Why Christians and Muslims Are Not Enemies: Challenging the Myth of Inherent Conflict

By V.A. Mohamad Ashrof, New Age Islam 28 June 2025 In the complex and often turbulent theatre of contemporary global affairs, the relationship between the world’s two largest religious communities, Christianity and Islam, is frequently portrayed through a distorted and dangerous lens. A prevailing narrative, amplified by political opportunists, sensationalist media, and the corrosive ideologies of extremists on both sides, posits an inherent and irreconcilable “clash of civilizations.” This framework casts Muslims and Christians as perennial adversaries, locked in a struggle rooted in theological incompatibility and destined for perpetual conflict. This perception, however, crumbles under the weight of a deep, intelligent, and coherently synthesized hermeneutical analysis of Islam’s foundational sources. This paper will argue, through a comprehensive examination of Islamic scripture, authenticated prophetic traditions, and historical documentation, that from an inclusive, humanistic, and ecumenical perspective derived directly from Islamic theology, Christians are not designated as an inherent enemy of Muslims (submitters). On the contrary, they are afforded a unique and privileged status as Ahl al-Kitab (the Family of the Book), a designation that establishes a framework not for enmity, but for profound dialogue, legally protected coexistence, social integration, and even affective kinship. (File Photo) ---- The methodological key to unlocking this understanding is hermeneutics—the art and science of interpretation. A superficial, decontextualized, or malevolent reading of sacred texts can indeed furnish justifications for ideologies of hate. However, a rigorous hermeneutical approach, one that is central to classical Islamic scholarship, demands a more nuanced engagement. This involves understanding the historical context of revelation, appreciating linguistic subtleties, recognizing thematic consistencies throughout the scripture, and above all, interpreting specific verses in light of the overarching objectives (Maqasid) of the Islamic message, which include the preservation of life, faith, reason, lineage, and property, all under the canopy of divine justice ('Adl) and mercy (Rahmah). It is this sophisticated interpretive tradition that reveals a vision of interfaith relations that is not only tolerant but fundamentally pluralistic and respectful. This Paper Will Navigate This Complex Terrain In Five Comprehensive Parts. First, it will delve deeply into the Quranic foundation for this special relationship, analysing the profound theological implications of the term Ahl al-Kitab and exploring the explicit Quranic calls for unity, the affirmation of Christian piety, and the remarkable declaration of affection towards the Christian community. Second, the paper will meticulously examine the prophetic model, demonstrating how the Prophet Muhammad translated these Quranic principles into a lived, historical reality through his strategic alliances, protective covenants that have echoed through centuries, and unwavering legal injunctions demanding justice and kindness. Third, this inquiry will explore the sanctioned mechanisms of profound social integration prescribed by Islamic law, such as shared food and the institution of intermarriage, which render a state of perpetual enmity a social and logical impossibility. Fourth, it will courageously and directly confront the so-called “problematic” verses—those passages often cherry-picked by extremists to fuel conflict—and will hermeneutically resolve them by situating them within their proper textual and historical contexts, demonstrating how they are governed by higher ethical principles of self-defence and justice. Finally, the paper will conclude by articulating the urgent humanistic and ecumenical imperative for Muslims and Christians in the modern world, an imperative that flows directly from this authentic, textually-grounded understanding of the Islamic tradition. Through this exhaustive synthesis, it will become unequivocally clear that the enemy in the Islamic paradigm is not the Christian, but rather the universal evils of oppression, ignorance, bigotry, and the transgression against God’s sacred commands for justice and universal mercy. The Family of the Book as Spiritual Kin The entire edifice of the Muslim-Christian relationship in Islamic theology is built upon the Quranic designation of Christians as Ahl al-Kitab, the “Family of the Scripture.” This is far more than a simple taxonomic label; it is a profound theological category imbued with immense significance. It distinguishes Christians and Jews from polytheists (Mushrikun) and those who deny divine revelation outright. The term itself signifies an honour: it is an explicit acknowledgement that these communities are the inheritors of authentic divine guidance, custodians of a sacred scripture (Kitab), and followers of a prophetic tradition that Muslims believe culminates in, and is affirmed by, the message of Islam. This shared heritage in a history of divine communication is the non-negotiable