Short answer
In one sense, yes, and Islam begins there. Its creed first denies every false god, and only then names the One: there is no god but Allah (﷾). What remains is not one more god on a list. It is the Creator that reason points to: a being who depends on nothing, has no beginning and has no partner. A god who was born, who had parents or who must share power fails that test, whatever his rank. The test is the same for every claim, and it owes nothing to any one culture. The Qur'an says Abraham used this reasoning against his own people. Islam's answer is that creed, and the way of life that follows from it.
Full explanation
Islam begins with a denial
The Muslim creed, the Shahada, opens with the words la ilaha illa Allah (﷾). They have two parts. The first is a denial: there is no god. Only then comes the affirmation: but Allah (﷾). So Islam rejects every other claimed god in the first words of its creed. The Qur'an gives the same instruction in one sentence (47:19). Islam does not mock what others worship (6:108). It sets the claims beside a test, and the test is open to anyone.
“Know, therefore, that there is no god but Allah, and ask forgiveness for thy fault, and for the men and women who believe: for Allah knows how ye move about and how ye dwell in your homes.”
“Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest they out of spite revile Allah in their ignorance. Thus have We made alluring to each people its own doings. In the end will they return to their Lord, and We shall then tell them the truth of all that they did.”
Four marks of the Creator
Begin with one fact: things depend on other things. A child depends on parents, and a fire depends on fuel. A chain of such things needs something at its root that depends on nothing. The page on who created God (﷾) gives the reasons. That gives four marks. It depends on nothing. It has no beginning, since whatever began depended on what began it. It has no parent or source. And it has no partner, since two such beings would have to differ by some limit, which a being that depends on nothing cannot have. The page on why there can only be one God gives the last step. The universe cannot be this being, because it has parts and changes. The Qur'an describes God (﷾) by the same marks.
Divides all that exists into what is only possible in itself (mumkin al-wujud), which needs a cause, and what is necessary in itself (wajib al-wujud), which needs none. Argues that a chain of possible things, however long, needs a necessary being outside it, and that this being is one and has no parts.
Argues that the sufficient reason for the whole series of contingent things must lie outside that series, in a necessary substance, which Leibniz calls God.
“Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him.”
“He is the First and the Last, the Evident and the Immanent: and He has full knowledge of all things.”
“O ye men! It is ye that have need of Allah: but Allah is the One Free of all wants, worthy of all praise.”
Running the test on the gods of the old stories
Take the Greek stories. Zeus is the son of Kronos, an older god, and he took power from his father. A god who was born has a beginning, so he depends on whatever brought him forth. In the same stories the Titans, an older family of gods, fought Zeus and the Olympian gods for rule. A god with a rival does not rule alone. Each of these fails a mark, so none is the being that the arguments reach. That is the test applied to every claim alike, not an insult. The Qur'an makes the same point about gods with rivals: each would take away what he had made, and some would lord it over others.
Tells how Zeus was born to Rhea and Cronos and overcame his father to reign over the gods. Tells how the Titans and the gods born of Cronos fought a ten-year war for rule.
“No son did Allah beget, nor is there any god along with Him: (if there were many gods), behold, each god would have taken away what he had created, and some would have lorded it over others! Glory to Allah! (He is free) from the (sort of) things they attribute to Him!”
“If there were, in the heavens and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both! but glory to Allah, the Lord of the Throne: (High is He) above what they attribute to Him!”
What the test does not strike out
Some traditions describe their highest being as without beginning, parent or rival. The test does not strike out such a claim. Such a claim is then tested on everything else its tradition says. Is the being distinct from the world? Are others worshipped beside it? The last question is what this being has said, and whether its message can be checked. The page on how to test a scripture gives the tests. So the sorting runs in two steps. First the marks, then the message. That is not "one god further", because it is a method, and anyone can apply it.
“Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him.”
Could several gods share the work?
Some reply that a few gods could simply agree and cooperate, so the Qur'an's argument fails. Look at what agreement means. If one god could overrule the other, only the stronger is all-powerful. If neither could ever overrule the other, neither is all-powerful. Either way there is one all-powerful God (﷾), or none. Someone could imagine a group of limited gods, but each would depend on the others for what it lacks. None of them would be the being that depends on nothing. The page on why there can only be one God gives the full argument.
“If there were, in the heavens and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both! but glory to Allah, the Lord of the Throne: (High is He) above what they attribute to Him!”
“No son did Allah beget, nor is there any god along with Him: (if there were many gods), behold, each god would have taken away what he had created, and some would have lorded it over others! Glory to Allah! (He is free) from the (sort of) things they attribute to Him!”
Abraham made this argument against his people
The Qur'an tells how Abraham spoke to his people about the star, the moon and the sun. Verse 75 says God (﷾) showed Abraham the power and laws of the heavens and the earth, that he might have certitude. In verses 76 to 79 he says of each in turn that it is his Lord, and he turns from it when it sets. Verse 83 gives the key: it calls this the reasoning given to Abraham to use against his people. So it is his argument, not a stage in his belief. The 14th-century commentator Ibn Kathir weighs the earlier views and reaches the same reading. What rises and sets, and so changes, cannot be the Lord. Abraham ends by turning to the One who created the heavens and the earth.
“So also did We show Abraham the power and the laws of the heavens and the earth, that he might (with understanding) have certitude.”
“When the night covered him over, He saw a star: He said: "This is my Lord." But when it set, He said: "I love not those that set." When he saw the moon rising in splendour, he said: "This is my Lord." But when the moon set, He said: "unless my Lord guide me, I shall surely be among those who go astray." When he saw the sun rising in splendour, he said: "This is my Lord; this is the greatest (of all)." But when the sun set, he said: "O my people! I am indeed free from your (guilt) of giving partners to Allah. "For me, I have set my face, firmly and truly, towards Him Who created the heavens and the earth, and never shall I give partners to Allah."”
“That was the reasoning about Us, which We gave to Abraham (to use) against his people: We raise whom We will, degree after degree: for thy Lord is full of wisdom and knowledge. We gave him Isaac and Jacob: all (three) guided: and before him, We guided Noah, and among his progeny, David, Solomon, Job, Joseph, Moses, and Aaron: thus do We reward those who do good: And Zakariya and John, and Jesus and Elias: all in the ranks of the righteous: And Isma'il and Elisha, and Jonas, and Lot: and to all We gave favour above the nations:”
Notes that the commentators differed over whether Abraham was reflecting for himself or debating his people, and that Ibn Jarir al-Tabari chose reflection. Holds that the truth is debate: Abraham was showing his people that the heavenly bodies they worshipped, which are set to a fixed course, rise and set and have no power of their own, cannot be gods.
Islam's answer: there is no god but Allah (﷾)
The creed is the answer. It sets aside whatever fails the marks and affirms the One who passes them: there is no god but Allah (﷾). In Islam this is the start of a whole way of life, not a slogan. Worship, conduct and character all follow from serving the One alone.
“Know, therefore, that there is no god but Allah, and ask forgiveness for thy fault, and for the men and women who believe: for Allah knows how ye move about and how ye dwell in your homes.”
“Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him.”
Reply by reply
"One god further" (by 1995; 2006)
A line popular among atheists: everyone who believes in a god is an atheist about nearly all the gods people have worshipped, and the atheist simply believes in one fewer. Stephen F. Roberts, an American software developer, used it as a signature on online newsgroup posts by early 1995. His version adds that once believers see why they dismiss the other gods, they will see why he dismisses theirs. Richard Dawkins made the same point in The God Delusion (2006), saying that he just goes one god further.
Cited for
When you see why you reject all the other gods, you will see why I reject yours.
The response
A Muslim rejects the gods of the old stories because they fail the marks: they were born, had parents or fought rivals. The reasons for a Creator are different reasons, from dependence and from the existence of anything at all. Where a person was born is a question of upbringing, which the page on following the religion you were born into answers.
Where it lands — The reasons against the old gods are not the reasons against a Creator, so they do not carry over.
Ibn Sina, Pointers and Reminders (11th c.)
Divides all that exists into what is only possible in itself (mumkin al-wujud), which needs a cause, and what is necessary in itself (wajib al-wujud), which needs none. Argues that a chain of possible things, however long, needs a necessary being outside it, and that this being is one and has no parts.
Cited for
The universe itself, or its first physical state, meets your marks. It may have no beginning and no rival, and it needs no mind.
The response
The universe is made of parts and changes, and its size and laws could have been otherwise. So it depends on its parts and on why it is this way, and a being that depends on nothing has no parts. The page on why there is something rather than nothing sets this out under "The universe is not the necessary being". Why such a being made this world and not another is a question of will. The page on how we know God (﷾) exists takes it up.
Where it lands — Whatever has parts and could have been otherwise fails the first mark, so the universe is not the being the marks describe.
"One god further" (by 1995; 2006)
A line popular among atheists: everyone who believes in a god is an atheist about nearly all the gods people have worshipped, and the atheist simply believes in one fewer. Stephen F. Roberts, an American software developer, used it as a signature on online newsgroup posts by early 1995. His version adds that once believers see why they dismiss the other gods, they will see why he dismisses theirs. Richard Dawkins made the same point in The God Delusion (2006), saying that he just goes one god further.
Cited for
We are all atheists about most gods. I just go one god further than you.
The response
The gods rejected and the Creator differ in kind. A god who was born or has rivals fails marks that a being depending on nothing meets. Rejecting the first is no reason to reject the second.
Where it lands — The difference is one of kind, not of number, so "one god further" does not follow.
"One god further" (by 1995; 2006)
A line popular among atheists: everyone who believes in a god is an atheist about nearly all the gods people have worshipped, and the atheist simply believes in one fewer. Stephen F. Roberts, an American software developer, used it as a signature on online newsgroup posts by early 1995. His version adds that once believers see why they dismiss the other gods, they will see why he dismisses theirs. Richard Dawkins made the same point in The God Delusion (2006), saying that he just goes one god further.
Cited for
Every believer says his god is the special one. Zeus and Brahman were supreme too.
The response
Run the same marks on each. Zeus has a father and fought for rule, so he fails. Where a tradition calls its highest being without beginning or rival, check everything else it says of that being. Is it distinct from the world, or does it become the world? Does it have other gods beside it? The page on whether the Hindu scriptures teach one God (﷾) sets out what those books say.
Where it lands — A claim of rank proves nothing. The marks decide first, and then the message.
"One god further" (by 1995; 2006)
A line popular among atheists: everyone who believes in a god is an atheist about nearly all the gods people have worshipped, and the atheist simply believes in one fewer. Stephen F. Roberts, an American software developer, used it as a signature on online newsgroup posts by early 1995. His version adds that once believers see why they dismiss the other gods, they will see why he dismisses theirs. Richard Dawkins made the same point in The God Delusion (2006), saying that he just goes one god further.
Cited for
Which god, out of thousands? A believer has no neutral way to choose.
The response
A long list of wrong answers does not show there is no right one. The marks sort the claims first. A claim that passes is then tested by its message, with tests that apply to every book alike.
Where it lands — The number of claims does not weaken the one that passes the test.
Qur'an 112:1-4 — Surat al-Ikhlas (Sincerity), verses 1-4
“Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him.”
Cited for
Even a first cause would not be a god with a name, so the step to Allah is unproved.
The response
The arguments give marks, not a name. Allah (﷾) is described in the Qur'an by exactly those marks. Which message comes from this being is the next question, and it can be tested.
Where it lands — The page claims the marks and sends the reader to the tests for the message.
Qur'an 21:22 — Surat al-Anbiya (The Prophets), verse 22
“If there were, in the heavens and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both! but glory to Allah, the Lord of the Throne: (High is He) above what they attribute to Him!”
