Get E-Mail Updates

Gingrich Labels 'Irreconcilable Wing of Islam' but Ignores Irascible Christianity

"'Tell me what distinguishes the murderer at Fort Hood, the people we arrested in Denver and Detroit and New York, and the five people who were just picked up in Pakistan?'" Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich posed rhetorically in December on Meet the Press. "You could say, 'Well, they weren't Rotarians.' But it would be politically incorrect to describe the one common characteristic they have, which is they all belong to an irreconcilable wing of Islam which wants to destroy our civilization."

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

For Mr. Gingrich, this 'fact' belies a deeper issue in American politics with self-deception. "Until we can have an honest conversation and not be self-deceptive about our enemies, it's pretty hard to design a strategy" for dealing with them. To be fair, this "irreconcilable wing of Islam" was only one among multiple threats identified by Mr. Gingrich, but it was the one he emphasized the most. He prefaced his remarks by apologizing, "We don't even have a language ... I would describe the irreconcilable wing of Islam, some of my friends would describe Islamists, in large parts of our current culture that's politically incorrect."

Mr. Gingrich's concerns sound reasoned; they sound measured. The other participants in the panel were drawn in. No one challenged Mr. Gingrich's notion, except for Mayor Bloomberg's brief mention that "most Muslims around the world are God-fearing people just like you and me." Still, he let Gingrich's notion of an "irreconcilable wing of Islam" stand as measured and reasoned. But I was offended. Measured disrespect is disrespect no less. As a follower of God in the way of Jesus, I find it disingenuous and incendiary to speak of an "irreconcilable wing of Islam" without simultaneously confessing the irascible wing of a pro-West Christendom.

Of course there are those who will immediately disagree with this assessment, intimating if not saying openly, "The Muslims attacked us, in the name of their God ... If we don't take the fight to them, they will continue to bring the fight to us ... They hate our way of life ... 'Moderate Muslims' aren't doing enough to betray the radicals among them ... They only understand brute force." Such tinderbox irascibility shows itself to be just as irreconcilable when it continues to be the primary reaction of those who pledge allegiance to the Prince of Peace, but devote themselves instantly to 'just' war.

What proponents of this way of thinking fail to grasp is that Gingrich's language is disingenuous because it does not afford Muslims the same protections from linguistic malfeasance that we as self-identifying Christians afford ourselves. If one were to try to play up direct or indirect ties between domestic terrorists and Christianity, we would immediately draw a bright line differentiating 'us' from 'them,' even though the Army of God, Lambs of Christ, and other Christian Identity and Christian Patriot activists claim unapologetically religious motives. We qualify the differences between us and them with adjectives like 'true' and 'real' and insist on a public rehearsal of our most admirable qualities, yet seldom does this register as insincere or self-serving.

Our ability to disambiguate shows itself even more highly developed when we laud the Christianity of our cultural, political, and historic heroes and leaders while at the same time reserving judgement or rendering neutral their moral shortcomings, even though the cost of those shortcomings is often human lives (consider most recently the internationally illegal act of "preemptive" aggression called the Iraq War). No matter what our Christianity may cost others, we seem ever capable of delineating our faith from our failures.

[to be continued]

Melvin BrayMelvin Bray (melvinbray.com) is a devoted husband, committed father, learner, teacher, writer, storyteller, purveyor of sustainability, and believer in possibilities. He is a contributing author to the recent compilation Audacity of Faith: Christian Leaders Reflect on the Election of Barack Obama (Judson Press) and an active participant in the Emergent Village.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: John Mulholland

01-05-2010 @ 6:19pm

"As a follower of God in the way of Jesus,"

What does this mean? Can one be a "follower of God in the way of Mohamed?"

by: Ken Peters

01-05-2010 @ 6:22pm

While the sentiments of fairness expressed by Melvin Bray are aimed at even handedness, there seems to be a fog of squeamishness amongst many of our progressive Christian thinkers. I think Newt Gingrich is exactly right admitting we have real enemies that are from the radical wing of Islam who are dedicated in their purpose to destroy us. The fringe groups of the extreme Christian right are not their moral equivalent, though wrong-headed and certainly not representative of the heart of Christ in a variety of ways. These militants of the Christian right extremity are more likely to do violence against Washington DC than foreign governments. And if they did attack foreign governments would we complain about profiling or would we help by supplying information and apologizing in all directions for the misrepresentation of Christianity. I think the latter.

by: ChristGraceFaith

01-05-2010 @ 6:32pm

Well put, Ken.

by: carlcopas

01-05-2010 @ 6:37pm

Melvin,
I don't much like the term "irrascible wing of Islam."

But surely we need some kind of vocabulary for what Robert Dreyfuss, in Devil's Game:How the United States Helped Unleash Islamic Fundamentalism, calls right-wing Islam or Islamic fundamentalism?

by: John Mulholland

01-08-2010 @ 12:56pm

So...Hinuds? Buddhists?

Same God?

by: jesse3

01-05-2010 @ 6:42pm

This is an example of the moral equivalence that inhibits the manner in which the left can approach issues. It's hard for me to take someone seriously whose response to wrongdoing is to say "everyone is doing bad things." And I find it somewhat ironic for such comments to be appearing on a site that bashes the Christian right with every other column. Gingrich was right to criticize radical Islam, and I agree with him 100%.

by: duhsciple

01-05-2010 @ 6:46pm

Abusing, stealing, destroying, terrorizing, threatening, genociding, murdering, hurting, harming, lying, distorting, bombing, shooting, slicing, dicing, whacking, slapping, and in any way denying the beloved-of-God-humanity of others in the name of God is wrong regardless of whether it is framed as Islam or Christianity. If you are an atheist and deny the humanness of another, I say, "Boo! Hiss!"

This contest to see who can "get them before they get you," for Christians at least, is anti-Christ. But I don't care who you are or what your faith is if you advocate preemptive, "emptive", or "post-emptive" violence as a solution, then I say, "Stop!"

I say to the Legion, "Be silent and come out of us!"

by: Palosaari

01-08-2010 @ 1:40pm

An excellent question. I'd say firstly, no, because Buddhism, in its pure form, has no god, and Hinduism in most forms has many gods. But of course, there are many people who don't practice either belief in the pure form. And then it becomes a matter of how one approaches their God/gods and how they see him. The thing with Judaism, Islam, and Zoroastrianism is not only are they monotheistic, but the way they describe their deity is very similar to the way we would describe him. Yes, we add in a bit, like the Jesus deal, but still we give God the same basic description. Yes, there are differences, in degree, such that a Friend like myself perceives the Trinity as based on consensus and the relationship all important, a particular Baptist might be more literal in her thinking and look at the Trinity as more heirarchical, and further afield a Zoroastrian might see everything as dualistic and equal whereas we don't, and see God as above and more powerful than Satan.

Thus, like Lewis says in the Horse and His Boy, it is possible to approach another deity (Tash) as if he were the one true God (Aslan), in how we perceive him, and how we approach him. So I think it entirely possible that a Buddhist or Hindu could believe in the same God- but less common by far than a Muslim or Jew or Zoroastrian, who believes in the same God but, in my opinion, believes wrong things about him or approaches him in the wrong way.

by: duhsciple

01-05-2010 @ 6:48pm

Let's not say "everyone." Who is on the list then? Let us document who is terrorizing, murdering, and maiming people, and tell them, "No!"

Name the names.

by: Lord_Voldemort

01-05-2010 @ 6:58pm

"For Mr. Gingrich, this 'fact' belies a deeper issue in American politics with self-deception."

Here we go with the scare quotes again. Look, either Gingrich is right (in which case no scare quotes are needed) or he isn't, in which case Mr. Bray should just say so. As it is, the reason why nobody on the panel challenged him is because there actually is a radical school of Islam that supports terror tactics. That's a fact, not a "fact".

It's been a while since a radical Christian group -- even the Bob Jones loonies -- has shown any interest in bombing airplanes anywhere. As long as that is the case the drawing of casual parallels between radical Islam and Irascible Christianity is not merely offensive, it is misleading.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:06pm

From a Christian perspective, not really. Jesus was divine and said so; Muhummad did not and Muslims would blanch at the prospect. Besides that, it's an insinuation that a lot of "right-wing" Christians aren't (and I personally agree).

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:18pm

That is not to say, of course, that such an impulse doesn't exist among such right-wing Christians, which was Bray's point. It wasn't so long ago that the "Christian" Ku Klux Klan was bombing churches -- what irony -- in the South during the civil-rights movement but eventually was isolated by its own attitude (consider that al-Qaeda lost supporters in Iraq for similar reasons). And what about the folks who are praying for the death of President Obama and even misquoting a verse from Psalms to justify that? We Christians ought not to consider ourselves "above" militant Islamists; I heard my pastor say once that he feared what he might be capable of were the Holy Spirit taken from him.

