I'm disappointed at the lack of argument here after 2 pages. Let's see if I can help.
collegestudent22 wrote:There are fundamental differences between the three.
I agree, but they're no more fundamental than the differences between (for example) many Christian sects.
Jews believe that they are waiting for a savior,
Most probably do. Some don't.
and are currently "saved" through ritual sacrifice.
No, Jews don't do ritual sacrifices. They used to back when they had a temple (you know, thousands of years ago), but now they just pray like everybody else. Most mainstream Jews today feel that sacrifice was just a way for God to teach primitive-minded people about religion, and that he never intended it to be a permanent thing.
Christians, however, believe that the savior has come in Christ, and therefore follow his teachings
Very few do. Even those who think they do seem amazingly selective and creative, "interpreting" certain statements so hard they even turn them into their opposites in some cases. Somehow "rich people can't go to heaven" has now been translated to "only rich people go to heaven", for example. BTW, if you own a computer, you are probably in the top 1% of the world's population in terms of wealth. Just sayin'.
namely that it is through belief in Christ and the sacrifice on the Cross, followed by the Resurrection, that saves them.
Not necessarily. Some believe that the pre-Christian pagans may have had a path to salvation, and some believe that those who have never been exposed to Christianity (and ergo have no "belief in Christ") might have one too. In particular, the pope (I'm sure you don't like him, but he's one of those who many people consider a Christian leader) thinks that unbaptized babies might be able to go to heaven.
And Islam says that the interpretation the Jews and Christians have is somehow flawed and "incomplete"
Most religions say this about all other religions. You believe that the interpretation of the Muslims is flawed and that of the Jews is incomplete (without the New Testament), for instance.
(yet still from a perfect God?),
Nope. They don't believe that your interpretation comes from God, they believe that you and your ancestors have distorted and perverted Jesus' teachings. (History largely agrees, interestingly enough.)
and the real way to be saved is to perfectly follow the Qu'ran's teachings on good works, etc.
Just like your holy book teaches that you cannot "inherit the kingdom of God" if you commit any of a long, long list of offenses including eating shellfish (unless you disavow the Old Testament) or wearing earrings in church (unless you disavow the New Testament).
(Which means I guess UBL isn't saved, even according to Islam, as he was all watching porn and ordering Coke up in his Pakistani mansion.)
Actually, he was famously pious, often giving generous banquets and then eating only the scraps to teach himself humility. He really believed all that silly stuff about the virgins and whatnot.
Science is both the how and the why to me.
For many other people Science is the how; Religion is the why.
I would be interested in how you answer the question of "why" with a scientific approach, given that "why" is a question of meaning.
I'm not him, but can I answer? First, I'm not sure "why" is a question of meaning. To me it sounds more like a question of purpose. People can create their own purpose, and they can also look to nature to discover our original purpose (survival and reproduction). He could also have meant that his own purpose is to learn about the universe -- science itself.
Science could explain how my computer works, but it isn't science that explains why I use it.
Wrong. Biology and Psychology can teach us all about why you use it.
Only I can do that.
Can you? Then go ahead, try. Why do you use it?