Responding to Jordan Peterson’s Claims that the Bible Doesn’t Subordinate Women

[@jasonpatterson8091]

Are you seriously trying to tell me that Jordan Peterson is talking out of his ass? See my astonished face; I am astonished.

[@TRayTV]

If you accuse Dan of publishing tales to astonish he may feel obliged to tell us a story about Thor.

[@GodOfBrevity]

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.

[@aaronpolichar7936]

Maybe that's why he's so popular among misogynists.

[@damianwhite504]

other than biologically, I would not even describe him as a man: or a gentleman, at least

[@Mark73]

It's not all that special, it's actually pretty common. What's special is to hear her out, to understand and sympathize.

[@alanx4121]

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.

[@jamesthedog7783]

​@@alanx4121crazy, right?

[@krank23]

JP is very, very, very good at sounding smart and educated to people who are neither

[@jkm9332]

I was thinking the same thing about Dan McClellan.

[@kaylandry3142]

​@@jkm9332Because he says things you don't want to be true. He says things they Josh Duggars & Elliot Rodgers of the world don't want to be true.

[@ladybluelotus]

Best comment 😂

[@ladybluelotus]

​@@jkm9332 Guess you're one of the two, if not both.

[@jkm9332]

@@ladybluelotus JP is smart and educated-that you can’t see that is unfortunate.

[@eeeeejc]

"Phenomenally harmful and Phenomenally ignorant" - a perfect description of Peterson

[@Mamba4.8]

Actually that's the exact opposite ironically

[@fariesz6786]

well he's about as ignorant (i.e. unknowing) as i am when some older guy offers me 50 quid

[@javm2825]

@@Mamba4.8 To think he isn’t harmful and ignorant you have to be exceptionally ignorant. His entire approach to psychology is exceptionally harmful, his tendency to use his platform to tell complete lies is exceptionally harmful. He pretends to stand for free speech, but endlessly tells anyone who disagrees with him that they have no right to speak. Consider his “Clean Your Room” position, basically it is that if you haven’t got your entire life in order then you shouldn’t speak on society. No one has everything in order least of all Peterson. So either he should shut his trap or accept that he is wrong, but of course he will do neither.

[@rodshop5897]

@@Mamba4.8 "Actually that's the exact opposite ironically" Oh do go on and explain your position with supporting evidence.

[@nunyabusiness9056]

@@Mamba4.8 I can't imagine what it could be like to exist as a human and not see through Jordan Peterson's grift haha. Somebody said that Jordan Peterson is what a stupid person imagines a smart person is like. That's so true.

[@ericgriffin2754]

J Peterson is an embarrasment to us Canadian academics. He thinks his degree in psychology gives him authority to address any subject without contest.

[@magister343]

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.

[@siroassociates]

Jordan Peterson cries more than a 10 year old girl. He sounds like Kermit the frogs shy cousin.

[@Crocalu]

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 😂

[@admez2680]

​@siroassociates That was the laugh I needed today. 😂 Piggy approved, too.

[@StannisHarlock]

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.

[@pythondrink]

Do you have any links to his daughter calling him out?

[@daniellamcgee4251]

​@@pythondrinkKZbin doesn't allow links. Best to do an internet search to find what you are looking for.

[@christasimon9716]

@@pythondrink A woman forwarded the idea that women shouldn't be allowed to vote. Obviously she already recognizes that her voice doesn't count.

[@pythondrink]

@@christasimon9716 you mean Pearl the tradcon? Yh I was already aware of that.

[@EyeOfProvidence777]

This is what happens when you go down the catholic rabbit hole dude. Similar thing occured with Candace Owens...

[@eyalguz6303]

"Phenomenally harmful and phenomenally ignorant" is all the words you need to describe Jordan Peterson.

[@jenniferhunter4074]

We can reduce it to "idiot". Unfortunately, Jordan Petersen followers are even stupider than their idiot "philosopher"

[@magister343]

@@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.

[@CoffeeAddictEvan]

​@@scidog6535 you're right, he's not ignorant, he's malicious

[@fergusfitzgerald977]

A much needed response from someone who has actually studied the topic in dept !

