It takes a special kind of man to hear a woman say that women are treated differently , then cut her off mid-sentence by yelling at her that she’s wrong.
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Jordan Peterson's daughter just called him out for retweeting a woman who tweeted sentiments that women should not be allowed to vote. This video is incredibly timely, as Jordan has become one of those people seeking to subjugate women.
No, they’re not. People who explicitly bash on Peterson and his work, in totem, are fools without discernment. He is frequently extremely insightful in his field of clinical psychology, and he has an incredible teaching talent.
Every time I hear Jordan Peterson saying something I'm struck by how arrogant and how wrong he is. His apparently good intentions made it difficult for me to see this at first.
Yes, you are right. JP’s first tactic if you like, is to speak very loudly and use words like ‘rubbish’ and ‘stupid’ when referencing someone else’s ideas. Ben is calm, brilliant, respectful and knowledgeable and is not intimidated by people like JP.
@@richyburnett i could, but why waste my time? I find that when people issue these off the cuff challenges, it's usually just to waste my time since they rarely come back to acknowledge my reply, and if they do it's usually just to ignore what I said and assert some dogma instead. Do your own research, I say, and let your own confirmation biases sort out the mess.
What do you mean. He said men and women are made in the image of god! Great quote, since we have roles. I ain’t no Christian , and I agree with the Bible of a patriarchal society since men and women aren’t equal!
0:00 I never realised until this moment how much Jordan Peterson sounds like an anguished Kermit the Frog. I've heard of it, I've just never noticed it "on a biblical basis".
When in fact it shouldn't even give him the authority to speak on psychology, as most psychologists and neurologists do not take his Jungian approach seriously.
You canadian academics should stop whining an crying about JBP and instead help him prevent Canada's civilisational collapse. Oh wait that's exactly what crooks and pseuds like you are working towards. Nevermind then, keep distracting yourself by sniffling over things JBP says 😂
it's because he speaks on a lot of topics outside his wheelhouse. This is not to he doesn't have a right to his opinions and the freedom to express them, but outside psychology, JBP is not an expert on things like Biblical scholarship.
The lack of honesty about what the Bible says and religious leaders failure to acknowledge harmful ideas and their willingness to include those harmful ideas in how they treat others is a huge reason why religion is dying.
@@scambammer6102Anglican have the highest iq on average bud. Coming from a secular, I’m just being honest. It’s so easy to understand why religious is dying and I’m waiting till I see someone who actually is correct, btw it happen multiple time in history to give you a hint!
Brilliant form of expressing it. It is like dismissing and abusing harmful relationships by saying there was never physical violence involved, giving chance to a lot of psychologically harmful relationships to pass under the radar and be normalized.
It was difficult, but I found a link to the original interview so that people can hear Peterson defend himself on this point. The clip starts at approximately 1:52:00 I would like to point out that Peterson uses and interprets the Bible through the lens of a archetypal story, and he is here defending himself in that context. He says that the Genesis statement that women will be ruled over by men does not say that it is what is right, but simply that it is what will inevitably happen because women are vulnerable due to child bearing. He says it’s a warning. He also points out the many heroic females in the Old Testament, and that he sees no evidence that women are any less worthy of the Kingdom of God. As he has said in a different context, (paraphrasing) he does not dispute that women have been oppressed throughout history, but he will point out that MOST people were oppressed throughout history. I know for a fact we can point out passages in the Bible that can be used to condone the subjugation of vast amounts of people. It is a human document, after all, which has been used throughout history to enforce the power of those who controlled it (this creator’s videos reveal many instances of that.) Again, in a larger context he is defending himself and his own interpretation of the Bible, as the interviewer is implying that by referencing it at all he is appearing to be against women, which is why he is so emotional here. Being misinterpreted as an uncaring and oppressive figure is very frustrating and insulting. ruclips.net/video/1ruwVc0t2c0/видео.html
Wow, JP really lost his cool here and got rather aggressive about the question. Of course, he cites his favorite verse and ignores the dozens of examples and verses which show the exact opposite, as he hates those other verses. Delusional dissonance.
For those confused by comments about his gratiing voice; to be clear, JP is an intellectual lightweight, a stealer and lazy rehasher of much more brilliant minds and theories. JP woldn't know an original thought if it came by and filled him with helium. Anyhoo ... his voice indicates far too often, he is not to be trusted.
@@chrisfriel2003 He is not stealing nothing.He just uses the wisdom of great minds to help lost people in this world(and its working pretty well).Dont be so harsh on his voice bc he cant control it.
@@dadoprso8266 I do not agree with you. JP’s thinking is parochial, and, quite frankly, science, culture and thought have already moved past most of what he professes to be profound knowledge. He demonstrates in debate he has no solid position, and waves like a reed in the current. JP is far behind the times in serious thinking, and that makes his pronouncements facile to dangerous.
@@chrisfriel2003 Well,what do you mean by parochial.He has very good stance when it comes to Bible.I wouldnt say that he has no solid position,he has very solid position on almost every subject because he needs to have to teach others.He is scientist,his foundation of ideas is science and nothing is proved by science against his ideas(if you think it is,can you give me an example)
There are multiple verses in the bible that contradict one another. So at the end of the day it's a matter of how you want to think of Christian teachings, not how they "are" or "aren't"
@@basedgamerguy818if Dan would watch JBPs actual content rather than highly condensed short clips, he might've picked up that JBP apparently understands more about the Bible, Dan just memorises a bunch of trivia to bore ppl with on parties he doesnt get invited to anymore
Well if both men and women were made in the image of God that must meant hat god has features of both men and women, that God is non-binary. I wonder how that squares with Peterson's other beliefs.
How can it be considered to give cover to these people when it apparently contradicts their bible-based assertion of woman subodination? It would be great if you could give more explanation about this point.
It gives cover by Validating this false-asserted and/or falsely-implied interpretation that "God was For genuine equality all along", because that allows most of them to Continue Justifying Their Ignoring of the inconvenient & Contradictory Parts... while they Still use and rely upon a Bible that expressly Still Contains those parts... which can result in people of their ideological-bent eventually arguing (Of the Subjugation of Women) "Look, it's not INequality, it's just what God said, so it MUST Be Equality by virtue of Being God's Word." at any point in the future without internal strife, pushback, or criticism.
Dan - Good stuff. Can you direct me to a video where you share you own story? Maybe that's outisde the realm of what you do, but I'm interested in your migration/development as a thinker.
Jordan Peterson’s is not a reasonable, credible or even balanced human being hardly worth even addressing his crap. It is a Peterson Performance, and it is ridiculous.
"Apostles" made me very happy. There's an idea that the women stayed with Jesus as he died because they wouldn't be killed by the Romans like the men, (this is very specious and ahistorical reasoning), but I've always thought it was because he was the only man t who actually treated them like full human beings.
I think it was just, that was the most-convenient & most-likely thing for the story. The women were often treated as little more than petty servants assigned to tedious (but "lesser") tasks, like housekeeping, preparing meals, feeding prisoners, attending the wounds of the injured, or cleaning and decorating tombs.
@@maxghost1766 The mind, mentality, and perception of the individuals of the time. I didn't say they were inherently or literally lesser tasks, I even put the word lesser in quotations for that matter. The men of that time & place, the leaders and ideologues, quite likely saw those tasks largely as menial chores that were utterly beneath them.
Oh my god it's not even a fair or decent fight The knight is just pounding on him, landing blow after blow It's like some kind of joke I'm sorry if this is weird I'm super high right now This has been so entertaining Gandalf versus the ball rog
Oh my god this is so great I think I'm going to make an effort to get really high and just comment on people's RUclips channels that I support to try to attract attention and get them support because I think they're doing great things This is so important I should start doing it routinely immediately, just try to make the world a better and happier place while attracting attention to someone who's a worthy ally It's like three for the price of one except I can't remember what the one was Sorry I'm super high man
Oh my god it's like three for one man I can't remember what that sentence means But I think this is going to be something like combining to positives or something and supplementing each other Man I sure hope so this is awesome
I don't take Peterson's views seriously, but I'm not sure if I fully agree with your argument. Maybe I don't fully understand it though. Maybe it's a bit too complex for a five-minute video to convey.
Dan makes a really good point here about the fact that when people negotiate the bible to their interpretation there is danger when they do it in a way to suggest univocality of the bible. This does cause people to ignore the harm caused by those who intentionally or unintentionally follow the bibles teachings and end up subordinating women, or end up saying homosexuality is against the bible, and so on. The cover up is real!
Magic works because we are all made in the image of God according to Grimoire tradition and Magdalene is the ultimate Christian and the successor of Jesus by some gnostic traditions.
The comments on this video are wild. A lot of people upset at you claiming the Bible has misogynistic scripture. I thought it was straightforward and simple to understand.
Because Dan sucks at reading comprehension and labels things incorrectly with too much haste. And that haste is because he wants to virtue signal. What true christian thinks virtue signalling is a good idea?
The bible also says women cannot be preachers or hold any position of authority in the church, which clearly is a violation of his ideology of equality. Basically the gospels tells women to be silent. This imo is not from God, as Paul himself is not a prophet. It's not like God told him to say all this stuff. Not everything in the bible is of divine origin. Unless the verse begins with God said or Jesus said, that verse is not of divine origin. Even many Rabbis admit, that many of the books of the old testament were not of divine origin.
Funny didn't Paul say he even he said so therefore Paul spoken Paul's name, you don't know what God thinks because men have been telling you for years what God thinks but how do they know 🤔
it's no mockery, it's a guideline for how to do church gatherings: Orderly, man prophesy one by one, others must be shut, and women should not teach or prophesy at all. churches that go astray and allow unbiblical things go bad, see NAR churches.
@@alanx4121 lol...In Judaism we have seven women profits esses who were Judges advisors like Debora.. Paul in your new testament tells them to sit down shut up bytch thing not us .. LoL
There is a lot here, you should do a separate video nothing to do with JP, just talking about the meaning of the "image of God" line. I've never heard the thing you mention, and ave been interested in what that line means for years, it's very interesting. The information you are providing regarding that line is not well known at all. Can you give some sources that you got your understanding from?
Hello - Can you please help me with this function definition? Does it appear correct to you? FinishSchool : SetofMaleWhiteNarcissists -> SetofMaleWhiteNarcissists FinishSchool(Russel Brand) = Jordan Peterson Thanks
Jordan Peterson can vehemently defend the Bible, but ask him if he believes in God and you won't get a straight answer. As far as I can see, religion (in other people) is something that is useful to him, not something he follows himself.
This isn’t really saying anything. You’re saying that you agree that Christianity brought about an innovation of expanding divinity to not just the King but to individuals and it’s an expansion of ancient Asian beliefs. You’re upset that there’s misogynistic people out there misinterpreting the Bible? And that they avoid hard to discuss topics about Gods word? Yeah that is very upsetting and it should be discussed but that fails to take away the fact that Christianity brought about individual sovereignty for all. More so I don’t know what this has to do with @JordanPeterson unless he’s just being used for click bait. If your point is that people avoid discussing the hard to defend passages he doesn’t avoid those. There’s like 30 hours of lectures on Genesis and Exodus. People who avoid answering questions don’t do that.
Bad rebuttal, don't hate on JBP just because you dont understand what hes trying to say. "Hurdur curse of Eve" is more a description than a prescription, thats implicit in the text. Unsubscribe
If you want to know how defensive and insecure Jordan Peterson is, watch the RUclips video entitled: WHEN SAM HARRIS EXPOSED JORDAN PETERSON'S DISHONESTY. Just a few seconds in, when the audience applauds Harris' criticism of JBP, instead of rebutting what Sam has said, he turns and gets snarky with the audience.
I think being around religious people in a church setting or a small group setting with other likeminded people trying their hardest to be the best people they can be is really positive for anyone. I encourage all to seek out positive people in their life and seek Jesus. That said, dismissing certain things that the Bible says that we deem harmful today in order to save face is not right. We should openly discuss biblical scripture and our interpretations of them. Rather than do what Peterson did which was flail like a baby and start whining that the interviewer is insulting his religion. No topic should be off limits.
If an ignorant interviewer is trying to spread bad ideas, you shut them up & down. That's what JBP did. A little vermin interviewer tried to vomit her own agenda onto JBP, JBP wiped it off. If the interviewer wanted to learn, they could ask a theologian
Peterson's method is also how he talks about racism. He finds one exception and that takes precedence over the mountain of documents, laws and experiences of the folks experiencing its effects.
A quick reading of Genisis teaches that as a result of Adam and Eve's sin "MEN WILL RULE OVER YOU" about women. Something of note is that is NOT how GOD designed it or wanted it just a result of humans thinking they know better than YAHWEH!!!
book of Thomas was proven to be a forgery. its why it didn't get into the bible. for one this contradicts Mary and also the person most likely wrote this to try and trick women out of Christianity. In early Christianity, a lot of the earlier followers were women and they were persecuted and sadly killed because they said they were equal in the eyes of God.
This is why i will always be thankful for the Mary’s in the bible and the two feminine figures we have listed as disciples. True or not at least the turn started taking place and we have something to use to argue women are just as important when talking to some bible noob
Also, interestingly, the "father" of prot😂estantism, Martin Luther, when asked " Why do girls mature quicker than boys stated " because weeds grow quicker than flowers ".
This is stupid, to all you claiming Jordan Peterson is a terrible person. I don't this you have listened to him ever and I also think that you don't understand his message.
It is a big mistake to attribute anything in Genesis to "P". The P author is characterized by atrocious writing, repetitions, legalistic concern with instructions, and various minutia. There is not a single (good) story written by the P. author(s). The narrative of Aaron's relatives (son? I forget) being consumed by fire after offering sacrifice in a wrong way is an example of a P narrative, it's AWFUL, it doesn't have any of the interiority or genuine emotion of the writing of Genesis. In addition, the line "male and female created them" is from the J chapter anyway. The first chapter is by the "E" author, NOT by the "P" author, and any modern attempt to change authorship from what was identified in the 19th century (more or less exactly correctly) by Wellhausen is misguided. This is a terrible mistake in modern scholarship, as opposed to scholarship of half a century ago, the complete tone-deafness to literary style when doing documentary separation.
Any truth to symbolism of the rib to form the woman Eve being evidence of equality or oneness? Also, I've heard the creation gets progressively more "good" until it ends with man being created and finally the highest creation of women? I've heard both arguments be made to teach about female value.
