Yet another thread about EP...and a poll...

Read the first post - make a choice!

  • Yes - it seems askew

    Votes: 13 35.1%
  • No - it is not askew

    Votes: 19 51.4%
  • Maybe - I need to study the issue more

    Votes: 2 5.4%
  • JD has too much time on his hands.

    Votes: 3 8.1%

  • Total voters
    37
Status
Not open for further replies.

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
Nowhere in Scripture does it command - preach a new sermon.

Nowhere in Scripture does it command - pray a new prayer.

Yet Scripture specifically commands - sing a new song - at least five times!

In this light, does strict EP seem askew to anyone but me? :)

(BTW - just feeling whimsical...and curious - no disrespect meant... :D...and obviously no answers to the poll are expected...:) )

But don't let that stop you!:lol:
 
Last edited:

Kaalvenist

Puritan Board Sophomore
Nowhere in Scripture does it command - preach a new sermon.

Nowhere in Scripture does it command - pray a new prayer.

Yet Scripture specifically commands - sing a new song - at least five times!

In this light, does strict EP seem askew to anyone but me? :)

(BTW - just feeling whimsical...and curious - no disrespect meant... :D...and obviously no answers to the poll are expected...:) )

But don't let that stop you!:lol:
JD,

I am going to attempt to exercise restraint; your poll and post are rather offensive to me. I am not going to give a direct answer to your questions, as I fear that I would become too frustrated and/or angry to discuss this subject in a charitable and Christian manner.

1. Your post demonstrates that you believe there to be some identity, blurring, or relation between the ordinances of preaching, prayer, and singing.

a. Do you believe that these are distinct, discreet ordinances of public worship; or that enough overlap exists between them so as to allow for non-canonical songs to be sung, as well as non-canonical sermons preached, or non-canonical prayers prayed? If so, please give support for this position.

b. If this is the case, would you also argue that all members of the church are permitted to preach simultaneously (since they may all sing simultaneously); or that only the minister may sing (since only the minister may preach); or that congregational singing may be extemporaneous (since preaching and praying may be extemporaneous); or any number of other relations which may then be drawn between these three ordinances?

2. You seem also to believe that the command to "sing a new song" means that we must sing non-canonical or uninspired songs. Please give a demonstration of this.
 

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
WCF - CHAPTER XXI - V. said:
The reading of the Scriptures with godly fear; the sound preaching, and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God with understanding, faith, and reverence; singing of psalms with grace in the heart; as, also, the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted by Christ; are all parts of the ordinary religious worship of God: besides religious oaths, and vows, solemn fastings, and thanksgivings upon special occasion; which are, in their several times and seasons, to be used in an holy and religious manner.

Kaalvenist said:
I am going to attempt to exercise restraint; your poll and post are rather offensive to me. I am not going to give a direct answer to your questions, as I fear that I would become too frustrated and/or angry to discuss this subject in a charitable and Christian manner.

Thank you for your restraint.

Your post demonstrates that you believe there to be some identity, blurring, or relation between the ordinances of preaching, prayer, and singing.

There are.

I know that the Psalms were originally sung and some were prayers, some were preaching.

Here are just a couple prayers:

Psalm 3:1
[ Morning Prayer of Trust in God. ] [ A Psalm of David, when he fled from Absalom his son. ] O LORD, how my adversaries have increased!Many are rising up against me.

Psalm 4:1
[ Evening Prayer of Trust in God. ] [ For the choir director; on stringed instruments. A Psalm of David. ] Answer me when I call, O God of my righteousness!You have relieved me in my distress;Be gracious to me and hear my prayer.

Psalm 5:1
[ Prayer for Protection from the Wicked. ] [ For the choir director; for flute accompaniment. A Psalm of David. ] Give ear to my words, O LORD,Consider my groaning.

Psalm 5:3
In the morning, O LORD, You will hear my voice;In the morning I will order my prayer to You and eagerly watch.

