Well, yeah, that's what Christians claiming to be Abrahamic monotheists claim.
Non-Christian Abrahamic monotheists often strenuously disagree.
EDIT: to be clear, I am a Christian and believe the Trinity isn't multiple Gods (and neither is, say, the veneration of saints.) But I am also not gatekeeping clearly Abrahamic-in-descent faiths from the Abrahamic family tree on the basis of whether or not they posit the existence of entities that I consider incompatible with monotheism (both because “monotheism” is a separate descriptor from Abrahamic, and because evaluated monotheism is slippery.)
Christianity is only monotheistic in name, for "reasons." The Trinity would just be three separate gods in any other religion. Even classifying Father, Son and Holy Spirit as "separate divine aspects of a single God" is basically what Hinduism does, and no one argues that Hinduism is monotheistic that I'm aware of. Also, the way saints and angels have traditionally been regarded in Christian practice (particularly in antiquity, prior to Protestantism) is exactly the way other religions have regarded minor and household gods, or ancestor gods.
They would emphatically say no, but the Trinity suggests otherwise.
Three distinct entities, with distinct personalities, goals and natures: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Son forgives easily, the Father holds grudges for generations. It's an unforgivable sin to blaspheme against one, but not the others. Meanwhile, the description of the Trinity as essentially distinct aspects of a single being is similar to some interpretations of Hinduism. There is at least a superficial (and not at all radical) case to be made that Christianity is monotheistic in name only.
So would, or do, Muslims consider Christians to be polytheists? I don't know. But it seems they would need to for that verse to really apply.
Although... Christian teaching holds the Old Testament to be as sacred and inerrant as the New, and that has many examples of God (the Father) commanding His people to stone the unclean and murder the infidels (which at the time would be anyone not a Jew, because of course the God of Israel was, exclusively, the God of Israel, (until He wasn't)) and the Book of Revelations is almost entirely about a holy war between Christians and Everyone and Everything Else.
Yet, I doubt you would find the majority of Christians or Jews holding to such a violent and literal interpretation of scripture. Some, yes, obviously. In the US at least, apocalyptic Christian theology is big business (just see the Left Behind and assorted clones in any bookstore) and big politics.
Nevertheless, it is no more the case that all Muslims want the infidels dead (but only a few are willing to pull the trigger) than it is that all Christians want every woman on her period within the city limits to be stoned to death. The truth is, most religious people are hypocrites, and the world remains the better for it, and both Islam and Christianity could (and have, now and then) justify genocide and hate with their Scriptures if they wanted, because both religions come from a time when those were SOP for religions and societies.
> But yeah, neither of those are Christian. Both are IIRC Polythistic religions, about as different from Christianity as possible.
Many Hindus believe that the numerous deities are different forms or aspects of one ultimate deity. As such, they are much closer to monotheism than you think. It can be described as "inclusive monotheism", as opposed to the "exclusive monotheism" of the Abrahamic religions.
Sikhism is not polytheistic at all, it is very monotheistic.
Christianity itself has been accused of polytheism. Many Jews, Muslims, and non-Trinitarian Christians argue that there is no real difference between Trinity and tritheism. Many Protestants accuse the Catholic and Orthodox cult of Mary and the Saints of bordering on polytheism. Mormonism (admittedly on the fringe of Christianity) sees the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three separate "beings", although it redefines the word "God" to refer to those three beings collectively. Mormon theology also implies that God the Father has a wife (the Heavenly Mother), and of other gods ruling over other universes (or parts of the universe.)
There is still no Jewish faith to my knowledge that is polytheistic. If you have material to share that provides evidence otherwise, I’d be interested in reading it, but Judaism isn’t Yahwism. That’s not gatekeeping, that’s… reading.
Mono- and polytheism isn’t slippery. You either believe in one god or multiple gods. There’s little to dissect there.
Polytheism and monotheism are completely incompatible. However, syncretic religions of incompatible elements actually exist. Thus, the assumption that they can't, is wrong.
Do you understand that the three 'Religions of the Book' or 'The Abrahamic Religions' all refer to the exact same God, whether that God be called 'Yahweh', 'Allah' or 'The Trinity'.
The only difference between a Monotheist and an Atheist is the the Atheist disbelieves in just one more God than the Monotheist.
Why would a person believing in just one God be more correct than a person believing in many Gods? The more the merrier, right?
Many major religions are monotheistic by definition. The entire premise is that only 1 true god exists.
Saying we "agree on 519 of 520 and disagree on 1" is a non-statement. The first person's belief in that 1 by definition precludes his belief in the other 519.
> Christians, Muslims and Jews believe in the same God
On the contrary, while all claim to believe in the God of Abraham, the characteristics of each God are different enough to describe different gods.
For example, Jews and Muslims do not believe Jesus is God and existed before the world was created. Both consider the Christian Trinity to be heretical.
Please do note that not all Christians believe in the trinity. It’s mainstream, but far from universal. As an example, I am a Christadelphian, and we refute the doctrine of the trinity, as it simply doesn’t appear in the Bible, and is indeed well documented as having been developed from roughly 100–325 AD.
>In the case of these so-called “Abrahamic” religions, the scriptures of said origin religions talk about false gods, yet some of the ones you claim believe in multiple gods. So which is it? Do you believe in the god of Abraham alone or not?
The jewish faith once had a pantheon of gods. You've "no true scottsman"ed your way into saying the jewish faith is not Abrahamic.
Imagine trying to explain to an ancient Greek philosopher how Christianity is monotheistic.
So, you have one God, but also a demigod, who is his son. There's a god of the underworld you call satan, and a number of divine or demonic creatures called angels and demons. Ok, throw in some ancestor worship in the form of saints.
This monotheistic pantheon would have sounded reassuringly familiar your ancient Greek interlocutor.
Which, in fairness, is a reason many denominations reject the notion of saints.
I don't think adherence to a rigorous definition of "monotheism" is really necessarily a premise of Christian belief. Every mainstream Christian denomination has thought more carefully about this definitional issue than any of us here have. If it's important to you, there's a menu of mainline denominations to select from to calibrate your "monotheism" to your church's.
Non-Christian Abrahamic monotheists often strenuously disagree.
EDIT: to be clear, I am a Christian and believe the Trinity isn't multiple Gods (and neither is, say, the veneration of saints.) But I am also not gatekeeping clearly Abrahamic-in-descent faiths from the Abrahamic family tree on the basis of whether or not they posit the existence of entities that I consider incompatible with monotheism (both because “monotheism” is a separate descriptor from Abrahamic, and because evaluated monotheism is slippery.)
reply