Sounds rather dubious to me, it seems more-likely (imo) that the idea that the first woman was made from the rib of man... was a clear & distinctive Message, meant to imply a sense of Demotion, to tell women that they were the 'Lessers' because they were "Only just a Small Part of Man" and were "Made not just From, but also FOR, Man". And this seems to be further paralleled in the idea that the first woman was the Main One to Blame (aside from the Snake) for "the Fall"; and this would have enabled the men of their primitive culture & society to Guilt and Shame Women into Submission (i.e. "It's YOUR [Womanly] Fault that We're Like This!").
@@TechySeven yeah, she broke the law because she was deceived. Men and women aren’t equal in anything but value. What’s so hard to understand about this?
@@yeboscrebo4451 Law? You mean your 'god's command for them to Obey? The very kind of thing that Someone LACKING Knowledge of Good & Evil would Literally be Incapable of Doing Properly?! And she was not really even deceived either. The snake told her she wouldn't die if she ate the fruit, she ate it and didn't die. Whereas your 'god' told them that they Would "surely die" if they did, so if anything, the only one that Really 'deceived' them was 'god'. And then he goes on to get Angry, Upset, and Fearful about what amounts to innocently-ignorant babies Failing to PROPERLY Obey, and unjustly punishes them for having been INCAPABLE of Understanding "Obey God = Good" and "DISOBEY God = Bad". What's so hard to understand about this?
@@TechySeven Lol. You’re not a thinker are ya? Yes, their creator’s commands are the law. Please explain how it makes one iota of difference that eve didn’t have knowledge of good and evil. You don’t have to understand why a commandment is given in order to obey it obviously. If daddy says don’t touch the hot stove, you don’t have to know what a hot stove feels like in order to just trust and obey daddy (maybe YOU do). You’re forgetting that they were told they would die “in the day thereof” - you’re conveniently forgetting that part. Do some research on the meaning of the word from which the translated “day” was derived. It’ll be enlightening to you.
@@yeboscrebo4451 *//"Lol. You’re not a thinker are ya?"//* Says the one "Lol"ing and deliberately & blatantly needing to resort to the posing of a question purely for the sake of insult/belittling. *//"Please explain how it makes one iota of difference that eve didn’t have knowledge of good and evil."//* I already did that, perhaps you weren't paying attention?! *//"If daddy says don’t touch the hot stove, you don’t have to know what a hot stove feels like in order to just trust and obey daddy (maybe YOU do)."//* A literal innocently-ignorant child would be Literally Incapable of Understanding. Much like how you seem to be incapable of understanding the issue here. *//"Do some research on the meaning of the word from which the translated “day” was derived. It’ll be enlightening to you."// Been there, done that. Wouldn't be here if I hadn't already. Still irrelevant to [Most of] my point(s). *//"You’re forgetting that they were told they would die “in the day thereof” - you’re conveniently forgetting that part."//* Didn't forget at all. I said 'day', just as the Exact Same as modern english-translated bibles read it as. Also, Still irrelevant to my overall argument. Think of it like this: Either: A) Adam & Eve were INTENDED to Eventually Die from the Very Start (even Prior to Eating the Fruit). OR... B) Adam & Eve were Originally INTENDED to Live Eternity. Guess which one Fits the Story?!? Hint: It's NOT B. 'God' says to the "Council of Gods" essentially that "If they remain and Eat from the Tree of Life (a 'Tree' Not Mentioned Until that Point), they will Become Like Us, They Will Become As Gods." and that was supposed to be the "Catalyst" for their Being Booted From the 'Garden', because WITH Their 'Knowledge of Good & Evil' they MIGHT Then Desire Immortality, and the "Gods" felt Threatened by That Idea. They were never INTENDED to Live Forever to Begin With, Otherwise the 'Gods' Wouldn't Have Felt Threatened, or Worried, About that Possibility.
One or two passages providing an illusory reference to equality between men and women DO NOT erase tens of references stating the opposite in no uncertain terms.
If, while reading Harry Potter, you never realise that you need to read through the whole collection of books to get the entirety of the story and the natural conclusion of the story, you might come up with conclusions that Harry is poor, is not loved, that he is in love with Granger, that Snape is the bad guy and all other incorrect conclusions, because you are refusing to see the evolution of the text and what it is leading towards. Although those things might seem to be true, temporarily (especially when taken out of context), you soon realise that the assumption is short sighted, myopic and incorrect and lacks global and universal scope.
@@helenbarrett6451 this statement arguably makes those books more comparable to the Bible. The books of the Bible were not originally intended to be (as McClellan would say) univocal
using your analogy, Jesus is a mass murdering theocratic monster... Have you ever read the entirety of the bible? Jesus - “I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works“ Again, using your analogy only a dim witted simpleton would think of Jesus as mild and loving having "incorrect conclusions, because you are refusing to see the evolution of the text and what it is leading towards." "Although those things might seem to be true, temporarily (especially when taken out of context), you soon realise that the assumption is short sighted, myopic and incorrect and lacks global and universal scope." It appears to me that you are failing to grasp a fundamental truth about the Bible - that it is an amalgamation of diverse texts, composed by different individuals with varying ideas and viewpoints over time. By attempting to forcefully unify them into a single narrative, you are not only disregarding the individual perspectives of each author but also fabricating a new viewpoint that is entirely disconnected from their original intentions.
The idea that people get “the” meaning of the Bible by “reading it in its entirety” it’s mistaken. Unlike Harry Potter, the Bible was not written by a single Author, who takes us through several books until we get to the satisfactory end; it was not even a series of books written by an author and ghost writers, as some franchises are. The Bible is the name given to collections of books that have been compiled, which had several authors with completely different views and agendas throughout. And most readers of the Bible construct their interpretations (negotiates them, as McClellan says), by emphasizing some passages and ignoring others. You can’t even make the case that the passages subordinating women to men are in the older texts, and that this stops in the more recent ones. JP here is acting like any other preacher or theologian making the case for his favorite interpretation of the Bible: he is skipping the parts that he finds inconvenient for his narrative. He can do that, but it is disingenuous to imply that other interpretations that directly contradict his ones have no basis on the texts (and their contexts).
I think the issue is the false traditions of the fathers. Today, the false tradition is sola scriptura. In my opinion, that doctrine gives liberty to anyone to take parts of the bible and teach however they wish, either for slavery or against it, either for women's rights or against it. This is why revelation and an open canon is so important. The issue of circumcision is a great example, for centuries it was a practice, but then came Peter and had a revelation, did that stop people from believing in the need for it right away? No… just my two cents.
I'd like to ask people who say the Bible doesn't demean women, "What's is the name of Lot's wife according to the Bible?" Because she wasn't even bothered to be given a name.
this has a very simple reason. Women were treated less then dirt back then. No one would of listened to the women at all and most likely would of straight up killed them. For example many of the early Christians were women and they were persecuted and killed because the men of the time couldn't deal with the fact that the creator of the universe (Jesus) said that men and women are equal. I think the problem with the bible is that we are reading a lot of it with us not being around at the time and people love to cherry pick bible verses. I believe anyone who met Jesus would of definitely said Jesus was no way in any shape of form a misogynist. Women loved and followed Jesus because he gave them hope, unconditional love and truth in what they felt at the time, which was their unfair treatment by a lot of people. My overall view of the bible is that its actually aimed at men more then women. I believe in society men are the bigger issues due to their pride, aggression due to being physically stronger and finally their entitlement. How many times has the bible been used by men to do horrific things? countless times. The best example of this is this "patriarchy" nonsense that Christian men (some and mainly political) throw around. its really easy to debunk. the simple debunk is that you can throw their logic back at them and say if men hold the responsibility then they forfeit there stance on a "patriarchy" is the only way society can stand because they just admitted technically that men are the root issue to all of the problems through history due to them holding the responsibility. Meaning men have to do better. I will stop now because idek if you are going to read all of this.
