The problem with organised religion of any denomination is that each requires adherence to prescribed doctrine and rituals, usually with a set of rules governing how that doctrine must be viewed, believed and practiced. As is the way of humans, these rules and teachings are interpreted subjectively according to personal perspective, personal situation and relevance, and understanding. Oh, and personal needs: desired outcome or goal.
There are people of evolved spirit to be found in any faith and there are bad people who hide their true nature behind the guise of religious faith. There are also many people who adopt a religion because they simply have no words to describe their relationship to, or connection with, their own maker/higher-self/or the universe [slot your preference in here]. Everyone functions within the limitations of their own intellect and experience. And therein is the problem which will never be resolved: there are as many interpretations [or needs] – even in the same religious denomination [individual or collective] - as there are humans.
Is it too hard for human-kind to understand and accept that there are many routes to spiritual evolvement? Must your ‘God’ have a name? Must ‘He/She/It’ only be valid if used within a chosen ‘Religion’? Must your ‘god’ have an image and preferably be packaged with a bag of tricks and an interesting history too? Must your ‘god’ be a ‘super human’?
Why does man so desperately need a religion to validate his connection to his god? And why does he need his fellow man to validate his religious choice or belief?
Perhaps the answer lies in the word ‘God’ and our social conditioning about what that word depicts. God means many different things to many different people. If the word for absolute purity of mind and spirit, reverence and faith in our one-ness with all of creation and the universe we live in, was a word you could make up any how you desired, any time and it could be different every time, or no word at all, if you chose – it would be personal, unrecognizable by anyone else, and would have no preconceived meaning to anyone other than you and your own personal understanding of it. That would put ‘god’ in you and not in the hands of an organized religion or man-made doctrine. You would be responsible for your own connectedness to your god/higher-self/universe/maker. You wouldn’t need a name or word or sound. You would simply BE and revel in the wonder of it. Perhaps we should not worship a word or name, but rather the whole of creation and each other and the wonder of BEING.