The Buddha of the Pali Canon repeatedly defined Nibbana, the goal of Buddhist practice, as the unconditioned. I'd like to know on what planet he isn't talking about the exact same thing as God. Here I have pasted a very short sutta, Ud 8.3, as an example:
"Thus have I heard. At one time the Lord was staying near Savatthi in the Jeta Wood at Anathapindika's monastery. On that occasion the Lord was instructing... the bhikkhus with a Dhamma talk connected with Nibbana, and those bhikkhus... were intent on listening to Dhamma.
Then, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance:
There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to-being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned."
Perhaps later philosophers and theologians had separate conceptions, where the West made God a person and the East made Nibbana into a psychological state, but to me the essential concept seems the same. Perhaps you have a different opinion.
