Theologically Sound. Culturally Relevant.

Redeemed Zoomer vs Andrew Isker

Redeemed Zoomer vs Andrew Isker: Is The Boniface Option Retreatist?

Andrew Isker’s book The Boniface Option is a lot of things, but it comes as a surprise to hear the book be called “retreatist” by Redeemed Zoomer. Redeemed Zoomer is a popular Christian YouTuber with 394K subs. He is also the face of the broader movement for the Reconquista of Mainline denominations. Last week he had some choice words to say about Christian Nationalism.

For the record, wars have been won by sacrificing the cities and consolidating the countryside. So Redeemed Zoomer’s tactical advice is duly noted. I may have set off this story by encouraging him to read Isker’s book.

And then this happened:

The Boniface Option advocates consolidating one’s life and building networks to take back the culture. That’s not retreatism, that’s rallying, something the quotes in Redeemed Zoomer’s criticism advocate.

Redeemed Zoomer believes that building a parallel economy is retreatism, and in some cases that is correct. However, The Boniface Option is more of a precursor to a Reconquista than a manual to do so. There is helpful wisdom for Redeemed Zoomer’s mission, but the book is not about how to accomplish it. Andrew Isker notes that mainline denominations are designed to prevent Reconquista, a fact coming up at the upcoming PCUSA meeting.

But Redeemed Zoomer touts the Southern Baptist Convention and the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod as successful examples of Reconquista. It’s worth noting that the LCMS was formed out of a Lutheran split on liberalism. Both denominations are currently helmed by liberals, but only in the SBC are men fighting back.

This story has a happy ending as Redeemed Zoomer gives a charitable summary of Andrew Isker’s book.

Redeemed Zoomer began as a hardcore liberal before becoming Christian. There’s a lot of liberalism to lose, but you can see it happen over time while he is actively contending for the faith. People like Redeemed Zoomer are far more reasonable than regime-approved voices like Neil Shenvi who also critiqued Isker’s book. More on that to come.

Powered by RedCircle

Receive the Evangelical Dark Web Newsletter

Bypass Big Tech censorship, and get Christian news in your inbox directly.

Support the Evangelical Dark Web

By becoming a member of Evangelical Dark Web, you get access to more content, help drive the direction of our research, and support the operations of the ministry.
Facebook
Twitter
Telegram
Reddit
LinkedIn

4 Responses

  1. I know you guys disagree with me but I take the approach of more of the John MacArthur approach, focusing on the local church and strengthen the local church because if we strengthen the local church and keep them Biblically sound and raising Godly children, going out to spread the Gospel. The rest of society will fall into place.

    The main reason why I disagree getting involved politically is because it distracts from the main objective spreading the Gospel.

  2. You younger boys want to fight, and that’s understandable. We are indeed at war. But you’re getting a bit too over-eager, imo. Making big plans and strategies. Focusing on institutions. Trying to think things through on your own. That’s where you’re getting off track.

    God’s word already contains His strategy for defeating the real enemy and overcoming the world.

    He knows mankind better than we know ourselves. He knows the enemy better than we ever could. His strategies are infinitely superior to anything we could conceive of our own accord.

    Don’t just pay lip service to the sufficiency of scripture. Recognize that it truly is sufficient. Read through the epistles, and look for the strategy of the apostles, the Lord’s strategy as conveyed to them by the Holy Spirit.

    It’s in there, you just need to look for it and pay attention to it.

    Then just do what He says to do. He’s the general and supreme commander. We are the infantry. The battle belongs to the Lord. Let Him worry about the strategy.

  3. The starkest thing about Richard Ackerman is that his belief of Creation is not in Genesis, it is against Genesis. The belief every person in the small o orthodox faith has when it comes to to Creation is that God made man. Richard Ackerman has made it clear, he thinks that Adam was plucked out of many people to be a chosen representative of the human race. He believes evolution and has made it clear. So who knows what theories he holds to be true and how much he will compromise on other places in theology.

  4. I think due to the “cultural” or “creation” mandate (as well as other ideas from Scripture) that Christians should be involved in the surrounding culture, which includes politics, in order to “try” to push things as close to God’s law as possible. We will never do it perfectly. That will be when Christ returns. And, everyone’s involvement will look different. At least vote. Maybe be involved at a local level. I do believe we should be involved and not retreat. But we do this ultimately knowing that only the gospel can change a person’s heart. Or, to put it another way, I believe that we should use the law to enforce the second table of the law, and preach the gospel to bring about obedience to the first. The Great Commission seems to be a “restating” of the cultural mandate, but taking it a much more spiritual level, with man’s need for salvation front and center.

    We are to set our mind on things above, but we can’t necessarily ignore the things below in terms of what we are responsible for. Preach the gospel and be a godly influence (“challenge”, even) on the surrounding culture.

Leave a Reply