The Koran, in it's raw text, is not any more or less violent than the old testament
No... It is not, there is a whole load of "smiting" in the bible, a bunch of killing, and a whole load of really (in modern terms) quite horrible stuff about how slavery is OK (provided you only keep slaves from out of town), about how women are property, I think that there is no specific guidance as to the age it's appropriate to start sleeping with women. (there is a website somewhere that compares the similarities asking you to guess whether verses came from the Koran or Bible.
And indeed along with all the harsh words that god had to say in the Koran there is specific guidance as to when you should sleep with a woman in Muslim texts (as in what age is appropriate)... but you have to ask why?
i would expect that if people need to be told that they have to wait for a young girl to develop before they have sex with her, it's because that was not the custom at the time (to wait)! - so all these Christians who are saying "dude was a peado" have to think... by today standards (which have evolved) yes (well... maybe, there is nothing in the book that says Mohammed actually slept with his 9 year old wife)... but standards were much different back then, and second there must have been a whole lot of child raping going on in the "predominantly Christian lands" for there to have needed to be specific restrictions put in place!
Pretty much everything that "we" (western folks) say oh I can't believe it says that, was most likely a vast improvement in the standards of life at the time.
(think about it, lets pretend that I'm the leader of a new religion, today, it doesn't matter how popular 'my' religion is, or how much of a truth that i may speak, if I walk into a primary school to choose a wive, I'm not going to have many followers the next day -I certainly won't be founding the next major religion... -this must have been socially acceptable at the time.
(anyway... old testament times = bad, new testament times, = a bit better for some)
it's not the
difference between the texts that are the issue though, so much as the way in which they are presented.
The bible is presented as the words of god transcribed by man, as a fluid text, because the bible and religion is framed in a context of evolving, whilst is is an unchanging law, it's also not an unchanging law, there is a dogmatic element, (Christians believe that Jesus spoke the word of God, was the son of God, and those things *must* be true because they are written in the bible.) but at the same time.
Even though Jesus says that the Hebrew scriptures (that we call the old testament) are true, there are contradictions in other things that he write, (so God goes from vengeful to loving) Additionally, given that the church has adopted many books, up to and including over a millennium after Jesus dies... it's safe to say that "the written interpretation of the word of God" can change... the bible in a lot of places doesn't say anything, meaning there are some quite key things in life where you may need to know how to behave, and you can infer "how to be a good christian" but you can't just go and loo kit up.
The Koran on the other hand, says a lot. arguably it is more strict,(because it says a lot more past a key message or look after each other) (though possibly with good reason), there is a lot of detail about what can and cannot be done. and it is very dogmatic, there is no evolution of the Koran, past the immediate times of Mohammed, and because it says a lot more, and is a lot more specific about a lot more things, there is a lot less "wiggle" room to justify things. there are no "what would Mohammed do" memes because to visually represent Mohammed would be bad, and you don't need to ask as it's right there is black and white! (not exhaustively obviously)