Originally posted by Bardock42
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- Albert Einstein
Originally posted by Bardock42
Starting to read the God Delusion I noticed something odd. And here it isYou quoted that, yet also told me to read The God Delusion. I wonder did you actually, because he rather prominently quote Einstein about this quote that's taken out of context:
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
- Albert Einstein
Are you one of them that systematically misquotes Einstein to give a wrong impression about his views?
Bro Einstein doesnt say that he doesnt believe in God he said he doesnt believe in a personal God, hes kinda specific. Hell hasnt Einstein said "God doesnt play dice", but his defintion of God is not the personal one.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Starting to read the God Delusion I noticed something odd. And here it isYou quoted that, yet also told me to read The God Delusion. I wonder did you actually, because he rather prominently quote Einstein about this quote that's taken out of context:
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
- Albert Einstein
Are you one of them that systematically misquotes Einstein to give a wrong impression about his views?
Dawkins is misquoting him, he didn't say he doesn't rule out the possibility of God, rather than he doesn't have one.
That quote is incomplete,
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated.
What is a lie? What was he talking about? This is the oft repeated quote used by many atheists to attempt to discredit the idea that Einstein respected religions.
Anyway none of that matters, lets go into what he really stood for.
it should be noted that he did not believe in traditional notions of a personal god, but rather perceived God to be a "superpersonal" entity, in ways that he declared to be inspired by Baruch Spinoza's and Arthur Schopenhauer's ideas. He also asserted that the Jewish scriptures, Jesus, Gautama Buddha and other religious figures were important guides for the ethical advancement of humanity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein#Religious_views
I know Wiki is not always the most trusted source but here all its statements are referenced to good sources...
Originally posted by Alliance
NO. Alfiem is right. Einstien was a very spiritual man, but did not believe in a PERSONAL God. Yet, the concept of God was very real to him.Einstein HAD a God...a universal God.
I hadn't finished yet, lol.
A book you could try, written by Einstein's friend.
Originally posted by Alfheim
Bro Einstein doesnt say that he doesnt believe in God he said he doesnt believe in a personal God, hes kinda specific. Hell hasnt Einstein said "God doesnt play dice", but his defintion of God is not the personal one.
HE uses the word God, for the magnificence he sees in the natural world. It has nothing to do with God in the traditional sense (which is really what matters to atheists) or Organized Religion or Mysticism. He was an atheist that enjoyed the greatness of the Universe, pretty much like Dawkins.
Originally posted by Alliance
NO. Alfiem is right. Einstien was a very spiritual man, but did not believe in a PERSONAL God. Yet, the concept of God was very real to him.Einstein HAD a God...a universal God.
A universal God is really of no matter. You can call your toilet God for all I care. He did not believe in a self aware creating force. If you want to call the Big Bang or similar theories God, that's your choice, but it doesn't make you a theist.
People quote him to give credit to their Religious believes saying Einstein was also Religious, but he wasn't in any way that they describe it..
Even that Wikipedia article says it, that he meant it in a way Spinoza meant God. Basically God is nature. That's very different from the Religions Dawkins is against. I don't see how quoting Einstein, especially with a quote that certainly gives the wrong impression helps.
Originally posted by Alfheim
Bro Einstein doesnt say that he doesnt believe in God he said he doesnt believe in a personal God, hes kinda specific. Hell hasnt Einstein said "God doesnt play dice", but his defintion of God is not the personal one.
Yeah, he uses the word God. That does not make Christianity any more or less ridiculous. I say "Oh my God" on a daily basis....I am still an atheist and find the idea of a sentient God kinda ridiculous.
God is just a word, we can attribute it any meaning we want. But atheism was a term coined before everyone called anything God. In fact I think you can be an atheist and still believe in a vast amount of God's depending on your definition. Debbiejo's God is energy for example is pretty atheistic.
My point was that what you that your post was certainly not honest towards his believes...
You guess...majority of astrologers are Christian...and many Christians are scientists. Big Bang? Catholic Monk came up with it. Evolution? Darwin, Christian. Galileo? Catholic, Bacon, Catholic, and it goes on.Einstein "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
That's pretty unfair towards his believes I think, because after what you said it certainly implies religion in the traditional sense, not the way he meant it.
Originally posted by Bardock42
A universal God is really of no matter. You can call your toilet God for all I care. He did not believe in a self aware creating force. If you want to call the Big Bang or similar theories God, that's your choice, but it doesn't make you a theist.
It does matter, because it affects the way you percieve the world. You can make a case wither way with Einstein (theist-agnostic), which is what makes him such an intereisting figure in the popularization of religion and science.
Calling Einstein an athiest is ignorant. He would be agnostic at best. Stop trying to co-opt figures for your current aims. Dawkins is NOT spiritual. Einstein most clearly was. (besides, you didn't [unless you've changed your mind] think Dawkins was athiest anyway)
God has specific connotations and Einstein knew exactly what he was saying when he said it. Unfortunately, misinterpretation comes form other people using other, more specific connotations of the word.
Originally posted by Alliance
It does matter, because it affects the way you percieve the world. You can make a case wither way with Einstein (theist-agnostic), which is what makes him such an intereisting figure in the popularization of religion and science.Calling Einstein an athiest is ignorant. He would be agnostic at best. Stop trying to co-opt figures for your current aims. Dawkins is NOT spiritual. Einstein most clearly was. (besides, you didn't [unless you've changed your mind] think Dawkins was athiest anyway)
God has specific connotations and Einstein knew exactly what he was saying when he said it. Unfortunately, misinterpretation comes form other people using other, more specific connotations of the word.
That may all be true, but you, Sir, are still a liar.
Originally posted by Alfheim
I dunno that was uncalled for. Anyway as I said wasnt Spinoza a Panthiest and didnt he believe in spirit?
Pantheists are people that define nature as God.
Originally posted by Alliance
Is that an Ush tactic or do you just not actually have an argument?
I have one, you haven't replied to my points for pages, but just on random tangents, no point in arguing with you. Especially as you lie and make things up. It's tedious.
Your points are idiotic. I don't really care whether you think he was a theist or not. He was certainly not a theist in the way atheists are opposed to them. There should surely be a distinction between a God that consciously created the universe and maybe still interferes and believing that the concept of energy can be referred to as God because of it's magnificence. It's just very, very different believes which should not be labeled with the same word. Which one keeps the theism is of no matter, but especially Dawkins is not against the natural theism if you want. I find it idiotic labelling on the other hand, but that's just me.
And I didn't mean to say Einstein was an atheist, though to me it seems he had atheistic traits and a tendency for poetic expressions, but it doesn't matter. What matters is that Einstein is misused by many real theists to make him look like he supported organized religion...which he seemed to not have done. My point was the quote earlier in this thread was out of context and very unfair to Einstein.
Also, I feel that pantheism is not incompatible with atheism. It seems to me like a more romantic approach to nature, nothing else.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Pantheists are people that define nature as God.
Well er ok. There are different sorts of Pantheists some have spiritual beleifs others dont but if you look at Spinozas beleief they seem spirtitual.
Correct me if im wrong he believed in the identity of spirit and nature. Some Pantheists are atheistc but if Einstein compared himself to Spinoza it implies that Einstein had spritual beliefs.
Another question does believing that the univesrse is infinte imply you are spritual? This is an actual question im not trying to cacth you out or anything, because I thought if the universe is infinte then that means infinite possibilities which include the supernatural.
Originally posted by Alfheim
Well er ok. There are different sorts of Pantheists some have spiritual beleifs others dont but if you look at Spinozas beleief they seem spirtitual.Correct me if im wrong he believed in the identity of spirit and nature. Some Pantheists are atheistc but if Einstein compared himself to Spinoza it implies that Einstein had spritual beliefs.
Another question does believing that the univesrse is infinte imply you are spritual? This is an actual question im not trying to cacth you out or anything, because I thought if the universe is infinte then that means infinite possibilities which include the supernatural.
Again, the supernatural is an odd word. It is mostly supernatural because we didn't find or understand it, yet.
And it may be true that Einstein was spiritual. But he stated that the idea of a personal God was rather absurd to him... and the way he is often quoted it is not shown.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Again, the supernatural is an odd word. It is mostly supernatural because we didn't find or understand it, yet.And it may be true that Einstein was spiritual. But he stated that the idea of a personal God was rather absurd to him... and the way he is often quoted it is not shown.
I agree with everything you said. This getting ridiculous....must...stop...agreeing with you. 😒:
Originally posted by Bardock42
I have one, you haven't replied to my points for pages, but just on random tangents, no point in arguing with you. Especially as you lie and make things up. It's tedious.
If you think I'm lying, you need a serious reality check, because you've never shown ANYWHERE that I've lied about anything or even been wrong about anything.
You simply slander. Compensating?
Originally posted by Bardock42If you don't care, then why did you bring up the distinction in the first place? Stop being hypocritical and stand by your statements. If you don't think its important, don't write it.
Your points are idiotic. I don't really care whether you think he was a theist or not.
Originally posted by Bardock42
He was certainly not a theist in the way atheists are opposed to them.
By "athiests" you mean "you." Please don't speak for people who have no authority to speak for.
{Begin real content}
Originally posted by Bardock42
There should surely be a distinction between a God that consciously created the universe and maybe still interferes and believing that the concept of energy can be referred to as God because of it's magnificence.
Originally posted by Bardock42
It's just very, very different believes which should not be labeled with the same word. Which one keeps the theism is of no matter, but especially Dawkins is not against the natural theism if you want. I find it idiotic labelling on the other hand, but that's just me.
Theism seems to be a belief in God. To me, it seems irrelevant what that God is.
Originally posted by Bardock42
[B]
My point was the quote earlier in this thread was out of context and very unfair to Einstein.
Originally posted by Alliance
If you think I'm lying, you need a serious reality check, because you've never shown ANYWHERE that I've lied about anything or even been wrong about anything.
Yes I have. Multiple times.
Originally posted by Alliance
You simply slander. Compensating?
Yeah, compensating for the time waster replying to your incredibly bullshit without you understanding.
Originally posted by Alliance
If you don't care, then why did you bring up the distinction in the first place? Stop being hypocritical and stand by your statements. If you don't think its important, don't write it.
Look, you idiot, I didn't say that I don't care whether he was a theist or not, I said that I don't care whether you think that. It is evident that he does not believe in a conscious God ...
Originally posted by Alliance
As "atheists" are oppesed? Lets take three Athiests, you, me, and Boris, we all have very different perceptions of theism.
Which is of no matter since I wasn't referring to persons, but the concept of atheists.
Originally posted by Alliance
By "athiests" you mean "you." Please don't speak for people who have no authority to speak for.
No I don't. How can you study in a University and have such limited comprehension level....it is irritating in so many ways.
Originally posted by Alliance
{Begin real content}
Right.
Originally posted by Alliance
Why?
Because they are very different concepts. To call them the same is confusing and lazy. It gives of a wrong impression.
Originally posted by Alliance
To put it in simpler terms for you: For the exact same reason why we have different words for "beans" and "tomatos"Theism seems to be a belief in God. To me, it seems irrelevant what that God is.
Well, it is not irrelevant though. Especially in a case where people call natural phenomenons their God a good case can be made how they are not theists, but atheists. Again there should be distinctions. For someone claiming to study science (doubtful, really, seeing as you lack basic understanding of rather trivial concepts) you sure don't seem to value precision much.
Originally posted by Alliance
I agree.
Good.