'Violence more common' in Bible than Quran, text analysis reveals

[TuxAme]

Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10

Luke 19.27

And these enemies of minewho were unwilling for me to rule overthem, bring them here and slay them in front of me.’”

I have studied islam and i see no reason to be critical about it, its indeed the religion of peace.

Oh, you're being sarcastic. That's the only explanation.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Jesus recommends that to avoid sin we cut off our hands and pluck out our eyes. This advice is given immediately after he says that anyone who looks with lust at any women commits adultery. 5:29-30

That looking on a woman with lust is the equivalent of committing adultery should indicate that cutting hands off and gouging out eyes is equally meant in non-literal terms.

Jesus sends some devils into a herd of pigs, causing them to run off a cliff and drown in the waters below. 8:32

Best bacon ever?

Families will be torn apart because of Jesus (this is one of the few "prophecies" in the Bible that has actually come true). "Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death."10:21

Yes Jesus is referring to persecution against His people (Christians) even within their own home, sadly.

Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has "come not to send peace, but a sword." 10:34-36

Not exactly, Christ did say "“Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword." and the context of this is persecution, and there is no shortage of evidence throughout history of persecution against Christians, all because of Christ, and not because of themselves.

Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the eternal torment of hell because they didn't care for his preaching. 11:20-24

Not exactly, because they did not believe in Him, because if they did, they would have repented in sackcloth. Only God has authority and power to much such condemnations, and in exercising His authority, He proved Himself to be the Son of God.

Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) So, does Jesus think that children who curse their parents should be killed? It sure sounds like it. 15:4-7

The point is the Pharisees thought of themselves as righteous obedient servants of God, and by not washing his hands, the indignation revealed the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. In other words, the Pharisees were straining at gnats while swallowing a camel.

In the parable of the unforgiving servant, the king threatens to enslave a man and his entire family to pay for a debt. This practice, which was common at the time, seems not to have bothered Jesus very much. The parable ends with this: "So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you." If you are cruel to others, God will be cruel to you. 18:23-35

A violent teaching is no more violent than watching a violent movie in the comfort of your living room while eating popcorn. No harm was done, and maybe a lesson could be learned to help prevent a violent tendency. The fact is, people are often kind to cruel people, and many kind hearted broken hearted Christians are treated cruelly. But trust me, in the final judgement, God will balance and settle these things out, because He knows and sees all. Did I not give the same message using other words without inflicting violence? If it's violence you seek, re-read the flood account in Noah's day, God is a God of wrath, and is to be feared for good reasons.

Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12

And your point is? It's not like Jesus invented the concept of Hell and punishment and wrath from God, it is taught consistently all throughout Scripture. Even after disobeying, God gave Samson back his strength long enough to bring down a temple that crushed the Philistines and killed him in the process. I guess that makes God a big meany, huh?

Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be killed. 3:23

I seem to recall Christ telling Peter to put away his sword, after Peter cut a soldier ear off, and Christ had compassion for the soldier, healing the man's ear.

The author of Acts talks about the "sure mercies of David." But David was anything but merciful. For an example of his behavior see 2 Sam 12:31and 1 Chr 20:3, where he saws, hacks, and burns to death the inhabitants of several cities. 13:34

And don't forget about the piles of foreskins...ewwww.

Homosexuals (those "without natural affection") and their supporters (those "that have pleasure in them") are "worthy of death" - - along with gossips, boasters, and disobedient children. 1:31-32

If Christians were under the Mosaic laws that would be correct, but we are not, nor have I lived in a theonomic society, so you might as well be speaking Hebrew which I am nearly incoherent with.

James says Abraham was justified by works (for being willing to kill his son for God); Paul (Romans 4:2-3) says he was justified by faith (for believing that God would order him to do such an evil act)

Not exactly, (but it was a good effort to insert your ideas in parenthesis, while twisting the meaning and attempting to give the appearance of Scripture support) Matthew 7:14 .

 

[jovanovic]

Oh, you're being sarcastic. That's the only explanation.

no, i am serious .

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I have studied islam and i see no reason to be critical about it, its indeed the religion of peace.

There is no peace in religion, not in any religion that I am aware of, regardless, peaceful or not, that characteristic is not what people should be concerned about, truth is what should matter, you know reality, what is the case, not what we hope is the case, and what we would like to be true, but what really is the truth, even if it hurts, even if it offends our sensibilities. I have to question a religion that claims to be peaceful when it is obviously based on Judaism which I am not totally ignorant about. Further I am somewhat familiar a few of the "extremist" passages in the Quran', which ironically is completely the opposite of the Scriptures you mentioned in previous posts concerning persecution of Christians. Oh I get it now, zealots for Islam are helping Christians in further proving His words to be true. Or is this brother against brother Israel and Palestine?

 

[Rajni]

Okay, and what happens when you compare the two in terms of how much they talk about love?

I'd be interested in knowing this too. Does the Quran have a
good chunk of love-based passages, at least enough to outweigh
the violent ones?

Sufism is mystic Islam, and I think it's supposed to be more moderate and maybe less associated with violence than some other strands of Islam. These are Sufi poems by Rumi: Poems by Rumi
And the video below is supposed to be Sufi music with Istanbul in the background in the picture.

Rumi definitely highlights the love-relationship one can have
with the Lord. His poetry really brings that out.

I do find it helpful to focus more on the mystical side of a
religion, rather than the militant side.

Religions are rather like people: There's a side that is all
lovey-dovey and a side that wants heads to roll.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

Jesus recommends that to avoid sin we cut off our hands and pluck out our eyes. This advice is given immediately after he says that anyone who looks with lust at any women commits adultery. 5:29-30

Jesus sends some devils into a herd of pigs, causing them to run off a cliff and drown in the waters below. 8:32

Families will be torn apart because of Jesus (this is one of the few "prophecies" in the Bible that has actually come true). "Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death."10:21

Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has "come not to send peace, but a sword." 10:34-36

Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the eternal torment of hell because they didn't care for his preaching. 11:20-24

Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) So, does Jesus think that children who curse their parents should be killed? It sure sounds like it. 15:4-7

In the parable of the unforgiving servant, the king threatens to enslave a man and his entire family to pay for a debt. This practice, which was common at the time, seems not to have bothered Jesus very much. The parable ends with this: "So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you." If you are cruel to others, God will be cruel to you. 18:23-35

Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12

Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10

Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be killed. 3:23

The author of Acts talks about the "sure mercies of David." But David was anything but merciful. For an example of his behavior see 2 Sam 12:31and 1 Chr 20:3, where he saws, hacks, and burns to death the inhabitants of several cities. 13:34

Homosexuals (those "without natural affection") and their supporters (those "that have pleasure in them") are "worthy of death" - - along with gossips, boasters, and disobedient children. 1:31-32

James says Abraham was justified by works (for being willing to kill his son for God); Paul (Romans 4:2-3) says he was justified by faith (for believing that God would order him to do such an evil act)

none of these examples advocate acts of violence against other people.

 

[Zoness]

I don't think it necessarily matters which has the more violent text.

They're both very imperialistic imo.

 

[jovanovic]

I don't think it necessarily matters which has the more violent text.

They're both very imperialistic imo.

and pagan texts have no violence, imperalistic, homophobia, anti-women ? there is like 200 pagan religions,,,you pagans are acting like its only judaism christianity islam that is bad...

 

[Zoness]

and pagan texts have no violence, imperalistic, homophobia, anti-women ? there is like 200 pagan religions,,,you pagans are acting like its only judaism christianity islam that is bad...

You're going to have to be clear on what you mean by pagan texts. Be specific and give examples.

I pick on Abrahamic religions because they both impose their wills at all costs. My religion, however, does not proselytize. People can believe whatever they want but the moment that they use society and politics to bend the circumstances in their favor, I am of course going to intervene. There is good in all of those religions but the fact is they've both had tremendous impact on the world and analyzing marginal differences in their text's level of violence does little to make a point. I care less about scripture and more about action.

 

[MehGuy]

Uh huh.. really depends how the violence is depicted. At least comparing the New Testament from the Quran I find it hard to believe the New Testament isn't vastly more peaceful. The New Testament has a lot of depictions of violence and blood, albeit in a more submissive/masochistic context. Seems to be quite a different idea of martyrdom between Christians and Muslims. One is masochistic/submissive where you die peacefully for your faith.. and the other more sadistic/aggressive where you still die for your faith but you do so by inflicting violence on others. Both still revere their bloody martyrs though.

Not that the history of Christianity doesn't have it's dark moments.. like the Inquisition, Crusades.. etc.. psychologically masochism and sadism are both sides of the same coin. Empathy can go both ways.. the same people who are able to greatly sympathize with the plight of the poor and their enemies can also probably easily use such heightened empathy to enjoy hurting others and wanting vengeance or whatever.. probably a reason why Jesus preached incredibly kindness and compassion like turning the other cheek.. but also eternal damnation like burning in hell forever for simply not following him. Both seem relevant to the hyper empathetic mind. So in reality.. incredibly peaceful religions will probably not fare much better in actual practice.

 

[AskTheFamily]

The rules of engagement and putting war and peace into proper perspective, is important, and holy book that shies away from explaining the right perspectives in that, doesn't speak to a Creator who knows how vital the issue is to humans.

 

[danbuter]

You guys are arguing with another Leftist/pseudo-Atheist who is pretending to be Christian in order to troll us.

 

[Abraxos]

"Killing and destruction are referenced slightly more often in the New Testament (2.8%) than in the Quran (2.1%), but the Old Testament clearly leads—more than twice that of the Quran—in mentions of destruction and killing (5.3%)."

Someone analysed the Bible and Quran to see which is more violent

I hope this fact can cure islamophobia.

Interesting how the article ended by admitting that the analysis was superficial, and was conducted hastily.

If you want a more fair critique done through rigorous study of comparing the Bible with the Quran, best to check out Bill Warner. He does have his opinions on Islam (most I agree with), but he is notable for having objectively crunched the numbers on this particular issue.

 

[awitch]

and pagan texts have no violence, imperalistic, homophobia, anti-women ? there is like 200 pagan religions,,,you pagans are acting like its only judaism christianity islam that is bad...

Our myths are indeed horrible. But they are myths; they are not to be taken literally and they are not "inspired by god(s)". They hold no stamp of divine approval as an official description of who/what the gods are or rules to govern the behavior of humans. No one's eternal soul is hinging on their acceptance and no one is punished for dismissing them like the ancient fan fiction that they are.

 

[ToBeLoved]

The Quran is one scroll attributed to one author (who could not read or write), the "Bible" is comprised of sixty-six scrolls with around forty authors. The Church recognized the canon of Scripture, before the Quran came into existence. I doubt these facts were figured into the percentages. An assessment of such would make author by author comparisons, and further take into consideration the contexts for said violence. Good day!

Let’s also remember that God promises to reestablish His chosen people in the promised land.

That means that those other people groups that had moved into that land while the Israelites were slaves in Egypt had to go for God to establish them back after Exodus w Moses.

They would not go so their were wars over that land.

There have always been war over land, resources, ect. Could the Israelite's and Hebrews survived without the only real wealth or inheritance they had to pass down to each generation? Jesus Himself said how heavily they were taxed and exploited by rulers.

But this should be recognized for what it was. Not labeled as ‘violence’

 

[John 1720]

"Killing and destruction are referenced slightly more often in the New Testament (2.8%) than in the Quran (2.1%), but the Old Testament clearly leads—more than twice that of the Quran—in mentions of destruction and killing (5.3%)."

Someone analysed the Bible and Quran to see which is more violent

I hope this fact can cure islamophobia.

Yeah read the article. This is FAKE NEWS destined for the ever increasing dungheap of pseudo intellectual spin.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Let’s also remember that God promises to reestablish His chosen people in the promised land.

That means that those other people groups that had moved into that land while the Israelites were slaves in Egypt had to go for God to establish them back after Exodus w Moses.

They would not go so their were wars over that land.

There have always been war over land, resources, ect.

But this should be recognized for what it was. Not labeled as ‘violence’

True there is a difference between civil violence especially where it concerns laws, and war between nations and survival.

 

[ToBeLoved]

True there is a difference between civil violence especially where it concerns laws, and war between nations and survival.

Yup.

Would have helped if the OP put things into the correct perspective Biblically.

But there is a lot of odd posts from the OP in this thread that are missing any kind of Biblical context and his views are off base with the truth of the text

 

[cloudyday2]

I what the percentages referenced mean precisely. Is it % of the words? % of the sentences? % of the stories?

For example, Muslims typically add obsequious suffixes to names when mentioned ("Muhammad (peace be upon him)"). If we are measuring the density of violent words then the obsequious suffixes will skew the result. (Never having read the Quran, I do not know if it contains these obsequious suffixes or not.)

Of course the flowery writing style probably makes these text more enjoyable to the reader. I do not mean to be critical - just saying this percentage could mean almost anything and probably means almost nothing.

 

[juvenissun]

"Killing and destruction are referenced slightly more often in the New Testament (2.8%) than in the Quran (2.1%), but the Old Testament clearly leads—more than twice that of the Quran—in mentions of destruction and killing (5.3%)."

Someone analysed the Bible and Quran to see which is more violent

I hope this fact can cure islamophobia.

No, it won't.
But please give example on the teaching of killing and violence in the NT. I think you are wrong to give that statistics.

------------

OK. I see you did that in #15. But I think you are still wrong on everyone of them. If you like to discuss, we can do that one by one.

I go for the first one:

"Cut off your hand if you don't like it". Is that "a reference" of violence?
If it is and you want to correct it (won't you?), what would you teach? Would the alternative give the same message?

"If I don't like your hand so I want to cut it off", that is violence. But if you want to do it to yourself, it is NOT violence. It is self discipline. Not all emotions or dramatic actions are violent.

I wish you would willing to go through items on your list one by one carefully. It is indeed a good topic in Bible study.