Because we all know how it will end. You post a verse, either it's misquoted, partially quoted, poorly translated, not contextualized or even fabricated.
Sometimes the
verse is wholly quoted with a respectable translation and all that, but then you don't quote the passage with a fair amount of verses that illustrate the full picture, for example; in my experience, most people post 4:89 with a respectable translator and it usually is
not out of context, misquoted or any of that, but then the person who post such a verse --either deliberately or mistakenly-- don't include 4:90 that illustrates the picture much more clearer than shown in the verse prior.
The impartial rebuttal to those allegations that are usually put forth points this out, but for some reason, the opponent do not view it as a reasonable debunking and dismiss it, deeming it as an apologist excuse for that faith, ironically they use the same reasoning that Muslims use against
them! I can't help but thinking these people are being in certain ways narrow-minded when basically sticking their fingers in their ears and scream the same debunked things whenever the sense is talking to them.
I once debated a person who came with a popular, out of context, verse "calling for Muslims to cast terror on disbelievers," the version she chose to use was this one:
Quran (8:12) -
"Cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them
"
I pointed out she excluded these parts of the verse (highlighted in bold):
Translated by Sahih International
[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, "I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip."
She had the audacity to say I did not debunk her allegation, but simply "made excuses." I then gently asked her if she denied the fact that the actual verse in contrast to hers, included those parts that she deliberately excluded - she was then unable to answer and (implicitly) retrieved her point that I made apologist excuses, but it was also there she left and our discussion ended.
I also once read a Hindu saying "no doubt there is violence in the Hindu scriptures, but don't you think it's justifiable when it is
in context and
self-defense for yourself or family and not the same as Quran which blatantly call out for the killing of others in an oppressive non self-defensive way?" Now, if anyone read the arguments put forth by Muslims, they usually say the verses are taken out of context and whenever it is about warfare, it's in self-defensive for yourself or family. I thus found that comment by the Hindu humorous and it support my theory that these anti-Muslims are skipping the arguments made by the Muslims and respond directly to that they have not read.
@Deidre tries to say due to this, she or he is tired of the same old, tedious discussion on verses that she has a good feeling is out of context or misquoted. Instead of pointing out verses in the middle of the Quran that we all know the extremists, or any other Muslim, has never read or even know the existence of (if you are going to ask "where is the source for the radicals' behavior then, if not from Quran, what then?" Answer is... Hadith is the source for their disturbing, medieval behavior, not the Quran, they in fact go against Quran whilst perfectly harmonious with certain Hadith),
@Deidre is suggesting a constructive discussion on the accurate portrayal of the events during the 7th century.
It seems to me that believers should at least attempt to give the Quran a critical reading and nurture the faith to, indeed, take that much needed leap and toss out the passages of the Quran that may need to be disregarded altogether.
Sunnis do this, they believe certain verses has been abrogated. Usually the latter verses abrogates the earlier. But I find it to be flawed logic and reasoning, Quranist movements and Shia schools disagree with this because they believe that Quran explicitly says God's words in the Quran cannot be abrogated and God is infallible, respectively. I agree with that abrogation of verses is implausible. Quran does not need to be interpolated with as you are saying, it is already perfectly fine as it is, it's the Hadith that Muslim scholars should start to pick and choose from, they are the sayings that falsify Muslims. It's the Hadith that says apostates should be killed and all that, not Quran, in fact Quran advocates
against such things! The only reason to say what you said is the false perception on that Quran contains negativity. I have critically read the Quran and I found nothing violent that should be abrogated, I instead found some narratives on Dhul-Qarnayn, Gog & Magog and Adam that Muslims should start to interpret figuratively and not literally, not alter out but interpret, since I found out these can be interpret as parables with a profound message in all of them.
As for your OP, decent reading. I must correct you on the definitions of Islam and Muslim, though.
Islam = Submission [to God].
Muslim = Submitter [to God].
