My transition from a Jordan Peterson-esque archetypal way of viewing Christ to seeing the gospel truth clearly was really a strange process on reflection. I didn't trust my ability to recognise truth from lies anymore and just wanted to know the truth and prayed that whatever was true out there might guide me. I just know that once I trusted His words as true and that scripture overall could be trusted - aided by exposure to some very helpful appologists - the foundation of my reality shifted and I recognised that the cross was not simply symbolic nor was it an ideal to be emmulated, but that it was effective in a very real sense. And that effect was the reconciliation of us to God. I think people can think their way out of the gospel and for Jordan Peterson he may have to set his mind down and become like a child in order for the seed to take route. Praying for him.
Another reflection is Matthew 16 24-26 "Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?" - As Christians I think we are called to sacrifice, but it's a sacrifice that is born from a revelation of His love and a desire to see His kingdom come. We are called to sacrifice our flesh and our worldly desires to be burnt up in sanctification. We don't lose our lives for our own sake and self justification, we lose our lives for the sake of allowing God to be glorified through us so that His light may shine throughout the nations.
The topic of conversation when we approach God like a child is the feeding of the poor because they, like people who are not poor, have a bio-logical responsibility to learn to heal as human stewards of the ecosystem; it is the topic of conversation in relation to Zaccheus, the rich young ruler and Cornelius; when someone calls a child, the child generally anticipates that they will be expected to use their mind in the conversation and part of the greatest commandment, as Jesus says, is to love God with our minds.
@@cinhofilmstotally agree that we are to love God with our minds, a greater knowledge of Him enables us to know who it is our hearts do love. We are to renew our minds with His word and also to not lean on our own understanding. In that sense becoming a child is more of a heart posture of trust in Him to guide and lead us and protect us and a humble recognition that we are not God and are vulnerable creatures prone to waywardness and stumbling, our hearts are deceitful and we need to prayerfully hold His hand as he leads us, much like a child would hold their parents hand while crossing the road. We may become adults in this life and become independent from our earthly parents, but He is forever our guiding Father and we are forever His children.
Your words are spot on, “Jesus in not an example of sacrifice…..it’s about His resurrection blessing not about my cross like sacrifices”. Thanks Glenn I do enjoy your gift of thinking through these things. I also enjoy Jordan Patersons thoughts and perceptions. I think he will lead many to Christ, through his unique perception of Jesus reflecting ultimate reality.
Jordan has stepped into the Bible and taken a good look around. He likes Biblical stories because they make sense of the human condition, but he has not taken that step of surrender to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Jesus is the reason for everything because he is why there is anything. I like Jordan and listen to him a lot and pray for him
I’m Orthodox Christian and I think you said it perfectly. I would only add that the Lord does also tell us to take up our Cross and follow Him. JBP is not wrong in that aspect. In Orthodoxy we believe we are called to active sacrificial love for God and for our neighbor.
I'm not Orthodox at all. I agree with you. Christ told his disciples, and anyone that would hear, that they should also give up their own desires for his sake. That they should lose their souls (the seat of desires) to keep what should truly be desired, "To know the one true God and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent".
I think you hit the nail on the head when you say Peterson's view is of a pattern or logos underlying reality and the Christian story happens to be the best expression of it.
Hi Glenn. Excellent analysis today. As someone who spent 25 years striving to live a life of 'Christian' law keeping what a joy it was to discover that Jesus had done what I never could. I pray that Jordan one day falls into his Saviour's arms too.
Peterson's insight, the ability to spot and describe the patterns of reality were key to my reconversion. Without seeing those incredible Mandelbrot like patterns of reality I wasn't able to believe in uniqueness or supernaturality of our world and the Gospel. I understand that all these archetypes are mere reflections of the Truth that our Lord is but they are like surprising, amazing signs and pointers to God. People are different. Some of us find it easy to believe and some are more sceptical, like Thomas, analytical, needing evidence to mount up, needing to put our hands in Jesus's side to believe. it's not easy to be that way and 'blessed are those who didn't see and believed ' but hopefully saved are also those others like us. Thanks God for Peterson 🙏
Peterson gets the whole thing about sacrifice as directing oneself consistently towards the maximal good and how, the more you really dig into that, the more it starts to look like the cross and mirror the cross's redemptive & reconciling power. That's certainly part of the biblical picture. However, he completely misses the irreducible nature of vicarious sacrifice - which is curious, given how insistent the Bible is on this point. It's no coincidence that JP seems to have the weight of the world on his shoulders the whole time. Basically, he's trying to BE Jesus: to be the agent, rather than the beneficiary, of a maximally effective sacrifice. Or perhaps more accurately, he's feeling the pressure of failing to do that while simultaneously perceiving it to be necessary. To realize that you are in fact the beneficiary of a perfect sacrifice, one which precedes any merit or work on your part - that is what it means to transition from a post-Christian ethical universe to a Christian one. Peterson is so near... and yet so far.
