You pasted something form a website, whcih includes hadith by Bukhari, Ishaq, Tabri . My interest here as you know was specific verses form the Qur’an. So,lets follow the rules of engagement.
Secondly, I will start with individual verses in your post, starting with the very first verse from the Qur’an that you pasted is from Surah (Chapter) 2 , verse 3 191. But my friend you have made the same mistake again, reading it out of context and the writer is practicing willful deception by ingoning the 2:190 and 2:192.
Please read and please respond to it directly before we go to other verses in your post.
Why does Hadith get a free pass for examination? Hadith is supposed to be the words of Muhammed. I am not actually purposefully ignoring 2:190 and 2:192. I can examine them.
[QUR’AN 2:190] Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.
Guest, the way I see it your inclusion of Pooya/Ali Commentary is Muslim apologetics or explanations set up to make the words of Muhammed seem or appear user friendly when in reality the sayings of your founding prophet are less than that. I concede to context but that won’t negate the brutality of the brutal parts of the writ.
[Pooya/Ali Commentary 2:190]
The message of Islam is universal. From early times the Muslims were only permitted to fight in self defence. When there is no option, and in the face of persecution, however, the Muslims must fight.
Noggin comments: Like when Muslims attempted to forceably expand their influence and religion in Africa and Europe starting in the 8th cenury? Fighting wars over land and resources in Spain and attempting to occcupy France? There was no option? Was it not greed that pushed the Muslim off to conquer other lands? They couldn’t just retreat? and not try to occupy? How does one consider the expansion of Muslim influence by force a form of self-defense? Muslim expansion led to slaughter in war. The barbaric mandates in the Qur’an and Hadith delineates how a mulsim should behave to further the Muslim faith in expansion and occupation.
And Muslims fighting “in the face of persecution” is relative. Kind of like how the Mormons in 1840 were “persecuted” by the Missourians and driven out of Nauvoo, Illinois when in reality the Mormons were attempting a subtle version of a theocratic hostile takeover and the Missourians would have none of that. So of course, the Mormons now tell the story that THEY were persecuted. That is utter bullshit.
The strength of Islam lies in its certainty of ultimate victory over aggression, transgression, and ascribing falsehood to Allah and His last prophet.
Guest, anything in the Koran is defensible? If one is willing to do the mental gymnastics. Yes. Every religion has this problem. Most political platform has this problem. It is a universal difficulty with any ideology.
We cannot remain intellectually honest and simultaneously reject the idea that the Muslim history is not full of brutality relating to hostile Muslim occupation attempts of other nations.