&quot;This&quot; means that if Islam is so obviously blood-thirsty, and this is the only possible mainstream interpretation of this religion, then how come the vast majority of Muslims are NOT killing the infidel?<p>Yes, many Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia support ISIS; it&#x27;s well-known this is a major source of funding. But how is this a counter to the fact the vast majority of Muslims -- are you aware that not all Muslims are Wahhabis, live in Saudi Arabia or, for that matter, are Arabs? -- are NOT trying to murder nonbelievers?<p>&quot;Balderdash&quot;, you say about the article &quot;The Phony Islam of ISIS&quot;. But what you say flies in the face of everything we know about religious texts; that they are anachronistic and self-contradictory in multiple places, and there is NO single interpretation of them. Evidently <i>most</i> Muslims choose not to acknowledge the part about spreading the word of Mohammed by the sword, or maybe you secretly believe they do -- all of them! -- and that they are biding their time?<p>The author argues that some parts of the Quran contradict other parts; that there are treatises and purported quotations of Mohammed that are meant to explain the Quran, but themselves are subject to interpretation and to varying degrees of reliability. I don&#x27;t know about you, but I tend to trust the word of someone who studies religion for a living and specifically Islam to have read the Quran. Are you sure it&#x27;s all &quot;balderdash&quot; and that this professor who teaches religious studies at college &quot;has never read [the Quran] himself&quot;?<p>But mostly I trust the reality of a world in which most Muslims are not trying to murder non-Muslims. I don&#x27;t even need to appeal to authority here, just to reality.