I firmly believe that it's the fear of sin and fear of loss that’s existing in a physical form or in the form of an idol which is given the term called GOD. If someone closely observes into the fathom of Indian mythology and read "Mahabharatam" which is the background of how and why one started worshiping, for those who don't know the story let me tell you at a glance:

Nakula and Sahadeva are the sons of Pandu,

When Pandu is on the death pier he calls his sons Nakula and Sahadeva and asks them to eat his pinkies, after they follow his suite they will get the power to foresight and can visualize the whole KURUKSHETRA war, meanwhile Lord Krishna who got the information regarding this walks up to these young people and throws a nemesis at them that if they reveal what they knew out of their foresight their skulls will go into pieces. Burning in rage Nakula and Sahadeva shot by throwing a curse to Krishna, that their dead bodies should be burnt on his heart. Taken aback Krishna promised to accompany them at the KURUKSHETRA as the nemesis once thrown can't be taken back" this is a small part which most of the mythological books will not emphasize.

The points I would like to draw in relevance with the context of the debating topic are as follows:

1. Lord Krishna who is the almighty is worried about the physical form which he is in and that is one of the utmost reasons for him be biased with the PANDAVAS, 'GOD' is more beyond its verbal form, like a word that refers to pupil who take tutelage or educate to tear apart the innocence but instead in the above context the form is carrying torch for his own physical form rather than look at the survival of many others lives. Nakula and Sahadeva started to worship Krishna because of their fear of loss of their lives and the vice-versa

2. On a vis-a-vis look at your mother, if you are trying to touch a hot body, she picks up the reflexes more fast than our reflexes update us. That is also indeed from the fear of loss, fear of losing her own blood. The thesis of godliness says that all are equal, in that case why should there be a division into casts and sub-casts.

Well, the very old saying, depending on the quality of bread the division is done. But GOD has to be somebody who will be able to foresee things, If he foresighted that the division will create a lot of turmoil in a common man's life he (the form) should not encourage it.

For example:

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar the writer of the Indian Constitution was a bit biased towards the lower sections of the society for their uplift, he had a clear foresight that a span of decade will help them get a better quality of life and bread, and the laws can be amended once the span is finished. Unfortunately, no such amendments are done.

Here from this I would like to emphasize two points:

a) The foresight of Ambedkar helped a lot to the country of India and his prolific penning down of constitution of India would symbolize the thesis of godliness.

b) Also excelling at the point given helps you define rules and regulations. Society and stature can't buy peace.

Rather than painting the towns in red on occasions of festival, it would be helpful if we paint the toilets of schools and make kids get the difference between myth and fact.

If GOD is a physical form then YES, it’s your mother who gave you birth, YES! your father who made you sit on his back and walked the roads for you instead. The teacher who taught you how to look at life

If GOD means just an idol, stagnant and motionless in the sanctum sanctorum of a temple then definitely it’s the other side of the coin.