Which is the best religion to follow?

There are hundreds of different religions in the world. Leaving aside the case of people who do not wish to follow any religion, is there an objective way to measure which of them is better? If yes, which one is the best for humans? For a debate about the existence of God, see Does God exist?

Limitations

 * This page only covers the top 4 religions in the world (Hinduism, Christianity, Buddhism and Islam). There is no way it could cover all religions.
 * The word "best" refers to the word "good", which arguably is ambiguous or vague. It is up to the arguments to interpret "good" and "best" in reference to some chosen standard/criterion of good.
 * Even given a fixed standard of good, a demonstration that a particular religion is better than all other religions seems nearly impossible. Therefore, the debate will probably have to be constrained to identifying good and bad aspects of various religions, with respect to various standards of good.

Pro

 * It is the best religion in the world
 * Hinduism accepts change as fundamental nature of the universe. Thus, it goes well with changing societal norms.
 * Science and technology has evolved and was learnt from Hindu scriptures
 * Technologies have developed independently all across the world, often independent from Hinduism
 * Yes the most things we see in our life are already there in Hindu script.
 * Protects rights of everyone, men, women, children and even animals. Everyone and every being is worshipped, respected and prayed to.
 * In ancient times women were not allowed to study
 * Really I don’t think that’s that how it interpreted because for women they were only allowed to do what the man of the house say
 * How can we worship everyone? The definition of God is the one who posses infinite powers and no one should be more powerful than God. God should be one to whom should we always seek help.
 * That's the definition of a monotheist god, which has no bearing on polytheist religions.
 * God is omnipotent and supreme. He has infinite power beyond comprehension. He manifests himself in all beings, and all spirituality, every soul is connected to him. That is the reason every being is respected and worshipped. Not only does it follow the rules of spirituality, but basic humanity also to care for every being.
 * There are no strict rules. One should abide by Dharma or also called Righteousness (duty). God is everywhere and in every being.
 * The ancient texts provide information about the world, its formation, the multiverses, the advancement of technology, the geography of Earth and Solar System and even informed us with the followers of Muhammed (Islam). https://www.supremeknowledge.org/islam/prophet-muhammad-in-bhavishya-purana/

Con

 * The historical connection to the caste system. While considered mostly obsolete, caste identities can still influence social dynamics.
 * Ritualism may occur due to excessive emphasis placed on rituals, which may not always be understood or practiced meaningfully by practitioners, leading to a prioritisation of form over spiritual essence.
 * Follow superstition
 * This is in no way unique to Hindus, and is true of every religion and society.

Pro

 * Christianity is a complete and well-established system of belief.
 * It has a bad culture.
 * What makes a religion "complete"?
 * All common religions are "well-established" by default.
 * Christianity encourages forgiveness and compassion.
 * Christianity encourages charity and helping those in need.
 * That’s true but I would say some people not all are orthodox which is not good

Con

 * According to some, There is not enough evidence to support the most important assertions of Christianity, since Christianity is often at odds with empirical science.
 * This isn't unique to Christianity; many religions contain unscientific assertions
 * While some Biblical literalists (e.g. young-earth creationists) often deny science, many modern Christians are engaged in scientific study, like those on the website BioLogos.

Pro

 * Buddhism is the only religion which holds that the ease of human suffering (war, hunger etc.) is its principle purpose.
 * Is this necessarily a good thing? This is a fact, but whether it is a pro or a con is not explained here.
 * Buddhism focuses on expanding and improving one's own consciousness and being a good and healthy person all-round.
 * Zen belief supports positive, ethical behaviors.
 * Zen often encourages detachment from politics and social matters in the pursuit of personal enlightenment. Such apathy harms the world.

Con

 * Buddhism promotes superstitious beliefs.
 * It's a debate on religion.
 * This isn't unique to Buddhism; many religions have superstitious-sounding beliefs
 * No example belief was stated. Thus, the above does not expose itself to refutation, making merely an existential statement, which are known to be either irrefutable/non-falsifiable to rather hard to verify. (The argument is so far as to be perhaps worthy of removal, or else serve as a basic argumentation teaching aid.)

Pro

 * Islamic epistemology marries the sources of knowledge to acquire truth, unlike other religions.
 * Which sources does it "marry", specifically? What does it mean, specifically?
 * Islamic epistemology is logically consistent.
 * The statement is not obvious and therefore needs some form of a proof. At a minimum, a link to a source arguing for consistency is to be provided.
 * Being logically consistent is no guarantee of goodness; rather, it would be a very basic prerequisite.
 * Being logically consistent would be an argument for Islam, though not a complete and defining one, as certain other religions hold inconsistent beliefs. The concept of the Christian trinity seems to defy logic. In the Trinity, although the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are distinct persons despite being "3 in 1" - the roles that each character plays differ and contradict one another (for example, the Father is all-knowing but the Son is not) . In Hinduism, religion can be interpreted based on the individual - therefore, certain Hindus can believe in monotheism while other Hindus believe in polytheism .  In Islam, the concept of one, all-powerful God & Muhammad being the last messenger has been well established in the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and the ijama [consensus] of the scholars. In fact, denying the creed of faith (shahada) takes one out of the fold of Islam & is not considered a Muslim.
 * The statement of the form "X would be Y" is consistent with "X is not Y", and therefore, the above is no objection proper.
 * Let us expound, then. Let us have a religion or an atheist philosophy that consistently aims at destruction of humankind (that, obviously, is not Islam). Such a religion or philosophy is consistent yet its aim is bad, and therefore, the religion or philosophy is bad. Therefore, consistency does not entail goodness.
 * I agree with you that consistency does not entail goodness, but I'm saying that, compared to Christianity and Hinduism, is an advantage since we are able to reason & ponder over a message that is consistent and a religion that does not contain contradictions in its theology or practice. For example, this could be used as an argument against Christianity in favor of Islam ("worshipping 3 in 1 with contradictory features, making it seem paganistic" vs. "worshipping of one God and accepting Muhammad as his final messenger"). Therefore, Islam's logical consistency is easy to accept and its lack of inconsistency cannot be used as an argument against the religion.
 * Islam provides a logical and simple module to worship a higher entity: one All-Powerful, eternal God to which no entity can imitate.
 * Well I would say that mostly all people know that god is one but all had interpreted to their own interest
 * And most important all who people who are worshiped as god are not god but a messenger of god

Con

 * This isn't unique to Islam; many religions have been spread through violence
 * There is some instruction toward violence in Old Testament as well. It is not clear that Islam is really worse than Judaism in this respect.
 * The motion is not that Islam is better than Judaism but rather that it is best, among all religions. Therefore, it has to be better than Christianity, which does not depend solely on the Old Testament, but rather mitigates its arguable flaws in the New Testament, in the figure of Jesus Christ who, instead of using sword, allows himself to be killed in a crucifixion. And even if one decides to claim that the New Testament override of the old one is insufficient to stifle violence, one still has to show Islam to be better, as regards violence, than e.g. Buddhism and Hinduism.
 * Although violence itself was used to increase and maintain the power of the Arabs, this was not used to spread the religion of Islam & the objection here implies that Muhammad used offensive violence to spread Islam. In fact, it is a popular claim that Islam 'spread by the sword', an untrue claim. The Muslims were oppressed by the polytheistic Arabs in Mecca after they were refusing to worship Arab idols (see Pre-Islamic Arabia), forcing them to migrate to Medina. After the peaceful conquest of Mecca in 630 by the Muslim army, Islam spread abundantly throughout the Arabian peninsula. The Muslims were forced to fight the Byzantines after a Byzantine faction killed one of Muhammad's diplomats, leading to the Battle of Mu'tah & the eventual conquest of Syria and the Levant. The Muslims fought the Sassanids, who were regarded as "threatening" to the Arabs . The Arabs invaded Egypt using violence (which was necessary to eliminate a threatening force), but the religion itself did not spread throughout the locals until over a 100 years later and was not spread through forced conversions or mass murder of non-Muslims . In fact, the Egyptians prefered Muslim rule over Byzantine [Christian] rule . Many comments regarding oppression of the native Egyptian population were written by Catholic bishops, such as John of Nikiû, which were obviously marred with biases and inconsistencies. The religion of Islam spread amongst the Middle East "voluntarily" and was done mostly for "economic advantage" . Lastly, the Prophet advocated for tolerance of religion & a multi-religious Islamic state. This is proven by the Qur'an and the Sunnah.