Voltaire’s religious arguments were influenced by Meslier’s work, but differed on a key idea: the existence of God. With this in mind, Voltaire severely altered the apparent meaning of Meslier’s Testament to better fit his own idea that God existed (Develennes, 2017). After Meslier died and the Testament became known, Voltaire edited and revised it to portray Meslier not as the atheist he was, but rather a deist that was seemingly in support of Voltaire’s position. Voltaire’s edition of the Testament became widespread and for a long time, it was the primary source for Meslier’s argument, but the issue was that it severely misrepresented him. It was not until later that the full, unedited, copy of the Testament came to light and showed how Voltaire altered it (Devellennes, 2017). Meslier’s Testament has 8 proofs with his true atheist argument, his metaphysical objection to God, occurring in the 7th proof. The previous proofs focus on how religion as an institution, including sacred texts, prophecies, morality, doctrines etc. was false. After levying objections to myriad aspects of religion, Meslier finally objects to the basic assumption religion, at least Christianity, makes: that God exists. Voltaire’s version of the Testament, however, includes only 5 of the 8 proofs, and excludes the 7th (Devellennes, 2017). With this in mind, let us compare Meslier and Voltaire in their religious commitments to determine where and how they agree and disagree.

 

The first distinction that must be made to understand Meslier and Voltaire, is the distinction between Atheism and Deism. Atheism can be generally understood as a rejection of the existence of the divine, while deism can be generally understood as God existing, but not intervening in the world (Hudson, 2014). With these two religious camps established, we can better distinguish between Meslier and Voltaire. Meslier is an atheist through and through, which is shown through his metaphysical argument against the existence of God. While his earlier proofs reject religion as an institution, through objection to numerous aspects of religions, he goes further to firmly reject the first premise of religion: that God exists. Thus, while Meslier does argue that religions are problematic, the final point of his Testament is that God does not exist, clearly denoting him as an atheist (Meslier, 2009; Hudson, 2014; Devellennes, 2017). Voltaire, can be understood as a deist, because he rejects Christianity and other organized religions, but he still believes that God exists (Hudson, 2104 & Morehouse, 1936). He believes that religions are false because there are contradictions in their texts, their morality is inaccurate and they have corrupted the sanctity of God; but God exists, created morality, and created the laws of nature which govern the world (Morehouse, 1936 & Deism, IEP). He thinks that instead of religious institutions, we should use natural philosophy and reason to understand the nature of the world and morality. In essence, Voltaire’s stance can be understood as a rejection of Christianity, and other organized religion, and rather an embracement of natural philosophy to replace them so as to understand God, morality, and the world more accurately (Deism, IEP & Morehouse, 1936).

 

            It is clear that Voltaire and Meslier agree on certain aspects of their religious stances: namely that religious institutions are false; however, there is also a crucial difference: whether God exists. If we think of theism, deism, and atheism as a spectrum of theological commitments, we can image theism is the strongest positive end: God exists and religion is true, deism is the center: God exists, but religion is false, and atheism is the strongest negative end: God does not exist and religion is false. With this idea, we can think of Voltaire’s deism and Meslier’s atheism overlapping in some form. This partial overlap can explain why Voltaire edited Meslier’s Testament the way he did; by keeping only material that focuses on rejecting religion on the basis of falsities in religious institutions themselves, Voltaire takes an atheist argument and repurposes it as a deist one. Meslier himself notes that all the of the proofs preceding the 7th operate only within the confines of the institution of religion itself, it does not tackle the main assumption that all religions make, namely that God exists (Meslier, 2009). Meslier uses the 7th proof to solidify his atheism by also rejecting the existence of God, but since Voltaire does not agree, he omits it. In this way, the partial overlaps on the spectrum of religious commitments are where Voltaire and Meslier may agree, but once Meslier moves from the center of the spectrum toward the negative end, Voltaire abandons or replaces that claim. Here are two examples of this, one that shows the partial overlap being complete and another showing while there is partial overlap, it is dissipated after Meslier makes a move toward atheism.

 

1. Arguments against miracles (complete partial overlap)

 

Both Meslier and Voltaire point out that religions use miracles as proof of truth. However, while religions take the miracles from their sacred texts as true, they also reject miracles from other religions can be used as proof of truth for that religion. So, if a religion uses miracles for both proof of truth for itself and proof of falsehood for another, then miracles cannot actually be used for proof. Meslier and Voltaire use a myriad of examples to show that in Christianity, there are miracles they take to be proof of their religion’s truth, but even in the bible, there are examples of other religions doing miracles and yet they deny those are real and true. This brings out a contradiction in their holy texts and so serve as a way for both Meslier and Voltaire to reject that religions as institutions are correct (Meslier, 2009 & Moorehouse, 1936).

It is obvious that this objection seems deist in that it focuses on an aspect of religion itself, but does not extend so far so as to object to God existing. In this way, it overlaps between atheism and deism on the spectrum of religious commitments and so Voltaire includes it in his deistic editorialization of the Testament.

 

     2. Moral arguments against Christianity (partial overlap dissipated)

 

Both Meslier and Voltaire object that the morality of Christianity is correct and argue that the moral claims it makes have set up the world in such a way so as to impose great suffering on people (Morehouse, 1936). Meslier points out that this suffering arises from the fact that Christian morality forces people to act in ways that goes against human nature (Meslier, 2009); similarly, Voltaire believes these morals go against common sense ideas of morality (Morehouse, 1936). In this way, we see that both Meslier and Voltaire object to religious institutions on the basis of the moral claims they make and that this objection is an overlap on the spectrum of religious commitments, so is safe for Voltaire too use in his inaccurate edit.

However, the way Meslier and Voltaire respond, to fix this objection, is different. Meslier responds by rejecting both God and religion, and argues both should be destroyed and replaced with morality that is in-line with the natural inclinations of humans so as to promote the best lives for the most just people (Meslier, 2009). Voltaire, on the other hand, responds by arguing the church has perverted and destroyed the actual morality that God gave, so rather than rejecting that God exists, he rejects the church, and instead argues we should try to understand morality through reason (Morehouse, 1936).

It is clear then, that while their objections begin from an overlap on the specturm, because Meslier’s response relies an atheist claim, which does not overlap with deism, Voltaire suggests an alternative that is deist. Meslier wants to do away with it all and replace it with morality based on reason, while Voltaire wants to use reason to de-mystify the morality that God has laid out. In this way, when Meslier makes a shift back toward atheism, the overlap dissipates as Voltaire must propose an alternative response that is in-line with deism.

 

Overall, it is clear that while Meslier has some arguments that may appear to be deist when considered alone (i.e. objections to miracles, morality and other parts of religious institutions) as a whole, Meslier was an atheist. His writing can be understood as a progression of objections to religion culminating in a grand metaphysical objection to God existing. In this way, the first proofs, while important in their own right, when used alone, do not accurately capture the atheist Meslier truly was. Voltaire on the other hand was a deist who believed that God existed, but did not intervene in the world, he only set the laws of nature in motion and gave ideas of morality, but the religions that claim to “know” him are false. Voltaire supports this claim by drawing incomplete influence from Meslier, to argue that the sacred texts and practices of (at least) Christianity are fully of contradictions and falsity. With that in mind, Voltaire uses only the partial overlaps of Meslier’s atheism and his deism to reject that religious institutions are correct without going so far to reject the existence of God; thus, supporting deism while rejecting atheism. In this way, Voltaire skews Meslier’s stances and utilizies in a way to advance his own argument, without acknowledging the impactful, original, and substantial atheist objection Meslier raises. So while the two may share some overlaps in their religious commitments, the real root of their difference lies in the fact Meslier rejects the existence of God, while Voltaire clings to the idea that He exists.