Glenn, you are partly right. How do you interpret Rom 8:17, John 15:18-20. It is true that we cannot save ourselves and Christ has stood in our place for us. It is completely him. But when we do follow Christ we follow in his footsteps and those footsteps lead to suffering (as Jesus suffered). (Rom 8:17, John 15:18-20). When we become Christians we don't suddenly enter into eternity without any suffering but we are called to endure for him. If not, then why did Paul write Rom 8:35-37.
I think what Jordan needs is a blunt speaker, he's always getting into wordy conversations with 'wordy' people, perhaps he just needs to come across a black and white speaker who doesn't use masses of words
Peterson is fundamentally a believer in salvation by works, he has no real room for grace in his understanding of Christianity. This absence of grace informs his entire ideological and political outlook.
I can't help feeling that Jordan wants to reason his way to God, to make belief a logical choice. But that calculation cannot be made as we cannot see beyond the veil and prove, or disprove, the resurrection and the afterlife. We are told to come as a child which, to me, sounds like a leap of faith rather than an act of reason. It is a choice between the way of love (Thy will be done) and the way of power (my will be done).
11:53. re: your excellent question about whether JBP conceives of the Ultimate Being as Pattern or Jesus Christ; I think JBP comes down on the former side. But my question might be, From the Christian perspective you articulate, what is the essential difference between the two? Do we separate Logos(call it Pattern) from Jesus (the Person, the Manifestation)? I'm thinking about the "fully divine" and "fully human", and the unity of Logos and Theophany, the unity of essence and the distinction of energies bound together. In other words, do Christians subsume both conceptions? Or have I missed an important basic theological distinction? Thoughts?
Thanks Glen. Love the way you unpack this so clearly. I understand JP has described himself as an evolutionary psychologist. Not sure what is the place of sacrifice in the Darwinian primordial reality. Are we not mere survival machines? JP often references Jung. Would love to hear your take on that.
If only we could borrow Jordan for a weekend, and send him away with Glen, Peter J Williams, Gary Habbermas, NT Wright, David Wood, John Lennox, and a small child to moderate the discussions and make sure everyone talked sense...
Jordan P's walk of life is instead of crossing the bridge to eternal life,that is Jesus, wants to explore every little side rd, and cul de sac to see if there is another way to get there. For someone looking from the other side the wonderful bridge of salvation and freedom that is only found in Him (Jesus) JP is always a frustration to listen to. To speak in his own language, JUST CROSS THE BLESSED BRIDGE!
Peterson declares himself to be a 'materialistic reductionist' but is talking in terms of a platonic view of the biblical narrative--that there's a more consequential reality behind who Jesus is beyond the simpler faith acceptance of Jesus being the lamb of God. In this respect, I appreciate Pageau's conclusion and find Scrivener's a bit more over developed than necessary. Wonderful conversation between the three of them!
I am the same. God needs to reveal Himself and people need to seek Him. Ultimately the resurrection could be used by the HS to draw JP to God but he is still appealing to reason in my view.
About getting to the moon, it was a race between USA and USSR, so to explain it only with why it happened in the USA as something exeptional makes no sense, unless one also does the same with the reason why USSR joined in this race.
1 Cor 1:27: Instead, God chose things the world considers foolish in order to shame those who think they are wise. And he chose things that are powerless to shame those who are powerful. (NLT)
Jordan is thinking on a linear level however the theory of everything pursuit towards the small or towards the large we discover the mystery of both - God himself, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I think if we encourage our children to be seekers of truth then this pursuit will lead them to discovering that only Jesus explains all that is visible and invisible Col 1:15
@@LHJC10 100%, Jordan will do anything to avoid admitting that he rejects Jesus offer of salvation. To avoid admitting that he is not a Christian. Trump does it too, they all do it. they pay lip service to God but have not been saved.
I relate to Peterson a lot although I don’t call myself Christian. And I agree he avoids and overthinks but the only push back I would give is that I think avoiding denial of certain stories can also come from him honestly not knowing if he believes they are true. Just how he won’t say “it definitely didn’t happen” he also doesn’t want to say “it definitely did” so we are left with his expression of how he doesn’t relate to the stories which is often a complicated, psychological word salad which I’m sure has a lot of truth for Peterson
Jesus is not a hero. Jesus is the sacrifice, not a tragedy, a necessary crucifixion of the perfect, sinless man taking all the pain and all the suffering, all the sin of the world, upon himself asking his Father, forgive them for they know not what they do. Pure LOVE, the Father's bloody son on the holy Cross, Jesus is the Lamb, sacrificed for the world and therefore is the Savior of the world. Resurrection is life after earthly death. Our soul, our spirit, is energy that never dies. The Holy Spirit leads people to do good and confess their sins to the Father for forgiveness and his grace to emulate Christ Jesus our Lord in our lives. LOVE ONE ANOTHER AS I HAVE LOVED YOU.
