P2 |APUSH | Ms. Wiley | Great Awakening & 21st C. Connections, D___
Name:
“Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”
Background: Jonathan Edwards, a Yale minister often cited as the individual who sparked the Great
Awakening in New England, preached this sermon at Enfield, Connecticut, on July 8, 1741. The sermon lays
out the dreadful consequences of man's sin; Edwards sought to persuade his listeners that they might at
any moment be called to judgment for their sins. Reportedly some in Edwards's audience cried out in
response to his terrible imagery.
…So that thus it is that natural men held in the hand of God over the pit of hell; they have deserved the
fiery pit, and are already sentenced to it; and God is dreadfully provoked: His anger is as great towards them as those that are
actually suffering the execution of the fierceness of His wrath in hell . . . . The devil is waiting for them, hell is gaping for them, the
flames gather and flash about them, and would fain lay hold on them, and swallow them up; the fire pent up in their own hearts is
struggling to break out; and they have no means within reach that can be any security to them. . . .
The use of this awful subject may be for awakening unconverted persons to a conviction of their danger, this that you have heard is
the case of every one out if Christ. That world of misery, that lake of burning brimstone, is extended abroad under you. There is the
dreadful pit of the glowing flames of the wrath of God; there is hell’s wide gaping mouth open; and you have nothing to stand upon,
nor anything between you and hell but the air; it is only the power and mere pleasure of God that holds you up.
…The wrath of God is like great waters that are restrained for the present; but they increase more and more, and rise higher and
higher, till an outlet is given; and the longer the stream is stopped the more rapid and mighty is its course when once it is let loose. It
is true, that judgment against your evil works has not been executed hitherto; the floods of God’s vengeance have been withheld;
but your guilt in the meantime is constantly increasing, and you are every day treasuring up more wrath; the waters are constantly
rising and waxing more and more mighty; and there is nothing but the mere pleasure of God that holds the waters back, that are
unwilling to be stopped, and press hard to go forward. If God should only withdraw His hand from the flood-gate, it would
immediately fly open, and the fiery floods of the fierceness and wrath of God, would rush forth with inconceivable fury, and would
come upon you with omnipotent power; and if your strength were ten thousand times greater than the strength of the stoutest,
sturdiest devil in hell, it would be nothing to withstand or endure it.
Thus all you that never passed under a great change of heart, by the mighty power of the Spirit of God upon your souls; all you that
were never born again, and made new creatures, and raised from being dead in sin, to a state of new, and before altogether
unexperienced light and life, are in the hands of an angry God. However you may have reformed your life in many things and many
have had religious affections, and may keep up a form of religion in your families and closets, and in the house of God, it is nothing
but His mere pleasure that keeps you from being this moment swallowed up in everlasting destruction.
…The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much in the same way as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect, over the fire,
abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked; His wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else but to be
cast into the fire; He is of purer eyes than to bear to have you in His sight; you are ten thousand times more abominable in His eyes
than the most hateful venomous serpent is in ours. You have offended Him infinitely more than ever a stubborn rebel did his prince;
and yet, it is nothing but His hand that holds you from falling into the fire every moment. . . .
1.
What was the purpose/objective of Edwards’s sermon? What did he hope to achieve?
2.
How would an Enlightenment thinker, like Benjamin Franklin (discussed on pages 128-129), respond to the sermon?
1
Diary Entry from Nathan Cole
Background: Connecticut farmer Nathan Cole found God after listening to sermons during the Great Awakening. But Cole’s spiritual
quest was not easy. He struggled for two years before coming to believe he was saved.
I began to think I was not Elected [chosen by God to be saved], and that God made some for heaven and me for hell. And I thought
God was not Just in so doing. . . . My heart then rose against God exceedingly, for his making me for hell; Now this distress lasted
Almost two years — Poor Me — Miserable me. . . . I was loaded with the guilt of Sin. . . . Hell fire was most always in my mind; and I
have hundreds of times put my fingers into my pipe when I have been smoking to feel how fire felt: And to see how my Body could
bear to lye in Hell fire for ever and ever. . . . And while these thoughts were in my mind God appeared unto me and made me cringe:
before whose face the heavens and the earth fled away; and I was Shrinked into nothing; I knew not whether I was in the body or
out, I seemed to hang in open Air before God, and he seemed to Speak to me in an angry and Sovereign way[:] What? Won’t you
trust your Soul with God?; My heart answered O yes, yes, yes. . . . When God disappeared or in some measure withdrew, every thing
was in its place again and I was on my Bed. . . . I was set free, my distress was gone, and I was filled with a pining desire to see
Christ’s own words in the bible; … I got the bible up under my Chin and hugged it; it was sweet and lovely; the word was nigh [near]
me in my hand, then I began to pray and to praise God.
3.
How does Cole’s diary entry reflect the tenants of the Great Awakening?
Jesus Camp Documentary Clip
The 2006 documentary Jesus Camp reflects the evangelical fervor of the Great Awakening. The documentary
follows several young children as they attend evangelical summer camps. We will watch a short clip from the
documentary to highlight the level of emotion in evangelical services. Quick notes about Evangelicals today:
 The U.S. has the largest concentration of evangelicals (over 90 million).
 Evangelicals are Protestants who view themselves as being “born again.”
 Origin of the term comes from the New Testament. Jesus said: No one can see the kingdom of God
without being born again.
 Evangelicals place the highest regard in biblical authority.
 Evangelicals are extremely socially conservative. Children are taught from a very young age that
abortion and homosexuality are sinful and the theory of evolution is heretical.
4.
Record your reactions to the clip below:
The articles that follow pertain to religion in America today.
Is Atheism Only for the Upper Class? Socioeconomic Differences Among the Religiously Unaffiliated
By Daniel Cox / Huffington Post / 2013
The religiously unaffiliated are an increasingly important part of the American religious and cultural landscape. They account for
nearly 1-in-5 American adults, and . . . are having a profound effect on American electoral politics, accounting for one-quarter of
Obama's vote in the past election.
Yet, although the politics of the unaffiliated -- comparatively liberal on cultural questions and increasingly Democratic in voting
preferences -- suggest that they are a fairly homogenous group, there are actually subsets among the unaffiliated that are
demographically and socially distinct. In 2012, the American Values Survey identified . . . distinct groups among the unaffiliated: selfidentified atheists [who deny the existence of God], agnostics [who believe nothing can be known of the existence of God and thus
claim neither faith nor disbelief in God], and unattached believers [those that believe in God but are not affiliated with a particular
faith]. The accompanying report detailed . . . major socio-economic differences separating them...
2
One of the more notable findings from this analysis is that atheists and agnostics have significantly higher socio-economic status
than the unattached believers. . . . Why are atheists and agnostics so much more economically advantaged than their unaffiliated
counterparts? Older scholarship pointed to the role that higher education plays in undermining traditional religious beliefs, but
recent research has found that higher education mostly affects religious participation, not belief. A more recent theory, proposes
that populations with a greater degree of economic uncertainty tend to have higher rates of religious observance: "societies where
people's daily lives are shaped by the threat of poverty, disease, and premature death remain as religious today as centuries earlier."
…[P]rosperous parents often adopt differing parenting styles than those of more modest means. Affluent parents tend to stress
values of individuality, creativity and autonomy, while less well-off parents tend to embrace more authoritarian approaches that
emphasize the value of conformity and control. Some scholars argue that authoritarianism has been shown to be strongly associated
with religiosity . . . .
5.
Do you agree with the theory given in this excerpt or do you believe that higher socio-economic status among atheists and
agnostics is simply a coincidence? Explain.
Religiosity Highest in World’s Poorest Nations:
U.S. is among the rich countries that buck the trend
By Steve Crabtree / Gallup
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Gallup surveys in 114 countries in 2009 show that religion
continues to play an important role in many people's lives worldwide. The global
median proportion of adults who say religion is an important part of their daily
lives is 84%, unchanged from what Gallup has found in other years. . . .
Each of the most religious countries is relatively poor, with a per-capita GDP
below $5,000. This reflects the strong relationship between a country's
socioeconomic status and the religiosity of its residents. In the world's poorest
countries -- those with average per-capita incomes of $2,000 or lower -- the
median proportion who say religion is important in their daily lives is 95%. In
contrast, the median for the richest countries -- those with average per-capita
incomes higher than $25,000 -- is 47%.
The United States is one of the rich countries that bucks the trend. About two-thirds of Americans -- 65% -- say religion is important
in their daily lives. Among high-income countries, only Italians, Greeks, Singaporeans, and residents of the oil-rich Persian Gulf states
are more likely to say religion is important.
Most high-income countries are further down the religiosity spectrum. In 10 countries, no more than 34% of residents say religion is
an important part of their daily lives. Six of those are developed countries in Europe and Asia with per-capita incomes greater than
$25,000.
…Social scientists have put forth numerous possible explanations for the relationship between the religiosity of a population and its
average income level. One theory is that religion plays a more functional role in the world's poorest countries, helping many
residents cope with a daily struggle to provide for themselves and their families. A previous Gallup analysis supports this idea,
revealing that the relationship between religiosity and emotional wellbeing is stronger among poor countries than among those in
the developed world.
6.
What is the typical relationship between economic prosperity and religiosity? How does the U.S. defy this norm?
3
With US youth losing religion, evangelicals struggle to spread ‘good news’
By Ben Piven / Aljazeera America / 2014
“I have been given the task of sharing the gospel,” said Brandon McCauley, an 18-year-old who
just finished his senior year at Lebanon High School in Ohio, where he ran a lunchtime Bible
study program. “I am offering you the opportunity to experience Jesus Christ,” McCauley
exhorted fellow students, as he debated whether to pursue the ministry instead of higher
education. “I like being different,” said McCauley, explaining his motivation to tell classmates
that they will end up in hell if they aren’t saved. “If you sin, you deserve death,” McCauley yelled,
before getting choked up and concluding, “I’m the reason that He had to die … I am accepting that You died on the cross for me.”
. . . . As the fraction of unaffiliated, agnostic, and atheist surpasses one-third of young people, proselytizing denominations are trying
to win over the so-called “nones.” A landmark Pew Research from 2012 shows that attachment by young people to organized
religious bodies is on the decline. Many of those who don’t belong to a church, synagogue, or mosque still practice religion
informally to a certain extent. However, they have grown wary of the way that traditional institutions mix political power with the
pursuit of otherworldly aims. . . . Softened commitment generally means less strong attachment to God and less frequent
attendance at services. It also entails more liberal political views, a higher likelihood of voting Democratic, and support for abortion
rights. If economic development leads to secularization, then stagnant growth and chronic unemployment in certain parts of the
country would seem to drive religious resurgence. But at the same time, the ranks of the unaffiliated have grown even among the
non-college-educated. This suggests the trend is not just spurred on by the skeptical collegiate atmosphere. . . .
In a New York Times op-ed, John S. Dickerson, senior pastor of Cornerstone Evangelical Free Church in Arizona, . . . describes a
“collapse” in which evangelical cultural strength is disintegrating in the face of mainstream American values . . . . An apparent point
of weakness is the inability to prevent widespread acceptance of same-sex marriage across the country even though the American
heartland hasn’t abruptly adopted urban “coastal” attitudes.
Irrespective of religious background, . . . well over half the American population believes creationism should be taught alongside
evolution. And more than four-fifths of Americans say they turn to God in making decisions. Dickerson suggests refashioning the
evangelical movement as “more sensitive, spiritual and humble” to boost church membership and political clout during “the great
evangelical recession.” One area of internal reform is in gender relations, where younger evangelicals tend to support more
prominent roles for women. But changes have been slow to come. . . .
7.
Why do you think young people are turning away from religion in larger numbers? Is this a good or bad thing?
Why Aren’t More Americans Atheists?
By Nick Spencer / Politico / 2014
Many expressed surprise recently when, in one of its periodic surveys of Americans’ views of other faiths, the Pew Research Center
found that atheists fare poorly—fully 40 percent of those polled described their views toward atheists as “cold.” Jews, Catholics,
Evangelicals, Buddhists, Hindus, Mormons—all are viewed more favorably than nonbelievers. Only around 2 percent of Americans
identify themselves as atheists, according to Pew, even though religious observance, measured by things like church attendance and
daily prayer, has been trending downward for decades.
You might think that America would be fertile ground for the rise of atheism. After all, the United States is the most scientifically
advanced society in human existence . . . . If atheism were a function of science and progress, then surely America, from the late
19th century the world’s most self-consciously modern and scientific nation, would become its atheistic capital. It didn’t—for
reasons that go back to its founding. Christianity was, of course, in the blood of the country’s first settlers, but just as important was
the fact that many American clergy enthusiastically supported the revolution. They described it as a just war and Christianity became
associated with the people’s political emancipation . . . .
At the same time, the nation’s new constitution did not refer to God (beyond the reference to the Year of our Lord in Article VII),
precluded any religious test from becoming a requirement for office, and, most famously, in its First Amendment, legislated against
4
Congress making any law “respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This did not, of course,
prevent individual states from legislating about religion and many retained established churches well into the 19th century, but it did
mean that there could be no formal national endorsement of Christianity.
This could be construed as de facto godlessness—indeed it was and is—but in reality it ended up being the nation’s strongest
bulwark against atheism, denying the church the temporal power that had done it so much harm in Europe.
[Another factor that may have decreased atheism’s ascent in America was Soviet communism. Soviets…] arranged demonstrations,
delivered lectures, established discussion circles, put on plays, set up domestic “godless corners,” ran anti-religious museums and
engaged in a massive campaign of propaganda with slogans . . . : “Religion is poison: protect your children;” “Without God, our
affairs are much better.” When this met with only limited success, atheistic activity became violent, destroying icons, closing and
then razing churches and singling out clergy for particular persecution. In the middle third of the 20th century, atheistic regimes in
Russia, China, Romania, Albania and elsewhere managed to murder on a scale that even the religious hadn’t managed. And still they
failed to eliminate God. As Yemelyan Yaroslavsky, at the time a leading anti-religion campaigner in the Soviet Union, once lamented,
“Religion is like a nail, the harder you hit, the deeper it goes in.”
Such activity served to retard atheism still further in America. Just as to be British in the 18th and early 19th century meant largely
not to be French—which entailed a self-conscious rejection of the atheism of the philosophes and their revolutionary successors—so
being American in the mid-20th century meant not being communist. It was no accident that Congress passed a bill that added the
words “under God” to the nation’s Pledge of Allegiance in 1954, and then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower made “In God We Trust”
the national motto two years later. The nation’s Constitution was not changed, but the diluted deism that ran through its veins was
fortified ever so slightly.
This political analysis of atheism also helps us understand the New Atheist spasm of recent years. In the last decades of the 20th
century, history veered off script. The world stopped secularising, and some religious groups, most famously evangelicals in America
and Shias in Iran—two groups not usually bracketed together—found a political voice that had heretofore been muted. The results
were often troubling and sometimes grotesque, and all of a sudden the wells of moral indignation were overflowing once more.
Today, atheism is resurgent, in America and elsewhere, confidently predicting God’s imminent death and uncritically retelling the
creation myth of atheism’s progress on science’s back.
The irony of the truth was sadly lost in the shouting: Atheism is indeed rejuvenating—but only because God is back.
8.
The author explores several factors that contribute to America’s low-rates of atheism. Make a list of these factors below:
5