… But eventually, the God of Abraham became dominant in the Middle East, with three major religions worshiping him. Moloch was abandoned. …
This three major religions business is repeated constantly.
And I find the idea that they all share “the God of Abraham” tedious, facile and shallow.
As it happens, I’ve seen no evidence that the mohammedan concept of allah developed from the judeo-christian notion of god, in parallel, shares a common historical background or even much of a theological nature.
I have seen some, albeit small, evidence that the notion of allah developed from that of an arabian moon god.
The only thing I know of that connects mohammedanism with the various Judeo-Christian faiths are:
a) the fact that both are monotheistic, and
b) mohammedanism makes reference to some of the names and stories in the bible
The contrast between the relation between Judaism and Christianity on one hand, and both of those with mohammedanism on the other is rather stark.
Christianity adopted the bible in its entirety from Judaism — added to it, no doubt — but adopted it whole. So the two share a large, detailed, common documentary basis.
Mohammedanism by contrast rejects the bible entirely — and mohammedans claim that the koran replaces the bible, or absurdly, that the bible is somehow magically a corruption of the koran that came after it.
There is no significant common documentary basis to speak of.
I am by now, almost completely convinced that the claim that allah is “the God of Abraham” is nothing more than a bizarre form of replacement theology intended, even in its original articulation, as a justification for the conquest and subjugation of Christian and Jewish people.
The author might want to reflect a bit on those verses of the koran that talk about the hostile relation between allah and the Jews and Christians, and consider whether that sounds consistent with the god of the bible — “Abraham” notwithstanding.
He might also want to reflect a bit on the relation between ancient Moloch and the modern allah.
