youthevang
Puritan Board Freshman
I have one question concerning the RPW discussion. It was stated somewhere earlier in this thread that Israel followed the RPW. If that is so, how would someone explain the establishment of the "Feast of Purim?"
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Originally posted by kevin.carroll
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
Originally posted by kevin.carroll
So where's the command...?
Kevin,
Even you would admit that we are commanded to sing Psalms. The question I believe that you are getting at here is "Where are we commanded to sing Psalms only?"
According to the Regulative Principle, an element needs scriptural justification to be performed in worship. We can justify Psalms (it is a clear command). What the EP argues, is the hymns cannot be justifyied (i.e. it is by no means clear, in fact the evidence seems to point the other way).
The EPer doesn't claim to have a verse that says "Thou shalt only sing Psalms." But the EPer DOES say is that
1) We have a clear command to sing Psalms
2) There is no clear command to make up our own songs
3) The arguments for the use of made-up songs are not convincing, and do not justify a "command" via the Regulative Principle
If you think that God has clearly commanded you to sing hymns, then we agree on the regulative principle, but differ on the application. The way I have explained the EP position above is because looking at it this way, was how I was convinced of the position.
We must earnestly look for scriptural warrant to include hymns, and I think all of the arguments to include them, do not constitute a "command" of God.
Just my
Excellent reply, Jeff. I think you nailed it on where I am struggling. I think it all hinges on the question posed earlier on whether or not "hymns and spiritual songs" refers to the Psalms. If it does, then EP is correct. If it does not, then EP is wrong.
Originally posted by youthevang
I have one question concerning the RPW discussion. It was stated somewhere earlier in this thread that Israel followed the RPW. If that is so, how would someone explain the establishment of the "Feast of Purim?"
Originally posted by youthevang
I have one question concerning the RPW discussion. It was stated somewhere earlier in this thread that Israel followed the RPW. If that is so, how would someone explain the establishment of the "Feast of Purim?"
Originally posted by crhoades
For what it's worth,
For an interesting look at the Westminster Assembly's discussions about the translation, publication, and use of the Metrical Psalms check out Carruther's Everyday Work of the Westminster Assembly:
http://www.heritagebooks.org/browse.asp?fname=Samuel&lname=Carruthers
They sent it to be reviewed by the best Hebraists of the day to ensure the best possible translation. I recommend it to all no matter which side of the fence you are on.
Originally posted by Saiph
Serious question: Was early synagogue worship EP ? ?
Originally posted by puritansailor
Originally posted by Saiph
Serious question: Was early synagogue worship EP ? ?
There is the other difficulty. Most EP's will say yes. But the evidence is hard to conclude. For one, there are differences between Jewish traditions (i.e. pharisaic, essene, etc.). Which ones followed the right pattern? The OT really doesn't spell out how synagogue worship was to be done. We have some descriptions from Jewish literature, but are those descriptions of divinely ordained worship or just traditions of men? Here is where alot of assumptions come into play for EP and non-EP.
Then we would have to ask What Would Jesus Sing ? ?
Originally posted by maxdetail
Then we would have to ask What Would Jesus Sing ? ?
Zephaniah 3:17
The Lord your God is in your midst,
a mighty one who will save;
he will rejoice over you with gladness;
he will quiet you by his love;
he will exult over you with loud singing.
I don't know what He would sing either but it's a wonderful thought and poor Zephaniah doesn't get quoted much.
"œThe Psalms of David In Meeter. Newly Translated and diligently compared with the Original Text, and former Translations: More plain, smooth and agreeable to the Text, than any heretofore."
Originally posted by maxdetail
Zephaniah 3:17
The Lord your God is in your midst,
a mighty one who will save;
he will rejoice over you with gladness;
he will quiet you by his love;
he will exult over you with loud singing.
I don't know what He would sing either but it's a wonderful thought and poor Zephaniah doesn't get quoted much.
Originally posted by puritansailor
Originally posted by Saiph
Serious question: Was early synagogue worship EP ? ?
The OT really doesn't spell out how synagogue worship was to be done.
Originally posted by biblelighthouse
Originally posted by puritansailor
Originally posted by Saiph
Serious question: Was early synagogue worship EP ? ?
The OT really doesn't spell out how synagogue worship was to be done.
Bingo. That's one reason why I think the Puritan version of the RPW is suspect. Scripture did not command specific worship to be done in the synagogue. Thus, according to the Puritan version of the RPW, the Israelites must have just done *nothing* at all in the synagogue. If they sang anything in the synagogue, it was against the RPW, because no singing was commanded for the synagogue. The same goes for prayer, preaching, etc. Thus, you either have to say that they upheld the Puritan RPW and did *nothing* there, or you have to believe that they did actively worship God in various ways in the synagogue, and that the Puritan RPW is in error.
Originally posted by Me Died BlueOr you have to remember that Scripture has not always been God's sole means of special revelation to His people.
Originally posted by kevin.carroll
Originally posted by Me Died BlueOr you have to remember that Scripture has not always been God's sole means of special revelation to His people.
Do you REALLY want to try to argue that unenscritpurated directives regarding worship were given???
By now you will see that "” according to Rev. Schlissel "” there were two kinds of worship in Old Testament times. (a) There was sacrificial worship, which was found only in the Tabernacle or Temple. And then (b) there was non-sacrificial worship, which was found in the Synagogue. He refers to these as "œmere" sacred assembles. "œThe Temple worship was strictly regulated" he says, "œbecause the Temple worship was the Gospel of the Messiah." But Synagogue worship, on the other hand, was not strictly regulated because it was not the gospel of the Messiah.
5. His argument is then carried one step further when he says that there is a parallel to this under the New Testament: (1) there is worship in the heavenly realm which is the continuation of Tabernacle/Temple worship. (2) The worship of the church, on the other hand, is just a continuation of Synagogue worship. And so, being "˜mere´ worship (to use his term), it is not subject to the RPW. The strict RPW that applied to the Tabernacle and Temple pertains to only one thing now, says Schlissel, and that is the gospel message. In other words, God is no more jealous today for the way in which worship is conducted in his church than he was for the way in which it was conducted in the synagogue. What he is jealous for is what most of us would call "˜purity of doctrine.´
Rev. Schlissel likens his novel theory to a famous New York bridge "” The Verrazano Bridge (which he calls "˜the most beautiful in the world´) "” which has an upper and lower level. The upper level, according to Schlissel´s novel scheme, represents the worship of the heavenly sanctuary "” or Temple "” where the Lord Jesus is. The lower level, on the other hand, represents the worship of the earthly Christian synagogue where we find ourselves. And because Synagogue worship is not Temple worship, according to Rev. Schlissel, the RPW doesn´t apply. And, again, we quote him:
The New Testament is beyond clear in teaching that the organizational model for the worshipping communities called "˜churches´ was the synagogue, not the Temple. (Pt. 1, p. 7)
And "œfor us the synagogue presents no problem at all. We find that it is sacrificial worship only, from Deuteronomy 12 on, that is absolutely restricted in regard to place, performers and particulars." "œSuch restrictions" says Rev. Schlissel, "œnever governed common sacred assemblies."
[5] And then, after giving a long list of directions as to what is, and what is not proper to be done in the church of God, he says "œIf anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the Lord´s commandment. But if anyone does not recognize this," he adds, "œhe is not recognized" (1 Cor. 14:37, 38). Paul was not giving pious advice about what he thought might be good things to do in some lower level, Christian synagogue, worship. (Or, "˜mere´ worship´ as Schlissel would put it). No, he was giving God´s commandments because the worship in the authentic New Testament Church is Temple worship.
I cannot go into this at length here, but let me also add that I am not at all persuaded that the ancient synagogue worship was as loose and unregulated as Rev. Schlissel seems to think. After all, what was synagogue worship? It is my conviction that it was what I would call mental participation in Temple worship made necessary because of the distances. Josephus, the Jewish historian, says Moses ordained "œthat every week men should desert their other occupations and assemble to listen to the Law and to obtain a thorough and accurate knowledge of it" (Ag. Ap. 2:175). And Luke confirms this in his quotation of James, at the Jerusalem Synod. "œFor Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath" (Acts 15:21). It was not possible, in Old Testament times, for all believers to always go to Jerusalem. So they gathered, locally, and they read the scriptures and expounded them. But they all knew that without the shedding of blood, in temple worship, there could be no remission. So, even then, their worship was really centered on the temple.
Originally posted by Me Died Blue
I do not want to explicitly argue that we know such - but if the Regulative Principle can be biblically derived from elsewhere in Scripture as a whole, and if we know the synagogue was for worship, I don't see many other plausible options (and the fact that there was much verbal special revelation under the Old Covenant only corroborates the plausibility of that implication).
1Co 14:12 So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church.
1Co 14:13 Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret.
1Co 14:14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.
1Co 14:15 What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also.
1Co 14:16 Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say "Amen" to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying?
1Co 14:17 For you may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not being built up.
1Co 14:26 What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up.
1Co 14:27 If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret.
1Co 14:28 But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God.
1Co 14:29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said.
1Co 14:30 If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent.
1Co 14:31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged,
1Co 14:32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets.
1Co 14:33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints,
1Co 14:34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.
1Co 14:35 If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.
1Co 14:36 Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached?
1Co 14:37 If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord.
1Co 14:38 If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.
1Co 14:39 So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.
1Co 14:40 But all things should be done decently and in order.
Originally posted by kevin.carroll
Another thing I've been wondering about: how do EP'ers account for the fact that the vast majority of Presbyterians who hold to RPW are not EP? I suppose the answer is the aren't really holding to the RPW...or, at the worst, they are gross idolaters...
Originally posted by kevin.carroll
Another thing I've been wondering about: how do EP'ers account for the fact that the vast majority of Presbyterians who hold to RPW are not EP? I suppose the answer is the aren't really holding to the RPW...or, at the worst, they are gross idolaters...
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
Originally posted by kevin.carroll
Another thing I've been wondering about: how do EP'ers account for the fact that the vast majority of Presbyterians who hold to RPW are not EP? I suppose the answer is the aren't really holding to the RPW...or, at the worst, they are gross idolaters...
Kevin, In the 16th and 17th centuries, the vast majority of all those holding to the RPW were EP.
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
Originally posted by kevin.carroll
Another thing I've been wondering about: how do EP'ers account for the fact that the vast majority of Presbyterians who hold to RPW are not EP? I suppose the answer is the aren't really holding to the RPW...or, at the worst, they are gross idolaters...
Kevin, In the 16th and 17th centuries, the vast majority of all those holding to the RPW were EP.
Originally posted by ChristopherPaul
Interesting post Mark, you give me a lot to consider.
What do you say is the difference between a spiritual song and a hymn?
Col 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.