In this case, for "religion" substitute philosophy, worldview, etc. in Bennett's description. Every adult has some view of "what it's all about." And, whether it's is a religion or not, they may still fit Bennet's description.
In confusing (read: passing off) what could be at best a Deistic concept of divinity, as the same as the highly anthropomorphous, interventionist, mythology- and superstition-laced concepts of divinity that the ancients developed?
Your concept of God clearly operates on a time scale. 7-day creation, et al. Do you dispute this? If you don't, then this feature alone causes even this version of divinity to have a finite existence - and therefore, inapplicability of the 'timeless' badge. How can this god, which, besides performing fantastic miracles that is impossible to conceive as possible in this day and age (living in fish for 3 days, talking animals, etc., vs. an amputee growing back a severed limb suddenly) be reconciled with the significantly non-anthropomorphous, sublime, formless divinity that's basically Deistic, barring an honest admission?
To me, it is evident that blurring these sharp contradictions to the point of obfuscation is what allows many to rationalise their superstitions.
What makes them "true"?