Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God?

[basics]

Dr Shuu,

I don't quite understand your statement as Mohammed is supposed to be the last word on prophecy whereas the Christian churches do have further provision for prophets, that being one of the three main identifications within its leadership, Prophets, Evangelists and Teachers. Therefore the Gospel that they project has to be the same Gospel that is the power of God unto salvation. Anything else is but a false gospel and this Paul and the other disciples warned of in their letters to the churches. Without exception they all wrote that Jesus Christ is God if not directly by implication because they believed that. That believe was backed up by the prophets and by God Himself who made the very first prophecy about Jesus, the Seed, at the fall of man.

[Cyclops]

Cyclops,

Quote, The ancient Hebrew language that the Hebrew Scriptures were written in did not have vowels. In the original Hebrew, God’s name is given as "YHWH." This is known as the tetragrammaton. Because of the lack of vowels, Bible scholars debate how the tetragrammaton “YHWH” was pronounced.
Contrary to what some Christians (and at least one cult that uses this name) believe, “Jehovah” is probably not the Divine Name revealed to Israel. Due to the Jewish fear of accidentally taking God’s Name in vain (Leviticus 24:16), they basically quit saying it out-loud altogether. Instead, when reading, they substituted the actual tetragrammaton (which is only the consonants of the Divine Name “YHWH” since Hebrew is not usually written with vowels included) with the word Adonai (Lord). Even in the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Old Testament) the translators substituted Kurios (Lord) for the Divine Name. Eventually the vowels from Adonai (“Lord”) or Elohim (“God”) found their way into the consonants YHWH, thus forming “YaHWeH.” But this does not mean that was how God’s Name was originally pronounced.
Any number of vowel combinations are possible, and the Jews are as uncertain of the real pronunciation as are Christians. “Jehovah” is actually a much later (probably 16th century) variant in Latin. Here, the “Y” is substituted with a “J” (Hebrew does not even have a “J” sound), and the “W” with a “V,” plus another vowel combination, resulting in “JeHoVaH.” This vowel combination is composed of the abbreviated forms of the imperfect, the participle, and the perfect of the Hebrew being verb (English “is”) - thus the meaning of Jehovah could be said to be "he who will be, is, and has been."
So, what is God's name and what does it mean? The most likely choice for how the tetragrammaton was pronounced is "Yahweh" or something very similar to that. The name "Yahweh" refers to God's self-existence. "Yahweh" is linked with how God described Himself in Exodus 3:14, "God said to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM.' This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'" God's name is a reflection of His being. God is the only self-existent / self-sufficient Being in the universe. Only God has life in and of Himself. That is the essential meaning of the tetragrammaton / YHWH / Yahweh. Quote.

You've cut and pasted another irrelevant response. Most Christian, most Jewish and most Muslim theologists agree they all follow the God of Abraham. Your incoherent response does nothing to challenge this widely held assertion.

When God had Moses write down the very first depiction of the creation, He began with, " In the beginning Elohim created the heaven and the earth....." Now Elohim is a plural name not depicting that there were many gods, rather the One God with multiple aptitudes or personalities. His use of the word " us " in creation shows these and from these we can see Jesus and the Spirit both working with the Father in creation. This is where Islam and Judaism fail to make the connection with what Abraham was brought to believe but then long before him, Abel began the salvation process when he was made righteous before God which could only have happened through Jesus Christ.

Irrelevant again and incoherent, you assert a plural term means a single God. The Bible contains many clear indications of polytheism despite Christian and other claims to the contrary. All this is irrelevant to the point that most Jews agree that Christians and Muslims worship their God.

I never said that there was an Empire in Syria at the time of Abraham but what Scripture tells us is that he was from Ur which at that time was a place of study and learning.

More incoherence. What "Empire in Syria" are you talking about? You asserted Abraham was an Assyrian, despite the fact he is probably fictional, his putative date in before the Assyrians were ever heard of, and the town of Ur is in southern Iraq and not in what was later Assyrian n territory around Ninevah.

Yes Mohammed makes many claims but the one regarding an angel so-called Gabriel has to be a bit of grasping at straws, why? Because Gabriel had already seen his prediction about Jesus come true so turning up some hundreds of years later to deny what had come true is more than a little far fetched, especially as Paul had told the church at Galatia that even if an angel turned up with another gospel it is no Gospel at all. So, Mohammed wasn't the first nor would he be the last to use angels as the wedge to kill Christianity.

Mahmud didn't claim the Qur'an was a gospel so assertions about angels with Gospels are irrelevant. Mahmud claimed to be the seal of prophets and that has so far been true, neither the B'Hai not Joseph Smith have proved world changing figures like Paul or Mahmud.

No sir, God has never changed His message. Whatever the circumstances the message that Jesus Christ would come in the flesh, die on a cross, be raised after three days thus gathering in a certain people who once reborn would become His church has never changed throughout the centuries and never will, why? Because it has been and is and will be the experience of many who have gone through that life changing work of all the Trinity to take the yoke of sin from off them thus guaranteeing a place in heaven when things are brought here to a conclusion.

Your assertion the church has not changed is patently false. A few moments studying church history will reveal to you the many enormous changes the community of Jesus followers have gone through starting with the Apostles being challenged by the non Apostle Paul over gentile conversion, circumcision etc. Church doctrine changed within a decade or two of Jesus death. This was the first of many changes to come.

Basics I feel you have shown no respect in this discussion. You do not respond to points raised and you cut and paste irrelevant walls of text. I hope you would respect the ToS better.

[Sphere]

There is good evidence that both Allah and Yahweh were plucked out of polytheistic pantheons.

So no. Allah and Yahweh are linked as much as Shiva and Jupiter. Different pantheons.

[basics]

Cyclops,

Of course they do and the fact that the Jews got it wrong was when they crucified their Messias. The Muslim adherence comes by way of Ishmael who was not given the promises afforded to Abraham and Sarah because it was through their line that Messias would come, thus making their claim just as wrong, why? Because Abraham's faith was that Jesus Christ would come, would die for a certain people, and by rising from the grave would set a precedent for them that believe on Him that they too would rise from the grave to eternal life. Neither the Jews nor the Muslims believe that and therefore do not qualify as being of Abraham's seed or faith. Therefore it means that they do not follow the God of Abraham but another god.

Concerning the Trinity, this is another example of why they don't worship the same God but another. The Trinity can be seen from Creation itself and is certainly authorised by the name Elohim, but not only by that but when god declared, " let us make man......" " Us " is the Trinity believed on by all the saints from then on. Why, when Noah came out of the Ark and his son Ham begat Cush and he in turn deified Ninus or Nimrod, his son, Semiramis his wife became in the twisting of the Gospel his mother so that in all depictions of that early apostate religion we find mother, baby Ninus and a dove, the so-called holy spirit as their version of the Trinity. Now that wouldn't have happened if they had not ever known of it.

Abraham was from the city of Ur in the Chaldeas. Quote, Because of a dearth of sources, very little is known of Assyria in the third millennium…Assyria did belong to the Empire of Akkad at times, as well as to the Third Dynasty of Ur. Our main sources for this period are the many thousand Assyrian letters and documents from the trade colonies in Cappadocia, foremost of which was Kanesh (modern Kultepe) (49-50). Quote. Therefore for me to say that he was an Assyrian from Ur in the Chaldeas is quite correct.

Jesus said that He was the I AM, that He was One with the Father, that before Abraham was I AM, that He would send a Comforter to indwell His people and impute His faith into each one. To do this as well as rise from the grave tells us or some of us that He must be God, a claim that the Sanhedrin spotted and plotted therefore to kill Him.

