A Brief History of Atheism (Excerpts)
The timeline arrives at 500 AD, a year in which the skeptical philosophy that emerged during the ancient Greek and Roman eras faced a tremendous trial: Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire—the Roman Catholic Church—and the Church closed the Greek philosophical schools that advocated rational materialism. Consequently, Christianity came to dominate the thought of the entire Western society while simultaneously exerting immense influence over Western politics. This state of affairs persisted for a full millennium. In such a social environment, there was virtually no space for atheism to survive.
Despite the continuous expansion of Christianity’s sphere of influence, it is still not difficult to find ruins of once-all-powerful but now-abandoned churches across the West. Why is this? In the 21st century, it is difficult to grasp the true meaning of past thoughts, especially those related to religion. Since the ability to read and write is possessed by nearly everyone in modern society, it is relatively easy for future historians to understand the thoughts and beliefs of the "ordinary person." However, in the 13th century, the era when these now-collapsed churches were built, the vast majority of the population was illiterate, and their thoughts left no trace in the historical record. To seek out the story of atheism, we must understand how religious belief is produced. To do this, we should first understand how the illiterate accepted religious ideas. For them, it was through the method of interpreting images. In the Scrovegni Chapel in Padua [1], Italy, the European "avant-garde" painter Giotto created a series of frescoes in the early 14th century that fully narrated the life of Jesus from birth to death. The rapid expansion of Christianity brought about a massive, irreversible change in the religious beliefs of Europeans. While it took some time to digest Christian doctrine and its various rituals, religious codes were quickly translated into the various languages of Europe under the presidency and supervision of religious authorities, and "articles of faith" were continuously published. Within these "articles of faith," the most important content was the promotion of monotheistic thought—inherited from the Jews—claiming that God created the world and endowed his most favored people with the infinite power to make moral choices. In contrast, ancient paganism possessed only loosely structured folklore; its authority and organization simply could not be compared with that of Christianity. Furthermore, these pagan mythological characters were thin and existed outside of specific timeframes. The descriptions in the Christian New Testament formed a sharp contrast: the events were vivid and fresh, making people feel as if they had occurred only a short time ago; the characters drifted wonderfully between the secular and the miraculous, making people feel both intimate and awestruck. These characteristics gave the New Testament a high degree of credibility; who would express doubt toward it? Even looking at them today, these paintings from over 700 years ago still possess great artistic power; one can imagine that the impact they had on the minds of people living in the 14th century was decisive. While Judaism and Islam prohibited the use of images, Christianity favored this form of expression. Thus, the minds of Christians were more or less haunted by these lifelike scenes of religious stories. Beyond churches, in some secular buildings—taking the Palace of Justice as an example—religious themes were also present among the various murals on the walls, creating the impression that the thought of medieval people was very monolithic. However, by the mid-15th century, the situation changed, though the frescoes of that period did not yet reflect this shift. In the academic circles of Padua, a skeptical philosophical trend was surging, which the orthodox labeled as atheism. I believe this philosophical trend contained the influence of two ideas from different sources. One can be called horizontal influence: increasing global trade and exploration led people to discover that people in different parts of the world held different beliefs, and surprisingly, many had never even heard of Christianity. Jesuit missionaries returning from China in the 17th century accepted the reality that a developed civilization could exist in a place without Christianity. Shortly thereafter, various forms of pagan skepticism and materialism originating in ancient Greece and Rome began to resurface. Like artesian wells, they continuously gushed forth the pre-Christian thoughts pioneered by Epicurus, Lucretius, and Democritus. This is vertical influence.
Fear created the gods. Everything that happens in nature proceeds spontaneously and has nothing to do with the gods. — Lucretius
The first Christian emperor of Rome closed the schools of philosophy and went to great lengths to transform some former pagan philosophers into Christians; only a small number of the works of Aristotle and Plato managed to survive. In the early Middle Ages, the greatest value of these few remaining works was, ironically, as theoretical pillars for Christian theology. Meanwhile, those explicit materialist philosophers—such as the likes of Epicurus, Lucretius, and Democritus—were disparaged as scoundrels who did not believe in God, and their works were spurned. However, Arab scholars in the Middle East, and shortly thereafter in Spain, preserved the complete works of Aristotle. As early as the 12th century, a large group of scholars led by Averroes [2] in Toledo [3] began to realize that within Aristotelian thought, there existed content incompatible with any religion. For example, the eternity of the world and the impossibility of an immortal soul in Aristotelian thought were fundamentally at odds with both Christianity and Islam. Aristotle’s works, annotated by Averroes, were quickly translated into the international language of the time—Latin—and spread throughout Christian Europe, particularly to Padua—where the Scrovegni Chapel and the Palace of Reason (Palazzo della Ragione) stood silently, testifying to the influence of Christianity in that city. In the 500 years that followed, these ancient ideas were passed down and developed by successive generations of thinkers, documenting an evolution into modern atheism. When the frescoes of the Palace of Reason were being created, this evolutionary process had in fact already begun. Today, the Palace of Reason has become a museum, exhibiting the artistic and technological achievements of the 1960s. These purely secular exhibits are so discordant with the medieval frescoes on the walls that it constitutes an almost complete desecration of piety.
