I think you can look at the Bible and see more violence:

Cruelty and Violence in the Old Testament

Meanwhile the Koran explicitly states:

The Koran

I am getting to contradicting arguments here both of them are trying to say that the Bible and Christianity is wrong and Islam is at least alright if not good. One says that the Bible is too old and so is the Koran so we can ignore them. The other is saying that the Bible encourages violence and the Koran encourages love.

The Bible and the Koran are taken by millions of people to be holy and without fault and these millions do influence the world. We can't ignore them just because they are old. Things that are old are held at a much higher value to many. And yes I have read the old testament. Most of it is accounts of things that happened. Yes, in the Old Testament God orders the Israelites to kill all the Canaanites. But Jews and Christians are completely different, Christians believe that the Jews are not saved nor are going to heaven. What Christians believe is that there is a new law not the stuff in the old Testament, but the new testament. Nowhere in the New Testament does it tell Christians to kill of be violent. Also please find me something I you wish, historically wrong with the Bible and I will find a answer for you. I haven't read the Koran and am not claiming that it says to live peacefully with everyone in the link you gave me, but I believe it does say to be violent in other parts of the Koran I am going to look for that now and will get back to you when I do.

I also want to let you know that I respect your views and am just trying to learn more not try to argue with anyone.

Ok, found some pretty clear violence in the Koran:

Koran 8:37

Koran 21:11

Koran 44:43-50

If you want example of violence in the Koran, I noticed a link on the previous link:

Cruelty in the Quran

Also another for the New Testament:
Cruelty and Violence in the New Testament

Still, objectively comparing the violence in the books, my point is that the Bible contains more violence (and probably should be rated R). IMO this refutes the claim that the Koran is a *more* violent book than the Bible. One can make excuses for the violent commandments in the Old Testament, but this doesn't make it go away.

Alright we agree they are both pretty violent.

I am a Muslim who is living in Turkey.Maybe you need my views and thoughts to think a little bit more clear.

Holy Koran forbids killing human being.There is some verses(sayings) in Koran , killing one human is equal to killing all humanity.

The idea of Jihad is totaly misunderstood.Crusades are declared to invade Muslim lands.In Jihad view , you cant do that.You can only defend your lands and your nation.You cant declare Jihad on "Vienna" or "Moscov".That is the most distinguish fact where Jihad differs from Crusade.

In fact, all living people , independent which religion they own,have the basic idea of Jihad.
Scenario :
You are living on France.You possess peacefull ideas and believe in democracy.Germany invades your homeland , you become slaves.Wouldnt you defend your homeland ?Wouldnt you accept dying for your country , your friends, your environment?You dont need to be too much nationalist for that...The basic idea of Jihad is that.

However some witless Muslims , have lack of education about both their religion and ethical thoughts , prefer to kill themself in order to kill invaders of their country(It happens in Iraq and Afganistan )Although THE WAY OF execution is wrong , the intention to killing is right.

All religions and nations have good and bad people.Its the theme of "black and white".Some deviant idea of Christianism inquisitory was torturing scientists in Middle Age,some deviant idea of Islam is bombing some buildings in England.There will be always bad people in all world.

Your views and perspective are most welcome here. Thank you for posting.

How do you explain all the killing that happen outside a jihad's motherland ? Is that self defense ?

Its the human nature to get more control and become more powerful.You cant explain attacking other countries with religion or something else , because there will be heavy casulties in human lifes, Koran says in case of death when you are trying to defend your homeland,you will be given a special status in afterlife.Nevertheless it doesnt advices to kill and gain more lands.It is the man who believes that should be done...Religion cant be a reason to invasion.Unless there will be great reason to invasion ,i am unwilling to fight.

And I can hear that you will ask Ottoman Empire's politics and why they attacked all over Europe?.Their invasion reason was "spreading the Muslim over the world" which seems a rubbish to me... You can do it by imams and missionary too.

@lastsurvior
I really appreciate your point of view.
They're a Hebrew saying:
"He who saves a single life, it is as he has saved the entire world"
which is more or less analogue to your Koranic quote.

...........

.........

If all muslims thought like this:
and all Jews thought like this:
the Middle East would be a peaceful place.

Hey lastsurvivior, thanks so much for your input. It is pretty clear to me now that there is always a few bad people in every country and religion.

Not all Muslims, not even the majority. Unfortunately, not enough of them are proactively trying to reform their religion, and purge it of those who give it a bad name. Worse, there's a surprising percentage who implicately support terrorist tactics, even if not actually contributing to them directly.

Bottom line: Its a big problem in the world today.

Playing the moral equivelancy card is so pathetically lame and unimaginative. Here's some reasons why that is dumb.

The guy is talking about the present, not the middle ages.

There has been no world-wide plague of Christians laucnching attacks on innocents and non-Christians for religious reasons in the last century.

What is an "oriental" in your mind? I assume you are using the word as it orignally meant and mean Arabs?

So you have your answer to your questions: no, and not at all.

So am I.

You were the one calling Muslims animals on every occasion. Isn't only this proof enough?

That's kind of the problem, Islamic Terrorists are in a very middle ages mindset and broadly fail to recognise that. The majority of the Western world has been at least quasi-democratic for around 2 or 3 centuries, extreme religous values and acting violently to defend ones faith has been slowly phased out as the countries, economies and societies evolve. In many parts of the world where Islam is prevelent the country and society has not been through the stabilising processes that have resulted in democracy, the rule of law and religious and cultural tolerance in the West. These countries and societies are still in a state of material and social deprevation, tribal tendencies and extreme religious vigilantes have not yet been phased out by progression of society; people believe all knowledge is contained in one book, the Koran, much as western people did in the middle ages with the Bible. And also as Western people did in the middle ages they feel duty bound to uphold their family, country and religious against outside influences as much as possible; this kind of enviroment means greivences are haboured for many decades as children inherit a sense of who on their side and who isn't from their parents. Interestingly, crusades have already been mentioned in this thread, in the kind of enviroment I have described it is entirely possible that many Islamists still hate the West over the events of centuries ago.

In Europe, Oriental usually refers to the inhaibitants of South East Asia.

One of the things I learned from this forum is that that doesn't apply for the US.

Mega Churches, prayers in the senat, presidents who think they're send by god, "in god we trust" on the money, creationism teached in some schools, pupils getting "outlawed" because of being atheists, and so on.

Depends on which states your talking about I suppose, but I was talking about the things are in the UK as that is my experience of the Western world, I think that the UK we are politically closer to Europe than the US even if our leaders don't show it.