A normative tradition of Islamic pacifism began when colonial pressure undermined the legal-administrative frameworks of Muslim governments, hence allowing a new interpretative space for fundamental texts. Key notions like "jihād" and its derivatives have been construed for centuries in a belligerent manner by a legal system backed by power structures. When these apparatuses were challenged, the hermeneutic legal monopoly diminished, allowing alternate readings of the same concepts to resurface more vigorously, alongside the emergence of new interpretations. This framework encompasses the evolution of an Islamic theological tradition that is fundamentally nonviolent, however it does not always align with pacifist denominations. This study presents three case studies that illustrate the interpretation methodologies of Islam's basic scriptures used by nonviolent theologians from diverse traditions: Syrian Sunni Jawdat Sa'īd, Iraqi Shiite al-Shīrāzī, and American Sunni feminist Amina Wadud. This analysis will demonstrate how these writers reinterpret conventional interpretations (tafsīr) by contextualising them within modern historical scenarios. A fundamental premise will be the inquiry into a potential description of Islam as a "religion," considering the constraints of this category and its intrinsic connections to Christian history. The indiscriminate use of this concept to Islam, often implicitly compared to Christianity, results in fundamental errors when identifying a potential Islamic Pacifism with its own features, separate from those of the Christian heritage.