Richard Dawkins and Theism

I recently saw an interview on the O'Reilly Factor. Richard Dawkins, an atheist, was talking about his book, 'God Delusion'. I haven't read the book. However, I believe Dawkins arguments are along the lines that religion has done more harm to the world than good. Hence, it might be sensible for modern man to replace a huge part of irrational religious beliefs with scientific thought. A very appealing perspective. Before I dig deeper, I BELIEVE in the existence of GOD. My definition of God is a super'human' intelligence. The 'human' that I refer to is today's human. I think this distinction is important because what is superhuman today might be 'human' in the future. For example, a pilot in an airplane would be 'superhuman' to an ancient greek but 'human' today. However this possibility in anyway does not diminish the significance of my belief in the existence of superhuman intelligence. I think this definition of God should be easy for most of us to believe in. The next step would be to define the consequences of this belief. So I believe in the existence of God, but what does that mean to my daily life? Am I supposed to alter my life in some particular way? This is where the major religions and the ancient religious texts come into picture. This is also the source of most conflict. Religious people agree to follow the dictats of some prophet/text from the past. Atheists, agnostics refuse to submit to this past authority. So the question of 'theism' really boils down to who you trust for finding answers to the 'superhuman'.
Unfortunately, some of the ancient texts have precluded the possibility of looking up to multiple sources for answers. On the bright side, they don't seem to conflict a lot while addressing spiritual questions. They differ significantly while talking about 'real' world activities though. How do you interpret these 'texts' in today's context? The 'real' world has evolved since these books were written. I believe that the texts were addressed to the people that were living around the time of their creation. It is possible that the texts transcend a particular age and society. However, I am not yet ready to accept that possibility. I certainly wouldn't understand a text that is intended to guide daily activities for humans living 200 years from now. So for the moment, I refuse to accept the mundane aspects of the religious texts. I however bow to the existence of a 'superhuman' intelligence. And for guidance regarding my mundane activities I shall look towards other scientific and rational sources.