According to MSNBC News, a letter is being auctioned in London this week, which paradoxes Einstein’s views about religion and spirituality.
 
In the note, written the year before his death, Einstein encourages that the idea of God is the result of human vulnerability, and that the Bible is "pretty childish." Einstein claimed that "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."

However, John Brooke - emeritus professor of science and religion at Oxford University - perceived the letter increases evidence towards the notion that "Einstein was not a conventional theist" - although he was not an atheist, either. So, Einstein believed there might be a god, but didn’t, at the same time.
 
But, don’t you see? This is where the idea of God comes in. If Einstein was still implying that it is immature, stupid, or wrong to believe that God exists or ideas in the Bible are true - because those ideas cannot be concretely proven - then Einstein was actually the one who was wrong here. Sure, we may only be able to demonstrate God symbolically through Church and the Holy Cross, etc., but just because you can’t see God doesn’t mean He isn’t there.
 
Philosophically speaking, the idea of God exists, because we can say the word “God.” Ideas have been passed on about God. And while those ideas may have been altered or misinterpreted otherwise by Man, they still exist, which, therefore, deduces that there is a reason for those ideas’ existence. If God - or a higher power - didn’t exist, then why does the idea or word “God” exist?
 
Perhaps God does exist, and if even by another name, an almighty, omniscient, higher power must exist, because it is determined by the theory of “cause-and-effect.” For one thing to happen, something must have caused it. Therefore, one thing could cause another thing, and that thing would be an effect. While it may be impossible to see if one idea that occurred before another idea is actually the cause of the later idea, it is also probable that the idea before another idea did cause the latter idea. Therefore, one can assume that all effects that were causes of later ideas and causes that were effects of earlier ideas (or just all causes and effects) derive from one cause: that cause, being the higher power, which could be known as “God,” or a god. The higher power would come before - and have caused? - all these later causes and effects, all of existence.
 
Einstein also said that "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." But, if he really believed this, then why would he question faith in one of those two subjects? Is it because belief in Bible or God is actually “religion without science,” as he would say? While it is good to question both religion and science to see the bigger picture - the whole possible truth - to expect something as metaphysical and subjective as religious perspective to possess objective and physical scientific evidence just doesn‘t coincide. If you could prove religion with scientific evidence, then it wouldn’t be mere beliefs, if the scientific evidence were valid. Religion would be beyond belief; it’d be the proven truth - or would it be?

Einstein’s words were also written: "I do not believe in the God of theology who rewards good and punishes evil. My God created laws that take care of that. His universe is not ruled by wishful thinking, but by immutable laws." Now, I’m not sure if this is intended to suggest that good things also happen to bad people, and bad things also happen to good people, but it still shows that Einstein was opposing his earlier views, once again. When Einstein says “My God” - or his idea of what god is - he is acknowledging that a god exists, by using the word “God.” He admits to knowing God is “not ruled by wishful thinking, but by immutable laws.” Also, he capitalizes the word “God,” as the Christians would, which somewhat contradicts his next point:
 
"There is some kind of intelligence working its way through nature. But it is certainly not a conventional Christian or Judaic religious view." Again, this intelligence would be a higher power, which could represent God. Also, for Einstein to say this intelligence is not a conventional Christian or Judaic religious view, but then say there is “My God” - which, with the capital “G,” would be the God in conventional Christian religious view - is also confusing.
 
So, as you can see, this letter supports that Einstein was contradicting himself, in terms of his religious and spiritual views. He can’t decide if God does - or doesn’t - exist, and whether the Christian and/or Judaic religious perspectives - or any religious perspectives, for that matter - are truthful. But, don’t blame him. If Einstein can’t prove it, then how can we expect ourselves to prove it? God is still a mystery to us.