There is nothing in the Koran that says Muslims are to kill non-Muslims because they are non-Muslims.
Any verse in the Koran that talks about killing non-Muslims are battle orders.
Those who most object to war verses of the Koran are invariably citizens of NATO member states and these nations are infamous for their imperialism and militarism, having participated in two World Wars ending in the nuking of non-combatants in two different Japanese cities.
Prior to that there were the Wars of National Unification in Europe after the 1848 Revolutions which were primarily based on the rejection of absolute monarchs after the French Revolution.
Prior to that were the European Wars of Religion which was about European nations trying to leave the Catholic Empire of Europe in rather the same way Britain tried for three years to leave the EU. Let us hope it will not take as long for the situation to stabilise as it took for the Protestant succession to become secure - about 141 years from the death of Henry VIII to the Glorious Revolution in 1688.
Europeans who became Americans to escape Christian on Christian religious persecution pursued their religious persecution against each other in the New World with the non-denominational Puritans and the non-denominational Quakers persecuting and killing each other.
Then the Americans waged a civil war on each other, which was really an American War of Unification, which was its first baby step towards global domination.
Yet it is always US and UK citizens that seem to regard a few battle orders in the Koran with condemnation and horror, as if they had never heard such a thing as killing your enemies in battle. If they could forbid Muslims from killing their enemies in battle, they would, while reserving their right to take all measures, proportionate and disproportionate to deal with their enemies eg the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, which would have found no verse in the Koran justifying it.
It has been said that Christianity and Hypocrisy march hand in hand, presumably because Christians have for centuries been practising Supreme Idolatry while condemning it in others.
Now, in the 21st century, Westerners have begun to notice that Christianity and Liberalism (and the sexual liberation it promotes from the rules of marriage and patriarchy) are now indistinguishable. Since the New Testament says nothing clearly, Christians are excused this chief defect of their religion.
On the question of idolatry, there is a strange silence. It seems Christians are now so invested in their idolatry and chauvinism they think they have no duty to answer questions on the idolatry of worshipping an executed revolutionary as the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God which they should know from the Ten Commandments has been specifically and explicitly forbidden.
On the question of the purpose of religion, political activists who call themselves nationalists refuse to answer my question at all. Perhaps they can be excused for not being theologians, philosophers or intellectuals of any standing. Perhaps they are at heart united by nothing more than their common ancestral hatreds of anyone who is above them even if they are of the same race, or of a different race to them, especially if they are Jews and Muslims. To call them nationalists is to dignify their thinking too much, since they are not interested in discussing the national interest, only complaining about foreigners and Muslims whom they think the Jews let in.
In their minds, Christianity and liberal democracy were perfect and working perfectly, until the Jews arrived and ruined everything.
Their history only goes back to living memory of how things were in the 1950s before the immigrants arrived.
They seen to know nothing about history beyond that, certainly nothing about the European Wars of Religion. They are mostly ignorant of the extent and nature of the British Empire. This collective ignorance or loss of memory is to be pitied and condemned because it prevents the problems of the present from being understood as the actions of the past.
Anything wrong with their government now is entirely the fault of Jews and Muslims whom they perceive to be treated better than they - the now redundant formerly working classes - who are the entitled claimants of the welfare state. They seem surprised that they are being warehoused for extinction since they are no longer perceived as for the purpose of working by their government.
It is impossible to get anyone at all to engage honestly and rationally as well as discuss matters in good faith, because they are mostly low status, low education and low income, with a myriad of personal problems and a corridor of locked rooms and cupboards full of skeletons they prefer not to talk about.
Anyone who has a different view will not be engaged with and effectively boycotted as I am boycotted by Mark Collett and Millennial Woes. Their echo chamber will not endure the presence of anyone asking a simple question they cannot answer honestly and clearly without giving up their racist, antisemitic and Islamophobic position: what is religion for and will just their magic white skin protect them from bad government?
When I recommend my holistic solution of Secular Koranism, they will say Muslims do not follow the Koran. But the same could be said of Jews who do not follow the Torah. As for the New Testament, I think Christians are excused from following the New Testament properly because nothing is said clearly in it.
The obvious solution to Muslims not following the Koran properly is to follow the Koran properly.
The solution to Christians not having a scripture with clear instructions is to replace the defective scripture of their failed religion with one that does have clear instructions meant for gentiles who wish to worship the Abrahamic God without falling foul of the prohibition against idolatry.
Being dishonest and unprincipled men who were never impressed on the necessity in gentlemen to have a strict regard for truth and upholding codes of honour, they will not be admitting the truth, submitting to reason or engaging in the discussion of any moral or political question in good faith.
Their most immediate short term objective is to go to their graves with their incoherent and paranoid beliefs intact, because they only see things in the short term, being mostly atheists and nihilists who do not care what happens to their society after they are dead and feel no duty to posterity, even if some of them have managed to have legitimate offspring.
Their most immediate objective is therefore not to be seen to lose the argument to me and the best tactic to avoid losing to me is not to engage at all or answer my question, which they pretend not to hear: what is religion for?