Not so fast…. A female slave can be considered worth far less than a male slave easily in a time when physical Labour and endurance is necessary for the running of a household or a farm for example. This is not a guaranteed example of subjugation, it’s an assignment of value based upon the application and endurance of ability to serve for example. Ancient people were not stupid. Female slavescould make you comfortable or be supportive they could of course Labour to a degree, but men can earn you money through enforced labour. There are a myriad of arguments that can be concocted against this but it’s a perfectly reasonable and logical claim. People who are already subjugated are not valued by their gender arbitrarily. This is a weak argument.
This is a generalisation as evidenced by women in the labour workforce today holding their own with men. You're making excuses for your Bible's nonsense.
@revilo178 Cool. Let me grant you the win on strength and resilience, at least commonly enough to justify a price difference. We're still talking about chattel slavery and the OP above specifically states they "could make you comfortable". We all know what that means. Sucks to be a woman in the ancient world, with no exception for women living under the supposed laws of the Hebrew God.
Take Paul’s writing out of the Bible and yeah, he’d be right the Bible does not say the things as Paul says of women. But the minute you put Paul’s writing in there the first thing he does is put chains on women. While Yeshua freed women, Paul’s first actions are to tell women shut up and stay at home. Women can't teach, lead., talk in church. Paul lies throughout his writings, and even Ephesus rejected him. Ephesus is considered Asia. Go look up in Revelation about that! They knew who Paul the Kenite was.
Yeah I was disappointed in Peterson on this one. Women are subordinated to men just as the body should be subordinated to the spirit. One is above the other. Just admit it. The gospel is pretty clear on the subject.
Jason . Because J.Peterson is in a dialogue with somone else . He's passionately argueing his point . Dan -whoever- has the luxury of delivering his spiel with no pushback . Editing it if need be , and working from a prepared script .
@@deanoverlie224 except the person Peterson's speaking with is speaking calmly so there's no need for the yelling. It's obviously an intimidation tactic.
@@jasonclayton4470 this is why I very rarely respond on social media . For your own reasons you see modulation of tone and volume to express passion as " intimidation " . Sorry for you . I don't know wether or not you've seen the whole interview , but Jordon Peterson neither leaned into the interviewers space , didn't clench his fists, didn't snarl .... Exhibited NO physical signs of intimidation in an adversarial interview situation . He was however passionate about his position . If you don't ( or can't ) see the difference I would like to submit that perhaps you spend an inordinate amount of time on social media . It ain't healthy . Don't hurt yourself . [ see my opening sentence ]
![[DOKKAN BATTLE] Worldwide Campaign Announcement Video Part 2!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JpT5Voak6WA/mqdefault.jpg)
It takes a special kind of man to hear a woman say that women are treated differently , then cut her off mid-sentence by yelling at her that she’s wrong.
Maybe that's why he's so popular among misogynists.
other than biologically, I would not even describe him as a man: or a gentleman, at least
It's not all that special, it's actually pretty common.
What's special is to hear her out, to understand and sympathize.
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
@@alanx4121crazy, right?
"Phenomenally harmful and Phenomenally ignorant" - a perfect description of Peterson
Jordan Peterson's daughter just called him out for retweeting a woman who tweeted sentiments that women should not be allowed to vote.
This video is incredibly timely, as Jordan has become one of those people seeking to subjugate women.
Do you have any links to his daughter calling him out?
@@pythondrinkRUclips doesn't allow links. Best to do an internet search to find what you are looking for.
@@pythondrink A woman forwarded the idea that women shouldn't be allowed to vote. Obviously she already recognizes that her voice doesn't count.
@@christasimon9716 you mean Pearl the tradcon? Yh I was already aware of that.
This is what happens when you go down the catholic rabbit hole dude. Similar thing occured with Candace Owens...
"Phenomenally harmful and phenomenally ignorant" is all the words you need to describe Jordan Peterson.
We can reduce it to "idiot". Unfortunately, Jordan Petersen followers are even stupider than their idiot "philosopher"
@@gangstadrz9326 He is an expert in Jungian psychology, but that field is pretty much bullshit so his knowledge there may do more harm than good.
@@scidog6535 you're right, he's not ignorant, he's malicious
A much needed response from someone who has actually studied the topic in dept !
No, they’re not. People who explicitly bash on Peterson and his work, in totem, are fools without discernment. He is frequently extremely insightful in his field of clinical psychology, and he has an incredible teaching talent.
Every time I hear Jordan Peterson saying something I'm struck by how arrogant and how wrong he is. His apparently good intentions made it difficult for me to see this at first.
Yes, you are right. JP’s first tactic if you like, is to speak very loudly and use words like ‘rubbish’ and ‘stupid’ when referencing someone else’s ideas. Ben is calm, brilliant, respectful and knowledgeable and is not intimidated by people like JP.
Can you give a good example of this?
@@richyburnett i could, but why waste my time? I find that when people issue these off the cuff challenges, it's usually just to waste my time since they rarely come back to acknowledge my reply, and if they do it's usually just to ignore what I said and assert some dogma instead.
Do your own research, I say, and let your own confirmation biases sort out the mess.
@@integrationalpolytheismtalk the talk, walk the walk, you polytheist pagan
What do you mean. He said men and women are made in the image of god! Great quote, since we have roles. I ain’t no Christian , and I agree with the Bible of a patriarchal society since men and women aren’t equal!
0:00 I never realised until this moment how much Jordan Peterson sounds like an anguished Kermit the Frog. I've heard of it, I've just never noticed it "on a biblical basis".
Incell Kermit, as he's affectionately known
Agreed. He’s definitely a problematic muppet.
J Peterson is an embarrasment to us Canadian academics. He thinks his degree in psychology gives him authority to address any subject without contest.
When in fact it shouldn't even give him the authority to speak on psychology, as most psychologists and neurologists do not take his Jungian approach seriously.
Jordan Peterson cries more than a 10 year old girl. He sounds like Kermit the frogs shy cousin.
You canadian academics should stop whining an crying about JBP and instead help him prevent Canada's civilisational collapse. Oh wait that's exactly what crooks and pseuds like you are working towards. Nevermind then, keep distracting yourself by sniffling over things JBP says 😂
It is astounding how JP manages to be consistently wrong about everything he talks about
I think he practices a lot in front of a mirror
it's because he speaks on a lot of topics outside his wheelhouse. This is not to he doesn't have a right to his opinions and the freedom to express them, but outside psychology, JBP is not an expert on things like Biblical scholarship.
Im astounded you would think that...its bizarre
Yet his fans think he is some sort of super-genius. I just think of him as the "old man yells at clouds" guy.
