Scripture-mandated Judeo-Christian incitements to violence/chauvinism v. nonbelievers

May 2008
1,301
Bangkok
I see posts including quotes like the following once in a while on the internet re: Islamic incitements to violence or at least chauvinism against nonbelievers...

• “Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.” – Quran (9:73)
• “O you who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness.” – Quran (9:123)
• “And when we wish to destroy a town, we send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so we destroy it with utter destruction.” – Quran (17:16)
• “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves.” – Quran (48:29)
• “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.’” – Bukhari (52:177)
• “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah.” – Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992
• “Allah’s Apostle said … ‘I have been made victorious with terror.’” – Bukhari (52:220)

....and I wonder if, in the holy Judeo-Christian texts, there is comparable bellicosity.

Discussion of this easily slides into vitriol, of course, so let me be clear that this is being asked from a position of genuine interest in whether we in the Christian and Jewish West are perhaps standing on a glass porch when we cast aspersions on to what extent Islam really is a religion of peace what with violent directives in the sacred texts. Is it pervasive in all the Abrahamic faiths?

Thanks in advance for sincere responses that quote and cite holy texts as is done above.
 

Belisarius

Forum Staff
Jun 2006
10,359
U.K.
Read about this interesting experiment on this very subject:

"A look at the combined Old and New Testaments—i.e., the Bible—compared to the Quran revealed the texts are fairly uniform in levels of ‘surprise,’ ‘sadness’ and ‘disgust’, but the Bible registers higher in ‘anger’ and the Quran rates higher in ‘joy,’ but also in ‘fear/anxiety’ and ‘trust’ (See figure).


Analyzing the Old and New Testaments separately against one another and the Quran yielded more specific findings:


-Of the three texts, the content in the Old Testament appears to be the most violent. 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%).


-The concept of ‘love’ appears most often in the New Testament (3.0%), significantly more than in either the Old Testament (1.9%) or the Quran (1.26%).


-The concept of ‘forgiveness/grace’ occurs significantly more often in the Quran (6.3%) than in the New Testament (2.9%) or the Old Testament (0.7%).


-On the concept of ‘faith/belief,’ the Quran leads (7.6%), followed by the New Testament (4.8%) and the Old Testament a distant third (0.2%).


An additional note about ‘non-members’
OdinText uncovered what appears to be a significant difference with regard to the extent to which the texts distinguish between ‘members’ and ‘non-members.’


Both the Old and New Testaments use the term “gentile” to signify those who are not Jewish, but the Quran is somewhat distinct in referencing the concept of the ‘Unbeliever’ (e.g.,“disbelievers,” “rejectors,” etc.). And in two instances, the ‘unbeliever’ is connected directly to the term “enemy.”


“While we’ve only scratched the surface here, it appears safe to conclude that some commonly-held assumptions about and perceptions of these texts may not necessarily hold true,” said Anderson.


“For instance, those who have not read or are not fairly familiar with the content of all three texts may be surprised to learn that the content in the Quran is not more violent than that of the Bible,” he said."


OdinText Text Analysis Answers: Is the Quran Really More Violent than the Bible?
 
May 2008
1,301
Bangkok
Really interesting stuff. However, if we were to focus on incitements to violence, it's likely many of those violent references in the Old Testament are just records of events passed, rather than suggestions or calls to action or belief intended for the reader to heed.
 

LatinoEuropa

Ad Honorem
Oct 2015
5,574
Matosinhos Portugal
What makes you see chauvenismo, has to do with the religions that exist in the world, only that the religions that exist in all the world were invented by the man.
They say that such. God created the world in colors as well as the human being, I'm sure that the time of stupidity has not ended before the history of the discoveries killed in the name of the Catholic king, but before it was already killing in the name of other religions, today still kill in the name Of religion, I am from a country with a large majority of Catholics I got married for the church. I pray the grandmother Maria because my parents taught me today, she calls me an atheist and you know why I only believe in religions that talk about doing good, but many only act to do Evil in the name of religions, I speak for myself I have nothing against black I have nothing against the Jew I have nothing against the yellow I have nothing against the red I have nothing against the gypsy. What I have against is of my color, where I live, they are angry at me, they say ill of me because my car is better than his or my house, etc.etc.
Yes they are those that I am against, it is not the other colors that affect my life, certainly what I say happens through this world outside. If God created the world in colors as well as mankind the whole color of the human being and choose what religion they have right to life.
Quanto mais conheço os homens, mais gosto dos animais. = Por
The more I know men, the more I like animals. » English
 
