Notes:
Sermon 141: The Image of God
This is John Wesley’s first ‘university sermon’, preached in St. Mary’s on November 15, 1730 (i.e., a fortnight after the preceding sermon preached at All Saints). In style and substance, it compares favourably with his second university sermon, and thus might also have been worthy of publication (cf. No. 17, ‘The Circumcision of the Heart’). It must have made a mark for the young don in St. Mary’s; it is lively and deals with the prime issue of Christian anthropology: the original design of human nature considered in the light of the crucial biblical metaphor of ‘the image of God’ and in the face of the tragic consequences of the Fall.
The argument is ordered into three stages: first, the original perfections of the imago Dei in Adam and Eve; second, the fall and defacement of that image; and third, the mystery of grace and the promise of the image’s restoration. It is, therefore, an important statement of Wesley’s early basic understanding of the ordo salutis. The clearest of the sermon’s three sections is its first: the Adamic perfections (cf. No. 5, ‘Justification by Faith’, I.4 and n.). This idea was a commonplace in Oxford, but Wesley’s development of it is not. Clearly, he was working from the tradition of ‘original righteousness’ (iustitia originalis) that had come to him from Christian Platonism through the Cambridge Platonists and John Norris. There are even echoes here from the medieval rabbis (especially Maimonides) and their speculations about Adam’s intellectual and moral perfections. We know of Wesley’s interest in this tradition and of its mediation to him through the Old Testament commentaries of Matthew Poole and Matthew Henry.
Indeed, so fulsome do Adam’s perfections appear here that the wonder rises irresistibly as to why a creature so perfect should ever have fallen from his paradisiacal state. Wesley’s answer is an interesting echo of Milton’s ‘I cannot praise a fugitive and cloistured virtue, unexercised and unbreathed’ (Areopagitica, 1644). God had designed the virtue of obedience as the precondition to all the others, and this had to be tested by an arbitrary command. When this was disobeyed (and Wesley leaves the ‘explanation’ for this disobedience quietly unexplained), the whole bright galaxy of those other perfections also fell away into ruin.
04:291Thereafter, human nature has been, in effect, an inversion of its original design—in intellect, will, and affections. One of the more interesting ‘asides’ in this sermon is Wesley’s description of the physiological effects of Adam’s eating of the forbidden fruit. This amounts to a speculative account of a correlation between bad nutrition and the course and onset of atherosclerosis—a hypothesis far enough beyond its own time that modern medicine is still in process of drawing it out.
The manuscript is in the Colman Miscellany in the Methodist Archives, Manchester, on nine leaves, with a front cover leaf missing. The leaves are numbered irregularly: pp. 1-5, followed by an unnumbered page with text, and pp. 6-10; then a blank page and pp. 11-15, followed by a back cover bearing notes about places and dates of preaching. The gathering is sewn between pp. 7 and 8. The text is in Wesley’s abbreviated longhand and cipher, with very few revisions. This, with the back cover notations, suggests that this was the ‘fair copy’ that Wesley used in the pulpit. His diary indicates that he had composed the sermon during the five days October 27-31; at the bottom of p. 15 there is an appended note: ‘tr[anscribed] Nov. 1, 3:30 aft[ernoon], 33 min.’ On the back cover there is the following list of preaching occasions:
At St. Mary’s, Nov. 15, 1730
Queen’s Square Chapel, London, Feb. 7 [1731]
Stanton
St. Margaret’s, Old Fleetstreet, London
St. Miles [Oxford], Jan. 7, 1733 [viz., just a week after he had preached ‘The Circumcision of the Heart’ in St. Mary’s]
This is its first publication.
04:292
The Image of GodGenesis 1:27
In the first chapter of Genesis at the twenty-seventh verse it is thus written:
So God created man in his own image.
1[1.] A truth that does so much honour to human nature, that gives so advantageous an account of it as this, could not fail, one would think, of being well entertained by all to whom that nature belonged. And accordingly some there have been in all ages who gladly received and firmly retained it; who asserted, not only that man was sprung from God, but that he was his likeness from whom he sprung; that the image of his divine Parent was still visible upon him, who had transfused as much of himself into this his picture as the materials on which he drew would allow.
