That ISIS uses modern propaganda techniques?
To the article I linked?
To the assertion that holy texts need interpretation?
That there is a doctrinal dispute between factions of ISIS and Al-Qaeda, therefore showing there can be no single interpretation?
All of it?
You're so hell-bent in replying "wrong" and "no" to every post you disagree with, it's really hard to understand what you actually mean, beyond "here are some horrible passages from the Quran".
I also think that understanding a religious book isn't as simple as sitting down one day and reading end to end. It's not just the Quran anyway; there is a huge body of followups that must be read in order to understand it. Some of them contradictory, some open to interpretation, some of varying degrees of reliability.
Have you read them all?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malala_Yousafzai
ask the victims of Boko Haram:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boko_Haram
It's not something exclusive for this period in history, the motives, principles and methods can be traced through all the 1400 years of the existence of Muslim faith.
I understand there are Islamic extremist groups; I've never disputed that. I'm arguing here that it's the extremism and not the Islamic that's worrying. I've read about Islamic culture and its history, and much like Christendom, it has both admirable and reprehensible parts. It's simply not true that the majority of the Muslim world do or support violent terrorist acts. Your position simply doesn't stand a reality check.
Have you read the Quran back to back, fully, including the verses that preach tolerance and compassion?
www.lettertobaghdadi.com/14/english-v14.pdf
"God says in the Qur’an: ‘Because of that, We decreed for the Children of Israel that whoever slays a soul for other than a soul, or for corruption in the land, it shall be as if he had slain mankind altogether; and whoever saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers have already come to them with clear proofs, but after that many of them still commit excesses in the land.’ (Al-Ma’idah, 5: 32)."
And that is actually cherry picking. If you read the sentence before and the few sentences after together with 5:32 you get what was said:
"32 For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth.
33 The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom; "
That's 5:32 and 5:33 together. Is there some nuance? The command is the "old" one given to the Jews but they became "prodigals," says "god" speaking in plural about him (as he does on other places in Quran too). The "reward" is specified one verse afterwards.
Or even better read the whole Sura 5, to get the whole message. One clearer translation (start from the verse 1 and beware the following side is behind the left arrow):
http://quran.ksu.edu.sa/index.php?l=en#aya=4_176&m=hafs&qare...