Cited for
Several gods could simply cooperate, so there need be no confusion.
The response
If one could overrule the other, only that one is all-powerful. If neither could, neither is. Gods that cooperate because each lacks something depend on each other, so none depends on nothing.
Where it lands — Cooperation among limited gods does not give an all-powerful Creator.
Qur'an 6:76-79 — Surat al-An'am (The Cattle), verses 76-79
“When the night covered him over, He saw a star: He said: "This is my Lord." But when it set, He said: "I love not those that set." When he saw the moon rising in splendour, he said: "This is my Lord." But when the moon set, He said: "unless my Lord guide me, I shall surely be among those who go astray." When he saw the sun rising in splendour, he said: "This is my Lord; this is the greatest (of all)." But when the sun set, he said: "O my people! I am indeed free from your (guilt) of giving partners to Allah. "For me, I have set my face, firmly and truly, towards Him Who created the heavens and the earth, and never shall I give partners to Allah."”
Cited for
In the Qur'an Abraham calls a star his Lord, so even he was unsure which god to follow.
The response
Verse 83 calls this the reasoning given to Abraham to use against his people. He shows that what sets cannot be Lord, and ends by turning to the One who created the heavens and the earth.
Where it lands — The passage is an argument Abraham made against his people, not a stage of doubt.
Perspectives
Atheist: "one god further"
Everyone who believes in a god is an atheist about nearly all the gods people have ever worshipped. The atheist, on this view, simply rejects one more. The line is popular among atheists. Stephen F. Roberts, an American software developer, used it in online posts by 1995. The biologist Richard Dawkins made the same point in 2006. The deeper point is that believers' reasons for rejecting other gods apply to their own. Those reasons are no evidence, old stories and the accident of birth.
Every believer already rejects nearly all the gods ever worshipped, so the atheist differs only by rejecting one more.
Rebuttal
The first half is true, and Islam itself begins by rejecting false gods. But a god who was born or has rivals differs in kind from a being that depends on nothing. Rejecting the first gives no reason to reject the second.
Every religion says its own god is the special one, so a claim to be special proves nothing.
Rebuttal
A claim is not a proof, and this page does not rest on one. It rests on marks any Creator must have. Zeus fails them, and a being that depends on nothing does not.
The reasons you give for rejecting other gods are the reasons I give for rejecting yours. You would worship another god had you been born elsewhere.
Rebuttal
A Muslim rejects Zeus because he was born and had rivals, so he fails the marks. Those reasons do not touch a Creator who depends on nothing. Where one is born decides where one starts, not what is true.
Agnostic: which god, out of thousands?
People have claimed thousands of gods. With no neutral way to choose between them, the sceptic holds that none can be singled out. And even a first cause, if there is one, would not come with a name.
Thousands of gods have been claimed. A believer has no neutral way to show that his god is the real one.
Rebuttal
A long list of wrong answers does not show there is no right one. The marks sort the list, and a claim that passes is then tested by its message.
Even if the arguments reach a first cause, they give no name, so the step to Allah is not shown.
Rebuttal
The arguments give marks, not a name. The Qur'an's own description of Allah (﷾) has exactly those marks. Which message comes from this being is the next test.
The Islamic perspective
Islam begins by denying every false god and then names the One. Reason gives the marks of that One, the Qur'an states the same marks, and the creed puts them in a single sentence.
The creed begins with a denial of every god and then affirms Allah (﷾) alone.
The Qur'an describes God (﷾) by the marks of the Creator. He is eternal, not begotten, not begetting, and with none like Him.
Whatever depends on something needs a being that depends on nothing. So the Creator has no beginning, no parent and no partner.
A god who was born, had parents or must share power fails these marks. The same test applies to every claim alike.
Several limited gods that cooperate would each depend on the others, so none of them depends on nothing.
The Qur'an says the reasoning of Abraham was given to him to use against his people.