I notice from this thread http://www.puritanboard.com/f124/high-scriptural-warrant-exclusive-psalmody-77227/#post981033 that my precise understanding of their role may need further clarification. (1) So, what role, exactly, do the passages in Ephesians and Colossians play in the EP debate? (2) Is the EP position necessarily tied to the particular interpretation that EPers usually have of them? Why or why not? (3) If the context of the passages do not in themselves distinguish between a public and private context, then how do we determine what context in which the psalms, hymns, and songs are to be sung in (e.g., what other passages are used, if any?)? If they do not refer to public worship, where do we get our command to sing in public worship? Or is it simply that because no distinction is made, they are to be sung in all contexts? (4) If any of the debated words means something other than a psalm, does that necessarily mean that hymns of human composition are commanded to be sung? Why or why not? If any of the debated words means something other than a psalm, does that at least imply that something other than a psalm is commanded to be sung? (5) Is a distinction between meaning and referent taken for granted here, so that whatever the terms mean, the concern is actually with what they refer to, and then to short-cut our language we say we are concerned with what the terms mean? (A famous philosophical example of meaning vs referent: "evening star" and "morning star" mean different things but refer to the same object. Perhaps a biblical example could be "Scripture" meaning one thing but referring to a particular collection of writings; or "law" meaning something but referring to Moses' law.) Edit: When I speak of the "usual interpretation", I am actually referring to the class of interpretations that views the terms as exclusively referring to the Book of Psalms in one way or another, since there are actually a few different and sometimes overlapping interpretations the EPer can have of these terms.