Abstract The Holy Qur’an contains verses that encourage Muslims to engage in war and military conflict with non-believers and polytheists. Conversely, some verses forbid fighting entirely with some or all non-believers. Additionally, we find verses that call for peace and cessation of combat, while others pro hibit appeasement and compromise with non-believers and polytheists. Understanding these sacred verses and reconcil ing their apparent differences is fundamental to the differing interpretations among Islamic sects and the internal perspec tives within the Imamiyyah school regarding Islam’s stance on war and peace with non-believers. The apparent contradic tions in the content of these verses have led some Orientalists to perceive contradictions in the Qur’anic text. Among Imamiyyah exegetes, there are three main views on reconciling these verses. Some interpret them through a tradi tional method known as specification. The second view holds that certain verses abrogate others. The third view suggests that the subjects of the verses have changed over time, thus eliminating any conflict in their meanings due to differing con texts. The chosen approach to evaluating these perspectives is to refer to the Prophetic chronicle , which is the practical interpretation and manifestation of Qur’anic verses based on the Prophet’s infallibility and adherence to divine legislation. I have adopted the third view and presented this idea based on the phased nature of legislation and implementation.