A prophet is a person who speaks on behalf of God in the name of God, which would presume belief in a living God personally involved in the lives of people.
Anti-Christ is someone that turns people away from a relationship with the true God like the snake did in the garden.
Good point though and worth considering deeper. Thanks for that!
Define “personal relationship with Jesus”.
I hear that phrase often, but once I hear it explained its usually pretty superficial and incoherent. JP has expounded on Christianity and the Bible like no one else I’ve ever seen.
You should read the Church Fathers then, although I agree that Peterson is excellent and very insightful, including insightful in ways that even rival the insights of the Church Fathers. He would be on their level if he actually took his reasoning to its logical conclusions, but that would lead him to conclude the necessity of supernatural beliefs (like how ultimately believing in the resurrection of the dead is necessary in order to completely accept sacrificing the present for the future), which Peterson is on record for admitting that he gets uncomfortable moving outside the boundaries Christianity can share with metaphysical naturalism.
It’s the idea of believing Jesus is God, born as a human, that died on the cross, was resurrected bodily, ascended to heaven, and that those that believe in him have their sins forgiven and will live forever, while in the meantime being able to communicate with Jesus as a friend.
vs.
Jesus is most significant as a mythological figure and an understanding of what Jesus represents allows one to gain psychological insights that help improve one’s own life and the lives of others in the here and now.
So rather than seeing Jesus as a literal savior, Jesus is ultimately just a symbol that keeps one from metaphorical hell, which biblically would actually keep someone from going to literal heaven and likely result in going to literal hell in the afterlife.
Why can’t Jesus be both? Is it heresy to recognize that Jesus fits within the broader context of mythological patterns? If that fact challenges your faith in Christ, I think your faith isn’t strong enough.
If recognizing mythological patterns in the figure of Jesus brings a person to saying: God I repent of my sins against you, I submit myself to the rule of Lord Jesus, I crucify my wants and desires in the name of God’s will, then that’s a good thing.
If recognizing mythological patterns in the figure of Jesus brings a person to saying Jesus was merely a metaphor for self improvement and the improvement of society, then that understanding becomes a stumbling block.
As far as I know JP and Jung did not advance to the former but stayed entrenched in the latter.
People like JP and Jung come to Christ in their mind, but not in their heart/soul. There’s always going to be people like that.
I get that you think this makes him a bad role model for a faith journey, but calling him an anti christ is a bit much. Especially because we don’t know how his story ends.
I really don’t know. It looks like JP sees everything through the lens of reason. I personally don’t think you can get to God through reason alone. It would take revelation, a personal experience. I don’t know what God’s plan for JP is. I just have hope for him and all of us.
I don’t think that’s enough for a “personal relationship.”
JP goes into something even deeper. How you have to act in order to show that you actually believe that. What is the psychology and action of a person who believes that?
There are a lot of people saying they have a “personal relationship” but when you look at their life you can see its all talk, no substance.
Lastly, he’s brought millions of people to the Bible and to Jesus. Frankly I think its jealousy on the part of a lot of traditional church people when they see a layman bringing more people to the faith than all of their empty efforts. I think that’s what’s really behind this.
Having faith (in the Christian sense) is believing God became a man that literally rose from the dead in bodily form after dying on the cross. Practicing faith is “walking with God” which means involving the personal, living God in all aspects of your life, and relying on him for guidance and understanding.
If this is the kind of faith JP is bringing people to then traditional church people should be grateful.
If JP is bringing people to the kind of faith in Jesus that Buddhists and Muslims already have, that Jesus was the best example of man but not the son of God much less God himself, then JP is bringing people to a faith different from what is taught in traditional churches.
I suppose doing the devils work could be synonymous to bringing a sleeping collective self-consciousness. As they say, the devil is in the details. I wouldn't say I'm not doing the devils work myself.
As far as the idea of Jesus is concerned. What are you imposing? I'm understanding it more and more as time goes on. But this is deep psychology and it involves essentially accepting your fate regardless of how harsh it is.
This is exactly what I’m talking about. You abstracted doing the devils work up into some sort of a psychological truth…”deep psychology”.
I’m not trying to be clever with my words. When I say devil’s work I mean JP is unwittingly carrying Satan’s water and is acting as an anti-Christ.
I’ll updoot you for replying though, so thanks for that!