The lack of honesty about what the Bible says and religious leaders failure to acknowledge harmful ideas and their willingness to include those harmful ideas in how they treat others is a huge reason why religion is dying.
“Religion is dying”
LOLOLOLOLOL
Men are only suppose to rule their wives not ever woman on earth. It's about marriage. The way you guys think is disgusting.
what the bible actually says is a bigger reason
@@dorothysay8327 he probably means among people with an IQ over 50
@@scambammer6102Anglican have the highest iq on average bud. Coming from a secular, I’m just being honest. It’s so easy to understand why religious is dying and I’m waiting till I see someone who actually is correct, btw it happen multiple time in history to give you a hint!
Brilliant form of expressing it. It is like dismissing and abusing harmful relationships by saying there was never physical violence involved, giving chance to a lot of psychologically harmful relationships to pass under the radar and be normalized.
Every time I listen to one of your videos I just want to yell BOOM every 3 seconds. So good.
You are a great speaker. Well Put !!
Excellent. Thank you. I appreciate your efforts very much.
I liked the npc comparison
Goddamn, how I would love for you to debate Jordan Peterson or even have a cordial discussion with him.
why prop up Peterson just ignore him
@@slink721 how many times do you need to see BS before you move on? There are potential non BS things I could be looking at.
@@slink721 you don't think there is anything better you could do with your time than watch jordan peterson?
@@slink721 One can know Jordan Peterson is a moron without being closed to reasonable debate. I'm still talking to YOU after all. Think. Better.
@@scambammer6102Yes, don't engage him, CANCEL HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It was difficult, but I found a link to the original interview so that people can hear Peterson defend himself on this point. The clip starts at approximately 1:52:00
I would like to point out that Peterson uses and interprets the Bible through the lens of a archetypal story, and he is here defending himself in that context. He says that the Genesis statement that women will be ruled over by men does not say that it is what is right, but simply that it is what will inevitably happen because women are vulnerable due to child bearing. He says it’s a warning. He also points out the many heroic females in the Old Testament, and that he sees no evidence that women are any less worthy of the Kingdom of God.
As he has said in a different context, (paraphrasing) he does not dispute that women have been oppressed throughout history, but he will point out that MOST people were oppressed throughout history. I know for a fact we can point out passages in the Bible that can be used to condone the subjugation of vast amounts of people. It is a human document, after all, which has been used throughout history to enforce the power of those who controlled it (this creator’s videos reveal many instances of that.)
Again, in a larger context he is defending himself and his own interpretation of the Bible, as the interviewer is implying that by referencing it at all he is appearing to be against women, which is why he is so emotional here. Being misinterpreted as an uncaring and oppressive figure is very frustrating and insulting.
ruclips.net/video/1ruwVc0t2c0/видео.html
Wow, JP really lost his cool here and got rather aggressive about the question. Of course, he cites his favorite verse and ignores the dozens of examples and verses which show the exact opposite, as he hates those other verses. Delusional dissonance.
JP’s voice is like nails on a blackboard.
Thanks you for this video.
For those confused by comments about his gratiing voice; to be clear, JP is an intellectual lightweight, a stealer and lazy rehasher of much more brilliant minds and theories. JP woldn't know an original thought if it came by and filled him with helium. Anyhoo ... his voice indicates far too often, he is not to be trusted.
@@chrisfriel2003 He is not stealing nothing.He just uses the wisdom of great minds to help lost people in this world(and its working pretty well).Dont be so harsh on his voice bc he cant control it.
@@dadoprso8266 I do not agree with you. JP’s thinking is parochial, and, quite frankly, science, culture and thought have already moved past most of what he professes to be profound knowledge. He demonstrates in debate he has no solid position, and waves like a reed in the current. JP is far behind the times in serious thinking, and that makes his pronouncements facile to dangerous.
@@chrisfriel2003 Well,what do you mean by parochial.He has very good stance when it comes to Bible.I wouldnt say that he has no solid position,he has very solid position on almost every subject because he needs to have to teach others.He is scientist,his foundation of ideas is science and nothing is proved by science against his ideas(if you think it is,can you give me an example)
Thanks for your content.
very insightful, thanks
You should collaborate with the channel Religion for Breakfast!
JP lost it during his serious illness. He came back totally crazy.
There are multiple verses in the bible that contradict one another. So at the end of the day it's a matter of how you want to think of Christian teachings, not how they "are" or "aren't"
OTOH there are lots of verses in the bible that are very clear and disgusting
That's what Dan points out. The Bible isn't univocal. You can always pick out 1 example to support whatever you're saying
@@basedgamerguy818if Dan would watch JBPs actual content rather than highly condensed short clips, he might've picked up that JBP apparently understands more about the Bible, Dan just memorises a bunch of trivia to bore ppl with on parties he doesnt get invited to anymore
@@Crocalu Spot the Peterson fan.
In today's digital world we think of "image" simply as a picture, but I like how you explain how that word represents much more.
Well if both men and women were made in the image of God that must meant hat god has features of both men and women, that God is non-binary. I wonder how that squares with Peterson's other beliefs.
That line doesn’t mean we look like God dude.
In the Bible God is likened to a mother at least twice. In the books of Proverbs and the Wisdom of Solomon the spirit of God speaks in the feminine.
"Phenomenally harmful and phenomenally ignorant" perfectly describes Peterson.
Once again, JP gets out of his lane...smh.
To be fair, he isn't good when he stays in his lane either, as his lane is Jungian pseudoscientific bullshit.
I used to enjoy a little JP but once he got onto the Bible and supposing he is an authority he lost me.
Jordan Petersen has a doctorate in everything, including drug abuse.
" what my arguement is..."
What his arguement is , is a stunning example of " presentism " .
Notice how in most vids, Dan tells us not to harass the creator featured... I didn't notice it this time and I'm here for it.
How can it be considered to give cover to these people when it apparently contradicts their bible-based assertion of woman subodination? It would be great if you could give more explanation about this point.
It gives cover by Validating this false-asserted and/or falsely-implied interpretation that "God was For genuine equality all along", because that allows most of them to Continue Justifying Their Ignoring of the inconvenient & Contradictory Parts... while they Still use and rely upon a Bible that expressly Still Contains those parts... which can result in people of their ideological-bent eventually arguing (Of the Subjugation of Women) "Look, it's not INequality, it's just what God said, so it MUST Be Equality by virtue of Being God's Word." at any point in the future without internal strife, pushback, or criticism.
that's not what he said
Dan forgets the difference between descriptive and prescriptive.
Divorce as only initiating from men.
Dan - Good stuff. Can you direct me to a video where you share you own story? Maybe that's outisde the realm of what you do, but I'm interested in your migration/development as a thinker.
You could google his old blog there's a lot to read there
JP talks to people inconvenient to his narrative the same way an abuser speaks to the abused.
Jordan Peterson’s is not a reasonable, credible or even balanced human being hardly worth even addressing his crap. It is a Peterson Performance, and it is ridiculous.
JP is very, very, very good at sounding smart and educated to people who are neither
Peterson must of not read the bible.
😂 you should read it instead of listening to this clown channel 😅 Danny's a bit of a dk 😊
@@brentmathie7345 I have read it 😁
you must not read mein kampf or das kapital
Yep. That's Jordan. Phenomenally harmful and phenomenally ignorant.
