Universality, Inclusivity, and Shared Wisdom – An Abrahamic Perspective

The figure of Abraham stands as a foundational patriarch for three major world religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. His unwavering faith, his submission to the Divine Will, and his journey represent a pivotal moment in the history of monotheism, creating a shared spiritual ancestry often symbolized by the “tent of Abraham” – a metaphorical space of common origin and potential fellowship. This paper explores the hermeneutics of universality, inclusivity, and shared wisdom through the lens of this Abrahamic heritage, examining how the sacred texts central to these traditions – primarily the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), the New Testament, and the Quran – contain internal resources for interpretations that emphasize bridges between these faiths and potentially beyond, encompassing diverse human experiences under a unifying divine umbrella.

While acknowledging the distinct theological frameworks, historical trajectories, and communal identities that shape each tradition, this analysis focuses on the interpretive possibilities embedded within their foundational scriptures. We will investigate shared themes such as the affirmation of Divine Oneness, the narrative of continuous prophetic guidance stemming from Abraham, the concept of an inherent human spirituality or connection to the Divine, the complex textual engagement with religious pluralism and the status of the ‘other,’ and the profound emphasis on universal ethical imperatives like justice and compassion.

The inquiry is hermeneutical in nature: it seeks to understand how these texts can be read and interpreted, drawing upon principles from within each tradition (such as notions of literal and allegorical senses, context, intent, and inner meaning) to uncover potential for universal understanding and inter-communal respect. It avoids imposing a single external philosophical framework, instead exploring the convergences and parallels that emerge from a comparative reading of the texts themselves, particularly concerning their capacity to speak to universal human concerns and spiritual aspirations.

This exploration does not aim to flatten the significant differences or elide the historical conflicts between these communities. Rather, it contends that alongside verses emphasizing particularity, covenantal specificity, and communal boundaries, the Abrahamic scriptures also contain powerful currents of universalism and inclusivity. By engaging seriously with these currents through careful hermeneutical analysis, we can identify textual foundations for mutual recognition, ethical collaboration, and a deeper appreciation of the shared wisdom inherited from Abraham, resisting simplistic syncretism yet fostering profound inter-communal understanding in a world desperately in need of it. The challenge lies in interpreting the specific expressions of divine guidance within each text in a way that honours their integrity while illuminating their connection to the broader sweep of divine activity in human history, rooted in the call first heard by Abraham.

Navigating Meaning Across Abrahamic Texts

Interpreting the sacred texts of the Abrahamic faiths involves navigating complex linguistic, historical, and theological landscapes. Each tradition has developed sophisticated hermeneutical methodologies to approach its scripture, acknowledging layers of meaning and grappling with apparent tensions or ambiguities. Recognizing these interpretive dynamics is crucial for understanding how readings emphasizing universality and inclusivity can emerge from within each tradition.

Within Judaism, the interpretation of the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) has a rich history, famously exemplified by the fourfold method known as PaRDeS: Peshat (plain, literal meaning), Remez (hinted, allegorical meaning), Drash (homiletical, seeking application), and Sod (secret, mystical meaning). This framework inherently acknowledges that the text operates on multiple levels, inviting deeper engagement beyond the surface reading. Midrashic literature further exemplifies this, employing narrative expansion, parable, and intricate textual connections to explore the ethical and theological implications of the biblical text, often finding contemporary relevance in ancient narratives. This openness to layered meaning allows for interpretations that can discern universal principles within specific historical accounts or legal injunctions.

Christianity, inheriting the Hebrew Bible (as the Old Testament) and adding the New Testament, also developed multivalent interpretive approaches. The medieval Church widely adopted a fourfold sense of scripture: the Literal (historical), the Allegorical (doctrinal/Christological), the Moral (tropological, guiding conduct), and the Anagogical (eschatological, pertaining to ultimate destiny). While modern historical-critical methods have brought new perspectives, focusing on authorial intent, historical context, and source criticism, the principle that scripture conveys truths beyond the purely literal remains influential, particularly in devotional reading and theological reflection. Allegorical readings, for instance, have often been used to see universal spiritual dramas played out in historical events or Old Testament figures prefiguring Christ in ways intended for all humanity.

