Jordan Peterson spells out God 1 and 2 to Ben Shapiro

Views:6966|Rating:4.91|View Time:51:25Minutes|Likes:289|Dislikes:5
This Rubin Report was a goldmine for those interested in JBP’s religious development. In this section he really nails God aspect 1 and 2, how it relates to biology and consciousness. It echoes what Jonathan Pageau said just a few days before.

Rubin Report
Jonathan Pageau
Vancouver 1

For the audio podcast mirror on Podbean

To listen to this on ITunes

If you need the RSS feed for your podcast player

To support this channel/podcast on Patreon

Join the Sacramento JBP Meetup

Paul’s Church Content at Living Stones Channel

You can donate to Living Stones CRC to support this work here
Donations may be tax deductible for taxpayers of the United States

You may also like...

33 Responses

  1. Ernesto Blanco says:

    Dude you make good points but for the love of God get a better microphone

  2. WhatUp says:

    Consciousness reflecting the universe is common New Age thought. Jordan isn't taking the step of stating outright the possibility of a personal god, merely, human consciousness and the thing that makes the whole program run appear to be , in some unknown way, linked or correlative or similar or "something like that".

    Paul uses the word "He" in summation to restate the matter. Jordan always avoids saying He.

  3. WhatUp says:

    According to Peterson, Brett Weinstein, and others humans exist to reproduce their genes. Their interpretations of religious texts has this sexual reproduction as their starting point. Materialist , theoretically based. Those theories about female selection mainly fit complex modern societies where women have the ability to be choosy. More historically common is arranged marriage. Wives taken in war. Slave owners impregnating the female slaves. Concubines had children of their rulers by the hundreds. 1 in 200 men are descended fro Ghengis Khan, that throws a big monkey wrench in this god of genetic selection over eons of time idea.

    According to traditional Christian belief humans exist to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. To fear Him and obey His commandments. Spiritual, experience based. That involves putting aside microscopes and theories, and examining our own hearts…with their selfishness, hate, deceitfulness, cruelty…creating wars and division…and becoming open to the truth all around us that we willfully ignore.

    The two don't line up.

  4. Richard Elliott II says:

    The "Spirit of competent hierarchical masculinity". I do not understand what this has to do with evolutionary biology, which Peterson seems to imply, or what metaphysics this is supposed to be a part of. Is there a literature that shows any scientific justification for this competitive pairing off for men to follow the alpha male that successfully protects and prospers the group such that the group identifies and defers mating privileges or hierarchical predominance to an individual or group? If yes, what Biblical justification or support for this biological predisposition is there ? I don't give any political credence to the primacy of patriarchy over matriarchy, or vice versa , as a preferred explanation of anything. I can understand what "competence", " hierarchy", and "masculinity" mean. But "The Spirit of . . . " I don't get it. I really don't get where Peterson is going with this! I haven't been able to see any Biblical truth that would justify the Judeo – Christian ethos embedding itself in any myth, or biological facts that support such a narrative within a Biblical moral framework. I will continue to try. Does God preference the masculine over the feminine in a spiritual way? biological way? any way?

  5. Thomas Simmons says:

    Martin Buber's "I and Thou" is for me
    one of the great works that bridges Judaism, Christianity and Western Philosophy altogether. The "Spirit" as a dialogical reality is distilled here. It's also on display in this video vis a vie the Rubin discussion.

    Thanks Pastor Paul!

  6. James Phillips says:

    "Is he saying a little prayer?" lol

  7. Richard Elliott II says:

    Reverend Vanderklay speaks of "belief" as a representational word. I see it can certainly stand for a picture of concepts. I have a memory of my 1st home that is accurate. I have a belief that I remember my home rightly. I can draw a picture of it. "Belief" can be a relational concept. Maybe, like the + and = signs in 1 + 1 = 2. It seems most of the time I use it as a relational concept rather than a picture of a state of affairs that can be represented. If the word "belief" is a representational word what does it picture? Other than a relation? What does a relation picture other than an identity or difference? That seems to be what is being asked when someone asks, "Do you believe" or a statement "I believe" or "I don't believe". But "I am not sure" doesn't seem to describe an affirmation or denial : ambiguity. What does ambiguity represent? Is it a belief? A relation? I don't know, myself. Help my unbelief.

  8. Matthew Schwerin says:

    Paul, you are not a pastor of an insignificant church! You are a messenger of the best news ever and remember, you have never talked to a "mere mortal". Keep up the good work!

  9. Richard Elliott II says:

    {"As if"}
    It seems to me that Mr. Pageau relates one of the most important identities one can make about God : personhood and consciousness. This unity is what answers the pseudo – problem of Faith or Works: The primacy of talking or acting ; the primacy of Reason over Passion; stories of myth and morals over objective scientific Realism. Jesus gave voice, in the Lord's prayer, of that famous esoteric chime, "As above, so below". If we are made Imago Dei then we will reflect "Above and Below". What happens when we divorce personhood from consciousness? It can be done temporarily for specific scientific purposes to much profit, but to do it as an anthropology or theology, well, it might be good Buddhism , but it doesn't source well in Christian or Judaic understanding. And I sometime wonder about Plato too (?).

    Dr. Peterson loosely sourced Matthew 7:21. Yes, Jesus implied words can be cheap. But he also implied actions and deeds can be deceptive. The centurion took Jesus' word that he could effectively heal his servant. No, I can't imagine Jesus coming back to tell those two guys on the Emmaus road, "I really tried to act and speak as if I were the Messiah."

  10. Lucas Davenport says:

    Verizon Lisa is the unofficial mascot of the channel

  11. Christopher Knuffke says:

    34:52 Random vs. Intentional !

  12. Christopher Knuffke says:

    28:39 Peterson's use of "spirit" seems to sit at the juncture between biology, psychology, sociology, philosophy and theology. . .

  13. Christopher Knuffke says:

    25:42 C.S. Lewis and G.K. Chesterton: Christianity – the myth that is ALSO historical fact ! (Not just another story we tell ourselves for moral edification.)

  14. Christopher Knuffke says:

    24:34 . . .or pantheistic !

  15. Christopher Knuffke says:

    19:57 We think in pictures, we structure in stories, we represent in words. . .

  16. Christopher Knuffke says:

    17:46 If selection is not "random". . . then it's "intentional" – right ? Is Jordan "backing into" Intelligent Design theory ??

  17. Christopher Knuffke says:

    13:37 "What do you mean by that?" THAT is the question that Peterson wrestles with. . .

  18. Christopher Knuffke says:

    8:39 Words are not only ambivalent, the are polyvalent: we need to define how / why we use a word (specifically, as per Peterson), before we can discuss or answer a question. . .

  19. Christopher Knuffke says:

    7:30 Words vs. Action: in Genesis "Word" in Hebrew is (transliterated) "dabar". . . Which indicates BOTH word and action – the Word literally creates. . . So, the dichotomy is overcome in the original language. Hans Urs von Balthasar suggests we could think of it as, "In the beginning was the Deed" [act, of creation]. . .

  20. Christopher Knuffke says:

    7:16 . . .and sometimes, differences of emphasis or nomenclature / phrasing.

  21. Afifah Hamilton says:

    But God does not exist. Obviously. God is the cause of existence. We muddle ourselves when we put the cart before the horse! God is not in existence, existence is in God. OK?

  22. CTSmerv says:

    From listening to JBP, I've come to a conclusion that religion, from an evolutionary perspective, could be considered a form of technology used to extract meaning from biologically embodied archetypal phonomena, as well as set a sense of morality for civilization to exist.

  23. Kieran Murphy says:

    Hi Paul if you had any interest in making a video about the John Macarthur/Ben Shapiro conversation that'd be great!

  24. Joe Fox says:

    @PaulVanderklay you should replace spiritual with Metaphysical in your vocabulary to define the same experience

  25. Joshua McLaughlin says:

    It matters what to you, Reader, what You believe. Whatever Dr Peterson believes is his own journey and that can go anywhere whether you're there with him or not.

  26. little Toe says:

    “We don’t understand any of the elements until we understand the relationship of them all” is true in agriculture too. The relational qualities of a system are barely accounted for in traditional ag and we see denuded earth, poisoned, water, poor farmers. In regenerative agriculture or permaculture you produce an abundance of food, increase soil volume and health, and the surrounding land benefits. This happens because you design the system from pattern to detail and perform exhaustive element/function analysis. You map out interactions between elements and design by a general rule that each element needs to provide at least 3 functions and be supported by at least 3 other elements. A farm that mimics the ecosystem has some of its stability.

  27. Teron James says:

    you're alive,….you move….you thinking….because you are concious
    but….if you're dead….concious gone…….
    life is conciousness

  28. Christopher Morris says:

    I am a 27 year old who has floated out there for the last year really seeking to learn about everything your channel has been discussing. I served as an associate pastor for 3 years in a small church but felt like I had so little understanding of how all this relates on a deeper level. I know theology but I don't know it like Jordan Peterson (natural theology) or you. I have spent this last year in awe of finally having a source that gives me ways of thinking about existence that is a no brainer. Just want to thank you for your work and passion. I feel like I might be able to start thinking about ministry again because I have something more than just canned answers about theological positions. I have an openness to meet people at the hundreds of crossroads that exist and maybe I can be useful. Thanks Paul.

  29. GoreQuill NachoVidal says:

    PS You should try watching some of Ben Shapiro's political debates….he might know something valuable you don't

  30. 5ilver42 says:

    This is the Jungian ties being brought to focus, with his "biological explanation of a spirit" is very similar to the concept of the collective unconscious . That all of the metaphysical happenings, all of the epiphenomena, these moving things underneath our consciousness that we share, those are the gods.

  31. Kevin James says:

    8 families own more wealth in the U.S. than the bottom 200 million citizens combined. I think Dr. Peterson should start spending more time critiquing this sociopathic economic hierarchy and less time blaming the individuals in this rigged game. Perhaps he should go to A bombed out factory town in Appalachia and tell those folks they should stand with their shoulders back.

  32. no way out says:

    all jordan is doing is putting forth a eastern christian view which is much closer to what jesus taught his views were taught to me 40 yrs ago you are really making to much of his position or feel threatened by his lack of dogma n tradition which are later add ons that distances one from jesus' teaching just as all religions i dont hear any disscusion from anyone one his words and no one elses such as paul being a xtian is about following christ and no one else

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *