I recently attended a Jordan B. Peterson speaking event at the San Jose Civic. The event was part of a book tour promoting his latest work, Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life. The auditorium was almost completely full, the audience about 85% male, and I spotted only a smattering of Asian Americans. About halfway through his lecture, I realize this an elaborate 75-minute gospel presentation. Gospel as in not only just Peterson’s soapbox but the good news of Jesus Christ. It was gorgeous and awe-inspiring.
Although I'm a pastor, I tire of most gospel presentations including my own. They're like sub-par romantic comedies: formulaic, emotionally manipulative, boring, and trying to be funny but falling woefully short. Worst of all, there's no subtlety; they hit you over the head with a trite message over and over. There's pressure in evangelical culture to present the gospel like a bad romantic comedy. It has to follow the formula. There’s an obligation to use the correct terms, abide by certain principles, and most importantly, cover all the bases - sin, fall, redemption, etc. In gospel proclamation, I value exhaustiveness and accuracy over creativity. It is exhausting.
But on Monday night, Peterson spoke of Christ in a compelling and beautiful way. It was arguably more gospel-saturated than a sermon by Tim Keller, one of evangelicalism's poster children. And yet Peterson's talk wasn't formulaic, boring, or emotionally manipulative. Rather. it risked offending many Christians. It defied evangelical convention. It was creatively inappropriate.
Acceptable Gospel Proclamation
How inappropriate?
First, let's define the boundaries of acceptable gospel proclamation. Many evangelicals would argue that proper gospel proclamation must include terms like sin, death, hell, propitiation/sacrifice, faith, eternal life, and most importantly, praying to receive Jesus in one's heart as LORD and savior. The discussion of sin, evil, and their consequences is extremely important otherwise the crucifixion of Christ has no meaning. The gospel proclaimer must identify as a Christian. Finally, a good gospel proclamation should have a point of decision. That's the purpose of the altar call - the "Come to Jesus moment". In Monday's lecture, Peterson did none of those things.
Peterson never identifies as a follower of Christ. He uses very little Christian jargon. He unabashedly appeals to the right-wing. He does not explicitly mention sin or evil. He opens the lecture with an extended diatribe about Marxism (spoiler alert: he doesn't like Marxism). He doesn’t use the term "faith", "eternal life", and certainly never mentions praying to receive Jesus as LORD and savior. He does not lead an altar call nor does he ask anyone to raise their hands to become a Christian.
Although it was unacceptable in evangelical terms, Peterson's lecture was unequivocally a gospel presentation. In Acts 17, curious Athenians invite the Apostle Paul to speak at the Areopagus in Athens. His gospel presentation does not include any of the above terms though he mentions repentance, judgment, righteousness, and explicitly mentions the resurrection of Christ. If one were to use Paul's speech as a template, gospel proclamation involves touch points with the audience's culture (Paul affirms the Athenian's religiosity), points to the transcendent Creator, explains the nature of evil and judgment, and describes the character and work of Jesus Christ.
Marxism as Ideology
Let's apply the template of Paul's Mars Hill speech to Peterson's lecture. His book tour lecture addressed his latest book’s 6th rule, "Abandon Ideology”. For Peterson, ideology equals Marxism. Peterson attacks Marxism as assuming a zero sum system - a world of limited economic resources where one person's increased consumption decreases the available supply for others. He also attacks the Marxist zero sum power belief that the world only contains two types of people: victims and victimizers.
Within this foray against Marxism, Peterson describes the inadequate explanatory power of psychopathy as the fundamental driver of human behavior. For example, we don't truly believe the founders and heads of enormous multinational corporations are psychopaths. If Jeff Bezos was a psychopath then it would translate in how Amazon is run but we buy from Amazon because it's a good deal. Amazon contributes value to our society and that runs counter to a psychopath's goal.
In driving this point home, Peterson makes touch points with political conservatives, who undoubtedly compose the majority of his audience. By attacking a shared enemy, the Neo-Marxists of today's woke culture, Peterson was building his credibility as a speaker. I view this extended introduction alongside Paul's introduction at the Areopagus, effectively saying to their respective hearers: "I love what we have in common here. Let me unpack what is going on with our shared interest."
Ideology as Hijacked Religious Narratives
This is where Peterson begins to unpack his ideas. He explains the differences between ideology and science. After the all-out assault on Marxism as ideology, Peterson contends that ideologies are hijacked profound religious narratives. Ideologies are parasitic. They sit on something good and suck the good out of them, at the expense of the host organism. And this of course, begs the question: what is a profound religious narrative? This is a crucial pivot point to begin explaining how the gospel is the most profound religious narrative.
The Value of Religious Narrative
Peterson then contrasts religion (not ideology) with science: Religious truth is different from science and teaches you how to act. Peterson discusses the power of an ethical system in defining what a winner is. His example: If you're teaching your son to play basketball and he's the best player on his team, what's your son's incentive to pass? Peterson defines being a winner as becoming the kind of teammate that others want to play with as opposed to winning any particular game. A robust religious narrative must define what a win is. Peterson is laying the groundwork for what defines a valuable religious narrative.
