Buddhism seems historically conflicted over this issue.
Some forms of Buddhism like Zen (Ch'an in China) consider themselves philosophies, not religions, and are largely indifferent to the question of the supernatural.
Zen Buddhist works of art, like the famous sand garden at the Ryoanji Temple in Kyoto, are hardly recognizable as religious art.
On the other hand, other forms of Buddhism have entire cosmologies swarming with deities and semi-deities.
A Heian Period mandala from Japan
The Buddhists haven't resolved this issue after 2500 years.
Does religion need what more militant atheists dismissively call "fairy tales?" Does the word "spirit" mean basically spooks, invisible beings? Some of the more conservative religious seem to depend on the existence of an entire invisible dimension of spiritual warfare between the forces of good and evil. They dismiss exclusively material explanations of evil as superficial and inadequate, as though evil could be eradicated by improved education and better hygiene.
Or, does "spirit" designate something more philosophical, something at the heart of being? Is mortality a boundary that circumscribes everything that is, or is it simply a horizon beyond which we cannot see from our present place in this life? Or are the 19th century Positivists right and there is nothing beyond what we can see with our eyes and grasp with our conscious reason? If that's true, then what of the imagination? Would the 18th century philosophes be right in dismissing it as just a source of delusions and hocus pocus? Or is imagination, as William Blake would insist, a faculty of perception?
If the Positivists are right, is that really the end of religion?
A Baptist minister might say yes, a Zen master might say no.
What do you think?