Religion and everything philosophical about religion, started during the prehistoric period when people faced with ignorance, and covered with fears about what they could not explain, begun the journey of believing in something bigger than themselves, gods that deserve their obedience and servitude.

We see this at the extreme when the Greeks, who while able to explain that all matter is made of atoms, they worshiped not one, but twelve gods, who were there to help them anytime there was something difficult to deal with. In fact, gods were there regardless of human difficulty; there was even a god to join the wine party!

We have made progress with regards to the teachings about morality but they still carry some unexplained, if not unwise - unwritten laws that do not make sense. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth; he that without sin among you, let him cast a stone at her (from the woman adultery story), seem to imply that only non-sinners are allowed to punish. Hence the dilemma about how imperfect societies are supposed to punish their sinners. Even Jesus' authority to forgive implies that people who had to be done wrong were left without compensation. We also see the gender bias in the woman adultery case, where Mosaic Law required that her male partner must also undergo the stoning. But where is he?

Then, we have the miracles. If we define a miracle as modification or alteration of the expected and/or established course of things, this of course would involve anything and everything, from apples falling inversely from the ground to the trees, tides going into the seas, to the sun rising in the west, etc., etc. The presentation of a miracle has to have two derivatives: one has to do with the laws of physics being violated, and the second has to do with the observation that the party witnessing this miracle is suffering from infinite imagination.

Modern day miracles, the Harry Houdini types, or the UFO sightings, have to be put in contrast to the ones described in the New Testament. Just about all types are being witnessed today, with the exception of course of the resurrection. We have been told that Jesus managed this task three times: one by raising Lazarus and two by raising the daughter of Jairus and three by raising himself. Following the "Murder at Golgotha" reasoning of forensic investigator, you would think that someone would have taken the time to interview all survivors and document their amazing extra-humane experience. In any case, what happened to them? Why did they vanish from history?

Questions about Jesus, and in general about religion are of paramount importance, given the cost of human life and sacrifices that humanity has endured over thousands of years. One can accept the fact that Jesus walked the streets of Jerusalem, and by most acim  suffered a brutal death. But, what about his father, what about God? What about paradise or the afterlife? What if there is God but not afterlife? What about if there is afterlife, but not God?

What about humans? Are they to remain mortals? Latest scientific discoveries have shown that life, in its primitive ameba form, can be artificially recreated. Religion on the other hand, claims to know all about "the end", a process of thought known as "eschatology". In the end, we are all after the truth, although the truth can take several interpretations depending on the ends that intends to justify.

The Greeks proclaim "know thyself", i.e., you need to learn about yourself, your inner-soul, first, if you are to know anything about anything else. After all, the truth is not a function of possessions, nor are possessions required to know the truth. It is rather a process, the truth, that takes you to a place where you perhaps have never expected to arrive, but nevertheless have painstakingly worked to get there - and when there, you feel fulfilled.

One wonders how the brightest minds approach these concepts. For example, how would Einstein feel about Jesus, religion? According to Einstein, "science is the century-old endeavor to bring together by means of systematic thought the perceptible phenomena of this world into as thorough-going an association as possible. To put boldly, it is the attempt at the posterior reconstruction of existence by the process of conceptualization."

How does the idea of an omnipotent personal God stand up to the might accumulation of science? For one thing, the idea that God is able to help man while in solace and guide towards the good deeds is not necessarily unreasonable. However, this is where the weaknesses appear with respect to defending beliefs and feelings and taken them in a dogmatic sense; if God is omnipotent, then everything we do, every action we take, everything we think is the result of his work. And if this is the case, how can men be held accountable for their actions, if these actions are God's anyway?