Of course, the science and technology that emerged during the Renaissance were also continuously eroding the confidence of the Christian world. The common view is that the most important factor in destroying religious belief was the scientific understanding of nature. This view seems very plausible, yet it is not the reality.
I do not see any God in the heavens. — Yuri Gagarin [4]
Christianity adopted Ptolemy's [5] description of the universe, believing the Earth to be the center of the universe, with the sun, moon, and stars all revolving around the Earth—arranged so by God. Since people can see the sun rise and set every day, it is easy to think the sun is orbiting the Earth. Similarly, at night, people can see the moon seemingly orbiting the Earth. With enough patience, one can also notice the stars orbiting the Earth. If humanity were the highest form of life in the center of such a universe, it would be easy to view oneself as God's special people. However, Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler [6] after them corrected the geocentric model; they pointed out that the Earth and all the planets revolve around the sun, and the sun itself is but one of millions of stars. When Copernicus made this idea public in 1543, one can imagine how massive a shock it caused in society. Before people even had time to carefully consider the new cosmic model proposed by Copernicus, science began to transform humanity's understanding of its own body. The Belgian anatomist Vesalius [7] completed his research on human dissection in Padua and published his findings on the structure of the human body in the same year. I believe that the simultaneous occurrence of these two events was no coincidence. When I stand in the conical anatomy theater of the University of Padua and look down, the fine structure of the human body on the dissection table is clear at a glance; looking up, it is like an astronomical telescope observing the heliocentric universe described by Copernicus. This sensation is stunning.
Although Christian leaders were skeptical of these two research achievements, there is no evidence that they were worried by them. Since the human body is God’s masterpiece, the structure revealed by anatomy further confirmed that it could only have come from the hand of God. Otherwise, how could it be so exquisite? As for the structure of the universe, it too served as evidence for Divine Creation. Even if the aforementioned scientific innovations did not harm the authority of the Bible, with the aid of these two scientific achievements, people could still discover cracks as fine as a hair on the solid shell of religious doctrine. One reason these cracks were not easily perceived was that the people who achieved these new scientific results were themselves devout Christians. In their view, their discoveries just happened to prove that the Creationism they believed in was correct. For many years, descriptions of the laws of the universe could coexist peacefully with belief in God.
In every village, there is a torch that lights the darkness: the teacher. In every village, there is a man who tries to extinguish the torch: the priest. — Victor Hugo [8]
Even if individuals like Copernicus, Vesalius, and Galileo were so devout in their treatment of religion, the Church still felt uneasy about the emergence of these new sciences. There are always some foolish Popes and Bishops who fail to see that the new science could actually be used to strengthen the belief in an omnipotent and omniscient God; they simply did not understand what science was, only feeling that there was something strange in science that seemed to offend the dignity of God. Furthermore, the fact that science was being led by secular curiosity rather than respect and awe for God was another reason for their unease. The religious status quo was inextricably linked to social and political power; in contrast, science perhaps belonged exclusively to those scientists possessed of curiosity. In the eyes of the Church, curiosity could breed a sense of contempt; for instance, Galileo’s actions fully demonstrated his total disregard for the Church’s refusal to accept the Copernican geocentric universe.
In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual. — Galileo
In the eyes of these early scientists, observing phenomena was the foundation of research.
To force astronomers to deny their observations is nothing less than forcing them not to see what they can see, and not to think what they can think. — Galileo
As is well known, Galileo was sentenced to imprisonment by the Roman Inquisition for insisting on the Copernican "heliocentric" position, and was later placed under life-long house arrest. Among Copernicus’s followers, Bruno [9] was one of the most steadfast. During his eight years of imprisonment, he suffered extreme physical torture. Although he announced his renunciation of the "heliocentric" theory under torture, he was still judged a "heretic" by the Inquisition and was burned to death in the Campo de' Fiori in Rome in 1600. His charred remains were further crushed into powder with a hammer and scattered to the winds. In fact, the Church’s actions demonstrated that it was the Church, rather than these scientists, who truly believed science and religion were irreconcilable—which is indeed somewhat mind-boggling.
