Exclusive Psalmody, Private Worship, and the Regulative Principle.

For EP'ers, do you hold to EP in private devotions?

  • Yes

    Votes: 31 81.6%
  • No

    Votes: 5 13.2%
  • Other (please explain)

    Votes: 2 5.3%

  • Total voters
    38
Status
Not open for further replies.
My point was simply that the mere possibility of error in a component of worship is not sufficient cause to bar it.
Unless, of course, there is an option free from error that could be used instead....

In Leviticus 14, God appears to have allowed a young pigeon to be offered if one was not able to bring a turtle dove. But if you were able to bring a turtle dove, do you think He would have accepted you bringing a pigeon?
 
I just can never understand why anyone would choose to use man's words over God's Word. In practice I am EP (in public and family worship) though in conviction I am IP. So I don't understand when people try to use the argument that parts of the NT contain new songs or fragments of them (Luke 1:46-55, the angels' song in Luke 2:14, the song of Zechariah in Luke 1:68-79, and various hymns and songs found in the Book of Revelation, particularly in chapters 4, 5, and 15). Fine - but then they still don't sing them and again choose to compose extrabiblical songs! I don't understand the "Jesus isn't mentioned by name in the Psalms so we need new songs" argument on a lot of levels. Okay, fine, I'll play along - then put some of the NT to music and sing it! I still don't see any need - never mind warrant - for using man's words when God's Word is available.
 
There's no point in rehashing all the arguments about EP here. My point was simply that the mere possibility of error in a component of worship is not sufficient cause to bar it. It's an argument that necessarily proves too much. That's not to say that there aren't other arguments that may be used; just not this one.

No, the fact of error is a good argument. The call for one to speak and for others to be silent and judge what is said is a sufficient provision to guard against error in the case of other parts of worship. In that case there is no "form," but the individual speaks of his own accord. In the case of congregational praise, however, there is a set form, and all are to join together in the singing of it, which precludes the possibility of sitting in judgment. The very act of singing that form presupposes it has been judged and found worthy.
 
This is exactly what happened in my case. I grew up in a hymn-singing church but since being introduced to Psalm singing I've not really looked back. Bless you.
If I might ask, brother, how common is exclusive psalmody in the Free Church of Scotland nowadays?
 
Greetings pilgrims,

Why I sing the Psalms.

About 25 years ago, I rode my Hayabusa down the highway near my home, reciting the first Psalm. Suddenly, it hit me like a freight train. My crying was more like screaming as the tears ran down my face. The Psalm was not about me. It was about Christ. He was the righteous man. I think all of the Psalms are, in one way or another, messianic. I was never the same after that. Even if not entirely about Christ, which I tend to think they are, it is a unique experience to get to know the heart of the Lord Jesus in a way much deeper than in the New Testament alone. Only in the Psalms can you be sure you're singing to Christ about Christ and with Christ.

It always intrigues me how people write books about how to find Christ in the Old Testament. I read several books on that subject but was never satisfied. Then it hit me that it was not Christ that was hard to find in the Old Testament, but it was the Father who was absent for the most part. Perhaps the creation was an exception to that, although the Bible, in many places, says that the man with boots on the ground was the Lord Jesus Christ himself, who created all things by his Almighty power. Consider the Father's role in those times He spoke. Where was He? He was in heaven–Jesus was on Earth.

Let me remind you of just a few passages.

Jude 1:5 (NIV)
Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.

Colossians 1:15–17 (ESV)
The Preeminence of Christ
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities
—all things were created through him and for him. 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

John 1:1–3 (KJV 1900)
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

1 Corinthians 8:6 (KJV 1900)
6 But to us, there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him;
and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Who then was it that rebuked Job?

1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind and said,
2 “Who is this that darkens counsel
By words without knowledge?
3 “Now gird up your loins like a man,
And I will ask you, and you instruct Me!
4 “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding,
5 Who set its measurements? Since you know.
Or who stretched the line on it?
6 “On what were its bases sunk?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
7 When the morning stars sang together
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?
--Job 38:1–7 (NASB95)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


CHAPTER 1

Song of the Righteous Man

Blessed is the man
Who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly,
Nor stands in the path of sinners,
Nor sits in the seat of the scornful;
But his delight is in the law of the LORD,
And in His law he meditates day and night.
—PSALM 1:1–2

Today we live in a world full of choices. If you go into a computer store, for example, you can purchase a computer and outfit it with numerous features and options. You can tailor-fit the product to meet your specific needs and demands. Another example of today’s seemingly endless choices is the Internet. Millions of Internet surfers have dozens, if not hundreds, of different websites that they have bookmarked in their browsers that give them numerous choices for reading, entertainment, education, and productivity. In this world of many choices, however, Psalm 1 presents a far different picture. Rather than give us multiple choices, the psalmist offers only two: the way of the righteous and the way of the wicked. We often hear that the world is not black and white and that there are many gray areas, but the psalmist entertains no such ideas. He presents the two ways and, in a sense, introduces a conflict between them and the people who choose them throughout the rest of the Psalter.
The first psalm is one of the few in Book 1 that indicates no author (the same is true for Psalm 2). Nevertheless, it serves as the “foyer” to the “mansion” of the Psalter. Its words represent the attitude with which and method of how the reader should approach the rest of the Psalter. It functions much like the closing words of the book of Ecclesiastes: “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God and keep His commandments, for this is man’s all” (Eccl. 12:13). The first psalm gives a description of two ways: righteousness and wickedness. As we take a closer look, we will learn about the two ways and, more specifically, the way of the righteous man. An important question is, who is the righteous man?

The Two Ways

In verse 1, the psalm begins with a description of the blessed man:

Blessed is the man
Who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly,
Nor stands in the path of sinners,
Nor sits in the seat of the scornful.

The psalmist tells us that a person can be blessed as he steers clear of ungodliness and wickedness. In his famous book The Screwtape Letters, C. S. Lewis characterizes the road to hell as a gradual decline rather than a cliff face, and similarly, the psalmist presents a gradual descent into evil. Notice that the blessed man does not walk, stand, or sit with the wicked, sinners, or scoffers. In other words, a person’s engagement with the wicked begins as he walks with them, becomes more involved as he stands with them, and finally results in a close relationship as he sits down with them.
Imagine you are walking along the road with someone who strikes up a conversation with you. You are intrigued, so you stop to consider the substance of the conversation. You want to contemplate the ideas under consideration, so you sit down with your companion, perhaps to share a meal. This illustrates the progression of the way of the wicked. Over the years I have heard confessions from a number of people both within the church and in the broader media who testify that they never thought they would be neck-deep in the sin they were in. They began in a seemingly innocent manner, only to find themselves later drowning in their sin. One public example of this is convicted and executed serial murderer Ted Bundy. In terms of the psalm, he walked with the wicked through dalliances with p0rnography and ended up sitting with the scoffers through serial murder and rape. The blessed man, then, steers clear of evil, but this is only half the equation.

Notice verse 2: “But his delight is in the law of the LORD, and in His law he meditates day and night.” The blessed man, or as verse 6 describes him, the righteous man, takes great delight in the law of Yahweh. Keep in mind that in this context the word law means “instruction,” or “teaching.” Not only does the righteous man delight in the instruction of the Lord but he also constantly sets it before his mind, relentlessly meditating upon it. Not only does he meditate upon it but he also makes it the subject of prayer.
The Lord’s instruction and the righteous man’s meditation upon it yield fruit, as we see in verse 3:

He shall be like a tree
Planted by the rivers of water,
That brings forth its fruit in its season,
Whose leaf also shall not wither;
And whatever he does shall prosper.

The psalmist uses a simile, a comparison of two unlike things (a man and a tree), to describe the prosperity of the righteous man. We must note two things about the prosperity of the righteous man. First, it is the consequence of and not the reward for his delight in the Lord. When a tree is nourished, it naturally produces fruit. Likewise, when the righteous man is nourished by the Lord’s instruction, the natural consequence is the fruit of righteousness.
Second, we must not understand the prosperity of the righteous man in some sort of crass, materialistic fashion—the psalmist is not writing about the health and wealth gospel or an abundance of wealth or material possessions such as cars, money, and large mansions. Rather, this prosperity must be understood in the light of the rest of Scripture, which I will explain later in the chapter. We need to understand, however, that the psalmist’s use of the simile of the fruitful tree suggests that meditation upon God’s instruction does not necessarily produce immediate results.

Rather, just as a tree must be planted and grow for a time before it yields fruit, so also the righteous man’s prayerful meditation upon the law of the Lord eventually yields a bounty. As one author writes:

The habit of prayer, this incessant meditation on God’s Law, is not supposed to be something immediately useful. Trees do not bear fruit right away. They first must eat amply of the earth and drink deeply of its water. Such nourishment must serve first to build up the tree. The fruit will come later on, when it is supposed to. The life of Christian prayer and meditation knows nothing of instant holiness; it is all a matter of perseverance and patience. Some trees do not even begin to bear fruit for many years.1

In contrast, the psalmist tells us in verse 4 that because the wicked hate the instruction of the Lord, they are blown about like chaff—the leftover bits of the harvest.

So, then, what awaits the wicked, those who hate the law of God? The psalmist writes: “Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous” (v. 5). The psalmist looks to the future, to the final judgment, and explains that those who hate God will not stand in the judgment. Nor will the wicked be found in the midst of the congregation of the righteous, the people of God. Verse 6 presents a contrast: “For the LORD knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the ungodly shall perish.” This means that the Lord knows the destiny of the righteous; therefore, He protects them and brings them to that destination. At the final judgment He acknowledges them as His people, whereas the wicked, the psalmist tells us, will perish.

Who Is the Righteous Man?

As we reflect upon what the psalmist has written, we see that he clearly presents the two ways—the way of the righteous and the way of the wicked. He showcases the characteristics of both the righteous and the wicked man. However, as I asked at the beginning of the chapter, who is the righteous man? Do we too quickly read the psalm and think that we are the righteous man? Perhaps in the effort to be egalitarian and “improve” the Bible and its patriarchal views, many translations render the opening verse, “Blessed are those …” which is a distortion of what the text says. To translate the passage in this manner changes the rest of the message. How? In this way: both the Hebrew and Greek words used for man are not the generic terms that denote human beings. Rather, there is one particular man in view. Who is he? The second psalm gives a further hint.

We often make the mistake of identifying only some of the psalms as messianic, such as 2; 22, and 110. Instead, we must identify all of the psalms as messianic—they all point us to Christ. Jesus told His disciples on the road to Emmaus: “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me” (Luke 24:44). This means that Jesus is the righteous and blessed man. Not only does the broader witness of Scripture confirm this but also the immediate context.
Interpreters from the earliest days, both Jewish and Christian, have noted that Psalms 1 and 2 are supposed to be taken together as one literary unit. Psalm 1 begins by talking about the blessing that falls upon the blessed man (v. 1), and Psalm 2 ends with the blessing that falls upon all who take refuge in the Messiah (v. 12). Psalm 2 is clearly about the Messiah, the Anointed of God. If we put these two psalms together, then (remember, there were no chapter divisions in the Bible—they were added long after the Bible was written), the psalmist informs us that the Messiah, Jesus, is the blessed and righteous man.

Think of it! Can Adam, Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, or any other Old Testament saint lay claim to the title that he is the righteous man? How is anyone righteous? The answer comes from the earliest chapters of the Bible when God declared Abraham righteous by faith in the promise of the Redeemer to come—because of his faith in Jesus (Gen. 15:6). Christ was the One who did not walk, stand, or sit in the counsel, path, or seat of the wicked. Christ delighted Himself in the law of His heavenly Father; not only was He completely obedient to it but he also meditated upon it day and night. Jesus told His disciples: “My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work” (John 4:34).

We frequently see Jesus withdrawing from the crowds and His disciples so that He could pray and meditate upon the instruction of His Father. Indeed, Jesus is like a tree that is planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in season. It is crucial that we see this because if we miss it, we will fail to see the source of our salvation, life, and sanctification. We cannot and will not become righteous by meditating upon the instruction of the Lord. We are, in and of ourselves, incapable of being righteous—we have no righteousness of which to speak. To come to the Word of God apart from the mediatorial work of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit is to try to feed ourselves when we do not have a mouth. What does the psalmist say? Blessed are all those who take refuge in the Messiah (2:12).

We must, therefore, look to Christ by faith alone, as not only will Christ, the one righteous man, save us from our sins but He will also fill us with the Holy Spirit and enable us to be like that tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season. Only in Christ, by the power of the Spirit, can we approach the instruction of the Lord and delight in it. Only in Christ, the righteous man, can we produce fruit like the tree planted by streams of water. Recall Jesus’ words in John 15:4–5: “Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me. I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.” Therefore, beloved, look to Christ by faith, meditate upon His Word, and pray to Christ that He would manifest His righteousness in you.

Remember, as the tree requires time to produce fruit, our sanctification will not be instantaneous. Rather, sometimes we will struggle with our sins for a while. However, we must begin by confessing our sinfulness, whatever it might be, and patiently wait on Christ to conform us to His image. At the same time, we must fill our hearts with His Word and meditate upon it day and night. We must not walk in the counsel of the wicked, stand in the way of sinners, or sit in the seat of scoffers. Apart from Christ, we will undoubtedly begin the descent into such sinful conduct. Therefore, we must constantly seek refuge in Him.

Conclusion

I close this chapter with a portrait that will help us see Psalm 1 in the light of Christ. In the garden-temple of Eden, the first Adam stood in the presence of God, his Father, in the midst of a grove of fruit-bearing trees. In subsequent temples, the high priest would stand in the presence of God, his Father, as he was flanked by the temple menorah, a lighted almond tree, and later golden palm trees that were etched into the walls of the temple.
Psalm 92:12–15 likens the righteous people of God, like Psalm 1, to trees, but more specifically to palm trees:

The righteous shall flourish like a palm tree,
He shall grow like a cedar in Lebanon.
Those who are planted in the house of the LORD
Shall flourish in the courts of our God.
They shall still bear fruit in old age;
They shall be fresh and flourishing,
To declare that the LORD is upright;
He is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in Him.

Here, the psalmist paints a prophetic picture of the future that looks just like the prophetic architecture and accoutrements of the tabernacle and temple. What was that prophetic portrait?

To what does Jesus liken the godly person but a fruitful tree? In Luke 6:43–44 He says, “For a good tree does not bear bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. For every tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they gather grapes from a bramble bush.” This imagery reappears in the closing chapters of the Bible and symbolizes none other than Jesus Christ, our Great High Priest, the last Adam, who stands in the midst of His heavenly Father surrounded by the saints, the righteous people of God, those who are planted by the river of life and yield the fruit of the Spirit in season. Rejoice that Jesus Christ is the blessed and righteous man and that He—by His life, death, resurrection, and ascension—makes us what we have been declared by faith alone in Him: a righteous and fruit-bearing people.

J. V. Fesko, Songs of a Suffering King: The Grand Christ Hymn of Psalms 1–8 (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014), 13–22.
 
If I might ask, brother, how common is exclusive psalmody in the Free Church of Scotland nowadays?
It is more common the further north a person travels. The Isle of Lewis (Lewis Presbytery) for example is, I'd say, a majority EP Presbytery. In the lowlands it is far less common; although I preach in two or three FCs who are certainly EP when I preach there ;)

I don't think Glasgow as an EP FC any more, ichabod, nor does Edinburgh. Since the split to form the FC(C), I'd say that most EP Free Churchmen have moved across to the Continuing.
Interestingly whenever I talk to people in non EP FCs, I routinely hear, "Well, we don't really like the hymns and would prefer the Psalms only".

The current rule of the Free Church states:
6. The General Assembly ordain that every service of congregational worship shall include the singing of Psalms.
... which to my mind instructs that at least two Metrical Psalms should be sung at each diet of worship. I don't know of any FCs that don't sing any Psalms. I know of a few which sing three Psalms and one hymn.
 
Interestingly whenever I talk to people in non EP FCs, I routinely hear, "Well, we don't really like the hymns and would prefer the Psalms only".
Sadly, when a denomination leaves the old paths, it's always the ministers who are the "progressives!"
 
... which to my mind instructs that at least two Metrical Psalms should be sung at each diet of worship. I don't know of any FCs that don't sing any Psalms. I know of a few which sing three Psalms and one hymn.

The last time I was in one of the Free Churches in central Edinburgh - in March 2023 - there were no psalms sung in the morning service, which was highly disappointing. I had worshipped in that congregation several times in the past and they always sang at least one psalm each service. I ended up going to Chalmers Church in south Edinburgh for the evening service instead. One thing to note is how rapid the decline often is once the innovations take root.
 
The last time I was in one of the Free Churches in central Edinburgh - in March 2023 - there were no psalms sung in the morning service, which was highly disappointing. I had worshipped in that congregation several times in the past and they always sang at least one psalm each service. I ended up going to Chalmers Church in south Edinburgh for the evening service instead. One thing to note is how rapid the decline often is once the innovations take root.
Really? Now that does surprise and disappoint me. I can only hope that was a one off or mistake. I don’t know whether Chalmers sing the Psalms?
 
Just a question that I have had concerning the topic as a non-EP. How do EPers address the view of 'Life as worship' in regards to Music outside of formal worship? One of my hang ups on EP is that it forbids the singing of the Apostle's Creed, Gloria Patri, and the Common Doxology even in private worship(for example: I am sometimes moved to worship by what I read to sing the Apostle's Creed in reverence toward God), but still allows for singing songs of unbelievers when outside of formal worship, and I find the distinction to be lacking(and I view it as somewhat hypocritical). So, how do people here answer this question, and are there any principals that we could look in or prior to the 17th century(since our context is definitely different, I would argue in a worse way) that would allow us to sus out the view of our forefathers might have had(in regards to listening to unbeliever music on any day let alone the Lord's Day)? Thanks in advance for responses.

Edit: Just clarifying that I am for Psalm supremacy(aka they should always be part of worship) but not for exclusivity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Really? Now that does surprise and disappoint me. I can only hope that was a one off or mistake. I don’t know whether Chalmers sing the Psalms?

It may just have been a one-off, as the regular minister was not preaching that morning. Chalmers did not sing any psalms either. They are good people and my visit was generally a positive experience. Although they remind me a lot of Sydney Anglicans, which is a positive in many ways, but not so good in other respects.
 
One of my hang ups on EP is that it forbids the singing of the Apostle's Creed, Gloria Patri, and the Common Doxology even in private worship(for example: I am sometimes moved to worship by what I read to sing the Apostle's Creed in reverence toward God), but still allows for singing songs of unbelievers when outside of formal worship, and I find the distinction to be lacking(and I view it as somewhat hypocritical). So, how do people here answer this question
One is the Word of God, one is not. If you are moved to worship God by something, should it lead you to offer praise to Him from His revealed Word or the words of man?

are there any principals that we could look in or prior to the 17th century
Was the Apostle's Creed written to be sung?
Doesn't the singing of Gloria Patri end up replacing/supplanting the Trinitarian doxology/blessing of the ordained minister?
Are there no doxologies in the inspired text (like at at the end of each book of the Psalms) that we need to invent them?
 
One is the Word of God, one is not. If you are moved to worship God by something, should it lead you to offer praise to Him from His revealed Word or the words of man?
This completely misses what I asked almost to a degree that I must question if you are arguing against something else or if indeed you can see what I wrote as if I am asking an earnest question. I was asking someone to clarify the EP/RP position on the Christian/Biblical notion of our lives as worship to God.

My Thoughts: If we wanted to worship(public/private, formal/informal) it should be done only by the principals(in my view I accept hymns into this both inside and outside of formal public worship) laid down in scripture. I believe that this would disallow the singing of the music of unbelievers(or anything not psalms in any context for the EP) if that is true, but my problem is that every EP church I have attended is fine with singing 'Happy Birthday' and other songs which aren't Psalms(on and off the Lord's Day). Our singing voices are given to us to worship God. So, to use them to sing the songs of the world rather than the songs of Zion is wrong. I just know too many EP/RP people who are fine putting on some godless music through the week and singing/listening to it, but also saying that to sing Hymns is wrong which I find absolutely ridiculous(or, indeed, preposterous). Why sing the radio when we have psalms and beautiful poems from godly saints to sing?

Was the Apostle's Creed written to be sung?
Doesn't the singing of Gloria Patri end up replacing/supplanting the Trinitarian doxology/blessing of the ordained minister?
Are there no doxologies in the inspired text (like at at the end of each book of the Psalms) that we need to invent them?
Also, I almost don't even want to dignify this with a response since it misses the point(Like your entire response) and doesn't give any sources(which was the question), but I will address the fact that there are dozens of benedictions in the bible and ministers that are RP/EP(and in yours and my context in the RPCNA) use benedictions never found in scripture('Father, Son, and Holy Spirit' is only used in the Great Commission and yet I hear that in the benediction all too often in EP/RP churches), so, I ask: why not doxologies as well?

I know this topic has much baggage, but I am trying to learn and find reading to come to a better knowledge of the truth. When people like you come in like fire crackers and ignore clear questions to foist on others irrelevant arguments it only causes confusion and anger. So, if anyone else could address my original post, as well as my further clarifications here, it would be much helpful.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just a question that I have had concerning the topic as a non-EP. How do EPers address the view of 'Life as worship' in regards to Music outside of formal worship?
If I'm understanding your question correctly, you are wondering how 1) can an EPer sing any other songs outside of formal worship and 2) how can an EPer sing godless music? These are two distinct questions. To answer the first, the Second Commandment applies to worship: whenever we wish to draw near to God to worship him, we must approach him as he has appointed. We would not worship God by images, so we ought not worship him in any other way not appointed in his Word. You might search the board for distinctions on specific vs generic worship for a bit more detail.

Outside the realm of worship, a normative principle applies: if it is not forbidden, we are morally permitted to do it. There are restrictions on Christian liberty that must be observed, of course, including whether an action is wise or beneficial. We are therefore morally permitted to use other songs than the Psalms when we are not seeking to worship God. There is a legitimate category of life where we do things to God's glory--whether they contain explicit religious reference or not--but it is not worship. If you deny this, you lose the regulative principle--it is not an EP issue. If you believe that we must use our singing voices to only sing songs of worship to God or only songs written by believers, that is not an EP issue either, but something you'll have to take up with everyone in the Reformed church!

There is also the category of meditation to consider. Meditation leads us to worship God by the means that he has appointed--oftentimes praise in prayer, or singing of praise by the psalms but also in stirring up our internal devotion to him that he has required. This isn't theoretically an EP issue either but an issue of the regulative principle: I can see many in the non-denominational world trying to reduce the regulative principle to absurdity (or even the not worshipping by images) by saying that meditation is free and leads them to spontaneously worship God by whatever means they feel is good.

Singing secular songs on the Lord's day is also not an EP issue but an issue in the Reformed church, which does not keep the Sabbath as it ought. There are plenty of EPers which would not allow for that on the Lord's day.

As for genuinely godless music (not just secular music but godless), that is a contradiction, indeed, and it is a problem in the church--Reformed included--that we do not take more care to separate from the world in the music that we put to our ears or mouths for recreation. My minister preached on separation form the world at our family conference last month and made some application to music:
 
Thanks for the response, Raymond. The sermon was greatly encouraging.

Maybe I am confused, but there are a great many EPers that hold to more than just formal worship(whether family or the Lord's Day service), so, for instance, if I am alone in my car during a break at work reading Isaiah for my weekly devotions during the course of the week week and decide to sing 'O Come O Come Emmanuel' in informal worship it would be wrong. Correct me if I am wrong about this since I often see people talk about how the RP/EP position covers public, private, and secret worship(whether formal or informal).

I agree with the Regulative Principal. I believe that the Word of God lays down specific principals for Worship. EP says only Psalms can be sung because of their view, but they avoid doing any other part of Worship. So, as I said before, they will do uninspired benedictions as well even though there are a sufficient amount in Holy Scripture. I have no such problem since I believe that we have a form given through the Word of God to structure other songs, prayers, doxologies, benedictions, etc. This also goes hand in hand with Christian living, I see the whole of biblical revelation and I see the 'narrow path'. I see principals that inform the Christian how they ought to live, so for me I see a regulative principal both for formal worship as well as the entire life. 'Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s' There are definitely things of common nature or indifferent use, but those are things that can be used right or wrong, and Christians are commanded to use them right.

I would also would ask for a clarification of how you or anyone else can exist and sing without a thought of 'seeking to worship God' since I cannot go a moment without seeing or experiencing the existence of God and the mercy he has had on us. I have a hard time understanding that we can be driven to sing(for any good reason at least) without remembering and seeking to worship the creator who made us. This is why David says, "When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, The moon the stars, which you have ordained, What is man that you are mindful of him, And the son of man that you visit him?' And in my mind this passage would seem to imply that we would have to be inconsiderate or mindless to sing without a thought of worship to our creator.

When I see the lives of EPer I see only hypocrisy toward the everyday ordinary lives that we live day to day. What does it matter if you sing the Psalms in formal worship, but on the other six days you sing all other manner of song which do not edify or remind us of the creator. The saints of history would look at modern western reformed Christianity(as well as all other strains of Christianity) with wonder and amazement that a people could have such doctrine and such blessings and yet spend so much of it to carve out a life of earthly comfort.
 
This completely misses what I asked almost to a degree that I must question if you are arguing against something else or if indeed you can see what I wrote as if I am asking an earnest question. I was asking someone to clarify the EP/RP position on the Christian/Biblical notion of our lives as worship to God.

My Thoughts: If we wanted to worship(public/private, formal/informal) it should be done only by the principals(in my view I accept hymns into this both inside and outside of formal public worship) laid down in scripture. I believe that this would disallow the singing of the music of unbelievers(or anything not psalms in any context for the EP) if that is true, but my problem is that every EP church I have attended is fine with singing 'Happy Birthday' and other songs which aren't Psalms(on and off the Lord's Day). Our singing voices are given to us to worship God. So, to use them to sing the songs of the world rather than the songs of Zion is wrong. I just know too many EP/RP people who are fine putting on some godless music through the week and singing/listening to it, but also saying that to sing Hymns is wrong which I find absolutely ridiculous(or, indeed, preposterous). Why sing the radio when we have psalms and beautiful poems from godly saints to sing?


Also, I almost don't even want to dignify this with a response since it misses the point(Like your entire response) and doesn't give any sources(which was the question), but I will address the fact that there are dozens of benedictions in the bible and ministers that are RP/EP(and in yours and my context in the RPCNA) use benedictions never found in scripture('Father, Son, and Holy Spirit' is only used in the Great Commission and yet I hear that in the benediction all too often in EP/RP churches), so, I ask: why not doxologies as well?

I know this topic has much baggage, but I am trying to learn and find reading to come to a better knowledge of the truth. When people like you come in like fire crackers and ignore clear questions to foist on others irrelevant arguments it only causes confusion and anger. So, if anyone else could address my original post, as well as my further clarifications here, it would be much helpful.
I apologize - I did/do not entirely understand what you were asking. Sorry to have angered you - I was trying to engage with what I thought was your question(-s).
 
Small correction: Father Son and Holy Ghost also appears in 2nd Corinthians 13:14 (not entirely relevant to the actual arguments but I wanted to add that)
The literal words in this order: 'Father, Son, and Holy Spirit' are never used. That quote says God instead of Father. i.e. means the same thing, but I hear the word Father in the benediction along with Son and Holy Spirit and there are no benedictions with those words.

Here is a verbatim quote of a benediction I heard recently in an EP/RP(RPCNA) church: "The peace of God which passes all understanding keep your hearts and minds in the knowledge of God and of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. The blessing of God almighty, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit be among you and remain with you always. Amen." I think it is a benediction since it meets the form laid down principally in scripture, but I also don't believe in the EP conception of the Regulative Principal which does not have such a view.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When I see the lives of EPer I see only hypocrisy toward the everyday ordinary lives that we live day to day.
That's a little tough isn't it? Where did you find these EPiers that are hypocrites. Do you think I'm a hypocrite just because I sing the Psalms. How many EP people do you know?

The example you gave of a song you might sing when you were alone, Oh, Come O Come Emmanuel? Is that it? Now I should mention that @iainduguid took me to task for this, but my question is why would we want to sing an historical fiction? Let's all pretend that Jesus hasn't come yet and we're languishing because we want him to come. What if your pastor opened the service with that prayer asking Jesus to come to our church and save us. I just think that's weird. Neither do I like songs that put words into Jesus mouth as if they were quotations. That too seems weird to me. I'm convinced the Psalms speak everywhere about the heart of Jesus during his time of humiliation. It's kind of hard to mimic the heart of Jesus in a man-made song. I am not 100% against ever singing hymns. I mentioned earlier in this thread that I'm having a hymn along with a Psalm sung at my funeral. But there's just not many hymns I feel comfortable singing. How about O how I love Jesus?

You must have run into a lot of bad apples that are proud somehow because they sing the Psalms exclusively. Pride is like that. Pride can take any good thing and destroy it. But I say again that I thought you were a little to judgmental and harsh towards people you've never met.

Well, now you've met me and I am a chief of sinners. My name is Ed Walsh and I've been a Christian since I was 20 years old and this November I'll be 73. You might want to read my post about singing the Psalms in this thread.

Take care,

Ed
 
That's a little tough isn't it? Where did you find these EPiers that are hypocrites. Do you think I'm a hypocrite just because I sing the Psalms. How many EP people do you know?
Good ol' inflammatory language, I did not say: Singing Psalms = hypocrite. I said I viewed singing the music of unbelievers while holding to EP = hypocrite. I would appreciate reading what I wrote. And I know several churches full of EPers, what is your point with this?
The example you gave of a song you might sing when you were alone, Oh, Come O Come Emmanuel? Is that it? Now I should mention that @iainduguid took me to task for this, but my question is why would we want to sing an historical fiction? Let's all pretend that Jesus hasn't come yet and we're languishing because we want him to come. What if your pastor opened the service with that prayer asking Jesus to come to our church and save us. I just think that's weird. Neither do I like songs that put words into Jesus mouth as if they were quotations. That too seems weird to me. I'm convinced the Psalms speak everywhere about the heart of Jesus during his time of humiliation. It's kind of hard to mimic the heart of Jesus in a man-made song. I am not 100% against ever singing hymns. I mentioned earlier in this thread that I'm having a hymn along with a Psalm sung at my funeral. But there's just not many hymns I feel comfortable singing. How about O how I love Jesus?
That is an extremely narrow view of the song which does not take into account the view of salvation still coming to people in this present moment as well as the fact of it being good to remember what has happened(i.e. the first advent of Christ) while looking forward to what is to come(i.e. the second advent of Christ). Jesus is still ransoming his own from Satan's tyranny by the effectual application of his blood to his lost sheep. Should we skip the psalms that speak about the Exile in Babylon? After all it is already past! No, that would be pure idiocy. We look toward the exile of our forefathers because we living in one now. O Come O Come Emmanuel we look forward to his coming to judge the living and the dead at his appearing. So, as I said, that is an incredibly uncharitable and narrow interpretation of the song that doesn't take into its origin, with what you are saying one might think a jew or a dispensational wrote the words, but alas it was based on early medieval monks reciting the O antiphons.
I am not 100% against ever singing hymns. I mentioned earlier in this thread that I'm having a hymn along with a Psalm sung at my funeral. But there's just not many hymns I feel comfortable singing. How about O how I love Jesus?
Funerals fall under the Westminster Directory for the Public Worship of God. Since, they are public worship, you should remain consistent and abstain from a hymn and use one of the Psalms that talks about death, there are a great many of those. I have no problem with the EP position when it is being consistent, I gladly submit to my RPCNA church in it, but I cant stand when the EP people themselves wont submit to what they claim to believe. Christians need to be true to what they believe or else they are hypocrites. Though I might add that the Directory also has a much different view of the burial of the dead, but even if you take exception to that, it would be wise to treat it as a worship service since doubtlessly it will have all the marks of one.
You must have run into a lot of bad apples that are proud somehow because they sing the Psalms exclusively. Pride is like that. Pride can take any good thing and destroy it. But I say again that I thought you were a little to judgmental and harsh towards people you've never met.
This is literally a no true Scotsman fallacy. You are saying that I cannot be speaking of true EPers because a true EPer would not do X. Like I said before, I have met several churches worth of EPers, so unlike you are spinning it, I have met these people.
Well, now you've met me and I am a chief of sinners. My name is Ed Walsh and I've been a Christian since I was 20 years old and this November I'll be 73. You might want to read my post about singing the Psalms in this thread.
I understand the arguments for Psalm singing. There is no shortage of that, but as soon as it comes to answering the counterpoints the Exclusive Psalmist camp seems to have trouble answering the objections that are on the ground of inconsistency.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is literally a no true Scotsman fallacy. You are saying that I cannot be speaking of true EPers because a true EPer would not do X. Like I said before, I have met several churches worth of EPers, so unlike you are spinning it, I have met these people.
I guess it's good that you understand all my thoughts that were behind what I said. You do seem a little hot under the collar though in response to the way I spoke to you. Anyway I will not be posting anymore on this subject. By the way, the psalm that will be sung at my funeral is Psalm 90. That ought to be good enough for death. I'm hoping I can get the preacher to use parts of Psalm 90 as a text for his sermon. I already have my written instructions that the sermon has to do nothing with me and just about salvation. Sorry if I rattled you. It certainly wasn't my intention.

Ed
 
Last edited:
Good ol' inflammatory language, I did not say: Singing Psalms = hypocrite. I said I viewed singing the music of unbelievers while holding to EP = hypocrite. I would appreciate reading what I wrote. And I know several churches full of EPers, what is your point with this?

That is an extremely narrow view of the song which does not take into account the view of salvation still coming to people in this present moment as well as the fact of it being good to remember what has happened(i.e. the first advent of Christ) while looking forward to what is to come(i.e. the second advent of Christ). Jesus is still ransoming his own from Satan's tyranny by the effectual application of his blood to his lost sheep. Should we skip the psalms that speak about the Exile in Babylon? After all it is already past! No, that would be pure idiocy. We look toward the exile of our forefathers because we living in one now. O Come O Come Emmanuel we look forward to his coming to judge the living and the dead at his appearing. So, as I said, that is an incredibly uncharitable and narrow interpretation of the song that doesn't take into its origin, with what you are saying one might think a jew or a dispensational wrote the words, but alas it was based on early medieval monks reciting the O antiphons.

Funerals fall under the Westminster Directory for the Public Worship of God. Since, they are public worship, you should remain consistent and abstain from a hymn and use one of the Psalms that talks about death, there are a great many of those. I have no problem with the EP position when it is being consistent, I gladly submit to my RPCNA church in it, but I cant stand when the EP people themselves wont submit to what they claim to believe. Christians need to be true to what they believe or else they are hypocrites. Though I might add that the Directory also has a much different view of the burial of the dead, but even if you take exception to that, it would be wise to treat it as a worship service since doubtlessly it will have all the marks of one.

This is literally a no true Scotsman fallacy. You are saying that I cannot be speaking of true EPers because a true EPer would not do X. Like I said before, I have met several churches worth of EPers, so unlike you are spinning it, I have met these people.

I understand the arguments for Psalm singing. There is no shortage of that, but as soon as it comes to answering the counterpoints the Exclusive Psalmist camp seems to have trouble answering the objections that are on the ground of inconsistency.
I pray that you may find peace on this issue, brother.
 
Good ol' inflammatory language, I did not say: Singing Psalms = hypocrite. I said I viewed singing the music of unbelievers while holding to EP = hypocrite. I would appreciate reading what I wrote. And I know several churches full of EPers, what is your point with this?

That is an extremely narrow view of the song which does not take into account the view of salvation still coming to people in this present moment as well as the fact of it being good to remember what has happened(i.e. the first advent of Christ) while looking forward to what is to come(i.e. the second advent of Christ). Jesus is still ransoming his own from Satan's tyranny by the effectual application of his blood to his lost sheep. Should we skip the psalms that speak about the Exile in Babylon? After all it is already past! No, that would be pure idiocy. We look toward the exile of our forefathers because we living in one now. O Come O Come Emmanuel we look forward to his coming to judge the living and the dead at his appearing. So, as I said, that is an incredibly uncharitable and narrow interpretation of the song that doesn't take into its origin, with what you are saying one might think a jew or a dispensational wrote the words, but alas it was based on early medieval monks reciting the O antiphons.

Funerals fall under the Westminster Directory for the Public Worship of God. Since, they are public worship, you should remain consistent and abstain from a hymn and use one of the Psalms that talks about death, there are a great many of those. I have no problem with the EP position when it is being consistent, I gladly submit to my RPCNA church in it, but I cant stand when the EP people themselves wont submit to what they claim to believe. Christians need to be true to what they believe or else they are hypocrites. Though I might add that the Directory also has a much different view of the burial of the dead, but even if you take exception to that, it would be wise to treat it as a worship service since doubtlessly it will have all the marks of one.

This is literally a no true Scotsman fallacy. You are saying that I cannot be speaking of true EPers because a true EPer would not do X. Like I said before, I have met several churches worth of EPers, so unlike you are spinning it, I have met these people.

I understand the arguments for Psalm singing. There is no shortage of that, but as soon as it comes to answering the counterpoints the Exclusive Psalmist camp seems to have trouble answering the objections that are on the ground of inconsistency.
Spend a little less time calling others inflammatory in their language and actually pay attention to your own tone. A tone which immediately jumped into “inflammatory” language and imputing of motive/intent. If you have frustrations, fine. Stop projecting those frustrations onto others.
 
Moderating. This thread needs a cooling off period so it is now locked. Abraham, please take TE Ryan's admonition to heart.
Good ol' inflammatory language, I did not say: Singing Psalms = hypocrite. I said I viewed singing the music of unbelievers while holding to EP = hypocrite. I would appreciate reading what I wrote. And I know several churches full of EPers, what is your point with this?

That is an extremely narrow view of the song which does not take into account the view of salvation still coming to people in this present moment as well as the fact of it being good to remember what has happened(i.e. the first advent of Christ) while looking forward to what is to come(i.e. the second advent of Christ). Jesus is still ransoming his own from Satan's tyranny by the effectual application of his blood to his lost sheep. Should we skip the psalms that speak about the Exile in Babylon? After all it is already past! No, that would be pure idiocy. We look toward the exile of our forefathers because we living in one now. O Come O Come Emmanuel we look forward to his coming to judge the living and the dead at his appearing. So, as I said, that is an incredibly uncharitable and narrow interpretation of the song that doesn't take into its origin, with what you are saying one might think a jew or a dispensational wrote the words, but alas it was based on early medieval monks reciting the O antiphons.

Funerals fall under the Westminster Directory for the Public Worship of God. Since, they are public worship, you should remain consistent and abstain from a hymn and use one of the Psalms that talks about death, there are a great many of those. I have no problem with the EP position when it is being consistent, I gladly submit to my RPCNA church in it, but I cant stand when the EP people themselves wont submit to what they claim to believe. Christians need to be true to what they believe or else they are hypocrites. Though I might add that the Directory also has a much different view of the burial of the dead, but even if you take exception to that, it would be wise to treat it as a worship service since doubtlessly it will have all the marks of one.

This is literally a no true Scotsman fallacy. You are saying that I cannot be speaking of true EPers because a true EPer would not do X. Like I said before, I have met several churches worth of EPers, so unlike you are spinning it, I have met these people.

I understand the arguments for Psalm singing. There is no shortage of that, but as soon as it comes to answering the counterpoints the Exclusive Psalmist camp seems to have trouble answering the objections that are on the ground of inconsistency.

Spend a little less time calling others inflammatory in their language and actually pay attention to your own tone. A tone which immediately jumped into “inflammatory” language and imputing of motive/intent. If you have frustrations, fine. Stop projecting those frustrations onto others.
 
Thread reopened if anything more on topic needs saying, carry on topic. Deleted member 12768 asked to be removed from the board; he felt the issue was with everyone else not him.
 
If we wanted to worship(public/private, formal/informal) it should be done only by the principals(in my view I accept hymns into this both inside and outside of formal public worship) laid down in scripture. I believe that this would disallow the singing of the music of unbelievers(or anything not psalms in any context for the EP) if that is true, but my problem is that every EP church I have attended is fine with singing 'Happy Birthday' and other songs which aren't Psalms(on and off the Lord's Day). Our singing voices are given to us to worship God. So, to use them to sing the songs of the world rather than the songs of Zion is wrong.

I don’t intend to speak ill of the deleted, but I had wanted to chat with him about this before the thread lock. Did no one else see the absurdity of this argument? Does anyone here, EP or nonEP, think that the singing voice is for worship only and that singing anything other than that which is worship is inherently wrong? I have never heard an EP state such a thing. So, to be branded as hypocritical based on this line of reasoning is just odd to me. Am I missing something here?
 
Thread reopened if anything more on topic needs saying, carry on topic. Deleted member 12768 asked to be removed from the board; he felt the issue was with everyone else not him.
If we wanted to worship(public/private, formal/informal) it should be done only by the principals(in my view I accept hymns into this both inside and outside of formal public worship) laid down in scripture. I believe that this would disallow the singing of the music of unbelievers(or anything not psalms in any context for the EP) if that is true, but my problem is that every EP church I have attended is fine with singing 'Happy Birthday' and other songs which aren't Psalms(on and off the Lord's Day). Our singing voices are given to us to worship God. So, to use them to sing the songs of the world rather than the songs of Zion is wrong.

I don’t intend to speak ill of the deleted, but I had wanted to chat with him about this before the thread lock. Did no one else see the absurdity of this argument? Does anyone here, EP or nonEP, think that the singing voice is for worship only and that singing anything other than that which is worship is inherently wrong? I have never heard an EP state such a thing. So, to be branded as hypocritical based on this line of reasoning is just odd to me. Am I missing something here?
I think I understand his concern/query to a degree, but I think it fails to acknowledge that there is a spectrum (however small) within the EP position. Again, I am positionally IP, though EP in practice, but the same principle applies to both in this case. There is a strict position held by some - only EP/IP all the time. Then there is a middle position (the majority?) - EP/IP when worshipping (public, family, and private). And finally there is a less strict position held by some - EP/IP only in corporate worship (public and family). I advocate for the latter based on the following reasoning:

While I don't base my position solely (or even largely) on the "psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs" statements in Ephesians 5.19 and Colossians 3.16, they are a part of the argument, and both speak of singing (1) to one another, (2) from your heart, and (3) to the Lord. You can do all 3 in public worship. You cannot do #1 in private worship. So I do believe Scripture sets forth a distinction. Furthermore, the previous dispensation teaches us that there are inspired songs that can be sung that are corporate but not part of worship - for example, the songs of Deborah and Moses were composed for corporate civic celebration, but they were not included in the psalter used for corporate worship (even though they were in fact commanded to be recorded and sung - See Deut. 31-32). Solomon composed over 1000 songs, but they are not all included in the psalter either - like the "songs in the night" Elihu speaks of God giving His people, they were likely private, personal compositions, and may not have been strictly to praise God. I learned my A,B,Cs via a song that did not mention God, was not directed to God, and yet glorified God. Sometimes I think the conversation about music needs a dose of Luther's the-maid-who-sweeps-her-kitchen-is-doing-the-will-of-God-just-as-much-as-the-monk-who-prays perspective.

I will not sing uninspired songs in public (including family) worship. In private worship, I cannot usually think of something better to sing than a psalm. And I doubt those who grew up singing inspired songs ever think to sing anything else (the only reason I know some hymns is because I was brought up in a congregation that sang them - it's almost funny at times when I hear my children say "Hey, that's the tune for Psalm such-and-such" when they hear certain hymns being sung).
 
I think I understand his concern/query to a degree, but I think it fails to acknowledge that there is a spectrum (however small) within the EP position. Again, I am positionally IP, though EP in practice, but the same principle applies to both in this case. There is a strict position held by some - only EP/IP all the time. Then there is a middle position (the majority?) - EP/IP when worshipping (public, family, and private). And finally there is a less strict position held by some - EP/IP only in corporate worship (public and family). I advocate for the latter based on the following reasoning:

While I don't base my position solely (or even largely) on the "psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs" statements in Ephesians 5.19 and Colossians 3.16, they are a part of the argument, and both speak of singing (1) to one another, (2) from your heart, and (3) to the Lord. You can do all 3 in public worship. You cannot do #1 in private worship. So I do believe Scripture sets forth a distinction. Furthermore, the previous dispensation teaches us that there are inspired songs that can be sung that are corporate but not part of worship - for example, the songs of Deborah and Moses were composed for corporate civic celebration, but they were not included in the psalter used for corporate worship (even though they were in fact commanded to be recorded and sung - See Deut. 31-32). Solomon composed over 1000 songs, but they are not all included in the psalter either - like the "songs in the night" Elihu speaks of God giving His people, they were likely private, personal compositions, and may not have been strictly to praise God. I learned my A,B,Cs via a song that did not mention God, was not directed to God, and yet glorified God. Sometimes I think the conversation about music needs a dose of Luther's the-maid-who-sweeps-her-kitchen-is-doing-the-will-of-God-just-as-much-as-the-monk-who-prays perspective.

I will not sing uninspired songs in public (including family) worship. In private worship, I cannot usually think of something better to sing than a psalm. And I doubt those who grew up singing inspired songs ever think to sing anything else (the only reason I know some hymns is because I was brought up in a congregation that sang them - it's almost funny at times when I hear my children say "Hey, that's the tune for Psalm such-and-such" when they hear certain hymns being sung).
The above quote seems to state that he thinks singing is only to be worship. That singing any uninspired song even outside of a worship context (like Happy Birthday) is somehow contradictory to an EP understanding of the RPW. I find that argument novel and odd. I don’t know a single EP who thinks you can’t sing any “secular” music because all singing is to be worship.
 
I don’t know a single EP who thinks you can’t sing any “secular” music because all singing is to be worship.
Alongside this idea, would you consider listening to a hymn which draws from the word of God or song of Scripture other than the Psalms sinful?

I ask because surely in doing so the act is necessarily worshipful.


Also to comment on the following,
One is the Word of God, one is not. If you are moved to worship God by something, should it lead you to offer praise to Him from His revealed Word or the words of man?
It does strike me as odd to speak of hymns/spiritual songs as the word of man as opposed to the word of God, as if hymns are naturalistic and in someway opposed to the Scriptures.

Whilst I understand they are not composed by infallible inspiration, even those good hymns/songs which use no direct song or prayer of Scripture outside the Psalms are drawing solely upon the word of God.
By illustration, taking the opening words of one example,

“Oh Lord my Rock and my Redeemer” - Psalm 19:14
“Greatest Treasure of my longing soul” - Genesis 15:1, Isaiah 26:9
“My God, like You there is no other” - Jeremiah 10:6
“True delight is found in You alone” - Psalm 16:11, Isaiah 58:14, Philippians 3:8
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top