Hi, Dan. Could you comment on NT's stance towards slavery? Nice video.
"Apostles" made me very happy. There's an idea that the women stayed with Jesus as he died because they wouldn't be killed by the Romans like the men, (this is very specious and ahistorical reasoning), but I've always thought it was because he was the only man t who actually treated them like full human beings.
I think it was just, that was the most-convenient & most-likely thing for the story. The women were often treated as little more than petty servants assigned to tedious (but "lesser") tasks, like housekeeping, preparing meals, feeding prisoners, attending the wounds of the injured, or cleaning and decorating tombs.
@@TechySeven what makes those things lesser tasks. They’re all still very helpful and valuable
@@maxghost1766 The mind, mentality, and perception of the individuals of the time. I didn't say they were inherently or literally lesser tasks, I even put the word lesser in quotations for that matter. The men of that time & place, the leaders and ideologues, quite likely saw those tasks largely as menial chores that were utterly beneath them.
paul expressly refers to a couple of woman apostles. they weren't the women who stayed with jesus.
@@scambammer6102 I didn't say otherwise. The point was about how Jesus and some early Christians saw women.
Oh my God Dan McClellan taking down Jordan Peterson
I feel like I'm watching a knight defeat a dragon
This is incredible
Oh my god it's not even a fair or decent fight
The knight is just pounding on him, landing blow after blow
It's like some kind of joke
I'm sorry if this is weird I'm super high right now
This has been so entertaining
Gandalf versus the ball rog
Oh my god this is so great I think I'm going to make an effort to get really high and just comment on people's RUclips channels that I support to try to attract attention and get them support because I think they're doing great things
This is so important I should start doing it routinely immediately, just try to make the world a better and happier place while attracting attention to someone who's a worthy ally
It's like three for the price of one except I can't remember what the one was
Sorry I'm super high man
Oh my god it's like three for one man
I can't remember what that sentence means
But I think this is going to be something like combining to positives or something and supplementing each other
Man I sure hope so this is awesome
"Women should not speak up in church", there for equality.
Whenever Peterson gets out of his lane, it's a cluster f*ck.
JP really should stay in his lane and stick to grifting manchildren with no discipline or common sense.
As always, great vid
I don't take Peterson's views seriously, but I'm not sure if I fully agree with your argument. Maybe I don't fully understand it though. Maybe it's a bit too complex for a five-minute video to convey.
Dan makes a really good point here about the fact that when people negotiate the bible to their interpretation there is danger when they do it in a way to suggest univocality of the bible. This does cause people to ignore the harm caused by those who intentionally or unintentionally follow the bibles teachings and end up subordinating women, or end up saying homosexuality is against the bible, and so on. The cover up is real!
2:20 I think that you mean Genesis 1:27 4:00 But what is meant by "renegotiated" here?
Thank you for the insight. I like the both of you, though for very different reasons.
Context matters.
Yep, most people take out a line or two and quote that to support their beliefs, when there is text around those lines that gives more meaning to it.
And the female element of the trinity, the Holy Ghost, plays a distant third fiddle.
Magic works because we are all made in the image of God according to Grimoire tradition and Magdalene is the ultimate Christian and the successor of Jesus by some gnostic traditions.
The comments on this video are wild. A lot of people upset at you claiming the Bible has misogynistic scripture. I thought it was straightforward and simple to understand.
Because Dan sucks at reading comprehension and labels things incorrectly with too much haste. And that haste is because he wants to virtue signal. What true christian thinks virtue signalling is a good idea?
My reading of pistis Sophia is the original sin was spiritual adultery and not taking your coequals feelings into consideration before acting
Peterson plays to what his audience wants to hear.
The bible also says women cannot be preachers or hold any position of authority in the church, which clearly is a violation of his ideology of equality. Basically the gospels tells women to be silent.
This imo is not from God, as Paul himself is not a prophet. It's not like God told him to say all this stuff. Not everything in the bible is of divine origin.
Unless the verse begins with God said or Jesus said, that verse is not of divine origin. Even many Rabbis admit, that many of the books of the old testament were not of divine origin.
1 Corinthians 1 Timothy and 1 Corinthians Women are mocked and told not to speak teach anyone.
Funny didn't Paul say he even he said so therefore Paul spoken Paul's name, you don't know what God thinks because men have been telling you for years what God thinks but how do they know 🤔
it's no mockery, it's a guideline for how to do church gatherings: Orderly, man prophesy one by one, others must be shut, and women should not teach or prophesy at all. churches that go astray and allow unbiblical things go bad, see NAR churches.
@@alanx4121 lol...In Judaism we have seven women profits esses who were Judges advisors like Debora..
Paul in your new testament tells them to sit down shut up bytch thing not us ..
LoL
@@alanx4121 Thus, proving the Bible is sexist.
@@brandonontama2415 yeah, because men are men and women are women
I avoid J. Peterson. He comes off like a know-it-all and is very emotional. A little creepy.
I’m not religious at all, but your vast knowledge of literature and theology is awesome. I’m thankful you’ve made these videos. Peterson is insane lol
There is a lot here, you should do a separate video nothing to do with JP, just talking about the meaning of the "image of God" line. I've never heard the thing you mention, and ave been interested in what that line means for years, it's very interesting. The information you are providing regarding that line is not well known at all. Can you give some sources that you got your understanding from?
Careful Dan, you’re upsetting Lobster Daddy’s cult of angry little boys.
Jordan Peterson is such a terrible person to follow on anything regarding the bible
Good gravy, Jordan Peterson’s voice is so strident and aggressive.
If you meant to say, Kermit like then you hit the nail on the head! Lol
Excellent Explanation!
Hello - Can you please help me with this function definition? Does it appear correct to you?
FinishSchool : SetofMaleWhiteNarcissists -> SetofMaleWhiteNarcissists
FinishSchool(Russel Brand) = Jordan Peterson
Thanks
Jordan Peterson can vehemently defend the Bible, but ask him if he believes in God and you won't get a straight answer. As far as I can see, religion (in other people) is something that is useful to him, not something he follows himself.
One question to counter what jp says could be…is a the only thing the Bible says about women?
Jordan is a delusional dude
This isn’t really saying anything. You’re saying that you agree that Christianity brought about an innovation of expanding divinity to not just the King but to individuals and it’s an expansion of ancient Asian beliefs. You’re upset that there’s misogynistic people out there misinterpreting the Bible? And that they avoid hard to discuss topics about Gods word? Yeah that is very upsetting and it should be discussed but that fails to take away the fact that Christianity brought about individual sovereignty for all. More so I don’t know what this has to do with @JordanPeterson unless he’s just being used for click bait. If your point is that people avoid discussing the hard to defend passages he doesn’t avoid those. There’s like 30 hours of lectures on Genesis and Exodus. People who avoid answering questions don’t do that.
Bad rebuttal, don't hate on JBP just because you dont understand what hes trying to say. "Hurdur curse of Eve" is more a description than a prescription, thats implicit in the text. Unsubscribe
If you want to know how defensive and insecure Jordan Peterson is, watch the RUclips video entitled: WHEN SAM HARRIS EXPOSED JORDAN PETERSON'S DISHONESTY. Just a few seconds in, when the audience applauds Harris' criticism of JBP, instead of rebutting what Sam has said, he turns and gets snarky with the audience.
