How can we be sure that all religions are wrong?

With respect.

If you are unable to distinguish common sense and idiocy, it's not my problem.

They have more in common than you think.

It's like counterfeit money, if you didn't study and examine the real money, you would more likely be fooled with the counterfeit money. Religion is the same and because there's so many counterfeit religions out there it's hard to see the true one. Example, There's over 42'000 different denominations in Christendom yet the book that describes true Christianity is only one.

The only 'true' religion is science.

Well all sciences are interconnected and SELF and PRESENCE are embroiled within it all (how can this not be the case?) ..please explain otherwise if you disagree.

We are not consciousness ...we “toggle” between consciousness TYPES also consciousness types and awareness are separate.

We know that now....things have moved on a bit....I can explain more if you wish.

Science is at a “cross roads” as we know.It needs to embrace consciousness types not avoid them ...just like it needs to embrace 0,0...1,1 logic.Neither are going anywhere.

I believe Adam, the first human was the first scientist. One of his responsibility was to name the animals. Like a scientist, he would have studied and observed the animals and gave them a name.
So I truly believe that science is part of our nature. The Bible tells us to observe God's creation. Example: (Proverbs 6:6) Go to the ant, you lazy one; Observe its ways and become wise. (what was he to observe?)
Verses 7-9 reads: Although it has no commander, officer, or ruler,  It prepares its food in the summer, And it gathers its food supplies in the harvest. How long, you lazy one, will you lie there? When will you rise up from your sleep?

God wants us to know Him and science is one way.
(Romans 1:20) For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable

Real discoveries in science are just not happening anymore even though millions and millions are being spent on research......Science has reached a cross roads.

Science needs to embrace stuff it doesn’t want to embrace.

LOGIC is shouting out loud for science to wake up.

Life has caught up with it just like it catches up with us all eventually.

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/82379/how-20-animals-got-their-names

Interesting! Thanks for sharing.
Here's the Bible's account:
Genesis 2:19-20
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field.

Job 40:15-23
Here, now, is Be·heʹmoth, which I made as I made you.
It eats grass like a bull.
Look at the strength in its hips
And the power in the muscles of its belly!
 It stiffens its tail like a cedar;
The sinews of its thighs are woven together.
 Its bones are tubes of copper;
Its limbs are like wrought-iron rods.
 It ranks first among the works of God;
Only its Maker can approach it with his sword.
 For the mountains produce food for it,
Where all the wild animals play.
 It lies down under the lotus trees,
In the shelter of the reeds of the marsh.
 The lotus trees cast their shadow on it,
And the poplars of the valley surround it.
 If the river is turbulent, it does not panic.
It is confident, although the Jordan rushes against its mouth.

The designation “Behemoth,” appearing at Job 40:15, has been variously viewed as (1) a derivative of an Egyptian word for “water ox,” (2) a word possibly of Assyrian origin meaning “monster,” and (3) an intensified plural of the Hebrew word behe·mahʹ (beast; domestic animal) that is understood to denote “great beast” or “huge beast.” In the Greek Septuagint the word the·riʹa (wild beasts) translates the Hebrew behe·mohthʹ. Evidently, though, a single animal is meant, as is indicated by the fact that the description given of Behemoth is not that of several creatures but of only one, generally considered to be the hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius). In fact, a number of Bible translations (AT, La, Ro, NW, JB, RS) use the word “hippopotamus” in the main text or in footnotes to identify the creature referred to by God.

“Job was a loony.”

Peter Cook as the Devil in Bedazzled.

I have read many 'versions' of the Bible, but never have I seen 'Job' so totally butchered as the bit you posted. Out of curiosity, what version were you quoting?

To give an idea how far afield it looks to me, here is how my go-to version (KJV) reads. The difference is 'significant', to put it mildly. I’ll start the quote a little earlier for context.



Notice the radical difference at vs 15. Your version has God talking about an animal God made. This one has ‘behemoth' being a creature that God made together with Job. The only creature that could possibly fit that description is Job himself.

And why at the end of this epic story would God start talking to Job about a hippopotamus? Is it any wonder why people have a hard time understanding the book with distortion like this being spewed about.

I have trouble understanding the old English that was used in translating the KJV. That version was a masterpiece in it's time but we don't speak like that anymore.
Here the American standard version 15Behold now, behemoth, which I made as well as thee; He eateth grass as an ox.

Which make sense because Job was not around when God created everything.
KJV Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

Are you arguing that we should choose what is easier to read rather than what is right?

And, after reading it awhile, I’ve come to love the 'King's English'.
Ever wonder why we don’t butcher Shakespeare with an 'American Standard' version? He would lose too much in translation.

But doesn’t it bother you even a little bit that the earlier version says something completely different?

And why derail the conversation by switching to a verse from a different chapter? It's Non sequitur.

It's all about context. So many try to interpret God's word out of context. You can't go wrong if you let God interpret his own words.
I wasn't derailing our conversation, I was trying to keep it in context.
If Job wasn't there, how could he be there when God created it?

By 'it' I assume you mean the ‘hippopotamus'. Job wasn’t there for the hippo, that's why God could not be talking about one.

But if He made ‘behemoth' with Job, then he couldn’t be talking about a ******* hippopotamus.

Yes, context is everything. I gave you the context for vs 15. It starts at chapter 40 vs 10. The vs you cited from chapter 38:4 is not directly related to what we are discussing. It is a detour from the subject of what ‘behemoth' was.

You use very good English....

Thank you. And forgive my momentary lapse into French.

The King James Bible is written in modern English.

Old English, or Anglo Saxon, would be Beowulf.

Chaucer wrote The Canterbury Tales in Middle English.

Try reading them in the original before complaining about the King James version.

All of the Bible was written by men, all of it, God didn’t write any of it.

Even the Koran which is supposed to be divine is not attributed to God, but to one of the angels.