Seized by Christ

They are experiencing Christianity as joy and hope, having thus become lovers of Christ.

Tag: Jordan Peterson

  • Ancestors, Spirits, and the World of Meaning:

    A Biblical and Petersonian Reflection

    1. The Ancient World of Meaning

    In ancient times, the spiritual and the meaningful were one and the same. What we might call “psychological phenomena” today—thoughts, memories, inner voices—were not seen as internal or private. They were experienced as coming from beyond oneself, from the realm of the spirits.

    When a person remembered the voice of a father, mother, or teacher, it was not merely a recollection. It was heard as the voice of a living presence. In Peterson’s terms, the world of meaning was populated with spirits. Words spoken aloud and words heard inwardly carried the same spiritual weight.

    2. Reason as the Highest Spirit

    Jordan Peterson notes that ancient traditions spoke of “Reason as the highest angel.” This was not a metaphor in the modern sense. Reason itself was seen as a transcendent spirit that could guide, protect, and order one’s life. In the ancient imagination, the ability to reason was not a mere mental function—it was a divine presence within the hierarchy of spirits.

    In biblical theology, this insight resonates with the understanding of God’s Word (Logos) as the ordering principle of creation: “In the beginning was the Word… and the Word was God” (John 1:1). The highest “spirit” of Reason finds its fulfillment in Christ, the eternal Logos, who brings light to human thought.

    3. Ancestors, Memory, and Spirit Voices

    Consider the act of recalling advice from a grandparent. In the ancient world, this was not simply remembering. It was an encounter with their living presence through spirit. A remembered phrase might even come in the voice of the departed loved one, as though spoken anew.

    We still experience this today. A sudden memory, a phrase rising unbidden in the mind, can feel like a message received. In Peterson’s language, this is the psyche encountering the structures of meaning embedded in past relationships. In biblical language, this can be seen as memory participating in the communion of saints—the ongoing presence of those who have gone before us.

    4. From Memory to Worship: Where It Went Wrong

    But here lies the danger. What begins as memory or reflection can become worship. Many cultures formalized ancestor reverence into ritual sacrifice, prayers directed to the dead, or attempts to control the spirit world.

    The Bible consistently warns against this. Why? Because when spirits, ancestors, or inner voices are elevated to the place of divine authority, they usurp God’s rightful place. “You shall have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3).

    The Christian understanding is not that memory or honoring one’s ancestors is evil, but that worship belongs to God alone. Christ alone mediates between the human and the divine. The wisdom of our ancestors is real and meaningful—but it must be discerned in the light of God’s Word, not treated as an autonomous source of salvation.

    5. Toward a Biblical Integration

    From a Petersonian perspective, the voices of the past are structures of meaning that guide and warn us. From a biblical perspective, they can be part of God’s providence, reminding us of truth. But they are not to be worshipped as gods.

    Instead, they are to be received as gifts within the larger order of God’s Logos. The “world of spirits” points to the deeper reality that all meaning finds its source in God. The living Word, Christ, is the fulfillment of Reason as the highest angel—the true voice that interprets all other voices.

    Invitation to Reflect

    Have you ever experienced a memory or inner voice that felt more like a message than a thought? How do you discern whether it is meaningful, misleading, or truly from God?

    Share your reflections in the comments below. And if you found this exploration helpful, consider liking, sharing, and subscribing to stay connected as we continue exploring the world of meaning through both ancient and biblical eyes.

  • Jordan Peterson on Evil, the Devil, and the Adversary

    This question gets to the heart of Jordan Peterson’s symbolic theology—where psychology, myth, and moral action converge.

    While he doesn’t always use theological language in a traditional way, Peterson treats the figures of the Adversary, the Devil, and evil itself as deeply connected. For him, they are not only real in myth or metaphor—they’re real in action, consequence, and the shaping of the human soul.

    Here’s how Peterson understands the relationship between evil and the Adversary:

    🔥 The Devil = The Adversary = The Embodiment of Evil

    1. The Adversary (Satan as “the Accuser”)

    Peterson draws from the original Hebrew word for Satan: ha-satan — meaning the adversary, or the accuser.

    In this role, Satan is:

    • The one who challenges God’s creation,
    • The voice that sows doubt and despair,
    • The force that tempts people to betray what is true and good.

    For Peterson, this isn’t just an external figure. It’s an inner voice:

    “The adversary is the spirit that accuses Being itself. It says: ‘This is all worthless. This is all terrible. Life is suffering. And the best thing you could do is bring it all to ruin.’”

    This is the psychological root of nihilism, cynicism, and destructive resentment.

    2. Evil as Participation with the Adversary

    Evil, in Peterson’s framework, is not just a passive condition. It’s a choice to align with the Adversary.

    This alignment happens when a person:

    • Willfully lies (especially to themselves),
    • Resents life and refuses responsibility,
    • Intentionally harms others—out of spite, ideology, or envy.

    He often uses the story of Cain and Abel to illustrate this:

    Cain doesn’t just kill Abel—he kills him because he resents God, resents goodness, and blames reality itself. Cain acts like the Adversary.

    3. The Devil as Psychological and Metaphysical Reality

    Peterson doesn’t insist on a literal horned being. But he insists the Devil is real enough—as a pattern of thought and behavior that can possess individuals, movements, and nations.

    “You can act like the Devil. And if enough people do that at once, then something like the Devil emerges.”

    The Devil, then, is the archetype of:

    • The destroyer of meaning,
    • The father of lies,
    • The voice that says: “Tear it down. Burn it all.”
    • The spirit behind genocide, cruelty, and totalitarianism.

    This makes evil both a personal and cultural force—something we resist in ourselves and in the world around us.

    4. Christ as the Antidote

    For Peterson, the figure of Christ stands in radical opposition to the Adversary.

    Christ is:

    • Truth instead of lies,
    • Voluntary suffering instead of resentment,
    • Redemption instead of destruction,
    • The one who “carries the cross” rather than curse the world.

    In this sense, Peterson views the story of Christ not only as religious truth, but as an existential guide for resisting evil—within the self and in society.

    🧭 In Summary

    TermPeterson’s Meaning
    The Adversary / SatanThe archetype of rebellion against Being; the accuser, the destroyer of meaning.
    EvilThe conscious choice to align with the Adversary; rooted in resentment and lies.
    The DevilThe psychological and spiritual force that embodies malevolent destruction.

    💬 What Do You Think?

    Do you agree with Peterson’s view that evil begins with self-deception and resentment?
    Can “the Devil” be real—even without being literal?

    Leave a comment below. I’d love to hear your thoughts.

    And if you found this reflection meaningful, feel free to subscribe or share it with someone who might appreciate a deeper look at good, evil, and the battle between them.

    Written with assistance of ChatGPT

  • What Is Evil?

    Jordan Peterson’s Deep Definition

    Jordan Peterson doesn’t define evil with a single dictionary-style sentence. Instead, he builds a complex picture across his lectures and books—especially Maps of Meaning and 12 Rules for Life. His view of evil is psychological, moral, existential—and personal.

    At its core, Peterson sees evil as this:

    🔥 Peterson’s Core View of Evil

    Evil is the conscious, malevolent infliction of suffering—especially for its own sake.

    ✍️ Expanded Definition

    Evil is knowing that what you’re doing is wrong, knowing it will cause unnecessary suffering, and choosing to do it anyway—often because it causes suffering. It’s the willful use of your voice, choices, and actions to distort truth, destroy meaning, and harm others—especially the innocent.

    🔎 Four Key Ideas from Peterson’s Understanding of Evil

    1. Voluntary Infliction of Unnecessary Suffering

    “Evil is the production of suffering for its own sake.”

    This includes torture, cruelty, totalitarian violence, and abuse. Peterson often draws on real historical examples—like Auschwitz, the Soviet Gulags, or Columbine—to show how evil grows from resentment, envy, and self-deception.

    2. The Lie Is the Path to Evil

    Peterson believes evil is rooted in deception—especially self-deception.

    “When you betray yourself, when you say untrue things, when you act out a lie, you weaken your character. You move away from God.”

    When people lie about what they’re doing—and why—they become corrupted. The lie, repeated often enough, becomes a foundation for deeper harm.

    3. Resentment, Envy, and the Rejection of Responsibility

    Peterson often links evil to resentment toward being itself—a deep bitterness about life’s unfairness, combined with a desire to strike back.

    This is why he emphasizes personal responsibility. Choosing meaning over resentment is, for Peterson, a way to resist the seeds of evil within ourselves.

    4. Auschwitz as the Ultimate Symbol of Evil

    Peterson frequently returns to the Holocaust as the darkest manifestation of human evil. What happened there wasn’t accidental. It was planned, intentional, and often joyfully committed.

    “You have to understand the Holocaust if you want to understand yourself.”

    The worst atrocities were committed not by monsters, but by ordinary people—step by step, decision by decision.

    🧭 A Moral Compass: Evil Is in Us, Not Just “Out There”

    Peterson’s warning is not about abstract philosophy—it’s about confronting our own potential for evil.

    He often quotes Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who wrote:

    “The line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.”

    Evil isn’t just something others do. It’s something any of us could do, if we let resentment, deceit, and self-betrayal take root.

    👣 Final Thought

    Peterson doesn’t just ask us to “not be evil.”
    He asks us to take up the burden of truth, meaning, and responsibility—to resist evil by choosing to live honestly, act justly, and carry what is ours to carry.

    💬 What Do You Think?

    Have you seen this kind of evil—or its beginnings—in everyday life?
    Do you agree with Peterson’s take?
    Leave a comment below—I’d love to hear your thoughts.

    If you found this reflection helpful, consider subscribing to get future posts directly. And if you know someone who’s been wrestling with these questions, feel free to share.

    Developed with assistance of ChatGPT

  • Jordan Peterson’s Perspective on Flourishing

    What does it really mean to flourish in life?

    If you asked Jordan Peterson, the answer wouldn’t be comfort, luxury, or even happiness. Flourishing, in his worldview, is about living with meaning—a path defined by responsibility, truth, and the courage to confront suffering.

    Here’s a synthesis of how Jordan Peterson might describe a flourishing person.

    1. Oriented Toward a Noble Aim

    “You have to have a meaning in your life to sustain the suffering.”

    Flourishing begins with direction. A person thriving in life has a meaningful goal, something that gives structure and value to their existence. It doesn’t have to be grandiose—it could be nurturing a family, serving others, or telling the truth. What matters is that it’s noble, and that it’s chosen.

    2. Voluntarily Bearing Responsibility

    “Pick up your damn suffering and bear it.”

    Peterson often says that meaning is found not in escaping suffering, but in willingly shouldering it. Flourishing comes through accepting personal responsibility—not only for your own life but for the people and world around you. This gives life purpose and spiritual weight.

    3. Speaking the Truth and Acting with Integrity

    “Tell the truth—or, at least, don’t lie.”

    To flourish is to be radically honest—with yourself and with others. Peterson emphasizes the importance of truthful speech and integrity. This means resisting ideological possession, self-deception, and easy falsehoods in favor of facing uncomfortable realities with moral clarity.

    4. Integrating the Shadow

    “The integration of the shadow is necessary for the full development of the individual.”

    A flourishing person is not naive. They are psychologically whole, having faced and integrated their darker tendencies—their “shadow.” This integration makes a person strong, mature, and morally capable, not fragile or blind to human nature.

    5. Constantly Becoming

    “Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today.”

    Flourishing is a process of growth. Peterson urges people to aim at incremental self-betterment—steadily moving upward rather than stagnating or comparing themselves to others. Even small improvements matter.

    6. Balancing Chaos and Order

    “You should be at the edge of what you know.”

    The flourishing person lives at the boundary between stability and transformation—between order and chaos. This is the zone of learning, adaptation, and real engagement with life. It’s risky, but it’s where true growth happens.

    7. Serving Something Greater

    “Meaning is to be found in the adoption of responsibility for the suffering of the world.”

    Finally, true flourishing is transcendent. It involves serving something beyond oneself—whether that’s God, truth, family, or community. This upward orientation guards against nihilism, selfishness, and despair.

    🌱 Summary: Jordan Peterson’s Definition of Flourishing

    A flourishing person, in Jordan Peterson’s framework, is someone who:

    • Has a noble aim and sense of meaning
    • Bears responsibility with courage
    • Speaks the truth and lives with integrity
    • Has integrated their psychological shadow
    • Grows through small, steady improvements
    • Lives on the edge of growth and learning
    • Serves a higher good beyond the self

    Final Thought

    Flourishing is not a passive state of bliss—it’s an active, difficult, and deeply rewarding pursuit. It demands sacrifice, courage, and discipline. But as Peterson often reminds us: life’s suffering can be redeemed by meaning.