[@dorothysay8327]

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.

[@james13sylar]

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.

[@arthurneddysmith]

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".

[@CoffeeAddictEvan]

Incell Kermit, as he's affectionately known

[@pxlent]

Agreed. He’s definitely a problematic muppet.

[@mrblaque]

"Anguished Kermit"? More like whiny snowflake.

[@ksan1648]

Define "Kermit," and then define "frog."

[@ericsmith5919]

Kermit the Fraud

[@countrywestern2272]

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.

[@dorothysay8327]

“Religion is dying” LOLOLOLOLOL

[@freespirit7450]

Men are only suppose to rule their wives not ever woman on earth. It's about marriage. The way you guys think is disgusting.

[@scambammer6102]

what the bible actually says is a bigger reason

[@scambammer6102]

@@dorothysay8327 he probably means among people with an IQ over 50

[@lxstcheckll9348]

@@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!

[@CDBYT1335]

It is astounding how JP manages to be consistently wrong about everything he talks about

[@damianwhite504]

I think he practices a lot in front of a mirror

[@benjamintrevino325]

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.

[@TylerDurden-oy2hm]

Im astounded you would think that...its bizarre

[@StephenGangi]

Yet his fans think he is some sort of super-genius. I just think of him as the "old man yells at clouds" guy.

[@nunyabusiness9056]

@@TylerDurden-oy2hm Somebody hit the nail on the head with JP. He's what a stupid person assumes a smart person sounds like.

[@integrationalpolytheism]

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.

[@tonyschumacher-jones1540]

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]

Can you give a good example of this?

[@integrationalpolytheism]

@@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.

[@Crocalu]

​@@integrationalpolytheismtalk the talk, walk the walk, you polytheist pagan

[@lxstcheckll9348]

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!

[@gregorydeanitos8121]

Excellent. Thank you. I appreciate your efforts very much.

[@ironcharioteer6660]

You are a great speaker. Well Put !!

[@fariesz6786]

your response is so well worded and addressing all the ramifications. big kudos!

[@americanpancakelive]

Goddamn, how I would love for you to debate Jordan Peterson or even have a cordial discussion with him.

[@scambammer6102]

why prop up Peterson just ignore him

[@scambammer6102]

@@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.

[@scambammer6102]

@@slink721 you don't think there is anything better you could do with your time than watch jordan peterson?

[@scambammer6102]

@@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.

[@chuckbecker4983]

​@@scambammer6102Yes, don't engage him, CANCEL HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@amayuk9016]

Every time I listen to one of your videos I just want to yell BOOM every 3 seconds. So good.

[@MicahBuzanANIMATION]

I'm starting to think the only think J Peterson has a PhD in is the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

[@lexispeaks5585]

The fact that JP instantly got so upset shows that he knows he's lying. Pretty sure God said not to lie, sir. Oopsie?

[@jamiegallier2106]

Thanks Dan. ❤

[@pneuma_23-rb4dx]

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!

[@spilgrim8757]

Thanks for your content.

[@contactpinacolada]

very insightful, thanks

[@timothymulholland7905]

JP lost it during his serious illness. He came back totally crazy.

[@jamesbest9038]

This just proves to point Dan is constantly making: the Bible is not univocal. It doesn't have a point of view. It is completely subjective to the point of view of the people reading it.

[@EnglishMike]

People can be just as subjective with a univocal text, and often are -- just think how many ways, say, a play by Shakespeare has been interpreted, even though it was created by one man. The same for any ancient document written with a single author. So the number of subjective interpretations says nothing about whether the source material is univocal. All Dan is doing here is rebutting the specific claim that the Bible is univocal in saying that women and men are equal.

[@rebekahvidler6769]

Peterson isn't even a pseudo-intellectual. He's an anti-intellectual.

[@117zenith]

It's almost like you can make the Bible say anything you want if you don't understand it or if you want to use it to win arguments.

[@stultusvenator3233]

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.

[@gillythehottuna2829]

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"

[@scambammer6102]

OTOH there are lots of verses in the bible that are very clear and disgusting

[@blktarockstar818]

That's what Dan points out. The Bible isn't univocal. You can always pick out 1 example to support whatever you're saying

[@Crocalu]

​@@blktarockstar818if 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

[@FlaksterMusic]

@@Crocalu Spot the Peterson fan.

[@Tmanaz480]

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.

[@eb1042]

I'm glad you said that....Ruled over BY THEIR HUSBANDS.... *BE SINGLE WOMEN* - BREAK THE CURSE!!!!! *RELIGION KILLS* *ABORT RELIGION SAVE YOURSELF*

[@TRayTV]

I operate under the assumption that in the cultures represented in the Bible, women and children are regarded (perhaps in fact, perhaps in practice) as property. Probably not on the same level as livestock or inanimate objects... or even thralls. But certainly subordinate, and probably deeply dependent on a patriarch for any kind of social or civil standing. If there were retribution or reconciliation owed, it would be owed to the husband/father. I find their narratives make more sense viewed with that perspective. Maybe that wasn't their perspective (in fact or practice). But from my modern perspective that's how it looks.

[@randomuser2619]

Is the Peterson video sped up 1.5x or does he always sound like that?

[@onionbubs386]

He always sounds like this. Like if Kermit the frog was maliciously stupid.

[@seanb7310]

Once again, JP gets out of his lane...smh.

[@magister343]

To be fair, he isn't good when he stays in his lane either, as his lane is Jungian pseudoscientific bullshit.

[@rachelcolomb]

I used to enjoy a little JP but once he got onto the Bible and supposing he is an authority he lost me.

[@chrisfriel2003]

JP’s voice is like nails on a blackboard.

[@chrisfriel2003]

Thanks you for this video.

[@chrisfriel2003]

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.

[@dadoprso8266]

@@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.

[@chrisfriel2003]

@@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.

[@dadoprso8266]

@@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)

[@jeffhansche6105]

Jordan Petersen has a doctorate in everything, including drug abuse.

[@NielMalan]

If, in the Bible, women are not subservient to men, please get from the Bible a.) a list of the names of the sons of King David, and b.) a list of the names of the daughters of King David.

[@robertbusselmaier]

So there is something in Genesis, where original texts say "I will send a rescuer" which was later translated to "helper" to imply subservience. It also uses the Hebrew word for "side," in reference to an equal part, to say what Eve was made from, again translated to "rib" to make her seem more insignificant. Both translations didn't come around until the King James Bible. Do with that what you will

[@jimmunro2136]

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 ".

[@55whiplash]

I was watching videos about George Mallory and Sandy Irving, lost on Mt Everest 100 years ago last June. The algorithm started suggesting Dan's videos for some reason. I'm glad it did, even though I'm a "fallen Catholic" with more in common with Christopher Hitchens than most biblical scholars, I really enjoy his content. I'm appalled at some Christians and their misogyny, and I enjoy Dan calmly dissecting their dogmas.

[@Lukejb2Butterworth]

so someone who made them selves famous lying about the effects of a law is still lying today , wow

[@Samdjuniority1]

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.

[@TechySeven]

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.

[@scambammer6102]

that's not what he said

[@deanoverlie224]

" what my arguement is..." What his arguement is , is a stunning example of " presentism " .

[@naomilee9866]

You should collaborate with the channel Religion for Breakfast!

[@HMarcBower]

"Phenomenally harmful and phenomenally ignorant" perfectly describes Peterson.

[@marycordeiro996]

Peterson is very good at talking a lot and has convinced himself that he is an authority on everything.

[@IsoSokkoMyllikas-db8xw]

Peterson has quite an annoying way of "HOW COULD YOU EVER THINK THAT?!" way of speech. Like, gee, maybe it's the 2000 years of Christian history of telling us how women are lesser and subservient and how almost all conservative Christians STILL do so.

[@20quid]

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.

[@vixendoe6943]

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.

[@LonelyParticle231]

​@@vixendoe6943 But Yahweh is a male deity... a misogynistic and racist meme at that.

[@caseyjonas86]

JP talks to people inconvenient to his narrative the same way an abuser speaks to the abused.

