Today, I found this video in my recommended list, so it's my privilege to bring a closer deep-dive examination of Jordan Peterson's thoughts on the Bible as he talks to a Franciscan Friar at a university dedicated to Franciscan education. For reviewing Peterson, I've decided to go deep-diving into his remarks to see how they stack up against Christian teachings as I understand them. This will hopefully help Christians wade through the complexities of Peterson's mind, and if Dr. Peterson were to read this, it would help him understand where his ideas in his talk were consistent with Christian teachings and where they are different.
Remarks That are Consistent with Nicene Creed Christianity
-"suffering with a sense of gratitude" - this is a Christian idea. First, we are grateful for the sacrifice of our Lord on the Cross for our sins. Second, we are grateful for spiritual correction from our Lord and Savior, that we may increase in holiness as we go through the sanctification process.-"the Bible being the foundation of the lens through which we look at the world" - Yes it is. A biblical worldview is central to the Christian faith, especially apologetics. Right before that, however, Peterson talks about viewing the Scripture psychologically, which means he's applying a psychological lens to the Bible instead of a religious one. Viewing the bible through a religious lens is "a method of last resort", according to Peterson, which is pretty bold talking to a Franciscan Friar on stage. So is the Bible the basis for the whole lens we should use to view it? Peterson seems to be suffering from contradictions here, leading to visible agony on stage.
-As he goes into talking about the Biblical text in Exodus and John, Peterson makes fewer problematic remarks as he settles into telling the story. Some of his remarks led me to the idea that there is a parallel between the scary serpents in Exodus and what people might be afraid of when they consider accepting the Gospel: attacks from the world, the flesh, and the devil. More specifically, people may be afraid from attacks from their fellow humans who haven't left the sin nature behind. Those attacks still hurt, but if we look to Christ, like the people in Exodus looked at the bronze serpent on the pole, we will be healed of these wounds. I like this idea and would like to see it tested by someone more skilled in hermeneutics than I. But that's my idea instead of Peterson's.
-Reconciliation is individual: through faith in Christ. On this, the friar and Peterson seem to agree.
-Finding Christ in the midst of suffering. Continuing in noble character in the face of it.
-Peterson affirms the Biblical ideas of evil and good.
-Peterson's advice to live an ethical life to take weapons away from spiritual opponents. Elders of the church are to be "above reproach" (1 Timothy 3:2 NASB) which many of the students aspire to be, and believers are admonished to be "above reproach in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation" (Philippians 2:14-16).
Remarks that may be a cause for spiritual concern
-This video opens with the idea of becoming unstoppable by taking on the maximum amounts of responsibility, in an effort to know what is the limit to God. Obviously God is responsible for everything in the universe. However, the way Peterson is approaching the idea suggests that he may still be interested in the idea of humans becoming God by taking responsibility for everything, which is humanistic and a lie of Satan.-The idea that "overcoming pain" leads to the idea of the resurrection. This can lead to the idea that human beings made up the idea of Christ's resurrection in order to be certain that the pain of death could be overcome, which is false. However, this is an old idea from one of Peterson's books that the Friar is quoting, which may not fully reflect Peterson's beliefs now.
-"the Bible is a living text" - This statement is problematic for a number of reasons, mostly because it undermines the authority of the Bible as the only source of truth and hands that authority to its interpreters. It undermines the Scriptures' authority over our minds by making our minds the authority over the Scriptures. His further remarks on embodying the Scripture as "avatars of the Judeo-Christian tradition" make it seem that the Bible's power is its psychological influence over those who "embody it", and they can choose whether or not to embody it. But then he goes back on himself and says that "we're stuck with it", implying that we can't help but embody it due to society, or perhaps because the Bible is true. Note the earlier comment about worldviews. If the Bible is the basis for our worldview, is it true?
-"the spirit of God is something that manifests in you in opposition to tyranny" - Nope. God is not within us, He's a real entity that exists that created the world that all human beings must be subject to. Try again.
-"serpents have been the biological enemy of mammals for like 60 million years" - This evidences a belief in evolution.
-Peterson implies that Satan is "the serpent in your own heart". He thinks Satan is a "psychologization" of the snake as predator, which is an evolutionary idea.
-He goes back to Jung to explain the cross as a tragedy, forcing it into the middle of the story and diving away from the conclusion. He's using too many words.
-Inoculation against tragedy. There is none. "Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep."
-Peterson uses Jung as a crutch to walk away from the truth twice. He's bending the Bible to fit Jung.
Conclusion
Overall, Peterson seems to be trying to ground his Christian ideas in secular principles. Part of the reason may be to make himself more palatable to his audience of Christian college students, and also a form of humility, because he is a psychologist and not a theologian. But in this video, I think Peterson is trying to convince himself that he isn't a Christian, even as he is surrounded by Catholics who would accept him falling on his knees. At the same time, he's trying not to push his audience away.
If we took his words alone, we would get a "Jungian psychology and Catholicism are the same thing, similar enough, can we get along?" which is non-Christian as all get out of an appeal, the daughter of the "all religions teach the same thing" lie. But it's clear that, while Peterson may buy the daughter, he doesn't really subscribe to the parent. He's forced to subscribe some uniqueness to Christianity. It's also clear, given the amount of eyebrow furrowing and stuttering, that Peterson is uncomfortable in this situation. It's clear that, while Peterson is telling us about confronting our fears and taking responsibility, Peterson seems to be confronting a fear of his own: that the Gospel might be true, and that he's trying to take responsibility for it by talking to Christians and studying the Bible.
This video is a year old now, but it caught my attention because of its title. For future Jordan Peterson reviews, I want to focus more on his recent videos to see how his beliefs have changed over his course of public exposure therapy, but this is a good starting position for examining his work, I think.
