Einstein the atheist.

========================================

He could have. Nonetheless, he would not be a theist. And were he on this forum, he would probably support the atheists.

==============================================

I have no idea what Albert Einstien would write on this Forum.

We have what he said on occasion. That's all we have.

Pantheistic ideas about God do not always support atheists.


Besides, Einstien also made a statement about wanting to know how God thought.

====================================

Dawkins makes the same comments as Einstein in his first chapter of The God Delusion. He even concedes that, like Einstein, he has a pantheistic reverence for nature. Do you think Dawkins ever sounds like a theist?

=====================================

Did Dawkins say anything like this?

He wanted "to know how God created the world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."

Originally posted by jaywill
Pantheistic ideas about God do not always support atheists.
.

Which ones?

EDIT: If pantheism entails that God and world are the same, how could a pantheist make a claim about God which an atheist could not make about the world?

Originally posted by Conrau K
Which ones?

EDIT: If pantheism entails that God and world are the same, how could a pantheist make a claim about God which an atheist could not make about the world?

As far as Einstien is concerned he actually did so. Isn't your argument more with him than with me?


He's the one who talked about wanting to know the thought of a creating God. Don't blame me for what he said.

His exact beliefs may not be easy to pinpoint. Like I said, sometimes he sounded more like a traditional theist and sometimes he did not.

When I did not know Jesus as my Lord and Savior I shifted belief and talk often. gropping and searching. So I understand how he could say different things depending on his mood.

Sometimes he wanted to distance himself from traditional Judeo Christian theology yet made theistic statements. At other times he wanted to make sure he was not taken as an atheist.

It could be that his belief could be discribed as Panentheism which is somewhat different from Pantheism. But I am presently studing the difference and am not ready to make a decision about that yet.

I don't know enough about it yet. And within Panentheism (not to be confused with Pantheism) there are even different kinds.

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]====================================

Dawkins makes the same comments as Einstein in his first chapter of The God Delusion. He even concedes that, like Einstein, he has a pantheistic reverence for nature. Do you think Dawkins ever sounds like a theist?

=====================================

Did Dawkins say anything like this?

He wanted ...[text shortened]... the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."[/b][/b]

Actually, I decided to check up on this. I came up with an article on Skepticality website.

http://skeptically.org/thinkersonreligion/id8.html

"Although Einstein stated he was religious and that he believed in God, it was in his own specialized sense that he used these terms. Many are aware that Einstein was not religious in the conventional sense, but it will come as a surprise to some to learn that Einstein clearly identified himself as an atheist and as an agnostic. If one understands how Einstein used the terms religion, God, atheism, and agnosticism, it is clear that he was consistent in his beliefs.

Part of the popular picture of Einstein's God and religion comes from his well-known statements, such as: "God is cunning but He is not malicious."(Also: "God is subtle but he is not bloody-minded." Or: "God is slick, but he ain't mean." (1946)

"God does not play dice."(On many occasions.)

"I want to know how God created the world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."(Unknown date.)

It is easy to see how some got the idea that Einstein was expressing a close relationship with a personal god, but it is more accurate to say he was simply expressing his ideas and beliefs about the universe.

Einstein's "belief" in Spinoza's God is one of his most widely quoted statements. But quoted out of context, like so many of these statements, it is misleading at best. It all started when Boston's Cardinal O'Connel attacked Einstein and the General Theory of Relativity and warned the youth that the theory "cloaked the ghastly apparition of atheism" and "befogged speculation, producing universal doubt about God and His creation"(Clark, 1971, 413-414). Einstein had already experienced heavier duty attacks against his theory in the form of anti-Semitic mass meetings in Germany, and he initially ignored the Cardinal's attack. Shortly thereafter though, on April 24, 1929, Rabbi Herbert Goldstein of New York cabled Einstein to ask: "Do you believe in God?"(Sommerfeld, 1949, 103). Einstein's return message is the famous statement: "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings"( 103).

Couldn't be clearer.

And further;

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. "

"I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science."

"I do not believe that the basic ideas of the theory of relativity can lay claim to a relationship with the religious sphere that is different from that of scientific knowledge in general. I see this connection in the fact that profound interrelationships in the objective world can be comprehended through simple logical concepts. To be sure, in the theory of relativity this is the case in particularly full measure.

The religious feeling engendered by experiencing the logical comprehensibility of profound interrelations is of a somewhat different sort from the feeling that one usually calls religious. It is more a feeling of awe at the scheme that is manifested in the material universe. It does not lead us to take the step of fashioning a god-like being in our own image-a personage who makes demands of us and who takes an interest in us as individuals. There is in this neither a will nor a goal, nor a must, but only sheer being. For this reason, people of our type see in morality a purely human matter, albeit the most important in the human sphere."

I'm sure you'll quote mine and take out of context some more fragments of text though, right???

Originally posted by jaywill
As far as Einstien is concerned he actually did so. Isn't your argument more with him than with me?


He's the one who talked about wanting to know the thought of a creating God. Don't blame me for what he said.

His exact beliefs may not be easy to pinpoint. Like I said, sometimes he sounded more like a traditional theist and sometimes he di ...[text shortened]... . And within Panentheism (not to be confused with Pantheism) there are even different kinds.[/b]

As far as Einstien is concerned he actually did so.

No; he said he wanted to know the mind of God - which, for him, means, the mind of the world. So, any statement about God would still be comprehensible to any materialist atheist. Both are still discussing the natural world, one just using "God" synonymous with "world".

It could be that his belief could be discribed as [b]Panentheism which is somewhat different from Pantheism. [/b]

No; panentheism means that God is immanent in the world; it does not mean that God is the world (which is what Einstein claims.)

=====================================

"Although Einstein stated he was religious and that he believed in God, it was in his own specialized sense that he used these terms.
===================================

Nothing new there.

==============================================
Many are aware that Einstein was not religious in the conventional sense, but it will come as a surprise to some to learn that Einstein clearly identified himself as an atheist and as an agnostic.
=========================================

Among his statements which positively identified himself as an atheist?

An agnostic is not an atheist. Concerning all the things that I have seen written on the subject by the man I am pretty persuadeded that if he were here he would answer this way:

ME "Professor Einstien, are you religious?"

AE "No. Unless you are willing to recognize that my mystification at
the scientific laws of the universe are my kind of religion."

ME "Professor Einstien, are you an atheist?"

AE "No."

Now this is fictional. But all things concsidered I think the conversation would have broken down something like this.

Now if you think I am wrong, please quote the statement which you think most pointedly identified his belief as atheism.


=======================================

If one understands how Einstein used the terms religion, God, atheism, and agnosticism, it is clear that he was consistent in his beliefs.

=================================

I have never met an atheist who when asked if he believed in God replied that the question was an insult to him.

Not once.


==================================
Part of the popular picture of Einstein's God and religion comes from his well-known statements, such as: "God is cunning but He is not malicious."(Also: "God is subtle but he is not bloody-minded." Or: "God is slick, but he ain't mean." (1946)
===================================

Funny statments for an atheist to have made.

If for Einstien, God did not exist, then God is not ANYTHING period.


===============================
"God does not play dice."(On many occasions.)
======================================

Funny statement for an atheist to have made.

=====================================
"I want to know how God created the world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."(Unknown date.)
=======================================

I neither could find the exact source of this comment.

Take it with a grain of salt if you wish. Perhaps he did not say it.

If he did, its still highly unlikely that an atheist would even say such things.

There are a whole LOT of concepts about G -O- D out there.

To the classic atheist none of them mean anything real, period. There is no God = atheism.

===================================
It is easy to see how some got the idea that Einstein was expressing a close relationship with a personal god, but it is more accurate to say he was simply expressing his ideas and beliefs about the universe.
=======================================

As a Pantheist or a Panentheist would, or perhaps a Buddhist.