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:26pm

Well, do you believe and trust that God will preserve His people and prevail against "radical Islam" or any other ideology, or do you not? That's the ultimate issue to be addressed here. I hope that, if I needed to die for the sake of the Gospel, I would do so willingly, and if more Christians were willing to lay down their lives for Jesus we might not have this "problem."

by: PASTOR JEFF

01-05-2010 @ 7:36pm

Carl: Maybe fundamentalism is a place to start with vocabulary. Most of the violence around the world could be related to religious or political fundamentalism IMO. Maybe we should declare war on fundamentalism ;-)

by: PASTOR JEFF

01-05-2010 @ 7:39pm

Blue: May I infer that you are saying there is more than one way to die for a cause? If so, kudos.

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:49pm

I had not thought of that, but that might be possible.

by: DJ9791

01-05-2010 @ 7:55pm

Sadly, there are fundamentalist Christian groups who have bombed and murdered in the Lord's name, all in the guise of being anti-abortion. It's counter-productive to argue about "we're less violent than they are", which seems to be the point of some posts...as Christians, we are called upon to follow the way of peace, not wallow in semantics about "degrees" of violence. There lies the path of rationalization and spiritual chaos.

There are definitely parallels between any religious groups which engage in violence in the name of God, no matter what faith they profess to follow.

Gingrich is engaged in POLITICS in this debate; he is playing to his "base" as it were, nothing more.

We must guard against being exploited by any politician, left, right or center, who plays to the religious biases for their own gain.

Pray for Peace and Dare to Act!

by: Lord_Voldemort

01-05-2010 @ 8:00pm

Give me a call when someone stuffs a bomb in his shorts and gets on an airplane.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 8:33pm

Irrelevant.

by: JacobS

01-05-2010 @ 9:03pm

The use of the term "fundamentalism" is subject to the same problems of labeling the "irreconcilable wing of Islam." It doesn't really mean anything. It is understood to be pejorative, but why shouldn't fundamentalist be a description that people of faith embrace? The term "Islamo-fascist" is no different. Pundits use it because it has negative connotations, but I have yet to hear a decent explanation of how they can be accurately described as fascists.

by: Joe_Allen_Doty

01-05-2010 @ 9:56pm

My belief in The Way of Jesus the Christ is not "my Christianity." That's because you cannot find the religion of Christianity in the Bible and certainly not in the New Testament books.

Calling oneself by the pagan created epithet "Christian" is like a native-born resident who has never left Oklahoma being given the hateful epithet "Okie."

Before "Christianity" was created by the war-mongering Byzantine Emperor Constantine in 325 AD, wars were not fought in the "name of Christianity."

There is no New Testament support for any kind of terrorism.

by: letjusticerolldown

01-05-2010 @ 9:57pm

Maybe the next part of the article will turn the tide--but so far Melvin disappoints (which is unusual for me). He sounds too much like Gingrich in this blog. Meaning-- a very bright man sometimes overly caught up in making an intelligent distinction--whether or not it has merit.

by: ford49

01-05-2010 @ 10:04pm

Christians do have moral equivalence; remember the genocide of Native Americans under the guise of Manifest Destiny (which is still reflected in Neo-Conservative thinking) and slavery?? Also, Christians have been all over the middle-east for hundreds of years subjecting its inhabitants to brutality and theft of wealth and land with a profound sense of religious narcissim...check out some of Ghandi's thoughts about Christians. This country still believes it is morally superior to the rest of the world and this lack of humility has the potential to be our undoing.

by: Jedidiah Abdul Muhib Palosaari

01-05-2010 @ 10:26pm

Yes. Why not?

by: John Mulholland

01-09-2010 @ 12:25am

"the Jesus deal"

Yeah...how unimportant.

Apparently, not all Muslims share your generous orthodoxy.

by: carlcopas

01-05-2010 @ 11:05pm

Pastor Jeff,
A nice way of expressing it. I think Melvin would agree as well.

by: squeaky

01-05-2010 @ 11:24pm

Ummm...yes. The Abrahamic religions claim the same God, whether they acknowledge their shared roots or not.

by: John Mulholland

01-05-2010 @ 11:48pm

But...are they the same God?

Do Muslims worship God, the Father of Jesus? Do Jews?

by: John Mulholland

01-05-2010 @ 11:49pm

Because Jesus claimed to be the only way to Heaven? Neither Muslims nor Jews believe that Jesus is God.

by: Palosaari

01-09-2010 @ 7:29am

Well, I don't find the Jesus deal unimportant. I'm sorry that you do.

