I don't bash the religious elite for corrupting religion because religions are inherently corrupt. At least, the top down religions are. Or maybe I should say that top-down religions are inherently corrupting.
I think the difference for others, like Jesus for instance, is he was not willing to throw out the baby with the bathwater. You just, admittedly here, are bashing all of it as inherently corrupt, as opposed to just calling out the corrupters. That's a more cynical approach, going nuclear on it as opposed to surgical strikes.
As a point of perspective,
any organization is inherently corruptible, because in any group dynamics situation you have those who wish to seek power over others and control them. While any group may start out with good intentions, just due to the fact of human nature in group dynamics, you'll see power struggles occur, unless that group can establish and protect the group through a system of rules and checks and balances, such as a democracy. But even those, are susceptible to corruption and exploitation, as we can clearly see in the current lethal threat to American democracy posed by the current extremist faction of the GOP.
So saying religion is inherently corrupting, really is no more true than saying government is, or any group which has positions of power to be exploited by the unscrupulous. I personally like it that Jesus called out the corrupters, because there is in fact a baby in that bathwater. Not all who participate in that system are corrupt. Only the few who clamor their ways to positions of power over others.
You might not be, but I see the history and the mythology as inextricably entwined. Just as what is actually going on in the united states, and how things are spun by Fox News. Political propaganda.
I don't see any comparison to be made between telling lies by Faux "news", and the creation of religious mythologies. This is an apples to orangutans comparison. They are distorting "facts". They are not creating elevated, transcendent themes of spirituality. They are just plain out lying for the sake of corrupting seats of power.
I do not believe that at all describes the creations of the gospels, nor the early Christian movement and communities. Those much later became corrupted, of course, but the source materials were nothing whatsoever comparable to ****er Carlson and Faux "news".
It does not have to be flawless and inerrant to speak human truths. But I don't filter out the portions I don't agree with and only spotlight the parts that appeal.
Nor do I. The Bible has quite a lot of cultural artifacts which are far less than spiritually inspiring. It's not "cherry picking" to recognize those and set them as aside as such. It's just discernment.
Cherry pickers deny they exist, or try to rationalize or explain them away. They would never admit they should be left in the dustbins of the past, such as "women keep silent in church" passages.