No, he didn't. At least not in any sense similar to the way that the "ID" folks (or even the traditional creationists) mean it. See the many quotes by Einstein in this post in which he makes clear his denial of any such belief -- and his impatience with those who would misrepresent his beliefs in an attempt to claim that Einstein believed in any kind of "personal God".
There are many scientists who think the same way, including some I have spoken to personally.
Although Einstein himself is not a good example, there are indeed countless scientists -- and millions of science-literate laymen -- who feel the same way. And there's nothign wrong with that. In fact, the *majority* of American "evolutionists" are also themselves Christians.
Even Kenneth R. Miller, the biologist who was the primary witness for the plaintiffs in the "Kitzmiller v Dover" court case which (correctly) concluded that "ID" is not science and is instead a Trojan Horse for religion, is not an atheist, as many anti-evolutionists presumed, but a devout Christian who has even written a good book on reconciling religion and science.
The vast majority of people who vigorously argue that science and belief in God are necessarily at odds are the *anti-evolution creationists*, not the evolutionists.
I don't see why a backing away from an ultimate creator is so necessary when men debate science.
It isn't necessary. Nor do they.
Unfortunately, however, far too many people insist on "backing away from science" when they ponder their religion.
Things evolve and that could be because God created them that way.
Yes, of course.
While we ALL know that...
Things are the way they are because they've evolved.