I don’t remember who it was who said, “I contend that we’re both atheists – I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you deny all other gods, you’ll understand why I deny yours.” Now Stentor claims that this argument is bunk on the grounds that it confuses two questions: first, does God exist? And second, if it exists, what is its nature?
In reality, however, most religious people don’t reason like that. The average Christian, or even the average Christian theologian doesn’t consider all religions to be mere variants of theism. Stentor analogizes religion to feminism and cars; but for a feminist, the main distinction is typically between feminism and anti-feminism rather than, say, radical feminism and the rest, and for a car owner the main point is having a car. For a Christian, the main distinction is between Christians and non-Christians.
It’s impossible even in theory to arrive at a religious view by sifting through several religions’ scriptures and choosing the best. Starting by comparing atheism, theism, deism, and so on can at most lead to a very general kind of theism, one that doesn’t condemn atheists and Muslims alike to Hell.
Further, in practice, the second sentence is critical. A Christian denies Islam and Hinduism for the same reasons an atheist denies all religions: because their scriptures don’t make sense to him. They don’t offer any evidence that they’re correct, they tell stories that almost invariably horrify people who didn’t grow up with them.