# Is the Koran significantly more violent than the Bible? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 11, 2014, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034 "2014-10-11T13:21:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/21 "2014-10-11T19:41:52Z")
> [@chappachula](#): > > Yes. The Torah is simply the first 5 books of the old testament. Doesn’t The Torah usually include rabbinic commentaries? ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/22 "2014-10-11T19:43:40Z")
The heart of the issue, as I see it, is what the leader of each religion actually said and did: Muhammad married a child and ordered the murder of his enemies. Jesus turned the other cheek. ---
**Author:** ![chappachula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/23 "2014-10-11T19:54:13Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > no one else even refers to comparing the books in like manner. By the way, that same link goes on to describe the difference in the Koran between jihad , which is legal warfare with the proper rules of engagement, and irjaf, which is illegal terrorism. In my posts, I have refered to comparing the books in like manner. And I have stated my opinion that it is not logical to do so.Simply comparing the texts is a very,very oversimplified way of looking at them, and whatever conclusion you draw will be irrelevant and misleading, causing you to misunderstand the meaning of the texts… You need historical context, as Jenkins stated. (See my example comparing the US and Russian constitutions.) > [@](#): > > and not another degradation into… Hey,buddy,…if you bring up jihad, pretty soon the thread will degrade… 🙂 > [@](#): > > Doesn’t The Torah usually include rabbinic commentaries? For Orthodox Jews, yes. And the commentaries are vast. To get an idea of how vast: think of the Torah as being the US constitution, and the rabbinic commentaries being the entire body of all the constitutional law cases ever written by every court in the US for 2 centuries. It takes many years to read it all, and learn how the original text of the Bible was actually used over the course of history. Historical context is everything! ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/24 "2014-10-11T20:00:03Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > The heart of the issue, as I see it, is what the leader of each religion actually said and did: > > Muhammad married a child and ordered the murder of his enemies. > > Jesus turned the other cheek. That’s enough of that. Don’t derail this one. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/25 "2014-10-11T20:01:48Z")
> [@chappachula](#): > > For Orthodox Jews, yes. And the commentaries are vast. > To get an idea of how vast: think of the Torah as being the US constitution, and the rabbinic commentaries being the entire body of all the constitutional law cases ever written by every court in the US for 2 centuries. It takes many years to read it all, and learn how the original text of the Bible was actually used over the course of history. Historical context is everything! Indeed, and all of them with only persuasive - not literal - authority. Nothing in the commentaries can be considered a word of God, they’re just one person, or one school’s, thoughts on particular passages. ---
**Author:** ![Bullitt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bullitt/32/5725_2.png) [@Bullitt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bullitt)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/26 "2014-10-11T20:06:34Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > Indeed, and all of them with only persuasive - not literal - authority. Nothing in the commentaries can be considered a word of God, they’re just one person, or one school’s, thoughts on particular passages. It’s similar to my Study Bible, with commentary on each of the 66 books. I place a lot more significance on the actual text than on the commentary, but the commentary helps to provide context. I do also realize that the Bible is a collection of books whose inclusion was decided on by councils of humans who can be errant. ---
**Author:** ![chappachula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/27 "2014-10-11T20:18:08Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > Indeed, and all of them with only persuasive - not literal - authority. Nothing in the commentaries can be considered a word of God, they’re just one person, or one school’s, thoughts on particular passages. But those thoughts are vital to understanding the original “Word of God”. For example, the Bible calls for the death penalty in certain cases, such as blasphemy. That would seem simple, right? But it is not—because the later commentaries impose such stringent restrictions on the death penalty that is was never used in actual practice. The commentaries severely limit,- and sometimes even reverse- the word of God. (Rough comparison: the US supreme Court places limits on freedom of speech, and gun ownership, etc.) So a newcomer, reading the Bible without reading the commentaries, can reach the wrong conclusion about what the Bible means to the people who follow its rulings. Now, the average person cannot spend years reading all the commentaries…so if you want to understand the Bible (or the Koran) what you need to do is look at the historical context, and see how the followers actually _use_ the text. Otherwise you might think that Jews kill blasphemers, when that does not happen and never did. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/28 "2014-10-11T21:23:00Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > According to the historian [Philp Jenkins](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Jenkins), The Bible wins. OT, of course. Holy amnesia Batman! > [@](#): > > “What happens in all religions as they grow and mature and expand, they go through a process of forgetting of the original violence, and I call this a process of holy amnesia,” Jenkins says. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/29 "2014-10-11T21:30:15Z")
> [@Bullitt](#): > > Does anyone disagree with **John Mace** ’s Jenkins reference and conclusion? The Bible generally tells the Jews to take out specific groups of people - the Gargamelites or whatever. I think the only person you’re allowed to just out and out kill without God’s explicit pre-approval is Atheists. Those, you’re supposed to collect and stone to death. I haven’t read the Koran, but even if it gave “kinder” rules of warfare than the Bible does, the Bible doesn’t advocate warfare with any particular group. So the question comes down to who, in the Koran, are people currently supposed to be attacking and/or killing? The quotes in the article are about things Mohammed himself was supposed to do, not ongoing rules for society. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/30 "2014-10-11T22:31:24Z")
I think they are both spectacularly violent and could both be used to advocate both abject pacifism and extreme warmongering. They have both been used such, in fact. What’s more important is what goes on today in the real world. We can get into the complex reasons that as a rule the OECD countries (which mostly are traditionally Christian countries) have very low levels of religious violence. We’re talking true rare shit here, like once every five years a Christian might kill an abortion doctor, or in Norway someone will vaguely shoot a bunch of people for vaguely Christian (but also xenophobic) reasons. Many Muslim countries around the near east have very high levels of religious violence comparatively. If that part of the world had developed to be the technologically and economically reigning top of the world I suspect things would be very different, and those of us in OECD countries would be a lot different people today, probably more violent. But that’s also an aside, whatever the cause for lower levels of development in technology, economics, and frankly a host of enlightenment values that came to the West along with those developments we’re in a situation where today Islam has a much greater problem with religious violence than Christianity. Where Christianity is practiced in less civilized and violent societies, however, you do see Christian violence. But with Christianity being the dominant religion of North and South America and Europe you see very little Christian violence on those continents. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/31 "2014-10-11T22:32:30Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I totally disagree. The topic is the topic: “Do the teachings of the Koran advocate, glamorize, encourage the use of violence, significantly more so than the Bible?” For this, we have to stick to what the Koran and the Bible _actually_ say. If one book advocates violence more than the other, then the fact that the followers of the second book choose to act more on the violent teachings of the second book doesn’t change the original fact. I’m interpreting this thread the same way. Let’s look at the text and see what it says. One might separately ask how it is interpreted today, but that’s a different question. I’ve not read either the Bible or the Koran en its entirety, but I have read a good amount of the Bible and virtually none of the Koran. So, I’m willing to accept Jenkins’ analysis unless someone has a differing source with a different conclusion. We’ve certainly seen that, historically, Christians have been every bit a brutal as even ISIS in terms of enforcing religious orthodoxy. How the various religions change and evolve over time is yet another question. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/32 "2014-10-11T23:07:52Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > This question doesn’t make sense, because the Bible isn’t a book. It’s a set of books, written at different times by different people and given (historically, by Christians) varying levels of authority and historical credibility. You appear to be saying it can’t be considered/judged/discussed as being an item, and yet if that were true, you wouldn’t have been able to make the statement above. You wouldn’t be able to call it ‘the Bible’, or ‘it’ - those terms treat it as an item. For the purpose of the question raised in this thread, it doesn’t matter what it _is_ - the question is about what’s in it. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/33 "2014-10-11T23:48:05Z")
The problem with saying “Oh, but we have to look at how it’s interpreted, rather than comparing the texts!” is that when the interpretations are compared, generally, it’s by people who know one text AND its interpretations, but only have access to the other text. So, they compare a Bible passage (text) plus their interpretation to a Koran passage (text) taken on its face. If you just do a textual comparison, that precise type of bias is not the starting point. Obviously, bias creeps in simply because it’s impossible not to apply knowledge. I took the OP’s question to be “If strangers to both religions read each text, which would they think was more glamorizing or advocating of violence?” Talking about the interpretations does not forward that question. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/34 "2014-10-11T23:59:38Z")
This 2010 NPR treatment of the OP topic may be of interest. [Is The Bible More Violent Than The Quran? : NPR](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124494788) Jenkins is quoted saying the same thing mentioned in an earlier post: > [@](#): > > “What happens in all religions as they grow and mature and expand, they go through a process of forgetting of the original violence, and I call this a process of holy amnesia,” Jenkins says. But then: > [@](#): > > Andrew Bostom calls this analysis “preposterous.” Bostom, editor of The Legacy of Jihad, says there’s a major difference between the Bible, which describes the destruction of an enemy at a point in time, and the Quran, which urges an ongoing struggle to defeat unbelievers. > “It’s an aggressive doctrine,” he says. “The idea is to impose Islamic law on the globe.” … Both textual analysis and historical context are crucial to addressing the OP question, surely. I’m most curious about the incidence of messages of _entitlement_ in the various holy books: how often is it claimed that members of the One True Religion (whatever it may be) are entitled to dominion over all other humans? One of the major selling points of the Abrahamic religions has always been that men are assured of dominion over women (well, that’s more of a selling point to the men than it is to the women, of course). But to what extent are adherents of one or the other religions assured that they have a right to rule over _all_ people? I’d maintain that this is what is bringing all those young men to the so-called Islamic State: _the promise of being part of the ruling regime_. Maybe it could be considered analogous to what motivated young men from the British Isles to join the British Army back in the days of Empire: you can feel righteous and be in charge of your own fiefdom, too! Humans tend to respond to that sort of thing in general; young men who’ve lived most of their lives in a recessionary, impoverished world, with few prospects for material advancement, may feel it particularly strongly. And of course, it’s all the better if your power comes with a healthy dose of Righteousness: God is On Our Side!!! For all I know, there’s an absolutely equal number of _“we have the right to rule over all”_ messages in the Old Testament, in the New Testament, and in the Koran. Or the quantities could differ. Of course any such analysis should include historical context, too. But it would be interesting to know. ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2014, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/35 "2014-10-12T00:25:50Z")
nvm. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2014, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/36 "2014-10-12T00:44:24Z")
IMO, the Koran is comparable to Psalms. Both are collections of verses praising God and elating in victory. They’re both a little bloodthirsty, but also both lyrical. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2014, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/37 "2014-10-12T02:30:26Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > The heart of the issue, as I see it, is what the leader of each religion actually said and did: > > Muhammad married a child and ordered the murder of his enemies. > > Jesus turned the other cheek. Even if these two characterizations were less selective and biased, you would still be glossing over the fact that the two “leaders” are presented in their respective scriptures as two completely different types of being. Muhammad is represented as a historical human being, albeit one involved in a number of miraculous events, while Jesus is considered to be God Himself temporarily incarnate as a human. Consequently, behavioral comparisons between the two are pretty much pointless. It would make more sense to compare Muhammad to, say, a plausibly historical **human** religious leader in the Bible, e.g., Moses or Paul. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2014, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/38 "2014-10-12T02:31:27Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > That’s enough of that. Don’t derail this one. Oops, just saw this mod message. Sorry about previous post. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2014, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/39 "2014-10-12T02:38:38Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > You appear to be saying it can’t be considered/judged/discussed as being an item, and yet if that were true, you wouldn’t have been able to make the statement above. You wouldn’t be able to call it ‘the Bible’, or ‘it’ - those terms treat it as an item. > > For the purpose of the question raised in this thread, it doesn’t matter what it _is_ - the question is about what’s in it. I mean, it certainly _can_ be treated as an item. I think it’s a mistake to do so. If you do insist on treating the Bible (which Bible, incidentally? Different churches have somewhat different biblical canons, and the translations and source documents can differ quite a bit) as a single document, then you can certainly find nasty stuff in there, yes. I don’t think that’s a particularly smart way to look at the Bible, though. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2014, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034/40 "2014-10-12T02:39:44Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Even if these two characterizations were less selective and biased, you would still be glossing over the fact that the two “leaders” are presented in their respective scriptures as two completely different types of being. Muhammad is represented as a historical human being, albeit one involved in a number of miraculous events, while Jesus is considered to be God Himself temporarily incarnate as a human. > > Consequently, behavioral comparisons between the two are pretty much pointless. It would make more sense to compare Muhammad to, say, a plausibly historical **human** religious leader in the Bible, e.g., Moses or Paul. Don’t many Muslims consider Muhammed as an exemplar of human behavior, though? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-koran-significantly-more-violent-than-the-bible/701034.md?page=3)