Next Peterson describes the power of stories. They are transmitters of ethical behavior. And the Bible is about what to worship. He discusses Cain and Abel and the act of making sacrifices. The act of burning incense or simply gazing upward is an act of connecting with the transcendent. The sky is above and beyond us. It means to connect with something greater than ourselves. Sacrifice concerns what you should value, celebrate, imitate, and mimic. He speaks of Chinese immigrants coming to Canada as a sacrifice for their children's education. Peterson then asks rhetorically “What, therefore, is of greatest value and worthy of sacrifice?
Certainly not Marxism. Rather, he speaks of Israel’s tyranny under Egypt. He explains that God is the principle of calling a people out of slavery, out of unjust oppression. Therefore, Israel's plagues and wilderness trials are best understood as necessary sacrifices for freedom.
Confronting the Snake (aka the surpassing value of Christ)
Then seemingly out of the blue, Peterson drops this: Christ is the word of God that spans time and space and he is the word that brings chaos out of order. And around there begins his story of the snakes.
The Israelites complained about life in the wilderness. They grumbled against God. God sent snakes to bite the Israelites and those bitten died from the poison. It is horrible and tragic. And yet the solution God gives to Moses is not to get rid of the snakes. Nor even to get rid of the poison. God has Moses make a fake snake. Peterson explains the fake snake represents the thing you fear the most. You have to look upon the one whom you are most afraid of; the snake who bites you. You must confront your worst fear.
The cross is the embodiment of our worst fears. The cross is an instrument of torture, humiliation, and death. The cross is the worst thing imaginable and death is the worst of all snakes. We cannot bear the unbearable weight of mortality but through the cross.
And the gospels teach us (he doesn’t cite the reference but it’s John 3:14-15) that the Son of Man will be lifted up like the fake snake. It means we need to confront our worst fear - torture, humiliation, and death. After all, death is the worst possible snake. And therefore, to be reborn is what happens after we confront our worst fears. You need to stare death in the face in order to live.
And Peterson closes by declaring how the crucified Christ makes too much sense. God is the one who causes you to look upon one whom you are afraid of; he is the snake who bites you. And the figure of Christ himself is now regarded as divine; that’s what we are called upon to do - to regard him as divine. Christ is the opposite of an ideology; the conception that should be elevated to the highest place.
And his final words: Everything not Christ is an ideology that should be abandoned.
Creativity over Exhaustiveness and Accuracy in Gospel Proclamation
It’s important to assess Peterson’s ideas by the appropriate criteria. I’ve heard him make statements in lectures and podcasts that contradict historical, orthodox Christianity. However, Peterson is not a pastor, teacher, or Christian leader. He cannot be a false teacher if he doesn’t purport to be a spiritual guide. Again, he does not even profess to be a follower of Jesus. On that account, I let his words and actions speak for themselves and as I’ve accounted, they testify about Jesus in a profound and remarkable way.
Thus, I see Peterson as a deep undercover missionary or Balaam’s donkey. He’s a missionary because if you’re reading this post, you’re likely an evangelical and he’s not talking to you. Peterson targets disaffected men that the evangelical church has failed to engage.
The other alternative is Peterson is a type of Balaam’s donkey. He is an unintentional prophet declaring truths he’s not fully aware of. And we don’t evaluate a prophet’s message based on exhaustiveness or accuracy. No one expects Balaam (a pagan prophet) or his donkey to spout correct theology. Rather, the prophet’s method is creative expression. And the missionary prizes creativity over exhaustiveness and accuracy in order to reach his mission field.
After further reflection, there were two things I realized after listening to Peterson that evening. One, the gospel is beautiful. Peterson wasn't making the gospel more attractive than it already is. He was revealing its marvelous worth by putting it next to other belief systems (consider the alternative!) and having us join with him to behold the beauty of Jesus in his death and resurrection. He took us into a clearing at night to gaze up at the stars and have us fix our attention on the brightest one. He said you don't need to pay attention to other stars - they don't shine as brightly or they're not actually stars. Focus on the one that lights up the rest of the sky.
Two, anyone can preach the gospel because there are many ways to preach it. It's not about a formula. If you’re a missionary (and every disciple is, in some form) then it's about knowing your audience, creating touch points because of shared values, and then transitioning to the beauty of what Jesus accomplished. Peterson's defiance of evangelical convention testifies to the freedom we have in gospel proclamation. Jesus employed all kinds of images that would penetrate to the hearts of his agrarian-focused audience. He was rarely exhaustive in his explanations of the kingdom. After all, parables are dense and focused metaphors and yet they are richly creative. There are myriad ways to preach the gospel, unique to each disciple of Jesus and the people a disciple is called to reach. It is comforting and freeing that God designed my imagination to talk about Christ in new ways.
Finally, the evening did contain a reference to sin though it didn't come from Peterson. It came from his wife, Tammy, who introduced Jordan to the stage. She shared a personal example of abandoning ideology. She talked about an interaction with her husband that left her hungry and resentful and prayed the serenity prayer. However, instead of blaming her husband, Tammy invited the Spirit to address the problem within her rather than the problem outside of her. It was quite moving and a great testimony to begin a gospel presentation.
Comments
Post a Comment