starting point for the relationship. At the very heart of the Quranic approach to interfaith relations lies not a declaration of war, but a gracious and compelling invitation to dialogue and unity. The scripture does not initiate contact with condemnation but with a call to identify and rally around a shared centre. The most eloquent and historically significant articulation of this principle is found in the verse: "Say, O Family of the Scripture, come to a word that is equitable between us and you - that we will not worship except God and not associate anything with Him and not take one another as lords instead of God" (Quran 3:64). A deep hermeneutical dive into this verse reveals its genius as a framework for ecumenical engagement. The term "equitable" (Sawa') implies a common ground, a just and level standing point accessible to both parties. The verse then defines this common ground as the bedrock principle of uncompromised monotheism—Tawhid. The invitation is to a shared theological core, not a battlefield of dogmatic differences. It implicitly acknowledges that while significant doctrinal divergences exist—most notably the Christian conception of the Trinity, which the Quran respectfully critiques as an excess in religion (Quran 4:171; 5:73)—the fundamental orientation towards the One God of Abraham is a powerful, unifying truth that should take precedence. This divine instruction prioritizes shared foundational belief over divisive doctrinal specifics, thereby setting the stage for collaboration and mutual recognition rather than conflict. This verse has served as the cornerstone for interfaith initiatives for centuries, including the recent "A Common Word Between Us and You" initiative, demonstrating its timeless relevance as a methodology for peace. This theme of a continuous, unified divine message is a consistent refrain in the Quran. Muslims are not only encouraged but commanded to affirm this continuity: "Say, [O believers], 'We have believed in God and what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants and what was given to Moses and Jesus and what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him'" (Quran 2:136). According to this verse, it is an article of Islamic faith (Iman) to believe in the divine mission of Jesus and the scripture he brought, the Injil (Gospel). This mandated belief in the prophetic legitimacy of Christianity’s central figures makes the notion of inherent, theologically-required enmity a profound internal contradiction. In a powerful challenge to religious triumphalism and exclusivism, the Quran makes a revolutionary statement that decouples salvation from mere communal affiliation. It posits that sincere faith in God and righteous action are the ultimate criteria for divine favour, and it explicitly and repeatedly extends this promise to Christians. The verse is unequivocal and stands as a pillar of Islamic pluralism: "Indeed, those who believed and those who were Jews or Christians or Sabeans [before Prophet Muhammad] - those [among them] who believed in God and the Last Day and did righteousness - will have their reward with their Lord, and no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve" (Quran 2:62). This verse, echoed almost verbatim in Quran 5:69, effectively demolishes the extremist claim that all Christians, by virtue of their faith alone, are condemned enemies destined for hellfire. Instead, it frames the Christian community as a valid path within which individuals can achieve ultimate success with God through sincere faith (Iman) and right action ('Amal Salih). While classical commentators have debated whether this applies only to pre-Muhammad Christians or has ongoing validity, many influential modern and classical scholars have argued for its broader, more pluralistic implication. Scholar Farid Esack notes that such verses provide a "Quranic basis for a theology of religious pluralism" that resists "salvific exclusivism" and values sincerity and orthopraxy (right action) as much as orthodoxy (right belief) (Esack, p.165). This inclusive vision of salvation is fundamentally incompatible with a mandate for blanket hostility and war. Furthermore, the Quran goes beyond a generic promise of salvation and paints a portrait of a segment of the Christian community in laudatory terms, recognizing their deep spiritual devotion and unwavering moral integrity: "They are not all alike; among the Family of the Scripture is a community that is upright, reciting the verses of God during periods of the night and prostrating [in prayer]. They believe in God and the Last Day, and they enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and hasten to good deeds. And those are among the righteous. And whatever good they do - never will it be denied them" (Quran 3:113-115). This is not the language of enmity. This is a vivid description of spiritual allies, fellow devotees of God who share the same core moral commitments—prayer, faith, and the active promotion of good in society—as the ideal Muslim community. The Quran sees and affirms the light of God in their practices. Perhaps the most direct, powerful, and emotionally resonant refutation of the "Christian-as-enemy" narrative is found in a remarkable verse in Surah Al-Ma'idah. In a stunning comparative assessment of different communities' dispositions towards Muslims, the Quran explicitly identifies Christians as being the most inclined towards friendship and affection: "You will surely find the most intense of the people in animosity toward the believers [to be] the Jews and those who associate others with God; and you will find the nearest of them in affection [Mawaddah] toward the believers those who say, 'We are Christians.' That is because among them are priests and monks and because they are not arrogant" (Quran 5:82). A careful hermeneutical analysis of this verse is profoundly revealing. Firstly, the choice of the word Mawaddah for "affection" is significant. It implies a love and friendship that is rooted in respect and admiration, a higher form than mere tolerance. Secondly, the Quran does not attribute this positive disposition to any shared political interest, strategic convenience, or ethnic affinity. Instead, it links the pro-Muslim sentiment of Christians directly to their spiritual and moral character. The verse identifies two reasons for this closeness: the presence of a devoted class of spiritual seekers ("priests and monks") and, most importantly, the cardinal virtue of humility ("they are not arrogant" - La Yastakbirun). The Quran thus celebrates the genuine piety, ascetic devotion, and lack of hubris it finds within the Christian tradition as a direct cause for friendship with Muslims. This moves beyond mere tolerance into a realm of positive affection and a deep recognition of shared spiritual values. As scholar Mona Siddiqui observes in her extensive work on this topic, this verse offers a "psychological and spiritual affinity" and suggests that "the Muslim is predisposed to find friendship among Christians," a disposition grounded in shared moral virtues (Siddiqui, p.78). This explicit, divinely-articulated endorsement of a natural affinity between the two communities makes it exceptionally difficult to argue for a divinely ordained state of perpetual enmity. (From Files) ---- Translating Divine Principle into Lived Reality If the Quran provides the theological and ethical blueprint for respectful and amicable Muslim-Christian relations, the Sunnah—the authenticated life-example and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad—provides the practical, historical, and legal implementation of that blueprint. The Prophet’s conduct consistently demonstrated that the principles of recognition, protection, and cooperation were not abstract ideals to be admired, but governing ethics for the Muslim community in its interactions with its Christian contemporaries. His life is a testament to turning divine writ into worldly reality. The very first major political-strategic act of the nascent Muslim community was not an act of war, but an act of profound trust in a Christian ruler and his kingdom. In the face of brutal and escalating persecution in Mecca, the Prophet Muhammad advised a group of his followers to undertake the first Hijra (migration). He did not send them to the protection of another powerful Arab tribe, but specifically directed them to seek refuge across the sea in the Christian kingdom of Abyssinia (modern-day Ethiopia and Eritrea). His rationale, preserved in the earliest sources, was a tribute to its Christian king, the Negus (al-Najashi): "If you were to go to Abyssinia, it would be better for you, for the king will not tolerate injustice and it is a land of truth" (Lings, p.81). This event was a pivotal moment in Islamic history. The physical survival of a significant portion of the early Muslim community was placed directly and voluntarily into the hands of a Christian monarch. When the pagan Meccan elite sent a delegation laden with gifts to demand the extradition of the Muslim refugees, the Negus summoned the Muslims to his court. In a dramatic scene, the Muslim spokesman, Ja'far ibn Abi Talib, eloquently explained their new faith and recited the opening verses of the Quranic chapter named after the Virgin Mary, Surah Maryam. Upon hearing the Quran's beautiful account of the miraculous birth of Jesus, the Negus and his bishops were moved to tears, and he famously declared, "It seems as if these words and those which were revealed to Jesus are the rays of light from the same lamp" (Ibn Hisham, p.334-338). He granted the Muslims full protection, refusing to hand them over. This foundational event establishes a historical paradigm of Christian-Muslim relations rooted in humanitarian alliance, mutual theological recognition, and shared reverence for God. The first safe haven for the persecuted followers of Islam was a nation sheltered by the Christian cross. The Prophet Muhammad did not leave the status and rights of Christians to the whims of future rulers or the vagaries of goodwill; he codified their protections in formal treaties and covenants that established a revolutionary legal framework for pluralistic coexistence. First, the Constitution of Medina, a ground-breaking charter established upon the