# Maybe a dumb question but...



## Reformingstudent (Aug 12, 2008)

Coming from someone who is some what new to the idea of EP and the idea that musical instruments in the church is a violation of RPW, what I want to know than is this, was David going against the Lord's command when he wrote in Psalm 150 when he called for the trumpet,lute,lyre and the stringed instruments and cymbals to praise the Lord?
Please forgive my great ignorance in this matter as I said before, I am still learning. Thanks.


Psa 150:1 Praise Jehovah. Praise God in His sanctuary; praise Him in the expanse of His power. 
Psa 150:2 Praise Him for His mighty acts; praise Him according to His excellent greatness. 
Psa 150:3 Praise Him with the sound of the trumpet; praise Him with the harp and lyre. 
Psa 150:4 Praise Him with the timbrel and dance; praise Him with stringed instruments and pipes. 
Psa 150:5 Praise Him on the sounding cymbals; praise Him with the resounding cymbals. 
Psa 150:6 Let everything that breathes praise Jehovah. Praise Jehovah!


----------



## bookslover (Aug 12, 2008)

Obviously not, since Psalm 150 (not written by David) was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. God never contradicts Himself.

Musical instruments are perfectly legitimate in worship.


----------



## Reformingstudent (Aug 12, 2008)

bookslover said:


> Obviously not, since Psalm 150 (not written by David) was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. God never contradicts Himself.
> 
> Musical instruments are perfectly legitimate in worship.



My mistake. I thought David had wrote that Psalm. Anyway whoever wrote it was inspired by the Holy Spirit and it is God's Word.


----------



## Reformingstudent (Aug 12, 2008)

joshua said:


> Reformingstudent said:
> 
> 
> > Coming from someone who is some what new to the idea of EP and the idea that musical instruments in the church is a violation of RPW, what I want to know than is this, was David going against the Lord's command when he wrote in Psalm 150 when he called for the trumpet,lute,lyre and the stringed instruments and cymbals to praise the Lord?
> ...




Thanks Joshua for clarifying that for me. At least now I understand better. Not sure I agree though but at least I see their point. Thank you.


----------



## Pergamum (Aug 12, 2008)

First, let me say that there is no such thing as a dumb question - only dumb people asking questions. Ha, just kidding. Been waiting to use that one, maybe it's lame, I know....



HERE IS AN IRONY THAT I NOTE REGARDING Presbyterian EPers:

--Almost all EPers that I know are Presbyterians.

--Presbyterians oppose not allowing infants of believers to be baptized because after all, if infants were all of the sudden restricted in this new and expanded covenant of blessings, then we would have the weird situation were God blesses us with a New Covenant and yet restricts those blessings....

--And then some (the EPers) argue that under this new covenant of expanded blessings (in which don't even dare think of restricting the subjects of baptism) they do away with all that good music and those wonderful instruments..... a real restriction!


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Aug 12, 2008)

As a non-Presbyterian I used to think the EP was a basic tenet of the RPW. Now I see that one can hold to RPW without necessarily being EP. In fact it was an eye-opener to me to see how broadly the RPW can be understood by some, a la John Frame.


----------



## Pergamum (Aug 12, 2008)

I like John Frame too, but folks tell me on here that he does not follow the confessions. It seems he is respected and is in good standing with the schools that he teaches at though.


----------



## Davidius (Aug 12, 2008)

Tom,

Someone defending the a capella position would claim, based on narrative passages in places such as 1 Chronicles 15 that the Psalmist is talking to the Levitical priests in Psalm 150, telling _them_ to worship the Lord with musical instruments.


----------



## TimV (Aug 12, 2008)

> Someone defending the a capella position would claim, based on narrative passages in places such as 1 Chronicles 15 that the Psalmist is talking to the Levitical priests in Psalm 150, telling them to worship the Lord with musical instruments.



I still wonder how musical instruments being used in Heaven fits in to their theory. Are there animal sacrifices in Heaven? And do we have the words to any songs sung in Heaven? If so, are they from the Psalms? One's theology should be systematic.

Also, Gomarus makes an important point that needs to be kept in mind. You can believe in the RPW and be perfectly consistent by having musical instruments in your worship service.


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 12, 2008)

TimV said:


> > Someone defending the a capella position would claim, based on narrative passages in places such as 1 Chronicles 15 that the Psalmist is talking to the Levitical priests in Psalm 150, telling them to worship the Lord with musical instruments.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Instruments in Heaven? Are you speaking of the references in the Book of the Revelation? Are you referring to the harps in Rev. 5? If so, those aren't literal references; they're symbolic, even as Jesus is portrayed to us there as a slain Lamb; the passage is filled with symbolism. The harps represent praise and the incense represents the prayers of the saints. If you think we should use instruments in worship because of these references, then should we also use incense? Why not? They're always found together in the Scriptures. If you're going to use the one, you ought to also use the other to be "perfectly consistent." Most Protestant Churches that use instruments in worship don't use incense and this goes to show how most Churches simply pick and choose whatever they think is fit to use in worship. 