As discussed previously regarding the Quran, Islamic tradition distinguishes between the ẓahir (apparent) and baṭin (inner) meanings, utilizes ta’wil (allegorical/symbolic interpretation) alongside tafsir (exegesis), considers the asbab al-nuzul (context), grapples with naskh (abrogation), and increasingly employs Maqaṣid al-Shari‘ah (higher objectives). These tools, particularly the ẓahir/baṭin distinction and ta’wil, have been central to mystical (Sufi) and philosophical interpretations that often highlight the universal dimensions of the Quranic message.

While the specific methodologies differ, a common thread runs through these Abrahamic hermeneutical traditions: the recognition that their sacred texts are profoundly rich, multi-layered, and capable of yielding meaning beyond the immediate, literal sense. This shared understanding of textual depth provides the essential groundwork for interpretations seeking universality and inclusivity. Such interpretations often prioritize the ethical spirit over the specific letter, the underlying principle over the historical manifestation, or the symbolic resonance over the literal narrative, drawing upon the interpretive tools sanctioned within their respective traditions to bridge the particular and the universal. Engaging with scripture through these lenses allows the texts to speak anew to different contexts and audiences, revealing enduring truths relevant to the broader human family descending spiritually from Abraham.

Divine Oneness in the Abrahamic Heritage

The cornerstone of the Abrahamic legacy, resolutely affirmed in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, is the belief in the existence and absolute Oneness of God. This shared monotheistic commitment serves as the fundamental theological axis around which these faiths revolve and provides a powerful basis for recognizing a common metaphysical ground.

Judaism’s definitive declaration of monotheism is the Shema: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.” (Deuteronomy 6:4). This is not merely a theological proposition but the central affirmation of Jewish faith, recited daily, emphasizing God’s unique, indivisible, and sovereign reality. The entirety of the Hebrew Bible can be read as a testament to this Oneness, contrasting the God of Israel with the idols and multiple deities of surrounding nations (e.g., Isaiah 44:6: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.”). This uncompromising monotheism forms the bedrock of the covenant relationship.

Christianity inherits this radical monotheism. Jesus himself affirmed the Shema as the greatest commandment (Mark 12:29-30). While the Christian doctrine of the Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) introduces complexity regarding the inner life of God, orthodox Christianity has always fiercely maintained that this does not compromise the fundamental truth of God’s absolute Oneness, distinguishing its understanding from polytheism. Paul affirms, “yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist” (1 Corinthians 8:6). The Trinitarian doctrine is understood as revealing the relational nature within the One God, not a division of the Godhead into separate deities.

Islam’s emphasis on Tawhid (Divine Oneness) is, as previously discussed, central and absolute, articulated forcefully in Quranic declarations like 112:1-4 (“Say: He is God, the One…”) and 2:163 (“Your God is one God; there is no god but He, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.”). Islam views Tawhid as the primordial truth communicated by all prophets, including Abraham, Moses, and Jesus (Quran 21:25), seeing its own mission as the final and purest restoration of this essential principle, rejecting specifically the Christian doctrine of the Trinity and any notion of divine partnership (shirk).

Despite the crucial theological divergence regarding the Trinity, the foundational agreement on the existence of One, Transcendent, Creator God provides a profound point of convergence. From a hermeneutical perspective focused on universality:

1. Shared Source: The belief in One God implies a single ultimate source for all existence and all authentic divine guidance. This allows interpreters across the traditions to potentially view different revelations or spiritual insights as originating from, or pointing towards, the same Divine Reality, even if understood and articulated differently. Abraham’s encounter with the One God becomes the archetype for this relationship.
2. Creation as Testimony: All three traditions view the natural world as God’s creation, bearing witness to the Creator’s power, wisdom, and unity. The Psalmist declares, “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands” (Psalm 19:1). Paul argues that God’s eternal power and divine nature are clearly perceived in the things that have been made (Romans 1:20). The Quran constantly points to the ‘signs’ (ayat) in the cosmos and within the self (41:53). This shared appeal to the ‘book of nature’ as a universally accessible testament to the One Creator transcends specific scriptural boundaries.
3. Ontological Unity: Mystical currents within all three traditions have explored the deeper implications of Divine Oneness, often pointing towards a fundamental unity of being where all existence is grounded in and reflects the Divine. Jewish Kabbalah speaks of the Ein Sof (the Infinite) from which all emanates. Christian mystics like Meister Eckhart spoke of the “ground of being” where the soul meets God beyond distinction. Islamic Sufism, particularly through interpretations of Wahdat al-Wujud, emphasizes the reflection of the One Reality in the multiplicity of creation. While expressed in distinct vocabularies and with important theological safeguards in each tradition, this shared mystical intuition towards unity reinforces the universal implications of monotheism.

