Present and appropriate

Apparently, I understood the naturalistic fallacy, which essentially means that there is no good or evil that is required by rational thinking, but religion is not just seeing the work of God as good, but the introduction of metaphysical beliefs that are required by recognizing the work of God as a value, just an example, such as believing that this is what God wants and that is what must be done (whether one wants it or not). On the other hand, the secular humanist does not introduce irrational and metaphysical assumptions into recognizing his duties towards man and seeing him as good, and this seems to me to be the whole problem with religion, because in essence it requires irrational thinking and beliefs in defining the good, and this is also, in my opinion, what keeps many educated people away from it and turns them to humanism. This problem also bothers me because as a religious person whose soul is tied to the work of God, I am constantly faced with doubts because religion bases, whether one likes it or not, thinking on abstract subjects. (I hope I was clear)
I would really appreciate it if you could help me with this issue because compared to the secular humanist liberal, I feel like an extremely irrational fool.
thanks(: