# Believers: How do we know which religion is the correct one? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 29, 2010, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311 "2010-11-29T18:42:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/41 "2010-11-30T20:49:38Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > Really? Could it not also be man’s response to the Creator reaching out? It could also be Martians fucking with us telepathically. But we actually have evidence for Man, so why not stick with that? ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/42 "2010-11-30T21:40:45Z")
> [@dzero](#): > > Whoa. That is clearly not true. From the very beginning there was something called the “gnostic heresy” which the church actively persecuted. And if you read any of those texts like the Gospel of Thomas, they do present a very different view of Jesus than the canonical gospels. I guess you never read anything fom the Nag Hammadi library. The gnostic heresy did not exist “from the beginning” at all. That’s precisely one of the incorrect beliefs that I was fed as a youngster, but which I later learned to be incorrect. We have not evidence that gnostic Christianity existed before the later second century A.D., perhaps beginning around 170 A.D., perhaps later. The Gospel of Thomas, which is probably the earliest gnostic writing, has been dated by some with honest intentions to the first century A.D. However, there is not evidence to support this. Nicholas Perrin in his book [Thomas and Tatian: The Relationship Between the Gospel of Thomas and the Diatessaron](http://books.google.com/books?id=_Vg7IZ0P_hwC&pg=PP1&dq=Thomas+and+Tatian#v=onepage&q&f=false), shows that the Gospel of Thomas depends on the _Diatessaron_, a compilation of the four canonical gospels written around 175 A.D. This puts a lower limit on when the Gospel of Thomas could have been written, and the other Gnostic gospels were likely written much later than that. As for the charge that I haven’t read them, I have read the Gospel of Thomas and pieces of some of the others, so I know what’s in them. Sure, it’s different from what’s in the canonical gospels, but different in a bad way, not a good one. For example, in the Gospel of Thomas, Saint Peter says “women don’t deserve life”, and Jesus appears to agree with him. Which raises the question of why groups such as the Jesus Seminar would so badly want this text to be viewed as mainstream and trustworthy by Christians? But regardless, the point is that the early Christian church did not separate the four canonical gospels from the others arbitrarily, as some claim. Rather they were separated based on reliability, with Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John becoming canonical because they were the reliable ones. ---
**Author:** ![dzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@dzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dzero)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/43 "2010-11-30T22:09:29Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > The gnostic heresy did not exist “from the beginning” at all. That’s precisely one of the incorrect beliefs that I was fed as a youngster, but which I later learned to be incorrect. We have not evidence that gnostic Christianity existed before the later second century A.D., perhaps beginning around 170 A.D., perhaps later. The Gospel of Thomas, which is probably the earliest gnostic writing, has been dated by some with honest intentions to the first century A.D. However, there is not evidence to support this. Nicholas Perrin in his book [Thomas and Tatian: The Relationship Between the Gospel of Thomas and the Diatessaron](http://books.google.com/books?id=_Vg7IZ0P_hwC&pg=PP1&dq=Thomas+and+Tatian#v=onepage&q&f=false), shows that the Gospel of Thomas depends on the Diatessaron, a compilation of the four canonical gospels written around 175 A.D. This puts a lower limit on when the Gospel of Thomas could have been written, and the other Gnostic gospels were likely written much later than that. As for the charge that I haven’t read them, I have read the Gospel of Thomas and pieces of some of the others, so I know what’s in them. Sure, it’s different from what’s in the canonical gospels, but different in a bad way, not a good one. For example, in the Gospel of Thomas, Saint Peter says “women don’t deserve life”, and Jesus appears to agree with him. Which raises the question of why groups such as the Jesus Seminar would so badly want this text to be viewed as mainstream and trustworthy by Christians? > > But regardless, the point is that the early Christian church did not separate the four canonical gospels from the others arbitrarily, as some claim. Rather they were separated based on reliability, with Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John becoming canonical because they were the reliable ones. No they were the ones deemed to be consistent with the “truth”, ie, the early church father’s view of the truth. [As for your dating](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism#History) > [@](#): > > [Bentley Layton](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bentley_Layton) has sketched out a relationship between the various gnostic movements in his introduction to The Gnostic Scriptures (SCM Press, London, 1987). In this model, ‘Classical Gnosticism’ and ‘The School of Thomas’ antedated and influenced the development of [Valentinus](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinus_%28Gnostic%29), who was to found his own school of Gnosticism in both [Alexandria](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria) and [Rome](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome), whom Layton called ‘the great [Gnostic] reformer’ and ‘the focal point’ of Gnostic development. While in Alexandria, where he was born, Valentinus probably would have had contact with the Gnostic teacher [Basilides](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilides), and may have been influenced by him. Also: > [@](#): > > It is hard to sift through what actual evidence there is regarding Gnosticism in the NT due to their historical synchronicity. The Hammadi library find contains Pagan, Jewish, Greek and early Gnostic influences,[[88]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism#cite_note-87) further reinforcing the need to tread lightly. The antiquity of the find being of utmost importance since it shows primary evidence of texts that may also have influenced the process of NT canonization.[[89]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism#cite_note-88) > If any conclusion is to be made at this point it is that Gnosticism was considered a real enough threat by the apostles themselves, showing us how early it started to infiltrate the Church, through which several of its undercurrents were to strongly influence later ‘orthodox’ doctrine.[[improper synthesis?](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Synthesis_of_published_material_that_advances_a_position)][[90]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism#cite_note-89)[[91]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism#cite_note-90) I think that would constitute “from the beginning”. The fact that Thomas is so much more primitive than even Mark as it has not even a semblance of a narrative I think guarantees that it is at least older than Mark which IIRC has been dated to possibly as early as the destruction of the temple. And while some may think the gnostic texts paint Christianity in a bad light, I think it offers us many new insights that are obscured by the traditionally monolithic view of church history. edit - oh, and you still haven’t made even an attempt at a case for the validity of Christianity over any other religion. I was hoping that would be the main course and not these exegetical tangents. ---
**Author:** ![Paranoid\_Randroid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/paranoid_randroid/32/18_2.png) [@Paranoid\_Randroid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paranoid_Randroid)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/44 "2010-11-30T22:12:43Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > You need to read the right papers then. Religious experiences are, by definition, psychotic episodes. Let’s be fair, here: _that_ is an example of begging the question. > [@](#): > > Name a single example of any actual miracle or supernatural event. You’ve seen his previous posts, so my guess is that you can recall several examples of what he believes to be actually miracles. (I’ll give you a start: Fatima; Medjugorje.) > [@](#): > > Not that it rpresents evidence for Christianity anyway. Can you cite any actual evidence that Jesus was actually a sky god in disguise, that he performed miracles or that he was physically resurrected? Now _that_ is a genuine question (if snidely worded). ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/45 "2010-11-30T22:22:10Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > The gnostic heresy did not exist “from the beginning” at all. Incorrect. While “gnosticism” is a broad category with obscure origins, there is evidence it may have predated Christianity as a Jewish, mystic sect. In any case, there were bickering and diverse Christian groups from the very beginning. Try reading Bart Ehrman’s _Lost Christianities_. > [@](#): > > The Gospel of Thomas, which is probably the earliest gnostic writing, has been dated by some with honest intentions to the first century A.D. However, there is not evidence to support this. Nicholas Perrin in his book [Thomas and Tatian: The Relationship Between the Gospel of Thomas and the Diatessaron](http://books.google.com/books?id=_Vg7IZ0P_hwC&pg=PP1&dq=Thomas+and+Tatian#v=onepage&q&f=false), shows that the Gospel of Thomas depends on the _Diatessaron_, a compilation of the four canonical gospels written around 175 A.D. This puts a lower limit on when the Gospel of Thomas could have been written, and the other Gnostic gospels were likely written much later than that. You should expand your “study” beyond only the apologists you so dearly want to believe. GThomas is not even a Gnostic gospel, although it appears to have been used by Gnostics later on. It’s earliest layers are likely contemporary with Q, in that it is a sayings gospel (and it is _not_ dependent on the canoicals) which which lacks the later theological accretions of the resurrection, virgin birth, Jesus as divine, as a miracle worker or even as the Messiah. This is stronmg evidence that it’s a very early work. You need to do a better job of educating yourself. > [@](#): > > For example, in the Gospel of Thomas, Saint Peter says “women don’t deserve life”, and Jesus appears to agree with him. Which raises the question of why groups such as the Jesus Seminar would so badly want this text to be viewed as mainstream and trustworthy by Christians? What does “mainstream and trusty” mean? The Jesus Seminar is not concerned with the religious authorirty of these writings. It doesn’t recognize any of them as having any religious authority. The JS is concerned with what is likely to be earlier and more authentic. The philsophical implications to believers are irrelevant to