Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 05:50PM

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

In the context which Einstein wrote this thought came the following,

"“Though religion may be that which determines the goal, it has, nevertheless, learned from science, in the broadest sense, what means will contribute to the attainment of the goals it has set up. But science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” ...

What is clear from Einstein’s writings on science and religion, though, is that he didn’t believe in a personal God, and saw theistic religion as a man-made fiction. In a letter written in 1954, he made no bones about this (translated from the original German):

“The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can change this for me.”

Indeed, the last paragraph of the 1954 essay shows his faith not in the numinous, but in rationality:

The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge. In this sense I believe that the priest must become a teacher if he wishes to do justice to his lofty educational mission."

Thoughts?

https://newrepublic.com/article/115821/einsteins-famous-quote-science-religion-didnt-mean-taught

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:20PM

It will be interesting to see how much that goes for.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:37PM

The news readers on my local newscast couldn't understand what was happening and actually called one of the new writes on-set. It was very entertaining!

I think that the mechanism jammed. I think it was supposed to shred the entire painting, leaving an empty frame on the wall and confetti on the floor.

That would have been completely hilarious! (except to the buyer)

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Beth ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:53PM

I'm sorry the shredder got stuck. Now it's like an Inverted Jenny. Maybe not, but that the closest thing I could think of.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:18PM

You mention "dichotomy" in your title, which one assumes you wrote yourself. Could you perhaps lend us your views on what the two dichotomous ideas are?

Is it as simple as "ghawd v. no ghawd?"

Because if it is, nothing you've done has furthered a reconciliation between deists and non-deists. All of Einstein's public utterances have been poured over for decades by adherents of both sides of the issue, and there is no resolution.

If you'd like to give your support for angels and visitation and answers to prayers, have at it, but I don't think bringing in Einstein does you any good.

From that same 1954 letter:

"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise, I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Darren Steers ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:22PM

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> From that same 1954 letter:
>
> "For me the Jewish religion like all others is an
> incarnation of the most childish superstitions.
> And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and
> with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have
> no different quality for me than all other people.
> As far as my experience goes, they are no better
> than other human groups, although they are
> protected from the worst cancers by a lack of
> power. Otherwise, I cannot see anything 'chosen'
> about them."

I think this part of the letter was just Einstein talking as a man, not Einstein the prophet..... errrrr.... I mean the theoretical physicist.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:31PM

I believe you are teasing...

How can a man talk as anything other than a man? At least from my perspective. And yes, I do mean to take away from ghawd!

"speaking as a man"... Each of us is on the continuum of ability to communicate. It seems to me that mormons get lots of practice in this art. None of us hesitates to mention that we were schooled in public speaking, and in truth, by age 18, those of us who grew up in the church are quite experienced.

And then there are those who forge so far ahead in communication skills. It is a skill that usually beckons rewards to its possessor. And it's more than just the words used.

Anyway, if this thread is intended to forge or foster belief in ghawd, etc., those who already have it won't lose it and those of us who don't, won't suddenly find ourselves on our knees.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Beth ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:34PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: anono this week ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:35PM

I would say Einstein is right. It takes the study of evidence and recognition of patterns to determine truth. In this process we develop intellect. When we have intellect then we can appreciate what religion is really all about.

Religion holds the answers to what life is about, what side is right in politics, a more accurate history and story of mankind. How to behave in society and why.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Darren Steers ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:40PM

anono this week Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Religion holds the answers to what life is about,
> what side is right in politics, a more accurate
> history and story of mankind. How to behave in
> society and why.

What The Frank!

Religion has zero answers to any of those things.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:40PM

> Religion holds the answers to what life is
> about, what side is right in politics, a
> more accurate history and story of mankind.
> How to behave in society and why.

I find this fascinating! When do the playoffs begin so that a final winner can be crowned and the One, True Religion is known?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Darren Steers ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:42PM

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I find this fascinating! When do the playoffs
> begin so that a final winner can be crowned and
> the One, True Religion is known?

We already know the answer to that one. ;o)

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Beth ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:56PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: summer ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:36PM

That we pay attention to Einstein's thoughts about religion and God IMO means that we hope that someone who was smarter than we are figured everything out. But his thoughts are just that -- thoughts. They are one person's ideas on a planet which has had many smart people with ideas. I might consider his thoughts but I find no reason to find them any more authoritative than my own thoughts on the matter.

As a born-and-raised Catholic, I was raised to believe that God is the God of the entire universe. Many Catholics believe in a personal God, but for me, if God is in charge of that many beings, how can he possibly be a personal god? A God of the entire universe tends to argue in favor of deism for those that believe. I was rather shocked to learn that Mormons believe in a God only of this planet -- well, this planet and Kolob. It is a very different conception of God.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Henry Bemis ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 10:28AM

"That we pay attention to Einstein's thoughts about religion and God IMO means that we hope that someone who was smarter than we are figured everything out. But his thoughts are just that -- thoughts. They are one person's ideas on a planet which has had many smart people with ideas. I might consider his thoughts but I find no reason to find them any more authoritative than my own thoughts on the matter."

COMMENT: Although I generally agree with what you say here, the point is not that Einstein's thoughts are "authoritative." What they offer is a unique perspective from a man with an extraordinary scientific and personal background, which includes in particular an extraordinary ability to abstract relationships between various facets of the physical (and perhaps metaphysical) world. I personally find that theists tend to make too much of his "God" references, and atheists, to little. (Coyne is a perfect example of the latter because he refuses to acknowledge the very real metaphysical "faith" that Einstein assigned to the scientific quest for the laws of the universe and his genuine perplexity as to their source.)

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: dogblogger ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:38PM

Why would i give einstein's view on religion any weight? His epertise is as a scientist. His peer reviewed and supported insights were made without religious extras. That he enjoyed their commingling personally offers no credence to the view.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: babyloncansuckit ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 06:41PM

I think Einstein was a product of his institution. He was a good “sell”. Original, smart, and the hair. Universities are atheistic enterprises, pretty much churches and cathedrals for rationalism. All isms are more about what you don’t believe than what you do. That’s bad for science because it sets itself up for revolution. Unless you’re an anarchist, in which case it’s a good thing, but come the revolution a lot of people get egg on their face.

Maybe the next revolution will be different because a huge chunk of the world economy is built on quantum mechanics, which touches on the God realm in ways we don’t understand. Money is the engine driving us toward God, but in a completely unexpected way.

I find that Liebniz had a view of God and religion that’s much more in line with my beliefs about reality. I think Newton, like Einstein, was more establishment-friendly so got all the fame for having invented calculus.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 07:12PM

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think Einstein was a product of his institution.
> He was a good “sell”. Original, smart, and the
> hair. Universities are atheistic enterprises,
> pretty much churches and cathedrals for
> rationalism. All isms are more about what you
> don’t believe than what you do. That’s bad for
> science because it sets itself up for revolution.
> Unless you’re an anarchist, in which case it’s
> a good thing, but come the revolution a lot of
> people get egg on their face.
>
Oh, the hair. Someone where I worship resembles Einstein so much he is going to play him in local theater. The resemblance has mostly to do with his hair, lol, than other features. It's poofed, like Einstein's was. :D

> Maybe the next revolution will be different
> because a huge chunk of the world economy is built
> on quantum mechanics, which touches on the God
> realm in ways we don’t understand. Money is the
> engine driving us toward God, but in a completely
> unexpected way.

One of Einstein's closest friends was Max Born, quantum physicist. He and Einstein had a long standing argument of their differing beliefs in God. Einstein's was one where God was in control of all things, including what happens on earth. Born believed God kept a distance, and played dice with the universe. Could both men have been right? Their friendship spanned their adult lifetime, and across oceans. The one thing they had in common was their love for friendship, and physics. They played violin duets together when not discussing physics or their concepts of God, or their families.

>
> I find that Liebniz had a view of God and religion
> that’s much more in line with my beliefs about
> reality. I think Newton, like Einstein, was more
> establishment-friendly so got all the fame for
> having invented calculus.

That well may be.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 09:14PM

"If God has made the world a perfect mechanism, He has at least conceded so much to our imperfect intellect that in order to predict little parts of it, we need not solve innumerable differential equations, but can use dice with fair success."

~ Max Born

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 11:19AM

Once again we fail to see irony in an ironic statement.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 03:50PM

Newton was a professor at Cambridge, served two terms in parliament, ran the Royal Mint and was president of the Royal Society.

He WAS the establishment, and he used the concomitant power to ensure that he got credit that in some cases rightfully belonged to others

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 10:57PM

I hope you realize that when they use the word "God," they don't mean "God."

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Beth ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 10:58PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 11:05PM

Einstein for almost all of his adult life had no belief in an "there" God. He used the word to describe the universe, the system of laws and/or uncertainty in the universe.

Born was pretty much the same way. He was baptized but didn't attend and thought all organized religions were silly. He spoke of "God" as the search for truth, reverence for life, and, again, the rules and/or uncertainty in the universe.

When theists or deists invoke these men, they take their "religious" statements as vindicating their own beliefs.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 11:15PM

So am I correct in my assertion that this is a pointless thread for RfM? Is she preaching to the deist choir, which is fine, or is she trying to convince the heathen of the error of our ways?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 06, 2018 11:25PM

Old dog, new tricks? Too late to save the heathens, I'd think.

As for any alternative explanations, I think I'll go roll some dice.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: spiritist ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 01:20PM

I like the following Einstein quote: 'The only real valuable thing is intuition.'

It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with God but it could based on your beliefs.

Also, Einstein supposedly said: 'When the solution is simple, God is answering.'

That certainly sounded like he was referencing a God of some type. I have no clue why he said it or what he meant!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 02:09PM

We know based on his life story, he was highly intuitive. He was a man of deep faith and profundity to match his deep intellect.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Done & Done ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 02:13PM

Who's the "we" who know this? Or, is the the "royal we?"

