Biblical Series I: Introduction to the Concept of God


Lecture I in my Psychological Significance of the Biblical Stories series from May possibly 16th at Isabel Bader Theatre in Toronto. In this lecture, I describe what I take into account to be the thought of God, which is at least partly the notion of sovereignty and power, divorced from any concrete sovereign or specific, individual individual of power. I also suggest that God, as Father, is anything akin to the spirit or pattern inherent in the human hierarchy of authority, which is based in turn on the dominance hierarchies characterizing animals.

Q & A Starts: 1:57:25

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/jordanbpeterson
Self Authoring: http://selfauthoring.com/
Jordan Peterson Internet site: http://jordanbpeterson.com/
Podcast: http://jordanbpeterson.com/jordan-b-p…
Reading List: http://jordanbpeterson.com/2017/03/gr…
Twitter: https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson

Producer Credit and thanks to the following $200/month Patreon supporters. With out such support, this series would not have occurred: Adam Clarke, Alexander Meckhai’el Beraeros, Andy Baker, Arden C. Armstrong, Badr Amari, BC, Ben Baker, Benjamin Cracknell, Brandon Yates, Chad Grills, Chris Martakis, Christopher Ballew, Craig Morrison, Daljeet Singh, Damian Fink, Dan Gaylinn, Daren Connel, David Johnson, David Tien, Donald Mitchell, Eleftheria Libertatem, Enrico Lejaru, George Diaz, GeorgeB, Holly Lindquist, Ian Trick, James Bradley, James N. Daniel, III, Jan Schanek, Jason R. Ferenc, Jesse Michalak, Joe Cairns, Joel Kurth, John Woolley, Johnny Vinje, Julie Byrne, Keith Jones, Kevin Fallon, Kevin Patrick McSurdy, Kevin Van Eekeren, Kristina Ripka, Louise Parberry, Matt Karamazov, Matt Sattler, Mayor Berkowitz , Michael Thiele, Nathan Claus, Nick Swenson , Patricia Newman, Pisit Mongkolsiriwattana, Robb Kelley, Robin Otto, Ryan Kane, Sabish Balan, Salman Alsabah, Scott Carter, Sean C., Sean Magin, Sebastian Thaci, Shiqi Hu, Soheil Daftarian, Srdan Pavlovic, Starting Ideas, Too Analytical, Trey McLemore, William Wilkinson, Yazz Troche, Zachary Vader

Religious Stories

By mikecogh on 2013-01-04 20:41:08
tags

There are some folks who decide on to residence school their children because they want to offer a religious foundation that could be lacking in their region schools. Incorporating religious studies into the learning atmosphere is fairly simple. There are many basic activities that can be created to include your religious preferences and ideals as component of your children’s understanding encounter.
 
There are a quantity of religious organizations that supply religious themed curriculums. Some of these organizations include House Study International which is a Seventh Day Adventist group that offers distance understanding supplies for property schooled young children. For those of the Jewish faith the On the web School for Young Shluchim gives a distance learning education via the internet. When looking for the assistance of religious curriculums for your children from an organization you should ask if they are accredited as some are. Accreditation may or may possibly not be important to you personally but there are some advantages to this. Use of the world wide web can also be of help in finding faith based curriculums. Employing the message boards on religious internet sites and posting your interest in acquiring religious activities for your kids ought to yield some benefits.

One of the best techniques to uncover info on religious materials to teach your youngsters is by in search of the counsel of a significant religious sect and asking if they know of organizations that provide finding out supplies or if they would be interested in sharing their learning materials. If your location of worship offers a Sunday college you can ask the teacher where he or she obtains the components they use for lessons. Religious summer camps also have access to religious components and activities and they could also be of help.
 
If you are interested in producing you personal religious activities for your children’s residence education you must be inventive. Making use of your holy book such as the Qur’an, the Torah or the Bible as the principal reading material is suggested. Several religious publishers have made children’s religious texts that have illustrations along with effortless to study text. This can be employed as the main reading material and as your child’s reading and comprehension level increase you can introduce him or her to the original religious text. You could also reenact components of a religious story with your children in play type to support them comprehend the moral aspects of the story. Yet another great notion is to listen to religious music and have the children type their personal band and sing along.

Teaching your children religious values whilst simultaneously supplying them with an education can be effortlessly done with your dedication.

Michael not too long ago took a Red Cross CNA Class in preparation for taking the CNA Exam.

50 thoughts on “Biblical Series I: Introduction to the Thought of God”

  1. JORDAN PETERSON: IS HE SOWING CHAOS CONCERNING GOD?
    At time point 130:44, Peterson says: "I can’t tell if I’m an advocate of the religious viewpoint or its worst possible critic, because I am doing my best to make it rational and there’s a reductionistic element to that ." Petersonian "Christianity" is a rational, naturalistic religion without any supernatural element. But Peterson is not hostile towards those who believe in the parts of the Bible that say that supernatural beings and events are literally real.

    In fact, Peterson is friendly towards Christian believers in the supernatural, since Peterson thinks that such believers get from the Christian myth the same psychological benefits that Peterson and his non-supernaturalist followers get from the Christian myth.

    Peterson is like a medical doctor who just wants sick people to take the penicillin that they need to recover, and he doesn’t care if the patients take penicillin because they believe penicillin has miraculous powers or because they believe that penicillin works according to the science of medicine, chemistry, bacteriology, and physiology.

    Peterson, in this video (see time point 130:57) says that he is "leaving the door open to things that I don’t understand," thereby seemingly suggesting that he (unlike hardcore activist atheists) is open to the idea that the supernatural realm really might literally exist.

    But if you look at his words carefully, I don’t think that’s what he’s really saying.

    He’s only saying what any scholar says, which is that there is always more to learn about any subject matter. Every chemistry professor or physics professor will admit that there are things about their academic discipline that they don’t yet grasp. But there are no reputable professors of physics or chemistry who would say that they leave the door open to the possibility that their sciences may operate according to supernatural dynamics. What they are open to is further rational, naturalistic information and understanding of chemistry and physics.

    And I think the same is true of Peterson as regards the Bible and religion. Peterson is a committed naturalist. Peterson is committed to promoting Christianity as a psychologically and socially beneficial myth. This is his whole mission in life.

    Again, Peterson says at 130:44, "I can’t tell if I’m an advocate of the religious viewpoint or its worst possible critic."

    Well, he sees the problem himself. He is indeed the "worst possible critic" (or one of the worst, right along with Sam Harris and others), but not of religion in general, but only of the SUPERNATURAL religious viewpoint.

    But unlike the direct assault coming from Sam Harris and others, Peterson’s assault is subtle and semi-hidden. "Assault" isn’t even the right word for what Peterson is doing. It’s just a replacement, of the supernaturalistic view of religion for the naturalistic (psychological, mythic) view.

    Peterson says, implicitly (and sometimes explicitly) that the universally known facts do not justify acknowledgment of the literal existence of any supernatural realm or beings. That makes him a skeptic. He calls himself an "agnostic" as regards the literal resurrection of Jesus Christ. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIB05YeMiW8&t=87s He’s using "agnostic" to mean "skeptic," I believe, from the context of his statements in that video and in other videos.

    But Peterson says that this skeptical stance does not prevent the Christian myth from operating in a psychologically powerful way in the lives of people.

    Peterson is a professor of psychology. He believes that psychology can help ("save") people.

    Peterson looks back on the long history of Western Civilization, and especially the Christian part of that civilization, and he interprets that history as showing that the Christian myth has been an indispensable part of making Western Civilization great.

    And now Peterson is part of the movement to "Make Western Civilization Great Again."

    And for Peterson, that means promoting and defending the Christian myth against all of its haters (the Marxists, the Postmodernists, the Atheist Activists, and the Muslims too, though so far I’ve haven’t seen Peterson really focus on the Muslim threat as much as other people trying to save Western Civilization).

    President Trump’s 2017 speech about Western Civilization made in Poland is another expression of the movement to save Western Civilization, the same movement of which Jordan Peterson is a conscious member and activist.

    Anyone who has really examined the life of Donald Trump will, I think, conclude that Trump is a skeptic or cynic of all supernatural claims of religion, and views religion in purely pragmatic terms, just like Peterson.

    In fact, I believe that many leaders of the political Conservative Movement are inner skeptics or cynics of all supernatural claims of religion, and see Christianity as a just a pragmatic tool for aiding in the culture war against the "big government" "social democrat" Progressives.

    Peterson is really just one of these Conservative Movement folks, in my view.

    But I do see Peterson as a very sincere person. He truly, truly is trying to help people and save Western Civilization through the power of psychology and myth.

    Unlike many politicians, Peterson is not simply a whore for money, power and fame.

    Peterson’s new book has the subtitle "An Antidote to Chaos." See: https://jordanbpeterson.com/12-rules-for-life/

    But Peterson himself is a sower of chaos.

    He sows chaos when he says or suggests that faith in supernatural persons and events is not important or necessary in the life of a Christian, and when he says or implies that Christianity is a powerful myth that works just fine in helping people and in saving Western Civilization, even when no one has any faith in supernatural persons and events.

    All these new Petersonian Christians will someday have to face the big question as to whether there really is any supernatural realm at all, any miracles, any life after death, and Peterson will then be of no use to them at all. They’ll end up hating Peterson for leading them out into a desert without a map to the oasis and without a water bottle.

    Peterson uses many words and phrases in an equivocal, "doublespeak" sort of way.

    For example, when he talks about the necessity of the recognition of the "transcendent," he’s NOT talking about a supernatural realm or being. He’s talking about how our status as biological beings, who were produced by the natural selection process of biological evolution, means that there are "transcendent" biological "structures of reality" that are completely dominant and unavoidable and which are present in every aspect of our minds, thoughts, language, bodies and societies. Peterson complaint against Marxism is simply that it is NOT grounded in biology. Peterson’s complaint against Marxism is NOT that it is not grounded in supernatural divine revelation.

    In one video, talking about his campaign against the Canadian law pertaining to transgendered pronouns, listen to what Peterson says:

    "…it’s about whether the subjective or the objective is going to take precedence, because implicit in Bill C-16, and I’m telling you there is an assault on the idea of objectivity itself, an assault on the idea of biology itself…"

    So, in Peterson’s mind, Bill C-16 was not against the laws of a supernatural deity or a supernatural Word of God (the Bible), but was against "the idea of biology itself," which he identifies as being identical to the "the idea of objectivity itself." For Peterson, it is biology (i.e., nature) that is "transcendent," the "structure of reality," and the "Logos."

    For Peterson to stop sowing this chaos, he would need to stop being semi-evasive and deliberately ambiguous, and instead, in his Bible lectures, always make it crystal clear to his audiences that he that he is a rationalist, naturalist skeptic of all supernatural claims (just like his hero Nietzsche), and that for him the value of the Bible is its use as a pragmatic tool for psychological benefits and proper social ordering (just like his hero Carl Jung).

    The antidote to the chaos of Marxism and Postmodernism is not a counter-chaos. You don’t fight fire with fire, but with water. You don’t fight darkness with darkness, but with light. You don’t fight anti-Reason with an opposing anti-Reason, but with Reason. You don’t fight injustice with an opposing injustice. You don’t fight lies with counter-lies.

    (I suppose a cynic and skeptic would say that in the preceding paragraph I am being ridiculously idealistic, and that all life ever can be is the "struggle for existence" [Darwin] and the "war of all against all" [Hobbes]. I suppose its possible that Peterson is just this sort of cynic and skeptic, deep down, and that Peterson’s game is fighting the false utopian myth of Marxism with the opposing false utopian myth of Christianity; but I don’t really think Peterson is so crude, crass, cynical, and Machiavellian as that.).

    I do see the value and benefits that Peterson’s videos bring to many people. I’m not a Peterson hater, not really. I just want him to be more precise, clear and open in his speech. I want him to stop being afraid that he will lose a big part of his audience if he more plainly explains himself and his mission in life. In Jungian terms, I’m calling on Peterson to stop hiding and to face and integrate his Shadow Self.

    By the way, I haven’t tried to document all my claims about Peterson with quotes from Peterson. That is just too time consuming. I’ve watched hundreds of Peterson’s videos. All this information about Peterson from Peterson is out there for anyone to find.

    Well, happy New Year everyone. Best wishes and God bless you.

  2. Big fan of your work fine sir,
    Been meaning to get around to watching this series, I’ve just finished episode 1 and oh my god does it not disappoint,
    This whole lecture was just fantastic…

  3. PETERSON IS SAYING THAT GOD IS AN EVOLVED COMPONENT OF HUMAN NEUROLOGY?
    Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems that Jordan Peterson is saying that God is a natural component of human neurology, and that this is a result of natural biological evolution. Peterson is NOT repeating the old saying that God is just a "figment of your imagination." Rather, he’s saying that God is much more than a thought or a imagine in the human brain.

