comparative religion

Let me explain, in a simplified fashion, how I see different religions.
There are those which emphasize the conscious mind, notably the Tradition of Abraham and Buddhism; and those which exalt subconscious or even visceral functions, such as Hinduism, secular inhumanism, and the like.
Among those who emphasize the conscious mind, the Tradition of Abraham is distinguished by belief in a personal God who is the source of good.
The Tradition of Abraham has a logical - not historical - division at Sinai. The Mussadek, including, of course, Christians, are strongly aware of original sin, even those such as deny the doctrine in that form, such as some Eastern Orthodox Christians. The Moslems seem to lack this awareness, although they do understand that there is a lot of sin in the world. The split is not between Christians and Moslems but between Mussadek and Moslems.
The Mussadek have split into Jews, crystallizing at the time of Ezra; Samaritans; and Yemenites. The main difference here, I think, is that Jews eschew collective responsibility and insist that each man shall die for his own sin(Jr 31:29-30). Obviously there are exceptions galore, but that is the basic distinguisher, I claim, of Judaism from Samaritanism and, I presume, from Yemenitism, of which I know very little. All three kinds of Mussadek have much the same Torah, but much development is distinctly Jewish.
The Jews at the beginning of the Common Era split into Christians, crystallizing at the Council of Jerusalem(Ac 15:6-29); Rabbinical Jews, crystallizing at the Council of Jamnia; and Falashas, about whom I know little. The difference is that Christians accept that Jesus is Messiah, while Rabbinical Jews reject him because he taught that the Law could not contradict itself(e.g. Mk 3:1-6); I do not know why Falashas reject him.