In the past, I have posed logical reasons why various named gods are false. Basically, because if one god or group of named gods effected mankind's world, all mankind would attribute that effect to that named god(s). If you like I could explain but I think it is irrelevant to the topic.
About the only types of gods that can not be excluded are the unknown or unknowable ones. You could say this is the deist god(s), but I tend to call it the deadbeat god(s) as they simply created then abandoned their creation. Seeing that they had no contact with their creation after the fact, no record would exist so mankind would have to make a best guess.
Not that I believe in this god either as there is no more evidence to it than any god.
Actually, I quite like this assessment. Religion, more often than not, tends to be no more than an accumulation of the masses, brought together to hear one, distinct message. Ultimately, this is the trigger for group-think and the forfeiture of the individual.
There is no evidence for or against the principal existence of God, but I tend to doubt that religion's focus was ever for 'God'. Of course, plenty of places of religion do enforce this as their norm, but even still, it is still the accumulation of the masses, into a rather collectivist mindset.
If God does exist, how much would we know about the reality of "him" and "his" wishes for us? How would we even know God is a "he"? People can call Messiah or messenger of the Lord all day, but is that really an answer. If in every generation, a child was chosen (spiritually, not by some church) by God to speak "his" words, maybe it would be believable. And, as God is supposed to be an all powerful being, this isn't too difficult for "him". But, instead, most religions depend on the surviving words of men who have claimed (with no lasting proof) that they were sent by God or heard messages from God and his angels. The truth is that nowadays, if a person came up to and told you that they just saw God (he was a burning bush), and he wants you to kill your child, o would admit them in a psychiatric hospital. And, after awhile (hopefully), they would get better.
Every religion is based off of incidents like this. I'm not saying there isn't a god or gods (though I don't believe there is - I mean, why hasn't he done anything? Why not send us a sign to let us know he's there. You can say "he" wants us to just have faith, but if :he" is there, I feel like "he's" just laughing at us as we struggle), but isn't it likely that not a single religion is 100% accurate (or at all accurate for that matter).
God is real, altho it takes faith to believe, therefore the definition of 'real' is a moot point.
Look at the message of Jesus & then look at what man has done with that message. Religion itself is "cultural system of behaviors and practices, world views, ethics, and social organization that relate humanity to an order of existence with the worship of God. Religion is following the tenets of it's founder. No religion today follows the original teachings of its founder precisely. But is it the fault of the religion, or the people that have changed the teachings to fit within their own agendas?