by Jean Meslier
With respect to the example that might arise here, of an insult or an offense, which a person of low status commits with respect to a King, or a person of high status, which insult would, it’s said, be far more grievous and criminal than if this person committed a similar offense against someone like himself: this is true; but this example doesn’t prove that it would be the same thing with respect to a God, since a King, or any other person, of any status whatsoever, is not entirely above the strict attacks and of the insults and offenses that people of the lowest status might commit against them, far from it, since they are of a more delicate complexion than others, they would feel the rigors of the attacks more intensely; this is also why they would consider themselves more seriously offended against than others, of lower status, would. But it would not be the same with a God, who would be infinitely perfect, since, being invulnerable by nature, as I’ve said, just as He is inalterable and impassive, He would be infinitely above all attacks and insults and offenses, nothing men could do would be capable of offending Him. Indeed, if the vices and wickedness of men were able to offend His divine nature to any extent, I mean, with a real and true offense, for this is how it must be understood, if they were, I say, capable of offending Him even slightly, then we would have to allow that God Himself would be the most offended against, the most mistreated, the most insulted, the most tormented being of all, and consequently that He would also be the most unhappy and miserable of all beings. For, to be the constant butt of every insult and offense which an infinity of men would cause Him every day, if every vice and every sin that are committed, cause Him only as much pain as a fly or a flea could give a man, this would be enough to make Him the most tormented and miserable person in the world. Imagine what trouble and what torment it would be for a man if he were continually, at every moment of his life, stung or bitten by a million flies or fleas, that were continually swarming around him, it would certainly be a more grievous, unbearable, and more painful torment than the most painful illness could ever cause; even death would be easier to endure, and less of a burden, than such an ordeal.
But here is, in a way, the image of the state to which, according to our Christ-cultists, their God would be reduced, if the vices and sins of men could offend Him, even to the slightest degree; for, although each vice or each sin didn’t offend Him very much, still, the great number and the near-infinite multitude of vices, crimes, and sins which are committed every day, and at every moment in the world, would make Him the most unhappy and wretched of all beings. But would it not be ridiculous and absurd to say that a God who is the omnipotent and infinitely perfect Being, and who should, therefore, also be the happiest, most calm, and the most content being, would nevertheless be, by reason of men’s vices and sins, the most unhappy and the most wretched of all. That would be completely ridiculous and absurd; therefore, it is ridiculous and absurd to say that a God would be truly offended by the vices and sins of men, and it would be ridiculous and absurd to say that a God would truly be offended by the vices and sins of men, and it is ridiculous and absurd to exaggerate, as our Christ-cultists do, the immensity and the enormity of men’s vices and sins with respect to this supposed offense which they bring to God, since this offense is not real or veritable, and it is only imaginary, and at best metaphorical, and so it is ridiculous to say, as they do, that a single venial sin is a greater evil than all the evils of all creatures put together; it is ridiculous to say, as they do, that it would be better to lose a thousand lives, even to allow the destruction of all creatures than to voluntarily commit one venial sin. And finally, it is ridiculous to say, as some of them do, that they would prefer to jump straight into the flames of Hell, than to voluntarily commit one venial sin, for this would be like saying that they would rather suffer all the torments of Hell than to tell one white lie, or a single vain or frivolous word. What madness inspires such talk? And if that were so, they should also say that God would have done better to refrain from making any creature at all, than to have allowed, as He did, any venial sin, or any officious lie, or any vain and trifling word. Judge for yourself whether it would be completely ridiculous to say that the vices or sins of men would grievously and mortally offend God, as our Christ-cultists say.
Add to that, that to be offended, or to be capable of being offended, is a sure sign of weakness and imbecility, which shouldn’t be present in a being who would be infinitely perfect, and consequently, which can’t be present in God.
And it’s an error, for the same reason, to believe that He will be irritated and angry, or that He will fall into a rage and wrath against humanity because of their vices and sins; it is, I say, an error to say and to think such a thing, not only because this would be unworthy of the wisdom of an infinitely perfect being, as a God is supposed to be, but also, since He is also supposed to be immutable and inalterable by His very nature, He cannot be subject to any of those passions. This is because the passions are the extraordinary emotions of the soul, which change and alter the natural and ordinary disposition of the soul, and thus, since God is thought to be immutable and inalterable by His very nature, it is evident that He cannot be moved by any of those passions. This our Christ-cultists themselves are also obliged to recognize, as is shown in what their principal thinkers say: “God,” says St. Ambrose, “cannot think like men do, as if His thoughts and desires came to Him in sequential order; He doesn’t get angry like men do, as if He were subject to some change. And still it is said,” he adds, “that He becomes angry and wrathful; but this is only,” he says, “to show the grievousness and malice residing in our sins, which is so immense,” he says, “that it seems as if God Himself were provoked by them to anger, although He can’t naturally be moved by anger, or hatred, or any other passion.” Neque enim Deus cogitat sicut hominus ut aliqua ei nova succedat sententia, neque irascitur quasi mutabilis, sed ideo haec leguntur ut exprimatur peccatorum nostrorum acerbitas, quae divinam meruerit offensam tanquam eo usque increverit culpa ut etiam Deus qui naturaliter non movetur ira aut odio, aut passione ulla provocatus videatur ad iracundiam.
And St. Augustine, speaking to God, told him: “You are jealous of your glory, but you fear nothing; you repent, but without pain, without sorrow or regret, you are angered, but remain calm[624].” Zelus et securus es, poenitet te et non doles, irasceris et tranquillus es. Elsewhere he addresses God in these terms: “My Lord, you have already told me, loudly in the inner ear of my heart, that you are eternal, because you never change, either by the impression of a new form, or by the vicissitudes of any movement. Your will, also, is not subject to the inconstancy of time, since a will which varies in its resolutions, in any way at all, cannot be immortal in its duration[625]. I can see,” he said, “the truth of this clearly while in your presence…, etc. These same lights that you have provided,” he adds, “show me that the disobedience of any of your creatures cannot be detrimental to your person, nor does it disturb the order of your Empire, either in Heaven or on Earth. And besides,” he says, “since God and the angels mete out punishment without anger, and since they act mercifully without compassion”: Sine ira puniunt et sine misericordia compassione subveniunt. And he says elsewhere that there is no variance with God in His thought or His will, through all the changes of time, unlike men; he says that God didn’t think any differently before He created the world, than He does now, after having created it, and that He will not think any differently after the world comes to an end, because, he says, the will of God remains eternally: Non est, he says, in Deo cogitatio, quae temporis volubilitate varietur, neque enim, sicut homines, aliter cogitavit, priusquam mundum faceret, aliter cogitat postquam fecit mundum, aut aliter cogitaturus est postquam mundi hujus figura transiverit, quia consilium Domini. he says, manet in aeternum. Fulgence says the same thing, etc. And our Apostle St. James says, that every excellent blessing and all perfect gifts come from God, who, he says, is not subject to any change, or any shadow of revolution: apud quem non est transmutatio, nec vicissitudinis obumbratio[
626]. By which it is clear and evident that our Christ-cultists themselves have to acknowledge that a Being who is infinitely perfect, as their God[627] would be, cannot be subject to any passion, and it’s an error to say and think and even more so to teach every day, as our Christ-cultists do, that vices and sins arouse the anger, wrath, and indignation of God. It is ridiculous and absurd to say that a Being which would, by its very nature, be immutable and unalterable, could be subject to being moved by these sorts of passions.
The Philosophers, the Stoics in particular, find it unworthy of a wise man to let himself be moved by any passion, and thus, with all the more reason they would find it unworthy of an infinitely perfect Being to be led by them, either. Which also proves that human vices and sins do not offend God, they do Him no harm nor cause Him any displeasure, nor do they arouse His wrath or outrage, He doesn’t prevent them in any way: for if they truly did offend Him and arouse His wrath and His indignation, as our Christ-cultists claim, then He wouldn’t fail to prevent them, or at least, if He didn’t prevent them, it wouldn’t be for a lack of the ability to do so. -- And therefore, since He doesn’t prevent them, He must not want to prevent them, and in this case, it would not only be against the nature of His goodness and wisdom, which always innately tend as much as possible to procure what is good and prevent what is bad. But in this way, He would become worthy of laughter and mockery: for it would be folly for Him to intentionally expose Himself to offenses and outrages by all sorts of vices and sins, and it would be folly for Him to want to be annoyed and stirred to anger for preventable evils, which He refused to prevent. But, our Christ-cultists will object, it’s because God doesn’t want to take away people’s freedom to do what they want, and by leaving them their liberty of doing what they want, they willingly abuse the power He gives them, by doing what is wrong, whereby they grievously offend Him. But we might also tell them that, since, as they claim, God is omnipotent and infinitely wise, He might, without taking away human liberty, guide and lead their hearts and minds, their thoughts and desires, their inclinations and wishes, so well that they would never want to do any evil or commit any sin; and thus He could easily prevent all sorts of vices and sins, without doing any harm to the liberty or the free will of men, and, consequently, it’s futile to argue that He would not want to prevent the vices and wickedness of men, on the pretext that He wants to leave human liberty intact, for them to do what they want.
Far more, since our Christ-cultists claim and teach, that their God is Himself the first principle and the first mover of all that moves, and of all that occurs in the world, and that nothing happens without Him and without His prior motion and cooperation, it would follow from this He would be the first principle, the first mover, and the first guardian of all that happens, both good and evil, to men and all creatures, and consequently, if He were upset and angry about the vices and disorder of men, this would be against it would be against that which He Himself would have done with them, that He would be wrathful and angry, and it would be He Himself who would be offended by the vices and sins of men, like a man, for example, who intentionally stabbed himself with someone else’s hand, which would be ridiculous to say and think of a God, i.e., a Being, who would be infinitely perfect, infinitely good, and infinitely wise. For it would be unsuitable for anyone but a madman to willingly offend themselves and get angry about what they themselves want to do. Which clearly shows that our Christ-cultists are mistaken, when they say that the vices and sins of men grievously and mortally offend their God, and that they attract His anger and indignation on this matter.
Our Christ-cultists, well are that their way of speaking concerning the supposed offense and the supposed anger and indignation of their God and that this cannot subsist in the true sense of words by which they express their thoughts, they have had to give them a metaphorical and figurative sense. This is also why they say that terms like “offense” and “insult”, “ire” and “wrath”, “anger”, “fury”, “indignation”, and so on, should not be understood strictly and literally, but that they should only be understood metaphorically, as referring to the external effects which these passions tend to produce in people who are truly offended against, and who are genuinely moved by anger and indignation. And, since people who feel offended normally become angry, furious, and indignant at those who offend them or who act contrary to their will and orders, and who, in their anger, they act according to vengeance and severity, violently and strictly punishing those who offend them or act contrary to their will and commands, likewise, say our Christ-cultists, God, often and severely punishing humans when they indulge in vice and sin, despising and His laws and commands, breaking and despising His law and commandments, and even punishes them with as much strictness and severity as if they grievously offended Him, and as if He were upset and actually enraged; this is why, they say, as a figure of speech, it’s said that the vices and sins of men offend God and arouse His anger and indignation. So that, according to their true opinion, when they say that men’s vices and sins severely and mortally offended their God, and arouse His wrath, rage, and indignation, all these expressions only mean that God castigates, and strictly punishes men’s vices and sins, and they think it suitable to use these expressions to conform, as they say, to the men’s normal way of speaking and at the same time, to inspire fear and terror in sinners, to humble the proud, to inspire virtue in the negligent, to stimulate curious minds, and to maintain the spirit of piety in the righteous.
But if that’s what they mean by their figures of speech, and if that’s their only intention, then it is true, as I’ve said, that the sins of men in no way offend God, and in no way spark His wrath and indignation, and consequently, our Christ-cultists are mistaken and wrong to vainly exaggerate, as they do, the grievousness and enormity of sins with respect to this supposed offense of God’s, since it is, according to them, only a metaphorical and imaginary offense. Besides, it’s an abuse of the terms to call, as they do, an insult and offense of God, something that is neither an insult nor an offense against God; it’s an abuse of terms to call, as they do, wrath and anger, fury and indignation, things that are neither wrath nor anger, nor fury, nor indignation. Nobody would call it anger or fury if a judge pronounced or executed the severe punishment of a judge when he ordered the strict punishment of criminals. Why, then, call ire, and anger, and fury, and indignation, the just punishment that an infinitely wise God would inflict on human wickedness, since He would punish them without anger and without indignation?
But if, according to this explanation of our Christ-cultists’ way of speaking, the vices and sins of men are only metaphorically and improperly called insults and offenses of God, that since He punishes them, it would follow that if He didn’t punish them, they wouldn’t be only, even metaphorically and improperly, be insults and offenses of God, and they wouldn’t be metaphorically and improperly, insults and offenses of God, except when He punished them; such that if He never punished them, and never had, then nor would they have ever been metaphorically or improperly offenses of God, and thus, for example, if God had never punished the sin and disobedience of Adam, that our Christ-cultists say was the sole cause of the misery and reprobation of men, then there never would have been, nor should have been, called an offense of God. I don’t know if our Christ-cultists could harmonize this with what they say about the grievousness and enormity of this sin, with respect to this supposed offense of God.
They are equally mistaken with respect to the temporal and eternal punishment, which they say God applies for men’s crimes and sins; 1) they relate to the temporal punishments that men suffer in this life; since it certainly can’t be said, or even thought, with any semblance of truth, that the pains and evils of this life are the punishments imposed by God for their sins, and the obvious and persuasive reason for this is that, if these penalties and evils truly were punishments from God, then these penalties and evils would always be proportionate to the severity of crimes and sins, and neither the i
nnocent nor the righteous would ever suffer the same punishment as the guilty, because God, being infinitely good and infinitely just, as is thought, it is not credible that He would severely punish the innocent and the guilty in the same way. It is not credible that He would want to severely punish some for minor slips, and only dole out trifling punishments for others who are guilty of abominable crimes; it is not credible that He would leave abominable crimes unpunished, or that He would impose the penalty on others which the wicked and the guilty would deserve. But thousands upon thousands of abominable crimes and wicked deeds are witnessed every day, which go unpunished; every day innocent and righteous people are seen to endure the same penalty as the guilty, and that the righteous and innocent groan through suffering and affliction, and that they often perish in misery, while the wicked and detestably impious people live in joy and prosperity, and that they triumph in their iniquity.