The story of Abraham is a really good example. Peterson will take the interpretation to a sacrifice to the highest good. But Abraham could only do this by revelation and faith that he would get his son back. Kierkegaard wrote about this in fear and trembling. While we of course should not sacrifice our sons, we should have his faith in gods promises. Kierkegaard also wrote about the moral systems, which peterson seems to be building, the problem is, these systems are not combined with an existential feeling of guilt for our sins, which can only come by humbling ourselves and revelation given by Christ. Another point is the claim by Peterson: if you sacrifice to the highest good, you will be rewarded. It seems the final goal of the system is self interest. While in the christian view is to transcend this self interest in love for god and the neighbor. We will be rewarded by eternal live, but the reward is not the goal in itself. Actually, the christian faith is the only way this claim can make sense: if a christian is martyred, he will be rewarded. But if peterson does not have a concept of an eternal self, why wouldn't we lie when asked about beliefs in case of danger for being martyred.
The underlying reality is a pattern of existence that is best expressed by Jesus, because He IS the pattern. Jesus is the nexus of all realities. Physical reality because he was a physical person, archetypal reality because he is the transcendence of all archetypes, spiritual reality because he is the ruler of the spirits. He is the pivot point and the linchpin of all everything. Jordan sees some of this, but he isn't comfortable yet with seeing the whole picture.
The man over all the Earth, Adam, died without a land (Genesis 5:5, the 111th vs), whose only land was then by the inheritance of the first prophesy of Salvation (Genesis 3:15). So the land of the Earth was destroyed, and then remade different; and therefore given a promise of which the whole Earth is a continual witness (Genesis 9:16, the 222nd vs). The Earth then was given its nations (Genesis 10-11). But only one man was worthy of a land promised directly from God (Genesis 12:1-13:18 (13:14 is the 333rd vs). For, this was a man known and chosen by God (Genesis 18:19, the 444th vs), and whose son was truly answered by him of the greatest concern (Genesis 22:7, the 555th vs). That man likewise died (Genesis 25:7, the 666th vs), but not without giving the True Blessing (Genesis 28:3, the 777th vs) through that son. For, he kept the True Witness (Genesis 31:14, the 888th vs) of a deep agreement of integrity, between a father and son, by which some sought to destroy them and their people (Genesis 34:18, the 999th vs). One, named Judah, sought to prevent this wickedness (Genesis 37:26, the 111X10 vs), and so the victim was blessed with the prophecy of salvation, and judgment (Genesis 41:25, the 111x11) (Genesis 44:7, the 111x12 vs), and priesthood (Genesis 47:22, the 111x13). So, when a Wicked one commanded wickedness (Exodus 1:22, the 111x14), the Great one was called to save (Exodus 3:4, the 111x14+30, for which 30 is the number of maturity, and of typing Christ) and to hold against him (Exodus 7:9, the 111x15+30). The Wicked one challenged the Great one (Exodus 10:28, the 111x16=30), but the Great one destroyed him (Exodus 14:27, the 111x17+30) and instructed His people (Exodus 19:1, the 111x18+30) in righteousness (Exodus 22:25, the 111x19+30), in understanding (Exodus 26:14, the 111x20+30), and in holiness (Exodus 29:24, the 111x21+30)
Jordan’s wrestling match with God is becoming tedious to watch and listen to. Here’s hoping that Tammy. (With the help of Mother Mary,, no doubt) can step in as a bit of an umpire, stop the fight , and teach a Jordan the benefits of being humble and as a little child before the Lord.
Yes one can drill down into the foundation, if one acknowledges the incarnate hypostatic Christ is the foundation, not the preincarnate Christ. Christ's body is the material for the creation.... no cross , no creation ... Christocentric causality instead of linear causality, genesis emanates from Golgotha, not the other way around. It more than pattern it is substance as well. I explore this in narrative and poetic form on my channel christus totalis, if anyone is interested. Blessings
So if the biological-social constructs are the lowest level and "who knows what's below that" - could this be a sign that Jordan has evolutionary philosophy at the base, getting in the way of a simple acceptance that God is at the base? Many do. I
I'm sorry, did I hear him right, you raise your daughter up to then give her away to someone else in marriage? We do not own our children, we raise them up for them to be themselves, not to be owned by a spouse or anyone. Does he think we raise our boys up as well, to be given away to their spouse? And what about those who never get married?
@@HearGodsWord Wedding rituals are different from country to country, and also in different denominations in the same country. I know there are places where it is part of the ritual, but thankfully not in my country nor any of the denominations I have been to a wedding in in my country. Bu the way, this is not a new thing, we never, ever had such a notion in our christian wedding rituals. In the earlies years of Christianity the wedding was done outside church, the couple went together into to have mass.
@@HearGodsWord That is a very strange conclusion based on what I just wrote. If you are not knowlegable about different christian wedding traditions and think they all are as in your church or tradition that would be a resonable thought. The father walking with her daughter up to the altar is even something many churches asks not to be done, because it is a new import from people seeing it done in movies, and think that is "how it is done". Most tradition is not only not so, but are strongly against doing it this way, as it is going against the tradition ant theology behind the lithurgy, and the priest might ask it to be done in the traditional way, and not the version I think is inspired by the Anglican wedding tradition. (To be sure where the Hollywood version is comming from I would need to read up on this topic.)
@beateifarta you see, that's actually you drawing a strange conclusion. I get you need to try to justify your comment, but it doesn't change your misunderstanding.
About who Isaac is, the author of the story did not think about Christ, this is a jewish story. To only understand it in the view of one Christian interpretation of the story (I have read mvery many different that all have long Christian tradition and is well thought out theologically) is very strange to listen to. The bombastic way it is said "this is the way to understand this or that story, this is the Christian interpretation of that idea does not really make me trust in Speak Life.
Abraham's task was one he opted into. It was by way of a plea from God, as from a mere friend asking him to do God a favor Abe could have chosen to refuse to do. It was NOT a command from God as from 'On High'. It was not as if Abraham had a duty to obey, as if it were an ethical-duty-since-God-commanded-it. No, For, the event was very much a kind of partnership between Abraham and Isaac, not between God and Abraham. Isaac was a type of Christ Crucified. But Abraham was a type of God Himself, in that God was not commanded to see to it that Christ be crucified. God willingly saw to it, as an expression of His mercy upon us. For, both Abe and Isaac knew of, and believed, the Promise of a suffering Messiah, and, of a Great Resurrection of the Dead, the first of which we moderns know of as Genesis 3:15, and that latter of which is the ultimate principle of that Promise. Isaac was Abraham's own main promise from God, despite that Abraham had decided to side with Sarah's doubts of such a full progeny to them. For, though Abimelech was told, by God, that Abraham was a prophet (Gen 20), she was in no sense being implied as being outside of Abraham's role as a prophet. Abraham was not an obedient mere slave of God (as even the Divine visit he hosted due to Sodom shows). Abraham was the friend of God. Abraham was simply thinking he was being asked by God to do God this one special favor. The ONLY reason he opted to do so was because of that which Hebrews 11: 17-19 related to us. So, it was NOT about Abraham first 'obeying the supposed command, and that, only some time after having begun to go to do the deed, began to have hope that God both could and WOULD raise Isaac from ashes. Abe opted into the plea, in the first place, BECAUSE he had such faith in God as Hebrews 11: 17-19 says. God did not 'reward' Abraham with that faith as a kind of stupid booby prize for Abe's supposed blind obedience to a suppose Divine Command to do something abominable 'just-because-God-commanded-it.' For, Job was only Satan's easy target against God. Abraham was Satan's ultimate way of putting God Himself to a harsh test. For, though God naturally praises his Saints in the court of Holy angels, Satan takes every opportunity to try to prove to that court that God is foolish to do so. Abraham was never much more than a redeemed pagan, unlike Job. It was NOT God's own idea to so test Abraham. It was Satan's idea to use God's praise of Abraham to the Holy Court to try to prove God foolish for praising His Saints to that Holy Court. Satan had lost regarding Job, and now here was Abraham, the prefect victim of test that God was being compelled to make of Abraham. Satan did not think Abraham had such faith, and thought that Abraham would simply opt of the God's seemingly sincere plea to actually sacrifice Isaac.
You can get to the middle of the bridge starting from either shore. Karl Barth emphasized revelation. Acts17:27 allowed for people seeking and reaching out for God. In each approach, there comes a time when the seeker needs to say, "I stand amazed in the presence Of Jesus the Nazarene, And wonder how he could love me, A sinner condemned, unclean." ua-cam.com/video/P8ZaDqJkJTY/v-deo.htmlsi=5e5Sroacbq8EEIVC
Jordan Peterson seems to me like a duck on a pond….moving across the surface to navigate a logical destination whilst underneath the feet (intellect) are madly scrambling to work it out to its perfect destination. Faith vs Intellect, rather than the symmetry of the two, the cooperation of heart and mind and ultimately the surrendering to the divine mystery. It’s a control thing at its core because surrender isn’t safe. I’m speaking as a fellow depressive, scrambling under the water to make sense of Love. Capital L love, the ultimate motivation of God’s gift through Jesus. Searching for that inside is harder for the tragic storyteller to grasp. Much easier to see the villain than the hero in ourselves. As Theresa of Avila would say, we then miss the top floor view of God’s kingdom because we are still living on the lower levels where our wounds are, trying to make sense of the why from an earthly perspective, it can become our own Hell.
My transition from a Jordan Peterson-esque archetypal way of viewing Christ to seeing the gospel truth clearly was really a strange process on reflection. I didn't trust my ability to recognise truth from lies anymore and just wanted to know the truth and prayed that whatever was true out there might guide me. I just know that once I trusted His words as true and that scripture overall could be trusted - aided by exposure to some very helpful appologists - the foundation of my reality shifted and I recognised that the cross was not simply symbolic nor was it an ideal to be emmulated, but that it was effective in a very real sense. And that effect was the reconciliation of us to God. I think people can think their way out of the gospel and for Jordan Peterson he may have to set his mind down and become like a child in order for the seed to take route. Praying for him.
Another reflection is Matthew 16 24-26 "Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?" - As Christians I think we are called to sacrifice, but it's a sacrifice that is born from a revelation of His love and a desire to see His kingdom come. We are called to sacrifice our flesh and our worldly desires to be burnt up in sanctification. We don't lose our lives for our own sake and self justification, we lose our lives for the sake of allowing God to be glorified through us so that His light may shine throughout the nations.
SUCH a helpful reflection. Thank you. (And praise God for your story!)
Praise God indeed! Amazing grace, how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me.
The topic of conversation when we approach God like a child is the feeding of the poor because they, like people who are not poor, have a bio-logical responsibility to learn to heal as human stewards of the ecosystem; it is the topic of conversation in relation to Zaccheus, the rich young ruler and Cornelius; when someone calls a child, the child generally anticipates that they will be expected to use their mind in the conversation and part of the greatest commandment, as Jesus says, is to love God with our minds.
@@cinhofilmstotally agree that we are to love God with our minds, a greater knowledge of Him enables us to know who it is our hearts do love. We are to renew our minds with His word and also to not lean on our own understanding. In that sense becoming a child is more of a heart posture of trust in Him to guide and lead us and protect us and a humble recognition that we are not God and are vulnerable creatures prone to waywardness and stumbling, our hearts are deceitful and we need to prayerfully hold His hand as he leads us, much like a child would hold their parents hand while crossing the road. We may become adults in this life and become independent from our earthly parents, but He is forever our guiding Father and we are forever His children.
Your words are spot on, “Jesus in not an example of sacrifice…..it’s about His resurrection blessing not about my cross like sacrifices”.
Thanks Glenn I do enjoy your gift of thinking through these things.
I also enjoy Jordan Patersons thoughts and perceptions. I think he will lead many to Christ, through his unique perception of Jesus reflecting ultimate reality.
Jordan has stepped into the Bible and taken a good look around. He likes Biblical stories because they make sense of the human condition, but he has not taken that step of surrender to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Jesus is the reason for everything because he is why there is anything. I like Jordan and listen to him a lot and pray for him
I agree completely, JP should really surrender our Master. God will guide him soon🙏🏽
Love these video that you do Glenn. I learn so much from them. Thank you
I’m Orthodox Christian and I think you said it perfectly. I would only add that the Lord does also tell us to take up our Cross and follow Him. JBP is not wrong in that aspect. In Orthodoxy we believe we are called to active sacrificial love for God and for our neighbor.
I'm not Orthodox at all. I agree with you. Christ told his disciples, and anyone that would hear, that they should also give up their own desires for his sake. That they should lose their souls (the seat of desires) to keep what should truly be desired, "To know the one true God and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent".
Thank you, Glen. I always appreciate your takes on JP’s exploration of the Bible. This was a really insightful analysis.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you say Peterson's view is of a pattern or logos underlying reality and the Christian story happens to be the best expression of it.
Hi Glenn. Excellent analysis today. As someone who spent 25 years striving to live a life of 'Christian' law keeping what a joy it was to discover that Jesus had done what I never could.
I pray that Jordan one day falls into his Saviour's arms too.
Peterson's insight, the ability to spot and describe the patterns of reality were key to my reconversion. Without seeing those incredible Mandelbrot like patterns of reality I wasn't able to believe in uniqueness or supernaturality of our world and the Gospel. I understand that all these archetypes are mere reflections of the Truth that our Lord is but they are like surprising, amazing signs and pointers to God. People are different. Some of us find it easy to believe and some are more sceptical, like Thomas, analytical, needing evidence to mount up, needing to put our hands in Jesus's side to believe. it's not easy to be that way and 'blessed are those who didn't see and believed ' but hopefully saved are also those others like us. Thanks God for Peterson 🙏
Peterson gets the whole thing about sacrifice as directing oneself consistently towards the maximal good and how, the more you really dig into that, the more it starts to look like the cross and mirror the cross's redemptive & reconciling power. That's certainly part of the biblical picture. However, he completely misses the irreducible nature of vicarious sacrifice - which is curious, given how insistent the Bible is on this point. It's no coincidence that JP seems to have the weight of the world on his shoulders the whole time. Basically, he's trying to BE Jesus: to be the agent, rather than the beneficiary, of a maximally effective sacrifice. Or perhaps more accurately, he's feeling the pressure of failing to do that while simultaneously perceiving it to be necessary. To realize that you are in fact the beneficiary of a perfect sacrifice, one which precedes any merit or work on your part - that is what it means to transition from a post-Christian ethical universe to a Christian one. Peterson is so near... and yet so far.
Amen
“To be the agent rather than the beneficiary…”, that’s well said.
Glenn, you are partly right. How do you interpret Rom 8:17, John 15:18-20. It is true that we cannot save ourselves and Christ has stood in our place for us. It is completely him. But when we do follow Christ we follow in his footsteps and those footsteps lead to suffering (as Jesus suffered). (Rom 8:17, John 15:18-20). When we become Christians we don't suddenly enter into eternity without any suffering but we are called to endure for him. If not, then why did Paul write Rom 8:35-37.
I think what Jordan needs is a blunt speaker, he's always getting into wordy conversations with 'wordy' people, perhaps he just needs to come across a black and white speaker who doesn't use masses of words
Peterson is fundamentally a believer in salvation by works, he has no real room for grace in his understanding of Christianity. This absence of grace informs his entire ideological and political outlook.
40:00 Pastor you are on fire! Amen.
Awesome.
I agree with your interpretation.
He has trouble embracing the idea of vicarious sacrifice. He still doesn't want to let go of the need to carry his own cross up the hill
Jesus does tell us to take up our cross and follow him though
I can't help feeling that Jordan wants to reason his way to God, to make belief a logical choice. But that calculation cannot be made as we cannot see beyond the veil and prove, or disprove, the resurrection and the afterlife.
We are told to come as a child which, to me, sounds like a leap of faith rather than an act of reason. It is a choice between the way of love (Thy will be done) and the way of power (my will be done).
11:53. re: your excellent question about whether JBP conceives of the Ultimate Being as Pattern or Jesus Christ; I think JBP comes down on the former side. But my question might be, From the Christian perspective you articulate, what is the essential difference between the two? Do we separate Logos(call it Pattern) from Jesus (the Person, the Manifestation)? I'm thinking about the "fully divine" and "fully human", and the unity of Logos and Theophany, the unity of essence and the distinction of energies bound together. In other words, do Christians subsume both conceptions? Or have I missed an important basic theological distinction? Thoughts?
Thanks Glen. Love the way you unpack this so clearly. I understand JP has described himself as an evolutionary psychologist. Not sure what is the place of sacrifice in the Darwinian primordial reality. Are we not mere survival machines? JP often references Jung. Would love to hear your take on that.
If only we could borrow Jordan for a weekend, and send him away with Glen, Peter J Williams, Gary Habbermas, NT Wright, David Wood, John Lennox, and a small child to moderate the discussions and make sure everyone talked sense...
Yes, Alex O'Connor could moderate heheh. Maybe he and Jordan could both put their trust in Christ after that!
Jordan P's walk of life is instead of crossing the bridge to eternal life,that is Jesus, wants to explore every little side rd, and cul de sac to see if there is another way to get there. For someone looking from the other side the wonderful bridge of salvation and freedom that is only found in Him (Jesus) JP is always a frustration to listen to.
To speak in his own language, JUST CROSS THE BLESSED BRIDGE!
Peterson declares himself to be a 'materialistic reductionist' but is talking in terms of a platonic view of the biblical narrative--that there's a more consequential reality behind who Jesus is beyond the simpler faith acceptance of Jesus being the lamb of God. In this respect, I appreciate Pageau's conclusion and find Scrivener's a bit more over developed than necessary. Wonderful conversation between the three of them!
I am the same. God needs to reveal Himself and people need to seek Him. Ultimately the resurrection could be used by the HS to draw JP to God but he is still appealing to reason in my view.
Thank you Glen for telling us of a living Lord Jesus, not a historical figure
About getting to the moon, it was a race between USA and USSR, so to explain it only with why it happened in the USA as something exeptional makes no sense, unless one also does the same with the reason why USSR joined in this race.
1 Cor 1:27: Instead, God chose things the world considers foolish in order to shame those who think they are wise. And he chose things that are powerless to shame those who are powerful. (NLT)
Jordan is thinking on a linear level however the theory of everything pursuit towards the small or towards the large we discover the mystery of both - God himself, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I think if we encourage our children to be seekers of truth then this pursuit will lead them to discovering that only Jesus explains all that is visible and invisible Col 1:15
Jordan doesn’t get it. He over thinks it, he over analyses it.
If he is over thinking it, I think it’s in an attempt to avoid things than pin them down
@@LHJC10 100%, Jordan will do anything to avoid admitting that he rejects Jesus offer of salvation. To avoid admitting that he is not a Christian. Trump does it too, they all do it. they pay lip service to God but have not been saved.
@@islandonlinenewsyup they act like God needs to prove himself to them and then should be so lucky they may choose to worship him, Pride, Pride Pride
Completely agree!
I relate to Peterson a lot although I don’t call myself Christian. And I agree he avoids and overthinks but the only push back I would give is that I think avoiding denial of certain stories can also come from him honestly not knowing if he believes they are true. Just how he won’t say “it definitely didn’t happen” he also doesn’t want to say “it definitely did” so we are left with his expression of how he doesn’t relate to the stories which is often a complicated, psychological word salad which I’m sure has a lot of truth for Peterson
Jesus is not a hero. Jesus is the sacrifice, not a tragedy, a necessary crucifixion of the perfect, sinless man taking all the pain and all the suffering, all the sin of the world, upon himself asking his Father, forgive them for they know not what they do. Pure LOVE, the Father's bloody son on the holy Cross, Jesus is the Lamb, sacrificed for the world and therefore is the Savior of the world. Resurrection is life after earthly death. Our soul, our spirit, is energy that never dies. The Holy Spirit leads people to do good and confess their sins to the Father for forgiveness and his grace to emulate Christ Jesus our Lord in our lives. LOVE ONE ANOTHER AS I HAVE LOVED YOU.
It’s both the biological and the lamb slain before the beginning, because it’s only a perspective shift.
The story of Abraham is a really good example. Peterson will take the interpretation to a sacrifice to the highest good. But Abraham could only do this by revelation and faith that he would get his son back. Kierkegaard wrote about this in fear and trembling. While we of course should not sacrifice our sons, we should have his faith in gods promises. Kierkegaard also wrote about the moral systems, which peterson seems to be building, the problem is, these systems are not combined with an existential feeling of guilt for our sins, which can only come by humbling ourselves and revelation given by Christ.
Another point is the claim by Peterson: if you sacrifice to the highest good, you will be rewarded. It seems the final goal of the system is self interest. While in the christian view is to transcend this self interest in love for god and the neighbor. We will be rewarded by eternal live, but the reward is not the goal in itself. Actually, the christian faith is the only way this claim can make sense: if a christian is martyred, he will be rewarded. But if peterson does not have a concept of an eternal self, why wouldn't we lie when asked about beliefs in case of danger for being martyred.
The underlying reality is a pattern of existence that is best expressed by Jesus, because He IS the pattern.
Jesus is the nexus of all realities. Physical reality because he was a physical person, archetypal reality because he is the transcendence of all archetypes, spiritual reality because he is the ruler of the spirits.
He is the pivot point and the linchpin of all everything.
Jordan sees some of this, but he isn't comfortable yet with seeing the whole picture.
The man over all the Earth, Adam, died without a land (Genesis 5:5, the 111th vs), whose only land was then by the inheritance of the first prophesy of Salvation (Genesis 3:15). So the land of the Earth was destroyed, and then remade different; and therefore given a promise of which the whole Earth is a continual witness (Genesis 9:16, the 222nd vs).
The Earth then was given its nations (Genesis 10-11). But only one man was worthy of a land promised directly from God (Genesis 12:1-13:18 (13:14 is the 333rd vs). For, this was a man known and chosen by God (Genesis 18:19, the 444th vs), and whose son was truly answered by him of the greatest concern (Genesis 22:7, the 555th vs).
That man likewise died (Genesis 25:7, the 666th vs), but not without giving the True Blessing (Genesis 28:3, the 777th vs) through that son. For, he kept the True Witness (Genesis 31:14, the 888th vs) of a deep agreement of integrity, between a father and son, by which some sought to destroy them and their people (Genesis 34:18, the 999th vs). One, named Judah, sought to prevent this wickedness (Genesis 37:26, the 111X10 vs), and so the victim was blessed with the prophecy of salvation, and judgment (Genesis 41:25, the 111x11) (Genesis 44:7, the 111x12 vs), and priesthood (Genesis 47:22, the 111x13).
So, when a Wicked one commanded wickedness (Exodus 1:22, the 111x14), the Great one was called to save (Exodus 3:4, the 111x14+30, for which 30 is the number of maturity, and of typing Christ) and to hold against him (Exodus 7:9, the 111x15+30). The Wicked one challenged the Great one (Exodus 10:28, the 111x16=30), but the Great one destroyed him (Exodus 14:27, the 111x17+30) and instructed His people (Exodus 19:1, the 111x18+30) in righteousness (Exodus 22:25, the 111x19+30), in understanding (Exodus 26:14, the 111x20+30), and in holiness (Exodus 29:24, the 111x21+30)
Jordan’s wrestling match with God is becoming tedious to watch and listen to. Here’s hoping that Tammy. (With the help of Mother Mary,, no doubt) can step in as a bit of an umpire, stop the fight , and teach a Jordan the benefits of being humble and as a little child before the Lord.
In the beginning was a meme? No!
Yes one can drill down into the foundation, if one acknowledges the incarnate hypostatic Christ is the foundation, not the preincarnate Christ. Christ's body is the material for the creation.... no cross , no creation ... Christocentric causality instead of linear causality, genesis emanates from Golgotha, not the other way around. It more than pattern it is substance as well. I explore this in narrative and poetic form on my channel christus totalis, if anyone is interested. Blessings
So if the biological-social constructs are the lowest level and "who knows what's below that" - could this be a sign that Jordan has evolutionary philosophy at the base, getting in the way of a simple acceptance that God is at the base? Many do. I
I agree. The false religion of evolutionism is holding him and billions of others back. It is the single most damaging belief system.
I'm sorry, did I hear him right, you raise your daughter up to then give her away to someone else in marriage?
We do not own our children, we raise them up for them to be themselves, not to be owned by a spouse or anyone. Does he think we raise our boys up as well, to be given away to their spouse? And what about those who never get married?
Perhaps you've never been to a wedding. Perhaps you're not familiar with the phrase used here.
@@HearGodsWord Wedding rituals are different from country to country, and also in different denominations in the same country. I know there are places where it is part of the ritual, but thankfully not in my country nor any of the denominations I have been to a wedding in in my country. Bu the way, this is not a new thing, we never, ever had such a notion in our christian wedding rituals. In the earlies years of Christianity the wedding was done outside church, the couple went together into to have mass.
@@beateifarta you misunderstand it as ownership. I guess you've never been to a wedding where the bride has been with her father.
