Why 'Moderate Islam' Is an Oxymoron

At a time when terrorism in the name of Islam has become disturbingly common, Western institutions—mainstream media, academia, and government—consistently assure us that this violence has "nothing to do with real Islam."

According to this narrative, Islam is inherently peaceful, and those who commit atrocities in its name are fringe radicals hijacking a noble religion for their own twisted purposes. We're told there are two distinct versions of Islam: the "moderate" Islam, practiced by the peaceful majority, and the "extremist" Islam, used by a deviant minority.

But this binary framing is fatally flawed. The question that must be asked is: Are both of these expressions of Islam theologically legitimate? And more importantly, what does Islam itself command?

The Illusion of a Spectrum

Terms like "moderate" and "extremist" refer to degree: to what extent something is practiced or believed. "Moderate" means observing reasonable limits; "extremist" means going to exaggerated lengths. But this framing only makes sense when applied to ideologies that allow for subjective interpretation. Islam is not such a system.

Islam is a prescriptive religion, defined by the Qur’an (allegedly the literal word of Allah) and Hadith (the sayings and actions of Muhammad, Islam’s "perfect man"). Islamic jurisprudence categorizes all actions into five rigid classifications: obligatory, recommended, neutral, discouraged, and forbidden. In other words, every human act falls into a fixed religious grid.

So how exactly does one "moderate" a divine command? One either obeys it or disobeys it. Anything in between is simply not Islamic.

What Do the Texts Say?

Let’s consider just one example. Qur’an 9:29 commands Muslims to:

"Fight those among the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth [Islam], until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued."

This verse isn’t vague. It mandates warfare against non-Muslims until they submit and pay tribute. Early Muslims took this literally, launching jihad campaigns that built the Islamic empire. There is no scholarly dispute about the historical context or interpretation. Even respected Islamic jurists confirm that such commands are active and binding until the entire world is under Islamic rule.

So how can a Muslim who obeys Qur’an 9:29 be labeled an "extremist"? Isn’t he simply following what the religion demands?

The Doctrine of Abrogation (Naskh)

Moderates often point to earlier, peaceful verses from the Qur’an. But Islamic doctrine includes the concept of naskh, or abrogation, where later revelations override earlier ones. Peaceful verses from Muhammad’s time in Mecca are nullified by more militant ones from Medina. Qur’an 9:5 (“Kill the polytheists wherever you find them”) and 9:29 are among the final revelations. They override the earlier verses about patience, tolerance, and coexistence.

When Power Allows, the True Islam Emerges

In times and places where Muslims gain power, the true nature of Islam is allowed to emerge. In Syria, for example, jihadist groups have revived jizya collection from Christians. Across the Muslim world, from Pakistan to Nigeria, attacks on non-Muslims and apostates are routinely justified by direct citation of Islamic scripture.

When Muslims are weak, they preach peace and coexistence. When they are strong, they often enforce sharia—with all its draconian consequences. This is not hypocrisy; it is permitted by Islamic jurisprudence, which allows delay in applying certain commands until conditions are favorable.

No Room for Reform

Islam lacks any legitimate internal mechanism for doctrinal reform. There is no equivalent of a Protestant Reformation. Islam views itself as final, perfect, and immutable. Questioning core teachings is apostasy, punishable by death.

Even terms like taqiyya (permissible deceit) allow Muslims to present a softened image of Islam for strategic purposes. This isn’t fringe theory; it’s codified in the legal schools.

"Moderation" Is a Western Mirage

The idea of "moderate Islam" is a Western projection—a culturally induced concept imposed on a religious framework that does not accommodate it. The secular West assumes all religions are elastic, moldable to modern values. But Islam is not built that way.

If Islam teaches X, and a Muslim practices X, he is not an extremist. He is simply obedient. If another Muslim rejects or ignores X, he is not a moderate; he is either ignorant, disobedient, or engaging in tactical concealment.

Conclusion: The Myth of Two Islams

There are not two Islams. There is only one Islam: submission to the will of Allah as revealed in the Qur’an and exemplified by Muhammad. The divide between "moderate" and "extremist" is not theological; it is political, psychological, and strategic.

It’s time to discard the comforting lie that "moderate Islam" is the solution to "radical Islam." They are not two separate entities. One is simply the full expression of the other, when conditions allow.

Islam, in its orthodox form, is extreme by modern liberal standards. The only question is whether Muslims are in a position to fully act on it.