My usual writing is more assertive. However, this subject is sufficiently complex that what follows is more speculative theory than a blunt attempt at persuasion. I am acutely aware of my own worldview and biases, and I make allowances for them where possible.

I believe that Islam, as it is commonly practiced, is not compatible with Western liberal democratic values. Antisemitism is undeniably prevalent and deeply problematic, but I would also argue that some of it has been exacerbated by cultural and political missteps made by Jewish communities in the diaspora. The fact that even raising this point is often branded as antisemitic is itself part of the problem: when all criticism is labelled antisemitism, genuine antisemitism becomes harder to identify, confront, and defeat.

None of the Abrahamic religions are perfect, and none are blameless. Christianity itself has been corrupted in subtle and overt ways across history. Nevertheless, I believe that religious faith is, on balance, a net positive for humanity, and I want to make that case honestly. Doing so requires a willingness to criticise all faiths, including one’s own.

You would have to be an incurable antisemite to deny the admirable qualities of Jewish resilience, family structure, communal solidarity, and the extraordinary contributions Jews have made to nearly every society they have inhabited. At the same time, it is reasonable to argue that Judaism can be insular and exclusivist, particularly given its refusal to proselytise or invite external participation.

Likewise, anyone who finds nothing admirable in Islam’s Five Pillars—faith, prayer, charity, fasting, and pilgrimage—is simply not being objective. One can argue that Islam’s treatment of non-believers is illiberal or even violent, but it is dishonest to deny its emphasis on family, discipline, and communal obligation.

My central argument can be summarised as follows:

There is no such thing as “Judeo-Christian values.”
By objective analysis, Judaism and Islam share more in common with each other than either does with Christianity.

From a global and historical perspective, the cultural and civilisational ties between Judaism and Islam are more immediate and layered than those between Judaism and Christianity. Both arise from shared Middle Eastern geographies, Semitic languages (Hebrew and Arabic), and centuries of historical intermingling—whether under Ottoman rule, in medieval Spain, or across the broader Islamic world. Phenotypic overlap among Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews and Arab Muslims further underscores this proximity. These are not abstract connections; they are lived, embodied, and continuous.

The term “Judeo-Christian” is largely a modern construct, retrofitted in the post–Holocaust and Cold War eras to promote Jewish-Christian solidarity against fascism and communism. As theologian Arthur Cohen observed, it functions as a myth—one that glosses over Christianity’s doctrine of supersessionism while marginalising Islam’s equally legitimate prophetic lineage.

I will now highlight several foundational differences and offer an apologetic as to why the Christian worldview is ultimately the correct one, and why the only sustainable long-term solution—however implausible it may seem—would involve Jews and Muslims alike embracing Jesus as the Messiah.

The three Abrahamic faiths are often described as sharing deep commonalities. In reality, their shared ground is remarkably thin. They agree on one essential proposition: that there is a single God who created the universe ex nihilo. Beyond that, most similarities they share are common to nearly all religions—such as worship, moral obligation, and ritual practice.

Where they differ is where it matters most.

The Nature of God

Protestant and Evangelical Christianity affirms a Trinitarian conception of God: one divine being in three persons [Father, Son, and Holy Spirit] with Jesus understood as fully divine.

Islam and Orthodox Judaism, by contrast, insist on an absolute and indivisible unity. In Islam, this is articulated as Tawhid, which categorically rejects incarnation or division. Jesus is revered as a prophet, not divine. Orthodox Judaism likewise understands God as transcendent and indivisible, present through covenant rather than embodiment.

The Christian conception is undoubtedly more complex and more susceptible to misunderstanding. Complexity, however, is not a disqualification. Indeed, this worldview—despite its difficulty—has spread further than any other and has exerted the greatest civilisational influence, giving rise to what we recognise as Western civilisation.

Human Nature and Sin

This theological divide extends to anthropology.

