Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
Jordan Peterson has always been somewhat ambiguous about his religious beliefs. He gets asked it a lot and usually declines to answer. He has said in the past that he follows the moral and philosophical teachings of Christianity and tries to act as if god exists, but is uncommitted to saying whether he actually believes in god or divinity. He has gone to say he doubts it.
So it kind of is a complicated question for him, as it is for a lot of people. If following the teachings of Jesus makes you a Christian, then he is. But if you have to actually commit to believing in god or Christ's divinity, then he wouldn't be considered one. Spirituality is complicated, hard to articulate, and deeply personal.
If that show was supposed to be a bona fide card carrying Christian debating atheists, he is probably on the wrong show. Not that I care for Jordan Peterson, but I wouldn't talk to someone using that tone either. That person seemed like he just wanted to cause a scene.
|
Well, that's kind of the whole problem with Peterson anyway; his M.O. has long been to couch his religious views in a kind of "strategic ambiguity". He invokes the pragmatic utility of religious belief systems ("act as if God exists") without outright claiming a belief in a theistic, personal God, and he leans hard on the whole "God as an idea" versus "God as a being" obfuscation to try to win debates. Yet when you listen to him, he's very clearly espousing a bias toward the Judeo-Christian concept of a 'God'. He's deliberately vague and it allows him to appeal to both religious and secular audiences... which is likely how he hookwinks such a wide range of people who otherwise wouldn't give him a second look.
If one side refuses to define (or even agree on a definition) for what 'God' is or admit that you're
the Christian (and agreeing to argue in support of the defacto definition), then you're just arguing past each other. It undermines the whole exercise; if you sign up for “Christian vs. 25 Atheists,” you are implicitly representing a specific worldview. I really don't get why he signed up for this if that's how he's going to respond to the question. Did he think it was going to be him on the offensive the whole time?