At this point, we must pause to insert other historical events. At that time, although those scientists abandoned their "heliocentric" views and faced severe judgement and punishment from the Church, the storm of the "heliocentric" theory did not end there. What happened next within the Christian Church might have a direct relationship with atheism: this was the Reformation that every schoolchild learns about. Mention of the Reformation brings to mind familiar names: Martin Luther [10], John Calvin [11], Zwingli [12], and so on. Through their joint efforts, they eventually dissolved the absolute power of the Pope and the Church to interpret Christian faith and doctrine, thereby triggering a series of religious transformations. For those who were already half-doubting religion, this religious schism helped them reach the conclusion that Christian doctrine might simply be wrong altogether. This was precisely what the Church feared.
Our internal disputes make those jokes ridiculing religion credible, and thus they become a powerful weapon against religion. This is what some people are most delighted to see. — Richard Hooker [13]
In the eyes of Christian authorities, certain ideas from these newly splintered sects could be described as nothing less than atheistic. The Anabaptists, for instance, were treated as atheists, though the parties involved never admitted to it. Furthermore, it is even less surprising that the Unitarian sects were also regarded as atheists.
Christ is not God, nor a savior, but a man, a sinner, and an abominable idol. It was a pack of idolaters who raised him to a high and lofty position. Christ neither rose from the dead nor ascended into heaven. — Matthew Hamont [14]
Matthew Hamont adhered to Unitarianism, and his aforementioned remarks cost him his life—he was burned at the stake in 1579 by order of the Bishop of Norwich. Although many condemned religious persecution, in such a harsh environment, few brave souls dared to publicly express doubt toward the supernatural, much less brand themselves as atheists. In fact, a chaotic situation where denial and condemnation coexisted lasted for roughly two hundred years. By "chaos," I mean that those who did not acknowledge (denied) the existence of atheism nevertheless spent a vast amount of time and energy attempting to eliminate its influence (condemning it). Simon Schaffer, a historian at the University of Cambridge, has conducted research on this period.
Simon Schaffer: From the 16th century until the 18th century, there existed an interesting paradox: those who hounded atheism most fiercely were precisely the ones who resolutely denied its existence. This was because demonstrating that it was fundamentally impossible to deny the existence of God was the best refutation of those who did deny Him. That is to say, denying the existence of atheists was itself a powerful rebuttal of atheism.
Some call themselves atheists, and others are seen as atheists by the world. But does anyone truly believe in atheism? This is doubtful. — Encyclopædia Britannica (1771)
Simon Schaffer: You refute unicorns, you refute fire-breathing monsters, and you refute the various monsters that exist in people's minds.
In the mind of a true atheist, there are no supernatural images; they believe only in reason. — Thomas Curtis, Essay on Atheism (1725)
Simon Schaffer: It was precisely the effort to deal with the threat of atheism that led to this logical confusion: exerting every effort to deny the existence of atheism while simultaneously and continuously refuting it.
I do not believe there are any true atheists; some people are regarded as such only because they are too lazy to spend time thinking. — The London Magazine (1774)
Simon Schaffer: "Atheism" was a label that clever people avoided at all costs. For this reason, when we trace the history of atheism, we encounter a problem: there were people among the common folk who should be judged as atheists by any standard, yet they did everything in their power to distance themselves from the name.
So, were there atheists during this historical period? Given how many sermons were preached, how many books were written, and how many laws were enacted against atheism with the sole objective of combatting it, is the answer not obvious? Due to the existence of censorship, we cannot see written records regarding religious doubt among the lower classes, but from various signs, we can conclude that atheism had already begun to emerge at that time. It was simply that those involved in the development of atheism continually denied being atheists.
Simon Schaffer: I believe "atheist" was an unwelcome term with which no one wanted to be associated, a situation that lasted until the late 18th century. This remained true during certain subsequent special periods as well. The word was certainly not printed on T-shirts; on the contrary, it was always used as an epithet in mutual abuse between different camps. In his book De la Sagesse (Of Wisdom), the 16th-century French Catholic theologian Pierre Charron wrote:
All religions have one thing in common: they run contrary to common sense, for they are composed of various elements, many of which are dross. This dross contradicts human reason and therefore inevitably invites the mockery and ridicule of the wise. — Pierre Charron
This passage should be taken as a true portrayal of the conditions of that period.
