According to Robert Wright, in his book “The Evolution of God”: yes.
“In light of Muhammad’s conviction that he spoke for the Abrahamic god, I’ll depart from current convention and refer to Allah as “God.” Of course, many Christians and Jews wouldn’t agree that their God is the God worshipped by Muslims. Then again, many Jews wouldn’t agree that their God is the God worshipped by Christians, since (for one thing) their God never assumed human form. In calling both the Jewish and Christian gods “God,” we defer to the claim of Christians that their God is the same God who spoke through Moses. It only makes sense to extend that deference to Muhammad’s claim that the God who spoke through him is the same God who had spoken through Moses and Jesus. Besides, if we look closely at how Muhammad turned Allah into the one true god of the Arabs, we’ll see that Allah’s Judeo-Christian lineage is, if anything, stronger than is commonly appreciated.”
“If Allah was indeed the Judeo-Christian God all along, that would solve at least one riddle. Marshall Hodgson, a highly respected mid-twentieth-century scholar of Islam, observed in his magisterial work The Venture of Islam that, before Muhammad came along, Allah “had no special cult”—no community of Arabs who worshipped him with special devotion. Then, a paragraph later, he reports in parentheses something that strikes him as curious: for some reason, “Christian Arabs made pilgrimage to the Ka’ba, honoring Allah there as God the Creator.”
“Maybe the explanation is simple: Christian Arabs were Allah’s cult, and had been from the day Allah first showed up at the Ka’ba under Christian sponsorship. (To this day, Christian Arabs refer to God as Allah.)…”
“…To be sure, scholars who embrace the independent-evolution scenario have an explanation for the phonetic likeness of the Arabian god Allah and the Christian God of Syria. In Arabic, the generic word for god—for any deity—was ilah, and the phrase for “the god” was al-ilah. Through contraction, they say, this phrase could have been compressed to allah.”
“If this is indeed what happened, then the resemblance between the Arabic allah and the Syriac allaha has an explanation that doesn’t involve direct transmission from Syriac to Arabic. After all, Syriac and Arabic are, like ancient Hebrew, Semitic tongues. So if you could precisely trace the history of the Syriac word allaha back a millennium or so, and you could do the same with the Arabic word ilah, the two lineages might well converge somewhere in the trunk of the Semitic-language family tree. Specifically, they might converge in the vicinity of a word that is enough like ilah and allaha in sound and meaning to suggest close kinship with them: Elohim, Hebrew for God (and for god—lowercase—as well). Thus the phonetic resemblance between the Syriac word for God and the Arabic word for god could be the legacy of a common, distant ancestor, rather than signifying that the former gave birth to the latter.”
“The problem with this scenario lies in the next step: the idea that the name Allah arose as a contraction of “the god” (al-ilah) to refer to a god who was pre-Islamic and non-Judeo-Christian—in other words, a god that dwelt among polytheists. How likely is it that Arabs would have been referring to a particular god simply as “the god” before they had come to believe that he was in fact “the god”—before they had accepted that there was such a thing as the one and only god? A more plausible sequence of linguistic evolution is the more straightforward one: the Arabic Allah is descended from the Syriac allaha, and allaha’s lineage, in turn, leads back to close kinship with Elohim. The names change—a little—but the God remains the same.”, [Robert Wright, The Evolution of God]