Per the sermon below: "It is a very poor and questionable policy to pattern our worship after the symbolism of a prophetic vision rather than according to the clear commands of Scripture." 

Listen to this great sermon: 

SermonAudio.com - Worthy Is the Lamb

He begins dealing with the subject thirty minutes into the sermon. He also deals with the question about what the "new song" is in the passage. Great stuff! The preacher is an OT scholar and currently the OT professor at RPTS. 

This sermon also deals with the subject. 

SermonAudio.com - On Incense and Harps

I'm glad you brought up the question about songs sung in Heaven. The song sung there is the song of redemption. It's an old song, that is sung in the new light of the work of Christ; it's a song included in the Psalms. In fact, even by using the term "new song" John is employing an old manner of reference. Where do we find this reference in God's Word? Throughout the Psalms. As the term is used in Scripture, the new song is not a reference to a newly composed song. Per the sermon above by C.J. Williams, "In every case where a song is called a new song in Scripture that song is recorded and written down in Scripture." Here are a couple more sermons to listen to that me help flesh this out a bit:

SermonAudio.com - One God, One Gospel, One Song
SermonAudio.com - Sing a New Song; Sing Psalms

As you may have guessed I will beg to differ with the assessment of being able to be "perfectly consistent" with the RPW and using musical instruments. Are you referring to the Lutheran definition or the Calvinist/Puritan definition? If you're using the Lutheran definition, then yes, you are being perfectly consistent, but not if you're using the Calvinistic/Puritan definition.


----------



## DMcFadden (Aug 12, 2008)

I was under the impression (as a non Presbyterian) that some are EP-non-instrumental and others are EP-instrumental. If one argued for a continuation for instruments along the lines of Pergy's argument or by some other evidence, one could still claim to be following the RPW could they not?


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 12, 2008)

Gomarus said:


> As a non-Presbyterian I used to think the EP was a basic tenet of the RPW. Now I see that one can hold to RPW without necessarily being EP. In fact it was an eye-opener to me to see how broadly the RPW can be understood by some, a la John Frame.



Jim, have you read any of the responses to Frame? I would recommend the following:

Worship in Spirit and in Truth

And I found this link on the PB that looks helpful:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f29/john-frame-worship-spirit-truth-6229/


----------



## TimV (Aug 12, 2008)

> Instruments in Heaven? Are you speaking of the references in the Book of the Revelation? Are you referring to the harps in Rev. 5? If so, those aren't literal references; they're symbolic, even as Jesus is portrayed to us there as a slain Lamb; the passage is filled with symbolism.



To say that they are symbolic is convenient for your position, but hardly proof. Isn't Heaven a place where our perfected bodies go when we are raised up at the Last Day? Will the playing of instruments be illegal in Heaven? If so why, and if not, why?



> The harps represent praise and the incense represents the prayers of the saints. If you think we should use instruments in worship because of these references, then should we also use incense? Why not? They're always found together in the Scriptures. If you're going to use the one, you ought to also use the other to be "perfectly consistent."



If someone said lighting incense was forbidden in a church, I would use the same argument. It requires no consistency to demand them both; both rather are examples of ways we are permitted to worship.

If the Bible says there were male and female singers, a church would not be inconsistant if there were only one man or one woman who had the requisite talent. To say that it would be inconsistant to only have a female soloist because the Bible says there were both male and female singers involved in worship isn't reasonable.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Aug 12, 2008)

Bygracealone said:


> Gomarus said:
> 
> 
> > As a non-Presbyterian I used to think the EP was a basic tenet of the RPW. Now I see that one can hold to RPW without necessarily being EP. In fact it was an eye-opener to me to see how broadly the RPW can be understood by some, a la John Frame.
> ...



I said his position was an eye-opener to me. I don't necessarily agree with him. In fact I think he goes too far -- perhaps one end of the spectrum. But there appears to be a spectrum of RPW understanding within the Reformed Presbyterian community and RPW does not necessarily equal non-instrumental EP.

Peace.


----------



## JBaldwin (Aug 12, 2008)

Instruments in Heaven? Are you speaking of the references in the Book of the Revelation? Are you referring to the harps in Rev. 5? If so, those aren't literal references; they're symbolic, even as Jesus is portrayed to us there as a slain Lamb; the passage is filled with symbolism. *The harps represent praise and the incense represents the prayers of the saints.* If you think we should use instruments in worship because of these references, then should we also use incense? Why not? They're always found together in the Scriptures. If you're going to use the one, you ought to also use the other to be "perfectly consistent." Most Protestant Churches that use instruments in worship don't use incense and this goes to show how most Churches simply pick and choose whatever they think is fit to use in worship. 

I don't see anywhere in Revelation where it says that the harps are praise, but it very specifically says that the incense is the prayers of the saints.


----------



## bookslover (Aug 13, 2008)

joshua said:


> bookslover said:
> 
> 
> > God never contradicts Himself.
> ...



Josh, I wasn't trying to say or imply that EPers believe that God contradicts Himself. I just made the statement as part of making my point.

No more doughnuts for _you_ this week!


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 15, 2008)

JBaldwin said:


> Instruments in Heaven? Are you speaking of the references in the Book of the Revelation? Are you referring to the harps in Rev. 5? If so, those aren't literal references; they're symbolic, even as Jesus is portrayed to us there as a slain Lamb; the passage is filled with symbolism. *The harps represent praise and the incense represents the prayers of the saints.* If you think we should use instruments in worship because of these references, then should we also use incense? Why not? They're always found together in the Scriptures. If you're going to use the one, you ought to also use the other to be "perfectly consistent." Most Protestant Churches that use instruments in worship don't use incense and this goes to show how most Churches simply pick and choose whatever they think is fit to use in worship.
> 
> I don't see anywhere in Revelation where it says that the harps are praise, but it very specifically says that the incense is the prayers of the saints.



The whole pericope is filled with symbolism, which is a hint to us for interpreting the passage. It would be odd to have so many things be symbolic and yet one thing in the midst of that symbolism not be symbolic. 

The harps and the incense are imagery taken from OT temple worship. As the incense represents prayer, the harps also represent something, which I would argue is praise. 

I would again encourage folks to listen to the sermon above by C.J. Williams. It really is worth listening to...


----------



## TimV (Aug 15, 2008)

> The whole pericope is filled with symbolism, which is a hint to us for interpreting the passage. It would be odd to have so many things be symbolic and yet one thing in the midst of that symbolism not be symbolic.



Just for personal clarity on your position (the idea came from an APR pastor who allows instruments) do you believe that in Heaven we will have bodies, and if so, will the playing of instruments be forbidden in worship there?


----------



## Mushroom (Aug 15, 2008)

If heavenly instruments only represent praise, how would that argue against their use in worship on earth? They are evidently good enough to be used in heaven to represent what we are doing in worship here, and there is no proscription against their use in scripture.


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 15, 2008)

Brad said:


> If heavenly instruments only represent praise, how would that argue against their use in worship on earth? They are evidently good enough to be used in heaven to represent what we are doing in worship here, and there is no proscription against their use in scripture.



Brad, that same question could be asked of the incense and the sacrificial lamb...

Nevertheless, we only do that in worship that we are commanded to do (RPW). I wouldn't turn to a vision in the Book of the Revelation as the basis for attempting to show something contrary to what we non-instrumental folk take to be clear instruction in other places of Scripture that aren't filled with symbolism... 

I know you don't agree with our position, but I would point you back to the other current thread about the use of instruments in worship as support for the position that the Scriptures do prohibit their use in NT worship. 

Peace...


----------



## Davidius (Aug 15, 2008)

As I understand it, the RPW requires God's command to add element to worship. Since instruments aren't mentioned in the Torah (I don't think?), do we have to infer that David received extra revelation from God to make instruments and have the Levites pray them?


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 15, 2008)

TimV said:


> > The whole pericope is filled with symbolism, which is a hint to us for interpreting the passage. It would be odd to have so many things be symbolic and yet one thing in the midst of that symbolism not be symbolic.
> 
> 
> 
> Just for personal clarity on your position (the idea came from an APR pastor who allows instruments) do you believe that in Heaven we will have bodies, and if so, will the playing of instruments be forbidden in worship there?



Tim, yes, I do believe we will have bodies. I won't pretend to know whether or not actual instruments will be used in worship in Heaven. I only know what I'm persuaded God's Word teaches about worship here on earth. I suppose we'll see when we get there. By the way, if they are used in Heaven, it will only be because the Lord commands them to be used; there will still be a RPW regulated by God...


----------



## TimV (Aug 15, 2008)

> By the way, if they are used in Heaven, it will only be because the Lord commands them to be used; there will still be a RPW regulated by God...



We are definitely on the same page there. It just seems to me a good argument; that if musical instruments were abolished as only an imperfect reflection of the clearer truth to come, as per animal sacrifices, then using them as symbolism at the very least would be unusual in the context of giving us a glimpse of future worship.

Thanks for your reply.


----------