One point to note is that from the very beginning of the Reformation, internal shifts within Christianity never ceased. However, these changes were not brought about by science, but by the hands of other Christians. A significant change was the emergence of a new sect, which we generally call the Deists. As the name implies, Deists firmly believed in the existence of a transcendent God. However, they were dissatisfied with the Christian explanation of God and even more repulsed by the overbearing and tyrannical behavior of the religious leaders of the time. Consequently, Deism recognized only the existence of a supreme God in the universe who created the world, while almost entirely rejecting the rest of Christianity. Most members of the Deist movement belonged to the upper classes; at least in England, a relatively relaxed religious environment allowed some people to use their privilege to contemplate the nature of Christianity within private circles. This was one of the factors favoring the development of Deism. Deism maintained that the human experience of God is universal; various irrational superstitions and absurd rituals were merely a surface phenomenon, behind which lay a monotheism shared by all human societies. The original intent of Deism was to design a more tolerant, more humane New Christianity—one that was more rational and more benevolent. Therefore, it retained only the aspect of Christ's divinity that acknowledged a Creator of supreme intelligence in the universe, while stripping away all content regarding miracles. Many British writers and scholars participated in the development of Deism. Lord Edward Herbert of Cherbury, known as the "Father of Deism," proposed the concept in the early 17th century. Born in 1582, Lord Herbert was an enthusiastic aristocratic metaphysical poet. He wrote:
Religion is a common treasure of mankind; there has never been an era or a nation in history that was not accompanied by religion. Therefore, we should find in religion those commonalities recognized by the world. — Lord Edward Herbert of Cherbury
In Herbert's view, while there were vital differences between Christianity and other religions, they should be able to reach an agreement.
That there is one supreme God who should be worshipped should be a consensus. The difference lies only in the manner of worship. Additionally, the principle that sins can be expiated through repentance is a belief held in common by all. — Lord Edward Herbert of Cherbury
Although Deism developed rapidly in the 17th century, until the 18th century, it remained difficult to confirm who was an atheist. We shall now examine a man who came very close to this dangerous title: Thomas Hobbes [15], the son of a Wiltshire clergyman. For most of his life, Thomas Hobbes served as a tutor to the sons of the nobility; Charles II was once his student. Influenced by the philosophies of Epicurus, Democritus, and Lucretius, he was a thoroughgoing materialist who opposed all forms of immaterial philosophy. He aimed his sights directly at traditional religion.
Simon Schaffer: Most fascinating is that Hobbes often used the arguments published by the most conservative apologists of the time to refute them. At that time, conservative apologists would often say, "Just look at the various sects, and you can see how dangerous and terrible the result is once one deviates from the one true faith." In refuting them, Hobbes merely modified this statement slightly: "Do you not see those appalling things between religious sects? Persecution, the hunting of so-called heresies—all of this shows that explaining the world in this way is fundamentally wrong." Hobbes adhered to monism, and monism holds that the origin of the world is a single entity—matter. What you feel, see, and touch is all matter, and nothing else. This is one reason why he could be considered an atheist.
The universe—that is, the whole mass of all things that are—is corporeal, that is to say, body; and hath the dimensions of magnitude, namely, length, breadth, and depth. Every part of the universe is body, and that which is not body is no part of the universe: and because the universe is all, that which is no part of it is nothing, and consequently nowhere. — Thomas Hobbes
In reality, Thomas Hobbes was merely resurrecting the viewpoints of ancient atheists.
Simon Schaffer: Indeed. I believe the important role Hobbes played in the mid-17th century was his brilliant integration of arguments scattered throughout ancient and classical pagan philosophical traditions, turning them into a systematic philosophical framework. Most importantly, within the English-speaking world, no one could any longer use derogatory comments about a "lack of a philosophical system" when attacking atheism. You could attack atheism as evil, or criticize it for severe logical errors, but it was difficult to claim it lacked a unified philosophical system and was thus "unpresentable." Hobbes provided vital philosophical resources for the subsequent development of atheism. I believe such an assessment of the significance of Hobbes's work is appropriate from both a historical and philosophical perspective.
