Sorry, but another question about the RPW

Discussion in 'A capella Exclusive Psalmody' started by Confessor, Oct 24, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Sorry for interjecting again, but this requires response:

    Singing new songs is no more rebellion than praying or preaching with "uninspired" words.

    God told us to be taught by the Psalms.

    God teaches in the Psalms and elsewhere that we should sing new songs.

    We should obey God's Word and sing new songs in the fullness of understanding as it regards the new covenant in Jesus Christ.

    That does not mean, as some have tried to propose, that we should abandon or change the "old songs", no more than we abandon or change the "old prayers" or "old preaching".

    We should obey God.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2008
  2. JohnV

    JohnV Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    People have to be very, very careful here. Speaking on behalf of God is a serious thing. For someone to assert that the worship of His people is not acceptable to God, he had better have assured authority on his side.

    The Psalms repeatedly demonstrate that God is pleased with the songs people sing in praise of Him, and it is He who calls that worship.

    There are innumerable songs, such as "A Mighty Fortress", which are freely taken from the Psalms. Some cross over many Psalms, such as "Amazing Grace"; they are no less Psalmist than a song that versifies only one Psalm at a time.

    And songs are to ascribe to God the things that are God's. If Israel was to sing of their redemption from slavery, from Egypt, how much more are we to sing of an immeasurably greater redemption from the bondage and condemnation of sin? If Israel was to sing about the acts of God in their history, even if only so as to remember them to their children but certainly in order to give praise to Whom it was due, how much more are we to praise God for the wonderful acts of salvation given to us, praise Him for the work of salvation done in His Church?

    These acts which the people of Israel sang about are symbolic to us as Christians. They speak of the redemption that we now know about. If we are to sing about those acts, then the Psalms clearly indicate that we are to sing about a much greater redemption wrought in Jesus Christ.

    It is utterly ridiculous to assert that someone is trying to trump the Psalms by writing another song. He is not trumping the Psalms; he is obeying what the Psalms so highly recommend and command: singing his praise to God. And the Psalms tell us that God is pleased with such praise.
     
  3. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    I wouldn't say EP is derived from some belief that all non-psalms are inherently or absolutely evil, or that they are based in human pride, but they are relatively worse than the psalms. God has given us the largest book in the Bible, 150 flawless songs, with which to worship Him. Why would we want anything else? It's not that other songs are bad; it's that they are worse.
     
  4. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    so is any sermon or prayer not verbatim from the Scriptures...relatively...
     
  5. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    Well, prayer by its very nature must be mutable, since it is not possible to address God with our current burdens or praises if we speak the same words. And we are commanded to reason from the Scriptures, allowing for significant deduction in our sermons.

    Worship, on the other hand, is descriptive of our immutable God, and He has not commanded us to change or add to the perfect psalms He has given us (unless I am mistaken).

    I know that you argue in prescriptive psalmody that the psalms command us to sing new songs, but it does not seem that that is exactly what the text is telling us. Maybe you could elaborate?
     
  6. JohnV

    JohnV Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    Here are your assumptions:
    The Psalms are the best; they are flawless; they are from God;
    Writing a song is wanting something else than the Psalms;
    Therefore writing other songs demonstrate dissatisfaction with what God has given.

    Do these assumption necessarily follow? Are you sure that you judge people's motives correctly? Or are they your motives superimposed on other people?

    I am saying that one can write a song of praise, as John Newton did, with an esteem of the Psalms that is no less than a high reverence for them. And it out of obedience to what the Psalms so highlly recommend and command.

    But that's not my main point. If the Psalms are so replete with recommendations and commendations from God concerning the joy and faith of God's people as expressed in their songs of worship, who are we to then say that God is not pleased with such praise and worship? God is pleased with joyful noise, how much more with organized music? If God repeatedly says that He is pleased with this, why should we doubt it?

    I think that it is rather the other way around, that some men are trumping the Psalms by putting rules in place which the Bible never intended. The Psalms themselves are an answer to EP. All you have to do is read them yourself to see that. I'm barely halfway through the Psalms and I have page after page after page of references concerning what God has to say about the praise and worship that He approves in the form of song. John Newton putting his experience of redemption in the form of a song is one of the best approvals of the Psalms that has been penned in the last 500 years. It does exactly what the Psalms enjoin, and is a perfect illustration of a high reverence for God's Psalter.

    The RPW nowhere denies the use of songs of worship. It is a misuse of the RPW to use it to forbid what the Psalms so widely and enthusiastically recommend to us as God-approved worship.
     
  7. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Where in Scripture would it seem as if singing a new song meant not singing some songs that were composed of new material?

    The Psalms themselves were new songs, prayers and prophecies written by David and others within the old Temple oriented covenant. When Scripture commands us to be taught by the Psalms in light of the new covenant in Christ, why would we not, along with preaching and praying, follow the teaching of the Psalms and sing new songs?

    God is immutable, but He is also revelatory. He has revealed Himself in Jesus Christ and accepts our worship of Him through the new covenant of Christ, so I will sing the Psalms and I will sing new songs that speak the revealed Name while I follow the guidance of the Psalms in singing and songwriting.
     
  8. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    Well, I'm not denying anyone's sincerity, and -- please understand this -- I do not want to denounce anyone for not following the regulative principle. I think they are mistaken, but I am not going to call anyone a blasphemer or heretic for disagreeing with me. We are all trying to sort this thing out.

    That being said, if people choose to add some uninspired song (even if it's really good), it still expresses some implicit dissatisfaction with the psalms. It is not malicious, it is probably not intentional, but it nonetheless is some sort of disapprobation. The best way to demonstrate this is through Leviticus 10:1-2:

    Aaron's sons Nadab and Abihu took their censers, put fire in them and added incense; and they offered unauthorized fire before the LORD, contrary to his command. So fire came out from the presence of the LORD and consumed them, and they died before the LORD.

    They were killed by the LORD not because they were insincere, not because they had done something forbidden, but because they had done something which was not commanded. Likewise, we need to make sure we do what God commands. We are to worship in Spirit and in truth. We cannot forget the latter.

    God said He was pleased with them because they were following His commands by singing psalms and following His instituted ceremonial laws. That is what we are to do as well; therefore, a capella exclusive psalmody.

    Can you please cite whatever passages would refute exclusive psalmody?
     
  9. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    Let's not make this abstract. Please cite the verses that speak of singing a new song, and then we can look at each one to determine the contextual evidences behind the meanings.

    This all depends on whether the Psalms command us to sing new songs, which is the exact point in dispute. If yes, EP is false; if no, EP is true.

    I understand your reasoning, and I will gladly change to prescriptive psalmody given convincing Scriptural evidence that the Psalms command us to sing and compose truly new songs and evidence that counters the other typical arguments for a stricter view of the RPW.

    But for now, I would request that you not defend prescriptive psalmody with references to prayers and sermons not being verbatim from Scripture, as there is a clear qualitative difference among the three.
     
  10. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    I'll address this first:

    There is certainly a difference, but there are also similarities, particularly since there are prayers among the Psalms themselves. There is certainly preaching in them, as well, so I respectfully decline your request.
     
  11. YXU

    YXU Puritan Board Freshman

    Due to the religous content in the song "A Mighty Fortress" and others, the due purpose for such compositions is to worship God and to praise God by good intention of men as well as by the invented ways of men. But such good intention as well as such wonderful composition regarding to music, it does not justify the singing of those songs.

    To singing a religous song which was written for the purpose of worshipping and praising God is an act of singing praises to God, such is an element of worship which must be ordained by God. You can offer thanks to God on your way to classroom as well as sing a psalm in the heart with understanding, but not using any human invention.

    If this door be opened, the flood comes after that will be terrible and uncontrollable.
     
  12. YXU

    YXU Puritan Board Freshman

    My friend,

    Prayer, preaching of God's word and singing of praise are 3 different elements of worship.

    There are different requirements of piety regarding those elements, and some are different and some are the same.
     
  13. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Who has said they are not? However each may contain substantial similarities in content and composition - including "uninspired" words.

    One can pray a Psalm, or preach a Psalm or sing Scripture or pray Scripture or preach, pray and sing "uninspired" words.
     
  14. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Certainly:

    Results 1-9 of 9

    1. Psalm 33:3
    Sing to Him a new song;Play skillfully with a shout of joy.

    2. Psalm 40:3
    He put a new song in my mouth, a song of praise to our God;Many will see and fear And will trust in the LORD.

    3. Psalm 96:1
    Sing to the LORD a new song;Sing to the LORD, all the earth.

    4. Psalm 98:1
    O sing to the LORD a new song,For He has done wonderful things,His right hand and His holy arm have gained the victory for Him.

    5. Psalm 144:9
    I will sing a new song to You, O God;Upon a harp of ten strings I will sing praises to You,

    6. Psalm 149:1
    Praise the LORD!Sing to the LORD a new song,And His praise in the congregation of the godly ones.

    7. Isaiah 42:10
    Sing to the LORD a new song,Sing His praise from the end of the earth! You who go down to the sea, and all that is in it You islands, and those who dwell on them.

    8. Revelation 5:9
    And they sang a new song, saying, " Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.

    9. Revelation 14:3
    And they sang a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders; and no one could learn the song except the one hundred and forty-four thousand who had been purchased from the earth.

    from here

    Before we begin however:

    Can we agree that Scripture commands us to be taught by the Psalms?

    Can we agree that the Psalms and at least one extra-Psalmic verse states: "Sing to the Lord a new song?"

    Can we agree that the term "new" normatively means either completely new and that the "new" can indeed imply "in a refreshed manner" but not frequently?

    Can we agree that the Psalms themselves were at one time new songs outside of the previously decreed Temple liturgy?

    Can we agree that we new covenant believers are no longer bound by the previously decreed Temple liturgy?

    Can we agree that the Psalms do not sing directly of the revealed Name at which every knee shall bow, that is, Jesus (Philippians 2:10)?

    Can we agree to discuss this in terms of Scripture and not tradition?

    Can we agree that singing songs in worship of God is nowhere couched as a mystery in Scripture?

    Can we agree that the RPW must be understood in terms of what God requires in worship as well as in terms of what God prohibits?

    If we can agree on these things or make our presuppositions clear, I believe it will do much to move forward the conversation.
     
  15. JohnV

    JohnV Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    Be sure, Xu, that you are closing the door that should be closed, and opening the one that should be opened. Be careful not to throw out the good with the bad; or to count all bad on unreasonable grounds.

    There is a great lacking in the making of distinctions here. John Newton writing "Amazing Grace" is a far, far cry from an electric band rocking the church. The two are by no means the same. Opening the door, as Scripture commands, to people singing their praises is a different topic than opening the door to rock bands.
     
  16. JohnV

    JohnV Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    Well said, JD. In a previous post Ben suggests that non-EP neglects a strict RPW. I claim to uphold a stricter version of it than he.
     
  17. JohnV

    JohnV Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    Ben:

    Do you want me to answer now, or would you prefer to wait until you are done with JD's comments?
     
  18. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    The fact that a Psalm can be prayed or even preached from does not change the fact that prayer and sermons are subject to uninspired additions, while worship is not, unless God explicitly commands it (which is the topic of other verses speaking of "a new song"). Unless you can cite some Scripture to justify placing all three of these in a similar category of allowable non-inspiration, I do not see how you can justify prescriptive psalmody.

    First, I just want to thank you for showing me that I can do a specific word/phrase search on Bible Gateway. I appreciate it. :)

    1. Psalm 33:3
    Sing to Him a new song;Play skillfully with a shout of joy.


    First off, how does this verse justify composing a new, uninspired song which would then be used in worship? How does the context lead to that? The prescriptive psalmody position is not the "default" until I prove otherwise; you need to provide contextual evidence as well. If you want to say, "New means new," then you are equivalent to the Arminian who exclaims "all means all." :detective:

    Second, imagine you are writing a letter to your family after you have been distanced from them. If you begin the letter with "I am writing you a new letter," would not the "new letter" obviously be the one being written, and not an additional one? Likewise with the "new song" in this verse. We are singing Him a new song, the one that is being sung at that instant we are singing it.

    Third, it most certainly can mean new in the sense of "fresh" or "rejuvenated"; i.e., we are singing the same song with a new meaning behind it. Indeed, this really seems to fit the bill given the New Covenant implications of the language in the Psalms.

    2. Psalm 40:3
    He put a new song in my mouth, a song of praise to our God;Many will see and fear And will trust in the LORD.


    If God is putting a new song in my mouth, then clearly we are not composing new, uninspired ones. In fact, this seems to heavily substantiate the fact that the "new songs" being spoken of are solely God-breathed. In fact, the past tense in this verse indicates that "new" is not referring to a future new song, but a song that is new in the sense of being fresh.

    3. Psalm 96:1
    Sing to the LORD a new song;Sing to the LORD, all the earth.


    See #1.

    4. Psalm 98:1
    O sing to the LORD a new song,For He has done wonderful things,His right hand and His holy arm have gained the victory for Him.


    See #1.

    5. Psalm 144:9
    I will sing a new song to You, O God;Upon a harp of ten strings I will sing praises to You,


    This is not really prescriptive of singing new songs, but merely a declaration that David will sing a new song.

    6. Psalm 149:1
    Praise the LORD!Sing to the LORD a new song,And His praise in the congregation of the godly ones.


    See #1.

    7. Isaiah 42:10
    Sing to the LORD a new song,Sing His praise from the end of the earth! You who go down to the sea, and all that is in it You islands, and those who dwell on them.


    See #1.

    8. Revelation 5:9
    And they sang a new song, saying, " Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.


    This is descriptive of a song, and not prescriptive of writing new songs.

    9. Revelation 14:3
    And they sang a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders; and no one could learn the song except the one hundred and forty-four thousand who had been purchased from the earth.


    See #8.

    Yes to these.

    If the context indicates that "new" means "completely new," then we will accept that denotation. If the context indicates otherwise, we will do otherwise.

    Yes.

    Yes, but that does not mean that we are not singing towards or speaking of Jesus. The actual syllables don't matter a thing.

    Yes.

    As long as we understand that the terms we are speaking of is that everything that God commands is required and everything not commanded is forbidden. In that case, yes.
     
  19. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    You can make a new thread if you'd like.
     
  20. YXU

    YXU Puritan Board Freshman

    Sir,

    I believe Rev. Schwertly has answered all of your objections in his examination of Psalmody in a systematic way. If you really want to see the defense of Psalmody regarding the objections raised, you can read his paper on that. At:
    A Brief Examination of Exclusive Psalmody

    My own answers to some of your questions:
    It is a blasphemy to say that Psalms are not suitable because it does not have the word Jesus in it. It totally contradicts with Jesus himself. (Luke 24:44, II Tim 3:15-17) As far as I know, many of the prophecies regarding our Messiah were quoted by the Apostles from Psalms. To bow down to Jesus does not mean to bow down when you hear the name Jesus, definitely not. Rather, is to bow down to his authority, kingship and his loving mercy, the name is just external. Let me use a financial accounting word, substance over form.

    We are not dispensationlists, all things in the OT, unless abrogated, are all binding to us. Singing of psalms is not a ceremonial event, but the musical instruments are.

    The new songs to be is not hard to understand: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all they mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thye neighbour as thyself. Over these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." - Matthew 22:37-40 "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another." -John 14:34
    This could be the meaning of the new songs, the same as we say God's mercy is new everyday. Also, I believe it can mean other new Psalms written by the prophet. The evidence is that, you cannot find any evidence of uninspired songs be used in the whole scripture in the worship of God.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2008
  21. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Singing alone is not considered corporate worship. Worship is the continuum of elements (singing, praying, preaching, practice (the ordinances and offering).

    The only thing you offer here is an assertion based on a convoluted hermeneutic, while I offer an elegant Scriptural solution in terms of corporate worship:

    We are commanded to be taught by the Psalms.
    The Psalms command new songs.
    We are commanded to sing new songs.

    Pleasure :)

    1. Psalm 33:3
    Sing to Him a new song;Play skillfully with a shout of joy.


    This is a cop-out - commonly referred to as guilt by association or a red-herring. Election is a mystery - singing new songs is not.

    Except the Psalmist (bless him!) did not say - "I am singing unto the Lord this new song!"

    Certainly, if you disregard the fact that we are to also be taught by the Psalms. I agree we can sing the Psalms in a renewed/refreshed manner - and if we were commanded only to sing them, fini. BUT - we are to be taught by them, also. And they clearly teach the new covenant believer to sing new songs in the sense that the song itself has new elements of the new covenant as compared to the old songs of the old covenant.

    2. Psalm 40:3
    He put a new song in my mouth, a song of praise to our God; Many will see and fear And will trust in the LORD.


    Except he didn't say a new Scripture in the Psalmist's mouth - the Lord puts new prayers and new sermons in our mouths today and we don't consider them Scripture. Look at the intent and the action - a new song of praise so that many will see and fear and trust in the Lord. Who is our revealed Lord?

    3. Psalm 96:1
    Sing to the LORD a new song;Sing to the LORD, all the earth.


    and my response :)

    4. Psalm 98:1
    O sing to the LORD a new song,For He has done wonderful things,His right hand and His holy arm have gained the victory for Him.


    and my response :)

    5. Psalm 144:9
    I will sing a new song to You, O God;Upon a harp of ten strings I will sing praises to You,


    Yah - but is it prescriptive for the new covenant believer? Yup.

    6. Psalm 149:1
    Praise the LORD!Sing to the LORD a new song,And His praise in the congregation of the godly ones.


    and my response :)

    7. Isaiah 42:10
    Sing to the LORD a new song,Sing His praise from the end of the earth! You who go down to the sea, and all that is in it You islands, and those who dwell on them.


    and my response :) besides - this is a non-Psalmic instance - I would have been interested to see your rebuttal.

    8. Revelation 5:9
    And they sang a new song, saying, " Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.


    It demonstrates consistent old covenant, new covenant, covenant fulfillment praxis. :)

    9. Revelation 14:3
    And they sang a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders; and no one could learn the song except the one hundred and forty-four thousand who had been purchased from the earth.


    and my response :)

    Really? So it is ok to make the name of Jesus irrelevant in worship? Interesting. Reason trumps the Father's transmission of His Son's name in the vernacular.

    I guess you could read Scripture and exchange the name Jesus for Satan or a profanity and it wouldn't mean a thing?


    sure - not sure what the refining point is, but ok :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2008
  22. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    I have read the piece a couple of times - it is built on a false premise, so all the conclusions are faulty.

    I think you are debating a strawman here - the Psalms are perfectly suitable for worship, just not without new song, too - otherwise Scripture contradicts itself.

    Again - accounting for English being not your native tongue - I believe you are interacting with an argument I am not making.

    AMEN! Except EP is abrogated here:

    Colossians 3:16
    Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you, with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God.

    See? The Psalms teach new covenant believers that we can sing a new song :)

    Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence.

    The evidence simply points to the transitory nature of the new covenant church's "uninspired" new songs. Just as we have no uninspired prayers or preaching from the early church, yet continue to produce them.
     
  23. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    Oh yes, I understand that. My point is simply that the singing aspect of worship is not given the leeway that praying and preaching are. By "worship" I meant the singing aspect of worship, and in retrospect I should have used more precise terminology. Thank you for the correction.

    My point is that you ought to provide positive evidence for your side as well. This argument is not one where the burden of proof is solely on EPers. I am not appealing to mystery or silence by any means.

    The phrase "sing unto the Lord a new song" can most certainly be tantamount in meaning. This would be analogous to a person shouting, "Praise God in the highest!" -- he would not be actually exhorting others in his vicinity to start to praise God, but rather he would just be praising God via that exhortation. Likewise with this.

    I'm sorry if I hastily agreed to this earlier, but where are your Scripture proofs for the claim that we are to be taught by the Psalms in this manner?

    That is a good point. Although, it is irrespective of EP's truthfulness. If EP is true, then the songs God is placing in us are only psalms; if not, then not.

    How so? Also, from reading this, how can you actually infer that the psalmist is referring to a newly composed song? That just seems to strain the text so much. This verse especially falls under the "new"="present" category.

    It's still an exclamation of praise in the same vein, so I figured they were equivalent for the most part.

    But it doesn't logically follow to say that uninspired songs are allowed in worship. The Bible's recording of eople singing a new song in the future is not the Bible's commandment to sing uninspired songs in worship.

    The denotation and connotation are what counts. Even the verse that says, "at the name of Jesus every knee should bow" is not necessarily referring to those specific syllables.

    No, it would. My point is that as long as we are speaking about Jesus, it isn't especially crucial to refer to Him as Jesus. We can call Him Lord, King of kings, Christ, Redeemer, etc. This is not to allow all language (not by any means), but it is not to restrict it to the syllables of Jesus. Besides, where exactly does God command that the specific name of "Jesus" be used in our worship? What kinds of parameters are assigned to that? Are we supposed to use it in every song? Every other song? Etc.

    I was ensuring that the negative aspect of the RPW entailed everything that is not commanded by God.

    Blessings.
     
  24. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    All,

    One request I would like to make is that we set aside any kind of personal or emotional convictions regarding what should be the case in worship. For example, it was brought up that Newton's "Amazing Grace" seems far too God-exalting to be reasonably excluded from worship. We may think that, but it is not what we think that matters.

    I am not trying to make an ad hominem here, but I am just asking that we check our hearts. I was previously averse to the implications of the RPW, and it was due to my rebellion against God's Word. The "it just makes sense" part of the doctrine came after I submitted myself to the Holy Scriptures.

    All the best.
     
  25. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    So you now you disagree that we are to be taught by the Psalms?

    Speaks to praxis.

    They are equivalent and they break the rationale that the command to sing new songs is self-referential.

    It is substantiation for PP, and irrelevant to EP.

    oy, can you say semantics?

    Ugh - so, how are you supposed to chew the bread in communion? How should you pick up the cup? left handed? right handed? etc... please don't mix trivia, circumstance and semantics with the proclamation of my Lord's name. God put those syllables together for a purpose - to objectify the Name is...wrong.
     
  26. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    So, you are proposing that all non-EP'ers are in rebellion against God's Word?
     
  27. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    No, I am merely asking for a citation that we are to be taught by the Psalms in that manner, i.e., that we are to learn from the Psalms how to compose other uninspired songs for corporate worship.

    How does a mention of the saints' singing a song during the eschaton imply that we are to sing uninspired songs in worship?

    What do you mean by the "rationale that the command to sing new songs is self-referential"?

    We are still referring to His name! Besides, it's just in song: we are not banning the word "Jesus" from the worship service; we are simply demanding that we only worship in the way God has prescribed. And where did God ever demand that the word "Jesus" be used specifically in sung worship?
     
  28. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    No, not necessarily. I'm asking that our positions be due to our searching the Scriptures and not due to "There's no way God would want that!"
     
  29. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    Not if the action is carefully defined. On the one hand, you carefully define the differences between preaching, praying, and singing, and you have discriminated well. On the other hand, you conflate all religious devotion into the single category of "worship," thereby negating the variety of devotional actions prescribed and described by Scripture.
     
  30. JohnV

    JohnV Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    I would like to participate in this one too, Ben. For me one at a time is enough. We can split the thread later.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page