[@kaptainkool408]

Jordan Peterson is such a terrible person to follow on anything regarding the bible

[@sadyugkefdkquskdSG]

You can tell he is a con when he says "how in the world could you possibly derive that idea..." as if the bible is not incredibly long and disjointed and occasionally at odds with itself

[@Wertbag99]

The "image of God" is such a useless vague term that Christians can't agree on. It might have meant physical image at one time, but that has been moved away from. Now it's sometimes our minds, our love, our empathy or whichever positive characteristic people want to subjectively select. Yet when you read other parts of the bible the "image" is used as a physical form like in Genesis 5:3 "When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth.". But elsewhere specifies women aren't the same 1 Corinthians 11:7 "A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man". Different authors, different times, different views...

[@robelliott4985]

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.

[@notanemoprog]

You could google his old blog there's a lot to read there

[@kentthalman4459]

Jordan is a delusional dude

[@roccorock997]

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.

[@Toywins]

😂😂😂💯🙌🏼

[@davidfleming6211]

Whenever Peterson gets out of his lane, it's a cluster f*ck.

[@philb4462]

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.

[@annaclarafenyo8185]

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.

[@zaycaar5280]

Thank you for the insight. I like the both of you, though for very different reasons.

[@Sewblon]

2:20 I think that you mean Genesis 1:27 4:00 But what is meant by "renegotiated" here?

[@lfilm3]

"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.

[@TechySeven]

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]

@@mackbenzie 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.

[@scambammer6102]

paul expressly refers to a couple of woman apostles. they weren't the women who stayed with jesus.

[@lfilm3]

​@@scambammer6102 I didn't say otherwise. The point was about how Jesus and some early Christians saw women.

[@scambammer6102]

@@lfilm3 Ok

[@florian5365]

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.

[@carlosserrano4048]

Fire!

[@coachwalk7485]

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.

[@samantharaulin]

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. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z6PYqImZZdllmZI

[@thedarknessthatcomesbefore4279]

Pordon jeterson talking bollox again? Colour me shocked😂

[@paradoxofepicurus]

"Women should not speak up in church", there for equality.

[@benjamintrevino325]

If you want to know how defensive and insecure Jordan Peterson is, watch the KZbin 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.

[@epincion]

In an important sense Peterson is correct as the ideal of the incoming Kingdom of God that has been made possible by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is as laid out in Galatians 3 v 28 ‘There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free man, there is no longer male or female. For all of you are one in Christ Jesus’ It’s the ideal for all individual Christians to strive for now in the time allotted to them in this life and it will be the way of the coming everlasting Kingdom when Jesus returns.

[@aaronpolichar7936]

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.

[@randykrus9562]

Peterson plays to what his audience wants to hear.

[@scottyvanantwerp]

I seriously hope that you experience the liberation of the truth that you express through scholarship. While recognizing that we cannot know all things, context and data matters. I cannot begin to tell you how validating what you do, touches me. Sometimes I think I am insane as I piece together that which is human vs. expressions of the image of G-d and reconcile that with faith assumptions and postmodern negotiation of the text. Please...never stop what you are doing, we faithful to the concept of G-d, faith, within ministry, need what we learn to be validated beyond church rhetoric and doctrine to remain sane. Ur awesome!

[@CarlosRomero-pl9tk]

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.

[@NfindaMalongo]

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.

[@christopherschalge9186]

can you respond to Peterson's claim that the bible needs to be read like a novel with a plot arc. thanks.

[@cameronsnegosky329]

I liked the npc comparison

[@ravenmoon1165]

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.

[@lisaboban]

Yep. That's Jordan. Phenomenally harmful and phenomenally ignorant.

[@thescoobymike]

Lmaooo this was a layup

[@iamfiefo]

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.

[@alanx4121]

yet s&g is found in that region, there's pure sulfur and ashes everywhere, its on yt

[@geograph-ology4343]

A trained psychologist now thinks he is a Biblical scholar...A God delusion?

[@billytheadult6247]

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.

[@gerathys]

He has also demonstrated that he is completely bone-ignorant about vaccines as well.

