Is Mr. Jordan Peterson a false prophet or ravenous wolf?

[Lon]

Wrong. That might be true about you, but we believe in what is true.

Yikes! Romans 10:
14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

Use those beautiful feet!

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yikes! Romans 10:
14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

Use those beautiful feet!

The point was that scripture is not an opinion. Which is what he was saying, what he wrote. It is objectively true.

 

[Clete]

I've watched Jordan for some time now and then I stopped. I suppose that is probably somewhat unnecessarily dismissive in that we are all works in progress; him and me included. I guess I saw just enough of what I didn't like about me in him to recognize the deficiencies in his approach to "truth." Those of us gifted by God with a little bit of a gift as it concerns intellect begin to become enamored of it to the point of becoming reliant upon it as the sole arbiter of the truth of what we are faced with in the way of life experience. It never occurs to us that there is some truth beyond the reach of our intellect. Live long enough and you get smacked in the face that dead fish that is the realization that this is simply not the case. He may be on the cusp of this realization but it appears that he's not quite there just yet.

Having succumbed to the notion that the Bible may well be true I studied it dutifully from an intellectual perspective. It wasn't until I was taught the value of love by a friend that the rest of it began to make sense. I fear that Jordan is still approaching the subject of the Bible from a strictly intellectual standpoint confidant that the Bible is, at the end of the day, so much superstition that has some value as an "archetype" but is somewhat shy of his chosen reality. Speaking from experience, love, and only love, is the inoculation for that malady.

I do not disagree with the gist of your comments here. In fact, I've thought almost the exact same thing about Dr. Peterson.

I did want to say, however, that love is not antithetical to the intellect. Indeed, love is an act of the intellect. One cannot love that which he does not choose to love and no wise choice is made in the absence of at least some rationally apprehended knowledge.

Also, God is both Love and Reason. See the opening post in the thread below...

Is God Moral?

 

[JudgeRightly]

I do not disagree with the gist of your comments here. In fact, I've thought almost the exact same thing about Dr. Peterson.

I did want to say, however, that love is not antithetical to the intellect. Indeed, love is an act of the intellect. One cannot love that which he does not choose to love and no wise choice is made in the absence of at least some rationally apprehended knowledge.

Also, God is both Love and Reason. See the opening post in the thread below...

Is God Moral?

@Lon

 

[Gary K]

I have been listening to Jordan Peterson for several years. I think he is on a journey to becoming a Christian for two reasons. He genuinely cares about people, and he's honest. Both of these are Christian attributes. God leads us all along different paths to Christianity as we all have different backgrounds and different temperaments so he may not even know he's moving along the path but I do believe God is leading him to that end.

 

[fzappa13]

I do not disagree with the gist of your comments here. In fact, I've thought almost the exact same thing about Dr. Peterson.

I did want to say, however, that love is not antithetical to the intellect. Indeed, love is an act of the intellect. One cannot love that which he does not choose to love and no wise choice is made in the absence of at least some rationally apprehended knowledge.

Also, God is both Love and Reason. See the opening post in the thread below...

Is God Moral?

First, I would have to say that you are much braver than I as it concerns the inclination to judge whether or not God is "moral." Speaking for myself, that's above my paygrade. As it concerns love and it's relationship to knowledge I think the 10 commandments were offered as a snapshot of what love looks like, offered to a people that didn't always manifest it, as something of a traffic sign as it were. A little help until we get there on our own. Getting there on our own does indeed involve the intellect but I think that what we learn through experience (pain, pleasure, etc.) effects us on an emotional level first and is later distilled by the intellect to then effect how we act or react.

Having said that, I think it revealing how we react, before we have time to think.

 

[Clete]

First, I would have to say that you are much braver than I as it concerns the inclination to judge whether or not God is "moral." Speaking for myself, that's above my paygrade.

No it isn't above your pay grade. This very sentiment of yours is itself based on a judgment of God, both of His stature and your lack thereof.

You'd not be a follower of Christ if you had made the judgment that God was evil. Would you?

