I'm not sure I completely understand the thrust of your post, but I believe you're midjudging the nature of the early Christian's approach to death. Not only is it in no way similar to the Islamic suicide route to heaven, in almost all ways it is the exact opposite.
The early Christians were defined by a very weird thing: They didn't fight. When the Romans sentenced them to fight lions or gladiators or whatever, the Christians just wouldn't fight. This frustrated the Romans because 1) they wanted "sport;" and 2) it was hard to characterize Christians as _evil_ if they were so kind hearted that they wouldn't even bring themselves to fight someone in defense of their own life.
This Christian stance was not a "zeal for martyrdom" but rather a deep acceptance of a complex cosmology in which Christians understand that there is something very special about humans and, just because some human beings don't see reality as deeply as some Christians and just because some humans may choose to do harm to others, there is strong Scriptural support (and, presumably in the pre-Scriptural days, strong oral tradition) supporting Christians who choose to acccept -- accept, not embrace -- their own death rather than risk what would be for them the commitment of a sin themselves. (I'm not going to get into Scriptural specifics, but there are many.)
As early as the writing of Marcus Aurelius we see the Roman "elites" struggling with this bizarre Christian trait and trying to come to terms with it. The Establishment (Gibbon simply presents a modern Establishment interpretation) has struggled with it for centuries. Almost always the Establishment seeks to cast the Christians as unbalanced mentally one way or another, and totally disregards the rather complex world-view which provides a context for the acceptance. (But, again, it's important to recognize that this has nothing to do with the Islamic view that suicides in some "holy" cause "earn" a place in "heaven." This isn't about taking action, but rather about refraining from action.)
This is why the global elites never have to worry about a "Fundamentalist Christian" revolt similar to the Muslim revolt -- many Christians, of course, have been great soldiers and many war-like cultures have, umm, adapted Scripture to suport the export of death and destruction. But really serious study of Christianity, really pure fundamentalist Christianity, always comes down to this odd characteristic of the early Church, and, of course, the extensive Scriptural support for the belief. Fundamentalist Christians may support the death penalty for criminals, but it's just impossible to imagine a fundamentalist Christian going out and killing innocent women and children to make a political or cultural point. It's just totally against any kind of meaningful, broadbased interpretation of Scripture and the early Church. Mark W.
What I was trying to point out was that there were some (probably only a handful) of early Christians who desired martyrdom so much that they would disturb a pagan ritual so that they would be put to death by the authorities. Enough of them did this so that the Bishops spoke out against this form of suicide. Now we're asking the moderate Muslims to also speak out against suicide in the name of their religion.