Why EP?

Status
Not open for further replies.

OPC'n

Puritan Board Doctor
I'm glad this subject has been opened up again. Until I came to the PB, I had only heard of this once or twice and thought it a very strange practice. Not that it is...I only thought it strange because I had never witness anyone in the reformed churches practicing it. To be honest, I thought it was practiced by legalistic Christians which had to be small in numbers. Ignorance is always frightening so bear with me. I wrote another thread on this subject when I was unaware of it not being open to discussion. So! I'm going to ask my question again. Now, please remember I really know nothing about this practice and so I'm not challenging the EP's in order to show them their "faults". I do want to ask hard questions (maybe only hard for me) in order to get to the heart of the matter. If I sound confrontational, it's not intentional. Here is my original thread:

This is mainly for EP'ers but others can join too if you want.

I have a question that is based off another thread talking about "worst hymns ever". If EP's believe that hymnals like the Trinity Hymnal is a slippery slope into unbiblical song singing, then how do you defend preaching? In other words, if you are confident that your pastor can preach a biblically sound sermon from the pulpit, then why are you not confident that these same men or those like them from the past who gave us our hymnals could not give us biblically sound hymns with which to worship God?
I would also like to add that the Psalms were not available to Israel when they first became a nation...chosen from/for God and they still worshipped God in the appropriate fashion.
 

DonP

Puritan Board Junior
The main argument would not be that the hymnal is bad, but that it is not scripturally warranted for public worship. They would be fine for private or family to use during the week just to listen to.

The psalms were used by the synagogue and we continue in that worship adding what we are told in the NT.

We believe the scriptures teach that God prescribes how He is to be worshiped and we must worship Him in that way only. Others who violated this were killed or punished.
So we only use that which we know to be pure in worship. The word of God is pure. Going beyond that may leave you open to error. So the RP then would say just use what we know is true and pure so no false worship occurs.

John 4:23-24
23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. 24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."
NKJV

PS wouldn't want to go without singing Come thou Fount, Amazing Grace, The Power of the Cross, and many others but I can do them at home or with friends or on a wed night hymn sing, or concert, no need to do it in the public worship
For more specifics check the other threads on canonical worship and singing
 

OPC'n

Puritan Board Doctor
The RP of worships states that we can only worship God as He stated for us to worship Him...so for example just because He doesn't say, "Don't add monkeys to the worship" doesn't mean we are allowed to add monkeys to worship because He hasn't commanded us to add monkeys to our worship. I think we both agree on the RP. So when it comes to EP how does this fit into Israel's worship before the Psalms were written? They obviously worshipped God whether it was in the tent (Aaron's sons got it wrong here and were consumed by God) or in the synagogue. Israel didn't start worshipping God when the Psalms were written. Also, a number of NT Scriptures teach us to sing Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. It doesn't say where to sing them, but if it mentions Psalms here and the Psalms are to be sung in worship then I would think the hymns and spiritual songs would have the same place as the Psalms.
 

Idelette

Puritan Board Graduate
Also, a number of NT Scriptures teach us to sing Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. It doesn't say where to sing them, but if it mentions Psalms here and the Psalms are to be sung in worship then I would think the hymns and spiritual songs would have the same place as the Psalms.
Actually that's debatable. Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs refer to different parts of the Psalms as we know them today. The Psalms were originally divided into types and later collected into one Psalter. And so when passages such as Eph 5:19 speak of "Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" it is actually prescribing the use of different types of Psalms and not extra-Biblical material.
 

PresReformed

Puritan Board Freshman
Sarah,

The position that Don has stated is not the EP position. The RP applies to all worship, not just corporate worship. EPers believe that nothing but the 150 inspired psalms of scripture are to be sung in worship whether in family or private worship. The hymns and spiritual songs that you mentioned are the titles of the psalms of scripture, not uninspired hymns and songs.

Scripture is silent when it comes to what Israel sang before the psalms. That silence does not warrant the use of uninspired hymnody. They worshiped God as they were prescribed to worship Him.

Deutoronomy 12:32 "What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it."

Thus the sin of Nadab and Abihu or Cain. They offered to God what was not prescribed and it was not accepted. Will worship is a form of idolatry and breech of the second commandment.

WCF SC Question 51. What is forbidden in the second commandment?
Answer. The second commandment forbiddeth the worshipping of God by images, or any other way not appointed in his Word.

WCF Chapter 21:Of Religious Worship,and the Sabbath Day
21:1 The light of nature showeth that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all, is good, and doth good unto all, and is therefore to be feared, loved, praised, called upon, trusted in, and served, with all the heart, and with all the soul, and with all the might. But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by Himself, and so limited to His own revealed will, that He may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representations, or any other way not prescribed in the holy Scripture.
 

OPC'n

Puritan Board Doctor
Also, a number of NT Scriptures teach us to sing Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. It doesn't say where to sing them, but if it mentions Psalms here and the Psalms are to be sung in worship then I would think the hymns and spiritual songs would have the same place as the Psalms.
Actually that's debatable. Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs refer to different parts of the Psalms as we know them today. The Psalms were originally divided into types and later collected into one Psalter. And so when passages such as Eph 5:19 speak of "Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" it is actually prescribing the use of different types of Psalms and not extra-Biblical material.
Do you have biblical support for that?

-----Added 4/7/2009 at 02:54:27 EST-----

The hymns and spiritual songs that you mentioned are the titles of the psalms of scripture, not uninspired hymns and songs.
Do you have biblical support for this?

Scripture is silent when it comes to what Israel sang before the psalms. That silence does not warrant the use of uninspired hymnody. They worshiped God as they were prescribed to worship Him.

Deutoronomy 12:32 "What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it."

Thus the sin of Nadab and Abihu or Cain. They offered to God what was not prescribed and it was not accepted. Will worship is a form of idolatry and breech of the second commandment.
Nor does does the silence command RP exclusively. The very fact that the Psalms were not written during that time shows that other things were used to worship God and not the Psalms.
 

PresReformed

Puritan Board Freshman
Taken from Brian Schwertley's book Exclusive Psalmody
Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16

Two passages which are crucial to the exclusive Psalmody debate are Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16. These passages are important because they are used as proof texts by both exclusive Psalm singers and those who use uninspired hymns in worship. Paul writes,

And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord. (Ephesians 5:18-19).

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

Before we consider the question of how these passages relate to public worship, we first will consider the question “what does Paul mean by psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs?” This question is very important, for many advocates of uninspired hymnody (who claim to adhere to the regulative principle) point to this passage as proof that uninspired hymns are permitted in public worship by God. When examining passages such as Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16, one should not make the common mistake of importing our modern meaning or usage of a word, such as hymn, into what Paul wrote over nineteen hundred years ago. When a person hears the word hymn today, he immediately thinks of the extra-biblical non-inspired hymns found in the pews of most churches. The only way to really determine what Paul meant by “psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs” is to determine how these terms were used by Greek-speaking Christians in the first century.

When interpreting religious terminology used by Paul in his epistles, there are certain rules of interpretation which should be followed. First, the religious thinking and world view of the apostles was essentially from the Old Testament and Jesus Christ, not Greek heathenism. Therefore, when Paul discusses doctrine or worship, the first place to look for help in understanding religious terms is the Old Testament. We often find Hebrew expressions or terms expressed in koine Greek. Second, we must keep in mind that the churches that Paul founded in Asia consisted of converted Jews, Gentile proselytes to Old Testament Judaism (God-fearers), and Gentile pagans. These churches had a Greek version of the Old Testament called the Septuagint. When Paul expressed Old Testament ideas to a Greek-speaking audience, he would use the religious terminology of the Septuagint. If the terms hymns (humnois) and spiritual songs (odais pheumatikais) were defined within the New Testament, then looking to the Septuagint for the meaning of these words would be unnecessary. Given the fact, however, that these terms are rarely used in the New Testament and cannot be defined within their immediate context apart from a knowledge of the Old Testament, it would be exegetically irresponsible to ignore how these words are used in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament.

When we examine the Septuagint, we find that the terms psalm (psalmos), hymn (humnos), and song (odee) used by Paul clearly refer to the Old Testament book of Psalms and not to ancient or modern uninspired hymns or songs.

Bushell writes:

Psalmos occurs some 87 times in the Septuagint, some 78 of which are in the Psalms themselves, and 67 times in the psalm titles. It also forms the title to the Greek version of the psalter. Humnos occurs some 17 times in the Septuagint, 13 of which are in the Psalms, six times in the titles. In 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah there are some 16 examples in which the Psalms are called ‘hymns’ (humnoi) or ‘songs’ (odai) and the singing of them is called ‘hymning’ (humneo, humnodeo, humnesis). Odee occurs some 80 times in the Septuagint, 45 of which are in the Psalms, 36 in the Psalm titles.

In twelve Psalm titles we find both psalm and song; and, in two others we find psalm and hymn. “Psalm seventy-six is designated ‘psalm, hymn and song.’ And at the end of the first seventy two psalms we read ‘the hymns of David the son of Jesse are ended’ (Ps. 72:20). In other words, there is no more reason to think that the Apostle referred to psalms when he said ‘psalms,’ than when he said ‘hymns’ and ‘songs,’ for all three were biblical terms for (the) psalms in the book of psalms itself.” To ignore how Paul’s audience would have understood these terms and how these terms are defined by the Bible; and then instead to import non-biblical modern meanings into these terms is exegetical malpractice.

One of the most common objections against the idea that in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 Paul is speaking of the book of Psalms is that it would be absurd for apostle to say, “sing psalms, psalms, and psalms.” This objection fails to consider the fact that a common literary method among the ancient Jews was to use a triadic form of expression to express an idea, act, or object. The Bible contains many examples of triadic expression. For example: Exodus 34:7—“iniquity and transgression and sin”; Deuteronomy 5:31 and 6:1—“commandments and statutes and judgments”; Matthew 22:37—“with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind” (cf. Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27); Acts 2:22—“miracles and wonders and signs”; Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16—“psalms and hymns and spiritual song.” “The triadic distinction used by Paul would be readily understood by those familiar with their Hebrew OT Psalter or the Greek Septuagint, where the Psalm titles are differentiated psalms, hymns, and songs. This interpretation does justice to the analogy of Scripture, i.e., Scripture is its own best interpreter.”

The interpretation that says that “psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs” refers to the inspired book of Psalms also receives biblical support from the immediate context and grammar of these passages. In Colossians 3:16 we are exhorted: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly” In this passage the word of Christ is very likely synonymous with the word of God.

In 1 Pet. 1:11 it is stated that ‘the spirit of Christ’ was in the Old Testament prophets and through them testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glory which should follow. If, as is definitely stated, the Spirit of Christ testified these things through the prophets, then Christ was the real Author of those Scriptures. Prominent among those prophecies, which so testified concerning Christ, is the Book of Psalms, and therefore Christ is the Author of the Psalms.

After Paul exhorts the Colossian church to let the word of Christ dwell in them richly, he immediately points them to the book of Psalms; a book which comprehends “most beautifully and briefly everything that is in the entire Bible;” a book far superior to any human devotional book, which Calvin called “an anatomy of all parts of the soul;” a book which is “a compendium of all divinity.” Do we let the Scriptures, the word of Christ dwell within us when we sing uninspired human compositions in worship? No, we do not! If we are to sing and meditate upon the word of Christ, we must sing the songs that Christ has written by His Spirit—the book of Psalms.

The grammar also supports the contention that Paul was speaking of the book of Psalms. In our English Bibles the adjective spiritual only applies to the word songs (“spiritual songs”). In the Greek language, however, when an adjective immediately follows two or more nouns, it applies to all the preceding nouns.

John Murray writes,

Why does the word pneumatikos [spiritual] qualify odais and not psalmois and hymnois? A reasonable answer to this question is that pneumatikais qualifies all three datives and that its gender (fem.) is due to attraction to the gender of the noun that is closest to it. Another distinct possibility, made particularly plausible by the omission of the copulative in Colossians 3:16, is that ‘Spiritual songs’ are the genus of which ‘psalms’ and ‘hymns’ are the species. This is the view of Meyer, for example. On either of these assumptions the psalms, hymns, and songs are all ‘Spiritual’ and therefore all inspired by the Holy Spirit. The bearing of this upon the question at issue is perfectly apparent. Uninspired hymns are immediately excluded.

If one wants to argue that spiritual does not apply to psalms and hymns, then one must answer two pertinent questions. First, why would Paul insist on divine inspiration for songs, yet permit uninspired hymns? We can safely assume that Paul was not irrational. Second, given the fact that psalms refers to divinely inspired songs, it would be unscriptural not to apply spiritual to that term. Furthermore, since we have already established that the phrase “psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs” refers to the divinely inspired book of Psalms, it is only natural to apply spiritual to all three terms. Since the book of Psalms is composed of divinely inspired (or spiritual) psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, we obey God only when we praise Him using the biblical Psalter. Uninspired hymns do not meet the scriptural criteria for authorized praise.

Another question that needs to be considered regarding these passages is: “Do these passages refer to formal public worship services or to informal Christian gatherings?” Since Paul is discussing the mutual edification of believers by singing inspired songs in private worship situations, it would be inconsistent on his part to allow uninspired songs in the more formal public worship settings. “What is proper or improper to be sung in one instance must be seen as proper or improper to be sung in the other. Worship is still worship, whatever its circumstances and regardless of the number of people involved. ” “If psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs are the limits of the material of songs in praise of God in less formal acts of worship, how much more are they the limits in more formal acts of worship?”
 

DonP

Puritan Board Junior
Sarah,

The position that Don has stated is not the EP position. The RP applies to all worship, not just corporate worship. EPers believe that nothing but the 150 inspired psalms of scripture are to be sung in worship whether in family or private worship. The hymns and spiritual songs that you mentioned are the titles of the psalms of scripture, not uninspired hymns and songs.
If you will read carefully you will note, (unless in the late hour I mis-wrote). I never said "worship". I said private use and family use or a wed concert etc.

I intentionally avoided saying private worship or family worship so as not to get into that and complicate it, since some differ.

In family worship it would be worshipping God and though not all would agree it has to be as regulated, we would prefer to follow the same RP.

There are differences in public and private worship though. We would allow women to speak and ask questions, non ministers to lead worship, etc. Maybe my brother wouldn't.

So I didn't mis represent it, you added to my words. Now if you think there are no times at all people can gather that is not worship or that they can sign hymns fine. I have never heard such a strict interpretation of RP.
 

PresReformed

Puritan Board Freshman
Nor does does the silence command RP exclusively. The very fact that the Psalms were not written during that time shows that other things were used to worship God and not the Psalms.
They worshiped God as they were prescribed to worship him. Silence does not prove that they used other things. God only accepted worship offered to Him as He prescribed, which at that time would've been an animal sacrifice. We now have a clear teaching from God in His word. This is what we need to obey.

-----Added 4/7/2009 at 03:09:34 EST-----

Sarah,

The position that Don has stated is not the EP position. The RP applies to all worship, not just corporate worship. EPers believe that nothing but the 150 inspired psalms of scripture are to be sung in worship whether in family or private worship. The hymns and spiritual songs that you mentioned are the titles of the psalms of scripture, not uninspired hymns and songs.
If you will read carefully you will note, (unless in the late hour I mis wrote). I never said "worship". I said private use and family use or a wed concert etc.

In family worship it would be worshipping God and though not all would agree it has to be as regulated, we would prefer to follow the same RP.

There are differences in public and private worship though. We would allow women to speak and ask questions. Maybe my brother wouldn't.
Thank you for clarifying. What you wrote did sound like it would be fine to use uninspired hymns in family or private worship. I think it would be quite difficult to sing Come thou Fount, Amazing Grace, The Power of the Cross or any other such song without thinking it was some type of worship though.
 

OPC'n

Puritan Board Doctor
Thanks for all the info...I haven't read most of it as it is very long and it's late and want to read it with a clear mind. I did read enough to know that you are defining Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs as just being the Psalms. Even if that is all true (again i will read what you wrote) what did they sing before the Psalms were written or do you believe they did not worship God until David came and wrote the Psalms? I can't imagine that anyone thinks this to be true. Also, if hymns cannot be sung even outside of worship within family devotions, then Moses and Marian etc were out of line when they sang songs which were not the Psalms. Right? Or do you think that everything they sang was inspired by God and thus not made up by man and were allowed to sing it? If this is true, then any part of the Bible could be sung not just the Psalms.
 

DonP

Puritan Board Junior
Thank you for clarifying. What you wrote did sound like it would be fine to use uninspired hymns in family or private worship. I think it would be quite difficult to sing Come thou Fount, Amazing Grace, The Power of the Cross or any other such song without thinking it was some type of worship though.
So you see no time at all a person is not under the RP?
 

Idelette

Puritan Board Graduate
Also, a number of NT Scriptures teach us to sing Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. It doesn't say where to sing them, but if it mentions Psalms here and the Psalms are to be sung in worship then I would think the hymns and spiritual songs would have the same place as the Psalms.
Actually that's debatable. Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs refer to different parts of the Psalms as we know them today. The Psalms were originally divided into types and later collected into one Psalter. And so when passages such as Eph 5:19 speak of "Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" it is actually prescribing the use of different types of Psalms and not extra-Biblical material.
Do you have biblical support for that?
Actually, post #7 by PresReformed is a pretty detailed explanation.
 

DonP

Puritan Board Junior
think that everything they sang was inspired by God and thus not made up by man and were allowed to sing it? If this is true, then any part of the Bible could be sung not just the Psalms.
Yes they sang songs God directed them to.

Some do believe you can sing any canonical song. Some only the 150
This has been debated and as I posted earlier, if you check the 2 threads currently going on canonical worship you will find some advanced questions posed and being answered in simple clear ways.

Though there is some minor differences the main agreement is only one way to be pure for sure in worship, that is canonical
http://www.puritanboard.com/f124/burden-proof-canonical-content-sung-praise-discussion-46557/

http://www.puritanboard.com/f124/exclusive-canonical-content-exclusive-psalmody-46558/
 

PresReformed

Puritan Board Freshman
Thank you for clarifying. What you wrote did sound like it would be fine to use uninspired hymns in family or private worship. I think it would be quite difficult to sing Come thou Fount, Amazing Grace, The Power of the Cross or any other such song without thinking it was some type of worship though.
So you see no time at all a person is not under the RP?
No I do not. I'm sure if the Israelites had just set up little golden calves in their tents God would've been equally displeased as He was in their public idolatry. It is the Regulative Principle of Worship not the Regulative Principle of Public Worship.
 

OPC'n

Puritan Board Doctor
Thank you for clarifying. What you wrote did sound like it would be fine to use uninspired hymns in family or private worship. I think it would be quite difficult to sing Come thou Fount, Amazing Grace, The Power of the Cross or any other such song without thinking it was some type of worship though.
So you see no time at all a person is not under the RP?
No I do not. I'm sure if the Israelites had just set up little golden calves in their tents God would've been equally displeased as He was in their public idolatry. It is the Regulative Principle of Worship not the Regulative Principle of Public Worship.
So do you not listen to any music which isn't the Psalms or secular music?
 

PresReformed

Puritan Board Freshman
think that everything they sang was inspired by God and thus not made up by man and were allowed to sing it? If this is true, then any part of the Bible could be sung not just the Psalms.
Yes they sang songs God directed them to.

Some do believe you can sing any canonical song. Some only the 150
This has been debated and as I posted earlier, if you check the 2 threads currently going on canonical worship you will find some advanced questions posed and being answered in simple clear ways.

Though there is some minor differences the main agreement is only one way to be pure for sure in worship, that is canonical
http://www.puritanboard.com/f124/burden-proof-canonical-content-sung-praise-discussion-46557/
I think that 150 songs in a book in the middle of the Bible is pretty convincing.
 

OPC'n

Puritan Board Doctor
I would like to get back to my OP.... If EP's believe that hymnals like the Trinity Hymnal is a slippery slope into unbiblical song singing, then how do you defend preaching? In other words, if you are confident that your pastor can preach a biblically sound sermon from the pulpit, then why are you not confident that these same men or those like them from the past who gave us our hymnals could not give us biblically sound hymns with which to worship God?" Do you not feel that the preaching of the word is part of the RP of worship?
 

PresReformed

Puritan Board Freshman
So you see no time at all a person is not under the RP?
No I do not. I'm sure if the Israelites had just set up little golden calves in their tents God would've been equally displeased as He was in their public idolatry. It is the Regulative Principle of Worship not the Regulative Principle of Public Worship.
So do you not listen to any music which isn't the Psalms or secular music?
Listening to music is not worship. All singing is not worship either, but when I lift up my voice in praise to God it is always one of the 150 inspired psalms. For instance, when I sing happy birthday to my daughter I am not engaging in worship.
 

DonP

Puritan Board Junior
Preaching from the word is and element of worship the exact words are circumstance. They could contain a mistake.
Reading of scripture is an element. It must be scripture not just reading.
Singing of Psalms is the element, not just singing.

The circumstances would be the psalter used, the version of Bible used, the pews you sit in or building to meet in.

The RP regulates the elements of worship not the circumstances of how they are carried out
 

PresReformed

Puritan Board Freshman
I would like to get back to my OP.... If EP's believe that hymnals like the Trinity Hymnal is a slippery slope into unbiblical song singing, then how do you defend preaching? In other words, if you are confident that your pastor can preach a biblically sound sermon from the pulpit, then why are you not confident that these same men or those like them from the past who gave us our hymnals could not give us biblically sound hymns with which to worship God?" Do you not feel that the preaching of the word is part of the RP of worship?
You are talking about to different elements of worship which are regulated differently. There is not a man in the world who could write something better than the Holy Spirit to be sung in worship. God's word is infallible, why sing the words of men over the word of God?
 

OPC'n

Puritan Board Doctor
No I do not. I'm sure if the Israelites had just set up little golden calves in their tents God would've been equally displeased as He was in their public idolatry. It is the Regulative Principle of Worship not the Regulative Principle of Public Worship.
So do you not listen to any music which isn't the Psalms or secular music?
Listening to music is not worship. All singing is not worship either, but when I lift up my voice in praise to God it is always one of the 150 inspired psalms. For instance, when I sing happy birthday to my daughter I am not engaging in worship.
:lol: Right, I would have to agree with you that the happy birthday song isn't a worship song. I don't think you understood me. Let's just pretend that the Trinity Hymnal was on CD...would you listen to it and sing along? How about the Christian radio? Do you listen to that or do you listen exclusively to the Psalms when you want to worship God in your car and then only listen to secular music when you just want to enjoy some good artistic music which isn't worship to God? So basically....do you shun every song that is Christian except for the Psalms?
 

PresReformed

Puritan Board Freshman
:lol: Right, I would have to agree with you that the happy birthday song isn't a worship song. I don't think you understood me. Let's just pretend that the Trinity Hymnal was on CD...would you listen to it and sing along? How about the Christian radio? Do you listen to that or do you listen exclusively to the Psalms when you want to worship God in your car and then only listen to secular music when you just want to enjoy some good artistic music which isn't worship to God? So basically....do you shun every song that is Christian except for the Psalms?
Yes. When it comes to Chrisitan music I only listen to psalm cd's.
 

OPC'n

Puritan Board Doctor
I would like to get back to my OP.... If EP's believe that hymnals like the Trinity Hymnal is a slippery slope into unbiblical song singing, then how do you defend preaching? In other words, if you are confident that your pastor can preach a biblically sound sermon from the pulpit, then why are you not confident that these same men or those like them from the past who gave us our hymnals could not give us biblically sound hymns with which to worship God?" Do you not feel that the preaching of the word is part of the RP of worship?
You are talking about to different elements of worship which are regulated differently. There is not a man in the world who could write something better than the Holy Spirit to be sung in worship. God's word is infallible, why sing the words of men over the word of God?
Why would they be regulated differently? There is not a man in the world who could interpret something better than the Holy Spirit to be read in worship than the Scriptures. God's word is infallible, why interpret the Scriptures when you could just read the Scriptures and leave out man's mistakes in interpretation? I'll tell you why...God commanded that we preach not just read. Part of singing is preaching/teaching. We teach each other what God has spoken in His word by singing about truths found in the Bible. So we sing what we interpret and then the Pastor preaches what he's interpreted from the Scriptures. Same thing...
 

DonP

Puritan Board Junior
Dir for Family Worship
II. The ordinary duties comprehended under the exercise of piety which should be in families, when they are convened to that effect,

When not convened for worship I listen to and sing other Christian music. I do not consider it worship anymore than Greg thinks his worldly music he sings is worship.
I just choose to listen to less of the world.

Why would you want to fill your head with worldly music or your kids if you are so careful to only sing psalms. I would rather listen to Christian music or good hymns I have picked out on my computer and MP3s, used to be tapes or CDs
 
Last edited:

PresReformed

Puritan Board Freshman
Why would they be regulated differently? There is not a man in the world who could interpret something better than the Holy Spirit to be read in worship than the Scriptures. God's word is infallible, why interpret the Scriptures when you could just read the Scriptures and leave out man's mistakes in interpretation? I'll tell you why...God commanded that we preach not just read. Part of singing is preaching/teaching. We teach each other what God has spoken in His word by singing about truths found in the Bible. So we sing what we interpret and then the Pastor preaches what he's interpreted from the Scriptures. Same thing...
They are regulated differently because that is God's will. He has instructed ministers of the gospel to preach from His word. He has also instructed them to read His word. But God has not instructed men to write songs and then sing them in worship. Rather he has instructed us to sing His psalms.
 

DonP

Puritan Board Junior
Sarah you can ask your pastor to give you copies of the majority and minority report from the OPC GA and read them too. It is very helpful

Of course I believe the minority report was more accurate but it sadly lost

He can give you the link to read them online too.

Found some

http://www.opc.org/GA/song.html

These men believe themselves to hold strictly to the RP and yet they allowed hymns.
 
Last edited:

Whitefield

Puritan Board Junior
Before we consider the question of how these passages relate to public worship, we first will consider the question “what does Paul mean by psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs?” This question is very important, for many advocates of uninspired hymnody (who claim to adhere to the regulative principle) point to this passage as proof that uninspired hymns are permitted in public worship by God. When examining passages such as Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16, one should not make the common mistake of importing our modern meaning or usage of a word, such as hymn, into what Paul wrote over nineteen hundred years ago. When a person hears the word hymn today, he immediately thinks of the extra-biblical non-inspired hymns found in the pews of most churches. The only way to really determine what Paul meant by “psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs” is to determine how these terms were used by Greek-speaking Christians in the first century.
To tighten up your argument, you might want to show that the Jews of the first century did in fact refer to the collection of Psalms with this three-fold reference (as they referred to the Hebrew Bible with the three-fold "Torah, Nevi'im, and Kethuvim"). Otherwise, why would the "ode" of Exodus 15:1 not be included?

And should we only consider those to be psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs which internally identify themselves as such?
 

OPC'n

Puritan Board Doctor
Why would they be regulated differently? There is not a man in the world who could interpret something better than the Holy Spirit to be read in worship than the Scriptures. God's word is infallible, why interpret the Scriptures when you could just read the Scriptures and leave out man's mistakes in interpretation? I'll tell you why...God commanded that we preach not just read. Part of singing is preaching/teaching. We teach each other what God has spoken in His word by singing about truths found in the Bible. So we sing what we interpret and then the Pastor preaches what he's interpreted from the Scriptures. Same thing...
They are regulated differently because that is God's will. He has instructed ministers of the gospel to preach from His word. He has also instructed them to read His word. But God has not instructed men to write songs and then sing them in worship. Rather he has instructed us to sing His psalms.
Where does He instruct us to sing the Psalms only? Again, no one has been able to answer what the Israelites sang before the Psalms were written.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top