As it concerns love and it's relationship to knowledge I think the 10 commandments were offered as a snapshot of what love looks like, offered to a people that didn't always manifest it, as something of a traffic sign as it were. A little help until we get there on our own. Getting there on our own does indeed involve the intellect but I think that what we learn through experience (pain, pleasure, etc.) effects us on an emotional level first and is later distilled by the intellect to then effect how we act or react.

Having said that, I think it revealing how we react, before we have time to think.

Spend a moment to think what you've said here through.

How you react?

React with what - if not your mind?

Emotions reside in the mind and are the result (mostly) of what we have learned, whether through personal, first person experience or through the experience of others.

Having said that, one does have to account for mere instinct to some degree, but instinctive reactionary emotions (like fear, aggression, sexual attraction, laughter, etc) have mostly to do with biology and physical survival and/or the avoidance of pain or harm. (Laughter is usually a semi-involuntary response to a surprise of one kind or another - usually a pleasant one, but not always). These kinds of emotion, while also products of the mind, are the ones most in immediate need of the intellectual distillation you mentioned. Emotions are short term, wisdom is not.

 

[fzappa13]

No it isn't above your pay grade. This very sentiment of yours is itself based on a judgment of God, both of His stature and your lack thereof.

You'd not be a follower of Christ if you had made the judgment that God was evil. Would you?


Spend a moment to think what you've said here through.

How you react?

React with what - if not your mind?

Emotions reside in the mind and are the result (mostly) of what we have learned, whether through personal, first person experience or through the experience of others.

Having said that, one does have to account for mere instinct to some degree, but instinctive reactionary emotions (like fear, aggression, sexual attraction, laughter, etc) have mostly to do with biology and physical survival and/or the avoidance of pain or harm. (Laughter is usually a semi-involuntary response to a surprise of one kind or another - usually a pleasant one, but not always). These kinds of emotion, while also products of the mind, are the ones most in immediate need of the intellectual distillation you mentioned. Emotions are short term, wisdom is not.

We're doing our Kirk/Spock routine again. Maybe, as an exercise in rhetoric, we should swap the roles just to keep it fresh.

 

[Gary K]

First, I would have to say that you are much braver than I as it concerns the inclination to judge whether or not God is "moral." Speaking for myself, that's above my paygrade. As it concerns love and it's relationship to knowledge I think the 10 commandments were offered as a snapshot of what love looks like, offered to a people that didn't always manifest it, as something of a traffic sign as it were. A little help until we get there on our own. Getting there on our own does indeed involve the intellect but I think that what we learn through experience (pain, pleasure, etc.) effects us on an emotional level first and is later distilled by the intellect to then effect how we act or react.

Having said that, I think it revealing how we react, before we have time to think.

I would disagree with you. The 10 commandments are based upon the principle of love. How do I know that? Jesus never sinned. He kept them perfectly. He loved us enough to die for us in the most demeaning method of execution ever devised. He hung naked on the cross. A human emotion isn't enough to die for but a principle is. Many people have died for living up to their principles. The martyrs of the dark ages for example. Therefore God's love is moral/morality.

 

[oatmeal]

Philosophically Mr. Peterson comes from materialism, he doesn't believe in God----so when he does think about God (the non-local hidden Person Who made everything) what does he think of? He thinks of ethics; morals. It's because being a materialist he 'gravitates' to the 'salient' things about religion as regards materialism, which basically means, physical, visible, observable things. Not the 'theory' or 'theology' of the thing, but what's obvious and apparent and patent; 'prima facie'.

2000 years ago being a materialist Mr. Peterson would have gravitated not to the ethics of religion but to the 'idolatry' of it; the offering of sacrifices on altars to deities or gods. Since Christians (with arguably some assistance from Muhammadans) have basically extinguished the offering of sacrifices on altars to deities (except for Christians themselves, who do practice the offering of sacrifices on altars to their own deity), Mr. Peterson today gravitates to ethics instead of idolatry, because that's the next materialistic 'layer of the onion' in religion (the 'top layer', idolatry, being 'removed' by Christians).