their work. Having said that, Jesus does not “agree” that women don’t deserve life. He makes an obscure mustical statement about women having to “become as men.” Don’t try to comment on the book if you aren’t familiar with it. > [@](#): > > But regardless, the point is that the early Christian church did not separate the four canonical gospels from the others arbitrarily, as some claim. Rather they were separated based on reliability, with Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John becoming canonical because they were the reliable ones. They chose them because they were popular, the best written and in the most accord with their own theological bent. I don’t know what you mean by “reliable,” but if you think they represent any kind of accurate, “reliable” history, you couldn’t be farther from the truth. We simply don’t possess any reliable information at all about Jesus or what he taught, but the sayings gospels Q and Thomas have the best shot at capturing something authentic about him. Note that neither of these gospels – likely the very earliest we have, (aside from Paul, who tells us nothing useful and who admits he was at odds with Jesus’ actual disciples) claims he did miracles or was resurrected from the dead). Actually, Paul doesn’t say anything about miracles, a virgin birth or a physical resurrection either. He just said Jesus “appeared” to people after he was dead. He does not say the appearances were physical and does not distingusih between the nature of these appearances to the apostles and to himself. In addition, Paul denies that physical resurrections are possible and calls people “idiots” for believing they can happen. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/46 "2010-11-30T22:28:08Z")
> [@Paranoid\_Randroid](#): > > Let’s be fair, here: _that_ is an example of begging the question. Not really, it’s just callinmg bullshit on ITR’s standard attempt to equivocate between regular hallucinations and religious one. ---
**Author:** ![dzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@dzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dzero)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/47 "2010-11-30T22:34:17Z")
Diogenes: Much nicer job of the historical analysis than I was capable of. :o ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/48 "2010-11-30T22:39:32Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > The gnostic heresy did not exist “from the beginning” at all. That’s precisely one of the incorrect beliefs that I was fed as a youngster, but which I later learned to be incorrect. We have not evidence that gnostic Christianity existed before the later second century A.D., perhaps beginning around 170 A.D., perhaps later. The Gospel of Thomas, which is probably the earliest gnostic writing, has been dated by some with honest intentions to the first century A.D. However, there is not evidence to support this. Nicholas Perrin in his book [Thomas and Tatian: The Relationship Between the Gospel of Thomas and the Diatessaron](http://books.google.com/books?id=_Vg7IZ0P_hwC&pg=PP1&dq=Thomas+and+Tatian#v=onepage&q&f=false), shows that the Gospel of Thomas depends on the _Diatessaron_, a compilation of the four canonical gospels written around 175 A.D. This puts a lower limit on when the Gospel of Thomas could have been written, and the other Gnostic gospels were likely written much later than that. As for the charge that I haven’t read them, I have read the Gospel of Thomas and pieces of some of the others, so I know what’s in them. Sure, it’s different from what’s in the canonical gospels, but different in a bad way, not a good one. For example, in the Gospel of Thomas, Saint Peter says “women don’t deserve life”, and Jesus appears to agree with him. Which raises the question of why groups such as the Jesus Seminar would so badly want this text to be viewed as mainstream and trustworthy by Christians? > > But regardless, the point is that the early Christian church did not separate the four canonical gospels from the others arbitrarily, as some claim. Rather they were separated based on reliability, with Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John becoming canonical because they were the reliable ones. Have you studied other religions with the same intensity and devotion to determine which would be the right road to go down? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/49 "2010-11-30T22:46:21Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Have you studied other religions with the same intensity and devotion to determine which would be the right road to go down? He did. Did you know that those other religions don’t have \*Jesus \*in them?!? Of course they’re fake! ---
**Author:** ![Cyningablod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc29f/32.png) [@Cyningablod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyningablod)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/50 "2010-11-30T23:29:26Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > The gnostic heresy did not exist “from the beginning” at all. That’s precisely one of the incorrect beliefs that I was fed as a youngster, but which I later learned to be incorrect. We have not evidence that gnostic Christianity existed before the later second century A.D., perhaps beginning around 170 A.D., perhaps later. Maybe the specific _Gnostic_ “heresy” (I put that word in quotes because I think it’s ALL bullshit) didn’t in fact exist “from the beginning”. But certain “heresies” clearly DID. Read Luke 1: 1-4. Luke himself admits that there were competing “gospels” out there, at the time he sat down to write. And this was in the very earliest days of the post-Resurrection church: between 50 and 80 AD. As usual, **ITR champion** …apologetics FAIL. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2010, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/51 "2010-11-30T23:41:55Z")
> [@Paranoid\_Randroid](#): > > You’d expect the correct religion to have a lot of adherents. Actually, [it doesn’t.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SubGenius) ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/52 "2010-12-01T01:49:31Z")
I do not _know_, I _believe_. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/53 "2010-12-01T01:59:57Z")
I believe that my faith is correct, but I do not claim to know if other paths are also a safe way to enlightenment and Heaven. There might be other ways into His Father’s House and all of those rooms, but I am going to stick with the way that I believe in. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/54 "2010-12-01T02:12:49Z")
> [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](#): > > I do not _know_, I _believe_. How many religions did you sample before you decided? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/55 "2010-12-01T04:13:12Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > If God is anything like a good parent (as many, but not all, religions would tell us), my best guess is that, like most good parents, S/He wants us to be happy with our lives, and that’s about it. God wants you to put on a sweater, because He is chilly. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/56 "2010-12-01T04:25:41Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > No, I hadn’t missed it. That’s one of the details. And you can take that as a metaphor for personal responsibility or even ‘joining the club’ instead of literally. Being Jewish, and having had my ancestors tormented for nearly 2,000 years thanks to this little detail, I think your idea of the history or religious thought is a bit fuzzy. How many people got forcibly converted, for their own good of course, due to this little detail? Aren’t there Christian articles of faith about this? ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/57 "2010-12-01T04:35:34Z")
> [@dzero](#): > > However I do agree that depending upon how open one is to seeing the hand of god at work in human affairs, you can look at certain events in the judeo-christian tradition and possibly make some sort of probabilistic argument. One example that I’ve always thought was difficult to explain away was how a small group of Jesus’ followers, who must have been scared shitless at seeing their leader crucified somehow snatched victory from the jaws of defeat and were able to unleash the philosophical equivalent of a highly contagious virus upon the Roman empire. Then there are also the stories of martyrs who were torn apart in the Colosseum with a passivity that evokes memories of self-immolations in Vietnam - for those of you who remember such things. This is actually kind of like an anthropic argument - religions that die out don’t have believers doing justification, so any religion around these days, pretty much, can use this argument. Besides Christianity, Judaism can, as can Islam, and even the Mormons can. The Scientologists should be trotting it out any week now, if they haven’t already. So it isn’t a winner. ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/58 "2010-12-01T04:50:06Z")
I’m Jewish because I was born Jewish from two Jewish parents. I don’t know if it’s correct; I don’t even care if it’s correct. The rituals and rites of Judaism are the ones I’m comfortable with. Belief has not much to do with it. Most of the time the prayers are in a language I don’t understand anyway. I could be reciting total gibberish. But it’s the gibberish I’ve been brought up on. ---
**Author:** ![dzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@dzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dzero)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/59 "2010-12-01T05:02:50Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > This is actually kind of like an anthropic argument - religions that die out don’t have believers doing justification, so any religion around these days, pretty much, can use this argument. Besides Christianity, Judaism can, as can Islam, and even the Mormons can. The Scientologists should be trotting it out any week now, if they haven’t already. So it isn’t a winner. You won’t get any argument for me. The parameters that need to be satisfied for it to be used to any practical effect are admittedly pretty damn narrow. I think there is something to those I can pick out of the J-C tradition, but I have already admitted that personal bias probably plays a role even if subjectively I can’t see it. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2010, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311/60 "2010-12-01T05:11:12Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > I’m Jewish because I was born Jewish from two Jewish parents. I don’t know if it’s correct; I don’t even care if it’s correct. The rituals and rites of Judaism are the ones I’m comfortable with. Belief has not much to do with it. Most of the time the prayers are in a language I don’t understand anyway. I could be reciting total gibberish. But it’s the gibberish I’ve been brought up on. An honest answer. And let’s be real: most devout Christians would be devout Muslims had they been brought up in, say, Iraq. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/believers-how-do-we-know-which-religion-is-the-correct-one/562311.md?page=4)