The folly of practical atheism. A discourse, delivered in the Chapel of Yale-College, on Lord's-Day, November 23, 1794. / By James Dana, D.D. Pastor of the First Congregational Church in New-Haven.

The folly of practical atheism. A discourse, delivered in the Chapel of Yale-College, on Lord's-Day, November 23, 1794. / By James Dana, D.D. Pastor of the First Congregational Church in New-Haven.

Table of contents

§

Title page

The folly of practical atheism.

[Page]

The folly of practical atheism.

PSALM LIII. 1.

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.

THE folly of practical atheism is the subject proposed for present consideration. The fool is not here supposed to deny the being of a God, considered as a speculative truth, but as it relates to practice; or the idea of a God considered as moral Governor, to whom he must give account. His practice declares the language of his heart to be this: No God: I would there were none. What influence his wish may possibly have on his opinion, we shall not tarry to enquire. It hath been much doubted, whether there ever was a speculative atheist. Be this as it may, the folly of another kind of atheism is to be laid open in the ensuing discourse. It is to be shewn that the practical atheist is a fool. His life declares the wish of his heart to be that expressed in the text. He is thus described in the following part of the psalm: ‘Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity. God looked down from heaven [Page] upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, that did seek God. Every one of them is gone back, they are altogether become filthy: There is none that doth good, no not one.’ St. Paul applies the passage to the body of the Jewish nation.*

According to this description of the atheist, he either neglects the worship of God, altho he may acknowledge his existence: Or he lives viciously, altho he attends to the externals of religion: Or he useth religion as a cloke to his wicked designs. Let us examine each of these cases.

1. To what end is the existence of God acknowledged, if his worship is neglected? To deny him our worship, is to all intents to say, There is no God. What could a speculative atheist say or do more? He doth not call upon God, because he maintains that no God exists. He acts consistently. For he that cometh to God must believe that he is. But the practical atheist admits that he is, and yet doth not come to him. Where is the material difference between denying him religious homage, and denying his existence?

The ancient Epicureans professed to believe a God, but denied his moral perfections and providence. They described him as a God at ease, indifferent to, and even ignorant of, the conduct of his creatures. Their own voluptuousness was but an imitation of their god. They who restrain [Page] prayer, cast off fear. They may possibly say, "We do not deny that God is to be worshipped, any more than we deny his being." May we not reply, as an apostle did in another and similar case? "Shew thy faith by thy works. The devils believe that there is one God, and tremble," and blaspheme.

2. Do any pay God an external worship, whose general course of life is a denial of his perfections and providence? Applicable to such are the words of St. Paul, "Be not deceived, for God is not mocked." Their religious performances declare one thing; their uniform practice, another. From which are we to determine whether they own or disown a God? Their actions say that they have no awe of God, no desire of his approbation, or fear of his displeasure. What less can we conclude than this, that, might they have their choice, there would be no God?

3. Such as use religion as a pretext to their sinister ends, may conceal their real character in a great measure from the world, and even from themselves. But is there more impiety in avowed atheism, than in making use of God and religion to patronise hypocrisy, and crimes which shock humanity? While men would be thought to do God service, yea, while they have thought themselves in the first class of his favorites, they have faught against him. In the judgment according to truth, the higher any one's pretensions, while the inward temper is most repugnant to religion, [Page] the higher indignity is offered to God; the more are his perfections and existence denied and reproached.

Is there a God of all perfection? Should we not then set him always before us? Should we not, in a steady course, solemnly recognize his being, perfections and providence? Should we not be habitually impressed with the contemplation of him in his works, his word, and his administration? Should not our hearts and lives, as well as our lips, express our faith in him? If there is a God of all perfection, of what high concern is it, that we be conformed to him, and the objects of his special love?

From the general view we have taken of the practical atheist's character, let us proceed to shew that he is deservedly pronounced a fool.

I. Were there no God, according to his wish, still the existence of a God is greatly to be desired, and therefore it is folly to wish there were none.

The being of a God includes a wise, universal and perpetual providence, a moral government, the immortality of the soul, and future ineffable rewards for them who diligently seek him. It is the foundation of serenity and hope amidst all the trials of life, and in the view of death. In the most favorable circumstances which we can suppose on earth, man is conscious to desires and capacities to which no external things are adapted— desires and capacities of a far superior nature to the animal appetites and affections. At his best [Page] state, he walks through dry places, seeking rest, but not finding it, unless he hath imbibed the principles of religion—is established in the belief of a God, who made and governs the world, consummately blessed in himself, and all-sufficient, of perfect moral rectitude, who delighteth in mercy, and will fulfil the desire of them that fear him.

Moreover, what a variety of circumstances are there, in which we cannot take outward satisfaction in the enjoyments of life, though surrounded with them; and which they would yield, were it not for such circumstances? Such are excruciating pains, languishing sickness, the loss of dearest connexions in life, or anxiety for them in their misfortunes and distresses, or affliction from their misconduct, or the calamities under which they are born and continued, or which may have come on them. In such circumstances man feels his need of the principles of religion.

Or could outward things satisfy us at present, were we exempt from all the troubles of life; yet we cannot but be thoughtful for the time to come. Death is the common lot of mankind, and must soon be our own lot. Persons of all conditions and ages die suddenly by various means. None of them return to us. We cannot promise ourselves another day, or hour. Shall we then take up satisfied with the world, when we know not what a day may bring forth? Suppose we shall die to-morrow, or this night, where shall we then be? No where! nothing! if there is no God, who [Page] alone hath immortality. What a damp must the prospect of speedy annihilation cast over all the pleasant things of the world? Must it not turn all joy into heaviness? Can the mind be reconciled to the thought, that in a little time, perhaps in one hour, we shall cease forever! Whenever death shall come, we shall perish as the beasts, if there is no God. What pre-eminence then hath man above them? What a fool, how brutish, is he who would thus degrade the human species, next in the scale of beings to the angels! Is it not more eligible and wise to believe an after state, free from all the encumbrances, pains, sorrows and anxieties of this? a state of unmingled, unceasing happiness, adapted to our intelligent, moral nature? The assured expectation of such a state can calm the mind, reconcile it to the sufferings of the present time, dispel the gloom of the grave, the house appointed for all the living, and make us more than conquerers in passing the vale of death.

The existence of a God therefore is most desirable. He who wisheth there were none, wisheth misery to himself, and to mankind. Were his wish the real truth, it would be the highest wisdom to embrace and act upon the contrary opinion, for the sake of passing with ease through life, and closing it quietly and joyfully. If he is mistaken who thinks there is a God, and conducts accordingly, he is not a loser, but a gainer, by his mistake, in life. He cannot repent his mistake [Page] after death; nor can any reproach him with it, if death is a total extinction of being. So that even on the supposition there were no God, the believer of one is wise, and the disbeliever a fool. The atheist is a fool, should what he wisheth turn out to be true. It is an happy delusion to think and wish differently from him, whether we regard our own comfort, or the welfare of mankind— Happy to think and wish differently, provided we also practise differently. For to believe a God, and not live accordingly, can only alarm us with unnecessary fears—Unnecessary, I mean, on the supposition of the truth of atheism—But,

Secondly, if there is a God, they who live as though there were none, must be eternally ruined; and therefore the atheist is a fool.

It is the part of wisdom to choose and act on that side which in all events will be most safe. If atheism is folly, even on the supposition of its truth, much more is it folly on the supposition of its falshood. Admit that the being of a God is barely possible, what an hazard may the atheist run? The hazard is, that he may possibly be miserable beyond expression, in body and soul, forever. If the being of a God is probable, the hazard then is that he will probably be thus miserable. And if the being of God is certain, the misery of the atheist is not less so. How inconceivable then is his stupidity? Could he persuade himself that the notion of a God is entirely a fiction, so as to be tolerably calm through life, and to have no other [Page] apprehension at death than that of annihilation; yet, should he then find himself mistaken, the consequence is too dismal to be expressed or conceived. Even the shadow of a probability that he may then find himself mistaken is abundantly sufficient to convict him of folly in not providing against such probability—call it contingency, if you please. What wise man would run the smallest possible hazard, where such a consequence may be depending?

We have shewn that the atheist's opinion, acted upon, abridgeth him of the truest satisfaction in life, and cuts him off from all hope in death. What a dreadful leap doth he then take, if the opposite opinion should be true▪ His error, not discovered till too late to be corrected, he must fruitlessly lament, and experience its effects under the final displeasure of that God who is a consuming fire. Had he acted on the supposition that there is a God, he would have run no hazard, if this be a mistake. For who could punish or reproach him for it? If he had worshipped as God an ideal being, his error and his existence would terminate together, and he would have enjoyed the temporary consolation, which the practical belief of a Deity must afford in this state.

Suppose atheism were the general opinion of mankind, and that a believer in God and true worshipper of him must sacrifice every thing dear in life, and life itself, to his belief and practice, would he not be the wise man, and all others [Page] fools, admitting the truth of religion? Their gain would be temporal, their loss eternal; but his gain would be eternal, his loss temporal.

Thirdly, it is the summit of folly to live in such a manner as must impel them to chuse that there were no God, when at the same time men suspect, and even conclude, there is one.

Such is the fool described in the text. His heart is at variance with his head. He acts against his own sentiments, as well as against the sentiment of all the world. For this principle, the being of a God, has had the consent of all mankind. The athiest "half believes a God;" why else doth he fear one? It is folly to fear the mere phantom of a Deity. If a Deity is merely a phantom, he thinks it a reality, or it would not terrify him. The psalmist observes, v. 5, con. "There were they in great fear, where no fear was." The vicious, the profane and atheistical scoffers at religion, as they have cause, are the greatest cowards, in certain circumstances. The sound of a shaken leaf chaseth them; and they fly as from the sword, when none are pursuing them. Many imaginary fears are the effect of guilt. In time of danger it takes from hardy veterans in vice all fortitude. When their iniquity doth but seem to have found them out, they betray guilt in their aspect, their behavior, their manner of defence; and sometimes make immediate confession.

‘But these fears, you may say, are produced by the apprehension of civil penalties, not [Page] by any sense of a God, or of accountableness to him.’ This, however, doth not account for the fears of the guilty, where no civil penalties are apprehended. It doth not account for their fear of death, from sickness or otherwise. Nor is this merely a natural dread of dissolution. Something within presages an after reckoning an after existence. They judge themselves, and naturally apprehend an higher judgment.

That such as mock at sin, and in the general course of life have no fear of God, are yet afraid when danger or death is nigh, proves that they believe there is a God, though they wish there were not. When their powers of reflection are by any means awakened, they are afraid of him. O thou afflicted, tossed with tempest, and not comforted! why do thy thoughts trouble thee? What is it within thy breast, that agitates thee, and prevents thy repose? what that makes thee heavy in the midst of laughter, and drives sleep from thine eyes? If there is no God, thou mayst certainly conclude that this officious intruder on thy peace is a liar; and needest not be troubled, because it writeth bitter things against thee. Why should the weakness of superstition, or sickly fancy, cause thy countenance to turn pale, thy tongue to faulter, and thy joints to tremble? Hast thou found by thy wisdom that some crazy dreamer first started the notion of a God? that fear circulated it? and that it was inculcated to answer the ends of politicians? Why then art thou unmanned by the [Page] misgivings and forebodings of thine own mind? Why should these confute thy declaration, that there is no God?

The plain truth is this: The thoughtless, vicious and profligate, by their manner of life, bring themselves to say in their heart. ‘No God. Well were it for us, if there were none. He is not our God, our Father and friend. We are enemies to his government, and have naught else to expect but to be frowned from his presence. O that there were no God! or that he had not brought us into being!’

When men have lived without God in the world, they have the temerity to wish, what perhaps they dare not utter, that God might not be. They are resolved not to alter their course. This, they are aware, must end in ruin, if God exists, and governs the world. Hence the only alternative left them is to wish that atheism were true. Surely these are fools. They are at variance with themselves. For while they wish there were no God, they also wish to die in favor with him. Can the atheist be named, who doth not most sincerely join with Balaam in his prayer: "Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his?" If this is even the atheist's prayer, judge ye whether his atheism is any other than practical. And is he not a fool to live as no one can be willing to die?—estranged from God? By wishing to die as the righteous man dieth, he commends the life of the righteous, the part chosen [Page] and the course pursued by him. The pious man's end could not be preferable to that of the impious, unless his life were so. That choice or course, which ends well, must be pronounced wise: that which ends ill, must therefore be unwise. The atheist himself being judge, he lives and dies a fool; why else is it his wish that he may die the death of the righteous?

Would we determine on wisdom and folly as relative to the characters and pursuits of men, let us follow them to the closing scene. Let us observe whether they go off the stage with honor or disgrace. Is death the end of all men? Then they are wise who consider their latter end—who refer their conduct in life to this solemn period, and act such a part as they can the review with approbation. If the atheist cannot then approve his own part, but will be compelled to wish that he had acted the part of the godly man, is it without reason that we call him a fool?

