OpinionJanuary 26, 2025

Defining ‘religion’

Janet Marugg’s “religious” commentary in the Jan. 11 Lewiston Tribune reveals her lack of understanding of religion. Although her remarks sound scientific, they lack references to support her claims in journals such as Neurology Open Access and other publications.

I marvel at her desire to reject God when there is overwhelming evidence for a creator. Is there some “boogeyman” in her subconscious she wishes to resolve, not knowing life’s destiny?

I encourage her to look up the definition of religion on Dictonary.com or in the Oxford English Dictionary. Both references recognize a “superhuman agency” or a “superhuman power.” The OED defines secular as, “Belonging to the world and its affairs as distinguished from the church and religion.”

Daily headlines, straight to your inboxRead it online first and stay up-to-date, delivered daily at 7 AM

The God I worship and admire wants us to have free speech, but he also requires responsible honesty. Why are her remarks under the Religion section of the Tribune? My God loves Janet and me and patiently wants to enlighten us about his creation and the reality surrounding us.

As for the devil, he can be found in the fearful recesses of our minds, telling us that our powerful God can’t be trusted to love us. Therefore, in this self-serving world, I need to serve myself even at the expense of others. How can this attitude bring social peace? Does the expanse of human history support man’s ability to arrive at an ultimate peaceful paradise?

It may be time for a global summit to discuss our God or gods. Perhaps then, we can better understand the real God.

John Vornholt

Clarkston

Daily headlines, straight to your inboxRead it online first and stay up-to-date, delivered daily at 7 AM