Mohammed claimed that he was the last of the prophets of God and demoted Jesus to being a prophet only yet one that has lied to people. Jesus offers life before death but Mohammed offers nothing unless one is good enough that God might, I repeat might, show them mercy after death. His angelic qualifications are but less than two thousand years old and only came into being by the sword. He turned women into mere slaves for the abasement of men and his Koran is no more than a book of double speak wherein one mustn't lie but one can. One mustn't steal but one can. One mustn't rape but one can. One mustn't kill but one can and probably the greatest of all, one mustn't lie but one can because these so-called messages from God are lies and Jesus Christ remains God. The only truth in your statement is that the Koran is no gospel at all.

Now, concerning the church of Jesus Christ, we must discern what is His church and what is not. He said that only the born again can be His church or ones that get into heaven. Clearly one can see that many linking themselves to Him are in fact not His church. His parables of the wheat and tares and the sheep and goats tell us this. The fact that few ever get in is the telling factor that many are living a lie. They think they are of God but in fact they are not. And since Jesus is to be the Judge of all things when that day comes His church and His church alone will be with Him when the rest are sent away elsewhere, it is hardly a lie that He is just a mere prophet who got it all wrong. It is a travesty of monumental proportions.

Of course in relating what the Scriptures say, it is highly unlikely I can escape offending people, but I make no apologies for that because I repeat what God my Saviour has had written plus I don't want to see anyone end up where they will not want to be when that time comes.

[bigdaddy1204]

There is good evidence that both Allah and Yahweh were plucked out of polytheistic pantheons.

So no. Allah and Yahweh are linked as much as Shiva and Jupiter. Different pantheons.

This is both right, and wrong. The first sentence is correct. The second is not.

'Al lah', 'the most high' was already king of the gods in the polytheistic pre-Muslim period. Allah simply continued as the one Muslim god. As for Yahweh, he appears to have gradually merged with the Israelite god El, whose title was 'the most high'. In short, Allah was El, which in turn became part of Yahweh. The mythology has a shared root.

[PointOfViewGun]

Yes, Christians and Muslims do worship the same god. Why? Because, Muslims acknowledge Christians prophets as prophets and their god as well and they simply believe that their message was corrupted. No, Christians and Muslims do not worship the same god. Why? Because, Christians do not believe that Muhammad was a real prophet.

There is good evidence that both Allah and Yahweh were plucked out of polytheistic pantheons.

So no. Allah and Yahweh are linked as much as Shiva and Jupiter. Different pantheons.

Finding many similarities doesn't make it evidence.

[Dromikaites]

The answer depends on the agenda of who is answering

The most recent popes decided it would be convenient to state the Christians and Muslims worship the same God. Centuries before, the Muslims were considered heathens by the popes of that time.

Likewise, if one asks ISIS' "caliph" one might get a different answer than from asking a mainstream imam.

[Cyclops]

Cyclops,

Of course they do and the fact that the Jews got it wrong was when they crucified their Messias. The Muslim adherence comes by way of Ishmael who was not given the promises afforded to Abraham and Sarah because it was through their line that Messias would come, thus making their claim just as wrong, why? Because Abraham's faith was that Jesus Christ would come, would die for a certain people, and by rising from the grave would set a precedent for them that believe on Him that they too would rise from the grave to eternal life. Neither the Jews nor the Muslims believe that and therefore do not qualify as being of Abraham's seed or faith. Therefore it means that they do not follow the God of Abraham but another god.

Arabs are descended from Ishmael and therefore Abraham. You are not? But their God belongs to you, because of some doctrinal hair splitting?

Concerning the Trinity, this is another example of why they don't worship the same God but another. The Trinity can be seen from Creation itself and is certainly authorised by the name Elohim, but not only by that but when god declared, " let us make man......" " Us " is the Trinity believed on by all the saints from then on. Why, when Noah came out of the Ark and his son Ham begat Cush and he in turn deified Ninus or Nimrod, his son, Semiramis his wife became in the twisting of the Gospel his mother so that in all depictions of that early apostate religion we find mother, baby Ninus and a dove, the so-called holy spirit as their version of the Trinity. Now that wouldn't have happened if they had not ever known of it.

