I accept the fact that many atrocities have been committed in the name of Christ with supposed support from the Bible, just as many atrocities have been committed by Muslims on the basis of the Qur’an.
But there is a significant difference.
The passages in the Qur’an which tell Muslims to lie, hate, fight, and kill for the sake of their religion are universal commandments which are meant to be obeyed by all Muslims in all eras. In contrast, there are no passages in the Bible which tell Christians to lie, hate, fight, and kill. The passages in the Bible where God’s people were commanded to pillage and slaughter are specific incidents authorised by God for a specific local temporary context. Those passages are narratives of what God did through his people at a particular point in history, but they are not commandments to be universally and perpetually obeyed.
Therefore there is no justification in the Bible for any of the shameful things that have been done by Christians. The Bible does not give any Christian an open invitation to indulge in terrorism. However, Muslims who commit violence and destruction have ample justification for their actions from the Qur'an.
Another contrast between Christianity and Islam is the difference in the character of Jesus Christ and Mohammed. Jesus challenged his enemies to name one sin he was guilty of, but no-one could pin anything on him. But Mohammed brutally abused, intimidated, and murdered his enemies, not just in self-defence (as it is commonly reported by Muslims) but in order to spread Islam. So when Christians commit atrocities, they are betraying the very person they claim to follow. But when Muslims commit such acts, they are following the example of their prophet.
The violence in the Old Testament does not contradict the teaching of Jesus Christ. The law about 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth' is part of the civil legislation given to the nation of Israel - it was a guide for judges who had to decide on punishments in legal court cases. It was nothing to do with a private individual exacting personal revenge on a neighbour. Furthermore, the aim of 'an eye for an eye' was to restrict the penalty to match the crime and to stop it being harsher than deserved - it was not meant to intensify punishment of criminals but to limit it.
Passages in the book of Joshua regarding the extermination of the Canaanites are significantly different from the early history of Islam and the violence perpetrated by Mohammed. Hundreds of years before the invasion of Canaan, God had told Abraham that the sins of the people living in Canaan had not yet reached its limit, but when the Canaanites had defiled the land to its limit, then the land was going to "vomit them out". (In fact, God later warned the nation of Israel to be careful not to repeat the sins of the previous people, otherwise the land was going to vomit them out too.) So the Israelite invasion of Canaan consisted of God using the Israelites as an instrument of justice to purge the land of its sinfulness. Later in history God used other nations such as the Assyrians and the Babylonians as his instruments to cleanse the land by destroying the Israelites for their own sinfulness.
So the principle behind the violent invasion of Canaan was God's holiness and his punishment of sin. The destruction of the Canaanites was not a model for succeeding generations of Israelites to copy by invading other territories and destroying other nations, but God only intended the Israelites to mete out just punishment on the Canaanites for their sinfulness, and then for the Israelites to occupy the land and establish themselves as a peaceful nation which stayed within its own borders and only went to war in self-defence.
In contrast there is no mention of divine holiness and its opposition to sin in the accounts of Mohammed's raids and wars. Instead, the primary motivation was looting of Mohammed's enemies and obtaining the spoils of war, enlarging Mohammed's dominion and spreading Islam, and earning a place in Paradise. This is the conclusion of the most ancient Muslim biography of Mohammed, written by Ibn Ishaq in the second century of the Islamic era (translated by A. Guillaume, published by Oxford University Press, 1955).
In contrast to the one-off invasion of Canaan by the Israelites, the Qur'an contains general commands to kill and destroy the enemies of Islam, which are applicable for all times and places and peoples. Even after the death of Mohammed, Muslim splinter groups fought and killed even each other in the name of God. The history of Islam down to the present day consists of various Muslims appealing to Qur'anic passages to justify them killing their enemies.
Phiz