But, as I said above, not everyone believes the same thing about God.

by: PASTOR JEFF

01-06-2010 @ 1:01am

Oh, I don't know, people seem to use terms like "free market capitalism" and "spiritual healing" without question here.
How about we start a definition with all those who believe that they alone possess the "truth" and that all others are diminished humans made in less than the image of God? Then we can throw in a predeliction to use compulsion to execute the integrity of this "truth" and purify the object of the god's affection. You may use the term dogmatism if you prefer but I think

by: John Mulholland

01-09-2010 @ 11:44am

"we add in a bit, like the Jesus deal,"

I do not understand this statement. What do you mean by that?

"not everyone believes the same thing about God."

Is there a right belief in God? OR is "just" believing in "a" God enough?

by: Montjoie

01-06-2010 @ 3:29am

"Fog" is an excellent description of this article. The fog is thick in Mr. Bray's mind and thins not a whit on the page.

by: Palosaari

01-09-2010 @ 12:11pm

Christian belief in a God is different from other beliefs because we include Jesus in the equation, and believe he is God.

I think there is a right way to believe in God, and that belief in a God is not enough. I also think that belief in the one true God is not enough, for even the demons believe that, and shudder. How about you?

by: John Mulholland

01-05-2010 @ 6:19pm

"As a follower of God in the way of Jesus,"

What does this mean? Can one be a "follower of God in the way of Mohamed?"

by: melvinbray

01-06-2010 @ 11:05am

great quip, montjolie! (sincerely)

by: melvinbray

01-06-2010 @ 11:06am

yes...

by: Ken Peters

01-05-2010 @ 6:22pm

While the sentiments of fairness expressed by Melvin Bray are aimed at even handedness, there seems to be a fog of squeamishness amongst many of our progressive Christian thinkers. I think Newt Gingrich is exactly right admitting we have real enemies that are from the radical wing of Islam who are dedicated in their purpose to destroy us. The fringe groups of the extreme Christian right are not their moral equivalent, though wrong-headed and certainly not representative of the heart of Christ in a variety of ways. These militants of the Christian right extremity are more likely to do violence against Washington DC than foreign governments. And if they did attack foreign governments would we complain about profiling or would we help by supplying information and apologizing in all directions for the misrepresentation of Christianity. I think the latter.

by: melvinbray

01-06-2010 @ 12:38pm

HA! it's been an hour, and i'm still laughing at your bon mot, montjoie. you sound like mark twain; your timing and word choice are flawless.

i wish i were as witty and concise. the best i could think of when i read it was: this from a guy who even his avatar is so ashamed of him that it wears a mask!

come into the light cobra commander (although with such a diminutive image you do look eerily like a grand wizard), and let's be friends.

your loyal adversary,
snake eyes

by: ChristGraceFaith

01-05-2010 @ 6:32pm

Well put, Ken.

by: carlcopas

01-05-2010 @ 6:37pm

Melvin,
I don't much like the term "irrascible wing of Islam."

But surely we need some kind of vocabulary for what Robert Dreyfuss, in Devil's Game:How the United States Helped Unleash Islamic Fundamentalism, calls right-wing Islam or Islamic fundamentalism?

by: jesse3

01-05-2010 @ 6:42pm

This is an example of the moral equivalence that inhibits the manner in which the left can approach issues. It's hard for me to take someone seriously whose response to wrongdoing is to say "everyone is doing bad things." And I find it somewhat ironic for such comments to be appearing on a site that bashes the Christian right with every other column. Gingrich was right to criticize radical Islam, and I agree with him 100%.

by: duhsciple

01-05-2010 @ 6:46pm

Abusing, stealing, destroying, terrorizing, threatening, genociding, murdering, hurting, harming, lying, distorting, bombing, shooting, slicing, dicing, whacking, slapping, and in any way denying the beloved-of-God-humanity of others in the name of God is wrong regardless of whether it is framed as Islam or Christianity. If you are an atheist and deny the humanness of another, I say, "Boo! Hiss!"

This contest to see who can "get them before they get you," for Christians at least, is anti-Christ. But I don't care who you are or what your faith is if you advocate preemptive, "emptive", or "post-emptive" violence as a solution, then I say, "Stop!"

I say to the Legion, "Be silent and come out of us!"

by: duhsciple

01-05-2010 @ 6:48pm

Let's not say "everyone." Who is on the list then? Let us document who is terrorizing, murdering, and maiming people, and tell them, "No!"

Name the names.

by: Lord_Voldemort

01-05-2010 @ 6:58pm

"For Mr. Gingrich, this 'fact' belies a deeper issue in American politics with self-deception."

