Notes

We need to draw a red line between two parties: Islam, the ideology and Muslims and their actions. Generally, we should not relate the actions of some Muslims to indicate the doctrines of an entire ideology. Some followers' actions =/= the doctrines of an ideology, whether it advocates belief or non-belief. If we did this then every ideology should be banned. For example, Atheism has had extremists as well like Pol Pot, Mao Zedong, Stalin, Hitler, Kim Jung-Un. Does that mean that atheism as an ideology preaches what the above examples did? NO. Christianity has had extremists as well like the Westboro Church, Crusaders, Inquistions, Catholic priests and the rape of little children, burning witches on the stakes, Burning heretics alive, etc. Does that mean that Christianity preaches what these heretics did? NO.

Now that we got this out of the way that some followers =/= the teachings of an ideology, we can discuss the actions of Muslims. First of all, We need to establish that news are by definition, rare events that might interest or entertain the audience. So when you hear another muslim bomb something, that should be treated as special... not the norm. The reason why we hear A LOT about muslim extremists on the news are for two reasons :

1- Muslims in the middle east view western intervention in their lands (Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan by Russia from 1979 to 1989 which led ... to Al - Qaeda and Mujahdeen). The muslims in the east who have their lands taken over by western forces view this intervention as dangerous and they commit terrorist acts in "retaliation". Here is some evidence (https://www.cato.org/publications/foreign-policy-briefing/does-us-intervention-overseas-breed-terrorism-historical-record)

2- Most of the news station that report Muslim extremism are conservative (Fox News) and frankly conservative news channels try their hardest to paint muslims as terrorists because conservatives are frankly intolerant and xenophobic.


Now moving on to the most aspect of this discussion ... The Ideology itself.

All the "violence" verses are commiting the historian fallacy. They are taken out of historical context not textual context (although it does some of that as well). For example if you read surah 9:29 one of the supposed "violence" verses then read literally one verse before you will realize the context is saying that the polytheists were trying to take over masjid al haram and put idols and spray them with alcohol and defame muslim worship sites and that the muslims were ordered to fight them.

This is the one of the most oft-cited "violence" verses put back into context.

Surah 9:5 commits the historian fallacy because of its oblivion of the surrounding historical context. Arab native, here. Arabs back then fought for some months then declared a peace truce for the remainder of the months called in this verse the "sacred months". After the sacred months, EVERYBODY had to fight for the protection of their tribe or village. Does not matter whether you are muslim or non-muslim, black or white, poor or rich, old or young, etc. Everybody had to fight for the protection of their tribe or village and the Muslims were merely given the permission to fight in this verse to repel the incoming forces on their village or tribe.

Surah 8:12 is a command given to the ANGELS if you read the verse not given to the muslims.

You will find a similar pattern among the "violence" verses. Either taken out of context or commit the historian fallacy. Islam is actually pretty clear on these issues.

Surah 22:39 "Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allah is competent to give them victory."

Surah 2:193 "And fight until there is no more persecution."

Surah 8:39 "And fight them until there is no persecution"

Surah 2:190 "You may fight in the cause of GOD against those who attack you but do not aggress. GOD does not love the aggressors."

The Qu'ran is very clear permission to fight is for combating persecution.
Islam also places important value on the human life.

Surah 5:32 " whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely."

Finally, I would like to close with the most convincing Qu'ranic evidence that Islam preaches that we are not allowed to force others unto our religions and that nobody should be forced to accept Islam.

Surah 2:256 "Let there be no compulsion in religion"

Surah 2:208 "“O You who believe! Enter absolutely into peace"

“God does not forbid you from being good to those who have not fought you in the religion or driven you from your homes, or from being just towards them. God loves those who are just.” (Surat al-Mumtahana, 8)

76:8-9 "And feed with food the needy wretch, the orphan and the prisoner, for love of Him (saying) : We feed you, for the sake of Allah only. We wish for no reward nor thanks from you."