"All religions basically say the same thing."

I know you know that, of course.

Another one:

"Religion is a force for good."

I haven't seen much evidence for that one, either.

generally followed by (silently, to one's self) "...which just so happens to line up perfectly with my personal beliefs."

...conveniently enough.

other religions, really. It's just something that makes them feel better when they say it.

And nowadays, only in conservative versions.

Which major religions accept the scriptures of other religions as truth?

Official Catholic doctrine is now that people can find God through other religions because there it least some inspiration in them. Been this way since Vatican II, I think.

on edit: Hinduism says all gods of all religions reflect the infinite Brahma. Buddhism is officially agnostic.

I said not all do. In your link, I mainly saw a diversity of Hindu views which mostly criticized Christianity for being to exclusive, not an unreasonable position for a conquered people forced to let missionaries run around the country. The Hindu position I've given you is from rank and file Hindus I've spoken to, also stuff I've read, but it was quite a while ago, pre-internet.

The degree to which that is true, varies, as do almost all things.

As a rule, you will not find followers of any particular religion studying the teachings of other religions. Some might look into them, but almost none study those other teachings with any particular vigor.

Few Christians, for example, have any knowledge at all of Hinduism, and precious little about Islam. The converse is also true, in most cases. A few scholars study comparative religions, but that's about it.

The reason for that is simple. People are taught that their religion is the correct one, by the very people who lead whatever religion is being followed. There's no reason to study other religions if yours is the correct one.

There are exceptions, of course, but they are not common. Some people do take courses in comparative religion at college or university. Typically, such courses are just a semester and intensive study is not required. I remember such a course from my own college days. To say it was not rigorous would be an understatement.

Followers of most religions are not only not encouraged to learn the beliefs of other religions, they are generally discouraged from doing so. Frankly, most ordinary congregation members don't even study their own faith very rigorously. Anyone who has attended Bible study classes knows that study is fragmentary, at best, and focused on such scriptures as reinforce the teachings of the particular denomination.

The common belief of most religionists is the one I summarized in my thread title. Ignorance is bliss in most cases. Too much study of religion often leads to abandonment of religion. Ask most atheists if they have read all or parts of multiple religious scriptures. Knowledge leads to enlightenment.

At the core of most people's religious thinking is that their religion is the correct ones and that others are incorrect. Of course you can find exceptions. I qualify my statement with the word "most."

Even if you change that to core flaw in most religion, I am not sure I would agree. It doesn't really matter whether the rank and file study this or that. I think it's more a matter of their attitudes towards others, not how much they actually know. And that varies a lot.

The idea that there is one exclusive right religion and the others are all nonsense is Jewish invention from late Old Testament times. Even then they didn't care what other nations believed one way or the other, and Jews today mostly still don't.. Christianity then Islam picked up the idea and added that everybody had to follow the one true religion. In the East and pre-Christian West there was no idea of exclusivity and a much more free exchange of ideas. Modern liberal Christians aren't exclusive and many don't believe other religions are nonsense, they just say they are different paths.

So I stand by my statement that.exclusivity is not a core flaw of religion, just some versions of Western religion. Specifically, conservative versions.

Which leads me to what I do think is a core flaw of religion. It tends to be conservative and hierarchical. It's got a built-in conservativism because it is looking to a past when an absolute truth was revealed. As I said, you do get liberal religion, but liberals have to overcome the conservative bias to get there.

That is what is taught to the average follower. Right down to the denomination. I remember being taught that it would be sinful to go to a Mass in the Catholic Church across the street from the church I attended as a child. I clearly remember wondering why that would be so, since both worshiped the same deity system.

Then, there were the Chick Tracts about the "Death Cookie," and other anti-Catholic nonsense. It's not a matter of what the leaders of Christianity think. It's about what is being taught. I'm sure the little Catholic kids were being taught to stay away from my childhood church, too. None ever stepped inside its door. Some people would even refuse to go to a wedding or a funeral at a different church. As teens, we were even warned not to date Catholics to avoid being "yoked unequally." And that was a Presbyterian Church, for pete's sake. Catholic kids got similar warnings.

And that's within Christianity. Teachings about exclusivity are common. Which returns me to the "core flaw" idea.

We're talking about this religion stuff from a relatively objective distance. Nobody pays any attention to us, really. The teachings still go on. Read the current Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church. That's where the core of the church lies. That is what is being taught.

They've only conceeded that being Catholic isn't a prerequisite for salvation. They still maintain that if you want to do this Christianity thing the right way, you gotta do it the rite way (ba dum tssssss).

I'm available for birthday parties, weddings, and the occasional bris.

There's lots of variation, including theistic.

There's a lot of variation in all religion, so making generalizations about it is dangerous. Even where there is scripture or official doctrine, actual practice may be totally different.

So one can make generalizations based on what that official source instructs. No such thing exists with Buddhism.

Based on early writings, Buddha was apparently agnostic, and there remains an agnostic tendency in Buddhism.

My religion is the purest religion

My religion damns your religion to hell

Only we have the truth

You are damned if you do not follow our religion

Send every fundamentalist ever....

"Your God Has a Funny Name!"

...but it's a great start.

It's pretty hard to define incontrovertible doctrine and reconcile that with others who don't subscribe to those incontrovertible truths.

The most quoted bible verse among Christians is John 3:16. If you read this verse by itself it sounds pretty exclusivist. Any remaining doubts are destroyed by the following two verses.

Believe or be damned. Not much way around that verse.

Not hard to do. All that's required is the abandonment of reason which is already required to begin with.

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!"

He said, "Nobody loves me."

I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"

He said, "Yes."

I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?"

He said, "A Christian."

I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?"

He said, "Protestant."

I said, "Me, too! What franchise?"

He said, "Baptist."

I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Baptist."

I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist."

I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region."

I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912.

I said, "Die, heretic!", and I pushed him off the bridge.

Which Christian sect is god’s favorite?

(crickets)

Which sect of Christianity guarantees my unequivocal entrance into Heaven?

They all claim exclusivity which is weird because that’s not what Jesus preached.

If I cared... oh, shit. I really don’t care.

I recommend becoming a Catholic Methodist Pentecostalist Hindu Muslim. That would cover pretty much everything.

Now I’m really confused.

Or not.

But thanks for the inclusive suggestion!

about following him, or be damned.

It’s really hard to follow.

A slight restatement that says essentially the same thing as yours.

And that is all that needs to be said.

Dueling beliefs.

Any alleged 1) "belief" in reason and science is backed by a thousand years of visible evidence, advancing technology, prosperity. 2) Belief in Christianity provides no visible provable evidence at all. In fact, evidence strongly contradicts its major assertions.

Religion provides no evidence, but relies just on raw egotism and vanity. The satisfaction of thinking you are right, better, with no evidence offered.