This essay examines the historical, linguistic, and theological origins of Allah within the context of Near Eastern monotheism, assessing whether Islam’s deity can be identified with the God of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) and the New Testament.

 

Employing historical-critical methodology, this study draws upon archaeological findings, ancient Semitic inscriptions, and textual analysis to evaluate the claim that Islam constitutes an “Abrahamic” religion. The evidence reveals that the Allah of the Quran represents a distinct theological reconstruction, emerging from late antique religious currents influenced by Judaism and Christianity but not historically continuous with either.

 

By re-evaluating the evolution of Yahweh within Israelite religion and contrasting it with the Quranic conception of divine unity, the essay argues that Islam should be regarded as an independent monotheistic development rather than a direct descendant of the Abrahamic tradition.

 

This conclusion challenges conventional interfaith classifications and underscores the necessity of distinguishing theological lineage from historical continuity in the study of comparative religion.

 

Introduction: The Abrahamic Claim and the Problem of Continuity

Islam’s self-identification as an “Abrahamic faith” is central to its theological narrative. The Quran asserts that Muhammad’s revelation restores the primordial religion of Abraham, who is depicted as neither Jew nor Christian but a pure monotheist (hanīf).

 

This claim presupposes an unbroken continuity between the God of Abraham in the Hebrew Bible and the Allah of Islam. Yet, historical-critical inquiry complicates this assertion. The absence of Allah from pre-Islamic Jewish and Christian scriptures, the evolving conceptions of God within the Israelite and early Christian traditions, and the late emergence of Islam all raise significant questions about whether theological continuity is historically demonstrable.

This study proceeds from the premise that religious identity must be established by evidence, not by later theological claims. It aims to distinguish between theological genealogy, the idea of a shared tradition asserted by faith, and historical continuity, the verifiable development of belief through time.

 

The Early Israelite Pantheon: El, Asherah, and Yahweh

The Hebrew Bible preserves traces of an earlier religious system that was neither strictly monotheistic nor originally centred on Yahweh alone. Archaeological and textual evidence indicate that early Israelite religion emerged within a broader Canaanite milieu that included multiple deities.

Inscriptions discovered at Kuntillet ʿAjrud and Khirbet el-Qôm refer to “Yahweh and his Asherah,” suggesting a divine consort figure associated with the Israelite god. These discoveries align with biblical references to Asherah poles and cultic objects condemned by later Deuteronomistic editors seeking to assert Yahweh’s exclusivity (e.g., 2 Kings 23:6–7).

Moreover, several biblical passages imply a hierarchical divine council.

Psalm 82 portrays Elohim presiding “in the midst of the gods,” while Deuteronomy 32:8-9, preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls, depicts Elyon (the Most High) apportioning nations to the “sons of God,” among whom Yahweh receives Israel as his inheritance.

This cosmological framework suggests a henotheistic worldview: multiple divine beings existed, but Israel was bound to the service of one.

 

Thus, the earliest form of Yahwism functioned not as pure monotheism but as a national monolatry, gradually elevated into universal monotheism through successive theological reformations, particularly during the exilic and post-exilic periods.

 

From Henotheism to Monotheism: The Transformation of Yahweh

The Babylonian exile (6th century BCE) catalysed a decisive theological transformation. Deprived of temple and territory, Israelite elites redefined Yahweh not merely as Israel’s tribal deity but as the sole creator and sustainer of the cosmos. This period produced the “Second Isaiah” corpus (Isaiah 40–55), where Yahweh declares, “Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me” (Isa.. 43:10).

 

This transition from henotheism to monotheism was thus not an abrupt revelation but a historical development responding to national crisis and theological necessity. Over subsequent centuries, this evolved into the strict monotheism that would shape Judaism and, indirectly, Christianity.

However, this transformation also entailed a significant conceptual break from earlier Israelite belief in divine plurality.

By the late Second Temple period, Yahweh had absorbed the attributes of El Elyon, and Asherah was excised from the pantheon.

 

This development contextualises later Abrahamic theology: the monotheistic God of Judaism and Christianity emerged from a process of consolidation, reinterpretation, and exclusion, not from primordial simplicity.

 

Any claim to continuity with Abraham’s “God” must therefore navigate this complex evolution.

 

Linguistic and Archaeological Origins of Allah

The term Allah (الله) derives from the Arabic al-ilāh, literally “the god”, which contracts through common phonetic elision. Its etymological root, ʾ-l-h, parallels cognates across Semitic languages: Hebrew Eloah (singular of Elohim) and Aramaic Alāhā, both denoting “deity.”

 

Yet linguistic cognates do not imply ontological identity.

The name Allah in pre-Islamic Arabia functioned as a generic term for a high god, not as a proper noun signifying a distinct, historically continuous deity.

