What do you think?
Rate this book
Very Short Introductions #633
The Abrahamic Religions: A Very Short Introduction: A Very Short Introduction
In the book of Genesis, God bestows a new name upon Abram--Abraham, a father of many nations. With this name and his Covenant, Abraham would become the patriarch of three of the world's major Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Connected by their mutual--if differentiated--veneration of the One God proclaimed by Abraham, these traditions share much beyond their origins in the ancient Israel of the Old Testament. This Very Short Introduction explores the intertwined histories of these monotheistic religions, from the emergence of Christianity and Islam to the violence of the Crusades and the cultural exchanges of al-Andalus.Each religion continues to be shaped by this history but has also reacted to the forces of modernity and politics. Movements such as the Reformation and that led by seventh-century Kharijites have emerged, intentioned to reform or restore traditional religious practice but quite different in their goals and effects. Relationships with states, among them Israel and Saudi Arabia, have also figured importantly in their development. The Abrahamic A Very Short Introduction brings these traditions together into a common narrative, lending much needed context to the story of Abraham and his descendants.ABOUT THE Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.
176 pages, Paperback
Published January 8, 2020
42 people are currently reading
284 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
March 1, 2021
What can be gained from viewing the three Abrahamic religions as intertwined in a historical lens? This is the question Charles Cohen explores within his text The Abrahamic Religions: A Very Short Introduction. Some modern religious studies have tended to approach the study of a religion by investigating it on its own. Such focus on the individual religion is ignorant to the outside influence it inevitably possesses. Cohen offers a new point of view that he calls a “braided histories” approach. He accomplishes this by juxtaposing each of the Abrahamic religions’ rich complex histories, analyzing similarities and understanding differences, as well as the influence that each religion had upon each other whether it be direct in interaction or indirectly through mere existence in proximity to one another in history. Having read Cohen’s texts, one would conclude that analysis of any religion only looking at the religion as it stands on its own is ignorant to the simple nature of culture itself. Influence is everywhere and unavoidable- and to exist as a people around other different peoples is to interact and inevitably receive influence. The comprehension of this idea is necessary to gain a complete understanding of why certain traditions and practices exist. There is a new perspective to be gained as to how religions are similar and how they are different. “Braided histories” is an embracement of this simple fact, putting aside tendencies to separate and individualize.
The ability to draw comparisons across the Abrahamic religions gained from this unique “braided histories” viewpoint opens up a whole new world of religious analysis. Throughout Cohen’s historical retellings, he draws parallels between religions and their phenomena. This allows us to analyze what is similar between the two, but also places emphasis on difference.
For example, on page 75 of the chapter Medieval Interactions, it is stated that: “Compared to Christian divinity, Islamic theology operated less in response to abstract speculation than to politics.” This quote is in reference to the fact that much of historical debate among Christians about the nature of God relied upon abstract thought: Was Jesus a human being or a mere illusion? What separates the Father from the Son? In comparison, Islamic theological debate relied much more upon politics: Who would usurp the role of Muhammad? Who possessed the divine right to rule the umma? Having juxtaposed the two phenomena that occurred within these separate religions against each other, we gain an understanding that vigorous theological debate is not unique to either religion. However, we also understand what aspects of their theological controversy make each religion unique. Therefore, by having considered the relationship between the two religions, we can better analyze the reasoning behind the partaking of intense theological debate as perhaps a phenomena related to religion in general, or better yet understand what conditions lead to this dissimilarity in theological debate.
Throughout history, the Abrahamic religions have also endured influence from outside forces, and in this way they also experience “braiding” with non-abrahamic traditions.
Many times throughout the book, the religious group in question is forced to assimilate with another culture. The Jews, for example, were many times subject to conquest by outside powers, like Alexander the Great. As a byproduct of their existence within his empire, Jewish traditions experienced influence from Greek cultural norms. Cohen offers his perspective on how the Abrahamic religions in general experience this exterior influence with some careful wording: “One might better understand [Judaism]’s interaction with Hellenism as an example of how Jews (not to mention Christians and Muslims) absorb influences from their surroundings to enrich their own traditions while maintaining (to their satisfaction) foundational convictions and customs.” (Cohen 2020, 16) Specific ways that Jewish culture took Hellenistic influence include Jewish scribes incorporating Greek wisdoms into their religious writing, welcoming “all wisdom” as being “the law that Moses commanded us” (Ecclus. 24:23). Another point of influence is the production of the Septuagint, which was a Greek translation of the Tanakh, as most Alexandrian Jews did not speak or write Hebrew anymore. The influence of tradition unrelated to the three Abrahamic religions emphasizes the fact that individualizing each religion is ignorant and does not show the larger picture, given that all Abrahamic religions are in some way “braided” with the culture and society around them.
These are just two examples of Cohen’s style of historical analysis that follows the reader throughout the book. It allows the reader to make connections between the different religions and the culture that history surrounded them with, allowing for a much smoother and memorable way of learning about the three Abrahamic religions. By the end, the reader will have attained a much more worldly understanding of what setting and conditions of history that lead to each of the Abrahamic religions’ practices, traditions, and norms that exist today.
Some modern religious writers may argue with and against what Cohen has to present in this book. Stephen Prothero, for example, is one religious writer who has vehemently argued for the separation of religion in study. In his book God Is Not One: The Eight Rival Religions That Run the World, he believes that religious unity is nothing but a fantasy: “It is comforting to pretend that the great religions make up one big, happy family. But this sentiment, however well-intentioned, is neither accurate nor ethically responsible. God is not one. Faith in the unity of religions is just that-faith” (Prothero 2010, 3). Prothero would reject Cohen’s ideas that religions like Christianity and Islam share similarities as a disrespect to the sharp divergence religions possess in every single field except for ethics.
Some religious scholars such as Edward Said would voice support for Cohen’s ideas. Said has vocalized displeasure with some modern religious writings that pit religions and cultures against one another stating that they are simply unassimilable. He instead argues that a comparison between cultures and traditions would reveal that the two religions are not so fundamentally opposed as one might think reading such oppository writings. “But why not instead see parallels, admittedly less spectacular in their destructiveness, for Osama bin Laden and his followers in cults like the Branch Davidians or the disciples of the Rev. Jim Jones at Guyana or the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo?” “But we are all swimming in those waters, Westerners and Muslims and others alike. And since the waters are part of the ocean of history, trying to plow or divide them with barriers is futile.” Undoubtedly, Edward Said would enjoy the many barriers broken by Cohen’s approach.
Although the three religions do share similarities and influence from their braided periods of history, they are unequivocally divided in their religious beliefs. Each of the religions believes that they are the ones who got it right, and that kind of debate has no common ground. Cohen explores this concept of unity in the epilogue of the book, discussing “unitive mysticism”- the idea of a common experience of the divine that all the religions seem to share to a degree. They all communicate similar desires in their connection with God. That being said, connection to God is definitionally a very personal experience that is not the key to religious unity. The three religions may never unite under an “Abrahamic identity” as long as they preach their own birthrights.
The ability to draw comparisons across the Abrahamic religions gained from this unique “braided histories” viewpoint opens up a whole new world of religious analysis. Throughout Cohen’s historical retellings, he draws parallels between religions and their phenomena. This allows us to analyze what is similar between the two, but also places emphasis on difference.
For example, on page 75 of the chapter Medieval Interactions, it is stated that: “Compared to Christian divinity, Islamic theology operated less in response to abstract speculation than to politics.” This quote is in reference to the fact that much of historical debate among Christians about the nature of God relied upon abstract thought: Was Jesus a human being or a mere illusion? What separates the Father from the Son? In comparison, Islamic theological debate relied much more upon politics: Who would usurp the role of Muhammad? Who possessed the divine right to rule the umma? Having juxtaposed the two phenomena that occurred within these separate religions against each other, we gain an understanding that vigorous theological debate is not unique to either religion. However, we also understand what aspects of their theological controversy make each religion unique. Therefore, by having considered the relationship between the two religions, we can better analyze the reasoning behind the partaking of intense theological debate as perhaps a phenomena related to religion in general, or better yet understand what conditions lead to this dissimilarity in theological debate.
Throughout history, the Abrahamic religions have also endured influence from outside forces, and in this way they also experience “braiding” with non-abrahamic traditions.
Many times throughout the book, the religious group in question is forced to assimilate with another culture. The Jews, for example, were many times subject to conquest by outside powers, like Alexander the Great. As a byproduct of their existence within his empire, Jewish traditions experienced influence from Greek cultural norms. Cohen offers his perspective on how the Abrahamic religions in general experience this exterior influence with some careful wording: “One might better understand [Judaism]’s interaction with Hellenism as an example of how Jews (not to mention Christians and Muslims) absorb influences from their surroundings to enrich their own traditions while maintaining (to their satisfaction) foundational convictions and customs.” (Cohen 2020, 16) Specific ways that Jewish culture took Hellenistic influence include Jewish scribes incorporating Greek wisdoms into their religious writing, welcoming “all wisdom” as being “the law that Moses commanded us” (Ecclus. 24:23). Another point of influence is the production of the Septuagint, which was a Greek translation of the Tanakh, as most Alexandrian Jews did not speak or write Hebrew anymore. The influence of tradition unrelated to the three Abrahamic religions emphasizes the fact that individualizing each religion is ignorant and does not show the larger picture, given that all Abrahamic religions are in some way “braided” with the culture and society around them.
These are just two examples of Cohen’s style of historical analysis that follows the reader throughout the book. It allows the reader to make connections between the different religions and the culture that history surrounded them with, allowing for a much smoother and memorable way of learning about the three Abrahamic religions. By the end, the reader will have attained a much more worldly understanding of what setting and conditions of history that lead to each of the Abrahamic religions’ practices, traditions, and norms that exist today.
Some modern religious writers may argue with and against what Cohen has to present in this book. Stephen Prothero, for example, is one religious writer who has vehemently argued for the separation of religion in study. In his book God Is Not One: The Eight Rival Religions That Run the World, he believes that religious unity is nothing but a fantasy: “It is comforting to pretend that the great religions make up one big, happy family. But this sentiment, however well-intentioned, is neither accurate nor ethically responsible. God is not one. Faith in the unity of religions is just that-faith” (Prothero 2010, 3). Prothero would reject Cohen’s ideas that religions like Christianity and Islam share similarities as a disrespect to the sharp divergence religions possess in every single field except for ethics.
Some religious scholars such as Edward Said would voice support for Cohen’s ideas. Said has vocalized displeasure with some modern religious writings that pit religions and cultures against one another stating that they are simply unassimilable. He instead argues that a comparison between cultures and traditions would reveal that the two religions are not so fundamentally opposed as one might think reading such oppository writings. “But why not instead see parallels, admittedly less spectacular in their destructiveness, for Osama bin Laden and his followers in cults like the Branch Davidians or the disciples of the Rev. Jim Jones at Guyana or the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo?” “But we are all swimming in those waters, Westerners and Muslims and others alike. And since the waters are part of the ocean of history, trying to plow or divide them with barriers is futile.” Undoubtedly, Edward Said would enjoy the many barriers broken by Cohen’s approach.
Although the three religions do share similarities and influence from their braided periods of history, they are unequivocally divided in their religious beliefs. Each of the religions believes that they are the ones who got it right, and that kind of debate has no common ground. Cohen explores this concept of unity in the epilogue of the book, discussing “unitive mysticism”- the idea of a common experience of the divine that all the religions seem to share to a degree. They all communicate similar desires in their connection with God. That being said, connection to God is definitionally a very personal experience that is not the key to religious unity. The three religions may never unite under an “Abrahamic identity” as long as they preach their own birthrights.
January 3, 2020
This is what it claims to be -- a short introduction to the three Abrahamic religions, sharing their story over time, along with the interactions for good or for bad. It is a very useful intro, that I think gets most things correct. It doesn't go into depth, but it is informative. It is accessible but rooted in scholarship.l
April 24, 2021
I enjoyed this book as it was a very good synopsis of the history, similarities, differences,schisms within,and the integration and relationships in the secular political world of Judaism,Christianity and Islam.
Read
August 5, 2024Hadde et prosjekt om med å ta notater til denne boken. Angrer på dette nå, da det tok alt for mye tid!
En slags oversikt over de religionene, deres felles utgangspunkt, forskjelligheter og utvikling. Den rent historiske delen er interessant, men kan muligvis dekkes bedre andre steder. Den teologiske delen er vanskelig. Teologi på engelsk inkluderer overraskende mange fremmedord, og er enda kjedelige enn forventet...
En slags oversikt over de religionene, deres felles utgangspunkt, forskjelligheter og utvikling. Den rent historiske delen er interessant, men kan muligvis dekkes bedre andre steder. Den teologiske delen er vanskelig. Teologi på engelsk inkluderer overraskende mange fremmedord, og er enda kjedelige enn forventet...
August 6, 2025
quite informative! vsi 11/700 something
August 24, 2025
informative on the historical spread of and interplay between the abrahamic religions, as well as the schisms and reform movements within each faith. verrry light on beliefs and practices tho.
also they need to change this book title on goodreads. why does that say “A Very Short Introduction: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions)” like ok we get it
also they need to change this book title on goodreads. why does that say “A Very Short Introduction: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions)” like ok we get it
January 8, 2026
Schematic history. (The world would be better without the Abrahamic religions. They are absurd and intolerant, and their gods are despicable as evidenced by hell.)
August 21, 2023
A pretty good introduction to the three religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam and their interactions. Seemed to take some detours here and there and abandon the general premise of the book, but the detours were interesting, so I didn't mind too much. It is always a bit jarring to hear your own religion dissected alongside other religions, by someone who clearly does not believe in the validity of any of them. I understand that there is controversy and scholarly debate on nearly every single point that could be made about the history of any of these three religions, but being familiar with some of the history of early Christianity and the historical writing of the gospels in particular, there are some statements made in this book that are either entirely false (according to other scholars) or their uncertain nature is simply not acknowledged.
Also, I understand that these are "very short introductions," but the way to shorten your book is not to cram everything you would say in a whole page into one long and convoluted sentence that has so many commas, semi colons, and dashes that you forget what the sentence started with by the time you reach the end. Adding a few words and some periods would go a long way to increase the clarity of this book.
Overall though, I enjoyed this read and learned some new things, which earns it the four stars.
Also, I understand that these are "very short introductions," but the way to shorten your book is not to cram everything you would say in a whole page into one long and convoluted sentence that has so many commas, semi colons, and dashes that you forget what the sentence started with by the time you reach the end. Adding a few words and some periods would go a long way to increase the clarity of this book.
Overall though, I enjoyed this read and learned some new things, which earns it the four stars.
November 26, 2022
Chapter 1: The Jewish matrix (1200 BCE-70 CE)
Chapter 2: Jews, Gentiles, and Christians (200 BCE-200 CE)
Chapter 3: Constructing Judaism and Christianity (70 CE-1054 CE)
Chapter 4: Islam: Religion, politics, and the state (600-1258)
Chapter 5: Medieval interactions (700-1500)
Chapter 6: Reform and Enlightenment (1500-1900)
Chapter 7: Modern encounters (1500-2010)
Chapter 2: Jews, Gentiles, and Christians (200 BCE-200 CE)
Chapter 3: Constructing Judaism and Christianity (70 CE-1054 CE)
Chapter 4: Islam: Religion, politics, and the state (600-1258)
Chapter 5: Medieval interactions (700-1500)
Chapter 6: Reform and Enlightenment (1500-1900)
Chapter 7: Modern encounters (1500-2010)
December 17, 2025
The book start off by explaining that the three main religions have a different tradition and interpretation from each other notably on the fact that christians and jews differ profoundly on the question about how they view and act on the laws of the text in which christians view jews as missing the true spiritual faith by blindly following what the text say and not going beyond. The Jews don't view Jesus as a messenger of God and have several fundamental different takes on holiness and spirituality from christians which were originally called "gentiles" as in non-jewish. Eventually, partly due to the considerable influence of the impact of Hellenism on the two different cultures (Jews despite being deeply influenced by it never merged with Hellenism as gentiles did) this eventually led the jews to the begining of the seclusion we know offf now.
The book also goes into how Jesus was always presented as a heavily political historical and philosophical figure and how the NT was divived by several interpretation sourced on the authors cultures and world views. The book make to the point how the christians evolution and political influence evolved within the perception of rome and the others people of the time and how they progressively distancied themselves from the Jews while claiming to be the true representation of the book and heritage which the Jews claim but misuse and don't actually understand. It also tackle the rise and significance of Islam impact and notably on how Islam had it's influence on the Jews and Christians eventually reconnecting culturally "Judeo-Christian" with christians using the Jews as a evidence of the veracity of their own religion. Meanwhile Islam by it's definition and philosophy considered the two others as "people of the book" and serving the same God as they do (so the opposite view the others have toward them) but not following the laws and the proper message. Islam have also the fundamental difference as in being the latest "picked" it's own history and theological interpretation by a selection of texts and traditions coming from the already existing two religions. The main grip of Islam with Christianity's merges around what they consider to be the sin of idolatry with praising Jesus (and Mary in a sense) as something they have no place or right to be. Not to mention, the trinity. Islam have also the fundamental view that law and religious texts overwrite everything and anything and should be the fundamental way of a society and of the laws within it, the Quran is self sufficient as a text for a functioning and stable society (in a sense they are some absolute version which never was dompted or derived of Jewish religious philosophy)
The part about the philosophical and politicals conflicts between Western Christianity's and Eastern but more notably between the creation of Islam and the war for the Prophet succession with Ali, the conflict between whenever or not a calif could represent Islam etc was very interesting and I definitely learned a things or two. I would recommend this book for anyone seeking to grasp the fundamentals history of religion from a historical and ideological perspective.
The book also goes into how Jesus was always presented as a heavily political historical and philosophical figure and how the NT was divived by several interpretation sourced on the authors cultures and world views. The book make to the point how the christians evolution and political influence evolved within the perception of rome and the others people of the time and how they progressively distancied themselves from the Jews while claiming to be the true representation of the book and heritage which the Jews claim but misuse and don't actually understand. It also tackle the rise and significance of Islam impact and notably on how Islam had it's influence on the Jews and Christians eventually reconnecting culturally "Judeo-Christian" with christians using the Jews as a evidence of the veracity of their own religion. Meanwhile Islam by it's definition and philosophy considered the two others as "people of the book" and serving the same God as they do (so the opposite view the others have toward them) but not following the laws and the proper message. Islam have also the fundamental difference as in being the latest "picked" it's own history and theological interpretation by a selection of texts and traditions coming from the already existing two religions. The main grip of Islam with Christianity's merges around what they consider to be the sin of idolatry with praising Jesus (and Mary in a sense) as something they have no place or right to be. Not to mention, the trinity. Islam have also the fundamental view that law and religious texts overwrite everything and anything and should be the fundamental way of a society and of the laws within it, the Quran is self sufficient as a text for a functioning and stable society (in a sense they are some absolute version which never was dompted or derived of Jewish religious philosophy)
The part about the philosophical and politicals conflicts between Western Christianity's and Eastern but more notably between the creation of Islam and the war for the Prophet succession with Ali, the conflict between whenever or not a calif could represent Islam etc was very interesting and I definitely learned a things or two. I would recommend this book for anyone seeking to grasp the fundamentals history of religion from a historical and ideological perspective.
December 27, 2023
I thought I knew a bit about each of the three "Abrahamic" religions of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam but reading this book has helped me see how they are connected theologically, historically, socially and politically. The book is longer than the title "a very short introduction" suggested but the level of detail and examples helped bring out the main points. I chose it because I has been puzzling about how these three traditions are represented in the media.
The is a lot in here and a previous reviewer has done a great job in summarising which I won't attempt to match. Key things that have stuck in my mind are:
1. The sheer complexity of each of these traditions - each has many subdivisions, differences and competing traditions that the simple terms Christian, Jew and Muslim are wholly inadequate to convey the richness and variation in belief and practice within each let alone between them.
2. The length of time (1000's of years) and amount of debate required to settle on the contents of the key sources of authority such as the Bible, Quran and Torah that each religion went through, and the pragmatic factors which made this a necessity.
3. The different emphasis within and between the religions on personal revelation and relationship with the single deity as compared with the importance of adherence to rules and rites which would guarantee reward.
4. The importance of the split in the Roman Empire not only for the distinction between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches but the impact on the other religions.
5. The differing and changing relationships between each of the religions and the state and how this has differed over time.
6. How each religion went through a period (albeit a different one) of reassessment during of The Enlightenment and the application of reason where previously there had been only belief.
7. How each has periodic calls or movements to return to the original beliefs or ways of doing things with a tension between orthodoxy and modernism.
8. The impact of European empire building and war on the global distribution of religious adherents and the impact of the collapse of empires.
9. How adherents have generally lived together peacefully but that periodically minority communities are persecuted and scapegoated (and that this is true within as well as between religions).
10. The common legacy of "Abraham" may not be a helpful attribute when considering future relationships as paradoxically it tends to emphasise differences in traditions. More helpful maybe a focus on the direct experience of god which is common to all but differently expressed.
So there was a lot to think about and learn in this book. The bits I have picked out will be a very incomplete list and no doubt very superficial. That said, thinking about these religions together rather than in isolation from each other and taking an overview rather than just relying on the simplistic news coverage has brightened up my Christmas!
The is a lot in here and a previous reviewer has done a great job in summarising which I won't attempt to match. Key things that have stuck in my mind are:
1. The sheer complexity of each of these traditions - each has many subdivisions, differences and competing traditions that the simple terms Christian, Jew and Muslim are wholly inadequate to convey the richness and variation in belief and practice within each let alone between them.
2. The length of time (1000's of years) and amount of debate required to settle on the contents of the key sources of authority such as the Bible, Quran and Torah that each religion went through, and the pragmatic factors which made this a necessity.
3. The different emphasis within and between the religions on personal revelation and relationship with the single deity as compared with the importance of adherence to rules and rites which would guarantee reward.
4. The importance of the split in the Roman Empire not only for the distinction between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches but the impact on the other religions.
5. The differing and changing relationships between each of the religions and the state and how this has differed over time.
6. How each religion went through a period (albeit a different one) of reassessment during of The Enlightenment and the application of reason where previously there had been only belief.
7. How each has periodic calls or movements to return to the original beliefs or ways of doing things with a tension between orthodoxy and modernism.
8. The impact of European empire building and war on the global distribution of religious adherents and the impact of the collapse of empires.
9. How adherents have generally lived together peacefully but that periodically minority communities are persecuted and scapegoated (and that this is true within as well as between religions).
10. The common legacy of "Abraham" may not be a helpful attribute when considering future relationships as paradoxically it tends to emphasise differences in traditions. More helpful maybe a focus on the direct experience of god which is common to all but differently expressed.
So there was a lot to think about and learn in this book. The bits I have picked out will be a very incomplete list and no doubt very superficial. That said, thinking about these religions together rather than in isolation from each other and taking an overview rather than just relying on the simplistic news coverage has brightened up my Christmas!
July 26, 2025
مقرری دورهی گفتوگوی بین الادیان در سوییس بود و خواندمش. از روششناسیاش خوشم آمد. کتاب با داستان شکلگیری یهودیت آغاز شد و تا برسد به مسیحیت، هیچ سخنی از مسیحیت در میان نیاورد. یعنی رویکرد تطبیقی کتاب موجب نشده بود نگاه گاهشمارانه را رها کند و همزمان هر سه دین را با یکدیگر مقایسه کند. سپس نوبت به مسیحیت رسید و لحن کتاب بهگونهای بود که گویی اسلامی در میان نیست و سپس در بخش سوم داستان هر سه دین را در کنار هم پیش میبرد.
این بازگفت گاهشمارانه برای من بسیار سودمند بود. برای نخستین بار توانستم اسلام را بهسان یکی از پاسخهای موجود به شوراها و بگومگوهای مسیحی (بهویژه خلقدون) دربارهی تکسرشتباوری یا دوسرشتباوری خداوند تصور کنم. اگر اسلام را پاسخی به آن پرسش ببینیم، بسیاری چیزها بهگونهی دیگری خوانده میشوند. همچنین نهی اسلام از پرستش تمثالها را اگر در سایهی کشمکشهای مسیحی Iconoclasm بخوانیم، معنای دیگری مییابد؛ زیرا پرسش از پیوند تمثالها با سرشت خداوند در زمانهی پیدایش اسلام، پرسشی زنده و داغ بوده است و مذاهب مسیحی پاسخهای بسیار گوناگونی در این زمینه دارند.
ارمغان دیگری که این کتاب برای من داشت، آن بود که گفت نویسندگان انجیلها به جای آنکه به تورات عبری ارجاع دهند، همواره از ترجمهی هفتادی نقل قول میکنند! و برای چون منی که همواره میان زبانها میاندیشد (تا آنجا که جایش را در زبان خودش هم گم کرده است!) این یک گزارهی هولناک بود. پیشتر هم در کتاب Bodies and Souls, or Spirited Bodies? استدلال نویسندهاش را (که در مدارس مذهبی تحصیل کرده است) خوانده بودم که دوگانهانگاری جسم و روح، محصول ترجمهی واژهی عبری נפש در تورات به دو واژهی یونانی (پسوخه و زوما) در اناجیل است. حالا با این کتاب دریافتم که گذار از تورات عبری به اناجیل یونانی، چه گذار سرنوشتسازی بوده است.
کتاب همچنین بسیار به پذیرایی سرزمینهای مسلماننشین (خلاف سرزمینهای مسیحینشین) از یهودیان در طول سدهها خوشبین بود. در بازگفت عقاید و تاریخ اسلام، آن اندازه که دانشش را داشتم، کمتر کژتابیای در کتاب دیدم. گرچه پرداختن به سویهها و فرقههای عرفانی این سه دین ادیان، از جمله اسلام، در کتاب بهکلی غایب بود و کتاب، بهنظر میرسد عمدا، در سطح نهادهای رسمی دینی و سیاسی باقی مانده بود اما نویسنده با شعری از مولوی اثر خود را به پایان برده بود که:
چه تدبیر ای مسلمانان که من خود را نمی دانم/ نه ترسا و یهودیم نه گبرم نه مسلمانم
نه شرقیم نه غربیم نه بـریم نه بحریم/ نه ارکان طبیعیم نه از افلاک گردانم
این بازگفت گاهشمارانه برای من بسیار سودمند بود. برای نخستین بار توانستم اسلام را بهسان یکی از پاسخهای موجود به شوراها و بگومگوهای مسیحی (بهویژه خلقدون) دربارهی تکسرشتباوری یا دوسرشتباوری خداوند تصور کنم. اگر اسلام را پاسخی به آن پرسش ببینیم، بسیاری چیزها بهگونهی دیگری خوانده میشوند. همچنین نهی اسلام از پرستش تمثالها را اگر در سایهی کشمکشهای مسیحی Iconoclasm بخوانیم، معنای دیگری مییابد؛ زیرا پرسش از پیوند تمثالها با سرشت خداوند در زمانهی پیدایش اسلام، پرسشی زنده و داغ بوده است و مذاهب مسیحی پاسخهای بسیار گوناگونی در این زمینه دارند.
ارمغان دیگری که این کتاب برای من داشت، آن بود که گفت نویسندگان انجیلها به جای آنکه به تورات عبری ارجاع دهند، همواره از ترجمهی هفتادی نقل قول میکنند! و برای چون منی که همواره میان زبانها میاندیشد (تا آنجا که جایش را در زبان خودش هم گم کرده است!) این یک گزارهی هولناک بود. پیشتر هم در کتاب Bodies and Souls, or Spirited Bodies? استدلال نویسندهاش را (که در مدارس مذهبی تحصیل کرده است) خوانده بودم که دوگانهانگاری جسم و روح، محصول ترجمهی واژهی عبری נפש در تورات به دو واژهی یونانی (پسوخه و زوما) در اناجیل است. حالا با این کتاب دریافتم که گذار از تورات عبری به اناجیل یونانی، چه گذار سرنوشتسازی بوده است.
