Myth and Meaning in Jordan Peterson: A Christian Perspective

As a pastor, I’ve been intrigued by Dr. Peterson for some time now. I was very happy when I stumbled upon other Christian thinkers who have chosen to dissect his thoughts. Granted, this is a couple years old by now and Peterson has had a lot more to say in that time. Regardless, this is a great book for those that are interested and are possibly weary of the pluralistic nature of Peterson’s approach to teaching scripture.

This is an excellent set of essays about Jordan Peterson, largely generated from a Christian perspective. The range of writers is notable, varying especially to age and professional experience, but this makes the volume interesting as to why and how people have taken such an interest in Peterson. Highly recommended.

Wonderful read!

I'm already enjoying this book.

I was greatly informed by this reading and feel I understand his perspectives better. What seems defificient in the read is a more critical analysis of the unviability of some tensions Peterson maintains. It has provoked me to read his actual writings.

As one who has actually read the book, I feel I am qualified to actually review it. *Ehem*I rather enjoyed this book. Its publication alone calls attention to the fascinating phenomenon Jordan Peterson is. The strongest chapter, in my estimation, is Bruce Ashford's. He positions Peterson within a stream of excellent social commentators to show where he nails it, and where his own metaphysical and religious commitments leave his answers insufficient. It is in this chapter, unsurprisingly (on account of Ashford's affinity with Dutch Reformed theology), that the theological "antithesis" is maintained strongly.Other portions maintained the central impoverishment of Peterson's system, but with varying degrees. The format for most of these chapters (outline of Peterson's thoughts on a given topic, appreciation for commonalities, and highlights of where Peterson falls short) make the book very readable. The exception to this rule of format is Alastair Roberts' chapter that, while laying out a great description of Peterson's concerns as a champion for free speech (and opponent of compelled speech), lacked analysis from the perspective of the Christian worldview (which is a pity, given how much Western Classical Liberal values like free speech owe to the heritage of a broadly Christian worldview). Another standout chapter is Hunter Baker's on Peterson's criticism of Marxism, Postmodernism, and Neo-Marxism. This, I think, is one of Peterson's greatest contributions as a public intellectual, and Baker brings this out well.My two critiques of the book have more to do with apologetic methodology. First, I think Ron Dart's chapter bespeaks an optimism for Peterson's usefulness in Christian apologetics that a thoroughgoing Reformed soteriology does not warrant (I don't know what Dart's views on soteriology are, so that may or may not land as an actual criticism in his own ears). Second, and like it, Dart's chapter, as well as T.S. Wilson's and Laurence Brown's lacked, in my estimation, sufficient emphasis on the metaphysical break between orthodox Christianity and Peterson. His Jungian retrieval of mythology, funneled through psychology, may differ from most materialistic modernism, or skeptical postmodernism, but it nevertheless still presupposes a materialistic cosmos. Peterson is therefore incapable of agreeing with the Christian tradition about what the Bible IS. This was the biggest disappointment in this section of the book, which contained outstanding analysis on Peterson's creative biblical hermeneutic--a section otherwise strong was weakened by the glaring reality left untouched by all three chapters (although Wilson's comes close with his emphasis on stressing the importance of contemplation of Jesus Christ as the burning center of Scripture). The glaring reality that demands attention is this: for Christians, Scripture is DIVINE REVELATION. In other words, these chapters on hermeneutics were interesting, but they left the impression that the difference between Christianity's bibliology and Peterson's could be basically the same (or at least doesn't matter), and that the difference is one of emphasis, or--like in Brown's chapter--theological and historical conviction regarding the death and resurrection of Christ. In fact, the differences are far, far deeper.The length of the above paragraph should not give the impression that the book was bad overall. To the contrary, it is very good, and I commend it highly.*Lexham press was kind enough to give me this book, and they did not demand or expect a positive review. "Myth and Meaning in Jordan Peterson" gets a positive review because it is, in my estimation, a good book.

This is not a book BY Jordan Peterson, it is a series of essays inspired by Jordan Peterson.The book says from a Christian perspective, I didn't find every essay overtly Christian, I found it more traditionally western values-oriented.... which I guess is more or less Christian. There wasn't a Christ focus in every single essay - just a handful of them. The non-christian would like this book if there were a fan of Peterson's perspective I think.

I felt the need to negate these 1-star reviewers who are clearly to lazy to read the cover of a book which clearly lists the author.