You think here Gods isn't polytheism, and one God is a twisting of monotheism?

Abraham was from the city of Ur in the Chaldeas. Quote, Because of a dearth of sources, very little is known of Assyria in the third millennium…Assyria did belong to the Empire of Akkad at times, as well as to the Third Dynasty of Ur. Our main sources for this period are the many thousand Assyrian letters and documents from the trade colonies in Cappadocia, foremost of which was Kanesh (modern Kultepe) (49-50). Quote. Therefore for me to say that he was an Assyrian from Ur in the Chaldeas is quite correct.

More cut and paste from a source you don't seem to understand. Let me spell it out for you. Ur was in southern Iraq. Assyria was in North east Iraq and eastern Syria. Saying "Abram was an Assyrian because he was born in Ur" Is like saying "William the Conquerer was Irish because he was born in France".

Now I was wrong to say Assyria did not exist at the time of Abraham's putative date, there was a city state (usually under Mesoptamian rule) called Assur at that time (which later attributed to itself king lists culled in part from their master's tradition), although the more famous Assyrian Empire flourished a thousand years later.

Jesus said that He was the I AM, that He was One with the Father, that before Abraham was I AM, that He would send a Comforter to indwell His people and impute His faith into each one. To do this as well as rise from the grave tells us or some of us that He must be God, a claim that the Sanhedrin spotted and plotted therefore to kill Him.

The blood libel is an ugly bigoted tradition. Jesus was killed on orders from a Roman governor using a Roman form of execution (Jewish religious criminals were stoned, you've heard of Stephen the protomatyr?). This unfair hatred of the Jewish tradition which Christianity has so thoroughly plundered is a stain on many Christian traditions.

I know of no scripture where Jesus says "I am YHWH", now that would have got him stoned. He was killed probably for being attributed the title "King of Jews" something the Roman Empire would not allow.

Mohammed claimed that he was the last of the prophets of God and demoted Jesus to being a prophet only yet one that has lied to people. Jesus offers life before death but Mohammed offers nothing unless one is good enough that God might, I repeat might, show them mercy after death. His angelic qualifications are but less than two thousand years old and only came into being by the sword. He turned women into mere slaves for the abasement of men and his Koran is no more than a book of double speak wherein one mustn't lie but one can. One mustn't steal but one can. One mustn't rape but one can. One mustn't kill but one can and probably the greatest of all, one mustn't lie but one can because these so-called messages from God are lies and Jesus Christ remains God. The only truth in your statement is that the Koran is no gospel at all.

You have a very angry and seemingly prejudiced view of Islam. Women were enslaved by the Qur'an? There are at least as many hideous anti-woman laws in the Bible. Mahmud's angelic qualifications are less than 2000 years old? Angels don't exist, the Bible is as phony as the Qur'an in my eyes. You're the one who thinks angels exist, why is this one phony and not the other ones?

Now, concerning the church of Jesus Christ, we must discern what is His church and what is not. He said that only the born again can be His church or ones that get into heaven. Clearly one can see that many linking themselves to Him are in fact not His church. His parables of the wheat and tares and the sheep and goats tell us this. The fact that few ever get in is the telling factor that many are living a lie. They think they are of God but in fact they are not. And since Jesus is to be the Judge of all things when that day comes His church and His church alone will be with Him when the rest are sent away elsewhere, it is hardly a lie that He is just a mere prophet who got it all wrong. It is a travesty of monumental proportions.

Well I think he's not even a prophet, I think he's a misunderstood religious figure who died in agony screaming against the non-existent God he felt had betrayed him.
However all this is off topic. Followers of Islam generously allow the notion that Judaism and Christianity look to the same God. Even most in Judaism sees this, as do most in Christianity. I don't see how your nitpicky doctrinal hairsplitting changes the identity of God.

