You choose wilful ignorance over knowledge. No one will deny there's a lot of crap in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament. But there are many differences that make the Bible far less bad than the Quran.
For one thing, there's an human filter in the Bible that there isn't in the Quran. The Bible has various human authors, which always provides an out for both Jews and Christians: you can always claim that maybe one of the fallible authors misunderstood God's message or just made a mistake. You cannot with the Quran, which has only one author, Muhammad, who claimed to report God's message word for word.
For another, since the Bible contradicts itself in many occasions, this actually provides believers with a way to explain away the bad parts. For example, you have the case of adulterous women who are to be stoned according to the Old Testament, but then you have Jesus, the ultimate authority for Christians, saving an adulterer woman, merely telling her to "go and sin no more". There is no such thing in the Quran, since it is only one book by one author, it has more consistency, which is a bad thing when the book itself contains only warlord-type ethics. There are the hadiths, but the one with an adulterer woman has Muhammad tell her to come back when her baby is born, then takes her baby away and has her stoned to death.
These contradictions allow even Jews to ignore part of their ancient texts, based on the theory that God's revelations change over time as human beings evolve.
While paraphrasing me, you claimed that Jesus started offensive religious wars. I hope you knew while writing you were lying, because your claim is ridiculous to the extreme. He did no such thing, and you cherry-pick passages from the Gospels, which are highly allegorical in nature to pretend there is any equivalency between his behavior and Muhammad's. The fact is that for the first millenium of Christianity, it spread peacefully or was imposed by secular rulers to obtain unity in their realm. The first time Christianity was used to justify war was the First Crusade... which is a reaction to 400 years of incessant Muslim aggression on the Christian world. And even then, the Catholic Church could not find any part of the Bible to justify it, so they used a loophole wherein they used their authority as representative of God on Earth to offer forgiveness of sins to those who would participate in the crusades. Islam doesn't need that, it is expressly written in the Quran that those who fight and die for Allah will have a special reward in heaven.
And this is the last, most important point, the example provided by the "perfect" man of Islam and Christianity. Jesus is portrayed in the Bible as basically a hippy. Muhammad on the other hand is a bloodthirsty warlord who raided caravans, slaughtered his enemies and enslaved their women, he owned slaves and had 10 wives (IIRC) including one he married at 6 and consummated the marriage with at 9.
A Christian who imitates Jesus is basically Ned Flanders, annoying, but the best neighbor one could wish for. A Muslim who imitates Muhammad... joins ISIS. I'm not kidding, what does ISIS do that Muhammad didn't do or obviously wouldn't approve of? For hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world, this 7th century warlord is the perfect human being.
It's incredible how many so-called progressives put their head in the sand when dealing with Islam, or support false equivalencies, pretending all religions are alike. No, they are not. Separation of Church and State is a doctrine of the Christian faith ("Render unto Casear..."), it is not in Islam, and as a result, the Muslim world has been ruled by theocracies since the 7th century, Arab itself didn't have a word for "secular" until the 19th century. You pretend that a passage of the Bible that tells slaves to obey their masters, while also saying that freeing your slave is an act of charity looked upon kindly by God, is equivalent to passages in the Quran that ALLOWS Muslims to HAVE slaves and to RAPE them. That's like saying Gandhi is the same as Hitler, because Gandhi told Indians not to fight against their oppressors, while Hitler was an oppressor himself.
30
@MarlenaWatches
You choose wilful ignorance over knowledge. No one will deny there's a lot of crap in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament. But there are many differences that make the Bible far less bad than the Quran.
For one thing, there's an human filter in the Bible that there isn't in the Quran. The Bible has various human authors, which always provides an out for both Jews and Christians: you can always claim that maybe one of the fallible authors misunderstood God's message or just made a mistake. You cannot with the Quran, which has only one author, Muhammad, who claimed to report God's message word for word.
For another, since the Bible contradicts itself in many occasions, this actually provides believers with a way to explain away the bad parts. For example, you have the case of adulterous women who are to be stoned according to the Old Testament, but then you have Jesus, the ultimate authority for Christians, saving an adulterer woman, merely telling her to "go and sin no more". There is no such thing in the Quran, since it is only one book by one author, it has more consistency, which is a bad thing when the book itself contains only warlord-type ethics. There are the hadiths, but the one with an adulterer woman has Muhammad tell her to come back when her baby is born, then takes her baby away and has her stoned to death.
These contradictions allow even Jews to ignore part of their ancient texts, based on the theory that God's revelations change over time as human beings evolve.
While paraphrasing me, you claimed that Jesus started offensive religious wars. I hope you knew while writing you were lying, because your claim is ridiculous to the extreme. He did no such thing, and you cherry-pick passages from the Gospels, which are highly allegorical in nature to pretend there is any equivalency between his behavior and Muhammad's. The fact is that for the first millenium of Christianity, it spread peacefully or was imposed by secular rulers to obtain unity in their realm. The first time Christianity was used to justify war was the First Crusade... which is a reaction to 400 years of incessant Muslim aggression on the Christian world. And even then, the Catholic Church could not find any part of the Bible to justify it, so they used a loophole wherein they used their authority as representative of God on Earth to offer forgiveness of sins to those who would participate in the crusades. Islam doesn't need that, it is expressly written in the Quran that those who fight and die for Allah will have a special reward in heaven.
And this is the last, most important point, the example provided by the "perfect" man of Islam and Christianity. Jesus is portrayed in the Bible as basically a hippy. Muhammad on the other hand is a bloodthirsty warlord who raided caravans, slaughtered his enemies and enslaved their women, he owned slaves and had 10 wives (IIRC) including one he married at 6 and consummated the marriage with at 9.
A Christian who imitates Jesus is basically Ned Flanders, annoying, but the best neighbor one could wish for. A Muslim who imitates Muhammad... joins ISIS. I'm not kidding, what does ISIS do that Muhammad didn't do or obviously wouldn't approve of? For hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world, this 7th century warlord is the perfect human being.
It's incredible how many so-called progressives put their head in the sand when dealing with Islam, or support false equivalencies, pretending all religions are alike. No, they are not. Separation of Church and State is a doctrine of the Christian faith ("Render unto Casear..."), it is not in Islam, and as a result, the Muslim world has been ruled by theocracies since the 7th century, Arab itself didn't have a word for "secular" until the 19th century. You pretend that a passage of the Bible that tells slaves to obey their masters, while also saying that freeing your slave is an act of charity looked upon kindly by God, is equivalent to passages in the Quran that ALLOWS Muslims to HAVE slaves and to RAPE them. That's like saying Gandhi is the same as Hitler, because Gandhi told Indians not to fight against their oppressors, while Hitler was an oppressor himself.