The main issue is the relationship between culture and religious doctrine. In the Middle Ages there was no problem, as religion provided explanation and was a sacred canopy. Since the Renaissance and Enlightenment, there has been a growing distance between the way things are commonly explained, which is this worldly and practical, and religious doctrine. The latter has been exposed (I’d say) as a kind of literary fiction, though none the worst for that in terms of carrying out a religious function.

As for people writing about and creating Gods, this in and of itself is neither evidence for nor against God. Whether there is a God or not, the God/s that humans create are still their creations.

The answer from neo-Calvinists like Barth, and postliberals, has been to say culture and doctrine are different, to there is either non-cultural revelation, a zap from outside, people chosen for salvation regardless of how we make this world, or that there should be mini sub-cultures, little communities that define themselves by the inherited doctrine and biblical drama. But this latter approach is to give up on general culture and to freeze religion. Religion should be dynamic, fluid and able to respond to challenges.

http://www.pluralist.co.uk