I'm a Christian, and if you really do want to understand what's going on here, I'd like to share.
(1) "In recent years the bible has been shown, at last, to be vastly falsified and made up by thousands of translators and scribes over thousands of years."
I'm not sure where you have drawn this "fact" from, but I am simply not aware of any consensus of the kind among Biblical scholars or ancient historians. They disagree as to when certain books were written, by whom, and whether they were inspired by God. But by and large the only vocal Bible scholar I know of who concludes as you claim they all do is Bart Ehrman - a Calivinist who threw the baby out with the bathwater when he discovered the Bible contained an error. And even he is agnostic. Catholic scholars have accepted errrors from the beginning of the canon, that has nothing to do with whether the book is infallible or inspired. Even the Jesus Seminar that tries to find an academic consensus among critical scholars is most interesting because they are all still Christians even after they decide the miracles Jesus did are just legends, etc.
(2) "Slowly but surely, Christianity and religion in general have been eroded, bit by bit, by philosophy, geology, physics, paleontology, biology and science in general."
Again, I'm not quite sure where you came up with this idea. For example, in the realm of philosophy Kant, Aristotle, and even someone as one-dimensional as Descartes have provided bases for Christianity. The Pope's controversial Regensburg lecture where he was vilified for pointing out how violent Islam is was primarily comparing the rampant relativism of postmodern cultural manifestation (like atheism) to the morality that is anchored in Greek philosophy - and he there makes a case for why Christianity cannot be separated from classical philosophy. Or on something like evolution, most of us are simply not phased. One of our first theologians was Origen, who in the second century commented that the sun and moon were not created in Genesis until the third day, which is physically impossible - Origen said this is a myth and metaphor and we'd be stupid to forget it. (Which Evangelicals have, but most Christians are Catholic and mainline Protestant).
(3) "Once religion was a world dominant way of thought, now all they have left is faith and an old, falsified book whose meanings and messages are so vague that they can be interpreted hundreds of different ways."
Religion is not a means of thought. You've claimed to know all this wonderful scholarship in all these academic areas, it shocks me that you haven't studied the psychology of religion or even the sociology of religion. It is generally accepted among all fields that humans have an innate compulsion towards grounding themselves in an ultimate concern - we seek purpose and meaning. Most humans throughout history have experienced a spiritual reality that goes beyond the physical world and the senses we have to access it with. The bringing of this experience into community, of sharing it among people, naturally creates organized religions. Religion is natural because man is a social animal. This has been evolutionarily successful. And if you really do know what you claim to know, then you know changing that because you're so much f'cking smarter than the billions of humans who came before you and the billions currently living who have faith and in the face of natural selection is something you may wantto think practically about first. Just saying. Humans need mythology to orient themselves psychologically. When we do not have a narrative arc to our lives we are essentially fragmented and lost.
(5) "So why? Why do so many still fight to hold on to something so hard even thought it has been falsified? Would it make more sense to obey Green Eggs and Ham?"
You do not distinguish between fact and truth. If I say, "Clapton is god" then I have clearly uttered something factually incorrect. But the underlying metaphor - that he plays the guitar with ethereal ability far surpassing anything else in my experience of the natural - is absolutely true. People want and need mythology and narrative meaning. All facts are interpreted through that narrative.
The trouble we have is that some of us, like you, have discovered that thsoe beliefs are factually questionable and that there are multiple "right" points of view. So we can no longer force ourselves to believe - our minds have expanded and won't shrink again. However, if we stop there we end up with this sort of postmodern angst, with no way of constructing anything but the most fragmented and organic meaning for our lives and unable to find any reasonable basis for judging others or their behaviors, a mechanism essential for an ethic.
But the silver lining here is that we can see what is true from ALL points of view. And that is (1) there is a real, ineffible spiritual experience that people are having and calling by different names and (2) the universal moral maxim is 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you.' From here, that would guide us toward mysticism, the Perennial Philosophy. But there are no DIY mystics who are succeeding at remaining an integrated human being. All mystics reside within a system of faith, and usually a community of faith. It is the richness of the depths of Christianity that gives my own experiences voice, keeps them fresh, keeps me focused on loving others rather than just being content to live my happy little life. That is why I believe. The specific images and words are in the end unimportant. But what the words stand for is What Is, the Divine Ground of Being from which my life force flows. Disconnected form that in some sort of intellectual, demythologized ivory tower I simply have no connection to the mystery. Been there, done that. Not interested in returning.