A.B. Melchizedek
10 min readJun 22, 2024


Photo credit: The Conversation

Multiculturalism, diversity, equity are words which we really should define in our political stratosphere. Those are some deceptive terms because they are vocabulary everybody agrees, or should agree with, on the surface but when we get down into the weeds to ascertain how the people uttering those words are using them, we may find the scope and laxity with which the words are use give us a lot more to disagree on rather than agree on.

The underlying assumption from a UK perspective is that a variety of cultures, faiths and a diversity of backgrounds would lead to a stronger society. There is also talk about how the UK should be an arena where these different cultures can assimilate and live in peace.

Problem though is that this makes a fundamental assumption, taken for granted, that people from all different backgrounds, religions and cultures are able to successfully assimilate into the British society and live in harmony with each other and with the good people of Britain. This assumes that immigrants into the country will be able to arrive at some degree of compromise, accepting the fact they are in a culture which would be nothing like where they are coming from while navigating culture shocks to establish in their own lives a blend of the better side of both British and Indigenous cultures. It also assumes people of all faiths are willing to live and let live, practising their faiths freely while permitting others the liberties in accordance with the laws of the land and their inherent dignity as human beings.

To this end, it has come up with a set of values,

Democracy, Rule of Law, Respect and Tolerance, Individual Liberty.

We proceed to examine these in light of Islam’s most trusted sources. How tolerant is Islam?

Fight against those who do not believe in Allāh or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allāh and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth [i.e., Islām] from those who were given the Scripture — [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.”

(Surah 9:29)

The Quran commands its adherents to fight people on the basis of what they believe, not to tolerate it. The Quran gives the reason people are to be fought,

“The Jews say, “Ezra is the son of Allāh”; and the Christians say, “The Messiah is the son of Allāh.” That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before [them]. May Allāh destroy them; how are they deluded?”

(Surah 9:30)

Now of course, not every adherent of Islam would take things like this seriously but Jihad (Striving in the way of Allah) against disbelievers is a big part of Islam, so much so that the prophet of Islam says it is the best deed,

It was narrated from Abu Dharr that he asked the prophet of Allah (ﷺ) which deed was best. He said:

“Belief in Allah and Jihad in the cause of Allah, the Mighty and Sublime.

(Sunan An-Nisai Book 25 Hadith 45)

This was such general knowledge that the women took it for granted,

Narrated `Aisha:

(That she said), “O Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ)! We consider Jihad as the best deed. Should we not fight in Allah’s Cause?” He said, “The best Jihad (for women) is Hajj-Mabrur (i.e. Hajj which is done according to the Prophet’s tradition and is accepted by Allah).”

(Book 56 Hadith 3)

The Quran further emphasizes this when it says,

Indeed, Allāh has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allāh, so they kill and are killed.”

(Surah 9:111)

I will leave it up to the judgment of the reader as to whether an ideology that is bent on fighting, by means of killing and violent subjugation, those who do not share its core beliefs is compatible with the British value of tolerance.

We go to the second value of respect.

The Quran says of those who do not believe in it,

Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the worst of creatures.”

(Surah 98:6)

But says of Muslims,

“You are the best nation produced [as an example] for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allāh. If only the People of the Scripture had believed, it would have been better for them. Among them are believers, but most of them are defiantly disobedient.”

(Surah 3:110)

Do we see the problem here? If you do not, let me flip this around.

If a British person were to say those who adhere to Islam are the worst creatures imaginable. Worse than dogs, worse than pigs, I am certain every sensible human being would say this is a dangerous person, a bigot and an Islamophobe. Such a person would also be accused of inciting hatred and violence against adherents of Islam worldwide…and rightly so! But this is exactly what the Quran does, this is the image it creates in the mind of those who take it seriously. They are the best of mankind while non-Muslims are the worst of mankind. Islam is an inherently discriminatory ideology yet how many times have we heard politicians say there is no place for discrimination in the UK?

And there are practical implications for this as well, first, in exegeting Surah 3:110, the Hadith reads,

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Verse: — “You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind.” means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.”

(Sahih Al-Bukhari Book 65 Hadith 79)

To further establish the disdain for people of other faiths, the prophet of Islam says,

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) as saying:

Do not greet the Jews and the Christians before they greet you and when you meet any one of them on the roads force him to go to the narrowest part of it.”

(Sahih Muslim Book 39 Hadith 16)

So from the above, adherents of Islam are to bring people into the ideology with chains. The ideology also teaches that Christians and Jews should not be greeted first and should be pushed to the side of the road. Again this is in line with Surah 9:29 cited above which says the people of the book should be made to feel humiliated while paying the Jizya. The Jizya, by the way, is protection money paid to the Islamic regime subduing the Christians and Jews in acknowledgment of their inferior status and in exchange for staying alive and practising their religion.

Again, and this cannot be stressed enough, imagine if the UK were to force adherents of Islam to pay a compulsory tax in exchange for allowing them pray their five daily prayers and read the Quran in peace! (Notice I have not even said they would be allowed to build mosques or give the Adan i.e. Islamic call to prayer despite this tax because under the pact of Umar, the Christians despite paying the Jizya were not allowed to build places of worship) Imagine the international outrage there would be against such a practise. Yet, this is fair game for the Islamic ideology.

The Pact of Umar, reproduced below is instructive regarding the relationships between adherents of Islam and Christians when the latter is in subjugation,

This is a writing to Umar from the Christians of such and such a city. When You [Muslims] marched against us [Christians],: we asked of you protection for ourselves, our posterity, our possessions, and our co-religionists; and we made this stipulation with you, that we will not erect in our city or the suburbs any new monastery, church, cell or hermitage; that we will not repair any of such buildings that may fall into ruins, or renew those that may be situated in the Muslim quarters of the town; that we will not refuse the Muslims entry into our churches either by night or by day…that we will not make a show of the Christian religion nor invite any one to embrace it; that we will not prevent any of our kinsmen from embracing Islam, if they so desire. That we will honor the Muslims and rise up in our assemblies when they wish to take their seats…

That we will not display the cross upon our churches or display our crosses or our sacred books in the streets of the Muslims, or in their market-places; that we will strike the clappers in our churches lightly [wooden rattles or bells summoned the people to church or synagogue]; that we will not recite our services in a loud voice when a Muslim is present; that we will not carry Palm branches [on Palm Sunday] or our images in procession in the streets; that at the burial of our dead we will not chant loudly or carry lighted candles in the streets of the Muslims or their market places…”

Imagine if this were flipped and Islam adherents in the UK were put through this? Yet this is what it proposes to do to people of other faiths. Now note, Christians and Jews are lucky, polytheists and other kinds of non-believers would be killed in line with Surah 9:29.

On the value of individual liberty, there is no freedom of religion under the Islamic framework because those who leave the religion are under a capital punishment as stated in the Hadith,

Ibn ‘Abbas said:

“The Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: ‘Whoever changes his religion, kill him.’”

(Sunan An- Nisai Book 37 Hadith 34)

Now, this is something the top Dawah (Islamic proselytizing) representatives in the UK have proudly said and are proudly saying. Ali Dawah (Muslim preacher with 1.2m subscribers) says he will sit back and eat pop corn while he watches apostates being executed in his ideal Islamic state, a notion seconded by his good friend Mohammed Hijab and Hamza Tzortis. This is the UK in the 21st century. The police of course do nothing about this because as we all know, it would be intolerant and islamophobic if they do.

Again, under the Islamic Hadith, there is a restriction on the travel of women,

The Prophet (ﷺ) said, “A woman should not travel except with a Dhu-Mahram (her husband or a man with whom that woman cannot marry at all according to the Islamic Jurisprudence), and no man may visit her except in the presence of a Dhu-Mahram.”

(Sahih Bukhari, Book 28 Hadith 42)

Finally on this, Islam is obsessed with control over the populace and all who adhere to it. In Surah 9:29, the order is to fight those who do not allow what the prophet allows, e.g. marriage to infants (Surah 65:4 and his own marriage to a 6 year old Aisha and consummation of said marriage at 9), or do not forbid what the prophet forbids (e.g. worship of any deity other than Allah, belief in the trinity or in Jesus as the Son of God). The prophet in his own words says,

Narrated Anas ibn Malik:

The Prophet (ﷺ) said: I am commanded to fight with men till they testify that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is His servant and His Apostle, face our qiblah (direction of prayer), eat what we slaughter, and pray like us. When they do that, their life and property are unlawful for us except what is due to them. They will have the same rights as the Muslims have, and have the same responsibilities as the Muslims have.”

(Sunan Abi Dawud Book 15 Hadith 165)

The command given to the prophet was not to promote individual liberty- screw that!- the mission was to fight people until they became adherents of Islam and prayed the prayers of Islam, began to forbid what he forbade and allow what he allowed. Even the great Ali Dawah (earlier referenced) in context of being proud of death for apostates, says “Shariah says the rights of the community are greater than your individual rights to freedom which is BS”. So this is a Muslim preacher in the UK, openly calling for killing of ex Muslims and saying individual rights are BS, what do the police do about this? Absolutely nothing! Never mind that this statement incites hate against Muslims who leave their religion in the UK.

So what have we learnt about Islam and tolerance? That Islam is not a tolerant ideology, it calls for the deaths and/or subjugation of any who rise up against it. So Islam is not compatible with that British value. Islam has no respect for those who do not believe in it, calling them the worst of creatures and Islam certainly is not interested in individual liberty, at least in the sense the UK envisions.

A final thought on this matter.

Why are the British values redefined whenever Islam is involved? Why is there so much clamour for Islam to be tolerated but a great deal of “understanding” when Islam fails to tolerate British values? Why do Dawah guys in the UK get to go around inciting hate towards ex-Muslims and those who do not believe in their prophet but once this ideology that teaches them to call for these things is criticized, the same UK law apparatus who were eerily quiet when the shoe was on the other foot, all of a sudden become concerned about hate speech, religious sensitivities and hurting people’s feelings?

If multiculturalism is to indeed work, if there is indeed such a thing as diversity and equity then every religion should be put on equal footing and held to the same standard. Islam, the Quran and its very criticisable prophet should be fair game for criticism as much as Jesus Christ and the Bible are. The police should protect those who criticize Islam from harm rather than blaming them for “stoking tensions” or engaging in debates and “hurting feelings”. The UK cannot have one religion in a protected class over above all others, it cannot police the rest of the public one way and police Muslims another way. It must hold adherents of the Islamic faith to British values as it does everybody else.



A.B. Melchizedek

Crusader for the truth of the gospel and the logical coherence within the context of the scriptural worldview.