I think being around religious people in a church setting or a small group setting with other likeminded people trying their hardest to be the best people they can be is really positive for anyone. I encourage all to seek out positive people in their life and seek Jesus.
That said, dismissing certain things that the Bible says that we deem harmful today in order to save face is not right. We should openly discuss biblical scripture and our interpretations of them. Rather than do what Peterson did which was flail like a baby and start whining that the interviewer is insulting his religion. No topic should be off limits.
Gal_5:6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision (Jew) availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision (Gentile); but faith which worketh by love.
If an ignorant interviewer is trying to spread bad ideas, you shut them up & down. That's what JBP did. A little vermin interviewer tried to vomit her own agenda onto JBP, JBP wiped it off.
If the interviewer wanted to learn, they could ask a theologian
Peterson's method is also how he talks about racism. He finds one exception and that takes precedence over the mountain of documents, laws and experiences of the folks experiencing its effects.
A quick reading of Genisis teaches that as a result of Adam and Eve's sin "MEN WILL RULE OVER YOU" about women. Something of note is that is NOT how GOD designed it or wanted it just a result of humans thinking they know better than YAHWEH!!!
What about the Book of Thomas with Jesus' statement women will not get into heaven?
book of Thomas was proven to be a forgery. its why it didn't get into the bible. for one this contradicts Mary and also the person most likely wrote this to try and trick women out of Christianity. In early Christianity, a lot of the earlier followers were women and they were persecuted and sadly killed because they said they were equal in the eyes of God.
And I use to regard him high because of his anti wokeness.I think I did not understand him.
This is why i will always be thankful for the Mary’s in the bible and the two feminine figures we have listed as disciples. True or not at least the turn started taking place and we have something to use to argue women are just as important when talking to some bible noob
Also, interestingly, the "father" of prot😂estantism, Martin Luther, when asked " Why do girls mature quicker than boys stated " because weeds grow quicker than flowers ".
This is stupid, to all you claiming Jordan Peterson is a terrible person. I don't this you have listened to him ever and I also think that you don't understand his message.
Lmaooo this was a layup
It is a big mistake to attribute anything in Genesis to "P". The P author is characterized by atrocious writing, repetitions, legalistic concern with instructions, and various minutia. There is not a single (good) story written by the P. author(s). The narrative of Aaron's relatives (son? I forget) being consumed by fire after offering sacrifice in a wrong way is an example of a P narrative, it's AWFUL, it doesn't have any of the interiority or genuine emotion of the writing of Genesis. In addition, the line "male and female created them" is from the J chapter anyway. The first chapter is by the "E" author, NOT by the "P" author, and any modern attempt to change authorship from what was identified in the 19th century (more or less exactly correctly) by Wellhausen is misguided. This is a terrible mistake in modern scholarship, as opposed to scholarship of half a century ago, the complete tone-deafness to literary style when doing documentary separation.
Any truth to symbolism of the rib to form the woman Eve being evidence of equality or oneness? Also, I've heard the creation gets progressively more "good" until it ends with man being created and finally the highest creation of women?
I've heard both arguments be made to teach about female value.
Sounds rather dubious to me, it seems more-likely (imo) that the idea that the first woman was made from the rib of man... was a clear & distinctive Message, meant to imply a sense of Demotion, to tell women that they were the 'Lessers' because they were "Only just a Small Part of Man" and were "Made not just From, but also FOR, Man". And this seems to be further paralleled in the idea that the first woman was the Main One to Blame (aside from the Snake) for "the Fall"; and this would have enabled the men of their primitive culture & society to Guilt and Shame Women into Submission (i.e. "It's YOUR [Womanly] Fault that We're Like This!").
@@TechySeven yeah, she broke the law because she was deceived. Men and women aren’t equal in anything but value. What’s so hard to understand about this?
@@yeboscrebo4451 Law? You mean your 'god's command for them to Obey? The very kind of thing that Someone LACKING Knowledge of Good & Evil would Literally be Incapable of Doing Properly?! And she was not really even deceived either. The snake told her she wouldn't die if she ate the fruit, she ate it and didn't die. Whereas your 'god' told them that they Would "surely die" if they did, so if anything, the only one that Really 'deceived' them was 'god'. And then he goes on to get Angry, Upset, and Fearful about what amounts to innocently-ignorant babies Failing to PROPERLY Obey, and unjustly punishes them for having been INCAPABLE of Understanding "Obey God = Good" and "DISOBEY God = Bad".
What's so hard to understand about this?
@@TechySeven Lol. You’re not a thinker are ya? Yes, their creator’s commands are the law. Please explain how it makes one iota of difference that eve didn’t have knowledge of good and evil. You don’t have to understand why a commandment is given in order to obey it obviously. If daddy says don’t touch the hot stove, you don’t have to know what a hot stove feels like in order to just trust and obey daddy (maybe YOU do). You’re forgetting that they were told they would die “in the day thereof” - you’re conveniently forgetting that part. Do some research on the meaning of the word from which the translated “day” was derived. It’ll be enlightening to you.
@@yeboscrebo4451 *//"Lol. You’re not a thinker are ya?"//*
Says the one "Lol"ing and deliberately & blatantly needing to resort to the posing of a question purely for the sake of insult/belittling.
*//"Please explain how it makes one iota of difference that eve didn’t have knowledge of good and evil."//*
I already did that, perhaps you weren't paying attention?!
*//"If daddy says don’t touch the hot stove, you don’t have to know what a hot stove feels like in order to just trust and obey daddy (maybe YOU do)."//*
A literal innocently-ignorant child would be Literally Incapable of Understanding. Much like how you seem to be incapable of understanding the issue here.
*//"Do some research on the meaning of the word from which the translated “day” was derived. It’ll be enlightening to you."//
Been there, done that. Wouldn't be here if I hadn't already. Still irrelevant to [Most of] my point(s).
*//"You’re forgetting that they were told they would die “in the day thereof” - you’re conveniently forgetting that part."//*
Didn't forget at all. I said 'day', just as the Exact Same as modern english-translated bibles read it as. Also, Still irrelevant to my overall argument.
Think of it like this:
Either: A) Adam & Eve were INTENDED to Eventually Die from the Very Start (even Prior to Eating the Fruit). OR...
B) Adam & Eve were Originally INTENDED to Live Eternity.
Guess which one Fits the Story?!? Hint: It's NOT B. 'God' says to the "Council of Gods" essentially that "If they remain and Eat from the Tree of Life (a 'Tree' Not Mentioned Until that Point), they will Become Like Us, They Will Become As Gods." and that was supposed to be the "Catalyst" for their Being Booted From the 'Garden', because WITH Their 'Knowledge of Good & Evil' they MIGHT Then Desire Immortality, and the "Gods" felt Threatened by That Idea. They were never INTENDED to Live Forever to Begin With, Otherwise the 'Gods' Wouldn't Have Felt Threatened, or Worried, About that Possibility.
Peterson is a bag of hot air. No one can say so much while saying so little than Peterson.
Wow, this guy is smart
One or two passages providing an illusory reference to equality between men and women DO NOT erase tens of references stating the opposite in no uncertain terms.