Here we go with the scare quotes again. Look, either Gingrich is right (in which case no scare quotes are needed) or he isn't, in which case Mr. Bray should just say so. As it is, the reason why nobody on the panel challenged him is because there actually is a radical school of Islam that supports terror tactics. That's a fact, not a "fact".

It's been a while since a radical Christian group -- even the Bob Jones loonies -- has shown any interest in bombing airplanes anywhere. As long as that is the case the drawing of casual parallels between radical Islam and Irascible Christianity is not merely offensive, it is misleading.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:06pm

From a Christian perspective, not really. Jesus was divine and said so; Muhummad did not and Muslims would blanch at the prospect. Besides that, it's an insinuation that a lot of "right-wing" Christians aren't (and I personally agree).

by: PASTOR JEFF

01-06-2010 @ 1:56pm

One more fundamental principle in common- putting women in their place.

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:18pm

That is not to say, of course, that such an impulse doesn't exist among such right-wing Christians, which was Bray's point. It wasn't so long ago that the "Christian" Ku Klux Klan was bombing churches -- what irony -- in the South during the civil-rights movement but eventually was isolated by its own attitude (consider that al-Qaeda lost supporters in Iraq for similar reasons). And what about the folks who are praying for the death of President Obama and even misquoting a verse from Psalms to justify that? We Christians ought not to consider ourselves "above" militant Islamists; I heard my pastor say once that he feared what he might be capable of were the Holy Spirit taken from him.

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:26pm

Well, do you believe and trust that God will preserve His people and prevail against "radical Islam" or any other ideology, or do you not? That's the ultimate issue to be addressed here. I hope that, if I needed to die for the sake of the Gospel, I would do so willingly, and if more Christians were willing to lay down their lives for Jesus we might not have this "problem."

by: PASTOR JEFF

01-05-2010 @ 7:36pm

Carl: Maybe fundamentalism is a place to start with vocabulary. Most of the violence around the world could be related to religious or political fundamentalism IMO. Maybe we should declare war on fundamentalism ;-)

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: John Mulholland

01-05-2010 @ 6:19pm

"As a follower of God in the way of Jesus,"

What does this mean? Can one be a "follower of God in the way of Mohamed?"

by: John Mulholland

01-05-2010 @ 6:19pm

"As a follower of God in the way of Jesus,"

What does this mean? Can one be a "follower of God in the way of Mohamed?"

by: Ken Peters

01-05-2010 @ 6:22pm

While the sentiments of fairness expressed by Melvin Bray are aimed at even handedness, there seems to be a fog of squeamishness amongst many of our progressive Christian thinkers. I think Newt Gingrich is exactly right admitting we have real enemies that are from the radical wing of Islam who are dedicated in their purpose to destroy us. The fringe groups of the extreme Christian right are not their moral equivalent, though wrong-headed and certainly not representative of the heart of Christ in a variety of ways. These militants of the Christian right extremity are more likely to do violence against Washington DC than foreign governments. And if they did attack foreign governments would we complain about profiling or would we help by supplying information and apologizing in all directions for the misrepresentation of Christianity. I think the latter.

by: Ken Peters

01-05-2010 @ 6:22pm

While the sentiments of fairness expressed by Melvin Bray are aimed at even handedness, there seems to be a fog of squeamishness amongst many of our progressive Christian thinkers. I think Newt Gingrich is exactly right admitting we have real enemies that are from the radical wing of Islam who are dedicated in their purpose to destroy us. The fringe groups of the extreme Christian right are not their moral equivalent, though wrong-headed and certainly not representative of the heart of Christ in a variety of ways. These militants of the Christian right extremity are more likely to do violence against Washington DC than foreign governments. And if they did attack foreign governments would we complain about profiling or would we help by supplying information and apologizing in all directions for the misrepresentation of Christianity. I think the latter.

by: ChristGraceFaith

01-05-2010 @ 6:32pm

Well put, Ken.

by: ChristGraceFaith

01-05-2010 @ 6:32pm

Well put, Ken.

by: carlcopas

01-05-2010 @ 6:37pm

Melvin,
I don't much like the term "irrascible wing of Islam."

But surely we need some kind of vocabulary for what Robert Dreyfuss, in Devil's Game:How the United States Helped Unleash Islamic Fundamentalism, calls right-wing Islam or Islamic fundamentalism?

by: carlcopas

01-05-2010 @ 6:37pm

Melvin,
I don't much like the term "irrascible wing of Islam."

