…for writing this post.
I received the following email, shortened for length:
A little less than a year ago, I sent Gary North an email about Jordan Peterson. I stated that I had become concerned about the Jordan Peterson "bandwagon."
The writer lists Tom Woods, Bob Murphy, Lew Rockwell, and yours truly as examples of those on the "bandwagon."
After expressing my concern re Peterson's comments on the Bible, Jesus, Christianity, etc., I said to Dr. North, "Without sounding too dramatic, before this gets out of hand, someone needs to write an exposé on him. I'm not the guy, but I'm thinking you might be or know someone that is….
He didn't take up the challenge, but he did reply (and gave me permission to pass on his comments) with this:
"Just another liberal. They are like cockroaches. Step on one, and four more appear.
A psychology professor who has taught at Harvard and now Toronto…a liberal? To paraphrase Captain Renault: I'm shocked! Shocked to find that psychology professors at major western universities are liberal!
"What I do not understand is why any Bible-believer pays any attention to such people. But they do."
Of course, I believe there are many Bible-believers who do not understand why any Bible-believer would pay any attention to Gary North when it comes to the Bible….
Well, the good news is there is now an exposé, if you will, on Peterson from a major Christian organization.
It's not quite as in-depth or extensive as I'd like it to be, but it does a great job of finally providing an analysis of Peterson for the Christian community from a Christian perspective. Please take a few minutes to read it. …I give Peterson credit for being excellent on several subjects/issues. It's just that he's awful when it comes to Christianity.
Why any Christian would look to Peterson to be good on Christianity is beyond me…but anyway…. Following is my reply, in total (with some editorial comments inserted), after which I will add some further comments:
I do not understand why it is important to turn Peterson into an "either / or" box: either he is 100% right on everything or he is not worth listening to at all.
"Is Genesis psychology or history?" Why can't it be both? Why does it take an atheist to elucidate the idea that God may have put more in Genesis than mere history, that God might have offered a meaning and depth to the narrative far greater than the mere recitation of facts and timelines?
Peterson isn't a theologian, he isn't a historian, he isn't an archeologist, he isn't an evolutionary biologist. He is a psychologist, and he has brought to life meaningful depth in these Biblical narratives. When it comes to the psychological aspects of his lectures, I find nothing blasphemous in this (I am sure there might be something, but little).