Therefore, the shared Abrahamic commitment to the One God, despite significant internal theological developments and differences, provides a fundamental unifying principle. It establishes a common metaphysical framework, points to universally accessible evidence in creation, and has inspired mystical interpretations emphasizing the interconnectedness of all things under the sovereignty of the singular Divine Reality encountered first by Abraham.

Prophetic Continuity and Divergent Culminations

A defining feature of the Abrahamic faiths is their historical consciousness, viewing divine revelation not as a static event but as an ongoing narrative unfolding through prophets and messengers. The Quran’s emphasis on a continuous chain of prophecy finds strong parallels and shared roots within Jewish and Christian scriptures, although each tradition understands the culmination and finality of this process differently.

The Hebrew Bible narrates a long succession of prophets – from Moses, the receiver of the Torah, through figures like Samuel, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and many others. These prophets are portrayed as messengers called by God to remind Israel of its covenant obligations, to call for justice and righteousness, and sometimes to foretell future events. They speak within a specific covenantal context (primarily with Israel) but often address universal themes of justice, idolatry, and divine sovereignty. The very structure of the Tanakh suggests a progressive unfolding of God’s relationship with humanity through these prophetic voices.

Christianity sees itself as the continuation and fulfillment of this prophetic narrative. The New Testament frequently quotes Hebrew prophets to demonstrate that Jesus is the promised Messiah and the culmination of God’s plan (e.g., Matthew’s repeated use of “This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet…”). Jesus is presented both as a prophet in the Jewish tradition (Luke 7:16) and as something more – the Son of God, the definitive revelation (Hebrews 1:1-2: “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son…”). While acknowledging the validity of the Hebrew prophets, Christianity posits the decisive and unsurpassable revelation in the person and work of Christ. The Holy Spirit is seen as continuing to guide the Church, but the foundational revelation is considered complete in Christ.

The Quran, as detailed earlier, explicitly embraces the lineage of Hebrew prophets and affirms Jesus’ prophetic role (2:136, 3:84, 42:13), presenting Muhammad as the final messenger in this same chain, bringing the culmination and perfection of the one primordial religion (din) of submission (islam) (5:3, 33:40). It sees its message as confirming the essential truths of previous revelations while correcting perceived human distortions (5:48).

From a hermeneutical perspective focused on universality and inclusivity, this shared narrative structure offers significant resources:

1. Validation of Shared Heritage: The explicit affirmation within Christian and Islamic scriptures of the divine inspiration of Hebrew prophets creates an undeniable link. The Quran’s respect for Moses and Jesus, and the New Testament’s grounding in the Old Testament, mean that these traditions inherently recognize vast swathes of each other’s sacred history as divinely guided. This provides a basis for mutual respect and the recognition of shared spiritual ancestors and foundational narratives.
2. Concept of One Underlying Message: The idea, prominent in the Quran (42:13) but resonant also with the prophetic call back to core covenant principles in the Tanakh and the Christian focus on Christ fulfilling the Law’s essence (Matthew 5:17, Romans 13:8-10), suggests that beneath the diversity of laws and specific messages lies a consistent divine call to faith, justice, and compassion. Interpreters can focus on this common ethical and spiritual core message delivered throughout the prophetic chain.
3. Divine Accommodation: The Quranic idea of God sending messengers “in their own language” (14:4) and prescribing different laws (shirʿah) and ways (minhaj) for different communities (5:48) resonates with the understanding in Judaism and Christianity that God interacts with humanity within specific historical and cultural contexts. This suggests divine accommodation to human diversity, allowing for multiple valid expressions of faithfulness within the overarching divine plan, at least historically.

However, the differing conceptions of finality represent a major point of divergence and hermeneutical challenge:

• Judaism generally maintains an expectation of a future Messianic age and potentially further prophetic guidance, not recognizing the claims of Jesus or Muhammad as definitive.
• Christianity asserts the finality and universality of the revelation in Jesus Christ.
• Islam asserts the finality of prophethood with Muhammad and the Quran as the ultimate, universal guidance.

Interpretations seeking inclusivity must navigate these competing claims. One approach is to focus on the shared structure of belief in ongoing divine guidance through Abrahamic history, while respectfully acknowledging the different conclusions each tradition draws about its culmination. Another is to interpret ‘finality’ not as necessarily invalidating the spiritual truths or potential for divine connection within other traditions, but as representing the ‘completion’ or ‘seal’ on a particular mode of prophetic revelation for a specific phase of human history, without precluding God’s ongoing relationship with all peoples. This requires sensitive readings that respect each text’s self-claims while highlighting the vast common ground established by the shared acknowledgment of the prophetic chain originating from Abraham.

Imago Dei, Heart, and Fitrah in Abrahamic Anthropology

Beyond external guidance through prophets and scriptures, the Abrahamic traditions share a conception of humanity as possessing an inherent dignity and an innate capacity for connection with the Divine. This shared anthropology provides fertile ground for interpretations emphasizing universal spirituality.

In Judaism and Christianity, the concept of humans being created “in the image of God” (Tselem Elohim in Hebrew, Imago Dei in Latin) (Genesis 1:26-27) is foundational. While interpretations vary (referring to reason, moral capacity, dominion, relationality, or physical form), it fundamentally signifies a unique relationship between humanity and God, bestowing inherent dignity and reflecting something of the divine nature within the human creature. This implies a universal human status that transcends ethnic or religious boundaries, as all share this divine image.

The Hebrew Bible and New Testament frequently speak of the ‘heart’ (lev or levav in Hebrew, kardia in Greek) as the center of human personality – the seat of thought, emotion, will, and spiritual understanding. God desires a circumcised or transformed heart (Deuteronomy 10:16, Jeremiah 4:4, Romans 2:29). The promise of the New Covenant involves God writing the law upon the hearts of the people (Jeremiah 31:33, echoed in Hebrews 8:10). This suggests an inner locus for divine connection and moral awareness. Paul speaks of Gentiles who do not have the written Law but show its requirements “written on their hearts,” their consciences bearing witness (Romans 2:14-15), implying a universal moral compass.

The Quranic concepts of Fitrah (primordial human nature oriented towards God, 30:30) and the Mithaq (pre-eternal covenant where all souls acknowledged God, 7:172), discussed earlier, strongly parallel these biblical ideas. Fitrah resonates with the Imago Dei in suggesting an inherent, God-given constitution that inclines humans towards the Divine. The Mithaq functions similarly to the law “written on the heart” or the implications of the Imago Dei, positing a universal, pre-cognitive recognition of God’s reality embedded within the human soul.

Like the Bible, the Quran emphasizes the ‘heart’ (qalb) as the organ of spiritual perception and understanding (50:37, 22:46). True belief resides in the heart, and its purification is essential for spiritual insight. The Quran also champions the use of reason (‘aql) and reflection (tafakkur) to discern God’s signs (30:8), paralleling the biblical wisdom tradition (e.g., Proverbs) and arguments from natural theology (e.g., Romans 1:20).

These overlapping anthropological concepts across the Abrahamic faiths provide a strong basis for hermeneutical approaches emphasizing universality:

1. Inherent Human Dignity: The shared idea that humans are created with a special connection to God (Imago Dei, Fitrah) implies a universal dignity and potential that transcends religious labels. Interpretations can leverage this to argue for mutual respect and the recognition of the divine spark in every individual.
2. Universal Spiritual Capacity: The emphasis on the heart as the seat of understanding and the notion of innate orientation towards God suggest that spiritual awareness and the capacity for a relationship with the Divine are not exclusive monopolies of any one tradition but are part of the universal human endowment. Different religious paths can be seen as different ways of awakening and nurturing this innate potential.
3. Accessibility of Truth: The acknowledgment in all three traditions that signs of God are present in creation and that humans possess reason and an inner moral compass (conscience, heart, Fitrah) suggests that avenues to knowing something of God and moral truth exist beyond formal adherence to a specific revealed law. This allows for recognizing wisdom and virtue wherever they are found.

While each tradition integrates these concepts into its specific theological framework (e.g., Christian doctrines of sin affecting the Imago Dei, Islamic emphasis on Fitrah needing activation by revelation), the shared affirmation of an innate human connection to the Divine offers significant resources for interpretations that highlight common humanity and universal spiritual potential, rooted in the very act of creation by the One God.

Interpreting Pluralism and the ‘Other’ in Abrahamic Texts

All three Abrahamic traditions grapple with the theological and social reality of religious diversity, and their scriptures contain complex, sometimes seemingly contradictory, statements regarding the status of those outside their specific covenantal community. Interpreting these texts requires careful attention to context, language, and overarching theological principles.

The Hebrew Bible presents Israel as God’s chosen people, bound by a specific covenant established at Sinai (Exodus 19-24; Deuteronomy 7:6). Much of its narrative and legal material focuses on maintaining this distinct identity and relationship. However, this particularity exists alongside universalist strands:

• The covenant with Noah after the flood encompasses all humanity (Genesis 9:8-17), establishing basic moral principles often seen as reflected in the later Rabbinic concept of the Seven Laws of Noah, applicable to all peoples.
• Figures like Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18-20), a priest of “God Most High” outside Abraham’s lineage, and Job, a righteous non-Israelite whose faithfulness is exemplary, suggest divine recognition beyond the specific covenant with Israel.
• Prophetic visions depict a future where all nations will stream to Jerusalem to worship the God of Israel and learn His ways, turning swords into plowshares (Isaiah 2:2-4, Micah 4:1-3). This eschatological vision is profoundly universalist.
• Commands to love the stranger (ger) “as yourself, for you were strangers in Egypt” (Leviticus 19:34) mandate ethical treatment of resident aliens.

The New Testament inherits this tension. While emphasizing belief in Jesus Christ as necessary for salvation (John 3:16-18, John 14:6, Acts 4:12) and the formation of a new covenant community (the Church), it also contains universalizing elements:

• God’s love is described as extending to the whole world (John 3:16).
• God “shows no partiality” and accepts those from every nation who fear Him and do what is right (Acts 10:34-35, Romans 2:11).
• The inclusion of Gentiles into the community of faith, a major theme in Acts and Paul’s letters, breaks down previous ethnic barriers (“There is neither Jew nor Greek… for you are all one in Christ Jesus,” Galatians 3:28).
• Parables like the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) redefine “neighbor” beyond religious or ethnic lines, emphasizing compassionate action.

The Quran, as previously analyzed, contains both verses suggesting universal criteria for salvation based on faith in God, the Last Day, and righteous deeds, explicitly mentioning Jews, Christians, and Sabians (2:62, 5:69), and verses emphasizing the necessity of accepting Islam (submission), particularly after the revelation given to Muhammad (3:19, 3:85). It acknowledges divinely-willed diversity (5:48, 49:13) and calls for kindness and justice towards non-hostile non-Muslims (60:8) and dialogue based on common terms (3:64).

Interpreting these complex textual data towards universality and inclusivity across the Abrahamic traditions involves several hermeneutical moves:

1. Contextualization: Reading seemingly exclusive verses within their specific historical and polemical contexts. For example, denunciations might be aimed at specific opposing groups or practices (like idolatry or active hostility) rather than representing a blanket condemnation of all outsiders for all time.
2. Prioritizing Foundational Principles: Giving hermeneutical weight to foundational divine attributes like justice, mercy, and universality (God as Lord of all worlds) and interpreting more specific or seemingly harsh verses in light of these broader principles. For instance, God’s universal lordship might temper interpretations of covenantal chosenness as exclusive privilege rather than responsibility.
3. Distinguishing Levels of Truth/Submission: Employing distinctions like the Quranic islam/al-Islam or analogous concepts (like implicit faith, anonymous Christians, righteous Gentiles/Noachides) allows interpreters to affirm the necessity of sincere faith and submission to God in a universal sense, while acknowledging the specific paths revealed within their traditions as the normative way for those who encounter them.
4. Eschatological Hope: Focusing on the universalist visions present in prophetic and apocalyptic literature (like Isaiah 2 or Revelation 21-22) where barriers seem to dissolve in the ultimate divine future. While pertaining to the end times, this vision can inform present attitudes towards diversity.
5. Emphasis on Orthopraxy: Highlighting the scriptural emphasis on righteous action and ethical conduct (Micah 6:8, Matthew 7:21, Quran 2:62) as a crucial, perhaps primary, criterion for divine judgment, potentially relativizing the importance of correct doctrinal formulation or formal affiliation alone.

Navigating these texts requires acknowledging that all three traditions contain internal resources for both inclusive and exclusive interpretations. The hermeneutical choices made by communities and individuals significantly shape their understanding of religious pluralism and their relationship with the ‘other’ inheritors of Abraham’s legacy. Focusing on the shared challenges and parallel resources within their scriptures can foster more empathetic and informed interfaith dialogue.

Bridging the Divide: Shared Strategies and Challenges

The task of interpreting Abrahamic scriptures towards greater universality and inclusivity involves employing hermeneutical strategies that resonate across the traditions, while acknowledging the unique challenges each faces.

• Inner vs. Outer Meaning: The Jewish PaRDeS system, Christian allegorical/moral senses, and Islamic ẓahir/baṭin distinction all provide frameworks for moving beyond literalism to discern deeper, potentially universal principles. This shared methodological potential allows interpreters to see, for instance, historical narratives as archetypes of the human spiritual journey, or specific laws as expressions of underlying ethical values like justice or compassion applicable in diverse contexts.
• Context Matters: While employed differently, attention to historical context (asbab al-nuzul in Islam, historical-critical methods in Judaism and Christianity) is crucial for understanding the original intent and scope of scriptural passages, preventing the misapplication of verses revealed in specific polemical or social situations to entirely different circumstances. This can mitigate harsh interpretations of verses dealing with conflict or the ‘other’.
• Reconciling Apparent Tensions: All three traditions face apparent contradictions or tensions within their scriptures (e.g., divine justice vs. mercy, particular election vs. universal concern, inclusive vs. exclusive statements). Methods like Midrashic reconciliation, Christian theological harmonization, and Islamic approaches to naskh (abrogation) or takhṣiṣ (specification) represent attempts to create coherent readings. Critically engaging with these methods, perhaps favoring harmonization over abrogation where textually plausible, can preserve inclusive potentials.
• Focus on Intent/Higher Objectives: Emphasizing the underlying purpose or spirit of the law, akin to the Islamic Maqaṣid al-Shariah or Jesus’ focus on the core principles of love for God and neighbour underlying the Torah (Matthew 22:37-40), allows for interpretations that prioritize ethical outcomes and universal values like justice, mercy, and human dignity over rigid adherence to the letter in all situations.

Shared Challenges:

• Claims of Finality/Uniqueness: As discussed, each tradition’s claim to a unique and definitive revelation (Torah, Christ, Quran) poses a significant barrier to interpretations aiming for full parity or equivalence. Hermeneutics must grapple respectfully with these core self-understandings.
• Historical Baggage: Centuries of conflict, polemic, and mutual misunderstanding have often entrenched exclusive interpretations and created suspicion towards more inclusive readings, which may be perceived as dilutions of faith or betrayals of tradition.
• Authority and Community: Interpretation is not solely an individual exercise but occurs within communities of faith with established authorities and interpretive traditions. Readings perceived as too radical or universalistic may face resistance from mainstream orthodoxies within each tradition.

Despite these challenges, the shared Abrahamic framework provides fertile ground. Recognizing the parallel hermeneutical tools and shared textual themes allows for a “trialogue” where insights from one tradition’s interpretive history might illuminate possibilities within another, fostering a collective exploration of the universal depths within their particular revelations.

The Ethical Core: Justice, Compassion, and Shared Abrahamic Values

Perhaps the most compelling and readily accessible common ground among the Abrahamic faiths lies in their profound emphasis on ethical conduct, particularly the demands for justice and compassion. These ethical imperatives, rooted in the nature of the One God, resonate universally and provide a powerful basis for shared understanding and collaboration.

