“Reflecting their origins in an oral culture, even Homer’s epics were conveyed from generation to generation through social events of singing and play. The past was present not only in written records but in living speech. Paul’s admonition to “let the word of Christ dwell in you richly” through “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” (Col 3:16) reflects this social context. The goal of such singing in public worship was not individualistic, either in terms of mystical contemplation or self-expression, but the enveloping of the community in the gospel” (Michael Horton, The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims On the Way, 88).

Those who seek wealth, those who live for money, starve spiritually. Wealth-seeking really means seeking for power and security, and Christians rely for their power and their security not upon money but upon God (John C. Wenger, Separated unto God, 29).

[God the Son] descended to earth to draw us up to Heaven (Theodore Beza, The Christian Faith, 11).

Ephesians 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.

“Lastly, in order to better manifest this incomprehensible goodness, God did not wish that His grace should only equal our crime; He willed that where sin abounds, grace superabounds (Rom. 5:15-21). For this reason, while he was created in the image of God, the first Adam, author of our sin, was earthly, as his frailty showed well (1 Cor. 15:45-47). Jesus Christ, on the contrary, the second Adam, through whom we are saved, while being true and perfect man, is nevertheless the Lord come from Heaven, that is to say, the true God. For, in essence, all the fullness of divinity dwells in Him (Col. 2:9). If the disobedience of Adam made us fall, the righteousness of Jesus Christ gives us more security than we had previously. We hope for life procured by Jesus Christ, better that that which we lost in Adam; even more so as Jesus Christ surpasses Adam” (Theodore Beza, The Christian Faith, 10).

“At all times, the prophets, Jesus Christ and the Apostles spoke ever and only in the language of the common people, so that they were understood by every man in their nation. . . . Therefore, the Kingdom of God is not a Kingdom of ignorance, but of faith, and, consequently, of knowledge; for it is beyond the ability of anyone to believe that which he is ignorant of” (Theodore Beza, from the “Preface” to The Christian Faith, iv).

“Go visit the Prairies in June, when for scores on scores of miles you wade knee-deep among Tiger-lilies–what is the one charm wanting?–Water–there is not a drop of water there! Were Niagara but a cataract of sand, would you travel your thousand miles to see it?” (Herman Melville, Moby Dick, 3).

By What Means God is Made Known Unto Us

We know Him by two means: first, by the creation, preservation, and government of the universe; which is before our eyes as a most elegant book, wherein all creatures, great and small, are as so many characters leading us to contemplate the invisible things of God, namely, His eternal power and divinity, as the apostle Paul saith (Rom. 1:20). All which things are sufficient to convince men, and leave them without excuse.

Secondly, He makes Himself more clearly and fully known to us by His holy and divine Word; that is to say, as far as is necessary for us to know in this life, to His glory and our salvation.

The foundations of theology are thus trinitarian: The Father, through the Son as Logos, imparts himself to his creatures in the Spirit. Theologians also distinguish God’s own trinitarian self-knowledge (archetypal) from the revealed knowledge accommodated to human understanding (ectypal) (ed. John Bolt, Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics: Abridged in One Volume, 50).

This point cannot be stressed enough: the divines believed that if human actions were not contingent (that is, freely chosen), then God could in no way hold sinners accountable for their sin. Conversely, if human acts were not truly contingent and free, then there would be no need for the response of faith to the preaching of the gospel. Another important element to consider is that Reformed theologians believed that God is free, and in an analogous fashion so are his creatures. The Confession states that God is “most free” (2.1) and that man, male and female, was created “after his own Image” with the “Law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfill it: and yet, under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject unto change” (4.2). The Confession affirms freedom of the will, but there are some important qualifiers regarding the nature of humanity’s freedom (J. V. Fesko, The Theology of the Westminster Standards, 110).

In the garden Adam was free to sin and not to sin, but once he sinned, he plunged himself and all of his progeny into bondage. The nature of the bondage, however, is important to note; while fallen humanity is unable to do any spiritual good, this does not mean people have lost freedom of choice. The Reformers make a common distinction between what Martin Luther (1483-1546) famously called teh bondage of the will (voluntas) and free choice (liberum arbitrium). The human will is bound to sin, but our choices are free and not forces upon us. Even though God decrees whatsoever comes to pass, people freely make their own choices. God is not the author of sin and offers no violence to the will of creatures–they freely choose sin. Only through the grace of the gospel does fallen humanity freely choose what is spiritually good, though we are still hampered by the abiding presence of sin. When sinners are converted and ultimately glorified, they are completely freed from sin and immutably able freely to choose good. The question naturally arises, whom does God free from the bondage of sin? (111).

God, despite the decree of Adam’s fall, is not the author of sin. God does not force anyone to do anything. In fact, the [Westminster] Confession–unlike Calvin–for example, argues that God permitted the fall; permission is a category that Calvin largely rejected. The Confession states, “This their sin, God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsell [sic] to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory” (6.1). Judas could have refrained from betraying Christ, but instead freely chose to do so, and he freely chose suicide over repentance (J.V. Fesko, The Theology of the Westminster Standards, 100).