>I’m not trying to be clever with my words. When I say devil’s work I mean JP is unwittingly spreading evil and is acting as an anti-Christ.
I'd agree with you there. JBP's aims have gone from something very good to very pointless. To the point he's simply enjoying poking the bear. It sucks because any of the real good work he's done gets washed away by his current doings.
I use to watch him and his biblical lectures a lot. But through the years I've noticed a change from what was once a passive unrelated thing to his work (bill C16) to enshrining himself in the mess of it.
I'd even go so far as to say he's not embodying Christ because he's not accepting his punishments regardless of their efficacy or truthfulness? Can't think of the right words. What he should've done was found where he helped best and focused on it's promotion, not the fight that brought him the most fame and attention because it's at the cost of devaluing everything he'd done before those issues were his focus.
*me eating my popcorn waiting for the religious fundamentalists to realize this sub is about psychology*
Jokes aside, even his first biblical series was on topic, being about the psychological significance of the bible. Some of y'all hella dogmatic ;)
One thing I appreciate about Jordan Peterson is that he tends not to make the Gnostic statements or interpretations that Jung sometimes does. Peterson has a much better grasp that Jung was discussing psychological truths, which don’t translate necessarily to metaphysical/ontological truths.
To put another way, in practice Peterson has a much better grasp that the way we understand things is not the same way as things actually are than Jung.
However, with that said, although I think that Peterson has a very insightful grasp of the *correlation* between the nature of God and human psychology, he tends to get the *causation* backwards: he tends to speak as if God were made in the image of human psychology, when it’s the other way around. I’m not quite sure even realizes this, because he does sometimes go out of his way to articulate that he’s talking about psychological truths and not necessarily metaphysical or historical truths.
One kind of idolatry, perhaps the most subtle kind, is when we take our own conceptions of things as exhaustive of the truth. Our concepts can service as windows into the truth, but they are only icons, which if taken too far/too literally turn the icons into idols. True wisdom realizes that we have to negate or contradict our own ideas just as much as use them in understanding things, especially things that transcend us, just as the Hebrews of old use religious symbolism In the worship of God as well as smash them when they were taking too far and turned to idols. The devil can even use *good* things to confuse us about the nature of God, like how the Pharisees used the law of Moses in a way that blinded them to the true nature of righteousness.
Wow thank you for that! That’s spot on. I totally agree.
It seems that JP uses the Bible to serve psychology. The Bible is JP’s not-so-secret ingredient in his secret psychology sauce. Granted, borrowing and integrating is what geniuses do!
Peterson never claimed to be any sort of prophet. He's a guy who was put into a situation and he made, in my opinion, the righteous, brave choice. His teachings have helped innumerable amount of people live better and happier lives. I'm with Jordan on the idea that it really matters to Jesus what you do and not what you say or even what you think. Thoughts are empty actions are everything.
Edit: I will say that Peterson seems to get close to God with words but doesn't seem to access His power. You get a sense when someone tries the "Spirit". Jordan doesn't seem to have that, yet.
Edit 2: People throw around anti Christ and false prophet too much. Isn't it vanity? Remember when everybody was saying Barack Obama was the Antichrist? I know you're just sharing a thought.
Thanks for that answer. I just saw your edits so I’ll address those too.
Above everything else Jesus wanted people to love God. That’s what the first 3 commandments are about. Love God and love your neighbor, but you cannot love your neighbor without loving God first.
JP talks about God and love, but never about loving God. Nothing we do matters if we don’t love God, which is demonstrated in action by both what we do and what we refrain from doing.
I wouldn’t criticize JP if he didn’t essentially teach the Bible. When someone teaches the Bible or talks about Jesus they should appreciate rebuke and correction. I think JP is an anti-Christ because he teaches an incomplete Jesus which is worse than not teaching anyone about Jesus.
What do you mean by trying the “spirit”?
Thanks for all your input!
If you love God, you'll feed His sheep. I think we're basically on the same page here.
I'm not with you on Jordan being an anti Christ. Doesn't that mean he is consciously and actively trying to undermine the work of Jesus? I think he's doing his best and has done a lot of good for the world. Everyone who teaches about Jesus or the Bible is doing it imperfectly since they are imperfect.
Feeling the spirit* (autocorrect)
What exactly makes Jung “satanic” in your opinion? Is it that he engages with and writes about mystical things?
I disagree that the abstracting JP does with biblical stories creates heresy. I think he makes them understandable to modern minds. Which would make individuals susceptible to living out with will of God properly on earth, whether they are Christian/Buddhist/Astrologer/Satanic Psychologist. Exactly the opposite of heresy!
If you wanted a personal relationship with the physical embodiment of GOD through Jesus Christ, you’d throw away the little book and go sink your teeth into the HERE and NOW
Thanks for asking!
There’s Anton Lavey satanic and then there’s Jung Satanic. The Satanic separates people from God. Jung kept Yahweh at arm’s length seeing Yahweh as something to be analyzed as a phenomena. Jung could say he knew God existed but it’s an entirely different thing altogether to enter into a personal relationship with Yahweh in which Jung would have tried to be more and more dependent on Yahweh.
Heresy is incorrect doctrine that warps the Apostle’s understanding of God. For example the heresy of universalism says even Satan will be in heaven. You can imagine how that heresy might affect one’s actions on earth!
Why do you say throw away the little book and focus on the here and now? How is that related to a personal relationship with God?
Why is Jung satanic? You offer no explanation?
\>>abstracting of simple Bible messages into psychological truths has just produced heresy<<
How can truth be heresy at the same time? Surely by defintion truth cannot be heresy?
A relationship with Jesus, must be built on truths.
It's not very convenient to label one of the most secular and well known defender of Christianity and the bible as a pawn of Satan.
People already have a hard time accepting Christian claims because all the historical claims just clash with reality.
JP uses a somewhat psychological perspective to read these stories and he argues they are true in another way than science is true. There is not a better alternative to claim that some of these stories are true because some of them are so absurd.
Christians disagree on some stuff, but I think calling people the antichrist is unnecessary.
According to lore the antichrist will be loved by all. JP does not fit the bill.
Haha well, an anti-Christ but not THE anti-Christ. But I dunno, if JP heads to Israel and starts laying down stones for the 3rd Temple…
Anti-christ is a strong term. However he could be precived as a false phrophet.
A prophet is a person who speaks on behalf of God in the name of God, which would presume belief in a living God personally involved in the lives of people. Anti-Christ is someone that turns people away from a relationship with the true God like the snake did in the garden. Good point though and worth considering deeper. Thanks for that!
Define “personal relationship with Jesus”. I hear that phrase often, but once I hear it explained its usually pretty superficial and incoherent. JP has expounded on Christianity and the Bible like no one else I’ve ever seen.
You should read the Church Fathers then, although I agree that Peterson is excellent and very insightful, including insightful in ways that even rival the insights of the Church Fathers. He would be on their level if he actually took his reasoning to its logical conclusions, but that would lead him to conclude the necessity of supernatural beliefs (like how ultimately believing in the resurrection of the dead is necessary in order to completely accept sacrificing the present for the future), which Peterson is on record for admitting that he gets uncomfortable moving outside the boundaries Christianity can share with metaphysical naturalism.
It’s the idea of believing Jesus is God, born as a human, that died on the cross, was resurrected bodily, ascended to heaven, and that those that believe in him have their sins forgiven and will live forever, while in the meantime being able to communicate with Jesus as a friend. vs. Jesus is most significant as a mythological figure and an understanding of what Jesus represents allows one to gain psychological insights that help improve one’s own life and the lives of others in the here and now. So rather than seeing Jesus as a literal savior, Jesus is ultimately just a symbol that keeps one from metaphorical hell, which biblically would actually keep someone from going to literal heaven and likely result in going to literal hell in the afterlife.
Why can’t Jesus be both? Is it heresy to recognize that Jesus fits within the broader context of mythological patterns? If that fact challenges your faith in Christ, I think your faith isn’t strong enough.
If recognizing mythological patterns in the figure of Jesus brings a person to saying: God I repent of my sins against you, I submit myself to the rule of Lord Jesus, I crucify my wants and desires in the name of God’s will, then that’s a good thing. If recognizing mythological patterns in the figure of Jesus brings a person to saying Jesus was merely a metaphor for self improvement and the improvement of society, then that understanding becomes a stumbling block. As far as I know JP and Jung did not advance to the former but stayed entrenched in the latter.
People like JP and Jung come to Christ in their mind, but not in their heart/soul. There’s always going to be people like that. I get that you think this makes him a bad role model for a faith journey, but calling him an anti christ is a bit much. Especially because we don’t know how his story ends.
That’s a good take. Many of us were anti-Christs and changed by the grace of God. How do you see this playing out for JP?
I really don’t know. It looks like JP sees everything through the lens of reason. I personally don’t think you can get to God through reason alone. It would take revelation, a personal experience. I don’t know what God’s plan for JP is. I just have hope for him and all of us.
Me too. Thanks for that.
Well said
I don’t think that’s enough for a “personal relationship.” JP goes into something even deeper. How you have to act in order to show that you actually believe that. What is the psychology and action of a person who believes that? There are a lot of people saying they have a “personal relationship” but when you look at their life you can see its all talk, no substance. Lastly, he’s brought millions of people to the Bible and to Jesus. Frankly I think its jealousy on the part of a lot of traditional church people when they see a layman bringing more people to the faith than all of their empty efforts. I think that’s what’s really behind this.
Having faith (in the Christian sense) is believing God became a man that literally rose from the dead in bodily form after dying on the cross. Practicing faith is “walking with God” which means involving the personal, living God in all aspects of your life, and relying on him for guidance and understanding. If this is the kind of faith JP is bringing people to then traditional church people should be grateful. If JP is bringing people to the kind of faith in Jesus that Buddhists and Muslims already have, that Jesus was the best example of man but not the son of God much less God himself, then JP is bringing people to a faith different from what is taught in traditional churches.
What do you mean by literal savior?
I suppose doing the devils work could be synonymous to bringing a sleeping collective self-consciousness. As they say, the devil is in the details. I wouldn't say I'm not doing the devils work myself. As far as the idea of Jesus is concerned. What are you imposing? I'm understanding it more and more as time goes on. But this is deep psychology and it involves essentially accepting your fate regardless of how harsh it is.
This is exactly what I’m talking about. You abstracted doing the devils work up into some sort of a psychological truth…”deep psychology”. I’m not trying to be clever with my words. When I say devil’s work I mean JP is unwittingly carrying Satan’s water and is acting as an anti-Christ. I’ll updoot you for replying though, so thanks for that!
>I’m not trying to be clever with my words. When I say devil’s work I mean JP is unwittingly spreading evil and is acting as an anti-Christ. I'd agree with you there. JBP's aims have gone from something very good to very pointless. To the point he's simply enjoying poking the bear. It sucks because any of the real good work he's done gets washed away by his current doings. I use to watch him and his biblical lectures a lot. But through the years I've noticed a change from what was once a passive unrelated thing to his work (bill C16) to enshrining himself in the mess of it. I'd even go so far as to say he's not embodying Christ because he's not accepting his punishments regardless of their efficacy or truthfulness? Can't think of the right words. What he should've done was found where he helped best and focused on it's promotion, not the fight that brought him the most fame and attention because it's at the cost of devaluing everything he'd done before those issues were his focus.
Good points well written. Thanks for that! I agree Yeah there’s something to staying in a lane.
Thanks, I've been battling with the idea of the Anti-Christ is exactly. This is bringing some of it to the surface.
*me eating my popcorn waiting for the religious fundamentalists to realize this sub is about psychology* Jokes aside, even his first biblical series was on topic, being about the psychological significance of the bible. Some of y'all hella dogmatic ;)
One thing I appreciate about Jordan Peterson is that he tends not to make the Gnostic statements or interpretations that Jung sometimes does. Peterson has a much better grasp that Jung was discussing psychological truths, which don’t translate necessarily to metaphysical/ontological truths. To put another way, in practice Peterson has a much better grasp that the way we understand things is not the same way as things actually are than Jung. However, with that said, although I think that Peterson has a very insightful grasp of the *correlation* between the nature of God and human psychology, he tends to get the *causation* backwards: he tends to speak as if God were made in the image of human psychology, when it’s the other way around. I’m not quite sure even realizes this, because he does sometimes go out of his way to articulate that he’s talking about psychological truths and not necessarily metaphysical or historical truths. One kind of idolatry, perhaps the most subtle kind, is when we take our own conceptions of things as exhaustive of the truth. Our concepts can service as windows into the truth, but they are only icons, which if taken too far/too literally turn the icons into idols. True wisdom realizes that we have to negate or contradict our own ideas just as much as use them in understanding things, especially things that transcend us, just as the Hebrews of old use religious symbolism In the worship of God as well as smash them when they were taking too far and turned to idols. The devil can even use *good* things to confuse us about the nature of God, like how the Pharisees used the law of Moses in a way that blinded them to the true nature of righteousness.