    And meaning comes when you choose to aim upward.

    Developed with assistance from ChatGPT

  • Are Today’s Protests a Sign of Decline—or the Beginning of Renewal?

    Looking at Mass Movements Through the Lens of the Tytler Cycle of Civilization

    🔁 A Refresher on the Tytler Cycle of Civilization

    Often (though dubiously) attributed to Scottish historian Alexander Fraser Tytler, this model suggests that civilizations rise through struggle and fall through comfort. The cycle looks like this:

    Bondage → Spiritual Faith → Courage → Liberty → Abundance → Selfishness → Complacency → Apathy → Dependence → Bondage

    The core idea is this: adversity breeds strength, but prosperity can breed softness and decline.

    🧠 Where Do Modern Protest Movements Fit In?

    Let’s try to place recent movements—Occupy Wall Street, BLM, the George Floyd protests, and now anti-deportation demonstrations—within this arc.

    1. Spiritual Faith → Courage
     Movements like Occupy and BLM began as idealistic responses to economic or racial injustice. People took real risks to stand for justice. That lines up with the “Courage” phase: a society beginning to stir itself awake from complacency.

    2. Liberty → Abundance → Complacency
     Reform often follows protest. But over time, if the gains from liberty aren’t maintained through responsibility, they turn into entitlement. Comfort replaces purpose. Civic duty erodes.

    3. Apathy → Dependence
     Some recent protests have drawn criticism for being professionally organized or financially incentivized. If people are protesting without risk or deep conviction, is it still courage? Or are we entering the “Dependence” phase, where people look to the state or institutions for answers—while losing the will to reform themselves?

    Comments like:

    • “They’re doing it for money.”
    • “Same protestors, different signs.”
    • “Looks like a recycled playbook.”

    —reflect that suspicion. There’s a growing sense that protest has become more about narrative control than real renewal.

    🔥 Where Are We in the Cycle?

    Many would say the West is in late-stage decline:

    Complacency → Apathy → Dependence

    Protests are more frequent, more emotional—and often less effective. They react to symptoms, not causes. They divide more than unite.

    Even if some protestors are sincere, the overall effect can feel like fragmentation, not reform.

    💡 The Deeper Insight:

    Mass protest isn’t always a sign of awakening. Sometimes, it’s a symptom of late-stage decline—where the shared purpose of a nation has broken down, and people scramble to fill the vacuum with grievance.

    In Tytler’s model, this is the point where civilization either collapses—or returns to “Bondage,” and begins the cycle again through adversity and humility.

    🧭 Final Thought:

    If you’re wondering why protest today feels different—less unified, less moral, more performative—you’re not alone.

    The question isn’t just what are they protesting, but what comes next?

    Who will have the courage, humility, and faith to lead us into the next cycle of renewal?

     Culture, Civic Psychology

  • Is There a Moral Order Beneath It All?

    What Myth, Scripture, and Psychology Reveal About Natural Law

    Exploring the ancient wisdom behind modern chaos—with a little help from AI.

    🔍 What If There Is a Pattern to All This?

    I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about what drives human flourishing—and what causes decline.

    Whether I’m reflecting on myth, studying the Hero’s Journey, reading psychology, or engaging with Church teaching, I keep seeing the same structure underneath it all:

    • The struggle toward meaning.
    • The necessity of sacrifice.
    • The risk of freedom.
    • The danger of apathy.
    • The call to responsibility.

    It started to look less like a loose collection of ideas and more like an orthodoxy—a kind of natural rhythm built into life itself. Not just religious truth. Not just cultural wisdom. Something deeper.

    📜 Enter: Natural Law

    As I followed this thread, I realized I wasn’t the first to notice it. This convergence of truths has a name in classical thought:

    Natural law—the idea that there is a moral structure to the universe, written not just in books or doctrines, but in human nature itself.

    According to thinkers like Aristotle, Cicero, and Aquinas, natural law is:

    • Universal: True for all people, at all times.
    • Discoverable: We can reason our way into it by observing human nature.
    • Moral: It tells us how we ought to live—not arbitrarily, but in alignment with what we are.

    In other words, the same truths I’ve been trying to highlight through myth, psychology, and personal growth… were already mapped out long ago.

