In a 1978 profile, Carl Sagan discussed the great physicist’s spiritual beliefs:
In matters of religion, Einstein thought more deeply than many others and was repeatedly misunderstood. On the occasion of Einstein’s first visit to America, Cardinal O’Connell of Boston warned that the relativity theory “cloaked the ghastly apparition of atheism.” This alarmed a New York rabbi who cabled Einstein: “Do you believe in God?” Einstein cabled back: “I believe in Spinoza’s God, who reveals himself in the harmony of all being, not in the God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of men”—a more subtle religious view embraced by many theologians today.
Einstein’s religious beliefs were very genuine. In the 1920s and 1930s he expressed grave doubts about a basic precept of quantum mechanics: that at the most fundamental level of matter particles behaved in an unpredictable way, as expressed by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Einstein said, “God does not play dice with the cosmos.” And on another occasion he asserted, “God is subtle but he is not malicious.” In fact Einstein was so fond of such aphorisms that the Danish physicist Niels Bohr turned to him on one occasion and with some exasperation said, “Stop telling God what to do.”
Update from a reader:
You quote Einstein selectively. He also expressed contempt for the “childish” belief in a Biblical god. He also called misrepresentations of his religious convictions “a lie which is being systematically repeated.” Einstein’s views in context are here:
The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this.
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.
It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. … Ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.
Another:
I would very much like to point out that the quotes your reader inserted are, in an interesting way, incorrect:
The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. … For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions.
The parts in bold simply do not exist in the original letter: they have been made up by the translator and yet this is the translation you will see quoted over one million times on the Internet. (No need to take my word for it: feel free to show a scan of the original German letter, recently sold for just over 3 million dollars, to anyone who speaks German.)
What happened? I can’t claim to know the motives of the translator, but it is clear that virtually no one has bothered to verify the correctness of the translation. You’ll even find the fabrication on (the English version of) wikiquote (but not the German one). I am happy you too fell into this trap because I know that you, unlike many of your colleagues, will gladly update the article and correct the mistake. I am also sure the truth will now reach many people.
P.S.: In case you were wondering: I am an atheist and I try to avoid the Dish on Sundays as much as possible. The other days I follow the Dish almost religiously.
The Dish 