Prophet’s arrival in the city, created a single political community (ummah wahidah) composed of various groups, including Muslims and Jewish tribes. It established a system of mutual defence, communal legal responsibility, and, crucially, freedom of religion and the right for each community to judge by its own laws. While Christians were not a large demographic in Medina at that specific time, the principles of the Constitution established a clear framework for a multi-religious state where different faith groups maintained their distinct religious identities while being bound by a common social and political contract (Lecker, p.40-42). Second, the Prophet’s personal engagement with Christian delegations is profoundly illustrative of his approach. The most famous example is the large delegation of Christians from the southern city of Najran who came to Medina to engage in theological debate. The Prophet received them with the highest honours, lodging them as his guests. Most remarkably, when the time for their prayer arrived, he invited them to perform their Christian worship, facing east towards Jerusalem, inside his own mosque in Medina—the central sacred space of the Muslim community (Bukhari 3:47). This act of profound hospitality and religious accommodation is almost unimaginable in a context of inherent enmity. Allowing another faith to perform its most sacred rites in the heart of the Muslim community’s holiest site is the ultimate symbol of recognition, security, and deep respect. Third, and perhaps the most powerful legal testaments, are the Covenants of the Prophet, such as the renowned Ashtiname granted to the monks of Saint Catherine’s Monastery at Mount Sinai. (Ashtiname of Muhammad, also known as the Covenant or Testament of Muhammad, is a document purportedly written or dictated by the Prophet Muhammad). While some modern historians debate the precise textual transmission of the document, its content is widely accepted by both Muslim and Western scholars as reflecting the undisputed spirit of the Prophet’s policies and the principles of early Islamic law. The covenant’s clauses are revolutionary for their time and ours. It grants Christians "security for their lives, their property, their churches, their children, their lands, their businesses, and their religion." It explicitly forbids the destruction of churches for the building of mosques, prohibits the forced conversion of Christians, and exempts monks and priests from taxes. It goes even further, mandating that Muslims must actively defend Christians and their places of worship if they are attacked, stating that if a Christian woman marries a Muslim man, she must not be prevented from praying in her church. The covenant concludes with a solemn oath, declaring that anyone who violates its terms "has verily transgressed the covenant of God and has broken His promise." As Dr. John Andrew Morrow's comprehensive study shows, this was not a temporary truce but a perpetual, divinely-sanctioned grant of full citizenship rights and protection, establishing Christians as a protected and allied community, not a targeted one (Morrow, p.165-167). Hadith Mandating Justice, Kindness, and Protection The authenticated Hadith literature, the vast corpus of the Prophet Muhammad's sayings and actions, is replete with powerful injunctions demanding fair, just, and kind treatment of non-Muslims, including Christians, who live in peace within the Muslim polity. These traditions are not mere ethical suggestions; they carry the full weight of prophetic authority and establish clear and binding legal and moral obligations for all Muslims. The sanctity of the life of a peaceful non-Muslim is declared to be absolute. The Prophet issued a dire and unequivocal warning: "Whoever killed a Dhimmi (a non-Muslim living under a covenant of protection with Muslims) shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise, though its fragrance can be smelled at a distance of forty years of travel" (Bukhari 3166). The severity of this otherworldly consequence—being barred even from the scent of Paradise—highlights the enormity of the sin of unjustly harming a protected non-Muslim. Furthermore, the Prophet positioned himself as the personal legal advocate for any non-Muslim who was wronged by a Muslim, elevating their civil rights to a matter of ultimate, eschatological significance. In a statement of profound governmental and moral responsibility, he declared: "Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority (dhimmi), or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against that person on the Day of Judgment" (Abu Dawud 3052). In this powerful tradition, the highest authority in Islam, the Prophet himself, becomes the prosecutor in God's court on behalf of the wronged Christian or Jew. To oppress them is thus a direct offense against the Prophet and a grave matter on the Day of Final Reckoning. The principle of kindness and good conduct extends to the most basic social unit: the neighbourhood. The Prophet’s famous injunction, "He who believes in God and the Last Day should do good to his neighbour," is understood by the overwhelming consensus