If, while reading Harry Potter, you never realise that you need to read through the whole collection of books to get the entirety of the story and the natural conclusion of the story, you might come up with conclusions that Harry is poor, is not loved, that he is in love with Granger, that Snape is the bad guy and all other incorrect conclusions, because you are refusing to see the evolution of the text and what it is leading towards. Although those things might seem to be true, temporarily (especially when taken out of context), you soon realise that the assumption is short sighted, myopic and incorrect and lacks global and universal scope.
I don't think she thought out all the books. She just sort of started drinking wine and writing stuff.
@@helenbarrett6451 No one said she did.
@@helenbarrett6451 this statement arguably makes those books more comparable to the Bible. The books of the Bible were not originally intended to be (as McClellan would say) univocal
using your analogy, Jesus is a mass murdering theocratic monster...
Have you ever read the entirety of the bible?
Jesus - “I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works“
Again, using your analogy only a dim witted simpleton would think of Jesus as mild and loving having "incorrect conclusions, because you are refusing to see the evolution of the text and what it is leading towards."
"Although those things might seem to be true, temporarily (especially when taken out of context), you soon realise that the assumption is short sighted, myopic and incorrect and lacks global and universal scope."
It appears to me that you are failing to grasp a fundamental truth about the Bible - that it is an amalgamation of diverse texts, composed by different individuals with varying ideas and viewpoints over time. By attempting to forcefully unify them into a single narrative, you are not only disregarding the individual perspectives of each author but also fabricating a new viewpoint that is entirely disconnected from their original intentions.
The idea that people get “the” meaning of the Bible by “reading it in its entirety” it’s mistaken. Unlike Harry Potter, the Bible was not written by a single Author, who takes us through several books until we get to the satisfactory end; it was not even a series of books written by an author and ghost writers, as some franchises are. The Bible is the name given to collections of books that have been compiled, which had several authors with completely different views and agendas throughout. And most readers of the Bible construct their interpretations (negotiates them, as McClellan says), by emphasizing some passages and ignoring others. You can’t even make the case that the passages subordinating women to men are in the older texts, and that this stops in the more recent ones.
JP here is acting like any other preacher or theologian making the case for his favorite interpretation of the Bible: he is skipping the parts that he finds inconvenient for his narrative. He can do that, but it is disingenuous to imply that other interpretations that directly contradict his ones have no basis on the texts (and their contexts).
so someone who made them selves famous lying about the effects of a law is still lying today , wow
I think the issue is the false traditions of the fathers. Today, the false tradition is sola scriptura. In my opinion, that doctrine gives liberty to anyone to take parts of the bible and teach however they wish, either for slavery or against it, either for women's rights or against it. This is why revelation and an open canon is so important. The issue of circumcision is a great example, for centuries it was a practice, but then came Peter and had a revelation, did that stop people from believing in the need for it right away? No… just my two cents.
I'd like to ask people who say the Bible doesn't demean women, "What's is the name of Lot's wife according to the Bible?" Because she wasn't even bothered to be given a name.
yet s&g is found in that region, there's pure sulfur and ashes everywhere, its on yt
And Jesus chose 12 men to be his disciples not 12 women. That should be very telling.
this has a very simple reason. Women were treated less then dirt back then. No one would of listened to the women at all and most likely would of straight up killed them. For example many of the early Christians were women and they were persecuted and killed because the men of the time couldn't deal with the fact that the creator of the universe (Jesus) said that men and women are equal. I think the problem with the bible is that we are reading a lot of it with us not being around at the time and people love to cherry pick bible verses. I believe anyone who met Jesus would of definitely said Jesus was no way in any shape of form a misogynist. Women loved and followed Jesus because he gave them hope, unconditional love and truth in what they felt at the time, which was their unfair treatment by a lot of people. My overall view of the bible is that its actually aimed at men more then women. I believe in society men are the bigger issues due to their pride, aggression due to being physically stronger and finally their entitlement. How many times has the bible been used by men to do horrific things? countless times. The best example of this is this "patriarchy" nonsense that Christian men (some and mainly political) throw around. its really easy to debunk. the simple debunk is that you can throw their logic back at them and say if men hold the responsibility then they forfeit there stance on a "patriarchy" is the only way society can stand because they just admitted technically that men are the root issue to all of the problems through history due to them holding the responsibility. Meaning men have to do better. I will stop now because idek if you are going to read all of this.
Not so fast…. A female slave can be considered worth far less than a male slave easily in a time when physical Labour and endurance is necessary for the running of a household or a farm for example. This is not a guaranteed example of subjugation, it’s an assignment of value based upon the application and endurance of ability to serve for example.
Ancient people were not stupid. Female slavescould make you comfortable or be supportive they could of course Labour to a degree, but men can earn you money through enforced labour. There are a myriad of arguments that can be concocted against this but it’s a perfectly reasonable and logical claim. People who are already subjugated are not valued by their gender arbitrarily. This is a weak argument.
This is a generalisation as evidenced by women in the labour workforce today holding their own with men. You're making excuses for your Bible's nonsense.
@revilo178 Cool. Let me grant you the win on strength and resilience, at least commonly enough to justify a price difference. We're still talking about chattel slavery and the OP above specifically states they "could make you comfortable". We all know what that means. Sucks to be a woman in the ancient world, with no exception for women living under the supposed laws of the Hebrew God.
Take Paul’s writing out of the Bible and yeah, he’d be right the Bible does not say the things as Paul says of women. But the minute you put Paul’s writing in there the first thing he does is put chains on women. While Yeshua freed women, Paul’s first actions are to tell women shut up and stay at home.
Women can't teach, lead., talk in church. Paul lies throughout his writings, and even Ephesus rejected him. Ephesus is considered Asia. Go look up in Revelation about that! They knew who Paul the Kenite was.
Yes, there bad things in the Bible, too! Not only good things! And a lot of meh!
Yeah I was disappointed in Peterson on this one. Women are subordinated to men just as the body should be subordinated to the spirit. One is above the other. Just admit it. The gospel is pretty clear on the subject.
Please can you have a debate set up with Jordan Peterson. This man is causing so much harm.
Okay but why is Petersen 🤌hollering🤌
Jason .
Because J.Peterson is in a dialogue with somone else . He's passionately argueing
his point .
Dan -whoever- has the luxury of delivering his spiel with no pushback . Editing it if need be , and working from a prepared script .
@@deanoverlie224 except the person Peterson's speaking with is speaking calmly so there's no need for the yelling. It's obviously an intimidation tactic.
@@jasonclayton4470 this is why I very rarely respond on social media .
For your own reasons you see modulation of tone and volume to express passion as
" intimidation " . Sorry for you .
I don't know wether or not you've seen the whole interview , but Jordon Peterson neither leaned into the interviewers space ,
didn't clench his fists, didn't snarl ....
Exhibited NO physical signs of intimidation in an adversarial interview situation .
He was however passionate about his position .
If you don't ( or can't ) see the difference
I would like to submit that perhaps you spend an inordinate amount of time on social media .
It ain't healthy .
Don't hurt yourself .
[ see my opening sentence ]
@@deanoverlie224 oh I absolutely can see the difference between passion and intimidation. I can also see when someone is being an apologist.
Brilliant. I love that you point out the women apostles (in contrast to Bednar who seems to be ignorant on this topic).
Numbers 5:11-31 Jordan!
Plus women were counted as property.