Nov 2016
1,686
Germany
One should consider that the Quran was authored by a warlord while the Christian source texts stem from non-militant commoners. With regard to violence, the Christian source texts are restricted to fantasied threats of hell, the intensity of which seems to be a novelty by the Jesus figure whose threats of hell amount to more than 30 times in the gospels. There is however no textual indication for threats of earthly violence by JC.

After Christianity became the only state religion of the Roman Empire, however hell seemed to be brought on Earth by Christian emperors and Christian advisors of them. Some examples:

324 CE: Constantine had the Delphian Oracle closed and its priests tortured to death. The Greek temples on the Athos mountain got destroyed.

326: Many more Hellenistic temples got destroyed.

335: All Hellenistic oracle priests were crucified.

341: Emperor Flavius Julius Constantius continued such practices.

353: He threatened all non-Christian cults with death penalty.

354: All non-Christians temples were closed or transformed into brothels.

370: Emperor Valens had brutally persecuted and killed non-Christians in the Eastern part of the empire. Thousands of non-Christian books were publically burned.

As to Islam, its emergence and spread was largely based on extreme violence.

+ Mohammed, who financed his army and enriched himself by carrying brutal assaults on caravans and nearby tribes, and by selling the families of killed males, which refused to convert to Islam, into slavery.

+ Mohammed, who elicited information about a gold hideout from Kinana, chief of Jewish tribe Khaibar, by laying glowing charcoal on his breast until he finally talked.

+ Mohammed, who then had the chief and his nephew decapitated, and who raped the 17-year-old bride of the nephew.

+ Mohammed, who had fleeing nonbelievers cut off their hands and cut out their eyes and had them abandoned in the desert.

Unfortunately the list could be continued.

Craig Winn in ´Mohammed, the Prophet of Doom´ p. 13:

Mohammed financed his religion entirely through piracy and the slave trade.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2014
1,429
Asia
Prophet Jesus sacrificed himself like Prophet Muhammad's grandson Imam Hussain to spread the message of the God.

On the other hand Prophet Muhammad picked up the sword like Prophet David to set up the authority of the God. Didn't the God intruct Prophet David to go ahead and kill the enemies.

Why Prophet Muhammad picked up the sword ? Why can't he spread his message among the Arab pagans peacefully ?
Meccans have already killed the Hanif, Zaid ibn Amr who tried to spread the message of God among these pagans before Prophet Muhammad.

Even Prophet Muhammad spread the message of God peacefully, but he and his followers faced violent opposition from the pagans. Many times Prophet's followers have to took refuge in Ethiopia. And in the end, even Prophet and his followers have to migrate to Medina for safety. It was only after migration that Prophet permitted his followers to picked up the arms.
 
Last edited:
Dec 2016
176
SAN
Judaeo bible (aka Hebrew Bible, Tanakh, and to Christians as the Old Testament) is far closer (to Quran) in violence than the New Testament.

Old Testament also features funky marriage, making kids as possible, etc.

It was tough times.

And don't tell me they didn't pick their nose after being out in the desert all that time.
 

Bart Dale

Ad Honorem
Dec 2009
7,095
Read about this interesting experiment on this very subject:

"A look at the combined Old and New Testaments—i.e., the Bible—compared to the Quran revealed the texts are fairly uniform in levels of ‘surprise,’ ‘sadness’ and ‘disgust’, but the Bible registers higher in ‘anger’ and the Quran rates higher in ‘joy,’ but also in ‘fear/anxiety’ and ‘trust’ (See figure).


Analyzing the Old and New Testaments separately against one another and the Quran yielded more specific findings:


-Of the three texts, the content in the Old Testament appears to be the most violent. 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%).


-The concept of ‘love’ appears most often in the New Testament (3.0%), significantly more than in either the Old Testament (1.9%) or the Quran (1.26%).


