Christians in the Western world are tragically soft. Although the Bible does talk about gentleness and respect, we really do take the biscuit, and the tea and milk with it. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the comment sections of Islamic outreach channels, such as Acts17Apologetics.
Acts17Apologetics is the ministry of ex-atheist and current psychopath David Wood. His testimony is truly inspiring, and given the nature of his condition, his love for God is evident. While he does address atheism and evidence for God, his primary ministry is towards Muslims. And, as it turns out, he's rather good at it. Every so often, he publishes videos in which he displays numerous comments he's received from ex-Muslims, who found Christ (or at least left Islam) thanks to his channel.
In spite of his success, he receives a lot of criticism due to his comedic, yet completely honest approach to Islam. On camera, David is quite theatrical, especially in series such as Islamicize Me, or Muhammad's Boom Boom Room. Take, for example, the following scene from episode 11 of Muhammad's Boom Boom Room:
Let's be honest here: If you're not so thin-skinned as to find that offensive, the chances are you'll find that quite funny. In the broader context, you will also find it very informative. Muhammad's Boom Boom Room centres around the premise of Muhammad's desire in Sahih al-Bukhari 2797: "By Him in Whose Hands my soul is! I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and then come back to life and then get martyred, and then come back to life again and then get martyred and then come back to life again and then get martyred." Throughout the series, Muhammad interviews a number of figures, both real and fictional, comparing their worldviews with Islam. If their views differ, he blows them up, and of course he's back next week for another explosive episode.
In episode 11, Muhammad, played by Vocab "Street Apologist" Malone, interviews the Joker, a well known villain from The Batman, played by David Wood. As in all episodes of the Boom Boom Room, the two converse, Muhammad tells The Joker about Islam (displaying all sources on screen), and Joker reacts pretty much how one might expect him to if you know basically anything about Batman's most notorious foe.
Of course, the Joker isn't a Christian, and so he isn't in the show either. The writers never try to change the religion of the characters they portray. Rather, the goal of the series is education through entertainment. Using Islamic sources, which again are always cited on screen, the show illustrates Islam, often with the guests highlighting a few significant problems. The Joker episode focuses rather heavily on Allah's deceptive nature, not merely calling him a false god, but actually showing where, in the Qur'an, Allah openly brags about being the best of deceivers, even to the point where he allegedly tricked the Jews into thinking they had crucified Jesus, which of course lead to the rise of Christianity.
Those who criticise Wood's approach to Islam tend to also be upset when he points out such inconvenient details. As strange as it seems, and indeed it seems strange because it is strange, they often want us to reach Muslims by effectively acting like they don't need to be reached. Not only do we need to be super nice to Muslims, we can't say anything negative about Islam, lest we offend them.
Of course, once again, Wood's success shows that there is method to the madness. In fact, he often goes through his methods in great detail. In fact, according to insider information from one of his earliest and greatest success stories, Nabeel Qureshi, many Muslims actually view calmness as weakness, and passion as strength. If you're a calm, collected, soft-spoken Christian, it doesn't matter how much sense you're making, if you're not passionate enough about it, that's seen as proof you don't believe what you're talking about. By contrast, if you're a loud Muslim apologist, you can say any nonsense you like, Muslims will think you believe it.
But is this passion Biblical? It's absolutely vital, even when we speak the truth, to do so in love, and with a clear conscience. It is almost better to let a soul perish than to sin in the rescue effort. But is it truly a sin to mock a false god?
In one sense, yes. In fact, coincidentally, we see an example in the Islamic sources. In The History of al-Tabari – The Victory of Islam, we read "Then ‘Urwah said: “Muhammad, tell me: if you extirpate your tribesmen, have you ever heard of any of the Arabs who destroyed his own race before you? And if the contrary comes to pass, by God I see both prominent people and rabble who are likely to flee and leave you.” Abu Bakr said, “Go suck the clitoris of al-Lat!” – al-Lat was the idol of Thaqif, which they used to worship – “Would we flee and leave him?”" (Emphasis mine).
One would hardly consider telling a pagan to perform such acts on their goddesses to be appropriate. Nor is it ok to tell people to bite their fathers' penises, as Muhammad tells his followers to do in Mishkat al-Masabih Vol 2, 1021: "Ubayy b. Ka‘b told that he heard God’s messenger say, “If anyone proudly asserts his descent in the manner of the pre-Islamic people, tell him to bite his father’s penis, and do not use a euphemism."
These kinds of grotesque sayings have no place in the Christian faith. If you ever see David Wood saying to Muslims "bite Allah's penis", rebuke him, unsubscribe, and let his career come to a sudden halt. But notice the difference. In the Islamic sources previously cited, the poor behaviour is in response to beliefs or sound criticism. "Hey Muhammad, don't destroy your own people, because whether you win or lose, you look bad". "Go do inappropriate things that aren't worth repeating to your goddess". What does this achieve? Nothing. It's just being needlessly aggressive and foul. By contrast, Wood's intent is education, possibly even salvation, through entertainment. Yet, he often stops short of the level of the Biblical writers.
Paul, for example, was quite firm against the Judaisers. This group of heretics taught that obedience to the law of Moses, particularly circumcision, was required for salvation. Paul, however, tells us that the law is our tutor to bring us to Christ, and that now Christ has come, we are no longer under that tutor. (Galatians 3:24-26). His response to the Judaisers? "I wish those who are disturbing you might also get themselves castrated!"
Notice, Paul's rhetoric has a point. It's not just crass words in response to an unrelated and completely valid argument. It's certainly quite strong by today's standards, and undoubtedly offensive to the Judaisers, but it's Biblical, and connected to the issue at hand, as castration and circumcision are quite similar. Paul is basically saying "hey, you're preaching circumcision for salvation, take the next step". There is reason and purpose behind his statement.
On top of this, there is the more famous example of Elijah with regard to Baal. Elijah proposed a challenge to the prophets of Baal to see which god was the real one: God, or Baal? They would construct two altars for sacrifice, but not light a fire. Whichever god lit their altar was the real God. Of course, God answered with fire, even going for style points by consuming a drenched altar with trenches of water. In 1 Kings 18:27, we read "At noon Elijah mocked them. He said, “Shout loudly, for he’s a god! Maybe he’s thinking it over; maybe he has wandered away; or maybe he’s on the road. Perhaps he’s sleeping and will wake up!" In some translations, and as is legitimised by the footnotes of translations that don't use this rendering, that phrase "maybe he has wandered away" can actually be rendered "maybe he's relieving himself". So Elijah is effectively saying "Hey guys, your god doesn't seem to be answering. Maybe he's pooping?"
Once again, notice, mockery with purpose and reason. Elijah doesn't believe Baal is pooping, he doesn't believe in Baal at all. Rather, he's emphasising, using humor, that Baal is failing the challenge. The whole point was to prove that Baal does not exist, not to be mean to the prophets of Baal (though, side note, they were all killed in accordance with the law of Moses, so suffice to say God isn't opposed to a few heretics shedding tears).
The conclusion of the matter is simple: Gentleness and respect does not exclude satire and mockery. Being obscene is out of the question, but being blunt or humorous are not. If Elijah can say Baal is too busy pooping to hear his prophets, we can say Allah is a cosmic trickster. If Paul can say he wishes the Judaisers would castrate themselves, we can say Muhammad was a bit of a numpty. Purpose and reason are the key. If our sole purpose is to be a jerk, we're in the wrong, but if our purpose is to help Muslims come to know Jesus, or at least take away their reasons to reject Him, we are not sinning with mockery.