are you aware Peterson called in and made jubilee change the title from. "1 Christian" to "Jordan Peterson" afterwards? this is all part of his continuous deception that am still baffled ppl take at face valueI'll only give a partial blame to Peterson on this one. Jubilee obfuscated what this debate was about which made two groups of people talk at cross purposes and this is clearly not Peterson's fault. It was Jubilee's .... AND Peterson did his normal 'everyone is allowed to have ideas as long as they don't disagree with me' schtick he has been doing for a long time

Testy Jordan Peterson exchange during Christianity debate viewed 3.4M times
The Canadian psychologist and author refused to say whether he was a Christian in a debate with 20 atheists.

trying to get any solid answers out of him is like getting blood from stone, and that's because he knows he can't argue any of his stances on their merits alone, the entire schtick is to be everything and nothing at the same time so you can attack everyone else but they can't attack you while you're shifting between whatever stance is most useful for weaseling out of awkward questioning. one guy got him to finally admit he believed in the resurrection of jesus but it took way more hassle than a simple question and answer should;While the video is now entitled Jordan Peterson vs 20 atheists, it is was originally called 1 Christian vs 20 atheists, according to an archived version of the page on WaybackMachine.

Jordan Peterson is sinking into crisis by denying his faith - Catholic Herald
Jordan Peterson’s recent appearance on Jubilee Media’s 1 Christian vs. 20 Atheists (a title that has since been changed for reasons that will become obvious shortly) was not just another clickbait clash of ideologies. It was an unraveling of sorts, one that must be viewed not in isolation, but...

Peterson’s refusal to be pinned down on this question isn’t noble agnosticism. It’s self-preservation masquerading as mystery. It’s not doubt, not humility – it’s strategic shapeshifting. A calculated hedging of bets. It’s the anxiety of a man who knows that clarity can cost him audience numbers. That conviction draws lines. That once truth is named out loud, there’s no retreat; that you can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube, and you can’t unring a bell.
This fact is not lost on the good doctor, which is why he circles continuously. He clouds. He talks of metaphysical realms and psychological utility. But when self-preservation begins to dictate public behaviour, it becomes a kind of possession in its own right. And it doesn’t turn men into prophets. It turns them into politicians.
Let me be clear: he doesn’t need to be a Christian to be worthy of respect. But he does need to be honest. Especially now, especially when his entire public persona is scaffolded around the Christian tradition. When he breaks into tears over Christ. When he urges men to live biblically. When his lectures edge closer and closer to sermons.
You cannot traffic in sacred meaning without ever stating your own. You cannot sell Christian archetypes while dodging Christian identity. You cannot turn the Bible into content and then refuse to say whether you believe a word of it. That’s not wisdom. That’s not right. You don’t get to bathe in the sacred for profit and then towel off when questioned. That’s cowardice.
The truth is, Peterson has become a preacher for a disenchanted generation. For better or worse, people believe him and look to him for answers. And when those people – broken, angry, searching – ask if he believes, they deserve more than weird word games.
If he said “Yes, I believe,” I’d respect the clarity. If he said “No, I don’t,” I’d respect the courage. If he said “I don’t know,” I’d respect the humility. But the stern-faced sexagenarian doesn’t say any of those things. What he offers instead is a maze of sophistry. You can’t build a church, fill it with seekers, light the candles, hand out hymnals, and then slink into the confessional and duck for cover when asked if you believe.
That’s not humility. That’s abdication. That’s spiritual cowardice. Jordan Peterson has told millions to shoulder the cross, to walk the narrow path and to act in an honest manner. But honesty requires a spine. And right now, all we’re getting is squirming.
hindsight for some maybe, but for others studying far right tactics, beliefs, rhetoric etc it was not only obvious but intensely frustrating trying to warn ppl. back then I knew far far less while learning on the go with help from more experienced researchers, but still enough to recognise his hysterical bullshit for what it was. let's not forget the whole reason he got famous was through melodramatic claims he's going to be sent to prison for misgendering any of his students if the goddamn communists get their way. and if that wasn't enough, anyone in the media who bothered to even mildly look into his personal history would find attempts to become reactionary RW politician (before he got famous for the trans hysteria) in local elections, alongside regular spouting off about the looming communist far left fascist threat about to take away everyone's freedoms as well as corrupting all education already. in the video above there's footage showing his pretty glaring historical revisionism of Hitler and the holocaust, somehow totally ignored and kicked under the rug all these years also.There's an element of hindsight in that. Jordan Peterson was, back in the day, a respected academic who wrote a reasonable self-help book for men and had some controversial political views: there was no particular reason to metaphorically slap him silly. It was only later he became nothing but a petty little troll. Intolerance should be reserved for the intolerable, otherwise we're the fascists.
to be clear, I'm referring to the media class here in regards to frustration, it was implied their jobs were journalism not surface-level reactionary stenographers for bad faith far right shit-stirrers while coincidentally saving those precious investigative resources for dissecting/dissolving progressive (in the economic sense) activists they can't just comfortably ignore anymore - mainstream legacy speaking, hashtag notallmedia and all that jazz of course. but how many financially insecure ppl really get to read the private eye these days?
Last edited: