"You keep accusing me of not following Jesus's teachings with no evidence to back it, even as I spread the gospel as Christ instructed."
Wrong. I am giving you evidence of the plank in your own eye first and then I am quoting Jesus telling you to take that plank out before looking at the speck in other people's eyes. In this very thread, you are doing the opposite - which is the opposite of following Jesus. You're just not capable of keeping up.
"As for the formal teachings of Muhammad's abrogation from scholars of Islam"
First, let's not pretend a youtube video counts as a proper source, but I watched it anyway - just to have good faith to my response even though I doubt it will be reciprocated.
I'll go ahead and point you in your own video to around 2:57, where he illustrates that what was abrogated was the ability to execute self-defense, not the other way around. After this point, the first verse he conveniently does not put on the screen - we will ignore that verse since it breaks his pattern and should not be considered valid outside of his context if he can't maintain consistency.
The next verse "O prophet! Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them" - Surah 9, verse 73
There is nothing in here advocating for violence. You can strive for many things. Christians also strive to spread the gospel and are unyielding. If you would not call that violent then it is not equal or fair to call this violent either. If this is violence, so is Christianity.
"O you who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness." -Surah 9, Verse 123
So if you take the term "fight" here to implicitly mean violence then Paul writing to fight against the devil's schemes with the full armor of god is then just as violent and just as abrogating.
Surah 48, verse 29 = 2 Thessalonians 3:6, Titus 3:10-11 & 1 Cor. 5:12
The main problem you have here is that David Wood is an american Christian apologist and his work has routinely centered around the criticism of islamic beliefs - definitively making him a biased source. Secondly, he is not a muslim scholar. His academic studies have root in specifically oppositional stances to that which he wants to review and needs to be considered with respect to the religious scholar community.
As it regards the religious scholar community, his views are not a part of academic religious studies at all: https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/11621912