1

The Political Violence of the Bible and the Koran: A Response

Kenneth M. Montville

In his argumentation for the dissimilarity of the Hebrew Bible, Christian New Testament,
and the Islamic scriptures of the Qur‘an and Hadith, Bill Warner makes several blunders in
comparative theology and the delivery of what he calls quantitative evidence. What will follow is
far from an exhaustive list of rebuttals, but rather what I would consider to be the most important
counter-arguments to consider before applying the label of war- mongering to Islam without also
applying it to Christianity and Judaism. Firstly, Warner claims that there is a political agenda of
Islam. This can be stated as either a misconception of Islam or as an understatement of the
political agendas of all religions save Islam. As all religions strive for control, especially the
Abrahamic faiths, this is certainly not a legitimate grievance. Secondly, Warner states that said
political agenda is derived from the ―trilogy‖ of Islamic scripture, the Qur‘an, Hadith and Sira.
The Sira, the biographical work depicting the life of Mohammed, is not scripture in the way that
the gospels are. They are more a reflection on the nature of the prophet in the same way that
reading deuterocanonical books would give one insight into the life of Jesus, important to the
faithful but not necessarily authoritative. In reality the bulk of Islamic scripture is the Hadith,
Qur‘an, Tawrat (Pentateuch), Injil (Gospel given to Jesus), and the Zabur (Psalms).
Warner‘s primary blunder is one of terms. He relies on the term ―political violence‖ one
which he seems reluctant to provide a definition for. Perhaps because if defined, a rebuttal would
be much more clear. As such, I will now infer a definition based on his loose stateme nt of what
political violence is not. ―Cain killing Abel is not political violence. Political violence is not
killing a lamb for a meal or making an animal sacrifice.‖ As his premise is most likely that
political violence is violence solely against other humans and solely for the purpose of religious
expansionism I will ignore all passages of animal sacrifice or cruelty (although one could read
these as worthy trespasses as well) or of human on human violence without socio-political
pretence.
Warner makes the claim that only 34,000 words in the Hebrew Bible are dedicated to
political violence and makes the unabashed claim that there is no political violence in the
Christian New Testament while there are 328,000 words dedicated to political violence in the
Islamic scriptures. These claims are sorely understated if not intentionally misleading. Firstly,
the Hebrew Bible is much shorter than the Islamic scriptures (1,163 pages of Old Testament 1 vs.
3,138 pages of Islamic Scripture 2 ) so his one for one comparison falls apart under even slight
scrutiny as the Islamic literature being compared is nearly three times the length of the Hebrew
Bible. Beyond this, one need only read until Exodus to find the Hebrew Bible is abundant with
political violence. Even if one doesn‘t recognise the Plagues of Egypt 3 as political violence as
they are atrocities committed by God and not the Israelites one needs read no further than when
Israel is finally out of bondage that they are told to go out and kill everyone who resides within
the Promised Land 4 . If that were not enough the message that they should ultimately kill anyone

1
The Oxford Annotated Bible, Revised Standard Edit ion. Oxfo rd: Oxford University. 1962.
2
The Qur‘an (Oxford World Classics). Oxford: Oxfo rd Un iversity. 2008. Calcu lated based on Warner‘s calculation
that the Qur‘an is 16% of the Islamic Scriptures at 502 pages.
3
Exodus 5:1 – 12:36
4
Exodus 23:23 – 28
 2

who offers sacrifice to any god but YHVH 5 would mean, in any literal sense, that Christians and
Jews are demanded by divine command to slaughter the 4 billion people who are not believers.
This concept is no doubt the basis of the fundamentalist strain of thought within Islam but it is
important to remember that this is heavily tied into scriptural references within the Christian and
Hebrew liturgical tradition. The list goes on, execution for anyone who breaks the Sabbath, 6 the
fate of the Midianites at the hand of the Israelites, 7 or God‘s command to kill all the inhabitants
of Canaan and destroy their relics. 8 This is not exhaustive as certainly this is simply a few
examples found in the Pentateuch (in my edition I am only 210 pages into the book with the final
example given) and not the militaristic histories given in Judges, Chronicles, 1 & 2 Kings or 1 &
2 Samuel.
Of course this is all moot when one does the math, by Warner‘s calculations the Islamic
trilogy is 328,000 words dedicated to ―political violence‖ but then realize that the Sira is not
Islamic scripture. If Warner isn‘t going to include the deuterocanon and apocrypha then we
should not allow the Sira in this. That then brings the amount of words back down to 118,080
words dedicated to political violence assuming that the Sira makes up 67% of its references. This
math means that there are only 118,080 references in 1,205 pages means that there are 98 words
per page in the Islamic texts—a questionable amount in any sense—versus 29 words per page in
the Hebrew bible. 9 Upon this conclusion I want to digress that words themselves are not a good
measure of how much violence is in a text but rather how many verses refer or condone violence.
However, even if the Qur‘an and Hadith are more violent than the Tanakh does that really
matter? If the expression of God‘s will to slaughter all non-believers occurs once or a hundred
times is it any different? Weren‘t Christianity, and Judaism before it, spread through political
warfare? Indeed, the Catholic symbol IHS stands for In Hoc Signio, Vinces, (Latin: By this sign,
conquer) attributed to a vision purportedly beheld by Constantine before the Battle of the
Milvian Bridge. Considering the long military history of European Christianity, the forced
conversions of Jews and Slavs in Central and Eastern Europe, of Native Americans a nd other
indigenous peoples, the Crusades, and the various witch hunts and inquisitions couldn‘t one also
call Christianity to the fore on the charge of political violence?
As for the claim that political violence is absent from the Christian New Testament, one
needs turn no further than the third chapter of the first gospel, that of Matthew, to find the first
example. ―Even now the axe is laid at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear
good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. ‖10 This startling threat that is given by John the
Baptist to the Pharisees is more than just a side note. This is a theological claim to the superiority
of Christendom. Further into the gospel Jesus references back to the Law of Moses, not
abolishing its abhorrent rules but making them more strict. ―Think not that I have come to
abolish the law and the prophets; but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth
pass away, not an iota, not a dot, shall pass from the law until all is accomp lished.‖11 Now taking
into consideration that the law, and that means its penalties are still enforced, reflect upon his
statement on adultery. ―You have heard that it is said ‗You shall not commit adultery.‘ But I say
to you that every one [sic] who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with
5
Exodus 22:23
6
Exodus 31:14
7
Nu mbers 31:1 – 54
8
Nu mbers 33:50 – 52
9
Abdul-Rah man, Ghouroub, Trans. The Authentic Holy Hadiths. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyah. 2010. 703 pages.
10
Matthew 3:10
11
Matthew 5:17 – 18
 3

her in his heart.‖12 Now what does the law say about adultery? The law clearly states that both
adulterers—yes, in this case that means the woman being lusted after, regardless of her
involvement—must be put to death. Adultery is serious business in God‘s eyes. 13 One could
continue to read into the socio-political message of Jesus by continuing through the final three
gospels, Acts, the epistles, and finally the ultimate socio-political treatise, Revelation. Judeo-
Christianity is rife with political violence in very comparable a sense as Islam.
Warner also makes the statement that Islam is singularly unique for making threats
against artists, videographers, and authors. This is an exquisitely false statement. The Catholic
Church maintained the Index Librorum Prohibitorum until 1966, a list of all books, banned by
the church, where it was not only illegal but at times punishable by death to own one. The John
Wycliffe, the first man to translate the bible into English, was heavily persecuted during his life
and after his death had his remains exhumed and destroyed. The church also declared that
translation of Scripture into English is a crime punishable by charges of heresy, coinciding with
the 1401 law De heretico comburendo (Latin: Regarding the Heretic who is to be burned). Percy
Bysshe Shelley was expelled from Oxford simply for writing his pamphlet The Necessity of
Atheism. In the 1930s there was the Catholic League of Decency, its sole purpose was to object
to what they saw as questionable content in films. Though these are not violent crimes per say,
Christianity has simply not been as harsh on the arts as contemporary Islam. Christianity is muc h
more obsessed with sexuality and political power.
The comingled religious/political propaganda used by Hitler in his rhetoric was
unabashedly Christian in nature. Concerning atheism and its perceived threat to his Christian
nation Hitler made the statements:
Today they say that Christianity is in danger, that the Catholic faith is
threatened. My reply to them is: for the time being, Christians and not
international atheists are now standing at Germany‘s fore. I am not merely
talking about Christianity; I confess that I will never ally myself with the parties
which aim to destroy Christianity. Fourteen years they have gone arm in arm
with atheism. At no time was greater damage ever done to Christianity than in
those years when the Christian parties ruled side by side with those who denied
the very existence of God. Germany's entire cultural life was shattered and
contaminated in this period. It shall be our task to burn out these manifestations
of degeneracy in literature, theater, schools, and the press —that is, in our entire
culture—and to eliminate the poison which has been permeating every facet of
our lives for these past fourteen years.14
This of course was perfectly fine by the Catholic Church. In fact religious identity was heavily
intertwined with the beginnings of the Nazi Party, 15 religious iconography made itself present in
German military apparel in the form of the motto Gott Mit Uns (German: God with us), and the
surprisingly close ties between the Holy See and Germany during the Third Reich in the form of
the Reichskonkordat, an agreement between Pope Pius XI and the fuehrer uniting the two.
Catholicism was taught in schools, clergy were exempt from mandatory military service should it
be reinstated, and the Holy See can maintain communication with its bishops. This close church-
state relation was all well and good with the Christians who adopted Nazi politics because they

12
Matthew 5:27 – 28
13
Lev iticus 20:10-21
14
Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939. Vo l. 1. Oxfo rd: Oxford University
Press. 1942. p. 240
15
Spencer, Heath A. "Catholicism and the Roots of Nazis m: Religious Identity and National Socialism." Church
History 3. 2010 p. 731-3.
 4

were weaned on the age-old Catholic rhetoric of Jewish deicide and Martin Luther‘s famous
essay, The Jews and Their Lies and thus were fine with the oppression and even extermination of
the Jewish people. Drawn from the account in the gospel of Matthew where Pontius Pilate
washes his hands of guilt while the Pharisees answer ―His blood be on us and on our children‖16
has been used as a justification for anti-Semitism for hundreds of years and it was one that would
have rung familiar with religious Germans attracted to the Nazi ideology.
Turning to contemporary America, all that is needed is a cursory search of the internet to
find a news article on recent the murder of a doctor who performs abortions. These slaying seem
to always have been carried out by devout Christians who see it as God‘s work. These people see
the murders of abortion providers as ―justifiable homicide.‖ 17 Sometimes it is not just the doctors
themselves that get attacked, in 1998, Robert Sanderson, who worked as a security guard for an
abortion clinic was killed when his work was bombed by Eric Robert Rudolph. In 2000, Ronald
Gay entered a gay bar in Roanoke, VA and opened fire killing Danny Lee Overstreet. Gay, self
described as a Christian soldier doing the Lord‘s work. He was sentenced to life in prison for his
crime.
In Warner‘s final statement he suggests that ―It is time for so-called intellectuals to get
down to the basics of judging Islam by its actual doctrine, not making lame analogies that are
sophomoric assertions. Fact-based reasoning should replace fantasies that are based upon
political correctness and multiculturalism.‖ While it can be said that fanatical Islam should be
recognized and dealt with in accordance to its severity, Christianity and Judaism are by no means
free of criticism on the matter. Both have and do use political violence to their ends and both will
continue to do so as long as they have carte blanche to do so. This is not so much a case of
multiculturalism or political correctness as it is calling things as they are. While fundamentalist
Islam is violent so is fundamentalist Christianity through justified homicide and sanctioned anti-
semitism. Any belief structure which claims ultimate truth will inevitably end up leading to
fanaticism and sanctioned violence against any perceived other.

Copyright © 2011 Kenneth M. Montville

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication can be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the author.

16
Matthew 27:25
17
O'Keefe, Mark. "Anarchy in the name of God". The Oregonian. January 24, 1999.
http://www.rickross.com/reference/a-abortion/a-abortion5.html. Retrieved January 4, 2011.