hi wazeer...
if u r talking about.. the hope that the conflicts between religions will end some day.. before hoping that we must take an account of the history of religions. as u said 3/4 of the religious myths are based on illusions or assumptions. well it doesnt make any sense that the non rational religions will somday prevail the world and save the humanity from the biggest threat.. as everyone knows that more than 90% of the bloodshed in the history of world was the result of conflictions in religions.

Religion is the one area of our discourse in which people are systematically protected from the demand to give good evidence and valid arguments in defense of their strongly held beliefs. And yet these beliefs regularly determine what they live for, what they will die for and all too often what they will kill for. Consequently, we are living in a world in which millions of grown men and women can rationalize the violent sacri-fice of their own children by recourse to fairy tales. We are living in a world in which millions of Muslims believe that there is nothing better than to be killed in defense of Islam. We are living in a world in which millions of Christians hope to soon be raptured into the stratosphere by Jesus so that they can safely enjoy a sacred genocide that will inaugurate the end of human history. In a world brimming with increasingly destructive technology, our infatuation with religious myths now poses a tremendous danger. And it is not a danger for which more religious faith is a remedy.

Whenever human beings make an honest effort to get at the truth, they reliably transcend the accidents of their birth and upbringing. It would, of course, be absurd to speak of “Christian physics” or “Muslim algebra.” And there is no such thing as Iraqi or Japanese as distinct from American science. Reasonable people really do have a monopoly on the truth. And while they might not agree about everything in the near term, common ground surrounds them on all sides. Consequently, there is no significant impediments within scientific discourse: It isn’t always pretty, but the conversation continues without appeals to force or deference to dogma. There are scientific dogmas, of course, but wherever they are found, they are set upon with hammer blows. In science, it is a cardinal sin to pretend to know something that you do not know. Such pretense is the very essence of religious faith.

im talking about science again and again because it proceeds on EVIDENCES not on ILLUSIONS or DOGMAS. Dogmatic religions have provided severe harms to the humanity.

And when we say that religions are more illusions and less truths then we should dare to judge each and every aspect of faiths on the strong basis of evidence! As Mr. pharm used the references from Quran. if we are so obvious about the teachings then we must know the evidences behind each "truth".

While the other major world religions have been fertile sources of intolerance, it is clear that the doctrine of Islam poses unique problems for the emergence of a global civilization. The world, from the point of view of Islam, is divided into the “House of Islam” and the “House of War,” and this latter designation should indicate how Muslims believe their differences with those who do not share their faith will be ultimately resolved. While there are undoubtedly some moderate Muslims who have decided to overlook the irrescindable militancy of their religion, Islam is undeniably a religion of conquest. The only future devout Muslims can envisage—as Muslims—is one in which all infidels have been converted to Islam, politically subjugated, or killed. The tenets of Islam simply do not admit of anything but a temporary sharing of power with the “enemies of God.” Devout Muslims can have no doubt about the reality of Paradise or about the efficacy of martyrdom as a means of getting there. Nor can they question the wisdom and reasonableness of killing people for what amount to theological grievances. In Islam, it is the moderate who is left to split hairs, because the basic thrust of the doctrine is undeniable: convert, subjugate, or kill unbelievers; kill apostates; and conquer the world.

same is the case with Christians and other major relegions. it doesn't make any sense that God wants a specific religion (whether it be any) to be prevailed in the world worth Bloodshed?

regards.

__________________
BRIGHT