But surely we need some kind of vocabulary for what Robert Dreyfuss, in Devil's Game:How the United States Helped Unleash Islamic Fundamentalism, calls right-wing Islam or Islamic fundamentalism?

by: jesse3

01-05-2010 @ 6:42pm

This is an example of the moral equivalence that inhibits the manner in which the left can approach issues. It's hard for me to take someone seriously whose response to wrongdoing is to say "everyone is doing bad things." And I find it somewhat ironic for such comments to be appearing on a site that bashes the Christian right with every other column. Gingrich was right to criticize radical Islam, and I agree with him 100%.

by: jesse3

01-05-2010 @ 6:42pm

This is an example of the moral equivalence that inhibits the manner in which the left can approach issues. It's hard for me to take someone seriously whose response to wrongdoing is to say "everyone is doing bad things." And I find it somewhat ironic for such comments to be appearing on a site that bashes the Christian right with every other column. Gingrich was right to criticize radical Islam, and I agree with him 100%.

by: duhsciple

01-05-2010 @ 6:46pm

Abusing, stealing, destroying, terrorizing, threatening, genociding, murdering, hurting, harming, lying, distorting, bombing, shooting, slicing, dicing, whacking, slapping, and in any way denying the beloved-of-God-humanity of others in the name of God is wrong regardless of whether it is framed as Islam or Christianity. If you are an atheist and deny the humanness of another, I say, "Boo! Hiss!"

This contest to see who can "get them before they get you," for Christians at least, is anti-Christ. But I don't care who you are or what your faith is if you advocate preemptive, "emptive", or "post-emptive" violence as a solution, then I say, "Stop!"

I say to the Legion, "Be silent and come out of us!"

by: duhsciple

01-05-2010 @ 6:46pm

Abusing, stealing, destroying, terrorizing, threatening, genociding, murdering, hurting, harming, lying, distorting, bombing, shooting, slicing, dicing, whacking, slapping, and in any way denying the beloved-of-God-humanity of others in the name of God is wrong regardless of whether it is framed as Islam or Christianity. If you are an atheist and deny the humanness of another, I say, "Boo! Hiss!"

This contest to see who can "get them before they get you," for Christians at least, is anti-Christ. But I don't care who you are or what your faith is if you advocate preemptive, "emptive", or "post-emptive" violence as a solution, then I say, "Stop!"

I say to the Legion, "Be silent and come out of us!"

by: duhsciple

01-05-2010 @ 6:48pm

Let's not say "everyone." Who is on the list then? Let us document who is terrorizing, murdering, and maiming people, and tell them, "No!"

Name the names.

by: duhsciple

01-05-2010 @ 6:48pm

Let's not say "everyone." Who is on the list then? Let us document who is terrorizing, murdering, and maiming people, and tell them, "No!"

Name the names.

by: Lord_Voldemort

01-05-2010 @ 6:58pm

"For Mr. Gingrich, this 'fact' belies a deeper issue in American politics with self-deception."

Here we go with the scare quotes again. Look, either Gingrich is right (in which case no scare quotes are needed) or he isn't, in which case Mr. Bray should just say so. As it is, the reason why nobody on the panel challenged him is because there actually is a radical school of Islam that supports terror tactics. That's a fact, not a "fact".

It's been a while since a radical Christian group -- even the Bob Jones loonies -- has shown any interest in bombing airplanes anywhere. As long as that is the case the drawing of casual parallels between radical Islam and Irascible Christianity is not merely offensive, it is misleading.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

01-05-2010 @ 6:58pm

"For Mr. Gingrich, this 'fact' belies a deeper issue in American politics with self-deception."

Here we go with the scare quotes again. Look, either Gingrich is right (in which case no scare quotes are needed) or he isn't, in which case Mr. Bray should just say so. As it is, the reason why nobody on the panel challenged him is because there actually is a radical school of Islam that supports terror tactics. That's a fact, not a "fact".

It's been a while since a radical Christian group -- even the Bob Jones loonies -- has shown any interest in bombing airplanes anywhere. As long as that is the case the drawing of casual parallels between radical Islam and Irascible Christianity is not merely offensive, it is misleading.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:06pm

From a Christian perspective, not really. Jesus was divine and said so; Muhummad did not and Muslims would blanch at the prospect. Besides that, it's an insinuation that a lot of "right-wing" Christians aren't (and I personally agree).

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:06pm

From a Christian perspective, not really. Jesus was divine and said so; Muhummad did not and Muslims would blanch at the prospect. Besides that, it's an insinuation that a lot of "right-wing" Christians aren't (and I personally agree).

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:18pm

That is not to say, of course, that such an impulse doesn't exist among such right-wing Christians, which was Bray's point. It wasn't so long ago that the "Christian" Ku Klux Klan was bombing churches -- what irony -- in the South during the civil-rights movement but eventually was isolated by its own attitude (consider that al-Qaeda lost supporters in Iraq for similar reasons). And what about the folks who are praying for the death of President Obama and even misquoting a verse from Psalms to justify that? We Christians ought not to consider ourselves "above" militant Islamists; I heard my pastor say once that he feared what he might be capable of were the Holy Spirit taken from him.

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:18pm

That is not to say, of course, that such an impulse doesn't exist among such right-wing Christians, which was Bray's point. It wasn't so long ago that the "Christian" Ku Klux Klan was bombing churches -- what irony -- in the South during the civil-rights movement but eventually was isolated by its own attitude (consider that al-Qaeda lost supporters in Iraq for similar reasons). And what about the folks who are praying for the death of President Obama and even misquoting a verse from Psalms to justify that? We Christians ought not to consider ourselves "above" militant Islamists; I heard my pastor say once that he feared what he might be capable of were the Holy Spirit taken from him.

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:26pm

Well, do you believe and trust that God will preserve His people and prevail against "radical Islam" or any other ideology, or do you not? That's the ultimate issue to be addressed here. I hope that, if I needed to die for the sake of the Gospel, I would do so willingly, and if more Christians were willing to lay down their lives for Jesus we might not have this "problem."

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:26pm

Well, do you believe and trust that God will preserve His people and prevail against "radical Islam" or any other ideology, or do you not? That's the ultimate issue to be addressed here. I hope that, if I needed to die for the sake of the Gospel, I would do so willingly, and if more Christians were willing to lay down their lives for Jesus we might not have this "problem."

by: PASTOR JEFF

01-05-2010 @ 7:36pm

Carl: Maybe fundamentalism is a place to start with vocabulary. Most of the violence around the world could be related to religious or political fundamentalism IMO. Maybe we should declare war on fundamentalism ;-)

by: PASTOR JEFF

01-05-2010 @ 7:36pm

Carl: Maybe fundamentalism is a place to start with vocabulary. Most of the violence around the world could be related to religious or political fundamentalism IMO. Maybe we should declare war on fundamentalism ;-)

by: PASTOR JEFF

01-05-2010 @ 7:39pm

Blue: May I infer that you are saying there is more than one way to die for a cause? If so, kudos.

by: PASTOR JEFF

01-05-2010 @ 7:39pm

Blue: May I infer that you are saying there is more than one way to die for a cause? If so, kudos.

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:49pm

I had not thought of that, but that might be possible.

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 7:49pm

I had not thought of that, but that might be possible.

by: DJ9791

01-05-2010 @ 7:55pm

Sadly, there are fundamentalist Christian groups who have bombed and murdered in the Lord's name, all in the guise of being anti-abortion. It's counter-productive to argue about "we're less violent than they are", which seems to be the point of some posts...as Christians, we are called upon to follow the way of peace, not wallow in semantics about "degrees" of violence. There lies the path of rationalization and spiritual chaos.

There are definitely parallels between any religious groups which engage in violence in the name of God, no matter what faith they profess to follow.

Gingrich is engaged in POLITICS in this debate; he is playing to his "base" as it were, nothing more.

We must guard against being exploited by any politician, left, right or center, who plays to the religious biases for their own gain.

Pray for Peace and Dare to Act!

by: DJ9791

01-05-2010 @ 7:55pm

Sadly, there are fundamentalist Christian groups who have bombed and murdered in the Lord's name, all in the guise of being anti-abortion. It's counter-productive to argue about "we're less violent than they are", which seems to be the point of some posts...as Christians, we are called upon to follow the way of peace, not wallow in semantics about "degrees" of violence. There lies the path of rationalization and spiritual chaos.

There are definitely parallels between any religious groups which engage in violence in the name of God, no matter what faith they profess to follow.

Gingrich is engaged in POLITICS in this debate; he is playing to his "base" as it were, nothing more.

We must guard against being exploited by any politician, left, right or center, who plays to the religious biases for their own gain.

