I met God

That is certainly a sophisticated (and I might say unusual) point of view.
However virtually all people inherit their religion from their parents or pervading culture in which they live rather than any sort of logical assessment of the accuracy of the available options.How does your "many maps theory" account for that fact and indeed your own largely Christian (correct me if I am wrong) convictions and subsequent (I assume) belief in Jesus as the son of God?

Malaria is a very specific example but there are numerous other diseases, natural disasters and other examples of extreme misfortune that afflict people.
These seem utterly random with no bearing on which map is being used, whether you have a map or not, whether you converse regularly with God or whether you believe conversing with God to be seriously delusional.Given that those who have maps and converse with God are no more or less likely to experience extreme suffering can we conclude that having a map and conversing with God is of no actual practical benefit at all?
(I would actually suggest that it is the parts of the world most predisposed to religion that are also those which suffer the most death and disease by natural means. So, statistically at least, you might be better off without any communication with God)'Spiritual' benefit (whatever exactly that is) can take many forms and can be attributed to many sources. The awe of nature, inner peace through meditation, aura cleansing and other new age practices or whatever.
Attributing it to God is just an arbitary choice.So, given that I am a mapless heathen who has found other means of achieving spiritual health and that the various maps seem to have no practical value at all, is it not logical to conclude that all the maps are equally useless in practise and that those chatting to God are fooling themselves by attributing the basis of their spiritual health to something that exists only within their own heads?This is my conclusion so if it is a wrong conclusion where am I going wrong?
If my thinking is sound how is it that so many others, including yourself, are so utterly convinced of the opposite view?Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

As unlikely as I think that to be - Yes I would. Followed by a 1001 questions about why things are the way they are. Including why it is that nature is exactly consistent with the complete absence of any sort of compassionate and caring creator overseeing it all.
That and the question as to why he failed to get through to me in the first place. As one who does not have enough faith to have absolute 100% certainty in anything, that is very (very very) slightly reassuring..........