Why is your interpretation of what Einstein said the the correct version? Why do you see it as supporting your agenda?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 02:16PM

His biography is my agenda?

Anyone who knows Einstein's life knows he was intuitive, had a great intellect, and believed in God. What did you miss?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 03:02PM

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> His biography is my agenda?
>
> Anyone who knows Einstein's life knows he was
> intuitive, had a great intellect, and believed in
> God. What did you miss?


Define the "God" in whom Einstein believed.


I much prefer the words of a famous philosopher in this regard:

"That we pay attention to Einstein's thoughts about religion and God IMO means that we hope that someone who was smarter than we are figured everything out. But his thoughts are just that -- thoughts. They are one person's ideas on a planet which has had many smart people with ideas. I might consider his thoughts but I find no reason to find them any more authoritative than my own thoughts on the matter."


It is so off-putting when you speak in certainties.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 12:09AM

Perhaps the only thing worse than someone who alludes to famous people in order to justify his own beliefs, in terms he doesn't even understand, is the person who alludes to others, in terms he does not comprehend, in order to assert his own expertise as a means of justifying his personal beliefs.

Words and arguments stand, or fall, on their own.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: SL Cabbie ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 03:33PM

Every group seems to want to claim Einstein as "their own." The über faithful point to his famous, "God does not play dice with the Universe!" statement; the non-religious find plenty of ammunition elsewhere.

My goal, to steal a phrase I love, is to "simplify without being simplistic." I'll start small; here's Wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein

>>Albert Einstein's religious views have been widely studied and often misunderstood.[1] Einstein stated that he believed in the pantheistic God of Baruch Spinoza.*[2] He did not believe in a personal God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings, a view which he described as naïve.[3] He clarified however that, "I am not an atheist",[4] preferring to call himself an agnostic,[5] or a "religious nonbeliever."[3] Einstein also stated he did not believe in life after death, adding "one life is enough for me."[6] He was closely involved in his lifetime with several humanist groups.[7][8]

*It could be argued that this "school of thought" may be characterized as "essentially Deist."

I note that he was "born into the Jewish religion," and yet "believed the problem of God was the "most difficult in the world"—a question that could not be answered "simply with yes or no." He conceded that, "the problem involved is too vast for our limited minds."[10]

He also said, "But, on the other hand, everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe—a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive.”[40]

In my own "metaphysics," I see a separation between "spiritual beliefs" and "religious beliefs" (and I have to pay homage to my upbringing as a "religious, scientific sort"; as a senior in high school, the "5" I received on the AP English test came in part because of an essay I wrote saying, essentially, what Einstein had said (It was titled,"A Scientific God"). I promise, I hadn't read anything from him on this subject at the time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/07/2018 04:13PM by SL Cabbie.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Done & Done ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 09:42AM

Thank you Cabbie. Nice.

This using Einstein to support one's own beliefs seems the same as using a celebrity to endorse your perfume.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Done & Done ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 09:55AM

Harold Bloom, Yale Professor, literary critic, and author or more than forty books when asked if he believed in God:

"My wife, Jeanne, is an atheist. In not an atheist. My attitude toward Yahweh is that I don't like him and I don't trust him and I wish he would go away.But I know he won't, because he's built into the language, as Nietzsche said. He's part of the way we think. . . "

I have a lot of respect for Mr.Bloom and it tickled me to read this. So many views on God even by those who choose to believe. Fascinating. God, whatever that is, is so engrained, such a major part of our human language at this point, that it is impossible to stand back and view reasonably for those who believe in a certain god.

But no matter how many I read, I have my own views and need no celebrity endorsement to prove my point. I don't need to "interpret" Einstein's words to my own satisfaction. I don't have the need to read a bit of Einstein and then claim he had "deep faith." I have found no evidence of that exact quote from him and would love Amyjo to substantiate her claim.

I left the Mormon church because I chose me over them, over anyone else's opinion. I chose my own brain, my own empathy, my own reasoning, and I will rise or fall with those.

And no one needs to accept what I say as truth. Even though it always is of course. :)

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Nightingale ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 06:23PM

"I left the Mormon church because I chose me over them, over anyone else's opinion. I chose my own brain, my own empathy, my own reasoning, and I will rise or fall with those."

Succinct. Inspiring. Not a bad life philosophy at all.

Your brain, your empathy, your reasoning, Done & Done, has done you well.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/08/2018 06:23PM by Nightingale.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 03:13PM

"Albert Einstein
Nobel Laureate in Physics
"Then there are fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics and comes from the same source. They are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who — in their grudge against the traditional 'opium for the people' — cannot bear the music of the spheres. The Wonder of nature does not become smaller because one cannot measure it by the standards of human and moral aims."

"The more I study science the more I believe in God." "True religion is real living — living with all one's soul, with all one's goodness and righteousness." I accept the historical Jesus "unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."

"I want to know how God created this 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." "We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books, but doesn't know what it is." "We see a Universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations." "Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe — a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive."

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 03:27PM

I still stand by the famous philosopher whose quote I posted just above. Einstein was beyond a doubt a shining light in terms of his brain power. But the concept of ghawd is, by it's basic definition, above a mere man's ability to know, much less describe.

You seem to be obsessed with preaching to RfM how great your ghawd is, how he answers so many of your prayers, how he blesses you, how you can see supernatural things and buy art at a discount.

I don't count myself as a fanatical atheist, but that's just me. I do count you as fanatical about ghawd and the very special relationship you and he have. It boggles the mind that you can't see that yammering away about your brand of deism is off-putting here on RfM.

I am a ghawdless happy man. I don't need to preach a darn thing other than the mormon church is bad for people.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 03:31PM

You accuse me falsely of certainties which I am no more certain than you are.

I accept on faith that which I do not know or understand.

As for Einstein's ideas and beliefs, he can speak for himself.

Inviting discussion as to why great minds don't think alike is what I was trying to encourage. Not discourage.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 03:44PM

In a letter dated March 1, 1954, Einstein reviews a book in a letter to the author. I will link to the original letter and translation below.

The letter explains Einstein's relationship to religion and God. He writes that while he shares the author's values, he does not accept the underlying religious rationale. Einstein describes religion as "written in a language inaccessible to me" and then notes that "the word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness. . ." All religions are, for Einstein, "the most childish superstitions" and "self-deception," which impedes rather than promotes "our moral efforts."

Spinoza is cited as explicitly rejecting the notion of God as First Cause and implicitly as redefining God as the physical rules informing the universe. Thus Einstein observes that both he and Spinoza rejected all theistic and deistic interpretations of reality. No Judaism, no Christianity, no Buddhism, no seances.


http://www.lettersofnote.com/2009/10/word-god-is-product-of-human-weakness.html

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: October 07, 2018 03:51PM

> You accuse me falsely of certainties
> which I am no more certain than you are.


Hey, all I do is read your words. I think it's very clear just in this thread how 'certain' you are on the topic of Einstein: you want your assessment of the man accepted by us all. Let me quote your response to Done & Done:

"Anyone who knows Einstein's life knows he was intuitive, had a great intellect, and believed in God. What did you miss?"

So not only certain, but snippy...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 09:48AM

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > You accuse me falsely of certainties
> > which I am no more certain than you are.
>
>
> Hey, all I do is read your words. I think it's
> very clear just in this thread how 'certain' you
> are on the topic of Einstein: you want your
> assessment of the man accepted by us all. Let me
> quote your response to Done & Done:
>
> "Anyone who knows Einstein's life knows he was
> intuitive, had a great intellect, and believed in
> God. What did you miss?"
>
> So not only certain, but snippy...

Why do you obsess over my posts or replies? And clearly take them out of context for which they were made. To Done and Done's remark which was, "Who's the "we" who know this? Or, is the the "royal we?"

Why is your interpretation of what Einstein said the the correct version? Why do you see it as supporting your agenda?"

If you're going to parrot one, why not both? And I also said Einstein's biography is not my agenda. Which you conveniently left out of your paraphrasing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/08/2018 09:53AM by Amyjo.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Done & Done ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 10:30AM

When you use a phrase such as "What we know" you are implying that it is provable fact. Had you changed that to "What I believe" your point could be taken seriously.

When you speak for others you have an obligation to offer evidence and fact if you, again, wish to be taken seriously.

I appreciate Henry Bemis explanation below as he has done just that: Spoken for himself and offered clear reasoning for his opinion.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Henry Bemis ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 10:17AM

Einstein:

"The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

OP: "Indeed, the last paragraph of the 1954 essay shows his faith not in the numinous, but in rationality:

COMMENT: You are right . . . almost. Einstein's "faith" here is not just in "rationality, i.e. the ability of human beings to do science; but it most importantly encompasses a religious-like metaphysical faith in the "order" of the universe itself, and the existence of universal laws. This faith is what provides meaning to scientific endeavors to discover such order and laws.

Einstein's realized that such order and the existence of such laws involve a metaphysical "religious-type" mystery, which is why he constantly identifies natural law with "God." "God" is meant by him to be a placeholder for the explanation of such order and laws, whatever it might turn out to be.

Finally, I think Einstein through rejecting a personal God would, for reasons noted above, had a kind of "numinous" (spiritual-like) appreciation for the laws of the universe.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 12:35PM

Very nicely, and accurately, stated.

Einstein's statements about God are not contradictory but paradoxical. Henry has explained the paradox, leaving no contradiction.

For Einstein, there was no God in a religious sense although the laws of nature inspired a religious awe. God was a placeholder for undiscovered law.

That's also what Born meant when he said you don't need the calculus to understand reality: uncertainty gives you a good approximation.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: jacob ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 11:58AM

Metaphysics is the intersection of philosophy and the natural world. Einstein's thoughts on metaphysics are founded on an almost unique understanding of the physical world, so I'm interested in what he has to say.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Henry Bemis ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 05:54PM

Jerry Coyne could take a few lessons from Einstein as it applies to science, and scientific "faith." (And the humility that it implies.)

JC: "Finally, I take issue with Einstein’s statement that the value of reason in understanding the world is a form of “profound faith.” As I wrote in Slate, this is confusing because the religious meaning of faith is “firm belief without substantial evidence,” while the scientist’s “faith” in the laws of physics is simply shorthand for “strong confidence, based on replicated evidence and experience, about how things are.”

COMMENT: First, "faith" does not make any claims about the nature or quantity of evidence. All that "faith" means is belief in something significant (in the religious sense God) in the absence of certainty or proof. Accordingly, for Einstein, scientific faith encompasses the belief that the universe encompasses a reality of profound order that is in a significant, but limited, way accessible to scientific discovery. Einstein was a theoretical physicist who was immersed in the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics, neither of which were, or are to this day, established by proof, or any kind of finality. In fact, there is no even "strong confidence" that either of these modern scientific achievements are the last word with regard to ultimate reality. Einstein's "faith" was not just a strong "confidence" in science, it encompassed a tremendous respect for what science does NOT know, *and* the mysteries that still surround what is known.
____________________________________________

JC: "Further, we don’t have faith in reason: we use reason because it helps us find out things. It is in fact the only way we’ve made progress in understanding the universe. If other ways had proven valuable, like personal revelation or Ouiji boards, we’d use those, too."

COMMENT: Science *does* have faith in reason; i.e. a belief not only in what science has uncovered to date, but most importantly in that human reason is yet to uncover. When scientists talk about "a theory of everything," they are demonstrating a faith that the order of the universe can not only be revealed by science, but that such order can be "expressed" in total by relatively simple scientific equations. (There is no evidence to support this metaphysical assumption. It is pure faith!)
__________________________________________

JC: "Although Einstein didn’t believe in a conventional god, his explanation of the harmony between science and faith has been widely misunderstood, and some of that is his own fault. What he should have done is abandon the world “faith” in favor of “confidence born of experience,” and not tried to argue that curiosity and wonder before nature was a form of religion."

COMMENT: Perhaps the better view to take is that Einstein used the word "faith" and "God" in applications to science for a reason, and not as a "mistake" to be lamented. Perhaps that reason was to encourage people to see the natural orderliness of the universe, and the underlying natural laws, as an alternative to religious "creation," and to note that in either case "faith" is required. In the one case, faith in God, but in the other case, faith in an ultimate metaphysical explanation that is naturally based. In any event, "Confidence born of experience" does not even come close to what Einstein had in mind by his use of "faith" as applied to science. "Curiosity and wonder before nature" takes on *religious* significance when one realizes that the fundamental order of the universe is itself a profound mystery.

The best biography of Einstein was by Abraham Pais, called (significantly) "Subtle is the Lord." Pais was a theoretical physicist himself and knew Einstein at Princeton quite well. He explains the title of the book by these comments:

"'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.' So Einstein once wrote to explain his personal creed. . . His was not a life of prayer and worship. Yet he lived by a deep faith--a faith not capable of rational foundation--that there are laws of Nature to be discovered. His lifelong pursuit was to discover them. His realism and his optimism are illuminated by his remark: "Subtle is the Lord, but malicious He is not.' When asked by a colleague what he meant by that, he replied: "Nature hides her secret because of her essential loftiness, but not by means of ruse.'"

Finally, it is a mistake to take Einstein use of "faith" and "God" as an endorsement of religion of any kind. But it is also a mistake to assume that Einstein just wasn't careful with his words. He clearly thought that the concepts of "faith" and "God" had application to science in a non-traditional sense beyond simply an "awe" of nature. Such use encompassed Einstein's view that the mysteries of science carried substantial metaphysical significance.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 06:14PM

Thanks for your insights, Henry Bemis.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 06:23PM

This is good stuff, Henry. The only point on which I would quibble is your use of the word "metaphysical," for although you do not make this mistake others may be temped to read into that a transcendent being or mysticism. There may be a transcendent being or a mystical truth, but Einstein did not think so.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Henry Bemis ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 07:03PM

Well, "metaphysical" is one of those problematic, but useful, words in a discussion of this time. Certainly, I do not mean to imply anything transcendent or mystical by that word alone. I only mean a reality that is beyond physics or science, in principle.

For example, the ideas of a "theory of everything" or of "ultimately reality" are metaphysical not only because modern science does not have any such theory; but also because we have no idea in principle what "everything" or "ultimate" might be.

Moreover, there is a temptation to go from metaphysical to mystical simply by emphasizing the mystery inherent in what is ultimately unknown, or unknowable, and speculating about it using religious language. Einstein sometimes comes close to this, and other scientists just make the leap. So, the application of these terms is subtle and not always clear.

Thank you for your positive comments!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 06:40PM

"Einstein and ‘God’
Albert Einstein was not a Christian. He had no concept of the God of the Bible or trust in Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour. His views on religion and ‘God’ were evolutionary and pantheistic.

He wrote,

‘I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts.’22

‘The desire for guidance, love, and support prompts men to form the social or moral conception of God. … The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events. … A God who rewards and punishes is inconceivable to him … .’23

‘During the youthful period of mankind’s spiritual evolution human fantasy created gods in man’s own image. … The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a sublimation of that old concept of the gods. … In their struggle for the ethical good, teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a personal God … .’24...

Answering a Japanese scholar who asked him about ‘scientific truth’, Albert wrote,

‘Certain it is that a conviction, akin to religious feeling, of the rationality or intelligibility of the world lies behind all scientific work of a higher order. This firm belief, a belief bound up with deep feeling, in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God. In common parlance this may be described as "pantheistic" (Spinoza).’25

It is thus clear that when Albert mentioned ‘God’, e.g. ‘God does not play dice with the universe’, and ‘The Lord God is subtle, but malicious he is not’,26 he was referring to something like rationality in the universe. He is recorded as saying that a ‘deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God’.27 However, he certainly was not referring to anything like the God of the Bible, who is Creator, Lawgiver, Judge and Saviour."

https://creation.com/einstein-the-universe-and-god

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Henry Bemis ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 07:18PM

"It is thus clear that when Albert mentioned ‘God’, e.g. ‘God does not play dice with the universe’, and ‘The Lord God is subtle, but malicious he is not’,26 he was referring to something like rationality in the universe. He is recorded as saying that a ‘deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God’.27"

COMMENT: I do not think Einstein ever referred to the "rationality in the universe" or that he believed in "a superior reasoning power." The "order" and "natural laws" of the universe are NOT the same, and cannot be equated with, "rationality." Order can come about by natural means (e.g. evolution), but "rationality" implies a creator, or design; i.e. a cognitive agent. I was not satisfied with citations 26 and 27 in your link, and would be interested in any quote by Einstein that implied that the universe was the product of "rationality" or a "superior reasoning power." I know of no such references.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 08, 2018 09:16PM

I know he and my cousin, Max Born, would get in lengthy discussions about their perceptions of God. Both were raised Jewish. Both men were physicists, and lifelong friends. They played violin duets together they were that close, along with their wives. The Born-Einstein Letters is a book of their letters wherein many of their conversations have been immortalized.

Max was under the impression that God *did* play dice with the universe and was not in control of humankind. Einstein believed in a perfect order there is found in creation, and that our being is no accident, but part of a perfectly made plan by whoever the Creator is, who is in control even under the worst of circumstances. Albeit he did not believe in a personal God.

Despite their differences, they were best friends whose friendship spanned their adult lifetime, and on opposite sides of the world. Discussing their concepts of God was as important to them as their understanding of physics. Einstein is said to have believed in a Pantheistic God. Max Born's own son said his father was a Deist.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/08/2018 09:26PM by Amyjo.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Henry Bemis ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 10:55AM

Max Born was *the* leading proponent of the probabilistic implications of Quantum Mechanics, and thus the failure of determinism in physics. Einstein believed in a strict Newtonian-type determinism. That was the basis of their scientific disagreement.

Although, as noted previously, Einstein believed in deterministic, ordered, universe, to my knowledge there is no evidence that he held the view that such order was the product of a Creator. Had he held such a deistic view, he could have easily expressed it in response to a myriad of questions on this issue.

In short, you seem to be reading into the Born-Einstein *scientific* debate (and corresponding friendship) a theistic element which is simply not there--except perhaps in your family religious folklore.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Done & Done ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 11:01AM

Thank you.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 11:16AM

It isn't family religious folklore. It's in his biographical history.

"Albert Einstein's religious views have been widely studied and often misunderstood.[1] Einstein stated that he believed in the pantheistic God of Baruch Spinoza.[2] He did not believe in a personal God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings, a view which he described as naïve.[3] He clarified however that, "I am not an atheist",[4] preferring to call himself an agnostic,[5] or a "religious nonbeliever."[3] Einstein also stated he did not believe in life after death, adding "one life is enough for me."[6] He was closely involved in his lifetime with several humanist groups.[7][8]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein

Einstein's quotes on spirituality #1-26:
"1. I want to know how God created this 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.
2. Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.
3. My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind.
The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.
4. Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble.
5. The scientists’ 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.
6. There is no logical way to the discovery of elemental laws. There is only the way of intuition, which is helped by a feeling for the order lying behind the appearance.
7. The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.
8. The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
9. We should take care not to make the intellect our god; it has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality.
10. Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods.
11. When the solution is simple, God is answering.
12. God does not play dice with the universe.
13. God is subtle but he is not malicious.
14. A human being is a part of the whole, called by us Universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest-a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole nature in its beauty.
15. Nothing will benefit human health and increase the chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet.
16. The man who regards his own life and that of his fellow creatures as meaningless is not merely unfortunate but almost disqualified for life.
17. Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
18. Only a life lived for others is a life worth while.
19. The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the ceilings with books in many different tongues.
20. The child knows that someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books—-a mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects.
21. The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing. One cannot help but be in awe when he contemplates the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality. It is enough if one tries merely to comprehend a little of this mystery every day. Never lose a holy curiosity.
22. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism.
23. The finest emotion of which we are capable is the mystic emotion. Herein lies the germ of all art and all true science. Anyone to whom this feeling is alien, who is no longer capable of wonderment and lives in a state of fear is a dead man. To know that what is impenetrable for us really exists and manifests itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty, whose gross forms alone are intelligible to our poor faculties - this knowledge, this feeling ... that is the core of the true religious sentiment. In this sense, and in this sense alone, I rank myself among profoundly religious men.
24. The real problem is in the hearts and minds of men. It is easier to denature plutonium than to denature the evil spirit of man.
25.True religion is real living; living with all one’s soul, with all one’s goodness and righteousness.
26. Intelligence makes clear to us the interrelationship of means and ends. But mere thinking cannot give us a sense of the ultimate and fundamental ends. To make clear these fundamental ends and valuations and to set them fast in the emotional life of the individual, seems to me precisely the most important function which religion has to form in the social life of man."

https://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/einstein/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/09/2018 11:46AM by Amyjo.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 03:01PM

I would like to suppose that you comprehend that when you erect these "quote walls" that they do nothing. Are you expecting that as each of us reads such a "wall" that we will fall into lockstep with your thinking?

After your first post, again, all quotes, you asked for our thoughts. A number of our thoughts were expressed, and your first response to what you had wrought was to tell us that someone at your place of worship had hair like Einstein and apparently as a consequence was going to play Einstein in local theater.

You have misquoted and misdirected without cease. And you have ignored the request to tell us what you want. Are you preaching your gospel here on RfM? Do you want us to accept your Truth? Are you quoting Einstein at us to get us to "believe"?

You have implied that that you and ghawd are close. ... Are you a prophetess?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 05:48PM

No, to all the above. You have your truth, and others have theirs.

To understand Einstein is more than trying to understand the science. His life was part and parcel of who he was. Through his quotes we can get a better idea of his understanding of God, however flawed it was.

Trying to understand Einstein is at least, to my perspective, a little bit like trying to understand the mind of God. But people can at least agree that the man Einstein did exist, albeit he himself did not allude to an afterlife. Could he be right? Even he didn't know the mysteries of the Universe, or the mind of God. But he was wont to try to.

As one of his close physicist friends Niels Bohr, with whom he had a running dialogue throughout their working lives would exclaim to him more than once ... as Niels was one of the early founding pioneers in quantum physics, like Max Born was. Bohr and Einstein each received their Nobels in Physics the same year. He couldn't get Einstein to accept Quantum Mechanics, though he tried without success. To which Einstein would quip to Niels that "God does not play dice," Niels would respond, "Einstein, stop telling God what to do!"

From his biography by Walter Isaacson, it was said "For Einstein, and indeed for most classical physicists, the idea that there could be a fundamental randomness in the universe---that events could just happen without a cause---was not only a cause of discomfort, it undermined the entire program of physics. Indeed, he never would become reconciled to it. 'The thing about causality plagues me very much,' he wrote Max Born in 1920. 'Is the quantumlike absorption and emission of light ever conceivable in terms of complete causality?'

For the rest of his life, Einstein would remain resistant to the notion that probabilities and uncertainties ruled nature in the realm of quantum mechanics. 'I find the idea quite intolerable that an electron exposed to radiation should choose of its own free will not only its moment to jump off but also its direction,' he despaired to Born a few years later. 'In that case, I would rather be a cobbler, or even an employee of a gaming house, than a physicist.'"

Nonetheless, despite his differences with Bohr, Born, and other Quantum Physicists, they remained friends for life. The fact that they could disagree on fundamental differences in how they viewed physics, included their differing perceptions on God. And that is okay in their world.

It's alright for men of science to be deists or agnostics. Not all great scientists are atheist, that isn't the point. The discussion drew in differing points of view, and others ideas on Einstein the man. To understand Einstein is something of an enigma to begin with, kind of like maybe how he struggled with physics. It's all based on degrees of relativity. His mind came closer to reaching the Gods than most. He lived his life in holy reverence of the laws of science, believing there is a spirit behind them that makes all things possible. And that is noteworthy IMO.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: ificouldhietokolob ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 07:06PM

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Through his quotes we can
> get a better idea of his understanding of God,
> however flawed it was.

Fair enough.
If you take ALL his quotes into account, his understand of "god" was that he didn't think there was one, that he was awed by the universe, and that he got tired of people asking him what he thought about "god."

Now, of course, your interpretation of his quotes may vary. Which is fine.

But in the end, what he thought about "god" tells us something about him, but nothing about "god."

So does it really matter, other than as a side show to his scientific work?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 06:30PM

"According to a new study, all Ashkenazi Jews are basically cousins. More specifically, Ashkenazi Jews are at least 30th cousins. LiveScience reports on the international team’s new study, which found that “the central and eastern European Jewish population, known as Ashkenazi Jews, from whom most American Jews are descended, started from a founding population of about 350 people between 600 and 800 years ago.”

According to Columbia University researcher Itsik Pe’er, who was involved with the study, their research also showed that the group of 350 was made up of Jews of Middle Eastern and European—thereby disproving the much-debated theory that Jews descended from Khazars, a Turkic people who lived in the Caucasus region between the 7th and 10th centuries.

Here’s how the study was performed, according to LiveScience:

The team analyzed the genomes of 128 Ashkenazi Jews, comparing them with a reference group of 26 Flemish people from Belgium. From that the researchers were able to work out which genetic markers in the genome are unique to Ashkenazi. The number of similarities within the genomes allowed the scientists to compute a rough estimate of the founding population and put upper and lower limits on the amount of time that had passed since that group originated. In this case it is 30 to 32 generations, or at most 800 years. “[Among Ashkenazi Jews] everyone is a 30th cousin,” Pe’er said. “They have a stretch of the genome that is identical.”

The discovery holds perhaps the most significance for doctors and Jewish patients. Just last week a new study revealed that all Ashkenazic women, even those without any family history of cancer, may carry the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic mutations linked to breast and ovarian cancer. The more genetic information available regarding Ashkenazi Jews, the fewer genome sequences doctors need to test and analyze when looking for potential problems or mutations.

This is pretty big stuff. Now go call your cousin."

https://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/184252/study-says-all-ashkenazi-jews-are-30th-cousins

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 06:40PM

How many degrees of separation are there between you and Born?

Just curious whether it is a first-cousins relationship or a 10th.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 06:41PM

We're third or fourth cousins, twice removed. Two differing family websites list us as being both third and fourth cousins. Per genealogists, the closest kinship is the defining one.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/09/2018 06:44PM by Amyjo.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 06:44PM

Wow. That is close.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 06:48PM

Yeah, and me and Olivia NJ both got breast cancer. There is no history of it (known of,) in my immediate family. After reading about the Ashkenazi connection, that may be a missing link to the puzzle.

The doctors where I live want to do a genome study to see whether I have the Ashkenazi gene for breast cancer and other related ailments.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/09/2018 06:58PM by Amyjo.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 06:58PM

Any idea what the "other things" might consist of?


I'm still adrift as to what you saw as the productive value of this thread. Obviously I enjoyed it, but I'm weird that way.

And again I repeat the question that is on many lips:

What is your explanation or just your musings as to why you have found such favor with your ghawd such that you have been the recipient of more 'ghawdly gifts' than the combined population of RfM regular posters. I was not the first to ask this question, and if you like musing, and dichotomies, start a thread on that issue.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 07:08PM

I've answered that before EOD. What didn't you get?

Nor have I ever made a claim to have such personal favor with god than you do. It's obvious I have more faith than you do. You mock God every chance you get.

Many people have answers to their prayers. I am not the exception or unique in that regard. Neither on this board.

Religion or the lack of it, was the topic for this thread. People study science and some don't see God in the equation. Yet there are great minds, like Einstein's and Max Born who could not conceive of a Universe without some kind of God behind the curtain.

So it is a conversation piece to have for believers or atheists ie, the meaning of existence or purpose. It's okay that it's a mystery. Like Einstein, I try to remain curious and in awe of Creation.

I do believe in the power of prayer, because I have had prayers answered.

Many people are questioning. I am included in that number. I hope to never stop asking questions. That's one reason I'm drawn to RfM, because of people who aren't satisfied with all the answers. We're either learning or we stop growing. When I left Mormonism it had become so stale that asking challenging questions was both frowned upon and met with glazed over stares. That was downright scary to me.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/09/2018 07:19PM by Amyjo.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: ificouldhietokolob ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 07:11PM

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yet there are great minds,
> like Einstein's and Max Born who could not
> conceive of a Universe without some kind of God
> behind the curtain.


a) I would consider that statement a nearly complete mis-statement of Einstein's views
b) even if it weren't (a), it wouldn't tell us anything about a claimed "god" -- that there is or isn't one, or anything about any of its supposed attributes if it exists...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lot's Wife ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 07:21PM

It is indeed a misstatement of Einstein's views. His views are consistent if one accepts that he uses the term God metaphorically, inconsistent if one does not.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: October 09, 2018 07:23PM

He believed there is a spirit at work behind the scientific laws in play. That is what he was in awe of and humbled by, was something he could only begin to imagine the spiritual source behind the workings of the Universe.

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed. Please start another thread and continue the conversation.