Read the Bible then read the Qur’an. A reasonably literate person should observe these basic, striking differences between the two texts. The HRS fails because it assumes far more than it can prove. The popular appropriation of the HRS in the current controversy fails for the same reason: it cannot account for actual particular facts. Moses is not Muhammad. Jesus is not Joseph Smith. He did not claim to have received a new, superior revelation.

It has been a conviction of a certain segment of scholars since at least the middle period of the German Enlightenment that all religions are essentially the same. The current twin controversies in the West (chiefly Europe and the USA) over what to do with Muslim “refugees” (a disputed term of discussion) and recent violent Jihadist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino have provided an opportunity some apologists for one side of this social argument to defend their case by flattening out the differences between the Qur’an and the Holy Bible.

Tension with and fear of Muslim immigrants seems to be rising across the West. In Oslo and in Germany  the number of violent attacks (e.g., rapes) attributed to Muslims has skyrocketed in recent months. Americans are afraid of more episodes like San Bernardino in the USA, which has seen a number of Jihadist attacks (e.g., Fort Hood, Boston, Houston, Chattanooga, Moore, OK) since 9/11, when 2,996 Americans were murdered by Muslim Jihadists.  In reaction both in Europe and in the USA Nationalism seems to be on the rise. Just yesterday a populist/nationalist political candidate in the USA called for a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration to the USA.

The History Of Religions School
These moves have provoked a counter-reaction arising from the old History of Religions School (Religionsgeschichte Schule; hereafter HRS), which says all religions are essentially the same. When offensive portions of the Qur’an (e.g., those calling for the death of infidels) are highlighted for discussion those who  operate under the assumption of the HRS make a tu quoque (you also) argument to the effect that anyone who holds to the Bible is disqualified from criticizing the Qur’an because just as many equally offensive passages (e.g., this video currently circulating or this NPR article arguing that the Bible is more violent than the Qur’an) can be found in the Bible as in the Qur’an.

The Actual History Of Religions
Is the Bible morally equivalent to the Qur’an? Let us make some distinctions. In a time, in the West, when people were generally more culturally literate, this sort of explanation would not have been necessary, but as we descend into a new dark ages in which most in the West have never read the classics, let alone the Bible or the Qur’an, some sort of response is necessary. The term Bible (book) refers to a complex document composed of 66 books traditionally understood to have been written beginning about 1500 BC and completed in the early 90s AD, in three languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek). In those 66 books one finds a wide array of literary genres and teaching.

Read More