Christianity teaches original sin: that humanity inherits a fallen nature and is incapable of achieving righteousness through effort alone, requiring divine grace for redemption.

Islam teaches that humans are born pure (fitrah) and become morally accountable at puberty. This oddly precise threshold suggests a human, rather than divine, origin—particularly given the implausibility of tying eternal accountability to hormonal development.

Orthodox Judaism rejects inherited guilt altogether, instead emphasising the tension between the yetzer tov (good inclination) and yetzer hara (evil inclination). While communal consequences may flow from ancestral actions, the soul is not eternally bound by them. This dualistic moral framework—mirrored in Islam’s halal/haram distinctions—is elegant and explanatory, but ultimately insufficient.

Which of these best reflects reality?

Christianity’s claim—that humans are fundamentally flawed from inception to death, incapable of earning salvation—aligns more closely with observable human nature. Salvation is not a reward for compliance but a gift of grace. Heaven is the result, not the prize.

By contrast, Judaism and Islam posit a moral balancing act in which humans earn divine favour through obedience. Heaven becomes the reward for success. Holding imperfect beings to a standard of divine perfection seems an impossible burden—one that Christianity uniquely resolves.

Scripture and Authority

Christians affirm the Bible as the sole, sufficient, and complete authority, with the New Testament fulfilling the Old. Islam regards the Quran as the final, unaltered revelation, supplemented by Hadith. Orthodox Judaism centres on the Tanakh, interpreted through the Oral Torah and Talmud.

The Christian canon—formalised through councils and culminating in sola scriptura—may have been shaped by political necessity, divine providence, or both. Regardless, it removed human intermediaries from ultimate authority, paving the way for the Reformation and curbing clerical corruption. By contrast, Islam and Judaism rely heavily on interpretive authorities—imams and rabbis—whose evolving schools of thought inevitably entangle theology with power.

Salvation and the Afterlife

Christianity stands alone in insisting on salvation by grace alone (sola fide). Islam and Judaism emphasise works, obedience, and law.

Their visions of the afterlife reflect this difference. Christianity’s heaven and hell are stark but deliberately vague—consistent with the unknowability of the eternal. Islam’s afterlife, by contrast, is strikingly concrete and anthropomorphic. Judaism remains comparatively restrained, focusing on ethical living here and now, with Gehinom serving as temporary purification rather than eternal torment.

Ironically, the more comforting Jewish conception feels, the more likely it seems to be human-designed.

Law, Ethics, and Governance

Christian ethics are powered by grace and adaptable across cultures, enabling pluralism and evangelism without legal compulsion.

Islam and Judaism codify ethics into law—Sharia and Halakha—making separation of religion and state exceedingly difficult. Islam’s fusion of faith and governance, combined with its proselytising imperative, makes it fundamentally incompatible with liberal democracy. Judaism, being non-proselytising, poses no equivalent threat.

Christianity has its own coercive history, but its modern Protestant expression persuades by invitation rather than force—a critical distinction.

The Problem and the (Unlikely) Solution

Judaism’s challenge is cultural, not existential. Jewish communities must learn to tolerate criticism without defaulting to accusations of antisemitism. Suppressing debate has diminishing returns, particularly among younger generations increasingly immune to moral sanction.

Islam presents a far greater challenge. Its legalistic structure and theological rigidity are irreconcilable with Western democratic norms. Having just spent a few weeks in Bali (many Muslim) and even guests in our AirBnB being nothing but great people; it must still be said that the system of Government (from any Islamic country - even progressive ones - will not go down well in any westernised country. 

My dream - however improbable - is mass conversion to Christianity. Christianity’s tolerance, restraint, and emphasis on love and grace are precisely what allowed it to give rise to civilisation (and even the central tenet of human rights) as we know it.

Were Christ’s teachings genuinely embraced as a governing principle, the result would not only be worldly peace—but peace within the human soul. I only see conflict in our future, sadly.