@@HearGodsWord That is a very strange conclusion based on what I just wrote. If you are not knowlegable about different christian wedding traditions and think they all are as in your church or tradition that would be a resonable thought. The father walking with her daughter up to the altar is even something many churches asks not to be done, because it is a new import from people seeing it done in movies, and think that is "how it is done". Most tradition is not only not so, but are strongly against doing it this way, as it is going against the tradition ant theology behind the lithurgy, and the priest might ask it to be done in the traditional way, and not the version I think is inspired by the Anglican wedding tradition. (To be sure where the Hollywood version is comming from I would need to read up on this topic.)
@beateifarta you see, that's actually you drawing a strange conclusion. I get you need to try to justify your comment, but it doesn't change your misunderstanding.
Honest advice to you - take a basic course in philosophy. Of course, education is a prerequisite.
HC-JAIPUR (23/11/2024)
.
About who Isaac is, the author of the story did not think about Christ, this is a jewish story. To only understand it in the view of one Christian interpretation of the story (I have read mvery many different that all have long Christian tradition and is well thought out theologically) is very strange to listen to. The bombastic way it is said "this is the way to understand this or that story, this is the Christian interpretation of that idea does not really make me trust in Speak Life.
Isaac was most definitely seen as a christ. He points us to Christ.
Abraham's task was one he opted into. It was by way of a plea from God, as from a mere friend asking him to do God a favor Abe could have chosen to refuse to do. It was NOT a command from God as from 'On High'. It was not as if Abraham had a duty to obey, as if it were an ethical-duty-since-God-commanded-it. No, For, the event was very much a kind of partnership between Abraham and Isaac, not between God and Abraham. Isaac was a type of Christ Crucified. But Abraham was a type of God Himself, in that God was not commanded to see to it that Christ be crucified. God willingly saw to it, as an expression of His mercy upon us. For, both Abe and Isaac knew of, and believed, the Promise of a suffering Messiah, and, of a Great Resurrection of the Dead, the first of which we moderns know of as Genesis 3:15, and that latter of which is the ultimate principle of that Promise.
Isaac was Abraham's own main promise from God, despite that Abraham had decided to side with Sarah's doubts of such a full progeny to them. For, though Abimelech was told, by God, that Abraham was a prophet (Gen 20), she was in no sense being implied as being outside of Abraham's role as a prophet. Abraham was not an obedient mere slave of God (as even the Divine visit he hosted due to Sodom shows). Abraham was the friend of God. Abraham was simply thinking he was being asked by God to do God this one special favor. The ONLY reason he opted to do so was because of that which Hebrews 11: 17-19 related to us.
So, it was NOT about Abraham first 'obeying the supposed command, and that, only some time after having begun to go to do the deed, began to have hope that God both could and WOULD raise Isaac from ashes.
Abe opted into the plea, in the first place, BECAUSE he had such faith in God as Hebrews 11: 17-19 says. God did not 'reward' Abraham with that faith as a kind of stupid booby prize for Abe's supposed blind obedience to a suppose Divine Command to do something abominable 'just-because-God-commanded-it.'
For, Job was only Satan's easy target against God. Abraham was Satan's ultimate way of putting God Himself to a harsh test. For, though God naturally praises his Saints in the court of Holy angels, Satan takes every opportunity to try to prove to that court that God is foolish to do so. Abraham was never much more than a redeemed pagan, unlike Job. It was NOT God's own idea to so test Abraham. It was Satan's idea to use God's praise of Abraham to the Holy Court to try to prove God foolish for praising His Saints to that Holy Court. Satan had lost regarding Job, and now here was Abraham, the prefect victim of test that God was being compelled to make of Abraham. Satan did not think Abraham had such faith, and thought that Abraham would simply opt of the God's seemingly sincere plea to actually sacrifice Isaac.
You can get to the middle of the bridge starting from either shore. Karl Barth emphasized revelation. Acts17:27 allowed for people seeking and reaching out for God. In each approach, there comes a time when the seeker needs to say,
"I stand amazed in the presence
Of Jesus the Nazarene,
And wonder how he could love me,
A sinner condemned, unclean."
ua-cam.com/video/P8ZaDqJkJTY/v-deo.htmlsi=5e5Sroacbq8EEIVC
Jordan Peterson seems to me like a duck on a pond….moving across the surface to navigate a logical destination whilst underneath the feet (intellect) are madly scrambling to work it out to its perfect destination. Faith vs Intellect, rather than the symmetry of the two, the cooperation of heart and mind and ultimately the surrendering to the divine mystery.
It’s a control thing at its core because surrender isn’t safe. I’m speaking as a fellow depressive, scrambling under the water to make sense of Love. Capital L love, the ultimate motivation of God’s gift through Jesus. Searching for that inside is harder for the tragic storyteller to grasp. Much easier to see the villain than the hero in ourselves. As Theresa of Avila would say, we then miss the top floor view of God’s kingdom because we are still living on the lower levels where our wounds are, trying to make sense of the why from an earthly perspective, it can become our own Hell.
Baby Christian and very confused by the idea of comedy in the Bible.
@ruslankd you should hop in here!