is there a term for judeo-christians + muslims?

People of the book is perfect

Just "religion". Historically the term has been "dead" or "converted" for the other two groups when either Christians or Muslims were in power.

The religions are separate and no more related than Buddhism or Hinduism or Paganism. The calendars are even different for all 3 religions.

Some scholars, (and I see from Angel's answer) some *critics* will use the term "Abrahamic" religions for the three, which is as inaccurate as 'Judeo-Christian'. Really no such things as "Abrahamic" or "Judeo-Christian".

@shadow: there is no "old" testament -- our covenant is living and eternal. Both Christians and Muslims have altered it to suit their own needs and ideas beyond the meaning or intent of the original (Hebrew/Aramaic) text. "People of the book" doesn't work for me since there are 3 distinct books which neither agree on anyone else's version.

The important area of agreement is one God. Monotheism. Again that is more a commonality for Jews and Muslims since Christians worship a human being as the one God. So it doesn't seem as if there is a legitimate grouping. Vedic Hinduism or Buddhism could be put in there as approximating Judaism closer than either of the other two. Then the Earth religions have much in common with Christianity (since many of the same holidays and calendar). So why not include all religions in that group? Then you have the set called "religion".

Jews find "Abrahamic" faiths confusing since the three religions are so different. For instance Judaism doesn't believe others need to be Jewish, nor does it have a hell, nor does it try to prostelyize.

"People of the book" IS the Islamic term for the three collectively. The Christian book, OT is a little different than the Jewish one. The Koran is considerably different with changes to the stories themselves.

By the time you've included all three, it's much of the world's people, since Christianity & Islam are about 2 Billion-ish each (Judaism is merely 14 Million). Is there a reason to refer to them in a lump term?

I'll star maybe someone has a good idea.

"Judeo-Christian" is used by Christians when they're trying to pretend that their ideas have some universality and occasionally by atheists who've learned the term from Christians.

"Abrahamic" is used primarily by pagans and atheists who want to lump three very different religions together in order to criticize them and contrast them with the wonders of modern paganism.

Neither term makes any sense in Judaism. And both make it far too easy to form false generalizations. Don't use them. Learn enough about the individual religions to talk about them as individual religions.

why do you need to put them under one term? i find the term judeo christian problematic enough. from the jewish side of it, there is no such thing. this term tries to impose the christian view of itself as a continuation of judaism, or even its supplanter. or heir...

the best way would be to just say judaism/christianity/islam (JCI) if you're writing articles and such.

i dont even know if christians are really monotheistic with that trinity... it's a bit of an iffy thing.

Abrahamic is correct, Muslims share the same OT as Jews and Christians

Both Jews and Muslims consider themselves to be "sons of Abraham". They both believe in the prophets, although the Jews don't recognize Muhammad as "the last prophet", as Muslims do. Both consider Jesus to be a prophet, although neither of them recognize his status as the Son of God.

Abrahamac religion.

Why must we label people? Why not try to get to actually know people?

Batsh*t crazies