The Game of Thrones and Reformed Internet Apologetics

Reformed Apologetics is a theological Game of Thrones. Ignore the urge to play.

Winter is coming.

That’s a line from A Song of Ice and Fire, which you probably know as Game of Thrones, the soft-core ‘adult’ fantasy show from HBO. Big Eva’s gay bestie, Sam Alberry, once tweeted out that he “preferred people watch Game of Thrones than read Pulpit & Pen,” which didn’t surprise me because - as previously mentioned - he’s gay. For the record, I read the book, and didn’t watch the show.

Anyway, “winter is coming” is the motto of House Stark, and was used as a reminder that hard times are approaching the Seven Kingdoms.

But, as George R.R. Martin (the author) described for us, the Known World couldn’t get itself together long enough to prepare adequately for the White Walkers to cross the Northern Wall in Westeros. The kingdoms instead were too preoccupied fighting over the Iron Throne. Every petulant brat and their inbred cousin wanted to rule the Seven Kingdoms, which if they didn’t get their act together, would be consumed by abominable snowmen and dragons.

Well, if I could draw the comparison, the small world of Reformed Apologetics - or more precisely, the small world of Reformed Internet Apologetics has been a constant battle for who will rule us all (all 134 of us) since at least 1996 (I don’t want to compare the valuable work of the Reformers, Puritans, or Non-Conformists with the Bishops of YouTubia). There is, metaphorically, an Iron Throne set up in the mind of every pop-theologian, and over the issue of who will sit upon it, has been the cause of many a skirmish.

Like the Baratheons, Lannisters, and Targaryens, their goal is to be crowned king, although why is sometimes taken for granted. Different houses, like the Starks and Greyjoys, have raised armies of loyal subjects to do battle over who will be the one king to rule them all.

“I am Dylan, of the House Alpha and Omega, subject of James the White Beard, who fights with the Sword Exegesis. We drink from the Ice of Smirnoff.”

“I am Kyle, of the House G3, subject of Josh the Buice, friend of Ascol the Founder.”

“I am Kevin, from the House of Mohler in the Southern Kingdom. Our watch keep is the Ivory Tower.”

“I am Aiden, of the House MacArthur, the Ancient One. We are from the Kingdom of the Western Coast.”

The battle for control over the niche Reformed evangelical low-church cyber real estate is very real. And usually, the various Kingdoms of the Reformed World don’t fight each other, so much as fight any up-and-coming prince who may challenge the precarious balance of power.

If you like my work, please consider getting a paid subscription of $8 a month or $80 a year to obtain exclusive content. This is part of what I do to support my family, so I would sure appreciate it.

When you think about the great Internet battles over the last 15 years within Reformed Internet Apologetics, it’s largely absent of anyone outside Reformed Internet Apologetics. While most skirmishes and wars start out with acknowledgments that these our ‘intramural’ debates, a brief historic survey will demonstrates that intramural infighting is all there is in these camps (except occasionally, we go to war with the Charismatics in between our fights).

The theology-minded have a tendency to fight exclusively theological wars, ironically with those only one or two degrees of difference with us. And that’s a crying shame, because there’s no shortage of enemies to attack if our primary concern wasn’t holding on to our power and control over our niche.

Consider, if you will, that the finest and fiercest group of theological warriors to exist in the 20th Century were the Theonomists (the real ones, not the fake General Equity kind). Rushdoony, North, Bahnsen, Jordan, Chilton, et al were ferocious beasts at contending for what they believed was truth. But their history has now been written, and they never fought the secular pluralists at all. They were too busy fighting inside the bubble that they couldn’t ever make it outside the bubble, to the larger culture, where the fight needed to be.

But they’re only one example, and not the exception. They were the rule.

Consider the last 20 years of The Dividing Line. Can anyone deny that James White has a formidable intellect? Sure, he does. But his keen wit and sharpest tongue has been reserved for whom? It’s not been Muslims or Papists or Mormons (all of whom he treats with gentleness and respect per 1 Peter 3:15), but for fellow evangelicals - especially Reformed evangelicals - who have shown disagreement or indicated an unwillingness to give him deference worthy of Joffrey Baratheon.

I remember well the first time I listened to one of his debate reviews - many years ago - in which the entire time he explained how the guy on the correct side of the debate sucked, and how he could have done better. I thought it was weird at the time, because I didn’t understand how the Game of Thrones was played.

There is, as I’ve explained before, only so many followers, patrons, supporters, and fans to go around, and many figures in Reformed Apologetics will fight to the death to keep their subjects loyal.

When I saw, for example, that the evidence clearly showed that Joel Webbon was wronged, and Tobias Ramsteinsclindönger did the wronging, I winced at what was about to happen; the only thing worse than a Reformed Internet Apologist proving you wrong, is when you’re proven right. That’s when the trouble is about to hit the fan, and they’re about to rain ugly down on you. If they can’t prove you wrong, for them it will suffice to only prove you’re bad. That’s because, if you’re bad, then whether or not they’re right no longer matters.

None of this is to say that the kings of Reformed Internet Apologetics don’t provide value to the Kingdom of God. They certainly do. James the White Beard, for example, is exactly who you should turn to if you want to understand issues surrounding textual criticism. Josh the Buice is who you should turn to if you don’t read Protestia and want to find out what they were concerned about two years ago. You get the point; everybody has value. Certain expressions I’ve found infinitely helpful from White include, “God uses our sin in an sinless way to accomplish his sinless will” and “the Bible uses the term ‘world’ 17 different ways in the Johannine Corpus alone.”

Seriously, I’ll always appreciate that stuff.

But the thing is, Reformed doctrine isn’t changing. Sure, there are weird eccentricities and momentary novelties that pop up from time to time, like Federal Vision and Theonomy 1.0, the YRR Movement, and the way the Emergent Church almost nicked us 15 years ago, but our best teachers are dead men. We aren’t trying to recreate doctrines. Our doctrines are old.

The fact is, Reformed Internet Apologetics is largely beneficial to lazy men, who either can’t do their own reading or don’t know how to access commentaries. It’s also beneficial for younger men who collect their favorite apologetics celebrities like autists collect Pokemon cards.

There is - and hear me out - an entire world of lost people who don’t know Jesus. There is also an entire church in America that’s largely ignorant of basic Christian doctrines. And there is an entire nation of people who don’t understand that their conservative worldview is sourced in the Holy Bible.

And none of those people - none at all - are anywhere close to the echo chamber of Reformed Internet Apologetics. The vast array of such podcasts might as well be screaming into their pillow, because nobody who needs to hear them is hearing them. And that’s just as well, because they aren’t saying much valuable for anyone outside of the theo-nerd world of perpetual doctrinal naval gazing.

If Christian Nationalism requires implementation of First Table Commands (for example, laws that govern blasphemy, compel support for a specific religion, criminalize Sabbath breaking etc) I am not a Christian Nationalist. Or another way to phrase it, if Christian Nationalism would expand the powers of government in any way, I’m not for that. And clearly, I’m not for the implementation of the Civil Code penologies “except that which the general equity may require.”

I like my government like I like my women; lean, quiet, and not nagging me.

That said, I enthusiastically admire the gumption of the Christian Nationalists, if for no other reason they appear to have a keen interest in doing something in this world besides telling other people how bad their theology is. They’re like Abolish Human Abortion (AHA); I may not be able to get behind every single thing they do, but I’m glad they’re out there doing something. I was out there doing something for quite a while, and it gets lonely on the picket line.

My caution to the Christian Nationalists primarily centers on the incredible temptation to sit around arguing with dusty old apologetics curmudgeons all day “about the best kinds of laws” (as Calvin said), and getting distracted by the flak shot at them by people only interested in keeping their throne warm. They must understand that a good many Bishops of the Internet are only concerned with keeping their patron support high, which means (they think) it requires keeping everyone else’s patron support low. And this is accomplished by the endless casting of shade.

The Populist Social Revival (PSR) has put wind at our backs, as serious-minded Christians. Many people are awakening daily to the General Revelation that God has provided in things like the handiwork of his creation, logic, and God-given common sense. They are seeking and searching, because God’s Spirit is at work in them, but they aren’t going to stumble upon a Dividing Line podcast or even an episode of Theology Applied. They might stumble upon Protestia Tonight, because at least it’s interesting, but even that remains unlikely.

Rather, these searchers are staggering through the Public Marketplace of Ideas, and Reformed Internet Apologetics doesn’t even have a kiosk there. We don’t even have a vending machine nearby.

Christian Nationalism, or whatever you want to call it, has the perfect avenue for infiltrating our lost culture. Topics like taxes, immigration, just war, the nuclear family, and gender roles are all topics that resonate with them. And these are all topics that are doctrines, if we could only convince them that God has much to say about these things.

When you preach outside abortion clinics and gay parades, there is almost inevitably some random demoniac who tries to get you aside to ask you seemingly-sincere theological questions. This will flatter the novice rabble rouser, but veteran street preachers understand that it’s usually a ploy of the devil to quiet your voice and stop your messaging; a demonic distraction, if you will.

I’d like everyone to stop for a moment and think about whether or not Christian Nationalism has been distracted for the last few weeks, and why. Has it not been unnecessary poppycock? I’d submit that’s exactly what it is, combined with attacks from those threatened by the growing voice of a few gifted men.

Guys, ignore them. They’re only interested in keeping their throne. And trust me, you don’t want it.