My whole point is that if one doesn't adopt the "Christianity came first" perspective, and looks at Islam objectively, within the framework of Islam Allah = God = Yahweh. Christians disagree because of the Trinity. Islam doesn't say it's a different God, it says that God has no progeny.
I'm not saying the religions and all their fine details are the same. I'm saying that the groundwork, traced back to Abraham and earlier prophets before Jesus, is common. Again, to Christians if Muslims believe that God did not have a son, then to them Islam is a false religion. To Muslims Jesus was a divinely inspired prophet but not divine himself, and they believe some aspects of Christianity to have been misinterpreted or skewed.
This is going in circles so I think I may give up. I'm not trying to convince anybody, I just want you to see that to many people (including all Muslims) it's the same God among the three faiths. In one of the faiths God has a son. In the others He doesn't.
Comparing Vishnu to Allah/Yahweh/God is inapplicable. We are not talking about Vishnu. And I already answered Akwat's questions by illustrating that Christianity says the only way to Heaven is through Jesus - how is that different than Islam saying others will go to Hell unless converting to Islam? It's funny that you keep ignoring this.
Akwat - you interpret Islam's stance of Judaism and Christianity being corrupted as Islam saying they believe in a different God. That is incorrect. The Quran doesn't say that and your argument is invalid. Your quote does not say it's a different God anywhere. Islam says that the scriptures of The Old/New Testaments were partially corrupted by man. That is why The Quran is written as the actual word of God.
I'm repeating myself because you are repeatedly ignoring the very fact that The Quran states repeatedly that Allah is the God of Abraham. You've ignored this because it contradicts your viewpoint. You've also ignored the fact that The Bible condemns nonbelievers to hell as well.
The ROTJ and sequel analogy doesn't work because you're essentially saying The Bible is authentic and The Quran is an illegitimate knockoff, written by a different author, at odds with the original work. Once again, The Quran is meant to be an extension of those previous teachings while correcting what it says are errors in how those faiths approached aspects of belief in God.
Judaism considers itself to be the final monotheistic faith (as to them Jesus was not the Messiah). Christianity considers itself to be final as Jesus was the son of God. Islam considers itself to be final because it is the word of God.
I don't know which one is correct (if any), but your perspective in this argument depends on which faith you have. Christians will say the Muslim God is different. Muslims will say it's the same God (but He didn't have a son). I'm not sure what Jews will say...
You guys are saying what Islam says can't be resolved with Christianity because Christianity came first (ROTJ vs hack sequel). Then within that logic Christianity can't be resolved with Judaism, because Judaism came first. Which is the original work then - Judaism or Christianity? If one is consistent, we'd say Judaism is the original.
By using the different author idea, you're holding Islam to be illegitimate w/ respect to Christianity. I don't feel this is an objective view on the matter.
I'm trying to convey that, without ruling out Islam because it came after Christianity, the common denominator is the same God.
I really don't have much more to provide on this. I'd like to find common ground. Maybe someone else can chime in from either or both perspectives?