Einstein has been a challenge for atheists who cannot accept that such a "modern" genius would believe in a Creator. Some have resorted to his statement that he believed in "Spinoza's God" to neutralize that possibility. In fact some have stated that Einstein only believed in "nature," or that Einstein used the term "God" as a "metaphor" rather than a reality.
By believing in Spinoza's God, Einstein is clearly refuting the idea of a "personal" God, in the Judeo-Christian tradition. He, consequently, did not embrace the belief that the Creator sits on a throne in Heaven having a body and human-like features, nor did he believe that God had any reward or punishment in store for humans. Yet, he did believe in a conscious, powerful, intelligent, good Being who manifests His greatness within His creation. Understanding this great Being, he stated, was the driving force behind his scientific search.

Therefore, the reader is asked to judge for himself or herself, by reading the quotes offered below. They should be sufficient in helping the reader to reach his or her own conclusion.




EINSTEIN'S VIEWS ON GOD


"I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals Himself in the harmony of all being.
(Schilpp, 1969, 103)

"You believe in God playing dice, and I in perfect laws in the world of things existing as real objects, which I try to grasp in a wildly speculative way"
(Ibid., 1969, 176)

"I defend the Good God against the idea of a continuous game of dice."
(Speziali, 1972, 425)

"I'm not much with people, and I'm not a family man. I want my peace. I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomena in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."
(Clarck, 1971, 18-19)

The scientist's religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.
(Iain, 1982, 57)

============================================================
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Schilpp, P. Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist. London: Cambridge University Press, 1969.

Speziali, P. Albert Einstein-Michele Basso Correspondence, 1903-1955. Paris: Herman, 1972.

Clarck, R. The Life and Times of Einstein. New York: The World Publishing Co., 1971.

Iain, P. Science, Theology and Einstein. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982.

[quote]The scientist's religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.
[/quote]

I like this one; and it makes me realize I don't have to believe in God, so many of my experiences only reflect my beliefs but God is not dependant on my belief.
(if that is what is behind nature ;D I don't know and I don't believe)

This dosn't have to deal so much with Einstein as it does with Stephen Hawking, but they're both practically in the same field so I figured I'd put it here. My post has to do with entropy, which is the measure of the degree of disorder in a system. A good example which is found in Hawking's book, The Theory of Everything, is a house. Hawking's example is this: "It is a matter of common experience that disorder will increase if things are left to themselves; one has only to leave a house without repairs to see that. One can create order out of disorder-for example, one can paint the house." Hawking later states that this idea (also known as the second law of thermodynamics) is practically universal. My point is, can the existence of some higher being really be denied since our world is so full of order (as well as disorder, but thats not the point here, the simple fact that there is order in our world practically proves, at least in my mind that there is a higher power at work since the second law of thermodynamics has been proved) almost as it is being maintained? If a higher power is not giving our universe a "coat of paint" then what is? Why has gravity remained a constant throughout time? How can one explain fibonaci numbers in nature, and the perfection of the honeycomb of a bee colony without considering the existance of a higher power? Why is it, that we are solid beings if there is no higher power? If we were not given a "coat of paint" we would not be, because the electrons that make us, and everything around us appear solid, would cease to revolve around the nucleus of the atom and go flying in different directions, effectively making us and everything we know disappear. Which brings up another interesting thing to think about. If that were to happen, would there be anything left? A "soul" perhaps? Or nothing? It's kind of strange to think that our lives and everything we know depends on the fact that something is making electrons continue to spin. So what does everyone think about this? This is what I got out of Hawking's book. Maybe I'm wrong and misunderstood what he was trying to say. Input from someone else who has read the book would be helpful. And for those of you who havn't read the book, I suggest you do. Many are hesitant to read Stephen Hawking, but the whole point of his books are to make those who aren't astrophysicists understand the laws of the universe. It's actually a pretty easy read.

Hi guest Ben,

How can it be that you have not joined us as a member of mind-brain?

You are asking the very questions we are seeking answers to ourselves!
It will be an on-going discussion for very many years I suspect.
Do you have any ideas?

If so, do come and join us; you will be most welcome, especially now that the site structure has been improved by Shawn, the owner.

I myself do not believe in God, simply because if I did I would then want to know who created God, and so on [the advantage of this approach has the added benefit of getting rid of the Devil at the same time].
This is not to say that I don't believe that man is capable of 'good' or 'bad' acts.
But it does beg the question of what is 'good' and what is 'bad'. Religions, to a large extent try to define good and bad the best way they can.
I guess that what exists is capable of existing, and that is as close as I can get to the Truth at the moment.
In terms of thoughts, we can think what we like, but we each need to test our models of reality to see how closely they mimic reality. This is not easy because our perception of reality is restricted by our senses and our capability to comprehend what we experience.
The beauty of the web and sites like this, is that we can share thoughts and ideas
and help one-another to move forwards!
Best regards, Bill.

Einstein was neither omniscient nor omnipotent.

Why would it be strange that a great scientist believes in a God.
Believing is a human condition.
And after all he still was a human.

I don't think anyone's claiming that Einstein was omniscient or omnipotent. The only point of this thread is to point out that Einstein, a world-renowned scientist, was deeply religious (in the mystical sense and not in the organized religion sense).

Einstein had many instances where people tried to say he was religious. He let it go a lot. In time he had to set the record straight. He was not religious and he was spiritual (as you say). I like how he said 'I am satisfied with the Mysteries'.