Well, Jim's coming at it from more of a humanist viewpoint whereby Gods exist because of their followers, or, rather, that Gods exist only in the minds of their followers. Of course, that kind of interrupts the notion that their God can be more valid, since they would all be as valid as the followers.

That said, if that humanist viewpoint is incorrect, and God is inscrutable, how can you be so sure that you're getting the correct message and that they're the ones getting a garbled transmission? Then apply that to your sociopolitical viewpoint on religions.