Islam, Judaism and Christianity – which one, if any, is true?

If we take the three main theistic religions – Islam, Judaism and Christianity – one of which is believed broadly by almost half of the world’s population – we find they have several striking similarities.


All share belief in an all knowing, all powerful creator God who made the universe.


All share belief in a judgement and an afterlife

– in angels and devils

– in scriptures and prophets

– in a similar ethical code


All share belief that God has intelligibly revealed his will in the course of history and strikingly all began in Middle East and trace themselves back to a common ancestor Abraham who once lived in what is now Southern Iraq.


The similarities are astounding – but there are profound differences too – and the most striking difference between them is in their beliefs about one person Jesus Christ.


The traditional Jewish view is that Jesus was a sorcerer and a false prophet who led people astray and died on a Roman cross.


Muslims see him as a prophet of God who spoke God’s word who didn’t die but was taken up to heaven by God whilst still alive.


Click here to continue reading…


One thought on “Islam, Judaism and Christianity – which one, if any, is true?

  1. Most of what you claim to be true is based entirely on” information” found in the gospels. This “information” is not evidence by any normal standards. It is just a classic case of “it would say that wouldn’t it”.
    You claim, and I quote,” in fact apart from the four biblical historians accounts there is substantial evidence for his [Jesus] existence from contemporary Roman and Jewish historians like Tacitus and Josephus.
    This is not true. Most of these often quoted chestnuts [Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius and the Younger Pliny] only make passing reference to some character called Jesus and the Josephus reference is heavily interpolated as you well know, or should know. The fact that early Christianity saw fit to forge Josephus’ records [Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18, Ch. 3, paragraph 3] to include reference to the resurrection in Jerusalem confirms beyond reasonable doubt that there never were any independent records of the Jerusalem resurrection. Had any such independent records ever existed, the early church would have ensured their survival and forgery would not have been necessary. The only so called evidence for this resurrection is that found in, and only in, the New Testament, and as I said earlier “it would say that wouldn’t it”.
    If you disagree with my assertions about the lack of any independent evidence, perhaps you would be kind enough to share your source(s).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s