Islam is a religion of peace

After demonstrating that the verses refer to self-defense from the very text and context of the verses, my opponent still insists that the verses do not refer to self-defense. I quoted and showed from the Qur'an itself that it was the non-muslims who attacked first, as shown in the following verse of the same chapter:"Will you not fight a people who have broken their oaths, and who plotted to turn out the Messenger and they were first to commence hostilities against you? Do you fear them? Nay, Allah is most worthy that you should fear Him, if you are believers"Thus the evidence is clear that the verses refer to self-defense, for not only does the verse say that it was the non-muslims who attacked first, but not one verse in the Qur'an says for muslims to ever attack 'FIRST". Thus is it crystal clear that the verses refer to self-defense.In response to this fact, my opponent actually acknowledges the verse, but states the following:"Even if some did doesn't mean that they all did.It is clear that verse 5 is going on all pagans that don't convert.Verse 13 is a speech about doing the 1st battle." So according to my opponent, the verse that clearly says that the non-muslims attacked first does not refer to verse 9:5, therefore when it says to fight, it means for the muslims to fight and attack first. Then if such is the case, then when we read verse 9:5, it should clearly state that muslims should attack first. We should see the word "First" in the verse, or at least a word synonymous to it. So let's quote the verse and see. Then when the Sacred Months have passed, then kill the Mushrikun (disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.Are the words "ATTACK FIRST' mentioned in the verse? NO. No where in the entire verse does it say for muslims to attack first. No where in the entire verse does it say to attack to make someone convert. No where. Thus the argument of my opponent that the verse means this fails. Words cannot mean something if the words are not there. What is clear from the verse is that it does say to fight and attack, but no where in the verse does it give the reason for it. As clearly shown, the reason why is completely ambiguous in the verse. This means that to get a clear understanding, you must refer to the context of the verse. Can my opponent show any verse, in the entire Qur'an, that says for muslims to attack "First". No. Can I refer to a verse that says that Non-muslims attacked first? YES. And once again, it reads:"Will you not fight a people who have broken their oaths, and who plotted to turn out the Messenger and they were first to commence hostilities against you? Do you fear them? Nay, Allah is most worthy that you should fear Him, if you are believers"Dear audience, the evidence is clear. Verse 9: 5 refers to self-defense, as proven by the fact that despite the verse stating to fight, it does not state for muslims to attack first and verse 9:13 of the same chapter clearly states that it was the non-muslims who attacked first. But my opponent does not finish there. He also states:"As I already pointed out, that verse is clearly going on the earlier battle of verse 3. After the clause of verse 4.A second battle is mentioned "Then when the Sacred Months have passed, then kill the Mushrikun (disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah)wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush."He continues and says: "They were already told to kill "those who have failed you...". If so those referred to in verse 5, are the rest, those who have not attacked. Furthermore if it was in self defence, they wouldn't put it off until "the Sacred Months have passed"."So according to my opponent, verse 9:3 and verse 9:5 refers to two different fights. He says that the order not to fight in verse 9:4 refers only to the non-muslims who converted or entered into a treaty in verse 9:3. While verse 9:5 refers to attack all non-muslims who are not in a reaty and who have not converted. Therefore, verse 9:5 does not refer to self-defense. So the question becomes, are the non-muslims in verse 9:5 being attacked first for not converting and entering a treaty like those in verse 9:3, or are the muslims once again acting in self-defense? Once again, no where in verse 9:5 does it say in the verse for muslims to attack first because they did not convert. So my opponent's argument fails. Yet at the same time, no where in the entire verse does it say that muslims attacked in self-defense. This means that the verse is ambiguous. The only thing the verse says is for muslims to attack and kill, but never states the reason why. Yet the very context of the verse gives the reason why. And once again, for the third time, what is that reason: "Will you not fight a people who have broken their oaths, and who plotted to turn out the Messenger and they were first to commence hostilities against you? Do you fear them? Nay, Allah is most worthy that you should fear Him, if you are believers" Dear audience, the evidence cannot be painted any clearer. The verse clearly refers to self-defense, as no where in the entire verse does it say for muslims to attack FIRST. It only says for the muslims to attack and does not give the direct reason in the verse, but gives it in the context of the verse, which clearly says that the non-muslims attacked first. Thus the evidence is clear, that muslims are only ordered to fight in self-defense. And when we consider the fact that verse 8:61 forbids muslims to fight those who incline to peace and verse 2:256 says that there is no compulsion in religion, then the very context of the Qur'an clearly shows that islam teaches to fight in self-defense and not against those who are peaceful. Lastly, my opponent concludes his argument with numerous verses of muslims being ordered to fight. Yet as we can see, not one says for muslims to fight and attack "First". Once again, the verses refer to self-defense, as proven by the very context of the verses in the Qur'an which says not to fight those who incline to peace (8:61), and that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256). Since the verse clearly says not to fight those who are peaceful, and since every verse in the Qur'an that refers to fighting never, ever, says to fight and attack FIRST, then the message of islam is clear, which is that every verse that mentions fighting refers to self-defense, as proven by the very context of the Qur'an. Thus islam should be recognized as a religion of peace.