Einstein was right about the theory of relativity. His beliefs, much like Carl Sagan's Pantheism were just that, beliefs. If you agree with them, you think they were right. I think they were wrong. Neither of us can prove right or wrong when it comes to religion. I contend the burden of proof is on the believer.

@barjoe
What can possibly be “wrong” about using a figure of speech? It has nothing to do with belief. Metaphors exist.

@skado I didn't say you are wrong, I said I think Pantheism is wrong. My opinion is unprovable.

@barjoe
That’s how I understood it. What I don’t understand is... what could be “wrong” about pantheism? It’s not a belief in anything but metaphor.

@skado it's me. I'm an opinionated nonbeliever. Some people claim my negativity is a belief system. They are wrong, lol, but it's not worth arguing about.

@barjoe
I wouldn’t claim your negativity is a belief system, and I agree it’s not worth arguing about, but there could be some value in mutually respectful dialogue.

Pantheism, like most other “isms” is more than just one thing. There are many versions and interpretations. So, while there may be some pantheists who envision (wrongly in my view) the universe as having sentience, I’m very confident Einstein, Sagan, Spinoza, et al were not among them. But then, that's just my belief. I didn’t know any of them personally.

From what I have read, it sounds like they just recognized that the word “god” could be seen as a metaphor for “all that is” and that doing so could serve as a graceful, non-confrontational way of avoiding arguments with religious literalists, while showing deference for their right to believe whatever they found believable.

Some atheists may think of that position as a disingenuous dodge, but I suspect it is actually closer to the “original” religious orientation than our post-Enlightenment insistence on literalism in all things.

Ideas! Everybody’s got’em!

Best regards.

@skado I agree. I think in Einstein's era to renounce god completely would have alienated too many people. The Pantheist doctrine is a more diplomatic way of saying he didn't believe in god. Carl Sagan espoused it more often so maybe it meant a lot to him.

God is omnipresent.

The universe is everywhere.

God is all powerful.

The universe contains all known forces and powers.

God is a creator.

Universe is a creator.
Stars in the universe creates atoms.
Atoms in the universe combined to create compounds.
Compounds combine to create cells.
Cells combine to create multicellular organisms.
You are a multicellular organism that can create imagination and thoughts . With a person of opposite sex, you combine contributions to create a new person.

A bull eats grass and hay to create bullshit, but call it what ever you want.

@Word Einstein chose Pantheism, he was a smart guy who was right about a lot. I am an Atheist and I think their is no such thing as god. Theism is bullshit so I will call it what I want. Even a brilliant man like Albert Einstein was full of shit.

@barjoe I am just saying, that's why people called it God before the word "universe" was invented