Is The Bible More Violent Than The Quran?

Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2010 04:04 am

"Much to my surprise, the Islamic scriptures in the Quran were actually far less bloody and less violent than those in the Bible," [Religious historian Philip Jenkin] says.

Jenkins is a professor at Penn State University and author of two books dealing with the issue: the recently published Jesus Wars, and Dark Passages , which has not been published but is already drawing controversy.

"By the standards of the time, which is the 7th century A.D., the laws of war that are laid down by the Quran are actually reasonably humane," he says. "Then we turn to the Bible, and we actually find something that is for many people a real surprise. There is a specific kind of warfare laid down in the Bible which we can only call genocide."

It is called herem, and it means total annihilation. Consider the Book of 1 Samuel, when God instructs King Saul to attack the Amalekites: "And utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them," God says through the prophet Samuel. "But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey."

When Saul failed to do that, God took away his kingdom.

"In other words," Jenkins says, "Saul has committed a dreadful sin by failing to complete genocide. And that passage echoes through Christian history. It is often used, for example, in American stories of the confrontation with Indians " not just is it legitimate to kill Indians, but you are violating God's law if you do not."

Jenkins notes that the history of Christianity is strewn with herem. During the Crusades in the Middle Ages, the Catholic popes declared the Muslims Amalekites. In the great religious wars in the 16th, 17th and 19th centuries, Protestants and Catholics each believed the other side were the Amalekites and should be utterly destroyed.

Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2010 06:15 am
The Good News Bible focuses on the New Testament out of embarrasement at those ideas. The old testament has been used to justify slavery and as you pointed out, genocide.

I think any comparison between the religions should include Judaism as it is their story you are referring to directly. That Christians used it is fact. They dont use it now. Muslims have a far more violent beginning the Christianity. They conquered to spread the word, wheras Christians were feared for being pasifists who wouldnt defend the empire.

That soon changed. The wars in Italy turned the Pope into a lord of the realm and he instituted wars with great enthusiasm at a time when Islam had fought civil wars and was becoming an advanced centre for learning. The Jews never had any power after the dispersion and were thrown out of europe depending on how much money they had lent the local christian king.

The more they lent, the more likely they were to be repaid by exile. They were almost always taken in by the muslims.

So historically, the religions of the desert are all tainted, and I dont think anyone can claim superiority over another. They have all had their turn at violence.
0 Replies
Reply Wed 23 Oct, 2013 10:15 pm
She is an idiot and an apologist. Someone who cashes in on trashing one religion to promote another.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 25 Oct, 2013 07:56 pm

This answers the question.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 25 Oct, 2013 10:07 pm
Bad ahabotron!
Elements Of Propaganda
Propaganda can serve to rally people behind a cause, but often at the cost of exaggerating, misrepresenting, or even lying about the issues in order to gain that support.

While the issue of propaganda often is discussed in the context of militarism, war and war-mongering, it is around us in all aspects of life.

As the various examples below will show, common tactics in propaganda often used by either side include:

Using selective stories that come over as wide-covering and objective.
Partial facts, or historical context
Reinforcing reasons and motivations to act due to threats on the security of the individual.
Narrow sources of “experts” to provide insights in to the situation. (For example, the mainstream media typically interview retired military personnel for many conflict-related issues, or treat official government sources as fact, rather than just one perspective that needs to be verified and researched).
Demonizing the “enemy” who does not fit the picture of what is “right”.
Using a narrow range of discourse, whereby judgments are often made while the boundary of discourse itself, or the framework within which the opinions are formed, are often not discussed. The narrow focus then helps to serve the interests of the propagandists.
Some of the following sections look into how propaganda is used in various ways, expanding on the above list of tactics and devices.
Reply Fri 25 Oct, 2013 10:09 pm
That is spam. The admin. will deal with you.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 25 Oct, 2013 10:26 pm
These both are holy books for different religion . So it can never be violent. It is because these books spread the message of peace not for any violence.
Reply Fri 25 Oct, 2013 10:40 pm
@austinclarke13 ,
That is a ridiculous statement.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 8 Nov, 2013 07:17 am
All religious texts must deal with the central human problem of vanity, as is explored in the Hollywood (USA) movie "The Devil's Advocate" (1997).

Because Islam and Christianity are the world's two dominant religions, their respective texts deal with the problem of gluttony violence as their respective philosophies treat the divisive problem of vanity.

Consider these three humanist stories below and how they would be dealt with differently in the Bible and the Quran. Which text would advocate more harsh punishments or wrath?

1. a hippie was cuckolded by a seductive gypsy woman and decided to poison the man who stole his girlfriend and when the poisoned man died, the gypsy woman returned to the hippie
2. a movie star was celebrated in society by gluttons for his tendency to lead an indulgently wild lifestyle which his wealth made possible much to the envy of others
3. a heroin dealer's attractive girlfriend who worked for him as a narcotics smuggler dealt cocaine to a couple who became addicted to her supply, a fact which she took awful advantage of by engaging in an adulterous love affair with the husband of the drug-addicted couple

Negotiations between Christians and Muslims can address how the respective religions treat the relationship between vanity and wrath. I personally find that the Bible is more graphically descriptive of violence, since Christianity is a religion more focused on dialogue than meditation.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 8 Nov, 2013 07:30 am
There is a total change of ideas and ideology in the OT.

ALL ancient religions were originally astral in nature. The name associations between pantheon gods and planetary bodies are primordial.

Primitives seeking to devise an astral religion in today's world would end up worshiping the sun and moon, but the two chieftain gods of all ancient religions were the two dwarf stars, Jupiter and Saturn.

There ae said to be two separate traditions in the OT, i.e. Jahvist and Elohist; that means Jupiter and Saturn. You can convince yourself that 'El' meant Saturn by doing google searches on "El Saturn Babylon" and you need to include the term 'Babylon' to weed out the hits for Saturn car dealerships. Jahveh is the same basic word as Jove.

What somebody may have ever done for the sake of Jupiter has nothing to do with Christianity or modern Judaism. Israelites were the first group of people on Earth to figure out that they should be worshiping dwarf stars. Worst case was Lithuanians, who were still worshiping Odin at the time of crusades.

The writers of the OT at least have the excuse that they were living in a different cosmic age. Mohammed (MHBH) and muslims has/have no such excuse.
0 Replies

Related Topics

  1. Forums
  2. » Is The Bible More Violent Than The Quran?
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/04/2023 at 08:55:03