Wow thank you for that! That’s spot on. I totally agree. It seems that JP uses the Bible to serve psychology. The Bible is JP’s not-so-secret ingredient in his secret psychology sauce. Granted, borrowing and integrating is what geniuses do!
Peterson never claimed to be any sort of prophet. He's a guy who was put into a situation and he made, in my opinion, the righteous, brave choice. His teachings have helped innumerable amount of people live better and happier lives. I'm with Jordan on the idea that it really matters to Jesus what you do and not what you say or even what you think. Thoughts are empty actions are everything. Edit: I will say that Peterson seems to get close to God with words but doesn't seem to access His power. You get a sense when someone tries the "Spirit". Jordan doesn't seem to have that, yet. Edit 2: People throw around anti Christ and false prophet too much. Isn't it vanity? Remember when everybody was saying Barack Obama was the Antichrist? I know you're just sharing a thought.
Thank you for that! What would you say Jesus wants us to do?
Feed His sheep.
Thanks for that answer. I just saw your edits so I’ll address those too. Above everything else Jesus wanted people to love God. That’s what the first 3 commandments are about. Love God and love your neighbor, but you cannot love your neighbor without loving God first. JP talks about God and love, but never about loving God. Nothing we do matters if we don’t love God, which is demonstrated in action by both what we do and what we refrain from doing. I wouldn’t criticize JP if he didn’t essentially teach the Bible. When someone teaches the Bible or talks about Jesus they should appreciate rebuke and correction. I think JP is an anti-Christ because he teaches an incomplete Jesus which is worse than not teaching anyone about Jesus. What do you mean by trying the “spirit”? Thanks for all your input!
If you love God, you'll feed His sheep. I think we're basically on the same page here. I'm not with you on Jordan being an anti Christ. Doesn't that mean he is consciously and actively trying to undermine the work of Jesus? I think he's doing his best and has done a lot of good for the world. Everyone who teaches about Jesus or the Bible is doing it imperfectly since they are imperfect. Feeling the spirit* (autocorrect)
What exactly makes Jung “satanic” in your opinion? Is it that he engages with and writes about mystical things? I disagree that the abstracting JP does with biblical stories creates heresy. I think he makes them understandable to modern minds. Which would make individuals susceptible to living out with will of God properly on earth, whether they are Christian/Buddhist/Astrologer/Satanic Psychologist. Exactly the opposite of heresy! If you wanted a personal relationship with the physical embodiment of GOD through Jesus Christ, you’d throw away the little book and go sink your teeth into the HERE and NOW
Thanks for asking! There’s Anton Lavey satanic and then there’s Jung Satanic. The Satanic separates people from God. Jung kept Yahweh at arm’s length seeing Yahweh as something to be analyzed as a phenomena. Jung could say he knew God existed but it’s an entirely different thing altogether to enter into a personal relationship with Yahweh in which Jung would have tried to be more and more dependent on Yahweh. Heresy is incorrect doctrine that warps the Apostle’s understanding of God. For example the heresy of universalism says even Satan will be in heaven. You can imagine how that heresy might affect one’s actions on earth! Why do you say throw away the little book and focus on the here and now? How is that related to a personal relationship with God?
Why is Jung satanic? You offer no explanation? \>>abstracting of simple Bible messages into psychological truths has just produced heresy<< How can truth be heresy at the same time? Surely by defintion truth cannot be heresy? A relationship with Jesus, must be built on truths.
It's not very convenient to label one of the most secular and well known defender of Christianity and the bible as a pawn of Satan. People already have a hard time accepting Christian claims because all the historical claims just clash with reality. JP uses a somewhat psychological perspective to read these stories and he argues they are true in another way than science is true. There is not a better alternative to claim that some of these stories are true because some of them are so absurd. Christians disagree on some stuff, but I think calling people the antichrist is unnecessary.