Darvish Intelligence: There Is Compulsion in Religion: A Former Muslim’s Response to Quran 2:256

Thursday, May 29, 2025

There Is Compulsion in Religion: A Former Muslim’s Response to Quran 2:256

There Is Compulsion in Religion: A Former Muslim’s Response to Quran 2:256
By Bobby Darvish

As a former Muslim and someone who actually studied the Quran, Hadith, and Islamic history in depth, not just cherry picked a verse off the internet, I find it absolutely laughable when someone throws out “there is no compulsion in religion” (Quran 2:256) like it’s some magical shield against the grim reality of Islamic doctrine. Do you genuinely think quoting that verse makes you sound enlightened? It makes you sound either ignorant or dishonest.

Quran 2:256, often cited by apologists to showcase Islam’s tolerance, was revealed in the early Meccan period, during a time when Muhammad had no political or military power. But as Islamic history shows, the tone of the revelations changed dramatically once Muhammad established political dominance in Medina. This process is not a matter of opinion but part of orthodox Islamic theology through the doctrine of abrogation (naskh). In this system, later verses override earlier ones when there is a contradiction. This is clearly stated in Quran 2:106: “Whatever a verse We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it.”

The so called "peaceful verse" of 2:256 was abrogated by what are known as the sword verses, most notably Quran 9:5: “Then, when the sacred months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them...” and Quran 9:29: “Fight those who do not believe in Allah... until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.” These are not allegorical. They were literal commands used to justify Islamic military expansion and the subjugation of non-Muslims through conquest.

Even mainstream Islamic scholars have acknowledged this reality. Ibn Kathir, one of Islam’s most revered commentators, explains that Quran 9:29 was revealed to command Muslims to fight Jews and Christians until they submit and pay tribute. He also notes that Quran 2:256 is no longer legally binding once the sword verses came down (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al Qur’an al Azim).

The Hadith literature further cements the idea that Islam is not optional once embraced. In Sahih al Bukhari 3017, the Prophet is quoted as saying: “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.” This is echoed throughout traditional Islamic jurisprudence, including all four Sunni schools of thought, which prescribe death for apostasy and military jihad against non Muslim societies.

Historically, Islamic conquests from the 7th century onward were soaked in violence and coercion. The Zoroastrians of Persia, the Hindus of India, the Christians of Egypt and Syria, all were subjected to Islam through war, humiliation, forced conversion, or heavy taxation under threat of death. This is not fringe interpretation. It is the foundation of Islamic empire.

So let’s stop pretending. Quoting Quran 2:256 to argue that Islam is tolerant is either a deliberate act of deception (taqiyya) or the result of willful ignorance. I left Islam not because I misunderstood it, but because I understood it all too well. I read the sources. I read the Hadith. I read the tafsirs. I followed the chain of historical evidence that leads straight to conquest, domination, and a religious political system that contradicts freedom of conscience and human dignity.

Islam commands violence, subjugation, and tyranny. And quoting one abrogated verse will not erase 1400 years of that reality. You are not proving Islam is peaceful, you are proving how gullible or dishonest you have become.

Citations