Changes
/* Critical analysis */
==Critical analysis==
Armstrong presents the Qur'an as saying that "It says that every rightly guided religion comes from God. And there must be no compulsion in religion," while stating that the Bible has no clear answers or theology. However, the reality is that the Qur'an is hardly a cohesive, progressively comprehensive revelation, while its disjointed suras do support an exclusive and elite view of Islam, and that unbelievers are worthy of repression, such as is expressed in the Pact of Umar.<ref>http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/pactofumar.html</ref> Moreover, anything close to a "New Testament," with its rejection physical religious violence, was part of Muhammad's earlier preMedenic "revelations" (when he was a minority, and militarily weak), in which there is one verse (2:256) clearly stating there should be "no compulsion in religion," while it is well evident in many other places that the Qur'an clearly exhorts retaliation and religious violence.
The Qur'an is far more restrictive in its scope of communication than the Bible,<ref>http://www.bible.ca/islam/library/Gilchrist/Vol1/4a.html</ref><ref>http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/bravo_r4bc.htm</ref> lacking the manner of context and clarity of theology which the Bible provides in this area, with its extensive historical narratives and theological treatises, which for Islam would enable restricting its religious violence to simply a defensive context or a limited geographical areas, versus commands such as to fight until the only worship be of Allah (2:193; 8:39) being used to justify world - wide physical Jihad. In addition, oppressing or making war against Islam can easily be understood to include ideological opposition. <ref>http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/JESUS.Vs.Muhammad.html</ref> It is also evidenced that the teaching of the Hadith promotes physical violence.<ref>http://www.muslimhope.com/WarInIslam.htm</ref>
