Well, as far as I am concerned, unless a single religion’s fundamental language can be used to debate all the different versions of religion that have ever existed, it is just another fairy tale.
The point is that in science there may be different (relative) perspectives and descriptions of reality, but it uses a single language (mathematics) to describe and argue for or against different interpretations of reality and its foundations, which has led to the acceptance of many fundamental truths that are revealed in the unfolding evolution of the universe.
Mathematical language is the common denominator in all of science and that allows for the eventual acceptance of a commonly shared interpretation of physical reality. and its causal foundations.
I cited Anil Seth before: “When our controlled hallucinations agree we call that reality”.
But if after some 3500 years of religious wars, no religion is willing to accept that a single hypothesis of a spiritual God can be arrived at, then I see no possibility of any "controlled hallucination coming to agreement on religion and how to describe it.
I read some of Kierkegaard and I cannot imagine that a Muslim would agree to his analysis of the Christian God. “Never the twain shall meet”.
I posed the question once to a Christian , “if Christianity and Islam both recognize that there is only one God, is the Christian God the same God as the Muslim God?”
The answer was “no”.
If you cannot even come to agreement on the single common fundamental denominator in separate belief systems, how can you ever hope to come to an agreement on the merits and flaws of such beliefs and practices?
p.s. CC4 summed it up very nicely: It’s Not A “Body-Mind Problem” - It’s An “Ego-God Problem.”