|
I don't know enough about either to comment, but I think it's entirely possible for one to be much more violent than the other. I don't think it's just a matter of how many violent passages that elude to violence but the substance of it. For example, one book could preach about human sacrifices for various reasons while another could preach about directing violent acts towards specific individuals or groups (eg. non-believers). Both can be considered violent but would likely have very different implications in the real world when practiced.
You would also have to consider the non-violent passages and the underlying philosophies of each book to put the violent passages into context, and how the majority of their believers interprets them (literally vs metaphorically).
As a non-religious person, I think neither book should be taken seriously. But I can't ignore that they are by many.
|