"The modern Christian prefers the Gospel of Nice to the Gospel of Christ" (UPDATED)

I touched yesterday on what should be done in answer to the Islamic threat, a piece perhaps summarized by the following bullets:

  1. End the political correctness that results in minimizing the threat
  2. More effectively fulfill God’s Great Commission
  3. Identify Islamism as evil and confront it (but not with evil)

Today I come across a post put up by Bill Warner at American Thinker that puts some meat on the bones of my own commentary.  In it he directly challenges Christian leaders, asking them to fulfill the mission of being Shepherds of God’s flock:

If you ask a Christian leader why he does not speak out on Islam, you get some version of: My duty is to tend to my flock, to help them become better Christians. My job is not to oppose Islam.

What would it mean if a Christian leader tried to follow Christ’s example of knowing the subject? It would mean that the leader would know the Koran and the Sunna of Mohammed. He would be able to comment on the great themes of the Koran and know it as a story. He would know the Sira, the life of Mohammed, and have detailed knowledge of the Hadith. He would know the history of the Christian dhimmi. He would know what happened to the Seven Churches of Asia mentioned in Revelation. He would know how Egypt, Turkey, North Africa, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon all went from being Christian to Islamic. This is not difficult work for a scholar. It can be done in six months with present books. Just reading Mark Durie’s The Third Choice, would give them a running start. He would know more than 90% of all Christian leaders.

Once you get your knowledge, you need one more quality: courage. A leader would stand in public and discuss the truth of the facts of Islam. According to political correctness and multiculturalism, that would not be nice, since someone might disapprove or become upset. Nice people do not confront others. That is not nice. The modern Christian prefers the Gospel of Nice to the Gospel of Christ. As a result of the Gospel of Nice, the Christian leader does not need courage.

Does tending the flock include being able to give fact-based advice to the Christian woman who comes to him and asks if it all right to marry a Muslim? Tending the flock would mean knowing the doctrine of wife-beating found in the Sharia, Koran and Hadith. The nice thing to do is saying, “Sure marry the Muslim. We worship the same god.” That is nice, but it is a lie. That nice lie is the one that many shepherds have given their flock.

Tending the flock would mean being able to teach a Christian who is flirting with Islam the truth about Islamic doctrine. But if the leader is ignorant, how can he refute Islamic arguments for the Christian to convert?

What if the flock extended beyond the limits of the boundaries of the church building? Tending the flock would include the suffering of Christians in Africa and the Middle East. A good Shepherd would tell of the murder, rape and abuse perpetrated by Islam on Christians on a daily basis.

Would the idea of a larger flock mean inviting persecuted Christians to speak to the congregation? Should the persecuted be recognized and prayed for at church? The current nice policy is to never mention the martyrs or the oppression of the Christians in Muslim countries.

A Christian leader would be able to see that the Great Commission of preaching the gospel would include converting Muslims to Christianity, increasing their flock. Preaching the Gospel to Muslims may be in the Gospel of Christ, but it is excluded from the Gospel of Nice. As a result, Christian leaders avoid the Great Commission when it comes to Islam in the West.

We will never defeat Political Islam as long as our Christian leaders see their job as being nice.

There’s more, including some much needed advice to the black church which, as Warner puts it, is “hemorrhaging young males to Islam“.

Read it all, pass it on, perhaps even to a Christian shepherd near you.

UPDATE: Since publishing this post, I’ve come across this Dave Henninger article at the Wall Street Journal pointing to the confrontational tactics employed by the Pope:

This being the season of hope, Islamic extremists of course have been engaged in their annual tradition of blowing up Christian churches.

An attack by a radical Muslim sect on two churches in northern Nigeria killed six people on Christmas Eve. On the Philippines’ Jolo Island, home to al Qaeda-linked terrorists, a chapel bombing during Christmas Mass injured 11.

One of the central public events during these days at year’s end is the Pope’s midnight Mass at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. In his homily the pope invariably pleads for peace, but on Friday evening a viewer could not have missed the meaning when Benedict XVI twice mentioned “garments rolled in blood,” from Isaiah 9:5.

The image, as befits Isaiah, is poetic and disturbing. Benedict surely intended it so: “It is true,” he said, “that the ‘rod of his oppressor’ is not yet broken, the boots of warriors continue to tramp and the ‘garment rolled in blood’ still remains.” He was of course referring to the sustained violence against Christian minorities by Islamic fundamentalists.

Hours before this, from a window above St. Peter’s Square, Benedict also took a pass on the holiday pabulum handed out by other world leaders this time of year by explicitly criticizing China. He said the “faithful of the church in mainland China [should not] lose heart through the limitations imposed on their freedom of religion and conscience.”

All that before the latest bombing in Egypt. 

I look forward to Pope Benedict’s continued eschewing of the Gospel of Nice.

The End Of An Error
Birds Of A Feather Drop Together