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. JohnV

    JohnV Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    I sense that there is another difference at work in this topic than that of how we view the RPW. I believe I also see a difference in how we regard worship. I know it is broader than this, but a reduction of the difference could be expressed by a narrower view which sees only formal worship as worship, and on the other extreme every act done in appreciation and adoration of a sovereign God being worship. As I said, I know it isn't so black and white, that there are many in-between ideas of worship, varying from one extreme to the other; yet this difference seems to showing itself in this thread.

    I am personally persuaded that resting EP on the RPW is disregard to what the RPW really is. It goes against Reformed teaching and practice to do that. I am also persuaded that there is formal worship in a strict sense, but also that there is informal worship, and that all of life is worship in a sense; but that we should not confuse one form of worship with another. Singing or whistling a hymn while working comes from a joy in the heart that comes from daily moment-to-moment worship. This is also there in formal worship, but formal worship is something that extends the meaning of worship to include not only others but also the necessary regulations required so that everything be done decently and orderly. Those regulations would change with the setting, but worship itself is still worship.
     
  2. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    A good follow up question to my earlier post is - although we all may sing new songs, who is allowed/qualified to compose them?:detective:
     
  3. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    "Sing a new song to the Lord." If this were to mean, "compose and sing a new song to the Lord," whenever an individual sang "Amazing Grace" he would not be composing/singing a new song to the Lord; ergo, he would be disobeying the "prescription" to compose and sing a new song. If the composing and singing of a new song were merely permitted, and one were still at liberty to sing an old song, then the command is no longer a command but merely a permission. But the RPW "regulates" worship, it does not merely give permission.
     
  4. jaybird0827

    jaybird0827 PuritanBoard Honor Roll

    Question: Does this passage teach us that such "new songs" originate with God and that he has graciously given us, in the Psalms, that which is acceptable praise unto him?
     
  5. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Hi, Matthew :)

    I think my previous post begins to approach this concern.

    We are all commanded to sing a new song - we are not, however, all commanded to compose new songs for worship any more than we are all commanded to be teachers.

    Those whom are called and qualified to compose new songs do so for the edification of the body in corporate worship, just as some do in terms of preaching and praying.
     
  6. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    At this point you have undermined your argument that "sing a new song" implies "compose a new song." You now have no basis for saying that "new songs" allow for uninspired songs.
     
  7. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    To further address your concern - the apostle commands us to sing the 150 Psalms as well as to be taught by them to sing new songs, thus we are commanded to sing the "new" and the "old" songs. Just as we are to be taught and admonished by the "Old" Testament and the "New".

    Not either/or, but both/and.
     
  8. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Sorry, I don't follow - how can one sing a new song unless it is composed?
     
  9. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    I believe so. There is no basis for concluding that "sing a new song" equates to "compose a new song."
     
  10. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    If "new song" means "new words," then it must be composed. This is your basic argument as to why uninspired songs should be permitted. I am pointing out that a prescription does not merely permit, but requires. If that is the case, then every individual who is commanded to sing "new words" must necessarily compose new words to be sung, and that only once. Once the words have been sung they are not "new" any more.
     
  11. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    so - to follow your reasoning - when the Lord creates in us a new heart, in the next instant it becomes an old heart?

    And when He creates a new heaven and a new earth, they, at some point, become old?

    And the New Testament is now actually the Old Testament?

    Sorry, this reasoning is very confusing to me.
     
  12. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    This is your reasoning, not mine. You claim that "new song" must require "new words," not me. I am perfectly content with the orthodox teaching that "new" refers to the circumstances in which the song is sung, not to the nature of the song.
     
  13. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    I'm sorry and with all due respect - I think you are flogging a strawman.

    Please explain where I am recommending "new words" and in what context.
     
  14. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    Gabriel, it is possible for Scripture to record an instance where people sing uninspired song. The song need not be printed in Scripture (and therefore inspired), just stated as an instance. That is, if the Bible were to explicitly sing, "and they sang hymns composed by men, and God was pleased," it would be an instance of an uninspired song.

    Also, what you are claiming is not that he was fallaciously begging the question, but rather stating a meaningless truism.

    And that is the point in dispute... :gpl:
     
  15. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Not really - the point in dispute (as I see it) is whether Scripture commands that new covenant believers sing new songs along with the Psalms.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2008
  16. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    You are appealing to the command to sing a new song as warrant to compose uninspired songs; therefore your argument assumes new songs require new words. If you accepted that a new song allows for an old song to be sung in new circumstances, you would undercut the basis on which you allege uninspired songs are necessitated by the command to sing new songs.
     
  17. timmopussycat

    timmopussycat Puritan Board Junior

    I agree that much "Christian worship music" written today does not show the type fulfilled and the anti-type revealed but is in contrast, hypnotic. But some good CWM is being written. 20 years ago a good friend wrote a beautiful anthem on these verses.
     
  18. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    I think this is the only significant place at which we disagree. I believe we are to be taught by the Psalms, and thus we should learn through the beautiful worship songs of God, but I do not think "sing a new song" in those contexts implies that we are to compose and sing uninspired songs in worship -- reading over the Psalms does not seem like an exhortation to actually sing it, just like a congregation singing "Praise the Lord!" are not actually encouraging other people to praise the Lord (everyone else already is!).

    We have gone over the interpretation of those specific passages before, so I don't think we can do anything else at this point.
     
  19. Confessor

    Confessor Puritan Board Senior

    JD, what I believe the brother is saying is that if we are commanded to sing a new song, then we are not merely allowed to sing a new song, but we are required to sing it -- the essence of the RPW. Further, that means that every song we use must be actually new, i.e., it must be newly composed. And if you argue that it does not have to be newly composed each time it is sung, then you undercut your basis from the beginning when you stated that the "new song" mandated to be sung in the Psalms refers to a newly composed song.

    Is that right, Rev. Winzer?
     
  20. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Ok, to strain the gnat - the argument assumes an arrangement of words that may contain an arrangement of words in an old way and include words that are arranged in such a way as to reference new circumstance as they are contextualized in the truth of the new covenant.

    I do and it doesn't - anymore than preaching the OT in light of the new circumstance undercuts commanded, yet uninspired, preaching from the NT.
     
  21. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    Exactly right. One is not at liberty to swap sailing vessels in the middle of a regatta.
     
  22. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    You can't support your supposition that new songs requires uninspired songs so you revert back to your conflation of the elements of worship. Please stick to the argument being discussed.
     
  23. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    If one is a non-EP'er, it is not conflation in terms of having "uninspired" content.
     
  24. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Only if one accepts that "new" implies totally and completely newly composed every time - which we know that it doesn't - otherwise the Psalms contradict themselves. By the EP'ers own rationale, "new" can mean both "totally new" and "in a refreshed context", so the uninspired new song can be composed, then sung completely new and in a refreshed context afterwards.

    And after this, I am done with semantic loops - let the reader judge.
     
  25. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    You are utilising a different argument to avoid facing the difficulties presented to your new songs argument. Please deal with the new songs difficulty first, and if you decide to abandon that then we can look at your preaching analogy.
     
  26. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    Hence you have no basis for assuming "new songs" necesarily means "totally new;" by your own admission you are reading this idea into the term.
     
  27. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Matthew, I can see that I am being forced to debate only on your terms, so, respectfully, I, once more, am bowing out of the thread.

    Maybe another time, packabacka.

    Pax to all.
     
  28. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    You are being challenged to account for the way you are using terms to establish an argument; but to bow out of the thread is you choice. Blessings!
     
  29. panta dokimazete

    panta dokimazete Panting Donkey Machete

    Thanks, I feel like there has been sufficient iteration and definition for either case to use as substantiation and the law of diminishing returns is certainly being evidentiated.

    Blessings to you, as well.

    See you next time! ;)
     
  30. PuritanCovenanter

    PuritanCovenanter Moderator Staff Member

    Here is a New Composition that is being sang in Heaven..... And this is inspired. This is spiritual.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page