The imago Dei metaphor was a favourite of the Cambridge Platonists and of John Norris, Whichcote, More, Cudworth, et al. See No. 1, Salvation by Faith, §1 and n.
2[2.] But to this it has constantly been opposed: if man was made in the image of God, whence flow those numberless imperfections that stain and dishonour his nature? Why is his body exposed to sickness and pain, and at last to a total dissolution? Why is his soul still more disgraced and deformed by ignorance and error, by unruly passions, and what is worse than all, as it contains them all, by vice? A fine picture—this ignorant, wretched, guilty creature—of a wise, happy, and holy Creator!
3[3.] I am ashamed to say there are [those] of our age and nation who greedily close with this old objection, and eagerly maintain that they were not made in the image of the living God, but of the beasts that perish;
See Ps. 49:12, 20; see also Hobbes, Humane Natur (1684), xi.69, where it is argued that ‘we can have no conception or image of the Deity’; cf. his famous dictum on the quality of human life: ‘nasty, brutish, and short’ (Leviathan, I.13).
Eccles. 3:18.
4[4.] The substance of his account is this: ‘God created man upright; in the image of God created he him; but man found out to himself many inventions.’
Cf. Gen. 1:27; Eccles. 7:29.
See Rom. 1:18-25.
Col. 3:10.
5[5.] That it may appear
This paragraph is prefixed by the marginal notation ‘G.D.’ (‘General Divisions’); see No. 138A, ‘On Dissimulation’, §3 and n.
I. Man was originally made in the image of God.
11. First with regard to his understanding. He was endued, after the likeness of his Maker, with a power of distinguishing truth from falsehood; either by a simple view wherein he made the nearest approach to that all-seeing Nature, or by comparing one thing with another (a manner of knowledge perhaps peculiar to himself) and often inferring farther truths from these preceding comparisons.
For this idea of ‘Adamic perfection’, see No. 5, ‘Justification by Faith’, I.4 and n.
1(1.) And in several properties of it, as well as in the faculty itself, man at first resembled God. His understanding was just; everything appeared to him according to its real nature. It never was betrayed into any mistake; whatever he perceived, he perceived as it was. He thought not at all of many things, but he thought wrong of none. (2.) And as it was just, it was likewise clear. Truth and evidence went hand in hand; as nothing appeared in a false light, so neither in a glimmering one. Light 04:294and darkness there were, but no twilight; whenever the shades of ignorance withdrew, in that moment the broader day appeared, the full blaze of knowledge shined. He was equally a stranger to error and doubt; either he saw not at all, or he saw plainly. (3.) And hence arose that other excellence of his understanding: being just and clear, it was swift in its motion. Nothing was then as quick as thought but that which alone is capable of it—spirit. How far anything of which we have any conception must fall short of expressing its swiftness will be readily seen by all who observe but one instance of it in our first father: in how short a space he ‘gave names to all cattle, and to the fowls of the air, and to every beast of the field’.
Gen. 2:20.
This admiration for Adam’s perfections had long since been a popular theme in Protestant preaching. Cf. Luther’s emphasis upon ‘Adam’s superior knowledge and wisdom’ (before the Fall) in his Lectures on Genesis (1535) on 2:19-20: ‘Adam, as soon as he viewed an animal, was already possessed of a knowledge of its entire nature and abilities…. What an ocean of knowledge and wisdom there was in this one human being’ (Works, Jaroslav Pelikan, ed. [St. Louis, Concordia, 1958], I.119-20). See Matthew Henry’s Exposition: ‘God himself gave names to the day and night, etc.… But he gave Adam leave to name the beasts and fowls,’ as signal proof of man’s special knowledge and authority. For Wesley’s further comments on Adamic perfection, see Nos. 5, ‘Justification by Faith’, I.1; 57, ‘On the Fall of Man’, II.1, 2, 5; 60, ‘The General Deliverance’, I.1; 62, ‘The End of Christ’s Coming’, I.7; 64, ‘The New Creation’,§ 18; 69, ‘The Imperfection of Human Knowledge’, I.13; 71, ‘Of Good Angels’, I.7; 76 ‘On Perfection’, I.1-2; 82, ‘On Temptation’, I.2; and 129, ‘Heavenly Treasure in Earthen Vessels’, §2.
22. And yet even this just, this clear, this swift, this comprehensive understanding was the least part of that image of God wherein man was originally made. Far greater and nobler was his second endowment, namely, a will equally perfect. It could not but be perfect while it followed the dictates of such an understanding. His affections were rational, even, and regular—if we may be allowed to say ‘affections’, for properly speaking he had but one: man was what God is, Love. Love filled the whole expansion of his soul; it possessed him without a rival. Every movement of his heart was love: it knew no other fervour. Love was his vital heat; it was the genial warmth that animated his 04:295whole frame. And the flame of it was continually streaming forth, directly to him from whom it came, and by reflection to all sensitive natures, inasmuch as they too were his offspring; but especially to those superior beings who bore not only the superscription, but likewise the image of their Creator.
See Matt. 22:20, etc.
33. What made his image yet plainer in his human offspring was, thirdly, the liberty he originally enjoyed; the perfect freedom implanted in his nature, and interwoven with all its parts. Man was made with an entire indifference,
I.e., ‘entire freedom’. See OED, 3: ‘indetermination of the will’, etc.; cf. the definition in Johnson’s Dictionary: ‘Equipoise or freedom from motives on either side.’
Wesley is here challenging a nominalist metaphor of the will’s being determined, as in a balance, by ‘the heaviest weight’ (i.e., the strongest motive); it had come to be associated in academic folklore with the case of ‘Buridan’s ass’, placed equidistant from two bales of hay and starving from indecision. The doctrine of the predetermined will is that of Jean Buridan in Quaestiones in Aristotelis Ethica Nicomachea (1489), III.1-3; the illustration is not. It seems to have been invented by one of Buridan’s critics as a reductio ad absurdum.
44. The result of all these—an unerring understanding, an uncorrupt will, and perfect freedom—gave the last stroke to the image of God in man, by crowning all these with happiness. Then indeed to live was to enjoy, when every faculty was in its perfection, amidst abundance of objects which infinite wisdom had purposely suited to it, when man’s understanding was satisfied with truth, as his will was with good; when he was at full liberty to enjoy either the Creator or the creation; to indulge in rivers of pleasure,
See Ps. 36:8.
Cf. Milton, Areopagitica (1644): ‘that which purifies us is trial’. Later, Soame Jenyns will repeat this idea (‘Some test of our obedience was necessary’) in his Free Inquiry into the Nature and Origin of Evil (1 757), p. 89; but see Wesley’s comments on Jenyns in Nos. 56, ‘God’s Approbation of His Works’, II.2; and 59, ‘God’s Love to Fallen Men’, §15.
Gen. 2:16-17.
Gen. 2:17; see No. 45, ‘The New Birth’, I.4 and n.
And ’tis easy to observe by what regular steps all these would succeed each other, if God did not miraculously prevent it, but suffer nature to take its course. But we should observe, first, that man even at his creation was a compound of matter and spirit; and that it was ordained by the original law that during this vital union neither part of the compound should act at all but together with its companion; that the dependence of each upon the other should be inviolably maintained; that even the operations of the soul should so far depend upon the body as to be exerted in a more or less perfect manner, as this was more or less aptly disposed.
This being observed, we may easily conceive how the forbidden fruit might work all those effects which are implied in the word ‘death’, as being introductory to, and paving the way for it. Which particulars of the following account are founded on Scripture and consequently certain, and which are built on conjecture and therefore proposed only as probable, it will not be hard to distinguish.
11. Its first effect must have been on his body, which, being before prepared for immortality, had no seeds of corruption within itself and adopted none from without. All its original particles were incorruptible, and therefore the additional ones taken in, being for pleasure rather than use, cannot be supposed ever to have cleaved to its native substance, ever to have adhered to any part of it, as none needed any reparation. By this means both the juices contained must have been still of the same consistence, and the vessels containing them have kept the same spring, and remained ever clear and open.
An attempt to update the age-old discussion of Adam’s mortality had he never defied God’s prohibition; cf. Luther, Works, I.110: ‘If Adam had obeyed…he never would have died…. [He] ate, masticated, digested, and if he had remained as he was, he would have done the other things physical life demands until at last he would have been translated to the spiritual and eternal life.’ Wesley believed that the new physiology (Harvey, Cheyne, Weemes, et al.) confirmed this tradition—viz., that the human organism is ‘designed’ to operate indefinitely unless corrupted by some noxious agent or another.
On the contrary, the fruit of that tree alone of whose deadly nature he was forewarned seems to have contained a juice, the particles of which were apt to cleave to whatever they touched. Some of these, being received into the human body, might adhere to the inner coats of the finer vessels; to which again other particles that before floated loose in the blood, continually joining, would naturally lay a foundation for numberless disorders in all parts of the machine. For death in particular; since, more foreign matter cleaving to the former every day, the solid parts of the body would every day lose something of their spring, and so be less able to contribute their necessary assistance to the circulation of the fluids. The smaller channels would gradually fill up, especially those that lie near the extremities, where the current, by reason of its distance from the fountain, was always more slow and languid. The whole tide, as the force that threw it forward abated, must [also] have abated its swiftness in proportion, till at length that force utterly failing, it ceased to move, and rested in death.
For Wesley’s notions of physiology, cf. No. 51, The Good Steward, I.4 and n. But note the anticipation here of later notions of low-density lipoproteins and atherosclerosis.
Indeed had Adam taken the antidote as well as the poison, had he again put forth his hand, and taken of the fruit of the Tree of Life,
See Gen. 3:22.
Cf. OED, where Sprat’s History of the Royal Society (2nd edn., 1702) is cited as having listed ‘fuller’s earth, linseed oil, and oxgall’ as ‘abstersives’. Dr. Johnson would later define ‘abstersive’ as ‘cleansing’, and would quote Francis Bacon, Natural History: ‘abstersive and mundifying clysters are also good to conclude [a purgation] with, to draw away the reliquies of the humours.’
However this be, thus much is certain: the moment wherein that fruit was tasted, the sentence of death passed on that body, which before was impassive and immortal. And this immortal 04:298having put on mortality,
An inversion of 1 Cor. 15:53-54.
Wisd. 9:15; cf. No. 41, Wandering Thoughts, II.3 and n.
22. His understanding first found the want of suitable organs; its notions were just no longer. It mistook falsehood for truth, and truth for falsehood. Error succeeded and increased ignorance. And no wonder, when it was no longer clear; when it not only saw through a glass, but darkly too,
See 1 Cor. 13:12.
33. How much the will suffered when its guide was thus blinded we may easily comprehend. Instead of the glorious one that possessed it whole before, it was now seized by legions of vile affections.
See Rom. 1:26.
Jas. 3:15.
Luke 11:24.
44. Indeed, what else could the human mind do when it had no freedom left? Liberty went away with virtue; instead of an indulgent master it was under a merciless tyrant. The subject 04:299of virtue became the slave of vice. It was not willingly that the creature obeyed vanity; the rule was now perforce; the sceptre of gold was changed into a rod of iron. Before, the bands of love indeed drew him
See Hos. 11:4.
See Luke 18:13.
55. The consequence of his being enslaved to a depraved understanding and a corrupted will could be no other than the reverse of that happiness which flowed from them when in their perfection. Then were the days of man evil as well as few;
See Gen. 47:9.
How such a creature as this, as every fair inquirer finds by experience himself to be, could come from the hands of the good God, has been the just wonder of all ages. And let the infidel look to it; let him surmount the difficulty if he can upon any scheme beside the Christian. Upon this indeed it is no difficulty at all; all is rational, plain, and easy, while we observe, on the one hand, that not the good God but man himself made man what he is now; on the other, how he may recover what he wilfully lost, which is the subject of our third inquiry.
3III. Who indeed shall recover us from the body of this death?
See Rom. 7:24.
Rom. 7:25.
1 Cor. 15:22.
See Rev. 2:11; 20:14-15.
2 Cor. 5:1.
11. The first step to this glorious change is humility, a knowledge of ourselves, a just sense of our condition: which the 04:300evil spirit himself, either overruled by or mimicking the true God, recommended on the front of his temple in those celebrated words, ‘Know Thyself’,
‘The evil spirit’ here is Apollo, and the maxim, ‘Know thyself’ (γνῶθι σεαυτόν), stood first among the inscriptions on the tablets of Apollo’s temple at Delphi. Plutarch ascribes it to Plato, but a more popular tradition attributes it to one or another of ‘the Seven Sages of Greece’. Juvenal, Satires, xi.27-30, says that ‘the maxim γνῶθι σεαυτόν comes down from the skies; it should be imprinted in the heart and stored in the memory.’ Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, I.40-42, traces it back to Thales. See also Plato, Protagoras, 343-44; and Alcibiades, I.129. The Latin form, Nosce teipsum, appears in Erasmus, Adagia, I.vi.95. By Wesley’s time it was a proverb among the educated.
Rom. 12:2-3.
’Tis almost needless to remark how conducive this is to the attainment of all
other knowledge; or, in other words, how conducive it is to the improvement of
the understanding. An erroneous opinion of ourselves naturally leads us into
numberless errors; whereas to those who know their own folly (beside the natural
advantage of it) the Lord of nature ‘giveth the spirit of wisdom, and enlightens
the eyes of their understanding, after the likeness in which they were
created’.
[Cf.] Eph. 1:17 [-18; Col.
3:10].
22. The understanding, thus enlightened by humility, immediately directs us to reform our will by charity.
I.e., ‘disinterested love’. Later, Wesley will complain that ‘charity’ is a misleading translation of ἀγάπη and will opt for ‘love’ instead. See Nos. 17, ‘The Circumcision of the Heart’, II.1 and n.; and 91, ‘On Charity’, I.1.
Eph. 4:31.
Acts 17:28.
Eph. 4:32.
33. Thus it is that the ‘law of the Spirit of life makes us free from the law of sin and death’;
Cf. Rom. 8:2.
Cf. Rom. 8:21.
An early instance of Wesley’s view that human existence is oriented toward happiness and this by God’s express design; cf. No. 5, ‘Justification by Faith’, I.4 and n.
1[IV. 1.]
In the margin of the paragraph there is added an abbreviation, ‘Inf[erences ]’.
Rom. 13:4.
See Luke 19:41; 20:9-15.
Eph. 4:18.
See Isa. 59:7-8.
Cf. Ps. 41:8.
See Ps. 5:9.
See Eph. 4:18.
Cf. 2 Cor. 4:4.
Mark 9:43.
22. Yes, one step farther he may, he ought to go: he ought to acknowledge the riches of that mercy shown to himself, and indeed to all of us who have our education in a truly Christian country;
Charles’s revision of what orig. read, ‘in this place’.
See Phil. 4:8.
See Jer. 2:13; Rev. 7:17, etc.
Dan. 3:29.
MS orig. read, ‘who are the stewards of its mysteries and dispensers of its benefits!’
Cf. Dan. 7:13, etc.
Cf. Dan. 12:2.
A third variation in the MS text, which orig. read, ‘who have wisely discharged this weighty trust’; the second version read, ‘who have turned others from sin [and the] error of their ways’.
Dan. 12:3.
Now unto God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, be ascribed all honour and praise, now and for ever.
How to Cite This Entry
Bibliography:
, “.” In , edited by . , 2024. Entry published February 25, 2024. https://wesleyworks.ecdsdev.org/sermons/Sermon141.About this Entry
Entry Title: Sermon 141: The Image of God