While I like Peterson, his following sort of reminds me of the Beatles back in the 60’s. Yeah I was there, but not a fan. They claimed they were more popular than Jesus. They are dead (as a group), but He is alive!
I’m not sure what this whole focus on “enchantment” is about. The gospel in itself is enchanting and the historical account from Genesis through Revelation is the most wonderful story of all times. There is no need to detract from it.
'...We see all the same themes here. The vague, New Age-y spirituality - living in the truth and aligning with the “force of reality.” It’s about letting what’s inside you out - the voice of God leading to self-actualization. It’s a call to adventure. It’s deployed therapeutically to avoid cynicism and bitterness. '
...."The best way to view Jordan Peterson’s religious perspective is as New Age. That is, he believes in a sort of vague spirituality that has implications for how we are supposed to live our lives.
..."What’s unique about Peterson is how he takes his New Age/therapeutic approach, and combines it with a view that how we live life is a matter of the utmost moral significance."
Given the authors title - the first so-called Christian that came to my mind - and it was re-enforced over and over throughout this bitter and envy ladened missive was DAVID FRENCH, an ardent fellow traveler with the authors 'DARK AGE' views. But so much for the Gnostic habit of reading the tea-leaves of a fellow - self avowed Christian's professed belief. I will leave that to those with a better vocabulary and an established following, even if it came out of diversity training rather than the church.
I don't believe this is genuine analysis...other than...Jordan is way more followed and enumerated than the Author.
I think your points 1 and 3 are very closely related. Part of an enchanted world is good and evil, and recognizing behaviors and objects as such. Our liberal society no longer treats many actions, lifestyles, etc. as morally serious in any way.
I think the post-liberal turn in politics will naturally bring re-enchantment with it. As people are once again punished for their behaviors and 'rights' are stripped away (against whom depending on the winning side), a politics of good and evil will arise. This is much more conducive to mystical thinking than our current managerialism.
I would be interested in hearing what a uniquely Protestant kind of enchantment (or re-enchantment) looks like. Roman Catholic and Orthodox forms seem more obvious, but not really compatible with Protestant theology. Symbolism (and what it means for something to be a symbol) seems to me to be the most important thing. It's strange that Baptists (and other low church types) views on what we call the ordinances are often dismissed as "mere" symbolism. Only disenchanted people think of symbolism as "mere".
Hmmm....I "thought" I saw a YouTube video where JP...was in tears...and came to Christ. I guess he was not genuine ???
Aaron, what was the prediction you made about Peterson a while back? It sounded rather pessimistic.
While I like Peterson, his following sort of reminds me of the Beatles back in the 60’s. Yeah I was there, but not a fan. They claimed they were more popular than Jesus. They are dead (as a group), but He is alive!
I’m not sure what this whole focus on “enchantment” is about. The gospel in itself is enchanting and the historical account from Genesis through Revelation is the most wonderful story of all times. There is no need to detract from it.
'...We see all the same themes here. The vague, New Age-y spirituality - living in the truth and aligning with the “force of reality.” It’s about letting what’s inside you out - the voice of God leading to self-actualization. It’s a call to adventure. It’s deployed therapeutically to avoid cynicism and bitterness. '
...."The best way to view Jordan Peterson’s religious perspective is as New Age. That is, he believes in a sort of vague spirituality that has implications for how we are supposed to live our lives.
..."What’s unique about Peterson is how he takes his New Age/therapeutic approach, and combines it with a view that how we live life is a matter of the utmost moral significance."
Given the authors title - the first so-called Christian that came to my mind - and it was re-enforced over and over throughout this bitter and envy ladened missive was DAVID FRENCH, an ardent fellow traveler with the authors 'DARK AGE' views. But so much for the Gnostic habit of reading the tea-leaves of a fellow - self avowed Christian's professed belief. I will leave that to those with a better vocabulary and an established following, even if it came out of diversity training rather than the church.
I don't believe this is genuine analysis...other than...Jordan is way more followed and enumerated than the Author.
Peterson at his best. Tells you very succinctly what you ought to do and exactly why.
I am overdosed on him at the moment but this article reminded me of what he is great at.
I am sometimes under the impression Peterson thinks Christianity is true and doesn't want to go there, but maybe that's not correct.
He is a force for good.
I think your points 1 and 3 are very closely related. Part of an enchanted world is good and evil, and recognizing behaviors and objects as such. Our liberal society no longer treats many actions, lifestyles, etc. as morally serious in any way.
I think the post-liberal turn in politics will naturally bring re-enchantment with it. As people are once again punished for their behaviors and 'rights' are stripped away (against whom depending on the winning side), a politics of good and evil will arise. This is much more conducive to mystical thinking than our current managerialism.
I’m a Catholic and I would also want to know what Protestant re-enchantment looks like.
The Reformations (German, Swiss, English) all did away with a lot of what would be in the realm of Christian enchantment/re-enchantment.
Eager to hear what others think!
I would be interested in hearing what a uniquely Protestant kind of enchantment (or re-enchantment) looks like. Roman Catholic and Orthodox forms seem more obvious, but not really compatible with Protestant theology. Symbolism (and what it means for something to be a symbol) seems to me to be the most important thing. It's strange that Baptists (and other low church types) views on what we call the ordinances are often dismissed as "mere" symbolism. Only disenchanted people think of symbolism as "mere".