The key issue to keep in mind is that the question of whether the Dieu-lusion exists or not is almost irrelevant to people’s lives because HE does not protect little children from being repeatedly raped by priests.
All the speculations about how the world was created are also irrelevant as to why the Holocaust happened. All the theories of merchants of religions as to why a voyeur God faced evil and simply watched because of HIS sacred, unbreakable, unshakable principle of giving Nazis and old priests free choice are insane.
EINSTEIN WAS CONVINCED THERE IS NO PERSONAL GOD
“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, in a letter March 24, 1954; from Albert Einstein the Human Side, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1981, p. 43.
Thank you so much, dear NaturesGodDisciple for presenting this fundamental, illuminating, delicious point.
"Why does the question "Does a god or god(s) exist?", even need to be answered? If that god, or those god(s) are not "interactively" participating in the human experience, what difference does a "yes" or "no" answer from science make?"
To imagine, the way those “full of faith” people do, that a Dieu-lusion is watching all those pedophile priests repeatedly raping, for years, theses defenseless children and that HE just watches is such a strange, weird, outlandish, wacky, freaky, kooky, kinky, grotesque proposition.
The arrogance (or delusion) of Deepak Chopra is exceptional.
While on the panel peddling a pompous, pretentious “knowledge of God”, something Einstein himself admitted he was ignorant of, Chopra ventured beyond “faith”, which he said is for insecure people, and declared he was “upgrading science”.
And as he was claiming to follow the “Occam's Principle”, the theory of parsimony, that the simplest explanation is the best explanation, he engaged in such mumbo- jumbo, such gobbledygook, and jumped right into “Thomas Jefferson’s dunghill”.
Here is part of what he said: “I want to reinforce that I am not here to talk about belief. I think belief is a cover up of insecurity. You only believe in things that you don’t know the truth of, and you want know the truth of.
If I asked you do you believe in electricity or electro-magnetism you would say “what kind of a ridiculous question is that?”
Please pay attention to the religion merchant, the entertainer, the crowd pleaser, the illusionist Deepak Chopra. Watch closely how he “pulls a rabbit out of hat” and pretends Einstein is on his side.
Einstein's philosophy is in fact a loud and clear rejection of mass delusions and superstitions and beliefs in God(s) or anything else that our science did not yet reveal.
Einstein knew nothing about God and admitted it. Deepak Chopra knows absolutely nothing about God. He just has the huzpah to pretend he knows. And as long as there are addicts, there will be delusion dealers.
Rulers and religion merchants exploit the fact that “Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones”.
Bertrand Russell, Unpopular Essays (1950), "Outline of Intellectual Rubbish"
British author, mathematician, & philosopher (1872 - 1970)
See my blogs and enjoy:
Izadora is polishing “Jefferson’s diamond”, aka the “Golden Rule”, while Deepak the demagogue, who presented Einstein as a believer in God was deep into “Jefferson’t dunghill”.
Jefferson’s desire was to secularize the catalog… to understand religious endeavor as subordinate to Reason, and indeed, The Jefferson Bible was his ambitious exercise in understanding the gospels themselves as a philosophical and moral system, rather than either the word of God or as a narrative of superstition.
He did so by the method of cut and paste – literally razoring passages from four different renditions of the gospels, in Greek, Latin, French, and English, and pasting them in a blank book. Jefferson’s attempt was simply to identify the words of Jesus himself, which he judged “as distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill”, undistorted by the misinterpretations of others (which is what Jefferson held a good portion of the gospels to be). No wonder they called it the Age of Reason. http://weibel-lines.typepad.com/weibelines/2006/01/diamonds_in_a_d.html
When Deepak Chopra tried to give the impression that Einstein believed in God he was either less informed or less honest than another well known religion merchant, R. Albert Mohler, Jr., the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, who wrote, “Einstein believed in awe and wonder, but not in God”.
In his article, Albert Einstein’s God — The “Product of Human Weaknesses”, published on Thursday, May 15, 2008, Mohler also wrote: Einstein’s language is very clear. God is dismissed as “nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses” — a statement hauntingly like the verdict of Friedrich Nietzsche... In the end, it is better to see Einstein, not as a believer of sorts, but as an atheist of sorts. Belief in God was simply childish, he asserted. http://www.albertmohler.com/2008/05/15/albert-einsteins-god-the-product-of-human-weaknesses/
Deepak Chopra is using the same tried-and-true technique that professional peddlers of superstitions always used, and that Einstein admonished them for so doing. Deepak Chopra is taking refuge in those domains in which scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot.
Einstein said: “To be sure, the doctrine of a personal God interfering with the natural events could never be refuted, in the real sense, by science, for this doctrine can always take refuge in those domains in which scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot. But I am persuaded that such behavior on the part of the representatives of religion would not only be unworthy but also fatal. For a doctrine which is able to maintain itself not in clear light but only in the dark, will of necessity lose its effect on mankind, with incalculable harm to human progress.”
Einstein defined in what sense he was religious, so that charlatans would be discredited whenever they misrepresented his views on religion.
“The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. He who knows it not and can no longer wonder, no longer feel amazement, is as good as dead, a snuffed-out candle. It was the experience of mystery — even if mixed with fear — that engendered religion. A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms-it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; IN THIS SENSE, AND IN THIS ALONE, I AM A DEEPLY RELIGIOUS MAN.
I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the type of which we are conscious in ourselves. An individual who should survive his physical death is also beyond my comprehension, nor do I wish it otherwise; such notions are for the fears or absurd egoism of feeble souls. Enough for me the mystery of the eternity of life, and the inkling of the marvellous structure of reality, together with the single-hearted endeavour to comprehend a portion, be it never so tiny, of the reason that manifests itself in nature.”
Einstein also said about his “religion”: “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.”
Deepak Chopra had the chuzpha to pretend that Einstein shared his views on religion. He quoted Einstein, reading from a piece of paper he brought, a well known quote that religious people always love to quote: “science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind”.
But we must not allow merchants of religion like Deepak Chopra mislead people about Einstein “religion”. Deepak Chopra must know that Einstein never endorsed superstitions. Einstein said about himself that he was “deeply religious” - - but that he was a “deeply religious NONBELIEVER”.
Einstein said: “I am a deeply religious nonbeliever.… This is a somewhat new kind of religion.”
“I am a deeply religious nonbeliever.… This is a somewhat new kind of religion.”
Albert Einstein, in a letter to Hans Muehsam, March 30, 1954; Einstein Archive 38-434; from Alice Calaprice, ed., The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 218.
Baruch Spinoza, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Freud and Einstein found that such a rotten argument that one must be infected with superstitions to enjoy life is not only faulty but also fatal for human progress.