This Is Islam Uncovered

Islam and the Illusion of Tolerance

When “No Compulsion in Religion” Collides with Islamic Supremacy

Introduction: A Religion of Peace?

The narrative that “Islam respects all religions” has become a centerpiece of modern Islamic public relations. We are told Islam is inherently tolerant, inclusive, and peaceful — a religion that not only respects Jews and Christians but welcomes pluralism and freedom of belief.

But this vision, widely circulated in da’wah circles and by apologetic sites like Studio Arabiya, doesn’t stand up to serious scrutiny. When the Qur’an is examined in full — not just cherry-picked verses — and when the Hadith, tafsir (exegesis), and Islamic jurisprudence are brought into the discussion, a very different picture emerges: not a doctrine of tolerance, but one of conditional acceptance, theological superiority, and eventual domination.

1. The Sword Verse and Its Legacy: Surah 9:5 in Context

Let’s begin with the most infamous verse in Islamic polemics:

“When the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them…” — Qur’an 9:5

Apologists claim this only refers to hostile pagan Arabs who persecuted early Muslims. But classical tafsir literature — including al-Tabari and Ibn Kathir — expands its application far beyond isolated historical incidents. Ibn Kathir explicitly writes:

“This is the Ayah of the Sword... it abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolater.”

This is not about self-defense. It’s about the nullification of coexistence. The same surah (9:29) commands Muslims to fight Jews and Christians until they pay the jizya in humiliation:

“Fight those who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day... until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.”

Hardly the tone of religious respect.

2. The Myth of Abrahamic Equality

Studio Arabiya highlights Qur’an 2:62 and 5:69 to suggest Jews and Christians can attain paradise. But they ignore the doctrine of naskh (abrogation), which most classical scholars use to invalidate these early Meccan verses.

Abrogation principle: Later revelations (like Surah 3:85 — “Whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted”) nullify earlier, more inclusive verses.

This is not fringe theory. Major tafsir authors — including al-Qurtubi, al-Jalalayn, and Ibn Kathir — affirm that the toleration shown to “People of the Book” in 2:62 is superseded by later Medina-era revelations that restrict salvation to Muslims alone.

“This verse [2:62] was abrogated by [3:85] and [5:17], which declare that those who say ‘Allah is Christ’ are disbelievers.” — Tafsir al-Jalalayn

3. The Dhimmi System: Institutionalized Inequality

Far from granting Jews and Christians equal standing, Islam introduces the concept of dhimmitude — second-class status under Islamic rule.

Jizya Tax: A discriminatory financial burden imposed solely on non-Muslims.
Social Restrictions: Prohibition from bearing arms, riding horses, building new houses of worship, or testifying against Muslims in court.
Legal Inferiority: Apostasy from Islam is punishable by death; conversion to Islam is praised and rewarded.

These principles were enforced throughout the Islamic world for over a millennium and still influence modern blasphemy and apostasy laws in countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran.

4. The Prophet’s Treatment of Jews and Christians

Studio Arabiya references Safiyya bint Huyayy as proof of Muhammad’s tolerance toward Jews. But they omit crucial facts:

Her father and husband were killed by Muslims at Khaybar.
She was taken as booty and given to Muhammad.
Her marriage followed the slaughter of her tribe — a practice legal under Islamic jurisprudence as sabaya (female captives taken in war).

Likewise, the massacre of the Jewish tribe Banu Qurayza — where 600–900 men were beheaded and the women and children enslaved — is omitted. This was not tolerance. It was annihilation of dissent.

As for Christians, the Ashtiname of Muhammad (a letter allegedly protecting Christian monks) has no chain of narration and is widely regarded by historians as a forgery or a later diplomatic gesture, not a revelation or hadith.

5. Do Not Force Religion? Except When You Do

Much is made of verses like Qur’an 2:256: “There is no compulsion in religion.” But this too is context-dependent.

Ibn Kathir notes that 2:256 was revealed regarding Ahl al-Kitab (People of the Book), but is not a general command against enforcing Islam when Muslims are in power.
The very next verses (2:257–260) reinforce Islamic superiority and divine punishment for disbelief.
Muslim jurists throughout history permitted forceful conversion of polytheists and the killing of apostates based on later verses and hadith.

“Whoever changes his religion — kill him.” — Sahih al-Bukhari 3017

No amount of apologetic whitewashing can undo this hadith’s presence in every Sunni school of law.

6. Islam’s Endgame: Supremacy, Not Coexistence

According to Qur’an 48:28:

“It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to make it prevail over all religion.”

Not coexist.
Not mutual respect.
But dominance.

The tafsir literature confirms that Islam’s long-term goal is the ultimate submission of all religions under Islamic rule — by preaching, treaty, or force.

7. Tolerance on a Leash: Modern Applications

In modern Muslim-majority states, the illusion of tolerance quickly evaporates:

Apostasy laws: Death penalty in 12 countries.
Blasphemy laws: Harsh prison sentences or death (e.g. Pakistan, Iran).
Restrictions on churches and temples: Especially in Saudi Arabia, where no churches are allowed at all.
Forced conversions: Especially of Christian and Hindu girls in parts of South Asia.

Yet these regimes often cite the same verses mentioned in the Studio Arabiya post to claim their state-sanctioned repression is “just.”

Conclusion: Islam’s Tolerance Is Conditional

When the full spectrum of Islamic sources is examined — Qur’an, Hadith, Sira, Tafsir, and Fiqh — it becomes clear that Islamic “tolerance” is not based on pluralism or equal coexistence. It is conditional, hierarchical, and ultimately supremacist.

Studio Arabiya’s article offers a carefully curated narrative designed to pacify Western readers — omitting abrogation, historical aggression, and the systemic inequality embedded in Islamic law. It appeals to modern sensibilities using selectively translated verses, while ignoring the broader framework of Islamic theology that demands eventual submission.

Islam doesn’t offer freedom of religion. It offers temporary permission for other faiths to exist — and only under Islamic terms.

Final Verdict

Islam’s so-called tolerance is not evidence of religious pluralism, but rather a strategic doctrine of phased dominance. To confuse conditional cohabitation with genuine equality is to mistake dhimmitude for freedom — and that is the true illusion.