Psalm 6:1
[ Prayer for Mercy in Time of Trouble. ] [ For the choir director; with stringed instruments, upon an eight-string lyre. A Psalm of David. ] O LORD, do not rebuke me in Your anger,Nor chasten me in Your wrath.


Prophesy is a form of preaching and some of the Psalms are Prophetic.

a. Do you believe that these are distinct, discreet ordinances of public worship; or that enough overlap exists between them so as to allow for non-canonical songs to be sung, as well as non-canonical sermons preached, or non-canonical prayers prayed? If so, please give support for this position.

See above.

I believe all the elements must be guided by the Holy Spirit and confirmed/validated with/by Scripture and will be made acceptable through Jesus Christ.

b. If this is the case, would you also argue that all members of the church are permitted to preach simultaneously (since they may all sing simultaneously); or that only the minister may sing (since only the minister may preach); or that congregational singing may be extemporaneous (since preaching and praying may be extemporaneous); or any number of other relations which may then be drawn between these three ordinances?

Expository preaching of the Word is done by the preacher to the edification of the church - yet all participate.

Prayer may be done by the preacher, an Elder, (a) congregant(s) or responsorial - yet all particiapte.

Scripture may be read by the preacher, an elder, (a) congregant(s) or responsorial - yet all participate.

Song may contain elements of Scripture, preaching (in the sense that it repeats a portion of a sermon in Scripture or reiterates the preached word in the service), prayer, or simple praise - it may be done by the preacher, an elder, (a) congregant(s) or responsorial - yet all participate.

Your use of extemporaneous would imply that the expression of these elements may not be guided by the Holy Spirit or bounded by Scripture - expression in this way would violate God's RPW.

2. You seem also to believe that the command to "sing a new song" means that we must sing non-canonical or uninspired songs. Please give a demonstration of this.

I believe we are to sing new songs that are guided by the Holy Spirit and bounded by Scripture to the glory of God through Jesus Christ who is the author and perfecter of our faith and thus the sub-elements of our faith, which includes our worship.

BTW: Please allow my post to "settle" a bit before you respond - you know how I am...

I think I'm done. Editing, anyway...sigh...I edited it again...sorry...
 
Last edited:

Bandguy

Puritan Board Sophomore
Ok. I am not reading all of that. Can you put it into a paragraph and just summarize it? Thanks.
 

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
Ok. I am not reading all of that. Can you put it into a paragraph and just summarize it? Thanks.

Sure, brother...

Exclusive psalmody is the particular worship practice of several denominations worldwide which use a metrical version of the Book of Psalms from the Bible as the only manual of songs that may be sung in their services.

The practice of Exclusive psalmody is founded on a strict interpretation of the regulative principle of worship. The Exclusive Psalmists contends that since God has given us a collection of 150 worship songs and provides scriptural examples of them being sung proves that God requires these songs to be used in public worship (2 Chronicles 5:13, 2 Chronicles 20:21, 2 Chronicles 29:30, Ezra 3:11, Exodus 15:1).

The debate arises because there are no Biblical examples or clear commands to write or sing uninspired songs. Therefore by using a strict (sometimes called 'Puritan') interpetation of the regulative principle of worship; the exclusive Psalmists contends that we are left with the exclusive singing of the 150 Psalms in worship.

from here on Wiki, so caveat emptor...
 

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
Administrators - feel free to modify my second choice on the poll to:

No - It is not askew

My apologies if I offended with my verbiage - as I said - I was in a whimsical mood.

Note: this is my own voluntary submission in repentance if I offended anyone. :)

Edited to add - thank you.
 
Last edited:

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
For those who have the time to study the subject, please note how the Scriptures place the element of praise-song within the context of prophetic speech, while prayer is spoken of in the language of offering. They are clearly two distinct elements of worship.
 

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
For those who have the time to study the subject, please note how the Scriptures place the element of praise-song within the context of prophetic speech, while prayer is spoken of in the language of offering. They are clearly two distinct elements of worship.

If you don't mind - please expand on this statement a bit, please.
 
Last edited:

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
Notice how song is always spoken of in terms of prophetic speech. E.g., 2 Sam. 23: 1, 2, "the sweet psalmist of Israel, said, The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue." See also the use of singing and psalm in the context of prophetic speech in 1 Cor. 14. OTOH, prayer is always spoken of in the language of offering, e.g., Ps. 141:2, "Let my prayer be set forth before thee as incense; and the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice." See also Rev. 8:3. It is clear that the element of singing is revelational and declarative; it is the Spirit of God's own speech being declared by the saints.
 

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
Notice how song is always spoken of in terms of prophetic speech. E.g., 2 Sam. 23: 1, 2, "the sweet psalmist of Israel, said, The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue." See also the use of singing and psalm in the context of prophetic speech in 1 Cor. 14. OTOH, prayer is always spoken of in the language of offering, e.g., Ps. 141:2, "Let my prayer be set forth before thee as incense; and the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice." See also Rev. 8:3. It is clear that the element of singing is revelational and declarative; it is the Spirit of God's own speech being declared by the saints.

seeking to understand - there is sung prayer and sung prophecy - different elements, both sung, though...am I misunderstanding?
 

elnwood

Puritan Board Junior
The question is confusing. Who sings prayers?

Actually, there are a lot of fine vocal arrangements for the Lord's Prayer. Many of the Psalms can be categorized as prayers as well.

As for the question, I agree that EP goes askew. :2cents:
 

Davidius

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Nowhere in Scripture does it command - preach a new sermon.

Nowhere in Scripture does it command - pray a new prayer.

Yet Scripture specifically commands - sing a new song - at least five times!

In this light, does strict EP seem askew to anyone but me? :)

(BTW - just feeling whimsical...and curious - no disrespect meant... :D...and obviously no answers to the poll are expected...:) )

But don't let that stop you!:lol:

Now these are the last words of David: The oracle of David, the son of Jesse,the oracle of the man who was raised on high,the anointed of the God of Jacob,the sweet psalmist of Israel

I guess you're right, JD. "Sing a new song" means "continually write new songs, no matter whether or not God has visibly anointed you for this purpose." And, since we only have a command to sing new "songs," as you have shown, and we don't have a command to "pray a new prayer" or "preach a new sermon" then we should never use original prayers or sermons.


Anyway...David was referred to as the sweet Psalmist of Israel because he had been given authority by God to write the songs which would be used in worship. Asaph and some of the Korahites also had this responsibility. Would you agree?
 

Davidius

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
And if "sing a new song" is a command that should be considered part of the RPW, then wouldn't that mean that every Lord's Day we could never use songs that had been used before?
 

Davidius

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
If one were to over-literalize and be legalistic, yes.

Which is my point, I suppose.

What is legalism, then? Consistently following God's command? What would a worship service be if we were to "not be legalistic" by not feeling like we must preach the Word every Sunday? You can't just define terms anyway you wish and create double standards. What was the legalistic error of the Pharisees? Following God's commandments? No.

[esv]Matthew 15:9[/esv]

My question was not an implication characterized by legalism at all, rather one showing how your argument is false, not only by the lack of such interpretation by the people to whom the command was actually given (where does it say that any of the Israelites wrote their own songs and didn't just use the ones that men inspired by God wrote?), but also by showing that your argument is one of reducto ad absurdum and that if what you're saying is true, then we should also compose brand new songs every Sunday if we are going to preach and pray together every Sunday.
 

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
If there were no other songs in the scriptures but Psalms, you may have a point. As it is, the hermeneutic that one may compose and sing new song if one is guided by the Holy Spirit and bounded by Scripture is more consistent than EP.

EP is legalistic because it attempts to take away the God commanded liberty we have been given as bearers of the Holy Spirit and receipients of God's Holy Word.
 

Davidius

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
If there were no other songs in the scriptures but Psalms, you would have a point. As it is, the hermeneutic that one may compose and sing new song if one is guided by the Holy Spirit and bounded by Scripture is more consistent than EP.


Then do me a favor and

1) show me a song in Scripture composed by an individual other than a prophet

and

2) show me that this song was authorized and used in congregational worship
 

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
(where does it say that any of the Israelites wrote their own songs and didn't just use the ones that men inspired by God wrote?)

Where did say they did not?

Where does it say that we should not?

Where is there a command not to sing new songs?

The fact is - there is no clear guidance, and where there is not, we have liberty - guided by the Holy Spirit and bounded by Scripture.
 

Davidius

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Where did say they did not?

Where does it say that we should not?

Where is there a command not to sing new songs?

The fact is - there is no clear guidance, and where there is not, we have liberty - guided by the Holy Spirit and bounded by Scripture.


Thank for you at least being more honest now and admitting that you don't adhere to the RPW. We've gotten to the crux of the issue. Worship has never been about what we are commanded not to do. Calling anything valid that is not prohibited is called the Normative Principle of Worship.
 

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
Then do me a favor and

1) show me a song in Scripture composed by an individual other than a prophet

and

2) show me that this song was authorized and used in congregational worship

Do me a favor - show me in Scripture who God was commanding through Isaiah to sing a new song

and

Show me in Scripture where it specifically demonstrates a song sung by New Testament Christians or the Apostles with the text included

Edited to add: Sorry, I apologize for the tone of this post.
 
Last edited:

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
Thank for you at least being more honest now and admitting that you don't adhere to the RPW. We've gotten to the crux of the issue. Worship has never been about what we are commanded not to do. Calling anything valid that is not prohibited is called the Normative Principle of Worship.

ah, now the "you are not of the same spirit" starts...Edited to add: Sorry, I apologize for the tone of this post. I got angry and I shouldn't have.
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.[1] But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshiped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scripture.[2]

Scripture prescribes new song - if anything it could be said that EP violates the RPW. Edited to add: Sorry, I apologize for the tone of this post.

I am not imagining a new form or element of worship.
 
Last edited:

Davidius

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
The fact is - there is no clear guidance, and where there is not, we have liberty - guided by the Holy Spirit and bounded by Scripture.

I'm appalled that you would even insinuate that God has left us "without clear guidance" as to an issue pertaining to his most holy worship. When did God ever lack in instruction to his people about how things were to be done when approaching him in reverence and awe? How much "freedom in the Holy Spirit" did God give to the Israelites concerning the construction of the tabernacle and temple, or in the offerings they were to give to him? At what point did this attention to detail just disappear, signifying that God had decided to let us bring to him offerings that we think are acceptable? Certain elements of worship may have changed, but whence this great deviation from the principle behind worship? The guidance is clear if you are willing to see it. God divinely inspired the writing of 150 songs for his Church, put them smack-dab in the middle of our bible, and told us to sing them. What more do you want?

Do me a favor - show me in Scripture who God was commanding through Isaiah to sing a new song

I don't understand what you are asking here.

jdlongmire said:
and

Show me in Scripture where it specifically demonstrates a song sung by New Testament Christians or the Apostles with the text included

This is my point. If the Church all of a sudden began singing anything else other than the Psalms which had been sung for generations, we'd think that it might be more clear. But there is no "Psalms Part 2," especially written for the New Covenant, because the praise of the Book of Psalms is just as valid for us.
 

Davidius

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Scripture prescribes new song.

I am not imagining an new form or element of worship.


But you are, because you are isolating the phrase "new song" and giving it your definition. No one to whom that passage was addressed interpreted it that way. They understood that they only sang the songs of David, Asaph, Moses, etc, men with divine inspiration. You're reading your own understanding of the phrase into the passage instead of looking at that passage in the light of the "whole counsel of God." I'm trying to use the analogy of faith to see what "new song" might mean in light of all of the other revelation we have.

By the way, it wasn't the "new song" argument that brought me to show you that you aren't actually adhering to the RPW. It was your demand for me to produce a text that says what we are commanded not to do, which is the heart of the NPW. That was not meant to be an ad hominem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top