Board index ‹ Islam

[Troy Seal]

My atheist friend just suggested this article to me...

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/violence-more-common-in-bible-than-quran-text-analysis-reveals-a6863381.html

In the article, the author spoke on how an analysis was conducted where they found that the Old Testament was more violent than the Quran. With you being an OT scholar, do you think that these instances of violence in the Bible were ones condoned by God? Is it fair to say, "The Bible is more violent than the Quran"?

Thank you so much for your help

God bless.

[jimwalton]

Let’s deal with the linked article first. My first reaction is that I’m disappointed in and suspicious of the the researcher's investigation and his methodology. He used "text analysis software” to categorize and search for “eight emotions”. If I’m going to be frank, I would say that this is not how one accurately or even scholastically evaluates the violent nature and content of the two books (Bible and Qur’an). It’s more like a lazy man’s approach, and I’m convinced it has yielded a false conclusion. He even admits his findings are “superficial…and by no means…conclusive.” No kidding.

It’s not for me to judge with such little information, but on the surface it seems that your atheist friend has found a link that says what he wants it to say. If he’s like other atheists with whom I’ve spoken, he probably just skimmed the article and never researched anything behind it to see if was true or not. And yet he stands on it as truth and throws it in your face as if he has made a point and substantiated it, but the article is shoddily researched and admittedly superficial. But maybe that’s unfair. It just seems that way.

A more accurate approach would be to converse with someone who can accurately describe and portray the two books. With your permission, I’ll dive into that at least to some extent.

Generally speaking, people accuse the Bible of violence in 4 main areas: the Flood, the plagues of Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of the land, and God’s wrath.

The story of the Flood is also in the Qur’an (Surah 10:71-73; 11.25-48).
The story of the plagues of Egypt is also in the Qur’an (Surah 7:103-136ff.; 17:102-103).
Joshua is not mentioned directly in the Qur’an, but the story Joshua’s conquest is in the Qur’an (Surah 18:59-60).
Allah’s wrath is a prominent Qur’anic teaching: Surah 2.61, 90; 3.112, 3:162 and so many more.

The Qur’an also teaches hell for unbelievers. So on what scale is the Bible more violent than the Qur’an? I think the man’s methodology is flawed.

Another thing is this: The conquering of the Amalekites (1 Sam. 15) and the conquest under Joshua and David were the ONLY times Israel was ever to engage in offensive warfare in all of history. Once they gained the land, they were to live in peace. The only battles they fought were defensive ones. This is distinctly different from Islam, which is dedicated to world domination by military victory.

An additional observation: 64% of the contents of the Qur’an is driven by the question of what to do with “kafir”—unbelievers (not just defined as those unaccepting of Islam, but as “evil, disgusting, and the lowest form of life”). The Kafir have no human or civil rights. Any non-Muslim can be killed, sold into slavery, sexually abused, raped, mistreated, dismembered, or mutiliated. In total there are over 100 verses in the Qur’an enjoining Muslims to fight, kill, torture, rape, pillage, and conquer in the name of Allah against the Kafir. Surah 2:190-196, 216; 5:33-35 are examples. Obviously, the Bible does not advocate or share this kind of violence.

Again I’d have to ask: in what sense is the OT more violent than the Qur’an?

Now, you also asked if these instances of violence in the Bible are ones that were condoned by God. It depends which ones you are asking about. In the article he mentions no specifics, no “instances". I’d be glad to discuss with you whatever texts are of concern to you, if you’re willing to speak with me.