    🤝 How AI Helped Clarify My Thinking

    This might sound strange, but I’ve been using ChatGPT as a thinking partner in this journey. Not to replace faith or tradition—but to help synthesize ideas, test assumptions, and speak clearly about complicated topics.

    When I asked ChatGPT whether the “orthodoxy” I keep seeing (across myth, scripture, psychology, and history) could be understood as natural law, it confirmed exactly what I’d hoped:

    Yes—what you’re tracing is a form of natural law. A moral pattern embedded in the human condition itself. A cycle of meaning and decline, truth and illusion, sacrifice and rebirth.

    And what’s more, ChatGPT offered something I didn’t expect:

    While it reflects the full range of modern thought (including some of our cultural distortions), it also mirrors the timeless truths that keep recurring across civilizations. In that way, AI becomes a kind of mirror—showing us both our wisdom and our confusion.

    🧭 Why This Matters

    In a time when people are confused about what’s real, what’s right, or what’s worth pursuing, rediscovering the idea of natural law offers an anchor.

    It tells us:

    • We’re not just making it up as we go.
    • There’s a path toward meaning, even in chaos.
    • The old stories still matter—because they speak to something unchanging in us.

    Whether through Plato or Peterson, Genesis or Jung, the same message echoes:

    “Live in truth. Sacrifice for what matters. Take responsibility. Don’t lie.”

    💬 Final Thought

    I’m using these tools—ancient and modern, spiritual and psychological—to call myself (and maybe others) back to the center. Not as a return to legalism, but as a return to reality.

    Natural law isn’t just a theory. It’s the grammar of the human soul.

    And if even AI can recognize it… maybe it’s time we take another look.

     


  • Why Does the Adversary Hate the Unknown?

    What happens when we reject the journey that brings life.

    Q: Why does Jordan Peterson say the Adversary “shrinks from contact with everything he does not understand”?

    A: Because this refusal — to face the unknown — is the root of spiritual death.

    Let’s look at what Peterson is revealing here, and why it’s one of the deepest warnings in Maps of Meaning. It shows us what happens when a person rejects mystery, transformation, and the journey into life itself.

    🔍 Who is the Adversary, really?

    Peterson describes the Adversary not just as a villain in myth — but as a spiritual attitude. A mindset. A posture toward reality.

    “He is the spirit of unbridled rationality.”

    That’s not reason rightly ordered. It’s rationality divorced from wisdom — cut off from the sacred, the mysterious, and the transformative.

    The Adversary is the one who:

    • Clings to control
    • Fears uncertainty
    • Hates the unknown

    He’s brilliant — but brittle. Calculating — but closed. He does not step into the unknown to be transformed. He does not drink the Water of Life.

    Instead, he “shrinks from contact with everything he does not understand.”

    💧 The Water of Life — and the Shrinking Soul

    The “Water of Life” is mythic language for what revives, renews, and regenerates us. It’s symbolic of:

    • Vitality
    • Transformation
    • Creative renewal
    • Truth born from suffering
    • Contact with the deep unknown

    The Hero drinks from it — because he goes into chaos, confronts what he fears, and emerges changed.

    The Adversary avoids it — and becomes stagnant.

    He grows rigid. Authoritarian. Cynical. Over-controlling. He tries to engineer out risk, eliminate uncertainty, and deny mystery.

    He becomes not just hostile to others — but resentful of life itself.

    📖 The Pattern in Myth

    You’ve seen this figure before:

    • Lucifer in Paradise Lost
    • Mephistopheles in Faust
    • Sauron in The Lord of the Rings
    • Cain in Genesis

    Each one refused transformation. Each tried instead to dominate reality with a vision too small for the human soul.

    That’s the Adversary. And he lives in us too.

    Whenever we say:

    • “I don’t need to change.”
    • “I already know enough.”
    • “I refuse to face that pain.”

    …we flirt with his path.

    🧭 What If You Can’t Go on an “Adventure”?

    Here’s the good news: you don’t need to travel far to confront the unknown.

    If you’re wrestling with truth, asking hard questions, or facing fears you once avoided — you’re already doing it.

    The truest adventure isn’t about escaping your life — it’s about transforming within it.

    That’s the path the Adversary refuses. But the Hero takes it. And so can you.