Pray for Peace and Dare to Act!

by: Lord_Voldemort

01-05-2010 @ 8:00pm

Give me a call when someone stuffs a bomb in his shorts and gets on an airplane.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

01-05-2010 @ 8:00pm

Give me a call when someone stuffs a bomb in his shorts and gets on an airplane.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 8:33pm

Irrelevant.

by: BlueDeacon

01-05-2010 @ 8:33pm

Irrelevant.

by: JacobS

01-05-2010 @ 9:03pm

The use of the term "fundamentalism" is subject to the same problems of labeling the "irreconcilable wing of Islam." It doesn't really mean anything. It is understood to be pejorative, but why shouldn't fundamentalist be a description that people of faith embrace? The term "Islamo-fascist" is no different. Pundits use it because it has negative connotations, but I have yet to hear a decent explanation of how they can be accurately described as fascists.

by: JacobS

01-05-2010 @ 9:03pm

The use of the term "fundamentalism" is subject to the same problems of labeling the "irreconcilable wing of Islam." It doesn't really mean anything. It is understood to be pejorative, but why shouldn't fundamentalist be a description that people of faith embrace? The term "Islamo-fascist" is no different. Pundits use it because it has negative connotations, but I have yet to hear a decent explanation of how they can be accurately described as fascists.

by: Joe_Allen_Doty

01-05-2010 @ 9:56pm

My belief in The Way of Jesus the Christ is not "my Christianity." That's because you cannot find the religion of Christianity in the Bible and certainly not in the New Testament books.

Calling oneself by the pagan created epithet "Christian" is like a native-born resident who has never left Oklahoma being given the hateful epithet "Okie."

Before "Christianity" was created by the war-mongering Byzantine Emperor Constantine in 325 AD, wars were not fought in the "name of Christianity."

There is no New Testament support for any kind of terrorism.

by: Joe_Allen_Doty

01-05-2010 @ 9:56pm

My belief in The Way of Jesus the Christ is not "my Christianity." That's because you cannot find the religion of Christianity in the Bible and certainly not in the New Testament books.

Calling oneself by the pagan created epithet "Christian" is like a native-born resident who has never left Oklahoma being given the hateful epithet "Okie."

Before "Christianity" was created by the war-mongering Byzantine Emperor Constantine in 325 AD, wars were not fought in the "name of Christianity."

There is no New Testament support for any kind of terrorism.

by: letjusticerolldown

01-05-2010 @ 9:57pm

Maybe the next part of the article will turn the tide--but so far Melvin disappoints (which is unusual for me). He sounds too much like Gingrich in this blog. Meaning-- a very bright man sometimes overly caught up in making an intelligent distinction--whether or not it has merit.

by: letjusticerolldown

01-05-2010 @ 9:57pm

Maybe the next part of the article will turn the tide--but so far Melvin disappoints (which is unusual for me). He sounds too much like Gingrich in this blog. Meaning-- a very bright man sometimes overly caught up in making an intelligent distinction--whether or not it has merit.

by: ford49

01-05-2010 @ 10:04pm

Christians do have moral equivalence; remember the genocide of Native Americans under the guise of Manifest Destiny (which is still reflected in Neo-Conservative thinking) and slavery?? Also, Christians have been all over the middle-east for hundreds of years subjecting its inhabitants to brutality and theft of wealth and land with a profound sense of religious narcissim...check out some of Ghandi's thoughts about Christians. This country still believes it is morally superior to the rest of the world and this lack of humility has the potential to be our undoing.

by: ford49

01-05-2010 @ 10:04pm

Christians do have moral equivalence; remember the genocide of Native Americans under the guise of Manifest Destiny (which is still reflected in Neo-Conservative thinking) and slavery?? Also, Christians have been all over the middle-east for hundreds of years subjecting its inhabitants to brutality and theft of wealth and land with a profound sense of religious narcissim...check out some of Ghandi's thoughts about Christians. This country still believes it is morally superior to the rest of the world and this lack of humility has the potential to be our undoing.

by: Jedidiah Abdul Muhib Palosaari

01-05-2010 @ 10:26pm

Yes. Why not?

by: Jedidiah Abdul Muhib Palosaari

01-05-2010 @ 10:26pm

Yes. Why not?

by: carlcopas

01-05-2010 @ 11:05pm

Pastor Jeff,
A nice way of expressing it. I think Melvin would agree as well.

by: carlcopas

01-05-2010 @ 11:05pm

Pastor Jeff,
A nice way of expressing it. I think Melvin would agree as well.

by: squeaky

01-05-2010 @ 11:24pm

Ummm...yes. The Abrahamic religions claim the same God, whether they acknowledge their shared roots or not.

by: squeaky

01-05-2010 @ 11:24pm

Ummm...yes. The Abrahamic religions claim the same God, whether they acknowledge their shared roots or not.

by: John Mulholland

01-05-2010 @ 11:48pm

But...are they the same God?

Do Muslims worship God, the Father of Jesus? Do Jews?

by: John Mulholland

01-05-2010 @ 11:48pm

But...are they the same God?

Do Muslims worship God, the Father of Jesus? Do Jews?