Jordan Peterson Should Stop Profiting from Religious Teaching While Refusing to Affirm Personal Belief in God
Source: Beverly Willett. "Jordan Peterson Wants To Keep His Faith Private And Profit Off It." October 2, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that Jordan Peterson is being hypocritical: he's built a hugely profitable education business teaching about the Bible and morality, but when people ask him directly if he actually believes in God, he dodges the question every time. She says if he wants to keep his personal faith private, that's his right, but then he shouldn't be making money off religious teachings he won't personally commit to.
Conclusion
Jordan Peterson should stop using God and biblical teachings to generate profit if he continues to keep his personal religious beliefs private and refuses to answer whether he believes in God.
Premises
- Peterson has built a lucrative business (Peterson Academy, now with 110+ courses, 70,000 students, and $5,000 lifetime memberships) that increasingly relies on biblical teachings and references.
- Despite extensively using religious material professionally (books, courses, lectures on the Sermon on the Mount, 'The Sacred and the Profane'), Peterson consistently refuses to directly answer whether he personally believes in God.
- Peterson reduces biblical truths to psychological symbolism rather than engaging with their literal/spiritual claims, avoiding discussion of Jesus's suffering, death, resurrection, and the grace they represent.
- When directly asked about his beliefs, Peterson deflects with evasive or contradictory answers ('none of your damned business,' 'I act as if God exists,' multiple denials followed by qualifications).
- Refusing to acknowledge God while still extensively profiting from religious content constitutes a form of denial, per the biblical standard that failing to acknowledge Christ is equivalent to denying Him.
- Peterson's moral philosophy, which grounds ethics in evolution and history rather than God, makes him a moral relativist despite his claims of advocating moral absolutes.
- The author's personal experience attending a Peterson event reinforced that he offers performance without genuine personal vulnerability or spiritual disclosure.
Assumptions
- There is an inherent inconsistency or hypocrisy in profiting from religious/biblical content while refusing to personally affirm the religious claims underlying that content.
- Public figures who teach about religious and moral topics for profit have an obligation to disclose their personal beliefs on those topics.
- Genuine engagement with biblical truth requires personal acknowledgment of Jesus as Lord and Savior, not merely philosophical or psychological interpretation.
- Evasiveness about one's beliefs when directly questioned is itself a meaningful indicator of disbelief or spiritual avoidance, not legitimate intellectual caution.
- A Christian theological framework (specifically citing Matthew 10 and the concept of denial of Christ) is the appropriate standard for evaluating Peterson's conduct.
- Peterson's psychological/symbolic interpretation of scripture is inherently insufficient or illegitimate compared to traditional theistic interpretation.