Article 3: “Sundry Times and Divers Manners”: How God Revealed Himself (WCF 1.1)
From the outset, the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) recognizes that the God of Scripture has not always communicated His redemptive purposes in the same way. Rather, He has progressively disclosed Himself throughout history—in “sundry times and divers manners” (Hebrews 1:1)—leading inexorably to the consummation of revelation in Jesus Christ and the apostolic writings. WCF 1.1 briefly gestures toward this historical unfolding of divine revelation, underscoring that although it arrived in a variety of forms, God ultimately committed it “wholly unto writing.” This third article explores the historical-theological rationale behind that progressive revelation, examining how the church historically transitioned from largely oral or prophetic forms of disclosure to the inscripturated canon, why it condemns alleged “new revelations” in the present, and how these principles speak to both the scholarly academy and the faithful in the pew.
1. Progressive Revelation: From Promises to Fulfillment
1.1. Old Testament Typology and Covenantal Steps
The concept of “progressive revelation” in Reformed theology maintains that God’s truth was not disclosed all at once but incrementally. The Westminster Assembly, in alignment with prior Reformed confessions, interpreted the various covenants—Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Davidic—as successive stages revealing more of God’s redemptive plan. Thus, the promise first made in Genesis 3:15 unfolds gradually through the patriarchal narratives and prophetic oracles, each covenant clarifying the nature of redemption.
While the patriarchs and prophets received direct communications (dreams, theophanies, oracles), these were mere “shadows” of the final revelation in the person of Christ (cf. Col. 2:17). For example, Abraham receives the covenant sign of circumcision (Gen. 17), Israel is given the Mosaic Law (Ex. 19–24), and David is promised an enduring throne (2 Sam. 7). Each of these covenants expands on a prior revelation but also hints at the future, culminating reality: a Messianic mediator who fulfills and surpasses earlier types. Here, “sundry times” means the successive epochs of redemptive history, each building upon what came before.
1.2. The Fullness of Time
In these “divers manners,” God employed varied forms: historical narrative, legal codes, sacrificial rituals, poetic psalms, wisdom literature, and prophetic messages—each portion casting light on divine holiness, human sin, and the promise of deliverance. The Confession’s drafters, reflecting standard Reformed hermeneutics, saw these as partial glimmers that converged on Christ’s advent (Gal. 4:4). Hence, Hebrews 1:1–2 stands as a pivotal text: God, who spoke in many ways in past times, has “in these last days spoken unto us by his Son.” That Son, Christ, is the apex of all prophecy, for He is both messenger and message, the incarnate Word (John 1:14).
In asserting progressive revelation, the WCF does not imply that earlier eras lacked genuine truth. Instead, it highlights that the Old Testament era was characterized by partial and anticipatory forms of revelation that, while sufficient in their contexts for leading the elect to faith in God’s promises, pointed typologically to the final revelation in Christ. By recognizing the unity and coherence of God’s plan through these covenants, Reformed confessionalism holds that the entire Scripture—Old and New Testaments—forms one integrated narrative culminating in Christ’s person and work.
2. From Oral to Written Revelation
2.1. Initial Oral Periods
Before the composition of the Pentateuch, God’s instructions circulated largely via oral transmission. The patriarchs, for instance, received direct communications from God and passed them down verbally (cf. Gen. 12:1–3). Nevertheless, the WCF observes that oral traditions alone could not permanently safeguard the purity of doctrine. As seen in the post-patriarchal era, idolatry crept in (e.g., the golden calf incident, Ex. 32), and rampant syncretism characterized Israel’s frequent apostasy.
Hence, the necessity for codifying revelation emerged especially with Moses. Exodus 17:14 depicts the Lord commanding Moses to write certain events, marking one of the earliest biblical attestations of divine revelation taking textual form. The Mosaic legislation then anchors Israel’s covenant life in a written deposit, to be read publicly (Deut. 31:9–13). From that point on, revelation is increasingly preserved in written documents—historical annals, psalms, prophetic scrolls—finally leading to the full Old Testament canon recognized in later Judaism and by Christ Himself (Luke 24:44).
2.2. The Transition in the New Testament Era
The New Testament testifies to a similar pattern: Jesus initially taught orally, proclaiming the kingdom of God (Matt. 4:17), and the apostles likewise evangelized verbally in the early decades post-resurrection. Yet, as the apostles faced martyrdom and the church spread geographically, the Gospels and apostolic epistles emerged to secure, in enduring written form, the final revelation. This final revelation is a record of Christ’s life, death, resurrection, and the apostolic explanation of its theological significance.
The WCF 1.1 states that God’s complete counsel regarding salvation was committed “wholly unto writing,” implying that once the apostolic era concluded, no further canonical revelation would arise. While the earliest church could rely on living apostles, the closure of the canon—66 books—forms the abiding standard for all subsequent generations. By appealing to 2 Timothy 3:16–17 (“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God …”), the Assembly underscores that the written Word is “profitable for doctrine” and fully sufficient to equip believers in every age.
3. Whitaker’s Critique of “New Revelations”
3.1. Historical Heresies and Sectarian Claims
William Whitaker, in his major polemical work A Disputation on Holy Scripture, cataloged various attempts throughout church history to add or substitute new revelations for the established Word. Examples include Montanism in the second century, whose adherents declared that the Holy Spirit spoke fresh oracles beyond the apostolic tradition, as well as medieval and Reformation-era fringe groups (e.g., certain radical Anabaptists) claiming direct visions or private prophecies. Such claims often eroded confidence in the biblical canon by suggesting that the Spirit’s current speech could supersede earlier apostolic texts.
Whitaker systematically rebutted these positions by appealing to the consensus of the early Church Fathers, who consistently pointed to Scripture as the ultimate standard. While some fathers (e.g., Irenaeus, Tertullian before his Montanist phase) believed that the Spirit continued to enlighten believers, they never sanctioned the idea that the church could receive new doctrinal revelations that trumped or went beyond the written apostolic deposit. In short, the sufficiency of the biblical canon, once established, precludes any purported revelations that would add to or subtract from Scripture’s essential content (Gal. 1:8–9).
3.2. Alignment with the Westminster Confession
The Westminster Confession’s statement in 1.6—“The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory … is either expressly set down in Scripture or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced …”—directly echoes Whitaker’s logic. A claim to a “new revelation” cannot stand if all doctrines essential for salvation are already in Scripture and can be known via faithful exegesis. WCF 1.10 will reiterate that Scripture, interpreted by the Holy Spirit, is the final arbiter of controversies. Therefore, the Confession’s impetus is to guard the church against the chaos of subjective revelations or self-appointed prophets who allege direct spiritual transmissions.
This perspective also aligns with confessional bibliology as championed by Reformed Orthodoxy. Since God has providentially preserved the authoritative text of Scripture, the faithful do not need to worry that some vital truth was “lost” or remains obscure until a new prophet arises. Instead, consistent historical exegesis and communal study of the canonical writings suffice for the church’s guidance.
4. Objections from Modern Theologies
4.1. Neo-Orthodox and Liberal Positions
In the twentieth century, neo-orthodox and liberal theologians often posited that God’s Word is primarily a dynamic event rather than fixed in textual form. They sometimes cited Hebrews 1:1–2 to argue that God’s final revelation is Christ Himself, the “living Word,” rather than any static compilation of biblical documents. By this reasoning, Scripture is merely a secondary testimony to Christ’s revelation, overshadowed by personal encounters with the “living Christ.”
Reformed confessional theology, consistent with the stance of the Westminster divines, maintains that while Christ is indeed the supreme revelation of God, it is precisely the Spirit-inspired Scriptures that reliably convey Christ to the church. If one separates the incarnate Word from the inscripturated Word, the locus of authority becomes subjective interpretations of “encounter” or “event,” potentially dislodging the stable foundation that Scripture supplies. The WCF thus insists on a Christocentric but textually mediated model: Christ reveals God, and the Spirit testifies to that revelation through the biblical canon.
4.2. Ongoing Prophetic Movements
Contemporary Pentecostal or charismatic movements occasionally espouse prophecies or words of knowledge that they claim add clarity or specificity to the biblical witness. While mainstream Reformed theology does not deny that God can act providentially, it is adamant that no “prophetic utterance” in the post-apostolic age attains canonical status. The final form of Scripture, recognized by the church catholic over centuries, is normative. New utterances must be tested by Scripture (1 John 4:1) and can never produce new doctrines or obligations that bind the conscience as biblical revelation does.
Hence, the Confession’s stance on progressive revelation fosters a stable framework: “sundry times and divers manners” belong to the history leading up to Christ and the apostolic era. After the Apostles, the church has the completed canon, beyond which no further universal revelations can or should be added.
5. The Confession’s Assertion of Finality
5.1. Hebrews 1:1–2 as a Hermeneutical Pivot
The Confession cites “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past … hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son,” making it clear that Christ is God’s definitive Word to humanity. The full significance of that revelation is explicated in the Gospels and the Apostolic Epistles, forming the New Testament canon. The Old Testament stands in continuity, bearing witness to the same Christ in shadowy or typological fashion (Luke 24:44).
Thus, the finality of the New Testament stands in stark contrast to any subsequent notion of “apostolic succession” that would yield new, norm-binding revelations. The WCF does not discount the Spirit’s ongoing work in illuminating Scripture and sanctifying believers; it simply distinguishes that vital ministry from the open-ended forging of new canonical materials.
5.2. Practical Churchly Consequences
Because the WCF sees Scripture as complete revelation, the church’s authority is declarative, not creative. Church councils or assemblies can only interpret and apply what God has revealed (WCF 31.2), but they cannot promulgate new dogmas or sacraments. Similarly, no extra-biblical prophecies are necessary to guide the corporate body of Christ. Instead, the church reaffirms “the faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 3) in each generation.
This confessional stance preserves doctrinal stability, enabling the Reformed tradition to avoid the pendulum swings that have characterized movements heavily reliant on new or uncertain “revelations.” Pastoral ministry, catechesis, and theological reflection are carried out within the safe bounds of a recognized canon, ensuring consistency with the gospel’s original apostolic witness.
6. Relevance for Church and Academy
6.1. Ecclesiastical Application
In day-to-day church life, the principle of progressive revelation clarifies the unity of Scripture’s message. Rather than reading the Old Testament merely as a backdrop to the New, Reformed theology underlines that God’s mighty works in earlier dispensations are integral steps in redemption history, all culminating in Christ. Sermons and Bible studies thus trace the continuity from Eden to Calvary, from the proto-evangelium (Gen. 3:15) to the new creation (Rev. 21–22), showing how “God spake in time past” and “hath in these last days spoken” definitively in Jesus.
Simultaneously, the church guards against “fresh revelations,” whether from external traditions or modern spiritual phenomena, that challenge Scripture’s sufficiency. By recalling WCF 1.1, believers stand confident that God’s will has been comprehensively set forth in the canonical writings, available in faithful translations and illuminated by the Spirit.
6.2. Scholarly Engagement
For academic theology, acknowledging the progressive yet complete nature of revelation assists in biblical theology, systematic theology, and textual criticism. Researchers can appreciate how each canonical book contributes to the overarching biblical meta-narrative, without hypothesizing extraneous layers of secret or post-apostolic “revelations.” Garnet Howard Milne’s work on the Westminster Confession’s doctrine of providential preservation reminds biblical scholars that Reformed orthodoxy historically claimed the essential purity of the textual tradition. The church’s trust in Scripture’s finality and integrity forms a counterpoint to minimalist textual skepticism.
Moreover, William Whitaker’s emphasis on patristic testimonies exemplifies how historical study can confirm the early church’s practical reliance on the canonical text. Rather than drifting into postmodern relativism—where new “revelations” might be welcomed uncritically—a confessional approach fosters a critical but reverent stance toward the biblical canon. Scholars thereby pursue exegesis with the understanding that the same Spirit who inspired the text also preserves it and enables the church to hear God speak through it.
Conclusion
When the Westminster Confession alludes to God’s revealing Himself in “sundry times and divers manners,” it evokes the rich tapestry of redemptive history in which God gradually prepared the way for the final revelation in His Son, Jesus Christ. This “progressive revelation” spanned oral instructions to patriarchs, Mosaic laws, prophetic pronouncements, and shadowy types, all culminating in the apostolic witness to Christ. Subsequently, the Spirit guided the church to enshrine these testimonies in the authoritative canon, now closed to any supplemental “new revelations.”
Far from rendering earlier revelations obsolete, the final inscripturated Word affirms their enduring value by situating them in the grand narrative of Christ’s redemptive work. William Whitaker’s rigorous defense of Scripture and Garnet Howard Milne’s focus on the Confession’s “kept pure” clause together illustrate that this canonical deposit, recognized by the Reformed tradition, need not be augmented by ongoing prophecy or tradition. Instead, God’s covenant community draws upon Scripture’s permanent record, confident in its reliability across time and cultures. Thus, WCF 1.1 not only underscores the necessity of Scripture but clarifies the diverse historical means by which God prepared His people for the fullness of divine revelation. In so doing, the Confession sets the stage for a robust, text-centered faith that resists both unwarranted expansions and subjective private claims, trusting God’s speaking “in these last days” through the written apostolic Word.