[@javm2825]

Jordan Peterson… and that is phenomenally harmful, and phenomenally ignorant.

[@annelieerasmus4232]

Please can you have a debate set up with Jordan Peterson. This man is causing so much harm.

[@wawer8846]

bro really said NPCs 💀

[@stevewalsh23]

Context matters.

[@rachelcolomb]

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.

[@RVMTube]

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]

I don't think she thought out all the books. She just sort of started drinking wine and writing stuff.

[@Liliquan]

@@helenbarrett6451 No one said she did.

[@liesandvideotape]

@@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

[@bobsmith-hd2zr]

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.

[@gabitamiravideos]

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).

[@exhumus]

JP really should stay in his lane and stick to grifting manchildren with no discipline or common sense.

[@glennrobinson7193]

And Jesus chose 12 men to be his disciples not 12 women. That should be very telling.

[@OverGrownBean]

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.

[@michaelmannucci8585]

Wow, a lot of problems with this video. First, defintions. The term used in the Peterson video is subsevient. The term you use in your video is subordinate. They don't mean the same thing. sub·ser·vi·ent prepared to obey others unquestioningly. sub·or·di·nate lower in rank or position. The Bible doesn't not expect women to "obey others unquestioningly". The Bible does present women as "lower in rank or position" with regard to societal constructs (family for example) but not in value. In fact, it elevates them. Second, Genesis 3:16 is indeed, as you said, a *curse*. Meaning it isn't a good thing. Duh. But in addition to this, what you say is it's misleading. Genesis 3:16 outlines basically that because of the fall there is enmity between men and women, where the women will try to rule over men, but the men will rule over them. These are perversions of how they're supposed to live together and compliment one another. Where men are supposed to lead and protect, they will instead in sin dominate. And if you're going to complain about the oppression of women in history, you're basically acknowledging that Genesis 3:16 is being fulfilled. Third, the overwhelming majority is addressed to men has nothing to do with being "subservient". With regard to "appendages to the agency of men", that is just categorically false. If you're going to critique that the Bible, do it accurately instead of making strawmen. Fourth, Leviticus 27, slaves were primarily used for physical labour. Women are weaker than men *shocker*. It would take too long to make a KZbin comment addressing the whole videos filled with straw-men arguments and misrepresentations. This was _really_ bad. Is this the level of challenge being offered to the Scriptures? Do people truly think this is persuasive?

[@ElHombretheman]

Thank you for clarifying what this disingenuous snake failed to. He’s a liar like almost all Bible bashers.

[@dinocollins720]

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.

[@TechySeven]

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!").

[@yeboscrebo4451]

@@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?

[@TechySeven]

@@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?

[@yeboscrebo4451]

@@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.

[@TechySeven]

@@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.

[@johnthomasriley2741]

And the female element of the trinity, the Holy Ghost, plays a distant third fiddle.

[@adriansantba]

Hi, Dan. Could you comment on NT's stance towards slavery? Nice video.

[@The_Other_Ghost]

Plus women were counted as property.

[@markbremer1813]

Subsection of Dunning Kruger effect applies to JP. "People who are too dumb to know how ignorant their source of information is."

[@NfindaMalongo]

My reading of pistis Sophia is the original sin was spiritual adultery and not taking your coequals feelings into consideration before acting

[@Nudnik1]

1 Corinthians 1 Timothy and 1 Corinthians Women are mocked and told not to speak teach anyone.

[@mickeydecurious]

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 🤔

[@alanx4121]

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.

[@Nudnik1]

@@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

[@brandonontama2415]

@@alanx4121 Thus, proving the Bible is sexist.

[@alanx4121]

@@brandonontama2415 yeah, because men are men and women are women

[@avishevin3353]

Divorce as only initiating from men.

[@jasonclayton4470]

Okay but why is Petersen 🤌hollering🤌

[@deanoverlie224]

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 .

[@jasonclayton4470]

@@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.

[@deanoverlie224]

@@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 ]

[@jasonclayton4470]

@@deanoverlie224 oh I absolutely can see the difference between passion and intimidation. I can also see when someone is being an apologist.