    Peterson is saying that God is NOT something learned from culture or constructed by culture or invented by humans (that’s the claim of Marxists, Postmodernists, Atheists Activists).

    Rather, Peterson is saying that God is actually a component of human neurology.

    He’s saying that God is in our DNA.

    To put this in terms of computers, Peterson is saying that God is NOT software that is added to some or many brains, but is actually built into the hardware of the brain.

    Thus, I think Peterson is saying that we humans have always told stories about God (as found in the Bible, and in other myths and legends) because the concept of God is hardwired into human brains.

    And Peterson believes that this God thing evolved in the human brain in order to enable humans to survive, prosper, reproduce, and have offspring who survive and reproduce.

    For this reason, Peterson believes that acknowledgment or appreciation of God, and obedience to the moral directives of God, are just important in the current time as they have ever been in the past. And this is why Peterson is so opposed to people who strive to suppress God (i.e., the atheist activists).

    Have I correctly understood Dr. Peterson on this matter?

    And if I have correctly understood him, am I not justified in being flabbergasted and shocked?

    Why flabbergasted and shocked?

    Because it seems that, deep down, Dr. Peterson is agreeing with atheists that there is no deity literally existing outside of the human brain. That’s shocking, to me anyway. That means that Peterson sees the universe, outside the human brain, as genuinely godless.

    As such, I think Peterson’s beliefs fit the classic, technical definition of "atheist" (someone who thinks deities do not exist outside the human brain).

    Peterson is saying that God exists; he exists in our DNA and in our brain.

    Peterson does NOT teach or suggest that God exists as a separate thinking and acting being, with free will, who lives eternally in a supernatural, transcendent realm. Peterson is well aware that some people still believe in this old-fashioned concept of God, and he isn’t particularly interested in leading them out of that belief and into Peterson’s concept of God. He believes the old-fashioned believers still get all the survival benefits from God.

    Some old-fashioned Christians say that God concept is in our DNA because God put Himself there. But that’s NOT what Peterson teaches. Peterson says that natural biological evolution, NOT any supernatural deity, put the God concept in our DNA. Peterson is a scientist, not a supernaturalist.

    All this makes Peterson a really strange bird: An person who is technically an atheist who is also a fervent defender and promoter of God and religion.

    I know Peterson does this with the concept of the "true myth," which apparently he borrowed from Carl Jung. Perhaps Peterson also borrows the "power of myth" concept from Joseph Campbell.

    I also know that Dr. Peterson adds little caveats, such as the doesn’t know everything, and there could be realities pertaining to God that are unseen by him. But in saying this, I think he merely saying what any scientist says regarding the subject matter he studies, which is that there is always more to know. I don’t think Peterson is saying that he thinks all or any of the miracles described in the Bible or in the Koran actually happened (e.g., Jesus raised from the dead; parting of the Red Sea; the flood sent by God that killed everything except Noah and the people and animals on his ship)

    I suppose this unique theory of God is why some people regard Peterson as a genius.

    But couldn’t this unique theory of God also reasonably lead other people to view Peterson as a madman?

    Some old-fashioned Christians are seeing Peterson as being not quite a Christian, but as nevertheless a very supportive and ally to the Christian cause. And they harbor hopes that Peterson will go "full Christian" at some point soon.

    But some old-fashioned Christians are seeing Peterson as a "wolf in sheep’s clothing," as a godless fake Christian who is a ferocious enemy of the true God and of true Christians.

    If I have misunderstood Peterson, please add a reply to correct me. Thank you.

    (P.S.#1 Dear fans of JBP: I am not trying to interfere with or disparage Dr. Peterson’s work. I respect the freedom of religion of Dr. Peterson and his fans. I am, above all, just trying to do what any good student tries to do: gain a deep understanding of a subject matter. I have watched over a hundred of JBP videos, and have for a long time had a hard time grasping what he’s really saying about God. This morning I woke up, and felt that I had flash of insight about what he’s really saying. )

    (P.S.#2: I often do feel that Dr. Peterson is trying to "pull a fast one," is engaging in "sleight of hand" (legerdemain), in seemingly trying to make people think that his natural, impersonal, non-thinking, non-acting, biological DNA-based God is the same as thing as the supernatural, person-being, acting and thinking God depicted in the Bible. They are similar, I admit. But the same thing? I don’t think so. Scholars are supposed to be careful in making necessary distinctions. But it seems like, on this point, JBP’s aim is to obscure distinctions that most people view as vital.)

  4. I discovered this man by accident today. Jordan (river) Peterson (son of rock). Moses strikes the rock and water flows. What an absolute treasure!

  5. Im writing this before watching the video. This will make sense in a moment. I’ve always disliked religious beliefs, or at least I thought I did, mainly by reading books by Hitchens and Sam Harris. My farther tried to tell me about some of the deeper underpinnings of religion even tho I’m pretty sure he didn’t understand it very well, but he was not really able to articulate it the way I’ve heard it from Jordan Peterson, even tho he was a high level lawyer. Now he is severely brain damaged at the age of 60 (hence the ‘was’ part) from a very serious stroke and can now barely speak and walks like a.. zombie would be the best way to describe it. I probably won’t need to go into details about why this sux.

    As far as I can tell he can still comprehend most things and I’ve even had long discussions with him that on ‘good days’ almost feel like old times.

    I’ve recently become very interested in learning more about why a book such as the bible survived for so long and what possible lessons it might hold that I haven’t thought about before. I’ve always disliked a literal fundamentalist reading of the bible and I think that is what scared me away from it.

    So I’m going to suggests to my dad that we watch this together as a way of breaching the gap we have between us on this front. I hope he will be able to follow the lecture even in his current state. He is or was a very smart man and even with only half a brain he is by no means stupid 😁

    I don’t really know why I’m writing this out and probably no one is going to read it, but if you ever see this Jordan, Thank you for everything you do.

    You may just have given me a chance to connect with my farther on a subject I thought was impossible to bring up again because of his current condition.

    Thank you.

  6. left 51.19 the Bible could be an abstraction., I don’t know……..God however is not, and is within the absorption……conscious ‘revelations’ spring, I agree, from this absorption. I disagree it is from abstracted analysis of patterns, which are perhaps the problem to be solved, rather than the resolution. Analysis may be able to extract the precious from the ore, but that is all above ground 🙂

  7. music absorbs us, just as we are when we dream, we are fully part of it rather than idividualised……it is dry to wake from sleep, into consciousness, the exception is the feeling of being ‘in love’ when you don’t want to leave, to go to sleep [even if it is a naturally drugged state]…….I have talked myself into the embryo argument lol.

  8. My one problem thus far at the 30:25, I’d say is the assumption that people don’t remember poetry, because we don’t recite things like Shakespeare or such things. We have our various forms of music, all which have various narrative storytelling aspects and underlying truths as well. We absolutely do remember poems and stories, just not in the same way.

  9. Professor have you ever asked God to reveal his truth to you?

    You don’t have to answer that. I just wanted to put the question to you. I did and God answered me he told me to read the Bible and don’t discount it. I did and I accepted Christ, not right away.
    I like you was stuck on the resurrection.

    I stumble across the Shroud of Turin and the physical evidence… well I can tell you as a Cop/investigator the amount of physical evidence on it is undeniable. The C14 dating has already been proven to be contaminated.

  10. Thank you, Jordan. Your view on the world is eye-opening and inspiring. I’m in New Zealand – through your channel, you’ve managed to have great influence all around the planet. You talk of the need for humans to find purpose – You’re in the process of leaving a legacy. Very impressive.

  11. Everyone chooses their belief system whether they realize it or not. Choose a good one and believe it. An unshakable One.

  12. Never have I thought I could say this about someone I don’t know in person…but I really love u Dr. Peterson. You’re like a paternal figure to me… Since I’m not living in the same city where my parents are and I’m on my own, anytime I need advice or motivation to be better I watch to your lectures and videos. Thank you for your work , ! It’s truly inspiring and enlightning. Looking forward to buy your book: maps of meaning!
    Cheers from Portugal

  13. I thought it was interesting that the EYE, has such a significance in religions. I was also thinking about the Meaning when Odin of the Nordic pantheon sacrificed his Eye, he did it for knowledge. You can swing that cat in at least two directions: Either the knowledge which he was offered was worth the sacrifice, of half his ability to perceive the world and that one should balk at nothing to obtain it. Or that the knowledge was NEEDED regardless of price and that Mimir asking this of him was par for the course. I have no doubt that he could have amassed this knowledge personally, was it the need that drove him? Or the foresight that comes with the knowledge? Do you need two eyes when you have such knowledge?

    Mostly rhetorical but the subject material about the significance of the Eye is what is interesting to me.

  14. 44:00 "it’s already happening" it certainly is. How about teaching 5-year-old kids in public schools that you get to "pick" whether you’re a boy or girl. We gotta right this ship. Jordan fighting the good fight.

  15. my best dream: has no time line, it opens and is whole. There is the inside of a flower, red and tulip like, ‘I am’ aware of it, there is nothing outside it…’I’ am facing down into it. Every feeling is there all at the same time, all consuming, yet beautiful, ,and fascinating. All has the same importance. When I awoke the dream reminded me of a beautiful song, with depth, height, air and tight spaces………self acceptance, I came to think. The darkness of the void outside it was endless…….the flower like a planet. I realised when I awoke there had been no ‘I’…nor anaylsis, nor body, just awareness, or consciousness, or witness. Witness is the best. The absorption would be negative socially lol, ………p.s. I had to ignore my feelings for years in order to continue providing ‘care’ for a loved one….responsibility & love of another.

  16. The lecture tickles my brain so delightfully. I have very hard to believe that anybody who listened to a significant chunk, or all of this lecture would thumb it down… that is the truly astounding thing about this video!

  17. I just don’t get it. So he is basically a more intellectual Tony Robbins. I guess I am too black for this sort of thing.

  18. Thank you very much Jordan Peterson! I’ve been a deeply religious person my whole life, but have been looking for people who speak clearly and cleanly from a philosophical and psychological view of the Bible. What a gift! For those who like a deeply symbolic reading of the Bible I highly recommend: "spirit and life bible study". Every episode is grounded very carefully in the literal teachings of the Bible while searching out the inner meaning and depth.

  19. Prior to "God is dead", there were many examples of man’s actions, both within/without religious belief in God, which influenced man’s belief systems and provided for psychological/socialization stability. I would suggest that the substitution of a belief system to scientific principals does not necessarily destroy the psychological, or social, fabric necessary for human tranquility. Man is quite capable of living a happy fulfilled life while not having all the answers to the existence of the universe. "I don’t know", is a perfectly acceptable answer. One must suppose that man, in his early history, before religion, was able to navigate his existence by either arresting his investigation into a realm beyond the physical or provided another rationalization for things that go bump in the night. Perhaps he was too busy in just surviving and making allies of other tribes to expand his power base. So, even though the shock that denying God does not necessarily scar the psyche to the point that man needs to accept something equally unprovable or to ferret out a solution to keep believing in the supernatural. Much of how one looks at their place in the universe has to do with the trust they had in their teachers during their formative years and the values of the belief systems which were taught to them. Yes, many a person’s trusts in those they held dear were destroyed upon learning the truth of Santa Clause. It can be a slow, often painful process to acchiving the reality of things. Having said that, I do believe that there is comfort in the belief in God, but then there is an equal discomfort as well.

  20. Your bible lectures are warm and intriguing, I spent my youth divorcing myself from religion to the point of becoming combatant of the very idea of God. Its been a long journey but you’ve really restored my respect for religious text and tradition as well as giving me a new perspective entirely. Thank you Jordan Peterson for your lectures, you are a shining beacon of light and truth in this Chaotic world of suffering!

  21. I could be wrong but it seems like far enough back ancient men and women worshipped the stars, the heavens, mother earth, nature and the Cosmos.
    Later it got anthropomorphized, people felt a need to think of it as ,well like them, like a male, or King, or supreme King that is like us. Prone to our same emotions.

  22. "Fiction might be true like numbers are true. Numbers are an abstraction of the underlying reality, but no one in their right mind would say that numbers aren’t real" – Best quote

  23. This guy is obviously very educated by the world education system, but he hasn’t really studied the bible, nor bible archeology and bible history as compared to world history, not to mention bible prophecy which comprises of over 2,500 prophecies and 2,000 of those have been fulfilled to the very letter of biblical scripture. Lets put it this way, if you went to the horse racing track and met a man that told you all the winning horses that raced that day (lets say 5 horses ) and they all won just as he said, you would likely return and search to find him again so that you could put a lot of money on the next races and win big bucks right? Now imagine that you do this every race day till you have won 2,000 races straight in a row. That is exactly what the bible already has done by knowing the future long before it actually happens, this is just one of the way’s that GOD the author of it proves it is true. Now imagine that some family and friends that heard of your experience, can’t believe that it is true, how would you explain it to them??? The greatest reward that trumps any other, is to live forever in paradise beyond your imagination with no war, famine, disease, sickness, evil or corrupt people, no taxes, or any type of unhappiness, and in perfect health forever. That is exactly what the bible promises. With over 2,000 perfect predictions why would anyone ever not believe it??? The only answer would be is because they never searched it out to see if it was so!!!

  24. I think what Dr. Peterson might enjoy … and I’m saying this completely as a student of Textual Criticism, and an ordained Teacher of the Bible ( _which to be fair would denote that I actually have a belief in God, a rational belief in God, but also follow the Bible as an adherent_ ) … is examining some of his own prejudices regarding the Bible. Prejudices is a bad word actually. "Prejudices" denotes that there is some hidden confirmation bias that Dr. Peterson is seeking to justify, and I don’t think that’s the case at all. It appears to more of a search for truth. Perhaps a better way to phrase my statement would be: Examine just a few of his own axioms regarding the Bible that he stated in the video. For example: " *Is the God of the Old Testament often Cruel and Arbitrary* _IN CONTRAST_ *with the God of the New Testament* ? ? " (As said around 25 minutes or so) ( _"New Testament" and "Old Testament" being corrupted linguistic constructions actually but that has more to do with linguistics_ ) I don’t think anything could be further from the truth when you take the book in it’s entirety. You have a God in the Old Testament that pleads with people for 1,780 years in one case (The Flood) to change their ways or the result will be societal implosion … 430 years in another case (Ammonite Depravity) … 400 years in another incident (Pre-Exillic Israel). A God of the Old Testament that instructs a new nation: " _Ok, these are your national borders. YOU MAY NOT invoke a first strike against any of the nations around you. Besides, you are related to them in a tribal way. So learn to live with them in a civil manner. These are the rules for warfare, if they attack you first. Then yes, IF THEY ATTACK YOU FIRST … you bring a vengeance upon them that will make them ever think twice about instituting an attack against you again_ " (Deuteronomy). A God of the Old Testament (Israelite Scriptures) that says a Prostitute (Rahab) may be forgiven to the extent that she become an ancestor of the King of Israel (David) (and eventually in the Greek Scriptures of our Common Era … of Jesus himself) … King David … that is to be lauded for all time as a incredibly sinful man, that tried to correct his errors. A God of the Old Testament (Israelite Scriptures) that states a Molech Worshipping woman, can also become an ancestor of King David (Ruth). A God of the Old Testament (Israelite Scriptures) that states when war is to be conducted you MUST give warning to a city before it is attacked, and allow these people to capitulate ( _Yeah, people always leave that part out but also forms a basis for the Rules of Warfare practiced in the 17th and 18th centuries_ ) And then a God of the New Testament (Greek Scriptures) that instructs individuals that if a person is unrepentant about Gross behaviors that they will not change and correct after opportunity after opportunity? Cut them out of your life. Completely and totally. Have nothing to do with them and do not even eat food with them Be it your Mother or Father or Son or Daughter … dont even say hello to them … (Matthew, 1st Corinthians, Johns final letters). A God of the New Testament (Greek Scriptures) that states when God will war with a world gone mad, he will bring the Blood of his enemies, and make it as deep as the withers of a horse while raining 250 pounds rocks on their head. …. …. …. My point being that this entire axiomatic approach of a God of the "Old Testament" (I hate that term simply because it perpetuates archaic ideologies) is "cruel and vengeful" and the God of the "New Testament" is always "kind and loving and you forgive everything" finds absolutely no support in any meaningful way ….. …. And my point is saying the forgoing, is to state that if you start to examine axioms that are accepted by society as "true" when they not be? It becomes very surprising to see what else "falls out" on the floor, and what new Truths can be wrestled to the forefront of your mind. And note, that I did not say: " _Is XYZ account found in the book of ABC a " cruel " act_ ? " That’s a separate conversation. But *is there such a ‘contrast’ in the personality and temperament* of the God of the "Old Testament" and the God of the "New Testament" ? Start pulling out incidents in each "section" of the Bible where the contrasting view is present, for a balanced examination of even THAT belief.

Leave a Reply

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