You would be incorrect in imagining that. Literalism is well within the mainstream of Islamic theology and has been since at least the days of Al Ghazali, himself a full fledged literalist.
Ghazali is considered the foremost theologian and thinker of "mainstream" Islam - even more so than Khaldun, who wrote more in the realm of history and politics. His influence is comparable to what Aquinas is to the Catholic Church, or St. Augustine to Christianity.
And as I indicated previously, the "radicals" of Islam like Qutb and Taymiyya took the already extreme premise of literalism, as found well inside the islamic "mainstream" of Ghazali, even further.
Literalism has been in the Christian mainstream since the sola scriptura movement of Protestantism.
His influence is comparable to what Aquinas is to the Catholic Church, or St. Augustine to Christianity.
And what do Aquinas and St. Augustine say about infidels and war?
And as I indicated previously, the "radicals" of Islam like Qutb and Taymiyya took the already extreme premise of literalism, as found well inside the islamic "mainstream" of Ghazali, even further.
And the radicals of the South African National Party took the already extreme premise of biologially ordering humanity even further. Does that discredit the Western Civilization they claimed to be serving? Does it discredit Linnaeus?