Of course in relating what the Scriptures say, it is highly unlikely I can escape offending people, but I make no apologies for that because I repeat what God my Saviour has had written plus I don't want to see anyone end up where they will not want to be when that time comes .

Its called bigotry. You're scared of hell and you denigrate the beliefs of others. Your own beliefs have no more basis in fact than any other.

The answer depends on the agenda of who is answering

The most recent popes decided it would be convenient to state the Christians and Muslims worship the same God. Centuries before, the Muslims were considered heathens by the popes of that time.

Likewise, if one asks ISIS' "caliph" one might get a different answer than from asking a mainstream imam.

Well that's still pretty simplified. When Islam first emerged IIRC East Romans thought they were schismatic Nestorians. Some early medieval Franks thought Muslims worshiped of Baphomet (wut?) but others said that about the Templars, so its a common slur. However the identity of the God worshipped in the Abrahamic religions has usually been acknowledged.

Mahmud clearly identified a common deity, the god of heaven or most high which was a concept seemingly entrenched in SW Asia in one form or another (although rarely identified as exclusively monotheistic, Solomon had altars to numerous gods and IIR there were altars to Ashteroth in his Temple maybe at a later date). More specifically he appealed to certain angels (especially Gibreel=Gabriel) as well as prophets (Ibrahim=Abraham) shared in the Jewish (and by appropriation Christian) tradition.

[Winston Smith]

Regardless of the theological stance, Jesus was executed by the Roman Empire, not "the Jews". An ethic group, or an ethno-religous group, cannot execute people. The poltiical organisations they form can, and individuals within a group can commit murder, but I for one find the whole notion of collective guilt to be asburdly illiberal and immoral.

[Dromikaites]

Well that's still pretty simplified. When Islam first emerged IIRC East Romans thought they were schismatic Nestorians. Some early medieval Franks thought Muslims worshiped of Baphomet (wut?) but others said that about the Templars, so its a common slur. However the identity of the God worshipped in the Abrahamic religions has usually been acknowledged.

I think the Christian attitude to Islam in the early days of that religion reflected the common evolution of human thought when confronted with something new.

The first attempt is to try to fit the new thing into the existing framework. The existing Christian framework consisted of the following key ideas:

1) anybody claiming to worship the Abrahamic God in other ways than the Nicean is a heretic (as agreed at Nicea);

2) any prophet coming after Jesus is a false prophet doing the work of Satan (as explicitly spelled out by the Book of Revelations).

As a result in that framework the Muslims could be considered either heretics (the mildest scenario) or Satan worshipers (the most radical one). The Baphomet line was pretty much fleshing out the concept that Muslims are Satan worshipers.

Since the Muslims keep considering Mohamed a true prophet to this day, technically the current pope should also label them as Satan worshipers. What changed though was the popes of the mid and late 20th century came to the conclusion it would be more convenient for their goals to turn a blind eye to the Book of Revelations. At least for now.

Thanks to the 30 Years War, the overwhelming majority of the Christians have become comfortable with a "pick-and-choose" approach to their religion. That war taught them that without a selective interpretation of their holy texts, corpses tend to pile up.

Today only a handful of fundamentalist Christians adhere strictly to the Book of Revelations, which turns into Satan worshipers not only the Muslims but also the Mormons. And some of them would kill witches, prostitutes and homosexuals too, as instructed by the Old Testament, if they could get away with it.

Given that currently the fundamentalist Christians hold no secular power, there is no material gain to be derived from such a stance. Which means the only thing which keeps them going is they hope to be vindicated in the afterlife. After the Judgment Day they will go to Heaven while everybody else with a "pick-and-choose" approach to the New Testament plus the Muslims, the Mormons and the rest of heathens and heretics will burn in Hell.

However back in the early days of Islam, it would have been lucrative to convince enough armed Christians that the Muslims are Satan worshipers. It would have been easy too, thanks to the Muslim appetite for invading territories inhabited by Christians.

The lucrative aspect of a war against Islam and the terrorist attacks against Christians make it possible for the strict interpretation of the Book of Revelations to become mainstream again.

Mahmud clearly identified a common deity, the god of heaven or most high which was a concept seemingly entrenched in SW Asia in one form or another (although rarely identified as exclusively monotheistic, Solomon had altars to numerous gods and IIR there were altars to Ashteroth in his Temple maybe at a later date). More specifically he appealed to certain angels (especially Gibreel=Gabriel) as well as prophets (Ibrahim=Abraham) shared in the Jewish (and by appropriation Christian) tradition.

From a pragmatic point of view it made a lot of sense for Mohamed to both copy heavily from the Abrahamic religions and to advise lenience towards the "People of the Book". That way his message would sound familiar and therefore more easily accepted by the potential converts and there would be less resistance to subjugation from the Christians and Jews.

[basics]

Cyclops,

Arabs may well be descended from Ishmael but Ishmael had no part of the promises given to Abraham and Sarah regarding their seed being that from which Jesus came. So, why was that? Why it was so, is because Jesus Christ was already ordained to be the Lamb of God sacrificed before the foundations of the world coming into the world by way of Abraham and Sarah. That was what Abraham believed and it was accounted as being righteous before God. It was by that faith that the people of God can only be found. Indeed it was by that faith that God chose Isaac's offspring to be the people to carry the oracles of God them being the Israelites so called because Isaac's son Jacob had his name changed to Israel by God. Ishmael had no part in this.

Now regarding the crucifixion of Christ the reason why both Jew and Gentile have blood on their hands is because both were involved in His death. The Jews manipulated Pilate into carrying it out and both Jews and Gentiles carried out the beatings that He endured before going on the cross, never mind the fact that all of them were sinners anyway. The Jews never got hold of what the prophets had written about His crucifixion many centuries before and the Romans were quite ignorant of these prophecies altogether although it must be said that there were one or two converts among the latter before His death. It meant that on His death and resurrection all them that had been accounted righteous before God prior to the crucifixion had their accounts cleared by His blood in real terms just as those who are born again since, even them still to be born.

You say there is nothing in Scripture that says Jesus is God and I say that the whole Scripture tells us that He is. For example Thomas' exclamation when he fell at His feet to declare, " My Lord and my God." Not to say anything of Him healing lepers, the blind, the maimed, walking on water, calming the waves and winds and leaving behind an empty tomb. And then there is John's vision of Jesus, the Alpha and Omega, standing at the throne of God. There is no Scripture that says such a thing so you say. What kind of Bible have you read because all the versions I have declare the very same things that I mention?

So, where does that leave God in the eyes of men? The Bible tells us that God is Father, Son and Holy Ghost and that the Son, Jesus Christ is the only Mediator between God and man or vice versa. Muslims and Jews don't believe that yet it was Abraham's faith just as it was the faith of Abel, Enoch, Noah, Shem, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Caleb, Samson and many others. And Gabriel not only appeared to Mary and Joseph but to Elizabeth and Zechariah declaring the names of the babies when born but also their purpose in coming into the world. It was therefore quite convenient for Mohammed to incur Gabriel into his system as most people then who knew of Jesus did believe in angels and the power they wielded because they were of God in Jesus' case. As Jesus said, if they knew both Abraham and Moses on different occasions then they the people would have known of Him because that is what they, Moses and Abraham preached and believed.

So no, they do not worship the same God. They worship what they imagine to be God most of which comes from the dead letter of Scripture, that mainly being the Old Testament. To them there then cannot be a New Testament since to them God cannot die which is quite true. But if God as is declared in Scripture, Father, Son and Holy Spirit then for One part of Him to come in the flesh, die and rise again after having cleared sin from certain people, it was because he could die quite legally and also set up a New Covenant or Testament in or by His blood. That is exactly what all Scripture is about. It's why Scripture is there. And if it wasn't there then Judaism and Islam would never exist nor would any other religion for that matter. They only exist because of God's word and that going all the way back to the garden of Eden and the fall.

