[ThisWillDestroyYou]

I'd like to add that it depends what you mean as a legitimate source. Technically, all faith-based claims, whether slanderous or not, are truth. Why? Because faith has no evidence. It's based on ones interpretation, indoctrination, and understanding. There's no empirical evidence to support it. So, when discussing "doctrines" or religion and why one is right over the other, it is purely faith-based and each source is just as reliable as the next.

The problem is, for example, within Christianity there are over 35,000 denominations. All of these denominations claim to be the right denomination based on faith. They have no reason, just faith and interpretation of a particular text that the other 35,999 interpreted differently. Amongst those 35,000 denominations, you won't find TWO Christians who believe EXACTLY the same. This means of the approximate 2 billion Christians in the world, there are about 2 billion versions of Christianity, and each, in their own mind, are the correct versions of Christianity. So finding accuracy on something faith-based is impossible.

Rather, I think asking an individual what they believe is a more accurate way to accumulate a knowledge of faith-based thinking instead of relying on a group that tries to box 2 billion beliefs.

However, if by legitimate you mean the historical accuracy of a religion and it's claims, then that's a different matter entirely.