The Religion of Irreligiousness

Several authorities have proffered various definitions of religion, out of which we are going to consider a few. Webster’s 1913 Dictionary defines religion as “The outward act or form by which men indicate their recognition of the existence of a god or of gods having power over their destiny, to whom obedience, service, and honor are due; the feeling or expression of human love, fear, or awe of some superhuman and overruling power, whether by profession of belief, by observance of rites and ceremonies, or by the conduct of life.” Dictionary.com sees it as “a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.” According to Wikipedia, religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence.

The word religion originates from Latin religio, meaning "respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods, obligation, the bond between man and the gods." Religion, therefore, can also be described as man’s way of rediscovering his link with his maker.

At the centre of every religion lies man’s recognition of a Supreme Being, authority, or power, that governs, controls, influences and regulates his life, conduct, and existence. That recognition instigates a sense of awe and reverence, as well as a desire to conform to the will of that Supreme Being. According to Webster, religion includes “the feeling or expression of human love, fear, or awe of some superhuman and overruling power.” Not conforming to the will of the Supreme Being produces an instant angst of sacrilege: a feeling that induces a strong desire for appeasement if equanimity must be restored.

In the light of the foregone, can anyone rightly claim to be irreligious? When one refuses to plan, his refusal to plan is itself a plan. Similarly, when one refuses to take a decision on an issue, his failure to take a decision is itself a decision. It follows as well, therefore, that one’s belief that he is irreligious becomes a religion itself; since in doing so he professes a belief (that he does not belief in religion). His belief (that he is irreligious) begins to influence and guide his conduct and world view.

Karl Marx, who described religion as “the opium of the masses” was being apologetic to Communism, which was not just an economic system but one of the most dangerous religions that has ever evolved in human history. Marx’s professing of irreligiousness evolved into a religion, which produced many apostles like Vladimir Lenin, who in turn won many converts to Communism.

Man’s religiousness is an innate trait. I dare to believe that if a man is born and isolated from the society of men, in his isolation and obscurity, he will grow to deify and worship some object. This is because man was created and breathed into by God. That God, whose breath he possesses, must he seek to reconnect correctly or erroneously. It is a basic human characteristic.

Whether man is a religious being should not be a subject of debate. The question should be which religion to follow. Which, if I were asked, is the one that promotes true peace, whose initiator is universally acclaimed sinless; offers proven salvation from man’s depraved nature, boasts of the Holy Spirit, who lifts man from natural to a supernatural being, and guarantees eternal life. It is Christianity.

Neither is there salvation in any other: there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be  saved. Acts 4:12