The call for justice echoes throughout Abrahamic scriptures:

• Hebrew Bible: “Justice, justice shall you pursue” (Deuteronomy 16:20); “Let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream” (Amos 5:24); the prophetic critique of social injustice is relentless (e.g., Isaiah 1:17, Micah 6:8). Impartiality in judgment is mandated (Leviticus 19:15).
• New Testament: Jesus champions the cause of the marginalized and critiques hypocritical legalism that neglects “the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness” (Matthew 23:23). His followers are urged to seek God’s kingdom and His righteousness (Matthew 6:33).
• Quran: Calls for establishing justice (ʿadl, qisṭ) are pervasive, demanding fairness even against oneself or one’s kin (4:135, 5:8). Justice is presented as close to piety (taqwa).

Similarly, compassion and mercy are central divine attributes reflected in ethical commands:

• Hebrew Bible: God is described as “merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love (ḥesed) and faithfulness” (Exodus 34:6). The commands to love the neighbor (Leviticus 19:18) and the stranger (Leviticus 19:34) are foundational. Care for the widow, orphan, and poor is a recurring theme (e.g., Deuteronomy 24:19-21).
• New Testament: Jesus’ ministry embodies compassion (Matthew 9:36). He sums up the law as loving God and loving neighbor (Matthew 22:37-40), extending the definition of neighbor radically (Luke 10:25-37). Love, even for enemies (Matthew 5:44), is presented as the hallmark of discipleship.
• Quran: God’s primary names are al-Raḥman (the Most Compassionate) and al-Raḥim (the Most Merciful), opening almost every textual unit. The Prophet Muhammad is described as a “mercy for all creatures” (raḥmatan lil-ʿalamin, 21:107). Believers are urged to show compassion, forgive, feed the hungry, and care for the needy (e.g., 90:11-18, 6:12).

This deep convergence on core ethical principles – justice, compassion, honesty, kindness, care for the vulnerable, peacemaking (cf. Matthew 5:9) – provides a robust foundation for interpretations emphasizing shared wisdom. The “Golden Rule,” articulated in various forms across the traditions (e.g., Hillel: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow,” Shabbat 31a; Jesus: “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them,” Matthew 7:12; cf. Hadith literature), encapsulates this shared ethical sensibility.

A hermeneutic focused on universality and inclusivity can rightly foreground this ethical core. It suggests that authentic faith, across the Abrahamic family, is measured significantly by moral conduct and social responsibility. This shared ethical language allows for practical collaboration on issues of common concern – poverty, human rights, environmental stewardship, conflict resolution – seeing such work not as a secular compromise but as a faithful response to the commands embedded within each tradition’s sacred text. It allows for recognizing ‘righteousness’ in action, fostering mutual respect based on shared values derived from the One God worshiped by Abraham.

Towards a More Spacious Tent

The Abrahamic faiths, born from a common spiritual ancestry, possess sacred texts that, alongside their particular claims and distinct theological developments, contain profound resources for hermeneutical interpretations emphasizing universality, inclusivity, and shared wisdom. The unwavering affirmation of Divine Oneness provides a common metaphysical ground. The narrative of continuous prophetic guidance, despite divergent understandings of its culmination, establishes a shared sacred history and the idea of an underlying divine message. The conception of humans as created with an innate spiritual capacity (Imago Dei, Fitrah, the responsive heart) grounds dignity and potential universally. The complex engagement with religious diversity reveals internal strands acknowledging divinely willed pluralism and suggesting criteria for divine acceptance based on sincere faith and righteous action, existing in tension with exclusive claims but offering significant potential for inclusive readings. Most powerfully, the convergent emphasis on core ethical imperatives like justice and compassion provides a practical basis for mutual recognition and collaboration.

Exploring these themes requires engaging seriously with the hermeneutical traditions and tools developed within Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Methodologies that acknowledge multiple layers of meaning, consider context critically, prioritize foundational principles like divine mercy, harmonize apparent tensions constructively, and focus on the higher objectives or ethical spirit of the texts are particularly conducive to uncovering these universal dimensions.

This endeavour does not seek to erase the real differences or historical conflicts between these traditions, nor does it advocate for a facile syncretism. The claims to unique and final revelations within Christianity and Islam, and the distinct covenantal identity of Judaism, remain central to their self-understanding and must be respectfully acknowledged. However, by focusing on the shared heritage, parallel textual resources, and convergent ethical concerns through sensitive and rigorous hermeneutics, it is possible to foster interpretations that expand the “tent of Abraham.”

Such interpretations highlight a vision where the One God of Abraham has related to humanity through diverse, albeit interconnected, pathways. They emphasize shared responsibility for establishing justice and compassion in the world as the practical hallmark of true faith. They allow adherents of each tradition to recognize reflections of divine truth and goodness in the others, not as threats to their own identity, but as further testimony to the boundless grace and wisdom of the singular Divine Source. In a world often fractured by religious division, an Abrahamic hermeneutic attuned to universality, inclusivity, and shared wisdom offers not just a scholarly pursuit, but a vital resource for building bridges of understanding and cooperation, striving together towards the peace and justice envisioned by the prophets common to their legacy. The unfolding scrolls of their scriptures, read with open hearts and minds, may yet guide humanity towards a more spacious and welcoming shared future.

Bibliography

Abdel Haleem, M. A. S., translator. The Qur’an. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Abu-Nimer, Mohammed, editor. Interfaith Dialogue: A Guide for Muslims. Herndon: The International Institute of Islamic Thought, 2006.

Abu Zayd, Nasr Hamid. Reformation of Islamic Thought: A Critical Historical Analysis. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2006.

Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books, 1981.

Arkoun, Mohammed. Rethinking Islam: Common Questions, Uncommon Answers. Translated and edited by Robert D. Lee, Boulder: Westview Press, 1994.

Auda, Jasser. Maqasid al-Shariah as Philosophy of Islamic Law: A Systems Approach. London: The International Institute of Islamic Thought, 2008.

The Bible. New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). New York: National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA, 1989.

Boyarin, Daniel. Intertextuality and the Reading of Midrash. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990.

Brueggemann, Walter. Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute, Advocacy. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997.

Chittick, William C. The Sufi Path of Knowledge: Ibn al-‘Arabi’s Metaphysics of Imagination. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989.

Clooney, Francis X. Comparative Theology: Deep Learning Across Religious Borders. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010.

Clooney, Francis X.  Seeing Through Texts: Doing Theology Among the Srivaishnavas of South India. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996.

Cohen, Norman J. Self, Struggle & Change: Family Conflict Stories in Genesis and Their Healing Insights. Woodstock: Jewish Lights Publishing, 1995.

D’Costa, Gavin. Theology and Religious Pluralism: The Challenge of Other Religions. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986.

Esack, Farid. Qur’an, Liberation and Pluralism: An Islamic Perspective of Interreligious Solidarity Against Oppression. Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 1997.

Fishbane, Michael A. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985.

Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Truth and Method. 2nd rev. ed. Translated by Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall, New York: Continuum, 2004.

Handelman, Susan A. The Slayers of Moses: The Emergence of Rabbinic Interpretation in Modern Literary Theory. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1982.

Heschel, Abraham Joshua. God in Search of Man: A Philosophy of Judaism. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1955.

Heschel, Abraham Joshua. The Prophets. New York: Harper & Row, 1962.

Hick, John. An Interpretation of Religion: Human Responses to the Transcendent. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004.

Izutsu, Toshihiko. Ethico-Religious Concepts in the Qur’an. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2002.

Knitter, Paul F. Introducing Theologies of Religions. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 2002.

Kugel, James L. How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture, Then and Now. New York: Free Press, 2007.

Küng, Hans. Christianity and the World Religions: Paths of Dialogue with Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism. Translated by Peter Heinegg, Garden City: Doubleday, 1986.

Kuschel, Karl-Josef. Abraham: Sign of Hope for Jews, Christians and Muslims. Translated by John Bowden, New York: Continuum, 1995.

Levenson, Jon D. Sinai & Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible. Minneapolis: Winston Press, 1985.

V.A. Mohamad Ashrof is an independent Indian scholar specializing in Islamic humanism. With a deep commitment to advancing Quranic hermeneutics that prioritize human well-being, peace, and progress, his work aims to foster a just society, encourage critical thinking, and promote inclusive discourse and peaceful coexistence. He is dedicated to creating pathways for meaningful social change and intellectual growth through his scholarship. He can be reached at [email protected]