Jordan Peterson’s Midrash
“In Judaism, we take a strong view on this, and we have now for 2,000 years and we say reading the Bible literally is heresy”.[i] This surprising statement was made by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, an orthodox chief Rabbi from the United Kingdom, in a lively debate with one of the most famous atheist and Evolutionary biologists in the world today, Richard Dawkins. Several topics were discussed during this hour-long back and forth, but one point Rabbi Sacks made in the conversation was that Richard’s book, the God Delusion, was attacking biblical literalism, specifically in America, over the Jewish or Judeo-Christian faith as a whole. While reading through Jordan Peterson’s book, Maps of Meaning, and listening to his lectures on the Bible, I was taken back to the statement above by Rabbi Sacks on biblical literalism which Peterson admits struggling with growing up.[ii]
Jordan Peterson’s approach to religious stories and cultural myths, similar to Joseph Campbell’s work, moves beyond the literal meaning of a text in an attempt to excavate the psychological archetypes and realities hidden below the surface. This approach also reminded me of Jewish Midrash which is a method of 
interpreting and expounding on Jewish Scriptures in a way that moves beyond the literal words, as Rabbi Sacks mentioned, to find deeper meaning and revelation.[iii] If you’ve ever explored this method it is easy for Christians to wonder, how did they get this from that passage? Although it can be a complex approach to Jewish Scripture, similar to Peterson’s, it serves the purpose of remaining faithful to tradition while finding applicable relevance for new circumstances and discoveries. This is what Jordan Peterson attempts to do with ancient stories, some Judeo-Christian, and some not, for Westerners in this book. He is moving beyond “literalism” to uncover universal patterns in ancient stories that can guide us today.
Narratives like Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Noah, Moses, etc. that many in the West have disregarded as irrelevant, he utilizes to explore subjects like order and chaos, human nature, the shadow self, anxiety, personal responsibility, and rebirth. He reinforces the theory, like Campbell, that universal themes keep showing up all around the world in our religious and cultural stories which should get our attention. He says, “It is reasonable to presume that, over the long run, our species “forgets” most things that are useless: we do not forget our myths, however. Indeed, much of the activity broadly deemed ‘cultural’ is in fact the effort to ensure that myths are constantly represented and communicated.”[iv] This reinforces what other anthropologists and psychologists have noticed about stories and myths. If certain patterns, archetypes, and themes keep showing up around the world in various narratives they must be expressing something deep within us and important for humans to survive and thrive.
Peterson, from what I’ve noticed over the years of watching his lectures, is concerned with how humans behave and act in the world. The stories that cultures believe and tell will determine, or at least highly influence, people’s actions and values. Peterson says, “Nonetheless, to live, it is necessary to act. Action presupposes belief and interpretation (implicit, if not explicit). Belief has to be grounded in faith, in the final analysis (as the criteria by which a moral theory might be evaluated have to be chosen as well).[v] I have been thinking a lot about belief systems lately. For example, if someone, Christian, agnostic, Hindu, Buddhist, or hardcore atheist, comes along and says, “You can’t treat people like that!” Another person could say, “Says who?” That same person could follow up by saying, “Prove to me empirically why I should care about or treat that person or people like I would my own group”. Without some kind of belief system to stand on, like ‘all humans have inherited value and deserve dignity regardless of race, disability, gender, orientation, class, or age’ which many of us extrapolate from the Genesis myth, there is no legitimate ground to stand on. Fukuyama says we all desire dignity, but what is going to motivate others to care or live that reality out toward others?[vi] These are truths woven in the Genesis story and found in the life and teachings of Christ. Although I can’t prove these things as self-evident through the scientific method, I ultimately choose to hold them as true. After reading several history books, I don’t want to live in a world that is not shaped by this theological belief system.
Thoughts on Interpretation
Since implicit bias is on the brain from reading Pragya Agarwal’s book, Sway, I find it highly probable that Peterson’s background in psychology is influencing how he interprets ancient stories. His connections and assumptions, especially about the details, and what they mean is likely a product of both exegesis and eisegesis.
Exegesis: To draw out or explain.[vii] Attempting to determine the historical context within which a passage or text was written or compiled to understand what it meant to them. What was the “Sitz im Leben” or setting in life.[viii]
Eisegeses: Reading meaning into a text. Interpreting a text in such a way that introduces one’s own presuppositions, agendas, and biases into it. Many also call this “proof-texting” meaning I already believe something so I will go out and find a verse or passage to prove my case.[ix]
What was interesting about my first few years of biblical education, is the time we spent on methods to “properly” exegete a biblical text to discover its original meaning, if that is even possible. However, we spent very little time critically examining how humans, especially commentators, could have imposed their own ideas, biases, and perspectives onto their experiences or texts at any given era of time. Interpreters like Peterson always prompt me to wonder how much modern-day thought is being forced into these ancient stories, but then I think:
Is that a bad thing? Is this part of the natural process of moving tradition forward?
Is this not what is likely happening to one degree or another when any of us are making sense of material from the past. How can it not? Does this not happen with Midrash to an extent? We will inevitably carry our own modernity and religious tradition with us when interpreting texts in order to keep our traditions relevant and applicable as society and situations evolve. In a podcast I heard several years ago, Richard Dawkins, once again, was throwing arguments against religion. He claimed that religious folks keep “reinterpreting” their text in light of modern advancements! Slavery, theology, divorce, science, interracial marriage, women’s rights, excommunication, homosexuality, etc. He makes a good point in some ways, but he also misses the important role of story, tradition, and meta-narratives in shaping human beings. Once again with Dawkins, the issue may be literalism. If anything, Jordan Peterson’s psychological and beyond-literal interpretations of biblical stories are getting many in the modern world who had lost their interest in faith to reengage the Judeo-Christian tradition in a deeper and more meaningful way and I believe that is a win.
[i] 1. “Rethink – Debate with Rabbi Sacks and Richard Dawkins,” YouTube, December 8, 2022, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ad3rVRdgbI&t=739s.
[ii] Peterson, Jordan B. Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief, New York: Routledge, 1999, xii.
[iii] McKim, Donald K. Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms, Louisville, Ky: Westminster John Knox Press [u.a.], 1997, 173.
[iv] Peterson, Maps of Meaning, 91.
[v] Ibid.,92.
[vi] Fukuyama, Francis. Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2018.
[vii] McKim, Westminister, 98.
[viii] Ibid., 262.
[ix] Ibid., 87.
About the Author
Adam Harris
I am currently the Associate Pastor at a church called Godwhy in Hendersonville, TN near Nashville. We love questions and love people even more. Our faith community embraces God and education wholeheartedly. I graduated from Oral Roberts University for undergrad and Vanderbilt for my masters. I teach historical critical Biblical studies at my church to help our community through their questions and ultimately deepen their faith. I love research, writing, learning, and teaching. I oversee our staff and leadership development. Before being at Godwhy I worked as a regional sales coach and director for Anytime Fitness. I've been married for over 13 years to my best friend and we have two amazing boys that keep us busy.9 responses to “Jordan Peterson’s Midrash”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Adam, I appreciate your connection to Midrash as a way of understanding Peterson’s perspective. I noticed in a few videos I watched of him speaking that he often spoke of what is true. In some ways I was confused by this since it seems he is talking about universal truths more than religious beliefs. I have had little exposure to Peterson’s writing or speeches until this week. Since you indicated you have watched his lectures, in your opinion what truth, belief system, or ideological perspective best describes him? He does seem to go after post-modernism quite a bit.
Peterson can be hard to pin down and he also seems to be going through a spiritual evolution of personal discover. I would recommend reading Scott’s post on him. Peterson has become more and more open to the idea of Christianity and God. Earlier, it seems at least, he looked at these stories primarily as psychological, similar to Joseph Campbell, but has become more open to spiritual realities in the Christian faith. He is also pretty conservative politically, but would be considered more liberal in his theology at this point. I’m not on board with all he says, which is the case with everyone I listen to, but he is opening many people up to faith which is great.
Bro! Fist bump with my left hand while pumping my fist in the air with my right hand! After this post I definitely need to apologize for everything I have said about you and your posts. All those past comments were understatements because you are brilliant bro!
First of all, you had me at “midrash” and I love your opening quote by Sacks. I definitely need to listen to that debate.
I really like your statement, about Peterson’s book “moves beyond the literal meaning of a text in an attempt to excavate the psychological archetypes and realities hidden below the surface.” Brilliant how you tied in midrash here!
Another quote of yours that I’m still pondering is “we spent very little time critically examining how humans, especially commentators, could have imposed their own ideas, biases, and perspectives onto their experiences or texts at any given era of time.” You tend to say in one sentence what can take me about 3 paragraphs to explain. I did not grow up religious and thought about how much those commentators, theologians, professors, and pastors were actually imposing their own perspective into the book or text. Of course that was a taboo back in the 80’s. Any way, I loved your blog and if I had a third hand, I’d be fist pumping with that one too! I appreciate sooo much, the insight you bring to this cohort! 😊
Thank you so much Todd, you are the world’s best hype man! I’m glad you enjoyed my post, I’ve was teaching a class that touched on Midrash while reading this and thought, “wow this seems to be similar to what he is doing to an extent.” As far as imposing, I really don’t see how any of us get around not allowing our own stuff to make its way into our interpretations of ancient texts like the Bible. Thanks for the response and encouraging words!
When you said :If anything, Jordan Peterson’s psychological and beyond-literal interpretations of biblical stories are getting many in the modern world who had lost their interest in faith to reengage the Judeo-Christian tradition in a deeper and more meaningful way and I believe that is a win. I think you are right. Thank you for working out Petersons approach with exegesis and eisegesis, very informative!
Thanks for the response, if anything, love him or hate him, he has done that. Many of the guys in a group I am in (1/3 of them agnostics or athiest) bring him up quite a bit which has led us into some great conversations about the big questions involving God, faith, morals, etc.
I agree with Jana, I really appreciate you working through his approach with exegesis and eisegesis. That was very valuable information for me. This is an excellent post. I learned a great deal and I am always appreciative of your perspective on the readings.
Hi Adam!
I really enjoy your writing which, after years of diving into Peterson’s thinking, can explain your meaning of Peterson’s book very well.
I resonate with your thoughts, ” If anything, Jordan Peterson’s psychological and beyond-literal interpretations of biblical stories are getting many in the modern world who have lost their interest in faith to reengage the Judeo-Christian tradition in a deeper and more meaningful way and I believe that is a win.”
I see that Peterson’s psychoanalytic approach actually helps Christianity and the church to reconstruct its teachings systematically and critically. Peterson, a rationalist, actually helped Christianity and the church, in my opinion, to see how the Bible is a large narrative that has a systemic pattern that cannot be a coincidence because it was written by many people over a long period. Who is behind it all? This is where we can answer, He is the Light who became human, Jesus Christ.
Blessings.
Thanks Dinka, agreed, if anything he is prompting people to dust off the Bible and reengage it again with fresh eyes. He also seems to be on a spiritual journey himself and seems to be more and more fascinated with the Christian meta narrative.