Can any subject of enquiry be more serious and important than this, whether we so live as that it is our highest interest to suppose there is a God, or the contrary? Could men, either from sceptical pride or dissolute manners, fix down in the persuasion, that God is nothing but a name, they might then be exempt from the perturbations of guilt, and apprehensions of a judgment. On this supposition, they would neither approve nor condemn any affections, volitions or actions in a moral view. Still, being endowed with sore thought, [Page] and observing the frailty of the human race, they could not but be anxious whether, or after what manner, they shall exist when they leave this world. If they are settled in the opinion of atheism, what but palpable darkness is before them? None of their friends who have been removed, return to inform them whether there is another life; or if there is, of what sort. Atheism then doth not relieve their minds, naturally thoughtful for futurity, and solicitous to know what may be at and after death—an event which the wise and foolish alike expect.

But if the wicked rather wish there were not a God, than really disbelieve, what madness hath led them to such a wish? Shall they profess that they know and believe in him, and yet seldom have him in their thoughts, renounce his fear, despise his goodness, and abuse his grace and patience? Shall their practice speak this language, ‘Who is the Almighty, that we should serve him? and what profit shall we have, if we pray unto him?’ Is he the former of our bodies, and the father of our spirit? Do we live, and move, and have our being in him? Doth every good gift come from him? Hath he to all other gifts added that of a Redeemer, which indeed comprehends all things? Can he save or destroy? And shall his creatures, formed to shew forth his praise, and for whom he hath delivered up his own Son, forget him, and live as though they were self-made, and self-preserved? as though their good were in their own [Page] hands? as though they were not accountable? had nothing to hope from his favor, nothing to fear from his anger? ‘Understand ye brutish, and ye fools when will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? He that formed the eye, shall he not see? He that teacheth man knowledge, shall not he know?’ Will you not call on his name in public or private? Or will you use it only to profane it? Or will you cry mightily to him in your calamity, or when danger is near; and yet not have him in all your thoughts in the day of health, safety and prosperity? Have you no concern with God, except in a time of extremity? and would you apply to him then only? Or have you to do with him at all times, in every place, in all circumstances? Those who fear before him habitually, who bless him at all times, and acknowledge him in all their ways, shall not be afraid of evil tidings. Their heart is fixed, trusting in the Lord. He hath not given them a spirit of fear. He is their refuge, and very present help in trouble. Such is the difference between religion and irreligion.

The atheist is a fool from choice, not from necessity. Were it owing to a want or imbecility of understanding that he saith there is no God, his folly would be his excuse. But this is not the case. "The world by WISDOM knew not God. Professing themselves to be WISE, they became fools." The grossest errors in religion, and atheism itself, proceed from an affectation of superior [Page] wisdom. Thrô the pride of knowing more than they have faculties for, it comes to pass that men know nothing as they ought to know. Hence they ‘put darkness for light, and light for darkness; bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter; and call evil good, and good evil.’

How great is human depravity, that God should be disowned! that any of the human race should indulge a wish in their hearts that HE were not! It is not considered what this horrid wish implies. But is inconsideration an excuse▪ Is it not a crime? A God may be clearly seen in his works—particularly in our own frame. The idea of a God, if not innate, has been a part of education among all nations; it is demonstrable, if we ascend from effects to their cause, whether it be or not in the other mode of descending from cause to effect. His being and moral perfections are the only joy and hope of such a creature as man, formed to contemplate and adore, capable of deliberating and preferring, naturally conscious of liberty and accountableness, placed in this mixed state, and apparently intended for another.

The government of an omnipotent Deity, the parent of the whole family in heaven and earth, is matter of rejoicing to that part of his family to which we belong, as well as to that above. Is it not then among the most affecting proofs of man's fall and corruption, that he should practically deny the God that is above! Surely he must be a very different creature from what God made [Page] him, before he could wish in his heart, that his Creator and Father were not! Would it be cruel to wish a numerous family of children might be left orphans! Would it be most vile and absurd were a child of the family to wish the father and head were taken away! What is this compared with his folly and vileness, who wisheth that all the offspring of God, angels and men, had no parent! What must the conduct be, in which such a wish originates? It is his wish who goes about seeking whom he may devour—his wish who left his own habitation by the eternal throne, and is compelled to say, "Farthest from God is best."

What has been discoursed should awaken reflection in those who have much regard to the eye of man, but little or no regard to the eye of God. All things are naked and open to the eyes of him with whom we have to do. This is forgotten, and practically denied, by all who do those things under cover of the night, or in retirement, which, should they come abroad, would fill them with fear or shame. To take pains in saving appearances, but no pains about the principles and ends of our actions, all which are weighed by a God of knowledge, is to deny that HE looketh at the heart. They who have a form of godliness, but deny the power, cherish this inward thought, that God doth not search the heart, in order to render to every man according to his ways. They who practise secret fraud, liars, false accusers, perjured [Page] persons, thieves, adulterers, envious persons, practically say, that God's eye is not on them. They deny him in works, in the heart. When those whose eye is evil towards others, learn the charity which envieth not—when the unclean become chaste—when he that stole, steals no more, but worketh with his hands the things that is good, that he may give to him that needeth— when the perjured have no longer a right hand of falshood—when the profane learn to fear HIM who holds not those guiltless that take his name in vain—when liars cease from falshood—when they who have defrauded others, learn to live in honesty—when they who have taken great pains to conceal their sins from the world, shall take like pains not to sin in secret—when they who have done their works to be seen of men, shall study to approve themselves to God—Then all these will best shew that they believe a God. Then will they have reason to conclude, that his being and perfections are the wish and joy of their hearts. With him there is mercy, and plenteous redemption. The Savior of the world came to call all manner of sinners to repentance.

Every one that doeth evil hateth the light. An evil heart is an heart of unbelief▪ It is inclined to deny or pervert the truth. Ahab said of Micajah, ‘I hate him; for he never prophesieth good unto me, but always evil.’ Micajah had told him the truth, and therefore was held as an enemy by Ahab, who cherished as friends those who prophesied lies.

[Page]Suppose a man of an evil heart may have just sentiments of religion, and can draw a fine picture of it; suppose him to have all knowledge, and the faith of a martyr; yet he hath not love to God or men, and is as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. If there be a God, we ought to love him with all the heart, and soul, and strength and mind. It is good to draw near to him. They that are far from him shall perish. The son in the parable, who, when commanded to work in the vineyard, answered very respectfully, I go, sir; and went not, was as destitute of filial reverence as he who petulantly answered, I will not. Trust not to external professions. The divine command is, My son, give me thine heart. "Keep thine heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life." Next to the love of God, your neighbor claims your attention and regard. The love of him should be measured by self-love. In other words, ‘Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.’

If we walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, we shall redeem time, and improve every talent, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. The wise shall inherit glory; but shame shall be the promotion of fools.

Notes

*

Romans, iii. 1 [...],—19.

↵

§

§

[Page]

[Page]

Dr. DANA'S SERMON On practical Atheism.

§

§

[Page]

The folly of practical atheism.

A DISCOURSE, DELIVERED IN THE CHAPEL OF YALE-COLLEGE ON LORD's-DAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1794.

BY JAMES DANA, D.D. PASTOR OF THE FIRST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH IN NEW-HAVEN.

Printed at New-Haven by T. & S. GREEN.

Information about this book

Title statement

The folly of practical atheism. A discourse, delivered in the Chapel of Yale-College, on Lord's-Day, November 23, 1794. / By James Dana, D.D. Pastor of the First Congregational Church in New-Haven.

Dana, James, 1735-1812.

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI :

Date

2011-05.

ID [DLPS]

N21682

ID [TCP]

N21682

ID [STC]

Evans 28529

ID [NOTIS]

APX3558

ID [IMAGE-SET]

28529

ID [EVANS-CITATION]

99020327

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Series

Early American Imprints, 1639-1800 ; no. 28529.

Notes

(Evans-TCP ; no. N21682)

Transcribed from: (Readex Archive of Americana ; Early American Imprints, series I ; image set 28529)

Images scanned from Readex microprint and microform: (Early American imprints. First series ; no. 28529)

Source

— The folly of practical atheism. A discourse, delivered in the Chapel of Yale-College, on Lord's-Day, November 23, 1794. / By James Dana, D.D. Pastor of the First Congregational Church in New-Haven., Dana, James, 1735-1812..

Extent

22, [2] p. ; 21 cm. (8vo)

by T. & S. Green.,. Printed at New-Haven :: [1794]. (Half-title: Dr. Dana's sermon on practical atheism.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.