I love how sneaky you are being but I am here for it. How did Ibn Taymiyyah define "aggression" that justifies Jihad against a person?

And taking a step back. How does the Quran itself define Jihad? It says it is something you do with your life and your wealth, in fact in Surah 9:20 it specifies that you emigrate and then wage this Jihad with your life and wealth, so it is not an internal struggle. Surah 9:29-30 clearly states this war is waged because of what people believe. "FIGHT THOSE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE" and Muhammad said he has been commanded to fight the people until they take the shahada and become Muslim (paraphrasing) over and over again in the hadith, so does Ibn Taymiyyah define Islam or does Muhammad and the Quran?

Again wiith Surah 2:256, I admit I got you wrong initially, I thought the quote was talking about Surah 9. I can now officially confirm you are a bare faced liar. You say Tabari is a scholar that says the verse is not abrogated. That is true but what does the verse mean though according to Tabari in Vol 5, pp 413-414? "As long as the people pay the Jizyah do not force them to convert". Jizyah anyway as we will see below is a sign of subjugation and disgrace. So after you subjugate a land because they are not a Muslim land according to 9:29 and make them pay you Jizya, you then say no compulsion in religion? Isn't that stupid?

Besides, the question actually was, which scholar says you prioritize Surah 2:256 over Surah 9:29??? Note that all your scholars are still trying to interpret Surah 2:256 with Surah 9:29 in mind. Hence most of them say it has been abrogated altogether. So whatever view you hold, 2:256 is not this blanket no compulsion in religion that liars like yourself trumpet around.

I ignored your other sources because we are dealing with and trying to exegete Surah 9 right now.

If Islam is against forced conversions, how do you explain this story in the biography of your prophet,

"Abu Sufyan] stayed the night with me [the narrator] and I took him in to see the apostle early in the morning and when he saw him he said, "Isn't it time that you should recognize that there is no God but Allah?"
He answered, "You are dearer to me than father and mother. How great is your clemence, honour, and kindness! By God, I thought that had there been another God with God he would have continued to help me."

He said: "Woe to you, Abu Sufyan, isn't it time that you recognize that I am God's apostle?"

He answered, "As to that I still have some doubt."

I said to him, "Submit and testify that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is the apostle of God before you lose your head," and he did so"

(Ibn Ishaq page 547)

Or is that story not authentic? And if it isn't what about this hadith?

"It is reported on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah, and he who professed it was guaranteed the protection of his property and life on my behalf except for the right affairs rest with Allah"

(Sahih Muslim 1:30)

Or this one,

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Verse:--"You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind." means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.

Sahih Bukhari 4557

And you lied again. Your exact quote on the Ottoman empire was,

"Ottoman Empire (1299–1924 CE): Ruled diverse populations with the millet system, allowing religious minorities (including jews) to govern their own communities peacefully."

Which is a bold faced lie. Did the Ottoman empire not force Christians and Jews to convert to Islam? Did they not enslave so many Jews that the budget of the Jews were strained just to buy back their own people from slavery? How in the world do you bring up the ottoman empire as an Islamic example of peace and tolerance? 🤣🤣🤣

Pact of Umar- Oh, so you take what is authentic and fake in your religion from the Jews now? Very interesting. Point is are you saying Muslims lie about their own heros? They make things up and fabricate things to attribute to them? So when Umar does something that is intolerant, it has to be a fabrication or contextual...where from that hadith are you getting that the Christians and Jews that were being expelled were at war with the prophet? Would that Pact not be consistent with Surah 9:29-30, an admonition to war against people based on their belief?

On Jizyah, Ibn Kathir specifically says it is a sign of disgrace!! And the verse literally says until they feel themselves subdued. Why are you such a liar?

And you are lying about the crusades and Saladin again...but don't change the topic....which again is all in relation to Surah 9, it's interpretation and all the beautiful acts of terror it has given us for fourteen centuries