Since the beginning of time, humans have been relying on religion to explain the unexplainable, to fill in the gaps that science can't. It is due to this that so many people call themselves believers, and have faith in the stories religions claim are true. However, others choose to believe in the more concrete pieces of evidence that explain our world, and are absolutely sure that the Bible is just one more storybook.

Many times, though, this supposedly concrete evidence is somewhat flimsy, as even though science has made many advances, we have not yet reached a point where all religious stories and theories can be proved false. Even if we do someday reach that point, it is hard to believe that religious people will simply accept this new way of explaining things easily, even if there is undeniable proof. So would their versions of the facts be lies then? Would the scientific version of things become the absolute and undeniable truth?

In my opinion, it wouldn't. I think that it all depends on perception, and this, in turn, is something very specific and personal for each individual. One’s perception is the way they see the world, and this is moulded by one’s background and surroundings.

People that have been raised in religious families tend to believe in religious explanations for things, no matter what. A significant example of this is the doubt that surrounds the creation of the world. The two most popular theories are the story in the first testament of the Bible about how God created the world in seven days; and the Big Bang Theory, and how humans have evolved from monkeys to homo sapiens sapiens over thousands of years.

Many religious people have absolute conviction that the Bible explanation is the absolute truth. The Big Bang Theory, although more scientific, has little proof, and yet many believe it to be the right account of how the world was created. So is it possible to call either of these groups of people liars? Of course not. If none of the stories can be proved completely true, none of them can be proved completely false either, and so one can argue that it depends completely on an individual’s perception to determine what is true or not.

Another example of how perception affects truth in religion is the question of what happens after death. Science has not yet been able to provide us with any concrete theories, but different religions offer a spectrum of possibilities and explanations. The most prominent question across religions is that of the existence of heaven and hell versus reincarnation.

There is no concrete proof of either of these being true, so once again, neither of these can be false either. Once this point has been made, people might feel inclined to say that then the real truth is in what atheists believe, that there really is nothing after death. However, there is no proof of that either, meaning that it is not the absolute truth or a lie.

So then what can we believe? What can we defend as the truth? That depends entirely on your personality, your values, and your background. Once again, it is what you choose to believe that is your own truth, rather than one established truth that no one can prove false.