کتاب همچنین بسیار به پذیرایی سرزمینهای مسلماننشین (خلاف سرزمینهای مسیحینشین) از یهودیان در طول سدهها خوشبین بود. در بازگفت عقاید و تاریخ اسلام، آن اندازه که دانشش را داشتم، کمتر کژتابیای در کتاب دیدم. گرچه پرداختن به سویهها و فرقههای عرفانی این سه دین ادیان، از جمله اسلام، در کتاب بهکلی غایب بود و کتاب، بهنظر میرسد عمدا، در سطح نهادهای رسمی دینی و سیاسی باقی مانده بود اما نویسنده با شعری از مولوی اثر خود را به پایان برده بود که:
چه تدبیر ای مسلمانان که من خود را نمی دانم/ نه ترسا و یهودیم نه گبرم نه مسلمانم
نه شرقیم نه غربیم نه بـریم نه بحریم/ نه ارکان طبیعیم نه از افلاک گردانم
August 29, 2025
I’m fairly ignorant about religions in general and I only have a passing interest in understanding them better.
Two things have made me want to learn more. First is that after no small provocation, one country is massacring their neighbour and it’s notable that they are of two different Abrahamic religions. Second, I’m currently working for a firm interviewing their client base of which the other denomination makes up a considerable portion.
The book offers a clear and logical summary of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. My main takeaways are:
- They have much more in common than they do different
- The idea of there being one god is probably the key thing that connects them
- They formed in order: Jews, Christians, Muslims
- They all took many years (multiple centuries) to each decide on their key tenets and doctrines
- They all agree on Abraham as the first prophet; they all recognise Moses too, but it’s with Jesus they begin to diverge
There are lots more detail and facts in the book but those are the main things I took away which might not be big revelations to other people but were interesting to me. For example, prior I hadn’t understood that Mohamed came long after the other prophets. Learning how the ancient Greeks saw Judaism and engaged with it, then later how the Romans viewed Christianity and eventually adopted it helped me with timelines in a way I hadn’t understood before.
I sometimes describe myself as an atheist but more accurately I should say I am agnostic because I’m only 99 percent sure there is no god - I concede we can’t truly know for certain. But reading the history of these religions I do conclude that each is so mad that to genuinely believe in any one of them leaves me dismayed.
Reading the history of the religions and the way the holy books were compiled over time - edited, disagreed over and reformulated - with so much dependency on mundane human remembering, decision making and crafting of messages, how could you conclude these documents are divine?
It just seems naive to trust that some other human beings were infallible in composing this information you stake your existence on.
Two things have made me want to learn more. First is that after no small provocation, one country is massacring their neighbour and it’s notable that they are of two different Abrahamic religions. Second, I’m currently working for a firm interviewing their client base of which the other denomination makes up a considerable portion.
The book offers a clear and logical summary of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. My main takeaways are:
- They have much more in common than they do different
- The idea of there being one god is probably the key thing that connects them
- They formed in order: Jews, Christians, Muslims
- They all took many years (multiple centuries) to each decide on their key tenets and doctrines
- They all agree on Abraham as the first prophet; they all recognise Moses too, but it’s with Jesus they begin to diverge
There are lots more detail and facts in the book but those are the main things I took away which might not be big revelations to other people but were interesting to me. For example, prior I hadn’t understood that Mohamed came long after the other prophets. Learning how the ancient Greeks saw Judaism and engaged with it, then later how the Romans viewed Christianity and eventually adopted it helped me with timelines in a way I hadn’t understood before.
I sometimes describe myself as an atheist but more accurately I should say I am agnostic because I’m only 99 percent sure there is no god - I concede we can’t truly know for certain. But reading the history of these religions I do conclude that each is so mad that to genuinely believe in any one of them leaves me dismayed.
Reading the history of the religions and the way the holy books were compiled over time - edited, disagreed over and reformulated - with so much dependency on mundane human remembering, decision making and crafting of messages, how could you conclude these documents are divine?
It just seems naive to trust that some other human beings were infallible in composing this information you stake your existence on.
April 10, 2023
I checked this book out of my library, along with Islam: A Very Short Introduction and The Koran: A Very Short Introduction to read while vacationing in Muslim majority countries in the Middle East earlier this year. I didn't get to this book until after I got home, but I'm glad I read it instead of just returning it to the library.
This is one of the better Very Short Introductions - in fact it's almost like three short introductions in one, since it covers Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, as well as their interactions with each other. Comparing the three religions, who all claim Abraham as an important figure, also serves to illuminate and illustrate unique attributes of each.
The book first introduces the foundation of each religion in turn, and then compares each during broad time periods, showing how each religion reacted differently to prevailing world conditions during each time period.
The only thing that kind of irked me was what felt like an atheistic, or perhaps agnostic, tone of the author, heavily giving weight to current opinions about religion. However, he treated all three equally, and I'd say in the same light. And even that approach provides a different view of the subject that is educational.
Overall, a pretty good book that I'm glad I read. Seeing all three religions and how they have interacted with each other and the world at large throughout history was very educational.
This is one of the better Very Short Introductions - in fact it's almost like three short introductions in one, since it covers Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, as well as their interactions with each other. Comparing the three religions, who all claim Abraham as an important figure, also serves to illuminate and illustrate unique attributes of each.
The book first introduces the foundation of each religion in turn, and then compares each during broad time periods, showing how each religion reacted differently to prevailing world conditions during each time period.
The only thing that kind of irked me was what felt like an atheistic, or perhaps agnostic, tone of the author, heavily giving weight to current opinions about religion. However, he treated all three equally, and I'd say in the same light. And even that approach provides a different view of the subject that is educational.
Overall, a pretty good book that I'm glad I read. Seeing all three religions and how they have interacted with each other and the world at large throughout history was very educational.
Read
June 22, 2025Abrahamic religions ranked as someone who is not religious but would genuinely join one of these religions because of my longtime fascination with all of them: Islam (lowkey wins cause it heavily inspired Dune, has the best symbol, love that Muslims aren’t allowed to have dogs because I absolutely hate dogs, I also have had a longtime fascination with the Middle East so that explains a lot, history of the Golden Age of Islam is also insanely interesting) > Judaism (I don’t know a single Jewish person so it being so other makes it more intriguing, I was obsessed with Judaism as a kid, love that Jews do not proselytize, unfortunately Judaism has the least amount of drip when compared to Islam and Christianity and Jewish weddings do not look aesthetic sorry…) > Christianity (Catholicism definitely has the best drip out of all the religions… the jewelry, the artwork, the churches, the architecture… so incredibly stunning that it feels like it shouldn’t be witnessed by human eyes, but irdgaf about the other denominations and I’m not a fan of the extreme proselytizing and I also don’t really care about Jesus being the messiah, but I like the fact that he was a Palestinian Jew)
December 4, 2025
It's interesting, but it chooses to be a history of the three major Abrahamic faiths rather than covering them in comparison. It is also peculiar to focus on 'the big three' when there are other Abrahamic faiths. The chapter on reform during the Enlightenment was closest to what I was looking for. It also chooses to go into depth on some unusual aspects, such as the early Church councils, but I would have rather that that section was in conversation with the theological roots of Islam. I am not really sure what the purpose of this book is, especially when there are several other VSIs on the Abrahamic Faiths individually. This book also seems to assume some level of familiarity with the three faiths, otherwise it feels rushed and uneven.
December 18, 2023
Easily one of the best books on comparative religion and interfaith issues I have ever read. The depth provided for each of the three belief systems presented is truly surprising and unexpected; normally this type of monograph seems to be written by an expert in one faith tradition with the other two tacked on seeminly as an afterthought, or the text focuses on the interfaith issues without delving in to the individual traditions themselves to provide context. With this text I could not determine what faith tradition the author's expertise is in and he dealt with the interfaith issues just as much as the contextual material. I am impressed.
Read
August 25, 2022Had a seminar with Prof Cohen in grad school ten years ago! He was very slyly and quietly funny and very smart, but he really let the students lead seminar (which is great), so I never really learned too much about him as a scholar. Loved reading this though. Fulfills the promise of comparative history, in that all three major religions come into sharper relief against each other.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 17, 2022
3.5, rounded up.
Works really well as an introduction to the Abrahamic religions, especially as one that views them as intertwined, plotting their histories collectively and noting the points at which they crossed paths.
Filled some holes in my understanding.
Works really well as an introduction to the Abrahamic religions, especially as one that views them as intertwined, plotting their histories collectively and noting the points at which they crossed paths.
Filled some holes in my understanding.
April 12, 2025
A bit difficult to read, maybe too much so for an ‘introductory’ book, but nevertheless very enjoyable. Highly recommend this if you’re interested in the history and relationships between the three Abrahamic religions.
July 1, 2022
Como introducción y muy muy corta, esta perfecta. Pero pues es mejor leerse algo más complejo si quieren profundizar en la historia de las religiones.
January 11, 2024
I was looking for a book that helped me understand the connections between Islam, Judaism and Christianity and this one made it with a simple, understanding and short form 👌
November 21, 2024
Had to read this for class. It was interesting and informative but felt like I was reading a text book unfortunately.
July 1, 2025
More historical than theological
March 8, 2022
As a mid-easterner, I found this book very informative on conception of Judaism and Christianity. It lays down the basic chronology in a very clear manner, leaving rest of the research to the reader as you can expect from an "introduction" book. It's also enlightening about modern Islamic movements' roots and evolution. Writer explains everything in a good, impartial and honest light.
Only downside of the book is writer's choice of some very archaic and obscure words (albeit in place) makes it impossible to read without a dictionary for a non-native English speaker.
Only downside of the book is writer's choice of some very archaic and obscure words (albeit in place) makes it impossible to read without a dictionary for a non-native English speaker.
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews