Meh... religion adapts to economic realities and politics. Islam being more violent just means that the governments in Muslims majority countries are less stable. Back when the Islamic world was the more economically prosperous and political stable, it was the Christian world that was backward and violent. Historically liberalism is a luxury we get when there's political stability and the rule of law functions. The lack of liberal forces just means people have more immediate concerns other than idealistic battles to be fought. Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and so on.
How religions turn out, I think is mostly accidents of history.
What wisdom can be found in current world religions are actually universal. They all make similar claims. Ie, it's better to forgive than to take revenge. Such "wisdom" can also be found in secular science and modern psychology text books. They all teach the importance of taking time out from your day for meditation/prayer/introspection. The importance of slowing down and not being in such a hurry in life. We don't need religion for any of this. And they're all interchangeable in this regard.
Modern psychological research also teaches us that humans need meaningful goals in life. If we don't we become unhappy. We lose our passions and momentum in life. Religion has solved this by making shit up. I'm sorry, but I think truth is a virtue. Something Christians and Muslims clearly don't share. Or they'd have shut up about God and Heaven a long time ago. Also here I think all world religions are comparable. They all make bullshit supernatural claims, that may or may not be metaphors. I would have appreciated if the Bible clearly labelled metaphor where the passages are such. The fact that so many Christians believe in magic, is obviously a failure.
Or success, if you think Christianity was intended as a con job right from the start.
But the study is misleading at the core because it does not take in account the fact that the Bible is actually the equivalent of the Quran+Hadith+sunna of Muhammad, muslims take the Quran as being the 'uncreated' word of god (a huge stumbling block, unlike the situation in Christianity and even Judaism, see below*), the laws in the Leviticus and Deuteronomy are not considered binding for Christians, the status of unaided Human Reason is different in islam and the other Abrahamic religions (not an accident that in islam we have 'slaves' of allah whilst in the other religions we have 'servants' of god, Job for example can even argue with god), the morality in Islam is what allah wants (even if completely immoral in our eyes) whilst in the other religions the inner nature of god is morality and can be known independently of revelation (that's why Job can argue with god in face of sheer injustice), it's rather straightforward to contextualize violence in the past in the case of Christianity and very difficult to do so in Islam (if the 'perfection' of the Quran and Muhammad is retained) and so on.
Bah. The Bible also teaches Christians to not get involved in politics. Which of course makes it immoral. But Christians still have gotten involved in politics anyway. So clearly that message hasn't worked. Which is good.
Tina Magaard is a minor researcher. She's got barely any pull in the academic community. Jihadwatch is a fake news site. So... well done quoting them. That's just proves that you're not that concerned about what is true.
* as Bernard Lewis puts it well in one of his books:
Arthur Jeffery’s book was entitled Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur’an: The Old Codices, 1937. To his horror, his study was immediately denounced and publicly burnt by order of the leading Muslim religious authorities at Al-Azhar Mosque and University. Professor Jeffery...had excellent relations with the people at Al-Azhar, and was the more startled and horrified by their reaction to his book. He pointed out that what he was doing was no different from what the most pious Christians and Jews do to the texts of the Old and New Testaments.
The Nazis also burned books. Does that prove that all Christians are intolerant of dissenting opinions and evil? Or has this to do with the prevailing politics of the country. But... since this happened in Turkey, a more liberal Islamic country, makes me think that this was either not true, or there's more to the story.
To which they replied, “But that is different. The Koran is not like the Bible. The Koran is the word of God.” By this they were not merely casting doubt on the authenticity or accuracy of the Jewish and Christian scriptures. They were pointing to the profound difference between Muslim perceptions and Judeo-Christian perceptions of the very nature of scripture. For Christians and Jews, the Bible consists of a number of books, written at different times and in different places, divinely inspired, but mostly committed to writing by human beings. For Muslims, the Koran is one book, divine, eternal and uncreated. It is not simply divinely inspired; it is literally divine and to question it in any way is blasphemy.
Who gives a shit? Newsflash, humans wrote both the Quran and Bible. God was not involved. Obviously.
And superficial it is indeed. Primarily given the existing evidence, at least the last 70 years are totally relevant: in spite of a long exposure of Islam to Modernity 'the end of the tunnel' is not in sight, we still witness extreme violence and the liberal forces are still extremely weak all over the Islamic world where Islam is majoritarian. Finally even if the quran and the bible were equally violent at the theoretical level it would still be valid that islam is more violent at the practical level. 