Can Hobbes be considered the first thoroughgoing atheist we have found? One might think that in Hobbes’s materialistic cosmology, there would be no room for the existence of an incorporeal soul. On the contrary, Hobbes believed that just as "immaterial body" was as nonsensical as a "square circle" in geometry, the concept of an incorporeal soul in philosophy was self-contradictory and meaningless. Although he frequently made such comparisons—seemingly hinting that he did not accept the concept of the immortality of the soul—he never stated it bluntly, cautiously leaving himself room for maneuver. He even acknowledged the concept of the Second Coming of Jesus, though he used metaphors to express his rejection of creationism. Considering the overall tone of his arguments and his radical materialist tendencies, the fact that he was buried in a church near Derbyshire after his death is somewhat surprising. Perhaps in the eyes of many, Hobbes was not an atheist, or at least, not a proponent of atheism.
Among the English heathens, ninety-nine in a hundred are followers of Hobbes’s philosophy, and as far as I know, Hobbes’s philosophy is atheism. — Richard Bentley [16]
In the latter half of the 17th century, Members of Parliament were busy discussing the introduction of legal provisions to strike at the blasphemous thoughts and speeches of skeptics. In 1697, the Blasphemy Act finally became formal law.
The word "atheism" did not appear in the original draft of this 300-year-old law, but in the version of the Blasphemy Act eventually passed by Parliament, atheism was specified as a crime, indicating that it was already receiving considerable attention at the time. The 1677 [17] Blasphemy Act contains the following text:
"Atheism and blasphemy are both felonies... Any person of the age of 16 years or upwards, being of sound mind and not a natural fool or a person of weak intellect, who shall from the date of the commencement of this Act, whether by word of mouth or in writing, deny the existence of God... shall be tried by a minister, and once a death sentence is passed, it shall be executed immediately, without any possibility of pardon or stay of execution."
When I read such provisions and see what people did back then, my heart races, and a feeling of wanting to stand up and speak out for atheists arises spontaneously.
Civilization is flawed as long as the last stone from the last church has not fallen on the head of the last priest. — Zola [18]
While the early Deists were busy reconstructing Christianity and taking care to distance themselves from atheism whenever possible, science was moving steadily and resolutely forward. The heliocentric theory received strong support from Galileo and Kepler. Although it still had mathematical flaws and no one could yet clearly explain the mechanisms by which it operated, some of the most liberal thinkers had begun to accept it. By the time of Newton, the situation changed significantly. Alexander Pope [19] wrote:
Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night: God said, "Let Newton be!" and all was light. — Alexander Pope
Text of this nature is fairly numerous, but Alexander Pope wrote with the greatest conciseness and clarity. Although the Catholic Church still adhered to the "geocentric" view, the law of universal gravitation and the laws of motion proposed by Newton indeed persuaded enlightened personages to no longer acknowledge it. Consequently, the central status of humanity was also called into question. To what extent was Newton a devout follower of the Church of England? This question remained unanswered until the 20th century, when Newton's manuscripts concerning religion were discovered: his scientific achievements were intimately linked to his religious faith. He was convinced that he achieved such research results precisely because he acted according to what God had told him in dialogue.
In retracing the history of atheism, the role of science can be divided into two scenarios. The first is what we mentioned when discussing Copernicus and Galileo: the vast majority of scientists involved—Newton included—were steadfast believers. The scientific research they conducted and the results they obtained not only failed to alter their faith but, in many cases, impelled them to become even firmer in their convictions. The second scenario occurred among intellectuals who were not scientists, and even among some theologians; they easily connected new scientific discoveries with the omnipotent God they worshipped, finding points where the two complemented each other.
In 1704, shortly after the publication of Newton's laws, Reverend Samuel Clarke was invited to Trinity College, Cambridge, to deliver a series of lectures. This series was presided over by Robert Boyle [38], the famous scientist and fellow member of the Royal Society alongside Newton. The theme of the lectures was the promotion of Christianity and the refutation of heresy. The first part of Clarke’s lecture was titled “The Being and Attributes of God—Against Hobbes and Spinoza [39] and their Followers.” Clarke did not break free from the thinking patterns of his 16th-century predecessors; he also classified atheists into three categories:
"The ignorant and stupid, who are unable to discover the most simple and obvious truths by the use of natural reason." — Samuel Clarke
"Those whose human nature has been corrupted by a wicked and debauched lifestyle, making them deaf to reason." — Samuel Clarke
Finally, the very people Clarke’s lecture intended to target: those who possessed both morality and reason, but whose mode of thinking placed them in the camp of the atheists.
The French philosopher Descartes argued: I think, therefore I am; I am, therefore God is. This fact served as the most powerful argument for the existence of God. Contrary to Descartes, Clarke, like Newton, was more inclined to demonstrate God's existence by applying the mechanisms of celestial motion. Like many authors both before and after him, Clarke also liked to cite biological discoveries as evidence for the theory of intelligent design.
"Recent discoveries in anatomy, such as the circulation of the blood and the precise structure of the heart and brain, all illustrate that only God’s design could be so exquisite." — Samuel Clarke
Although this sentence is linguistically logical, the religious conclusions Clarke reached do not necessarily follow from the scientific evidence he cited. Like Newton, he was first and foremost a devout Christian and thus inclined to view nature as an expression of an omnipotent God. Precisely because of this, in a certain sense, his arguments were constructed to reach a predetermined conclusion. Nevertheless, the fact that a mathematically literate clergyman could effortlessly link Newtonian mechanics to the existence of God is sufficient to show that the conflict between religion and the increasingly clear scientific description of the natural world has been greatly exaggerated.
"To my mind, there is not a single word in the Bible in praise of intelligence." — Bertrand Russell
As stated above, since the Reformation, the path to atheism was in a sense paved by religious will rather than science. Deists like Hobbes intended to establish a more "rational" form of religion; it was precisely their efforts in this regard that unintentionally forged the sharp weapon that could ultimately subvert all religious thought. Because the environment in England at that time was relatively loose, a considerable number of Deists were able to express such ideas freely there. Among them were Shaftesbury [40], Bolingbroke [41], Tyndale [42], and Collins [43]. Their methods differed, but all aimed at the same goal: to find the commonalities of all religions—that is, the primitive origin of religion. They all made important contributions to the development of Deism, but the most important figure in articulating these Deistic ideas was David Hume. Although he never admitted to being an atheist, he was undoubtedly the most active, concise, and eloquent skeptic.
"I have always considered David Hume to have pushed human wisdom and virtue to their ultimate limits." — Adam Smith
David Hume was born in 1711, exactly 32 years after Hobbes had passed away. He entered the University of Edinburgh at the age of twelve but later dropped out to teach himself philosophy. At the age of twenty, he went to France, where he completed A Treatise of Human Nature. Hobbes believed that man in a "state of nature" was a dangerous creature, requiring a social structure backed by religion to curb his selfish, violent, and greedy nature. Compared to Hobbes's pessimistic tone, Hume was much more optimistic. Hume’s skeptical attitude toward religion hindered his academic career.
"Generally speaking, errors in religion are dangerous, while errors in philosophy are merely ridiculous." — David Hume
At that time, all universities were predicated on religion, and the power of appointment and dismissal was held by the clergy. Therefore, when the ministers invited Hume to serve as the Chair of Moral Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh, Hume declined the invitation—a fact not unrelated to his atheistic thoughts. Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion is one of Hume’s major works; even his friends considered its content heterodox, so it was not published until after his death. In this book, Hume launched a ruthless critique of religious belief.
"God’s power is infinite; He can do as He pleases. But the lives of humans and other animals are not happy, which shows that God does not want them to live happily. Epicurus’s old questions are yet unanswered: If God is willing to prevent evil but not able, then is He impotent? Is He able, but not willing? Whence then comes evil?" — David Hume
Like other Deists, when it came to truly challenging divine authority, Hume would recoil somewhat, perhaps out of a deep-seated fear of the socially rejected label of "atheist."
"I am certain that no one will misunderstand my true intention; no one has a deeper understanding of religion than I, nor deeper feelings for God." — David Hume
I believe that Deists should not be viewed as an indivisible whole, because there were great divergences in the religious conceptions of this group; for instance, both pantheism and non-traditional forms of the Church of England fell within the scope of Deism. Although discussions on religious issues were heated at the time, at least in England, no one truly stood up to categorically deny the existence of God. Reviewing this period of human intellectual history, we cannot help but be surprised—and subsequently a bit saddened—by the extent to which the speech of skeptics was restricted by the religious environment. In such an environment, the need to weigh one's words carefully to protect oneself is entirely understandable and forgivable. But what is unexpected is that even among the most skeptical people we have mentioned, there were some who remained firmly convinced of the existence of a Divine Will in the universe.
By the late 18th century, British Deism may have begun to decline. Although David Hume had been serving as a diplomat in Paris, Deistic thought was actually transmitted to continental Europe by the French philosopher Voltaire. Despite the presence of Catholicism in France at the time, there were many philosophers—such as Bayle [45], Condillac [46], La Mettrie [47], and Diderot [48]—whose conclusions were rejected by their British counterparts. In short, by the end of the 18th century, the situation in France was completely different from that in England: atheism had become the focus of heated debate. On August 18, 1770, a total of seven books were torn to pieces and burned in public. Among these seven books, three were published under the pseudonym of a writer who had died ten years earlier. We now know that the true author of these three books was Baron d'Holbach [49]. Scholarly circles now generally agree that Holbach was the first person in the world to write books and establish theories specifically for atheism. He differed from Hobbes, who acknowledged the immortality of the soul, and from Hume, who accepted that a supernatural power might have created the universe.
"If we retrace history, we will find that fear and ignorance created the gods, imagination and deception adorned them, weakness worshipped them, credulity preserved them, and custom, worship, and tyranny supported them. If ignorance of nature gave birth to the gods, then knowledge of nature is bound to destroy them." — Baron d'Holbach
Holbach’s home was on the Rue Royale in Paris; his drawing-room was a famous Parisian salon, bustling with people. The dinner parties he hosted attracted a large number of famous intellectuals, not only from France but also from overseas. Benjamin Franklin [50], Horace Walpole [51], David Garrick [52], Laurence Sterne [53], and Adam Smith [54] were all guests. When the Scottish philosopher David Hume first attended such a dinner, he announced to the host that he had never met an atheist. According to Diderot’s records, upon hearing this, Holbach waved his hand around the table and said: "You can see eighteen atheists right here; I must admit, three of them are still a bit hesitant."
Holbach was the first person since the Classical Era [55] to unhesitatingly assert that there is no God in the universe, nor any supernatural dimension. His work The System of Nature is known to the world as the "Bible of Atheism." Therefore, Holbach occupies an extremely important position in the history of atheism; one could say that his home was the birthplace of modern atheism.
"Only by dispersing the clouds of religion and driving away the ghosts of religion can one find truth, reason, and morality." — Baron d'Holbach
How wonderful it would be to pay a physical visit to that old site of so many controversies, but it seems no one can confirm exactly which house was Holbach’s former residence. In our imagination, an elegant private residence on the Rue Royale should have a plaque on its outer wall, explaining in simple words that the progenitor of French atheism once lived here—but there is none. Does this mean that even now, atheism is not an entirely honorable label? But it shouldn't be so; after all, shortly after Holbach's death, France became a secular state, and in this process, Holbach’s role as a founder of free thought cannot be ignored. Perhaps even the reformers could not tolerate Holbach’s atheistic ideas; the series of revolution-restoration processes that occurred after his death resulted in Holbach and others not receiving the memorialization they deserved. Today, no trace of Holbach can be found on this street, yet the Madeleine Church still stands there, teeming with tourists. One cannot even find Holbach's grave. In the past, after Holbach died, he was buried in the Church of Saint-Roch, not far from the Rue Royale, but his tomb no longer exists, and even his remains have been scattered to parts unknown. Although the church's guidebook still states that Holbach is buried here, no evidence can be found within the church itself. Life goes on; on the Rue Royale, traffic flows incessantly and shops are clustered like a forest. Whether it is religion or anti-religion, neither seems to matter much here. Yet, even so, it remains puzzling that such a moment in the history of human thought—so full of controversy—could be so easily forgotten. Perhaps the reason why everything that happened here has been obscured is that the subsequent development of atheism was closely linked to the violent political revolutions and the establishment of new political frameworks on three continents.
③ Toledo: A city in central Spain. Occupied by the Romans in 192 BC. In 527 AD, the Visigoths ruled Spain and established their capital in this city. It was captured by the Arabs in 711 AD. In 1085, Alfonso VI recaptured Toledo, and it became the capital of the Kingdom of Castile and the ecclesiastical center of the nation.
④ Yuri Gagarin: A former Soviet cosmonaut. He was the first human in the world to enter outer space.
⑤ Ptolemy: An ancient astronomer who founded and perfected the geocentric model of the universe.
⑥ Kepler (1571–1630): A German astronomer and physicist. [37]
⑦ Vesalius (1514–1564): A physician from the Flemish region and professor of anatomy in the city of Padua, Italy, during the medieval European period. In 1543, he published De humani corporis fabrica (On the Fabric of the Human Body) in seven volumes, founding modern anatomy.
⑧ Victor Hugo (1802–1885): A representative figure of French Romanticism and the leader of the active Romantic literary movement in the early 19th century, he was an eminent writer in the history of French literature.
⑨ Bruno (1548–1600): An Italian thinker, natural scientist, philosopher, and man of letters. In 1592, he was arrested and imprisoned for opposing the "geocentric theory" and propagating the "heliocentric theory"; he was ultimately sentenced by the Inquisition as a "heretic" and burned at the stake in Rome's Campo de' Fiori.