[Holger Danske]

Is it really relevant when they're equally wrong?

[basics]

Is it really relevant when they're equally wrong?

Holger Danske,

It is to God.

[Winston Smith]

Holger Danske,

It is to God.

Do you think your god is really so petty as to care as to the difference between Catholics, Shia, Sunni, Lutheran, etc?

[nce_wht_guy]

Is it really relevant when they're equally wrong?

This x1000. It's like comic book nerds arguing over what stories should be canon.

[Col. Tartleton]

Both religions say they worship the one true god. Therefore they would have to argue that it must be the same god because its in their interest. Christians claiming Mohammad was a false prophet and Muslims claiming the Christians worship Christ as a God rather than venerating him as a prophet which is heresy.

Christians believe Jesus was the incarnation of God. Muslims do not believe Jesus was an incarnation of Allah. Therefore they are in fact different gods.

[Cyclops]

<snip>.

Good points, a lot to think about. I'd add that Christianity stand in the same relation to Judaism as Islam does to Christianity and Judaism in that there's a Jewish tradition about a deity (probably shared with other groups in the ME) which Christian adopt wholesale and then tell the Jews "yeah you were right up to this bit when we appeared, then we're right. Oh and we changed the significance of this bit".

If you look at the Qur'an it recites a lot of stuff that's in the Bible (but iwas also likely part of a shared Mesopotamian/Syrian/Canaanite/Egyptian mythic inheritance too). It attributes actions to do with Eden, the flood etc to Allah which in the Torah are attributed to the god who was later edited to be called YHWH. They identify the common deity explicitly as the same. Likewise Christians even more blatantly lift the Jewish texts (containing many shared stories and stuff culled from other sources) and say "that's our God, let us tell you where you went wrong". Hairspliters and people who have had "their" traditions adopted wholesale can get butthurt about it but they are the same imaginary guy and treated as such by most members of all three religions.

This extends from the Islamic concept of "the people of the book", to the Christian "sharing" of Jewish beliefs like messiahs and Kingdoms of God, to the practical level of Christians and Muslims sharing shrines all over the middle east.

You're right at a political level some leaders defined the other religions as 'the enemy" and put whatever motivational label on them was required. However I would argue most people at moist times have believed and acted as though they believe its the same God.

...
You say there is nothing in Scripture that says Jesus is God and I say that the whole Scripture tells us that He is.....

Come on, chapter an verse, where does Jesus say "I am the Messiah"? Not some sick person or someone seeing a ghost blurting it out, where does Jesus of Nazareth say "I am the Messiah, the son of God".

...So no, they do not worship the same God. They worship what they imagine to be God most of which comes from the dead letter of Scripture, that mainly being the Old Testament.....

Where your proof is derived?

[classical_hero]

Allah has no son, but Jehovah does. Nor do they believe that God is 3 person in one as Christians do. Muslims do not believe the Jesus is the Son of God, Christians do. Therefore Muslims and Christians do not worship the same God.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Autho...pical/ch20.htm

[MaximiIian]

Ostensibly, yes. How they conceive that god is rather different. But the doctrines in both religions assert rather clearly that the god they worship is the same god described in the Jewish holy books.

[basics]

Cyclops,

When Jesus told the Sanhedrin members that, " Before Abraham was, I AM." that was a direct affirmation to them of Whom He was. But there are many others which can be found in John 14:9, Mark 2:5-7, John 5:17-18, Isaiah 43:25, Col !:17, Tim 3:16, John 1:1, John 10:33, Romans 1:4, Hebrews 1:10, Tim 2:5, and John 8:58, which directly or indirectly point to the Divine nature of Jesus. And since it is written that Jesus Christ is the only Mediator between man and God it follows that those that don't believe that, don't follow the same God, why? Because that Mediator came in the flesh as God with us and now sits at the Father's right hand waiting to return to judge all things. So, once again the god Jews and Muslims worship is not the same God.