Now I match your quotation with one of my own:

"Although Einstien said that he believed in a pantheistic God (a god that is the universe ), his comments admitting creation and divine thought better describe a theistic God. And as "irritating" as it may be, his theory of General Relativity stands today as one of the strongest lines of evidence for a theistic God. Indeed, General Relativity supports what is one of the oldest formal arguments for the existence of a theistic God - the Cosmological Argument."

( Norm Geisler, Frank Turek, I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist, pg,74)

===============================

As far as Einstien is concerned he actually did so.

No; he said he wanted to know the mind of God - which, for him, means, the mind of the world. So, any statement about God would still be comprehensible to any materialist atheist. Both are still discussing the natural world, one just using "God" synonymous with "world".

====================================

Well, he drew a difference between what he said was the mind of God and the details. Now if the material universe is all the mind of God for Einstien than to know these details is to know the mind of God.

He did not say that. He said (if he indeed said it, not being able to get the source ) " I am not interested in this or that phenomenon in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thought, THE REST ARE DETAILS."

If what you say is true than "the rest" would be the mind of God - light spectrums of elements in the natural world, etc.



===================================
It could be that his belief could be discribed as Panentheism which is somewhat different from Pantheism.

No; panentheism means that God is immanent in the world; it does not mean that God is the world (which is what Einstein claims
======================================

Thanks for your input. The stuff I am reading on that now is kind of dense.

Still not ready to make discussion on it.

===================================

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. "

"I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science."
=======================================

Scott,

A non-personal God, a non-caring God, an obnoxious God, an aloof God, a God who is on an eternal vacaton from the affairs of the world, a God who hides and doesn't want to be known - is still a God.

These are not the statements of one for whom a Deity does not exist at all period.

Originally posted by scherzo
I never said he was not an atheist.

He was a cultural Jew. He was an atheist. Just like an atheist can celebrate Christmas and Easter, or Ramadan. There are cultural Christians, Jews, Muslims, and everything else throughout the world. Of them, several million are atheist.

Good heavens, you are incapable of reading.

Originally posted by jaywill
ME "Professor Einstien, are you religious?"

AE "No. Unless you are willing to recognize that my mystification at
the scientific laws of the universe are my kind of religion."

ME "Professor Einstien, are you an atheist?"

AE "No."

Now this is fictional. But all things concsidered I think the conversation would have broken down something like this.

'However, in 1929 - during a rare interview with a journalist - Einstein was directly asked if he believed in the God of Spinoza. "I can't answer with a simple yes or no," he replied. "I am not an atheist [and] I do not know if I can define myself as a pantheist." '

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/23008

Quoted for the sake of those who cannot read.

What annoys me in this thread is people prepared to instrumentalize Einstein to give their soap bubbles lift.

Here's another bit on Spinoza -- with diagrams -- that shows that saying that 'God is Nature' is a misrepresentation of his views.

I haven't got to the bottom of Spinoza; I'm not wedded to his views; I just find them fascinating, the more so because a thinker of Einstein's stature paid them heed. Also because I find it interesting that my response to the question: Is (a)theism your bag is similar to Einstein's: yes and no. That answer predates my reading of Spinoza or Einstein; naturally I can't support my answer with internationally renowned philosophical or scientific work, but as a coincidence it's intriguing enough.

Scott,

=================================

"Do you believe in God?"(Sommerfeld, 1949, 103). Einstein's return message is the famous statement: "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings"( 103).

Couldn't be clearer.


========================================


Spinoza held to a non theistic God, and argued against miracles.

The question I have is "Is a non-theistic pantheistic God no God or a God?"

And if Einstien's concept of a pantheistic God was strong then why did he speak of the thought of God as apart from the details of natural phenomenon?

At best I can admit that Einstien wavered and at times was not sure what to believe. He was human.