Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Einstein's God
September 28, 2009 | Jean F. Drew

Posted on 09/28/2009 9:40:25 AM PDT by betty boop

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-57 next last

1 posted on 09/28/2009 9:40:25 AM PDT by betty boop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: betty boop

sounds as if Einstein was a deist. Believed in a Higher Power or Creative Intelligence, but didn’t think it participated in worldly affairs.

I’ve found that astronomers and physicists are more open towards a deity than biologists. I have read that, in Einstein’s case, creative intelligence was the only possible way to explain how such cosmic marvels could exist.


2 posted on 09/28/2009 9:51:12 AM PDT by Retired Greyhound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

I’ve always wondered why it seems so important for people to have labels attached to their beliefs.


3 posted on 09/28/2009 9:54:28 AM PDT by stuartcr (If we are truly made in the image of God, why do we have faults?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

Very interesting and worthy of future study. Thanks!!


4 posted on 09/28/2009 10:01:36 AM PDT by RichardW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; r9etb; xzins; metmom; spirited irish; hosepipe; TXnMA; MHGinTN; GodGunsGuts; ...

FYI!!!


5 posted on 09/28/2009 10:07:08 AM PDT by betty boop (Without God man neither knows which way to go, nor even understands who he is. —Pope Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retired Greyhound; stuartcr; Alamo-Girl
I’ve found that astronomers and physicists are more open towards a deity than biologists.

Me too, Retired Greyhound! Very curious....

Though we dislike "labeling" people, Einstein's views do have a deistic flavor....

I have read that, in Einstein’s case, creative intelligence was the only possible way to explain how such cosmic marvels could exist.

Indeed. Einstein may indeed have believed there is a creative intelligence behind the "pure marble of geometry" that lay at the root of "the base wood" of material phenomena. He calls him/it the "Old One," or the Lord....

Thank you so much for sharing your insight, Retired Greyhound!

6 posted on 09/28/2009 10:16:09 AM PDT by betty boop (Without God man neither knows which way to go, nor even understands who he is. —Pope Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
I caught YOU.. you are trying to sneak up on me.. AND TEACH ME SOMETHING..
Well Nyah.. I'm too smart for you..
7 posted on 09/28/2009 10:20:15 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

It doesn’t seem to me that we dislike ‘labeling’ people, that’s all we hear nowadays...so-and-so is a____________, especially when it comes to religion.


8 posted on 09/28/2009 10:30:03 AM PDT by stuartcr (If we are truly made in the image of God, why do we have faults?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; metmom; xzins
Thank you oh so very much for this outstanding, illuminating essay, dearest sister in Christ!

Truly, I suspect Einstein's strong determinism was rooted in his vision of the "lofty structure" of "all that there is."

Clearly he was a geometer of the greatest insight. And I very strongly agree with his dream of transmuting the base wood of matter into the pure marble of geometry.

But he had an astonishing prejudice in favor of physical causation (as do most scientists) and I imagine that might have clouded his cosmology.

Or to put it another way, he accepted that God must be in order for "all that there is" to become - the initial cause or first cause.

But beyond that, perhaps because he had a greater appreciation for the magnitude of the universe, he could not envision God being bothered with the small things to cause anything else (non-physical causation.)

He certain saw God's hand in the "lofty structure" - as I often do in the "unreasonable effectiveness of math" (Wigner.)

Then again, Einstein didn't live to gain the insights of information theory (Shannon et al) or how it applies to biological life. Had he known these things, perhaps he would have expended his cosmology to include non-physical causation.

Under Shannon this would be called "successful communication."

But we Christians recognize the cause as God Himself, Jesus Christ, Logos,Creator not just Alpha but Omega as well.

God's Name is I AM.

9 posted on 09/28/2009 10:33:54 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

If we didn’t ask Einstein what he believed in life, why try to squeeze it out of his dead bones now? Does it even matter? He can not know anymore than the garbage man. He too merely had his opinion.

He was a great physicist though. RIP.


10 posted on 09/28/2009 10:34:31 AM PDT by HospiceNurse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

Perhaps because the wrong label at the wrong time might get you burned at the stake, or worse.


11 posted on 09/28/2009 10:35:04 AM PDT by Unassuaged (I have shocking data relevant to the conversation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: HospiceNurse
Your chances of getting an illuminating and particularly insightful answer asking a physicist about theology is about as likely as getting the same asking a theologian about physics.

Brilliance in one endeavor doesn't necessarily translate into every endeavor, especially one taken on in such a cursory and ad hoc fashion.

Or as Heinlein pointed out “expertise in one narrow area doesn't translate into other areas, and yet the narrower the area of expertise, the more likely the expert is to think that it does.”

12 posted on 09/28/2009 10:39:44 AM PDT by allmendream (Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be RE-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: HospiceNurse
If we didn’t ask Einstein what he believed in life, why try to squeeze it out of his dead bones now?

But people did try to "squeeze it out of him" during life. That's the reason we have Einstein on record discussing such matters, illuminating his own view of things.

If you don't think Einstein's cosmological views are relevant to his practice of theoretical physics, then of course you're entitled to your opinion, HospiceNurse! And I'll respect it, too.

13 posted on 09/28/2009 10:46:12 AM PDT by betty boop (Without God man neither knows which way to go, nor even understands who he is. —Pope Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Devining what Einstein thought after his death is similar to “reading” chicken entrails or tea leaves. Like most mortals, I’m sure he believed different things at different times. Again, may God bless him, but what difference does it make what he believed? He was a scientist who rejected belief as a methodology for establishing truth.


14 posted on 09/28/2009 10:53:57 AM PDT by HospiceNurse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Unassuaged

I guess you’re right. Seems the best label, is the most common for where&whenever you’re living. I’ve never experienced anything like that, so I hadn’t looked at it that way, thanks.


15 posted on 09/28/2009 10:56:40 AM PDT by stuartcr (If we are truly made in the image of God, why do we have faults?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: HospiceNurse

I like your answer, thanks.


16 posted on 09/28/2009 10:57:46 AM PDT by stuartcr (If we are truly made in the image of God, why do we have faults?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr; Alamo-Girl
It doesn’t seem to me that we dislike ‘labeling’ people, that’s all we hear nowadays...so-and-so is a____________, especially when it comes to religion.

Actually, I thought I was very careful not to "label" either Einstein or Spinoza in this article. And this as a matter of principle: No person is reducible to a single descriptive term. Or so it seems to me.

These are two towering thinkers. To understand something about their respective views on ultimate reality I personally find helpful to my own thinking about the world. I tried to let these men speak for themselves, not through me.

And I do agree with you, stuartcr: All too often, "labeling" is counterproductive. Too often it serves as a distraction away from matters of substance.

17 posted on 09/28/2009 11:04:21 AM PDT by betty boop (Without God man neither knows which way to go, nor even understands who he is. —Pope Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
I’ve always wondered why it seems so important for people to have labels attached to their beliefs.

Same reason we have money, instead of a barter economy: it makes for convenient shorthand.

Labels work fine for a lot of things ... so long as we don't hold on to them too tightly.

It can go too far, of course ... to the point where the labels supplant the ideas themselves. Just check into one of those Calvinist threads on premillenial dispensational whatsis-ism and you'll see the point.

18 posted on 09/28/2009 11:13:28 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
It doesn’t seem to me that we dislike ‘labeling’ people, that’s all we hear nowadays...so-and-so is a____________, especially when it comes to religion.

Or a RINO when it comes to politics....

19 posted on 09/28/2009 11:15:33 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
But he had an astonishing prejudice in favor of physical causation (as do most scientists) and I imagine that might have clouded his cosmology.

Indeed — physical causation of the Newtonian type. Whose theory Einstein himself realizes is not "the last word" in physics, any more than quantum mechanics (in his oft-stated view). Newton's mechanics, you'll recall, forbids the idea of final cause. Thus we are not entitled to inquire into what Einstein's "lofty structure" is for, or what the "pure marble of geometry" — the ultimate cause of all that there is — is there for....

I'd love to know what Einstein would have made of, not only Shannon's information theory, but also of Rosen's relational biology.

I dunno; maybe I'm reading too much of myself into the picture here; but it sure looks to me that Einstein's "pure marble of geometry" is closely related to the idea of Logos....

The Word, Alpha to Omega.

All glory be to God!

20 posted on 09/28/2009 11:18:30 AM PDT by betty boop (Without God man neither knows which way to go, nor even understands who he is. —Pope Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-57 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson