Possibly more from me about this from real me in a few weeks, if I can find local collaborators.
The real argument against Hobbes’s notion that the natural state is one of war of all against all isn’t the argument of Locke about natural rights or of Rousseau about the social nature of humans. It isn’t even an argument in the sense of rational dispute with the truth of statements.
One cannot take seriously the commandment to “Love your enemies” and assent to the war of all against all, whether one takes it to be the natural state or not. At this level, the details of interpretation are unimportant.
(I will add that a war of all against all does not preclude the possibility of alliances or even gangs.)