My Religion - Part II

I’m now 32 years old and I realize that maybe my teenage questions weren't so dumb after all. Some people spend their lives trying to bring out the similarities between religion and science, while others spend their lives trying to tear the two apart. I simply won’t bother. My kids, if I ever have any, will be christened and they will have to go to church, at least on the holidays, at least up to maturing, just like I did. If not else, it’s my culture, my Home traditions.
One reason religion is unwilling to familiarize itself with science is because science offers simple, valid, indisputable and above all, logical explanations for some of the "miracles" described in holy books. The Nile, for example, is known to turn red when it is overgrown with bacteria. I guess Moses had other ideas, or, carbon dating of fossils tells us that there was life on this planet long before the estimated time of the creation of Adam and Eve. There are those, of course, who would argue that Adam and Eve are representative of all men and women etc. But should we apply the metaphorical translation to something which is so obviously meant literally? I’d say not.
Lastly, another difference which I have found between science and religion is the definition of "truth". To the scientist, who is more skeptical, truth is ever-changing - the more one sees of the world, the more observations one makes, the closer one comes to the truth. The theologian, on the other hand, defines truth as that which is printed in the Holy Texts, that which should not be analyzed any further.

Bottom line is, if you find that your faith in religion strengthens your hopes for genuineness, then believe in it. Otherwise keep on searching for the scientific truth.