 

Inscriptions from the Arabian Peninsula, Safaitic, Hismaic, and Nabataean, document numerous deities such as Almaqah, Wadd, ʿAthtar, and Yaghūth, but none unequivocally identify Allah as an individual object of worship. South Arabian epigraphy, for instance, consistently invokes local gods tied to regional cults rather than a pan-Arabian high god named Allah.

 

Nevertheless, by the 5th–6th centuries CE, Christian Arab communities had begun using Allah as a linguistic equivalent of the Biblical God. The trilingual Zabad Inscription (512 CE), the Jabal Usays Inscription (528 CE), and the Umm al-Jimal inscription (6th century CE) employ phrases such as bism al-ilāh (“in the name of God”) within explicitly Christian contexts.

These attest that the term was circulating as a translation of Deus or Theos among Arab Christians rather than denoting a distinct deity.

 

Thus, Allah, before Islam appears as a linguistic adaptation rather than a theological identity: a title rather than a name.

Islam’s later appropriation of the term as a proper noun reflects theological redefinition rather than continuity with Abrahamic or Israelite worship.

​

The Qur’anic Conception of Allah

Within the Quran, Allah is portrayed as absolutely singular, eternal, and self-subsistent,al-Aḥad and al-Ṣamad (Quran: chapter 112, verse 1–2).

 

He neither begets nor is begotten, and no divine partners or intermediaries are acknowledged. This conception represents an uncompromising monotheism that explicitly repudiates the divine plurality of earlier Near Eastern religion and the Trinitarian theology of Christianity.

The Quran reinterprets history through a unifying monotheistic lens: Allah is said to have been worshipped by all prophets, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, each proclaiming the same divine truth later corrupted by their followers. This narrative serves a theological purpose rather than a historical one, positioning Islam not as a new revelation but as a restoration of an original, universal monotheism.

However, critical analysis reveals that this presentation lacks textual or archaeological corroboration.

 

No Hebrew or Aramaic manuscripts refer to Allah as the deity of Abraham or Moses. Moreover, the Quranic God operates within a strictly transcendent framework devoid of the covenantal and incarnational dimensions that characterise the Biblical portrayals of Yahweh and the God of the New Testament.

The Quranic deity issues decrees, not covenants; demands submission, not relationship.

Hence, while Islam asserts continuity with the Abrahamic line, its conception of God diverges profoundly in both ontology and relational theology. The Allah of the Qur’an is not a continuation of the Biblical deity but a new synthesis, a reconstructed monotheism shaped by the theological currents of late antiquity.

 

Comparative Analysis: Allah, Yahweh, and the God of the New Testament

When examined comparatively, the distinctions between Allah, Yahweh, and the New Testament God become theologically decisive.

The Hebrew Bible’s Yahweh is a dynamic and historically engaged deity, anthropopathic, covenantal, and deeply entangled with Israel’s fate. He appears, speaks, and acts within history, bound by promises to Abraham and his descendants.

By contrast, the Quranic Allah is remote, utterly transcendent, and impersonal in character. While omnipotent and merciful, He is not depicted as entering human history in a personal or incarnate form. This distinction becomes even more pronounced when juxtaposed with the New Testament’s depiction of God as revealed in Christ, a God who becomes incarnate and relationally accessible.

 

The Quranic rejection of divine sonship (Quran: chapter 19, verse 35, chapter 112, verse 3) thus represents not continuity but theological opposition to the Christian understanding of divine immanence.

Linguistically, the shared Semitic roots (ʾ-l-h) might suggest superficial similarity, but theological substance must be drawn from textual content, not phonetic coincidence.

The Elohim of the Hebrew Bible evolved through a process of historical refinement, whereas the Allah of the Quran emerges abruptly as an absolute monad, defined by negation: not triune, not incarnate, not father, not begotten.

This apophatic theology bears resemblance not to the covenantal Yahweh but to the Hellenized philosophical monotheism of late antiquity, filtered through the matrix of Arabian religious reform.

Accordingly, equating Allah with the Biblical God collapses distinct theological categories. Each represents a different stage in the Near Eastern evolution of monotheistic thought.

 

The Problem of Abrahamic Continuity

Islam’s classification as an “Abrahamic religion” rests upon the Quran’s claim that Abraham (Ibrāhīm) was the archetype of pure monotheism and that Allah is the same God he worshipped. Yet, historically, this identification is unsupported. The Hebrew patriarchs emerged within a polytheistic milieu where El Elyon, not Yahweh, appears as the high god. It was only later that Yahweh absorbed El’s functions and titles, transforming into Israel’s singular deity.

​

The Quran, composed over a millennium later, retrojects its strict monotheism onto Abraham, reframing him as the progenitor of Islam’s theology. This literary construction parallels the way early Judaism reinterpreted patriarchal traditions to affirm post-exilic monotheism. However, the absence of any textual bridge between the Biblical Elohim and the Quranic Allah undermines claims of direct continuity.

Moreover, while Judaism and Christianity define their divine-human relationships through covenant (Sinai, Eucharist), Islam grounds its relationship in submission (islām), a term reflecting political allegiance as much as spiritual devotion. The theological shift from covenant to command marks a decisive departure from the Abrahamic paradigm of relational faith.

Consequently, the claim of Abrahamic lineage functions theologically rather than historically: it legitimises Islam’s prophetic narrative but cannot be sustained by critical evidence.

 

Reevaluating the “Abrahamic” Classification

Recognising Allah as a distinct theological construct necessitates reexamining the category of “Abrahamic religions.” The label, though convenient for interfaith dialogue, obscures the substantive historical and doctrinal discontinuities separating Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

 

Historical Criteria

No archaeological or textual evidence links the pre-Islamic concept of Allah with the God of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob. The Quran’s genealogical claim operates within a theological framework of continuity, not an evidential one. The use of Allah by pre-Islamic Arab Christians reflects translation, not inheritance.

 

Theological Divergence

The attributes of Allah, absolute unity, transcendence, and impersonal will, contrast sharply with Yahweh’s covenantal engagement and the New Testament’s incarnational theology. To equate these fundamentally different divine conceptions under the banner of “Abrahamic” collapses critical distinctions that are essential to historical theology.

 

Linguistic Confusion

Shared etymology does not entail shared identity. Just as the Greek Zeus and Latin Deus derive from a common Indo-European root, unrelated to the same deity, so too Allah and Eloah are linguistically related but not theologically. The conflation of cognates with continuity is a frequent error in popular comparative religion.¹⁷

Hence, “Abrahamic” should be regarded as a theological metaphor rather than a historical category. It signifies aspired rather than demonstrated descent.

 

Conclusion: Islam as a Distinct Monotheistic Synthesis

Historical-critical evidence demonstrates that Allah is not historically continuous with the God of the Hebrew Bible or the New Testament.

 

No pre-Islamic sources attest to Allah as the deity of Abraham or Moses, and linguistic cognates alone cannot bridge this gap.

The Quranic conception of God represents a new synthesis, a reconstructed monotheism formulated within the late antique religious environment, shaped by exposure to Judaic, Christian, and Hellenistic ideas but ultimately distinct from them.

Islam’s theological achievement lies not in its preservation of Abrahamic faith but in its rearticulation of monotheism through the lens of Arabian religio-political reform. By rejecting divine plurality, incarnation, and covenantal intimacy, Islam forged an austere and uncompromising theology that stands apart from both Judaism and Christianity.

 

Classifying Islam as an “Abrahamic religion” therefore misrepresents its historical origins and theological essence.

It is better understood as a parallel development, emerging from the same Near Eastern monotheistic matrix but constructing its own conceptual universe. Recognising this distinction enhances scholarly precision and interfaith honesty.

 

Allah is not the God of Abraham in any historical or textual sense, but the expression of a later monotheistic vision born from humanity’s ongoing quest to define the divine in singular terms. Understanding Islam in this light honours its originality without distorting history, allowing theology to be studied not as inherited dogma but as evolving human reflection on the mystery of God.

 

References

1. Zevit, Ziony. The Religions of Ancient Israel. Continuum, 2001.

2. Cross, Frank M. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic. Harvard University Press, 1973.

3. Smith, Mark S. The Early History of God. Eerdmans, 2002.

4. Albertz, Rainer. A History of Israelite Religion in the Old Testament Period. SCM Press, 1994.

5. Dever, William G. Did God Have a Wife? Archaeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Israel. Eerdmans, 2005.

6. Brown, F., et al. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. Hendrickson, 2017.

7. Al-Jallad, Ahmad. An Outline of the Grammar of the Safaitic Inscriptions. Brill, 2015.

8. Fiema, Zbigniew T. et al. “Religious Life in Arabia Before Islam.” Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 26 (2015).

9. MacDonald, Michael C.A. “Ancient Arabia and the Written Word.” Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 40 (2010).

10. The Qur’an, Surah 112.

11. Donner, Fred M. Muhammad and the Believers: At the Origins of Islam. Harvard University Press, 2010.

12. Cross, Frank M., Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic.

13. Nevo, Yehuda, and Judith Koren. Crossroads to Islam. Prometheus Books, 2003.

14. Crone, Patricia. Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam. Princeton University Press, 2004.

15. Smith, Mark S., The Origins of Biblical Monotheism. Oxford University Press, 2001.

16. Al-Jallad, Ahmad, An Outline of the Grammar of the Safaitic Inscriptions.

17. Donner, Fred M., Muhammad and the Believers.

18. Crone, Patricia, Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam.