Is the Bible simply a book?

[Access Denied]

I'm still smelling old, stinky Toon around here!

Whoever "alantree" is was hiding behind an anonymous proxy service. I’m not into playing guessing games so I escorted "alantree" out of the building…

[ryguy]

A big thank you to our moderator / bouncer / security guard, AD.

[Access Denied]

Thank you Ryan but I do believe in this case the credit belongs to Ray for the actionable intelligence.

[Access Denied]

Is the Bible simply a book? Apparently Einstein thought so...

Einstein letter calls Bible ‘pretty childish’
Famous scientist also dismisses belief in God as product of human weakness
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24598856/

LONDON - Albert Einstein: arch rationalist or scientist with a spiritual core?

A letter being auctioned in London this week adds more fuel to the long-simmering debate about the Nobel Prize-winning physicist's religious views. In the note, written the year before his death, Einstein dismissed the idea of God as the product of human weakness and the Bible as "pretty childish."

[snip]

In it, Einstein said that "the word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."

"For me," he added, "the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions."

Ouch.

[Chorlton]

Is the Bible simply a book? Apparently Einstein thought so...

Einstein letter calls Bible ‘pretty childish’
Famous scientist also dismisses belief in God as product of human weakness
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24598856/
.

See ? Im in good company. Me and Einstein ?? Like that mate !!

[You Can Call Me Ray]

Is the Bible simply a book? Apparently Einstein thought so...

Einstein letter calls Bible ‘pretty childish’
Famous scientist also dismisses belief in God as product of human weakness
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24598856/
.

See ? Im in good company. Me and Einstein ?? Like that mate !!

What I wonder is whether or not the "fundies" who love to use the previous quote from Einstein will stop using it? You know the one I mean, right?

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Now we can start a whole new CT about Einstein!!!
Ray

[ryguy]

The reason both non-believers and believers constantly quote Einstein to support their own views is because Einstein never agreed completely with either side.

On the one hand, he believed that traditional religions were human-based, childish, and overly dogmatic and superstitious. On the other side he saw the power of god through the organized beauty of nature - which Einstein had the pleasure of experiencing in the field of quantum physics.

While Einstein explicitly denounces religion in many of his statements, likewise he denounces atheism.

Some examples:

"The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer."

— Albert Einstein
in Goldman, p. vii

Einstein represented an amazing balance between belief and non-belief...and that's why his quotes are so selectively used by each side. I think I've been guilty of plucking some of his quotes as well - as have several others here and elsewhere. It's tempting to do...because he is, after all, Einstein. Who better to selectively quote in order to support our argument? lol

More examples of the balance of Einstein:

"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human understanding, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."

— Prince Hubertus zu Löwenstein, Towards the Further Shore (Victor Gollancz, London, 1968), p. 156; quoted in Jammer, p. 97

or this one:

"I was barked at by numerous dogs who are earning their food guarding ignorance and superstition for the benefit of those who profit from it. Then there are the 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 of 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 moral and human aims."

— Einstein to an unidentified adressee, Aug.7, 1941. Einstein Archive, reel 54-927, quoted in Jammer, p. 97

I guess the conclusion is - Einstein is not a source either Fundies or Atheists should quote, because taking all of his views into account, he honestly supported neither cause.

-Ry

[ScaRZ]

I don't need Einstein or any man to give value to my belief in God. If it takes backing by others to help maintain my faith,then I would say I have little faith. I either have faith,trust and belief or I don't. I don't need encouragement or a cheerleading squad shaking Pom Poms to make me feel part of the god team. This is what I call a feel good moment that rises and quickly dies.

[Access Denied]

Damn ScaRZ, that was profound... maybe we’re not so far apart as I thought after all. I think maybe where you and I differ is I see the Bible the same way you see Einstein and organized Religion if I’m understanding you correctly?

The Way I see it I don’t need to accept Jesus as my Saviour or anybody else for that matter… I have my own relationship with God and what some hip dude’s fan club wrote some 2,000 years ago, while undeniably inspiring for many, isn’t the last Word in my book… it’s just one piece of a much larger Puzzle we call Life… and neither is the aptly titled “Old” Testament… there’s New Testaments being written each and every day if you know where to look.

Hell, there’s been moments for me when something as simple as seeing the World through a child’s eyes (I mean actually Seeing it!) speaks more Truth to me than 2,000 books ever could.

But that’s just Me…

Anyway, I don’t see what all the fuss over Einstien’s beliefs are either, clearly the Man had his own Faith… it’s Religion he had no use for and maybe that’s what allowed him to step behind the Curtain and discern much of the Inner workings of God’s deceptively simple Grand Design… separate from the Outer workings of Our deceptively complex Grand Illusion.

AD

[Chorlton]

Anyway, I don’t see what all the fuss over Einstien’s beliefs are either, clearly the Man had his own Faith… AD

Thats more my take on it. I have my own faith.....myself. *I* am my own God. *I* am responsible for what happens to me. If something goes wrong. Its my fault, no one elses, if things work, its because I made them work.
I dont need to believe in anything or anyone else other than myself.
I could go on about peoples faith but I'd probably annoy people so I wont.

[ryguy]

Hell, there’s been moments for me when something as simple as seeing the World through a child’s eyes (I mean actually Seeing it!) speaks more Truth to me than 2,000 books ever could.

But that’s just Me…

Me too, my friend...what a perfect statement. There is no way to get closer to God than seeing the world through a child's eyes. Talk about profound...thanks for that post.

-Ry

[You Can Call Me Ray]

Hi Chorlton,

Anyway, I don’t see what all the fuss over Einstien’s beliefs are either, clearly the Man had his own Faith… AD

Thats more my take on it. I have my own faith.....myself. *I* am my own God. *I* am responsible for what happens to me. If something goes wrong. Its my fault, no one elses, if things work, its because I made them work.

I can really appreciate what you are getting at here. It speaks to personal responsibility in a succint way, and I am a big believer in personal responsibility. But I might differ with you about "no one elses" only because I adhere to a Systems Theory view of existence. I am a whole system, responsible for myself, but my system interacts with a whole helluva lot of other physical systems out "In the Real World".

I dont need to believe in anything or anyone else other than myself.

Well, I do. I need to believe in the goodness of (some of) my fellow man. I also need to believe that I can use science and math to "predict" how the physics of the universe around me will respond to my inputs. At a very minimalist, primitive level...I need to believe that I have some form of control, at some level of the "dance of energy" that is my life-trace throughout these dimensions we might call Massive SpaceTime.

Perhaps a bit wistful and ill-defined? I wouldn't deny that one bit. But any description of a personal spiritual belief might be expected to be somewhat wistful and ill-defined...
Ray

[Chorlton]

Hi Chorlton,
Well, I do. I need to believe in the goodness of (some of) my fellow man. I also need to believe that I can use science and math to "predict" how the physics of the universe around me will respond to my inputs. At a very minimalist, primitive level...I need to believe that I have some form of control, at some level of the "dance of energy" that is my life-trace throughout these dimensions we might call Massive SpaceTime.

Perhaps a bit wistful and ill-defined? I wouldn't deny that one bit. But any description of a personal spiritual belief might be expected to be somewhat wistful and ill-defined...
Ray

I see where youre coming from, but my point was I dont need any 'God' to get me through the day or thank for the sunshine or a flower or such other things. I think we all need each other, sometimes having someone to talk problems thorugh with helps, but when it comes down to any final decision its me I look to.

[lost_shaman]

Hi Chorlton,
Well, I do. I need to believe in the goodness of (some of) my fellow man. I also need to believe that I can use science and math to "predict" how the physics of the universe around me will respond to my inputs. At a very minimalist, primitive level...I need to believe that I have some form of control, at some level of the "dance of energy" that is my life-trace throughout these dimensions we might call Massive SpaceTime.

Perhaps a bit wistful and ill-defined? I wouldn't deny that one bit. But any description of a personal spiritual belief might be expected to be somewhat wistful and ill-defined...
Ray

I see where youre coming from, but my point was I dont need any 'God' to get me through the day or thank for the sunshine or a flower or such other things. I think we all need each other, sometimes having someone to talk problems thorugh with helps, but when it comes down to any final decision its me I look to.

These are interesting ideas. Heck, Religion itself is interesting from many different angles or POV's. In a literal sense it might be said that 'Religion' in general is an integral part of Human History. Even then it's also possible that 'Religion' isn't unique to (us) 'Modern Humans'.

What we do know (IMO) is that 'Religion' in general is certainly a Human trait!

If 'Religion' in general is a Human trait it is an Intellectual trait (IMO). Certainly not a new Intellectual trait at that, but one that appears to define 'our' common ancestors as having the distinction of clearly being 'religious' in a way that is archaeologically confirmed rather than questioned!

From that POV, 'we' as 'Modern day' Humans are clearly the most 'Religious' Species to exist on Earth to date, yet we are also considered the most intellectual and clearly we are a highly successful Species despite of/or because of 'our' propensity toward 'Religion'!

Interesting, No?

[Shawnna]

From that POV, 'we' as 'Modern day' Humans are clearly the most 'Religious' Species to exist on Earth to date, yet we are also considered the most intellectual and clearly we are a highly successful Species despite of/or because of 'our' propensity toward 'Religion'!

Interesting, No?

Perhaps we humans, being the 'intelligent' species we are, simply haven't learned the 'Religious' language of our planet's other species and are therefore unaware of their 'Religious' 'knowledge'?

Now substitute the word "spiritual" for "religious" and to me - it makes complete sense.

Religions are the institutional expressions of the human species spiritual inclinations. Religions, and thus religious beliefs, are not equivalent to a being who is deeply spiritual.

IMHO, of course.