Religions have very different concepts. There are theistic (most religions) and atheistic religions. The theistic ones can be politheistic or monotheistic. Their gods are vastly different. They have different explanations on how the world was created or works, they can't all be true.
Religions also have different concepts about afterlife. Christianity has Heaven and Hell, Hinduism and Buddhisn have reincarnation, Judaism is vague about this topic, some religions claim there is no afterlife and there many other examples. Sometimes, there are different beliefs about afterlife within the same religion, for instance, Catholicism has the concept purgatory, which is absent in other christian sects.
Dogma differs from religion to religion. There are different rules about treating others, what to wear, what to eat or drink, how to care for your health and many more.
I was thinking, are some of the people who claim that all religions are just as good actually lying, because they think they will come across as arrogant if they claim their religion is the true one?

Some people want coexistence to work, despite the differences in religious opinions. Unfortunately, we are not hard-wired to coexist in certain ways. Never have been. Never will be, because the ego and the id always get in the way.

(June 24, 2018 at 6:53 am)Kit Wrote: Some people want coexistence to work, despite the differences in religious opinions.  Unfortunately, we are not hard-wired to coexist in certain ways.  Never have been.  Never will be, because the ego and the id always get in the way.

I agree, but there is another thing. Some christians I know claim that all religions are just as good, but see lack of religion as a bad choice. Do they wanna coexist with other religious, but not with nonreligious?

Belief, for some people, is a metaphorical comfort blanket. Even though they can perceive of coexistence, they have difficulty comprehending that not everyone has a need for religious belief. There could be multiple factors for their non-association with non-believers, and for most of them it culminates to the realization that the association is toxic to their personal belief system due to the fact that doubts are being raised through the wonderful art of logic. When this doubt begins to tug at their metaphorical comfort blanket, they panic. Thus, they slowly disassociate themselves from non-believers.

(June 24, 2018 at 7:16 am)Kit Wrote: Belief, for some people, is a metaphorical comfort blanket.  Even though they can perceive of coexistence, they have difficulty comprehending that not everyone has a need for religious belief.  There could be multiple factors for their non-association with non-believers, and for most of them it culminates to the realization that the association is toxic to their personal belief system due to the fact that doubts are being raised through the wonderful art of logic.  When this doubt begins to tug at their metaphorical comfort blanket, they panic.  Thus, they slowly disassociate themselves from non-believers.

Thank you for your answer!

I don't know any religious people who claim that.

The belief that all religions have some truth in them is fundamentally a reaction to the problem posed by multiple religions. If there truly are multiple incompatible religions, then the most plausible response is that they've all got it wrong. Rather than face that conclusion, and end up impugning their own beliefs, they disarm it with the innocuous alternative that maybe, all religions have it right (but of course, with their specific religion having it the rightest of all). It's essentially another aspect of defending their beliefs against the inevitable force of logic.

For a few years in my twenties I was an initiate in the Chisti Sufi order. They believed that all religions contained a kernel of the same truth. If someone asked me if I was Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, or Christian the answer would have been yes to any of these. Then I read the Koran and dropped out.

I only wish more would make that claim. I'm pretty sure we will always share the planet with believers. That being the case, I would prefer them to be as rational, tolerant and self-reflective as possible. This would be a step in the right direction. There are even some who respect people who identify as none, you just won't find many evangelical xtians who think nones aren't ripe for saving no matter how many times we tell them we prefer none.

I still find the concept of atheistic religion off 

Most of the examples that are used either sound more like a philosophy or don't sound atheistic