If you are EP, then...

Status
Not open for further replies.

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
If you are EP, then you should sing in Hebrew!
Upon which it naturally follows, if you are sola scriptura, then you should read the Hebrew and Greek. Quite clearly there is something amiss with the conclusion which does not take into account the validity of faithful translations. See WCF 1:8, and Larger Catechism answers 156, 157.
 

MrMerlin777

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Wow this looks like an argy bargy just waiting to happen. I'll hold the coats for anyone who's rolling up their sleeves. ;)

:worms:
 

VaughanRSmith

Puritan Board Sophomore
It actually raises an interesting question for me. I'm new to the whole idea of EP, so bear with me.

How does an EP church choose the translation they will use to sing? Is a translation of a psalm in language which is faithful to the original meaning yet more poetic/musically based still considered a faithful translation?

Just shooting off a few questions to make the thread a little less of a :worms:
 

Davidius

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
How does an EP church choose the translation they will use to sing? Is a translation of a psalm in language which is faithful to the original meaning yet more poetic/musically based still considered a faithful translation?
I don't know exactly how the selection process goes since I've only been a member of the RPCNA for a few months. However, I believe that the choice is made on the denominational level. RPCNA churches use the Book of Psalms for Singing (translated "by us for us," although other people use it), the Presbyterian Reformed Church and other denominations use the 1650 Scottish psalter. Someone else should be able to provide more info for this.

Concerning maintaining the original meaning, it helps that English has so many synonyms and has a fair amount of syntactic malleability allowing for creative license.
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
As far as accuracy is concerned, the 1650 Psalter possesses an acknowledged supremacy, with the free use of the divine name being its only criticism in this respect. It was originally written by one skilled in the art of metrication and sensitive to the meaning of the original, passed through an editorial process which included a committee of the Westminster Assembly of divines, and was finally scrutinised through the Presbyterial system of the Church of Scotland before being adopted by the General Assembly. It is on the basis of adaptability to modern worship that it is rejected in favour of more modern renditions. Recent works tend to take more license with the use of paraphrase. The use of Psalters has proven a thorn in the side of the Presbyterian principle of uniformity, with various books being used even in a single denomination. In the more conservative micro-denominations the Scottish Psalter is still utilised because of its accuracy.

The use of metrication has its own history of debate from the 17th century onwards. It is generally accepted that style is a dynamic quality in translation, and so it is looked upon as reasonable to omit certain features of the original; e.g., the acrostic pattern of Ps. 119 is not duplicated. It has therefore been regarded as acceptable to leave out the Hebrew system of metrication (itself a debated subject), and to supplement it with poetic qualities natural to the target language.
 

Puritan Sailor

Puritan Board Doctor
If you are EP, then you should sing in Hebrew!
Your bad ;)

If 1 Cor. 14:26-28 holds any vailidity in worship (which it especially did for the WCF), then translating the psalms is required. Otherwise we must keep silent. The EP argument is not threatened by the reductio :2cents:
 

Romans922

Puritan Board Professor
Your bad ;)

If 1 Cor. 14:26-28 holds any vailidity in worship (which it especially did for the WCF), then translating the psalms is required. Otherwise we must keep silent. The EP argument is not threatened by the reductio :2cents:
Hey, I didn't say anything about EP and dispensationalism! :D
 

Theoretical

Puritan Board Professor
You people REALLY teach such things?:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Max, I used to think the only people who were a cappella EP were ultra-sectarian Church of Christers, but the Reformed tradition has traditionally been EP for reasons related to the Regulative Principle of Worship, and that as such, it was/is believed that only the psalms should be sung.

Now you may disagree with them about Exclusive Psalmody, but don't ridicule a huge portion of your brethren lightly. The position has far, far more merit as I've grown to study it, and I do not come from anything close to a Reformed background. There are many issues discussed on this board that I at first thought were trivial nonsense, but after reading and interacting on a bunch of them, I see why people get so heated about them.
 

Davidius

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
You people REALLY teach such things?:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Max,

You didn't seem to appreciate it when people responded negatively to your thoughts on Ash Wednesday, but at least those people were offering real discussion. My post was serious. This thread was obviously not started to encourage intelligent discussion but to just take a quick, silly jab at people who hold Exclusive Psalmody and I think that is silly.
 

jaybird0827

PuritanBoard Honor Roll
You people REALLY teach such things?:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
This type of message can go a long way to intimidate people and stifle discussion.

I had the impression from an earlier thread that you were interested in learning more about the RPW. I have second thoughts now. Are you really teachable, or do you ask the question to set people up?

:(
 

NaphtaliPress

Administrator
Staff member
***Infrequent Moderator hat on*******
Ok; that's enough of the "pile on" as far as chastisment. Let Max answer.
 

Machaira

Puritan Board Freshman
Upon which it naturally follows, if you are sola scriptura, then you should read the Hebrew and Greek. Quite clearly there is something amiss with the conclusion which does not take into account the validity of faithful translations. See WCF 1:8, and Larger Catechism answers 156, 157.
I hope no one minds if I bump the preceding reply to the top because I believe that it's the correct answer to the OP. Bon Appétit! Thank you Rev. Winzer.
 

etexas

Puritan Board Doctor
This type of message can go a long way to intimidate people and stifle discussion.

I had the impression from an earlier thread that you were interested in learning more about the RPW. I have second thoughts now. Are you really teachable, or do you ask the question to set people up?

:(
Manifold and Profuse Apologies!!!! My careless comment was based on a misunderstanding (now set right) between David Pell and myself. IT IS IN NO WAY MY REFLECTION on EP, it was a silly stupid joke that got out of hand. I make my apology to ANYONE caught in the "crossfire". The weakness in online forums is that we can write something.....but hearing it would have been different. In any event, my comment sounds and comes across as boorish and rude. Never was this my intent. I can only offer my most sincere apology! GRACE AND PEACE!:handshake:
 

etexas

Puritan Board Doctor
Manifold and Profuse Apologies!!!! My careless comment was based on a misunderstanding (now set right) between David Pell and myself. IT IS IN NO WAY MY REFLECTION on EP, it was a silly stupid joke that got out of hand. I make my apology to ANYONE caught in the "crossfire". The weakness in online forums is that we can write something.....but hearing it would have been different. In any event, my comment sounds and comes across as boorish and rude. Never was this my intent. I can only offer my most sincere apology! GRACE AND PEACE!:handshake:
By the way.....is there a site where I can listen to sung or chanted Psalter in the classical "Presbyterian" style? would love any links.:detective:
 

etexas

Puritan Board Doctor
Manifold and Profuse Apologies!!!! My careless comment was based on a misunderstanding (now set right) between David Pell and myself. IT IS IN NO WAY MY REFLECTION on EP, it was a silly stupid joke that got out of hand. I make my apology to ANYONE caught in the "crossfire". The weakness in online forums is that we can write something.....but hearing it would have been different. In any event, my comment sounds and comes across as boorish and rude. Never was this my intent. I can only offer my most sincere apology! GRACE AND PEACE!:handshake:
Thank you I will check those out.:sing:
 

Ambrose

Puritan Board Freshman
Dispensationalists: We are required to follow the Law of God only insofar as it is repeated or initiated in the New Testament.

EP'ers: We are required to follow the Law of God as it applies to worship only insofar as it is repeated or initiated in the New Testament.

:think:
 

Davidius

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Dispensationalists: We are required to follow the Law of God only insofar as it is repeated or initiated in the New Testament.

EP'ers: We are required to follow the Law of God as it applies to worship only insofar as it is repeated or initiated in the New Testament.

:think:
The foundations for EP are laid in the Old Testament, not the New. Therefore, your comparison is false. EPers are the complete opposite of Dispensationlists in this regard.
 

jaybird0827

PuritanBoard Honor Roll
Manifold and Profuse Apologies!!!! My careless comment was based on a misunderstanding (now set right) between David Pell and myself. IT IS IN NO WAY MY REFLECTION on EP, it was a silly stupid joke that got out of hand. I make my apology to ANYONE caught in the "crossfire". The weakness in online forums is that we can write something.....but hearing it would have been different. In any event, my comment sounds and comes across as boorish and rude. Never was this my intent. I can only offer my most sincere apology! GRACE AND PEACE!:handshake:
:handshake: Accepted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top