WHY did this thread get dug up? Come on, we don't need another of these to pop up!

"Religion is the opiate of the masses", it also serves other ulterior purposes. It transcends the confines of mere 'childish superstition'. While I'm not a religious man myself, to deny or ridicule others of their belief in religion is not the way to go and I don't believe Einstein's intentions were purely to offend. Einstein's thoughts on the topic merely highlight that he was a greater Scientist than he was a Sociologist or Philosopher, nothing more. No need for jimmies to be rustled. Then again I haven't read the transcript.

Sheesh my bad just realized this thread is from 2008. Wow.

I think that is a very core difference between Liberal and Conservative Christianity: one believes that God has a vested interest in the physical world, and believes we have to obey a certain law; also has a literalist view of the bible. There is also this thought that believing that Jesus was historically true is necessary for salvation.

The liberal Christianity is rather differently focused: it instead focuses on humans making the effort to reach God via spiritualism in the same scriptures - it is similar to Buddhism in that way; in that the duty is on us to reach God, not on God to punish us for failing to do so. We bring the Kingdom of God, not God. Liberal Christianity believes that to have faith in Jesus is to have faith in what Jesus personifies, not to believe that "Jesus rose from the dead; he was born from a virgin human female." Liberal Christianity is also a viewpoint that is open to religious pluralism - a Hindu practitioner may be on the same path, but with different terminology.

As a Christian, I see no reason why non-canonical texts are not valid just because they weren't canonized in the 4th century AD. The inclusion of the old testament was obviously a silly idea; even Marcion of Synope, the author of the first Christian Bible in 140 AD, realized that the Jehovah books shouldn't be Christian - that Jehovah was not the God of Jesus. Books like Revelation, an obvious text of an apocalyptic cult, made it into the Christian canon as well (and it was sort of a last minute addition that the bishops weren't really sure about). The bible is viewed as being metaphorical by Liberal Christians, and many non-canonical texts such as the Gospel of Thomas and the Lord's Gospel were obviously metaphorical - the canonized gospels were said to be written between 70 and 100 AD, but this is wishful thinking - all these dates represent is the oldest that they could possibly be. I am a Christian, but I don't think that I can ignore that these books do not enter history until the late second century at the earliest. Marcion of Synope seemed completely unaware of the other gospels outside of his (an early version of Luke which did not contain the virgin birth story - rather Jesus coming down to earth from heaven), or even all of the Pauline letters; kind of odd considering that Marcion was an avidly devout follower of Paul and probably the main reason the Pauline letters were highly regarded (and canonized hundreds of years later).

The main reason why traditionally the canonized Goapels are seen to be as old as they are largely has to do with the wish for these clearly metaphorical texts of the early 100's to be a later tradition than them. I don't see any clear evidence that the "gnostic gospels" as they call them have to be younger, particularly since they enter into the historical records first. Also that some biblical texts (like Revelation) reference these texts. Revelation could very easily be third century.

Don't necrobump old threads. If you want to make a thread on the topic, go ahead, and link to this if you like.

There was (or is) a bug in the forums that pops up old threads. As for Einstein's religious views - he can probably be best described as an agnostic theist or a liberal theist. Here are some quotes from him:

“I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws."^[17]

In the same interview, Einstein spoke of his feelings regarding Christianity:

"As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene."

And when asked if he accepted the historical existence of Jesus, Einstein replied:

"Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."

Einstein also said

"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognise, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."^[18],

"The fanatical atheists, 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 traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'-- cannot hear the music of the spheres."^[19]