Mahayana Buddhism and Christianity both say the same thing, ultimately.
The difference is that Christianity sinks deeper in transitional material.
There, it carves niches to shelter believers.
Their architecture is so convincing most of them spend their lives in these places.
Mahayana Buddhism vigorously steps over these transitional zones (rituals, dogmas, theological considerations, devotional aspects).
At best, it will wrap it all as “skillful means” (upaya).
The virtue of upaya is that it already points to a place beyond all beliefs, without denying them.
Here is a delightful form of elegance : it creates the conditions of inner peace by reminding the relative its relativity, and side matters their subsidiary functions.
In the Body of Practice, the Heart of Experience is one.