of classical and contemporary scholars to be universal, applying to neighbours of all faiths without distinction (Muslim 47). Good neighbourliness is presented as an essential sign of true faith, and this duty is not suspended if one’s neighbour happens to be a Christian. Erasing Enmity Through Law and Love The Islamic legal and ethical framework, the Shariah, when properly understood, goes far beyond mere passive tolerance or political protection for Christians. It actively creates and sanctions powerful avenues for deep social integration and even the formation of unbreakable kinship ties. These divinely sanctioned mechanisms make the very notion of Christians as a permanent, untouchable enemy a social, legal, and logical absurdity. In almost every human culture, the act of sharing a meal is a fundamental expression of fellowship, trust, and community. It signifies the lowering of barriers and the acceptance of the other. The Quran explicitly sanctions this deeply human act of communion between Muslims and the Family of the Book. Surah Al-Ma'idah, the same chapter that speaks of the unique affection between Muslims and Christians, declares: "This day [all] good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them" (Quran 5:5). This verse has immense social implications. By permitting Muslims to eat the food prepared by Christians (provided it does not contain intrinsically forbidden items like pork or carrion), the Quran removes a significant and often insurmountable barrier to social interaction. It opens the door to shared tables, invitations to each other's homes, participation in life-cycle celebrations, and the building of genuine communal bonds through the simple, profound human act of breaking bread together. This is a clear directive towards fellowship, not estrangement. The single most powerful piece of evidence against the "enemy" thesis within the entire corpus of Islamic law is undoubtedly the Quranic permission for Muslim men to marry Christian women. The second half of the aforementioned verse is revolutionary in its social and theological implications: "...And [lawful in marriage are] chaste women from among the believers and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture before you..." (Quran 5:5). A deep hermeneutical reflection on this single legal ruling shatters the entire framework of inherent enmity. Marriage is the most intimate and sacred of human bonds. It is inconceivable that a scripture would command its followers to view Christians as a collective enemy while simultaneously permitting a Muslim man to take a Christian woman as his wife, his partner in life, the confidant of his secrets, and the mother of his children. According to the full consensus of Islamic jurists, this Christian wife retains her faith; she cannot be compelled to convert. She must be honoured and protected as a member of the Muslim family, and her right to practice her Christianity, including attending church, must be respected by her Muslim husband. The children of this union would have a Christian mother and a Muslim father, Christian grandparents and Muslim grandparents. The two communities, in this most fundamental of ways, become fused into one family, one bloodline. This law presupposes and is designed to create a relationship built on love, trust, mutual respect, and the lived reality of a harmonious, multi-faith household. It is the ultimate legal and social antidote to any ideology of hate, replacing the divisive rhetoric of conflict with the unifying reality of kinship. The Veneration of Jesus and Mary The Islamic tradition does not merely acknowledge or tolerate the central figures of Christianity; it reveres them with the highest honour. In the Quran, Jesus, or Isa ibn Maryam (Jesus, son of Mary), is one of the five greatest, arch-prophets of God, known as the Ulu al-'Azm. He is granted lofty titles such as al-Masih (the Messiah), a "Word from God," and a "Spirit from Him" (Quran 4:171). The Quran is the only holy book of a major world religion other than Christianity that affirms his miraculous virgin birth, his ability to perform miracles by God's leave (healing the leper, giving sight to the blind, and raising the dead), and his ascension into heaven (Quran 3:45-49; 5:110). While Islam diverges sharply from Christian doctrine on the question of Jesus's divinity and crucifixion, the profound respect, love, and honour accorded to him as a mighty messenger of God are undeniable and integral to the Muslim faith. Even more remarkable is the exalted status of his mother, Mary (Maryam). Mary is the only woman mentioned by her proper name in the entire Quran. An entire chapter of the Quran, Surah Maryam (Chapter 19), a chapter of immense beauty and spiritual power, is named in her honour. The Quran describes her as having been chosen by God and purified, selecting her "above the women of the worlds" (Quran 3:42). The Quranic account of the Annunciation is a scene of profound divine favour and piety. This deep, textually-mandated veneration for the central figures of Christianity within Islam’s own holiest text creates a profound and undeniable spiritual bridge between the two faiths. It is a theological impossibility for Muslims to hold Jesus and Mary in such high esteem while simultaneously viewing their sincere followers as inherent enemies. This shared reverence provides a deep and inexhaustible wellspring for mutual understanding, spiritual dialogue, and heartfelt respect. Addressing the "Problematic" Texts A credible, comprehensive, and intellectually honest analysis must, without omission or apology, directly address the verses and hadiths that are frequently decontextualized and weaponized by both anti-Muslim critics and Muslim extremists to argue for a divinely mandated state of perpetual war against Christians. A proper Islamic hermeneutical approach, however, demonstrates that these texts are almost invariably context-specific, defensive in nature, and are governed by the Quran’s higher, overarching ethical principles of justice, the sanctity of life, and peace. To understand these challenging verses, one must employ the standard, rigorous principles of classical Islamic textual interpretation (Usul al-Tafsir). Chief among these is understanding the historical occasions of revelation, which demands that a verse be anchored in the specific circumstances it was addressing. Another crucial principle is the distinction between general, timeless principles ('Aam) and specific, qualified rulings (Khaas). Furthermore, the concept of abrogation (Naskh) has been grossly misused by extremists. While a valid concept, the vast majority of mainstream scholars hold that verses of peace and justice are not "abrogated" by "verses of the sword"; rather, the verses of conflict apply to specific situations of active warfare, while the verses of peace and justice apply to all situations of non-belligerence. The overwhelming ethical thrust of the Quran—towards mercy (Rahmah), justice ('Adl), forgiveness ('Afw), and the sanctity of covenants—must be used as the definitive interpretive lens through which to understand any verse dealing with conflict. Two verses in the ninth chapter of the Quran, Surah At-Tawbah, are often presented as the primary evidence for mandated warfare. The so-called "Verse of the Sword" (Quran 9:5) calls for fighting polytheists who break their treaties, while Quran 9:29 instructs Muslims to "fight those who do not believe in God or in the Last Day... from among those who were given the Scripture... until they give the Jizya from a hand of authority while they are in a state of submission." A decontextualized reading is deeply misleading and violates the most basic interpretive rules. Surah At-Tawbah was revealed at a very specific and tense historical juncture, near the end of the Prophet’s life, in the context of repeated political betrayals and imminent military threats from certain pagan Arab tribes and factions of the Byzantine Empire who were mobilizing against the Muslim state. These verses are not a blanket command to attack any and all Christians for all time simply for being Christian. They are specific legal and military rulings related to political entities that had broken treaties and initiated or threatened hostilities. The renowned classical commentator Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, in his encyclopaedic Tafsir, links these verses to specific belligerent groups rather than to all Christians universally (al-Tabari 9:29). Crucially, these verses are specified and governed by other, more foundational principles in the Quran. The clearest and most decisive of these is found in this verse: "God does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, God loves those who act justly. God only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion - [forbids] that you make allies of them" (Quran 60:8-9). This pair of verses acts as the ultimate interpretive key and ethical arbiter. It explicitly bifurcates the non-Muslim world into two distinct categories: the peaceful, non-aggressive majority and the actively belligerent minority. The default, standing command towards the peaceful—which would include the vast majority of Christians throughout history and today—is the exercise of the highest ethical virtues: righteousness (Birr) and justice (Qist). Fighting is the exception, a last resort reserved strictly for self-defence against active, military aggression. The term Jizya in 9:29 is also widely misunderstood. It was not a "punishment for disbelief" but a poll tax levied on able-bodied male citizens of a protected non-Muslim community in an Islamic state, in lieu of the military service and the obligatory religious alms (zakat) required of all able-bodied male Muslim citizens. It was a standard feature of statecraft in the ancient world, and in the Islamic context, it was levied in exchange for the state's guarantee of external defence and internal security for that community. Another verse frequently misinterpreted to forbid friendship is Quran 5:51: "O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as Awliya. They are [in fact] Awliya of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you - then indeed, he is [one] of them." The entire meaning of this verse hinges on the correct translation