Correct Option (D)
The passage posits a paradox concerning religious judgment: if individuals judge their own religion, no religion is deemed incorrect; however, if they judge each other's religions, no religion is deemed correct. This leads to the conclusion that either all religions are right or all are wrong. This inherent contradiction suggests that individuals may not possess a comprehensive or objective understanding of their own religious denomination, especially when confronted with the diversity of beliefs and the act of inter-religious judgment. The subjective nature of self-assessment ("no religion that is wrong") juxtaposed with critical external assessment ("no religion that is right") implies a fundamental gap in understanding that option (D) logically captures.
Incorrect Options:
Option (A) is incorrect because the passage discusses the act of judging religion, not the necessity of adhering to a religious denomination for one's existence. It does not assert that individuals cannot live without a religious affiliation.
Option (B) is incorrect because the passage focuses on the implications of religious judgment, both internal and external, rather than advocating for the propagation of one's religious denomination. There is no mention or implication of such a duty.
Option (C) is incorrect because while inter-religious judgment, as described, could potentially lead to disunity, the primary focus of the passage is on the subjective nature of religious understanding and the resulting paradox of right and wrong, rather than the inherent tendency of denominations to disregard human unity. The core assumption derived pertains to understanding, not social consequence.