"Agnosticism 102"

It has said that Dr. Albert Einstein was an agnostic – which when one reads or studies his life (from his own writings) this cannot be discerned. Interestingly – I’ve read most all of Einstein’s writings and never seen this there – however this has been around. Einstein – was raised in an inactive Jewish home – went to Catholic schools (was ridiculed) and never professed either a belief or disbelief to any Church – however, he did fully acknowledge the existence of God (per se’ not Jesus Christ) and a higher authority. He stated this in a small meeting in CA just prior to WW2 (1940). When Israel was formed he was asked to be the first Prime Minister but turned it down. As almost all those of a higher intellect he understood the being of a higher being – had read the Bible – and found where it made common sense none of the churches he knew of did. I’ll research the below but don’t believe it is anything more than someone’s creation trying to give it more credibility.  All of the writing’s claiming what Einstein’s writings do or do not say have been proven much like the news of today – fake/false and very opinionated. Would highly recommend one read’s the works of Albert Einstein’s – and see what you can come to grasps with. 

Agnostic: a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God. This does not and is not found in any Einstein’s writings. Of course one can go back to those of who wrote serious papers as a youth might be quoted from then and not today.

This is found in one of the Analysis of this myth: This apocryphal tale of a college-age Albert Einstein proving the existence of God to his atheist professor first began circulating in 2004. One reason we know it isn't true is that the same story was already making the rounds earlier with no mention of Einstein in it at all.

Another reason we know it isn't true is that Einstein was a self-described agnostic who didn't believe in what he called a "personal God." He wrote: "[T]he word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."

And, finally, we know it isn't true because Einstein was a careful thinker who wouldn't have abided the specious logic attributed to him here. As written, the argument neither disproves the existence of evil nor proves the existence of God.

Actually the author who wrote the analysis doesn’t understand the definition of Agnostic – and or much of Einstein. An agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively. Over time many have asserted this label on those like Jefferson, Darwin, Einstein and many other – and I would guess to some degree you and I! Huxley came up with the term – and since then the liberal application has taken in a lot of territory without understanding who they’ve assessed it to. Einstein never self-described himself as such except to get people off of his case – the same as Jefferson and Adams belonged to churches to keep people off of their backs. Darwin – was born into a preachers home – attended seminary and finally walked away due to the confusion found. What is taken out of context is that almost all of the Christian Churches claim no personal God – but in their various creeds only a God which makes absolutely no sense. Thus most all of Christendom and the other major religions of the world are by Huxley’s definition ‘Agnostics’.

By definition a ‘personal God’ is one you can communicate with one to one – and be heard and understood and at the same time come to know literally. Since only one organized Church believes this to be true – that there is open communication with their God – then what of the rest of the world? Claiming such a belief and in the same breathe denying it. All of the Creeds in Christendom deny the literal existence of a physical being of flesh and bone – as two separate beings as the Savior testifies over and over again in the Scriptures.  Again neither here nor there – believing what one wants cannot change the truth – ‘If you love me keep my Commandments’ – and thus to believe the Savior’s Word! We must each remember – all of us who proclaim Christianity ‘faith without works is dead’ (James) and we’ve to live the Will of the Father or deny all that we profess to believe.   

Whether we choose to become a disciple of Jesus Christ – we better read the instruction book(s) – and heed them literally without the logismoi of men/women intermixed. Sadly most will just read the synopsis or maybe a College Cheat Book. We do not know the heart of beliefs of a man/woman until they walk/talk/listen/discern and even then might not know. However, we don’t have to know – only Father and the Son need to know and they do! Careful quoting out of context, edited writings, hearsay, myths and whatever else can be known/shown/guessed is not to be used to understand the heart of a man/woman.

Agnosticism 102 is nothing more than continuation of men/women justifying what they want to believe or to be held accountable for to their peers or associates. Einstein, Jefferson and many others to include Darwin are labeled by what men/women try to apply to justify their history retroactively re-written. We’ve each to do our own homework – going back as far as we can to primary source materials – lacking to do this we then hang what we believe on what others want us to believe.

“Agnosticism 102”

cji

9/14/17

Grabbing a straw here/there

building up huge fires about

placing trust in men/women

wanting to be accepted

lacking thinking or reason

appeasement to the world

sitting on the fence again

doing so in pre-existence

1/3 the host of Heaven

unable to choose sides

now today doing the same

believing nothing known

nothing can be proved

ignoring what’s all about!

Copyright © 2017 – cji