of the rich and multi-layered Arabic word Awliya (singular: Wali). It does not simply mean "friends" in the modern, casual sense. Its semantic range is far stronger, implying patrons, protectors, or intimate political-military allies upon whom one depends for security, guidance, and allegiance, potentially to the detriment of one's own community's faith and integrity. The historical context of the verse was a period of intense political and military intrigue in Medina, where some wavering individuals were tempted to form treacherous alliances with outside powers who were hostile to the Muslim community. As the great scholar Ibn Kathir notes in his classical commentary, "This verse was revealed in reference to those who were pretending to be Muslims but were secretly in league with the Jews and Christians" against the security and interests of the Muslim polity (Ibn Kathir 5:51). Therefore, the verse is not a prohibition on everyday friendship, neighbourly kindness, professional cooperation, or social affection with Christians. It is a strategic, political, and theological warning against compromising the core identity and security of the Muslim community by entering into protectorate-level alliances that subordinate it to hostile powers. The very existence of Quran 5:82 ("nearest of them in affection") and 60:8 ("be righteous and just toward them") within the same scripture proves that a blanket ban on all forms of friendly relations is not the intended meaning. Ecumenical Imperative in the Modern World The hermeneutical recovery and championing of this authentic Islamic vision of Muslim-Christian relations is not merely a sterile academic exercise; it is a profound and urgent humanistic and ecumenical imperative for the turbulent 21st century. In a world increasingly beset by religious nationalism, sectarian violence, and civilizational polarization, this understanding provides a powerful, internally-generated antidote from within the Islamic tradition itself. The Islamic framework, properly understood, calls for more than just a grudging, passive coexistence where communities live side-by-side in mutual suspicion. It calls for a relationship of active justice, demonstrable kindness, and fruitful cooperation. It calls for what some contemporary interfaith thinkers have termed "pro-existence"—a state of not just living alongside the other, but actively willing and working for the well-being, security, and flourishing of the other. The Quranic command to "cooperate in righteousness and piety, and do not cooperate in sin and aggression" (Quran 5:2) is a universal ethical call that transcends religious boundaries. As the two largest religious communities on the planet, Muslims and Christians share a profound and undeniable ethical responsibility to cooperate in addressing the great moral and existential challenges of our time: abject poverty, systemic social and racial injustice, catastrophic climate change, and the global erosion of human dignity. The vast shared ethical universe of both faiths—centred on the core commandments of love of God and love of neighbour, and the cardinal virtues of mercy, compassion, and justice—provides an immense and fertile common ground for this vital collaboration. This spirit of collaboration is not a modern, revisionist invention; it has deep roots in Islamic history. During the Islamic Golden Age, the great intellectual centres of Baghdad, Cordoba, and Toledo were melting pots of creativity where Muslim, Christian, and Jewish scholars, scientists, and philosophers engaged in lively debates and fruitful collaborations. This interaction led to monumental advances in science, medicine, mathematics, and philosophy that benefited all of humanity (Watt, p.23). In our time, this noble legacy is being revived through courageous interfaith initiatives. A prime example is the 2007 "A Common Word Between Us and You," an open letter where over 138 of the world's most senior Muslim scholars extended a hand of friendship and dialogue to Christian leaders, basing their entire appeal on the twin foundational commandments shared by both faiths—the love of the One God, and the love of the neighbour—and citing Quran 3:64 as their scriptural basis. These dialogues are not a departure from tradition but a powerful return to the foundational spirit of the Quran and the lived example of the Prophet. Rejecting Extremism from Within Ultimately, the most potent and effective weapon against the violent, hateful ideologies of extremist groups who preach hatred towards Christians is an authentic, deeply-rooted, intellectually robust, and spiritually compelling interpretation of Islam itself. When Muslims are educated to understand that their own scripture calls Christians the "nearest in affection," that their own Prophet guaranteed the protection of Christian churches as a sacred duty, and that their own sacred law permits the creation of families with Christian spouses, the extremist narrative is immediately exposed for what it is: a gross, ignorant, and blasphemous perversion of the faith. Fostering this humanistic, inclusive perspective is therefore not an apologetic "reform" of