God="A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions." Only if everyone believed this. However, there are numerous reasons as to why and/or why not God's existence can be valid. I plan to take the view of numerous authors who give endless reason as to the issue of God. But in the end I feel as if there clearly will be no justification into the matter, mainly due to the fact that I believe it difficult to prove let alone explain aspects of a mere belief. .
One particular author that grabbed my attention was Ramakrishna (1836-1886). Ramakrishna takes the view of God himself (assuming a male) mandating different religions to suit different aspects, different times, and even different countries. Ramakrishna speaks of ones ability to ultimately reach God if he/she follows any of the religious paths with "wholehearted devotion." This particular statement denotes that God himself has mandated certain and particular religious paths in order to reach a religious summit. But how can such a being conceived as the perfect, enlist a path to perfection, but for those who are only as fortunate enough to achieve perfection. .
So if indeed God has mandated religions for particular peoples, is one religion harder to reach God as opposed to another religion? If a Jew and a Christian both were "wholehearted", would one have an advantage or disadvantage over the other because perhaps God has chosen a better or easier religion? I believe that a "wholehearted" person needs neither particular religion nor correct path to reach God. Would a being conceived as the perfect, make it more difficult for one person to reach God rather than another?.
Ramakrishna also speaks of the methods in which man prays towards God. Is there a proper way to pray to a being conceived as the perfect? Perhaps if I simply bow and worship towards God, whereas others fully kneel for admiration, will I be overlooked upon by God.