So morals and or ethics is Mr. Peterson's 'door' to God, coming as he is from materialism. He's safe and confident with materialistic theory so if he can 'wade' into religion through this 'door' then he's going to be more comfortable in his quest.

Yes he does cry in this video, so no surprises.

He is a person who is searching.

John 5:39
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

1 Peter 1:10-11
Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

Why would anyone have a problem with that?

 

[Nick M]

We don't need to invoke the Bible to call a spade a spade here, right? Liars lie. Lies come from liars. Lies and liars are connected.

Let all men be called a liar.

 

[Nick M]

I think he is on a journey to becoming a Christian

It is an instantaneous event. And it does not involve him pulling you from a gutter, as the cliche goes.

16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” 17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Paul is writing about unbelieving first century Jews. But, that is the order and confirmed later. You are to hear the gospel, and then believe and trust, or reject him. So that people are without excuse. This includes Jordan Peterson. And it isn't like the comedians at the Babylon Bee shared the gospel with him. Or Elon Musk. Let non-right divider Ray Comfort talk to him.

 

[Lon]

It is an instantaneous event. And it does not involve him pulling you from a gutter, as the cliche goes.

16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” 17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Paul is writing about unbelieving first century Jews. But, that is the order and confirmed later. You are to hear the gospel, and then believe and trust, or reject him. So that people are without excuse. This includes Jordan Peterson. And it isn't like the comedians at the Babylon Bee shared the gospel with him. Or Elon Musk. Let non-right divider Ray Comfort talk to him.

Ray Comfort and Elon Musk know each other?? Agree on the former Romans 10:14,15 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tidings of good things!”

 

[Lon]

What do you imagine, SAVED, means? Saved from what, saved for what, saved to do what?

Scripture has to answer: Romans 10:9-10 Comes after these:

Romans 3:23 All have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God
Romans 5:8 God loves us, even in sin
Romans 6:23 Because the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ.

1) Saved thus means "rescued." 2) From sin and death 3a) To live, without sin, with and in Christ 3b) ...in just a second...

"The world through Jesus might be saved," yes indeed. That is, a better state of existence might be experienced by humanity as it cleaves to and obeys the Teachings of Christ. Less hunger, less inequality, equality for women, a reduction in the conditions of the obscenely wealthy and the tragically poor. There are lots of physical states associated with being saved, but the SAVED talked about here is the condition of the human spirit.

This is a 'social' good-news (gospel) and isn't grasping the need. It will ONLY happen in the new heaven and earth once all ills are wiped out. Such has to have 'wiped-out' and wiped-clean.' It isn't something man can accomplish by his/her bootstraps. Such isn't possible because man is incapable else Judaism would have worked.

Is one save by believing in Christ alone, or does it require living as a true Christian, with all the complex, self-sacrifice a true Christ would necessarily undertake for the love of Christ. In such a case the state of being SAVED is a condition of the spirit, the individual taking upon themselves virtues and moral integrity for the love of Christ and this is made possible because Christ existed and showed a path to a better, more fulfilling way of being human and being in the Good Graces of God.

Ephesians 2:8-10 is VERY clear. "This not of yourselves." It is putting the cart before the horse. First, you(I) have to meet a condition whereby we are recreated 2 Corinthians 5:17

If we went the route you suggest, we'd be in trouble: Matthew 7:16-23 Summary: "Didn't we do these things?" Jesus - "I never knew you!"
Note the warning, they were trying to do what Jesus said as you suggest and note the contradiction: I don't know you.
3b) Hence the need is to be known by Him as a necessity. It isn't so much that I have a hold of Him, His teachings, but rather whether He and they have a hold of me. 2 Corinthians 5:17 If anyone is in Christ, he(she) is a new creation recreated (by Christ's hand) with the old things passed away. Philippians 3:12

So SAVED has little to do with belief and all to do with the corresponding actions caused by belief in Christ and the blueprint He revealed to save ones self. To not be saved is to live for one's self, to be materialistic, to reject the path to God.

I believe in Jesus, I have Faith, I believe in God, I go to church is not SAVED in the sense of the Scripture you provided. Belief and Faith only exist as descriptors of a Christian who is living the life in deeds and actions.

As far as preaching goes, in this enlightened age we are each responsible for our own spirituality. There are no religious experts, nor is there a seperate religious class of human, but there are of course those who have a greater knowledge than others. It is incumbent upon the Christian who is spiritually alive to share the Teachings of Christ with those who ask for it, rather than proselytising. And share means one must listen to and respect the religious beliefs of others. If Christians lived by deeds and not words this world would be transformed overnight, such is preaching.

Hence the warning: "Depart from Me, I never knew you." If salvation is not contained in the scriptures, given by God, we would be/or are in real trouble. Hence "Faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the Word of God." If we don't have His words, we are in trouble. If we do, then there is one salvation we all must heed. Acts 4:12

As for the Scripture you quoted, as wonderful as it is, everything has evolved and changed across the last 2000 odd years, as such it is essential and it is also permissible to approach the Bible utilising the greater understandings of this age and not limit ourselves to the understandings of our ancient forefathers.

Thanks for your response, very much appreciated.

Then we are lost. You cannot 'rationalize' your salvation else the above scriptures are of no avail. I've met no one who rationalizes who isn't also struggling with their own spirituality. These scriptures and more than, given today, are timeless without any need for intruding with trend and contemporary sensibility. The cart before the horse misses the spiritual. Paul said: 1 Corinthians 2 the man without the Spirit cannot understand the things of the Spirit. Why? Because we have to be new creations designed to follow the directions of the Spirit. We have to be His. We have to be 'in' Christ. There is not tangent way else "Depart from Me, I never knew you." Realize the mark is who He knows, as clearly as that.

 

[Clete]

What do you imagine, SAVED, means? Saved from what, saved for what, saved to do what?

"The world through Jesus might be saved," yes indeed. That is, a better state of existence might be experienced by humanity as it cleaves to and obeys the Teachings of Christ. Less hunger, less inequality, equality for women, a reduction in the conditions of the obscenely wealthy and the tragically poor. There are lots of physical states associated with being saved, but the SAVED talked about here is the condition of the human spirit.

Is one save by believing in Christ alone, or does it require living as a true Christian, with all the complex, self-sacrifice a true Christ would necessarily undertake for the love of Christ. In such a case the state of being SAVED is a condition of the spirit, the individual taking upon themselves virtues and moral integrity for the love of Christ and this is made possible because Christ existed and showed a path to a better, more fulfilling way of being human and being in the Good Graces of God.

So SAVED has little to do with belief and all to do with the corresponding actions caused by belief in Christ and the blueprint He revealed to save ones self. To not be saved is to live for one's self, to be materialistic, to reject the path to God.

I believe in Jesus, I have Faith, I believe in God, I go to church is not SAVED in the sense of the Scripture you provided. Belief and Faith only exist as descriptors of a Christian who is living the life in deeds and actions.

As far as preaching goes, in this enlightened age we are each responsible for our own spirituality. There are no religious experts, nor is there a seperate religious class of human, but there are of course those who have a greater knowledge than others. It is incumbent upon the Christian who is spiritually alive to share the Teachings of Christ with those who ask for it, rather than proselytising. And share means one must listen to and respect the religious beliefs of others. If Christians lived by deeds and not words this world would be transformed overnight, such is preaching.

As for the Scripture you quoted, as wonderful as it is, everything has evolved and changed across the last 2000 odd years, as such it is essential and it is also permissible to approach the Bible utilising the greater understandings of this age and not limit ourselves to the understandings of our ancient forefathers.

Thanks for your response, very much appreciated.

What is it that you think has changed so much in the last 2000 years? What is it that you think counts as "the greater understanding of this age"? The greater understanding of what?