Islam designed to appease the West; it is a reclamation of its original, normative principles. The true jihad (struggle) for Muslims in this context is the intellectual and spiritual struggle to reclaim their faith from the clutches of those who would twist its sublime message of mercy into a hateful manifesto of death. As the Prophet Muhammad is reported to have said, "The best of deeds is to love for the sake of God and to hate for the sake of God" (Sahih Muslim 45:1). To cultivate a love for humanity and a just, respectful, and affectionate relationship with Christians—for the sake of obeying God's own commands to be merciful and just—is one of the highest and most necessary expressions of this principle in our time. Thus, we see that Islam’s primary sources decisively dismantles the pernicious and demonstrably false myth that Christians are the inherent and perpetual enemies of Muslims. A deep, contextual, and holistic hermeneutical inquiry reveals precisely the opposite. The Quran establishes Christians as Ahl al-Kitab, a recognized and spiritually respected community with a shared Abrahamic heritage, whose genuine piety and humility make them the "nearest of them in affection" to believers. The Prophet Muhammad, the "walking Quran," translated this divine theology into a consistent and unwavering lived reality of protection, alliance, hospitality, and profound respect, allowing Christians to pray in his mosque, seeking refuge in their kingdoms, and enshrining their rights and freedoms in perpetual, sacred covenants. The Islamic legal tradition, in its wisdom, cemented this relationship by sanctioning the most intimate of social bonds—shared meals and intermarriage—making the concept of inherent enmity a social, legal, and theological impossibility. The verses that appear to command conflict are, upon proper and rigorous interpretation according to classical Islamic principles, understood as specific, defensive responses to historical aggression and political treachery, and are unequivocally governed by the Quran’s unambiguous and overarching mandate for justice, righteousness, and kindness towards all who live in peace. The enemy in Islam is not the sincere follower of Christ. The true enemies, condemned throughout the Quran and the Sunnah, are the universal human evils of injustice (Zulm), oppression (Istibdad), arrogance (Kibr), ignorance (Jahl), and extremism (Ghuluw)—vices that can afflict people of any faith or of no faith at all. By engaging with their Christian brethren in a spirit of kindness, compassion, and mutual respect, and by building enduring bridges of understanding through honest dialogue and active cooperation for the common good, Muslims are not betraying their faith. On the contrary, they are embodying its highest ethical and spiritual values, contributing to a more harmonious and peaceful world, and remaining faithful to the inclusive, humanistic, and ecumenical call of their sacred scripture and the blessed example of their Prophet. Bibliography Ayoub, Mahmoud. Islam: Faith and History. London: Oneworld, 2004. Denny, Frederick M. Islam and the Muslim Community. Long Grove: Waveland Press, 2005. Esack, Farid. Qur'an, Liberation and Pluralism: An Islamic Perspective of Interreligious Solidarity Against Oppression. London: Oneworld, 1997. Lecker, Michael. The "Constitution of Medina": Muhammad's First Legal Document. Princeton: Darwin Press, 2004. Lings, Martin. Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources. Rochester: Inner Traditions, 2006. Morrow, John Andrew. The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. Kettering: Angelico Press, 2013. Nasr, Seyyed Hossein, et al., editors. The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary. New York: HarperOne, 2015. Sahih al-Bukhari. Compiled by Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari. Translated by Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Riyadh: Darussalam, 1997. Sahih Muslim. Compiled by Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj. Translated by Abdul Hamid Siddiqui, Riyadh: International Islamic Publishing House, 2000. Siddiqui, Mona. Christians, Muslims, and Jesus. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013. Sunan Abi Dawud. Compiled by Abu Dawud Sulayman ibn al-Ash'ath. Translated by Nasiruddin Al-Khattab, Riyadh: Darussalam, 2008. The Quran. Translated by M.A.S. Abdel Haleem, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Watt, W. Montgomery. Muslim-Christian Encounters: Perceptions and Misperceptions. London: Routledge, 1991. ------ V.A. Mohamad Ashrof is an independent Indian scholar specializing in Islamic humanism. With a deep commitment to advancing Quranic hermeneutics that prioritize human well-being, peace, and progress, his work aims to foster a just society, encourage critical thinking, and promote inclusive discourse and peaceful coexistence. He is dedicated to creating pathways for meaningful social change and intellectual growth through his scholarship. URL: https://www.newageislam.com/interfaith-dialogue/christians-muslims-enemies-myth-conflict/d/136014 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism