibility for all of my intellectual deficiencies. My intention was to make an inquiry. I was under the impression that we were discussing Jordan Peterson and Jungian philosophy, which seemed to be under my undergraduate purview as an English major.

I do not wish to further impose upon you, but you may find it to your benefit to compile a set of links as to where these books by the church fathers that you are recommending are located. Since these are ancient works, I imagine that they may be in the public domain and thus freely accessible. Linking to what you want people to read may encourage people to actually read it and reduce the odds of further misunderstandings by the incompetent, if you would stoop so low as to help a dead dog such as I.

In time I will perform such legwork myself anyway, but at the moment you may be better equipped to do so and I do not know the extent of the research I will need to undertake so we may discuss this subject without further inconveniencing you with incompetence.