⑩ Martin Luther (1483–1546): A German professor of theology and leader of the Protestant Reformation.
{11} John Calvin (1509–1564): A French theologian and a leading figure of the Protestant Reformation.
{12} Zwingli (1484–1531): A leader of the Swiss Reformation.
{13} Richard Hooker (1554–1600): An English priest and theologian.
{14} Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679): An English politician, thinker, and philosopher. He established a complete system of mechanical materialism [38], positing that the universe is the sum of all extended bodies moving mechanically. He opposed the divine right of kings and advocated for absolute monarchy. He compared the Pope of Rome to the King of Spirits (Prince of Darkness) and the clergy to a confederacy of deceivers (phantoms). His works include De Corpore (On the Body) and Leviathan.
{15} Charles II (1630–1685): King of Scotland and England.
{16} Richard Bentley (1662–1742): A Biblical scholar.
{17} Zola (1840–1902): An important French critical-realist writer of the late 19th century and the primary advocate of the theory of Naturalism in literature. He is regarded as an integral part of the 19th-century critical-realist literary heritage. His representative works include Germinal, Nana, L'Argent (Money), and the Les Rougon-Macquart cycle.
{18} Alexander Pope (1688–1744): The greatest English poet of the 18th century and an outstanding Enlightenment thinker.
{19} Robert Boyle (1627–1691): An English chemist. Historians of chemistry regard 1661 as the beginning of the modern era of chemistry because a work with significant influence on the development of the field was published that year: The Sceptical Chymist, authored by the British scientist Robert Boyle.
{20} Spinoza (1632–1677): A Dutch philosopher. He was a major Continental Rationalist in the history of modern Western philosophy, standing alongside Descartes of France and Leibniz of Germany.
{21} Shaftesbury (1671–1713): An English Deist.
{22} Bolingbroke (1678–1751): An English Deist.
{23} Tyndale (1494–1536): An English religious reformer and translator of the Bible. In 1535, he was arrested and imprisoned for heresy by agents of the Holy Roman Empire; he was eventually executed by strangling and his body was burned at the stake.
{24} Collins (1676–1729): An English Deist.
{25} David Hume (1711–1776): A Scottish philosopher, economist, and historian. He is regarded as one of the most important figures of the Scottish Enlightenment and in the history of Western philosophy.
{26} Bayle (1647–1706): A famous French philosopher.
{27} Condillac (1715–1780): A famous French philosopher.
{28} La Mettrie (1709–1751): A French Enlightenment thinker and philosopher, and a representative of mechanical materialism. He authored L'homme machine (Man a Machine), among other works.
{29} Diderot (1713–1784): A French materialist philosopher and a representative figure of the Encyclopédistes.
{30} Holbach (1723–1789): A German philosopher. Born in 1723 to a merchant family in Bavaria, Germany. He moved to France in 1735. In 1744, he attended Leiden University in the Netherlands. He returned to France in 1749 and later inherited his uncle's title of Baron. He participated in the compilation of the Encyclopédie with Diderot and others, and was a primary member of the "Encyclopédistes." His works include The System of Nature, Good Sense, Christianity Unveiled, The Sacred Contagion, and Natural Politics. Among these, The System of Nature is known as the "Atheist's Bible."
{31} Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790): An American official, writer, and scientist. He played an important role in the American War of Independence and helped draft the Constitution. His many scientific and practical innovations include the lightning rod, bifocal glasses, and the Franklin stove.
{32} Horace Walpole (1721–1742): An English politician and Prime Minister, and leader of the Whig Party. [39]
{33} David Garrick (1717–1779): A famous English actor, skilled in Shakespearean plays, especially known for his portrayal of Richard III.
{34} Laurence Sterne (1713–1768): An English novelist. His most famous work is The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman.
{35} Adam Smith (1723–1790): A Scottish economist and philosopher. He is hailed as the father of economics and was the author of The Wealth of Nations.
{36} Classical Antiquity: Classical Antiquity (also known as the Classical Era or Classical Period) is a broad term for the long cultural history centered on the Greco-Roman world (the Mediterranean world, including the civilizations of Ancient Greece and Rome). It was an era of prosperity for Greek and Roman literature (such as the works of Aeschylus, Ovid, and Homer).
(This article is a translation excerpt of the narration for the BBC television documentary A Brief History of Disbelief, written and hosted by Jonathan Miller.)
Web Editor: Jiafei