The issue of Blasphemy in Islam

[Leonardo17]

1) You mean the last two? - No
2) As I said. I am not a scholar. But Animal sacrifice is an old tradition. 

Old traditions are often garbage, yet another missed opportunity for the lord of creation.  "Hey, about the whole ritual sacrifice thing - not my gig, never struck any of you as creepy?"

-but no, these are not the kinds of gods we get, are they?  We get the "yes...AND!" kind of gods.  Line upon line of borrowed ladders.

3) As I said. That was not the popular practice in the past. Ancient rulers used to follow Islamic teachings more seriously in the past (in the Middle Ages to renaissance past) and yes. Many of those rules were followed. Forced conversions did not exist. Pillaging and slavery had limits, rape (as far as I know) was forbidden. But this also has to be put in a context. Today we don’t mutilate people, raze cities to the ground, enslave entire cities, and catapult the heads of captive soldiers from above city walls. Today we have war crimes and some international rules of war. These are, in my opinion, to be interpreted as a preliminary chapter to this.
   And as far as I know. War has to be a defensive war. But again I can’t really say this was always understood in this way in ancient times. But many of today’s serious scholars (the one’s that I read the most) agree on the fact that “no war that is not defensive in nature can be approved by the Kuran”. But if your very existence is threatened. That is if you are not the aggressor. Than is becomes a divine order to go to war.
   So war is something that is not approved by God. But if your are the defending side, it becomes an order of God.

It has always been popular practice to use the pretense of self defense for a war of aggression.  If people back in the day were more seriously following islam...which I doubt...then it would also be true that those people, more seriously following islam, were more seriously engaged in wars of territorial expansion with defense of the umma as pretext.  War is not a bug of abrahamic religions - it's a feature.  

4) Yes. If your are dealing with serious terrorists or similar troublemakers. Say, fanatical / brainwashed indoctrinated people of any school. I don’t believe there’s another solution. So the book is sort of giving a license to be tough on those people.

Such as pagans, homosexuals, sunni/shia (check a map to see which applies),women with their hair out..and, one assumes, all of their various children.  
 

- We don’t live are a beautifully ordered world now do we? So of course there can be instances in which we have to kill. That’s what they teach in martial arts too. “Stay away as much as you can. But if you can’t, than hit fast and hit them good” (That’s what my Taekwando teacher used to tell me). Do you not agree with this?

Yet another missed opportunity for an all powerful god.  Can't keep it's toyroom in order.

1) In ancient cultures blood symbolizes life energy. So when you offered this energy to the Gods / Goddesses, you could expect favors like victory in war, a healthy boy child, greater wealth and influence etc. That’s simply human evolution
2) Yes this is true. But I would say that true religion would not agree with that. I would said that only if you are truly attacked, like Ukraine is being attacked by Russia, than you have the religious duty of going to war. I think it clearly says “do not desert your nation, don’t be a coward, just fight these …., I will be there with you” (or that’s how I understand it).
3) No. As you put it there is a serious problem of interpretation. The word “Those who come to create trouble” is distortable. But pertinent religious scholars would all agree that what is meant here is terrorists, spies and propagandists. See: This is why I always say that these issues must be understood and debated by the general public. The same issue exists in many belief systems. I think there is a clear difference between the message that was given, and the message that people choose to understand and people made this mistake many many times.
4) Well, than you may choose one of the other teachings like the teachings of Jesus, or that of the Buddha which is more peaceful and more pacifist in nature . But I will grant this also. The Kuran is very practical and very down to earth in many issues. That’s simply the teaching or the message in this religious tradition.