-The concept of ‘forgiveness/grace’ occurs significantly more often in the Quran (6.3%) than in the New Testament (2.9%) or the Old Testament (0.7%).


-On the concept of ‘faith/belief,’ the Quran leads (7.6%), followed by the New Testament (4.8%) and the Old Testament a distant third (0.2%).


An additional note about ‘non-members’
OdinText uncovered what appears to be a significant difference with regard to the extent to which the texts distinguish between ‘members’ and ‘non-members.’


Both the Old and New Testaments use the term “gentile” to signify those who are not Jewish, but the Quran is somewhat distinct in referencing the concept of the ‘Unbeliever’ (e.g.,“disbelievers,” “rejectors,” etc.). And in two instances, the ‘unbeliever’ is connected directly to the term “enemy.”


“While we’ve only scratched the surface here, it appears safe to conclude that some commonly-held assumptions about and perceptions of these texts may not necessarily hold true,” said Anderson.


“For instance, those who have not read or are not fairly familiar with the content of all three texts may be surprised to learn that the content in the Quran is not more violent than that of the Bible,” he said."


OdinText Text Analysis Answers: Is the Quran Really More Violent than the Bible?
You fail to make an very important and fundamental distinction between the Qu'ran and the OT and NT. The violence discussed in the OT and NT is specific to time and place, and in the case of the NT, specifically done by God and his supernatural agents - Unlike Muslims, Christians are repeatedly instructed not to conduct violence against others, even despite good just reasons.

The violence that the OT sanctioned against the Canaanites was only for and during the conquest of Palestine, and did not apply for all time and against all pagans.

In contrast, because of a lack of clear chronology in tne Koran, there is no such limitation the Koran. The violence that the Koran sanctions against non Muslims is not limitated to any time or place, and it is Muslims, not God and his angels, who are expected to do the violence. When the Koran tells to fight against non Muslims and subdue them, it makes no mention of self defense in the passage, and throughout history, from the earliest times of the Muslims to current, the Muslims have always killed and enslaved others.

An the Koran, unlike the OT and NT, sanctions the rape of women. The fact that the women mare slaves makes it no less rape, and despite any lies to the contrary, the OT and NT never said, unlike the Koran, it was ok to rape a woman if she was your slave.

From the founding of Islam, Muslims have always engaged in violence against non Muslims. The pagans of Mecca allowed the Muslims to leave on their own, and even the Muslims provide no evidence that they were forced to leave - conditions may have been unpleasant (perhaps because the pagans wouldn't apply the Muslims to impose their will on everyone)mbut no evidence that Muslims lives were threaten, or that the pagans would have been unwilling to let Muslims stay. In contrast, Muslims came back to Mecca, and even though there was no evidence of the pagans of Mecca threatening the Muslims, and killed or enslaved all the pagans. The first act of violence by Muslims was not an act of self defense, but of theft, as they robbed a caravan during the sacred months.



A contrast between the OT and Koran on violence is the story of the destruction of Soddom and Gomorah. It the OT, when God announces he will destroy those cities, Abraham is shocked, and challenges God to live by his own standards. The conversation between God and Abraham ends after Abraham whittles down God to agree to spare the city if there was onky 5 good men. (Unfortunately, there was only 1, Lot, not enough to save the cities). We are also shown how wicked tnose cities were (and Sodom was as evil a city as the ancients could image) in the OT. In the Koran, Ibrams repsonse to God annoucing he is going to slaughter all the inhabitants is "Allah be praised" - no sense of shock, and we are never told what evils the inhabitants did to deserve such a ghastly fate - Allah said they need to die, and that was good enough for the Muslims.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2014
1,429
Asia
Well, Quran has Tafsirs, Sahih and Hadith associated with it that give very accurate idea about the specific time and place of the violence.

If violence in OT is specifically against the Canaanites then why the violence in Quran can't be specifically against the Arab pagans.
 

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,090
Republika Srpska
Well, Quran has Tafsirs, Sahih and Hadith associated with it that give very accurate idea about the specific time and place of the violence.

If violence in OT is specifically against the Canaanites then why the violence in Quran can't be specifically against the Arab pagans.
Well, it's mostly because very soon Muslims used violence on Christians. I mean, they did invade Persia and Byzantium. Christianity did no such thing.