And Quran (3:56) contradicts that statement. How about Quran (3:151)? And Quran (4:89)... and Quran (5:51)... and Quran (8:12)... and Quran (9:14)...

Just like the Bhuddist karmatic doctrine of rebirth was used to justify killing opponents of the Japanese. Of course, there were other doctrines that countered that. But it goes to show your point is mute.

But to entertain your clearly unrelated response, the Buddhists used the doctrine as justification. The doctrine did not tell them to kill. The Quran, on the other hand, tells Muslims to kill and slay non-believers. There's a major distinction between the two.

The Buddhists killed their opponents because of their interpretation of a doctrine.
Muslims (jihadis and Islamists) killed non-believers because the doctrines told them to kill non-believers. No interpretation is involved.

It's still a matter of interpretation if it's to kill other people, or the more popular interpretation: to defend the  fait. Don't forget the bible explicetly curses people who follow a different religion, so that thats not really a fair point to make.

A non sequitor followed by another red herring. There's nothing to interpret if the texts tell you to kill a certain group of people. In addition, telling followers to curse non-believers is significantly different from telling followers to kill non-believers. I'd rather live with people who curse me for not following their religion because at least they're not going to kill me. Curses don't chop my head off.

The lines do not differ al that much. And you forgot to mention that 2:192 and 2:193 call for an immediate cessation of hostilities when the opponent surrenders. This line is again, watered down due to the fact one should not attack Christians or Jews. It was only applicable in the early days when the Arabic penninsula was polytheïstic.

Another red herring with nice dash of false equivalence. You know, it's best if you actually address my points rather than quantum leaping from one topic to another. Oh, and saying that the religion does not call for attacking Christians or Jews ad nauseaum isn't helping your case either, especially when I already provided evidence that contradicts your claim.

No it doesn't. How could you attack enemies of the faith when they're not enemies of the faith. It's the mainstream accepted modus of islamic thinking. Doesn't matter that you take some loose parts of the script when you refuse to see them as a whole.

Another ad nauseaum fallacy. The Quran says to not consider Christians and Jews as allies. It also doesn't help that Christians and Jews are technically non-believers, so the Quran contradicts itself. Ironic how you're accusing me for seeing the scripts as a whole when you're committing that fatal error yourself.

No. It does not see Christians and Jews as non believers, it seems them as folowers of a deviation of the same fate, there is no contradiction here.