# Variety in worship - how much is possible?



## Pergamum (Feb 26, 2008)

Singing and dancing in church?

Some have argued against choirs, solos on the basis of the'Regulative Principle', i.e. they are not prescribed by Scripture. But if we are allowed to pray or to preach using our own words (based on Scripture), why can we not sing using our own words (based on Scripture)? 

Why would a song be regulated in a different way than prayer and preaching? 


Also, what about body movements? Even dance in worship? 

We are exhorted to raise hands (Neh.2:8;Ps.28:2; 1 Tim.2:8), clap hands (Ps.47:1), and fall down (1 Cor.14:25). We can’t preach without using our bodies to express our thoughts and words, so how can we ‘draw the line’ to exclude dance? Certainly dance and body movement is part of the psalms.


(paraphrased from John Frame)



Thoughts?


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 26, 2008)

> Why would a song be regulated in a different way than prayer and preaching?



Because that is what the Scriptures teach.


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 26, 2008)

Can you elaborate?


Also what about dancing? It seems biblically sanctioned.


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 26, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> Can you elaborate?



Sure. We find in Scripture that each element is regulated as an element. Hence we do not sing prayers nor pray sermons. We _sing_ psalms, _pray_ prayers, _read_ Scriptures and _preach_ sermons. Can you find an example (other than those in the Psalter) of prayers that were sung?

*Nehemiah 8:4-8* "And Ezra the scribe stood upon a pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose; and beside him stood Mattithiah, and Shema, and Anaiah, and Urijah, and Hilkiah, and Maaseiah, on his right hand; and on his left hand, Pedaiah, and Mishael, and Malchiah, and Hashum, and Hashbadana, Zechariah, and Meshullam. And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people; (for he was above all the people and when he opened it, all the people stood up: And Ezra blessed the LORD, the great God. And all the people answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting up their hands: and they bowed their heads, and worshipped the LORD with their faces to the ground. Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the law: and the people stood in their place. So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading."

Look also at the WCF proofs:

*21:3* Prayer, with thanksgiving, being one special part of religious worship (Phi_4:6), is by God required of all men(Psa_65:2): and that it may be accepted, it is to be made in the name of the Son (Joh_14:13, Joh_14:14; 1Pe_2:5), by the help of His Spirit (Rom_8:26), according to His will (1Jo_5:14), with understanding, reverence, humility, fervency, faith, love, and perseverance (Gen_18:27; Psa_47:7; Ecc_5:1, Ecc_5:2; Mat_6:12, Mat_6:14, Mat_6:15; Mar_11:24; Eph_6:18; Col_4:2; Heb_12:28; Jam_1:6, Jam_1:7; Jam_5:16); and, if vocal, in a known tongue (1Co_14:14).

*21:5* The reading of the Scriptures with godly fear (Act_15:21; Rev 1;3); the sound preaching (2Ti_4:2) and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God, with understanding, faith, and reverence (Isa_66:2; Mat_13:19; Act_10:33; Heb_4:2; Jam_1:22); singing of psalms with grace in the heart (Eph_5:19; Col_3:16; Jam_5:13); as also, the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted by Christ; are all parts of the ordinary religious worship of God (Mat_28:19; Act_2:42; 1Co_11:23-29): besides religious oaths (Deu_6:13 with Neh_10:29), vows Isa_19:21 with Eccl 5;4, 5), solemn fastings (Est_4:16; Joe_2:12; Mat_9:15; 1Co_7:5), and thanksgivings, upon several occasions (Est_9:22; Psalm 107:1-43), which are, in their several times and seasons, to be used in a holy and religious manner (Heb_12:28).



Pergamum said:


> Also what about dancing? It seems biblically sanctioned.



What are the *contexts* wherein dancing takes place? (I know but I want you to think about it). Also, are you able to determine what "dancing" is?

“And it came to pass as they came, when David was returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, that the women came out of all cities of Israel, singing and dancing, to meet king Saul, with tabrets, with joy, and with instruments of musick.” (*1 Samuel 18:6*) 

“And when he had brought him down, behold, they were spread abroad upon all the earth, eating and drinking, and dancing, because of all the great spoil that they had taken out of the land of the Philistines, and out of the land of Judah.” (*1 Samuel 30:16*)

“And David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod.” (*2 Samuel 6:14*)

“And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal Saul's daughter looked through a window, and saw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD; and she despised him in her heart.” (*2 Samuel 6:16; see also 1 Chronicles 15:29*)


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 26, 2008)

If the Psalms are prescriptive for worship, prayers may be sung. 

Which elements of worship, and their praxis, described in the Psalms have been abrogated by the NT?

If the praxis has not been abrogated, then one may safely continue to incorporate them in worship.

Always in an orderly fashion, of course!


----------



## FenderPriest (Feb 26, 2008)

I think to help bring a Biblical understanding of worship, we should also look to the worship in the throne room picture of Revelation 4 and 5. Here we see people bless God and the Lamb and prostrate themselves before God with strong, ready, fast, and exuberant worship. The worship is filled with expressive passion, and is pleasing to God. We should follow this example, particularly since it's in part how we will worship for eternity, but also because it brings the full force of expression, both body and mind into the exultation of God.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 26, 2008)

Also relevant:



> 1 Peter 2:
> 
> 9But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. 10Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 26, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> If the Psalms are prescriptive for worship, prayers may be sung.



Only those prayers that the Spirit of God has determined may be sung and they are those which have been placed into the Psalter.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 26, 2008)

Where is that commanded or taught? If the Psalms are prescriptive as a model for worship, the praxis of new songs sung as prayers are allowed in worship.

You may want to address this in the new thread I started.


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 26, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> Where is that commanded or taught? If the Psalms are prescriptive as a model for worship, the praxis of new songs sung as prayers are allowed in worship.
> 
> You may want to address this in the new thread I started.



Other than the prayers in the Psalter can you provide any examples of prayers being sung?


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 26, 2008)

AV1611 said:


> panta dokimazete said:
> 
> 
> > Where is that commanded or taught? If the Psalms are prescriptive as a model for worship, the praxis of new songs sung as prayers are allowed in worship.
> ...



Why should I have to do that - just because the NT is silent on a practice does not mean it is abrogated, right?


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 26, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> Why should I have to do that - just because the NT is silent on a practice does not mean it is abrogated, right?



Let me explain my thinking a little; The Spirit of God has collected 150 psalms to be sung. Included in this are some prayers. Question: "Does the inclusion of prayers in the Psalter mean that we should sing our prayers?" Answer: Can I find any examples of prayers being sung outside of the Psalter? No. This means it cannot be established that prayers are to be sung. What it does establish is that the only reason that some prayers are sung is because the Spirit of God has included them into God's hymnal i.e. the Psalter, but then they are Psalms not prayers as such. Hope that makes some sense.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 26, 2008)

It makes sense, but is it in the spirit of what Christ came to establish? 

Did he come to abrogate the entirety of OT worship?

Did he come to abrogate the Psalmic praxis of singing prayers?


----------



## elnwood (Feb 26, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> Singing and dancing in church?
> 
> Some have argued against choirs, solos on the basis of the'Regulative Principle', i.e. they are not prescribed by Scripture. But if we are allowed to pray or to preach using our own words (based on Scripture), why can we not sing using our own words (based on Scripture)?
> 
> ...



My thought is that I'm with John Frame on this one. The Bible gives so many ways to worship God with our whole bodies, not just with our voices.

Sometimes I hear people interpret the Bible as if it is supposed to be a user manual for how Christians are to worship. The only part of the NT I see like that is in 1 Corinthians that talks about regulating tongues and prophecy. Or did I somehow miss the book of the bible that has the prescribed liturgy?


----------



## matthew11v25 (Feb 26, 2008)

This is interesting. I understand the argument against dancing based on the RP...how we must see if the events involving dancing are actually corporate, etc, and what is prescribed for worship. Though I must admit I am not sure how one narrows down if a setting is corporate (of course context). Such as dancing in Psalm 150, the psalms are prescribed for worship but what about the instruments and dancing in 150.

This may be slightly off topic but what about a church in Africa that is reformed in doctrine but its members dance or clap hands? Do western (and some eastern) churches just set a tone of standing still? When I have gone on missions trips to Africa and South America the christians I came in contact with were solid believers, but they were anything but still during the music aspect of the service.


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 26, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> Did he come to abrogate the entirety of OT worship?



He abrogated those aspects of worship that were typological.



panta dokimazete said:


> Did he come to abrogate the Psalmic praxis of singing prayers?



But you cannot reason that because some psalms are prayers we are to sing psalms of our own composition. Not least because one presecription of singing is that it is inspired (i.e. God-breathed).

Rev. Winzer writes:

*The Analogy of Prayer*
Nor is the author’s assimilation of prayer and praise to any effect. He says: “If the exclusive [psalmody] argument were true it would mean there is a prohibition concerning sung praise which is in marked contrast with the freedom believers have in expressing all desires and thanksgivings which are not set to music.” This is exactly what is found in both the Old and New Testaments. There are, in fact, public prayers which are offered up in the Old Testament; but none of these are either appointed to be used as set prayers in public worship or incorporated into a book of other set prayers to form a liturgy of common prayer.

The Psalms, though, are both appointed for public praise and incorporated into a book to be used in public praise. Similarly in the New Testament. In Eph. 5:19 Paul commands the singing of a form of words. The “psalms,” “hymns,” and “songs” must be written compositions which the whole congregation can sing in unison to. By its very nature, congregational singing must be bound to a form of words which prohibits individual expression (in words, though not in spirit), in order to provide for a unified voice. A little later, in Eph. 6:18, the apostle instructs the same church to pray “with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit.” Herein the apostle has not bound prayer to a set form, but has given liberty to the church to express their desires and thanksgivings in their own words.​


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 26, 2008)

> one presecription of singing is that it is inspired



There is no prescription that all singing is to the 150 Psalms - particularly since the Psalms themselves contradict the assertion and prescribe the converse.



> Psalm 107:22
> Let them also offer sacrifices of thanksgiving,And tell of His works with joyful singing.



Question: How will you tell of Christ's fulfilling work in the NT without a new song?


----------



## jaybird0827 (Feb 26, 2008)

See also this thread.

How many ways exist to ask the same question, answer the same question, same people coming down on the same side of the question?


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 26, 2008)

I know - it is great! 

This is really for the newbies to weigh in...


----------



## elnwood (Feb 26, 2008)

Re: dancing, there is no explicit command or imperative from Scripture to stand still during worship. Is standing still a violation of the RPW?


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 27, 2008)

How about falling on our faces, raising holy hands, kneeling during worship? It all sounds very biblical.


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 27, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> Question: How will you tell of Christ's fulfilling work in the NT without a new song?



You obviously do not understand the Psalms very well.

*Psa 16:10* "For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption."

*Psa 32:1, 2* "Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile."

*Psa 110* "The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth. The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek. The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath. He shall judge among the heathen, he shall fill the places with the dead bodies; he shall wound the heads over many countries. He shall drink of the brook in the way: therefore shall he lift up the head."

*Psa 130* "Out of the depths have I cried unto thee, O LORD. Lord, hear my voice: let thine ears be attentive to the voice of my supplications. If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand? But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared. I wait for the LORD, my soul doth wait, and in his word do I hope. My soul waiteth for the Lord more than they that watch for the morning: I say, more than they that watch for the morning. Let Israel hope in the LORD: for with the LORD there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption. And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities."

See also: Christ in the Psalms


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 27, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> There is no prescription that all singing is to the 150 Psalms - particularly since the Psalms themselves contradict the assertion and prescribe the converse.



When you are a seer/prophet and God speaks through you and you write some songs that God has written through you and when the Spirit of God places them in the Psalter and commands me to sing them, then I will. 

You have not demonstrated anything except you do not understand the basics of the EP argument and that you understand the psalms.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Feb 27, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> Also, what about body movements? Even dance in worship?
> 
> We are exhorted to raise hands (Neh.2:8;Ps.28:2; 1 Tim.2:8), clap hands (Ps.47:1), and fall down (1 Cor.14:25). We can’t preach without using our bodies to express our thoughts and words, so how can we ‘draw the line’ to exclude dance? Certainly dance and body movement is part of the psalms.


If you are going to allow dance as an element of worship, then everyone must dance. Do you have the Scriptural warrant to bind the conscience of the Church to dancing? 



> (paraphrased from John Frame)



Important note. Frame does not hold to the RPW. He has changed it to blur the distinctions between elements, circumstances, etc. It makes the difference between public worship and worship in "all of life" minimal. That is not an apostolic view of worship.


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 27, 2008)

Puritan Sailor said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> > Also, what about body movements? Even dance in worship?
> ...



Whoa.


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 27, 2008)

If this, then why not drama, which Frame will not rule out. Why not Team Impact? Why not send in the clowns if it "helps with evangelism"?


----------



## elnwood (Feb 27, 2008)

Puritan Sailor said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> > Also, what about body movements? Even dance in worship?
> ...



Why does everyone have to perform an element of worship? What is the Scriptural warrant? Does everyone have to get baptized during a baptism? Does everyone have to preach during the sermon? Does everyone have to utter prayers? It seems to me that one can participate in these elements without actually performing the elements themselves.



Puritan Sailor said:


> > (paraphrased from John Frame)
> 
> 
> 
> Important note. Frame does not hold to the RPW. He has changed it to blur the distinctions between elements, circumstances, etc. It makes the difference between public worship and worship in "all of life" minimal. That is not an apostolic view of worship.



I don't see a problem. Does not the RPW apply to private worship also? I don't think the WCF makes the distinction.



> WCF XXI.vi. Neither prayer, nor any other part of religious worship, is now, under the Gospel, either tied unto, or made more acceptable by any place in which it is performed, or towards which it is directed: but God is to be worshipped everywhere, in spirit and truth; as, in private families daily, and in secret, each one by himself; so, more solemnly in the public assemblies, which are not carelessly or wilfully to be neglected, or forsaken, when God, by His Word or providence, calls thereunto.


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 27, 2008)

Pilgrim said:


> If this, then why not drama, which Frame will not rule out. Why not Team Impact? Why not send in the clowns if it "helps with evangelism"?



I used to be on the Puppet Team at one of my old churches.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Feb 27, 2008)

elnwood said:


> Puritan Sailor said:
> 
> 
> > Pergamum said:
> ...


Everyone participates in the element yes. But the elements are also clearly defined. Obviously, we don't all participate in baptism the same way if we have already been baptized. The nature of the sacrament dictates the nature of the participation. It is the same with the other elements. Preaching is clearly defined, and careful attention to preaching is how we participate. Praying and singing are clearly defined. What about dancing? The only command to dance I know of is in Psalm 150, clearly a congregational act. Worship is a corporate act, not a salad bar where you pick and choose which parts you will participate in. 

Again, the beauty of the RPW is that it protects the church from human innovations and traditions, like dancing. You cannot impose or introduce elements of worship upon another without clear warrrant from Scripture. 



> Puritan Sailor said:
> 
> 
> > Important note. Frame does not hold to the RPW. He has changed it to blur the distinctions between elements, circumstances, etc. It makes the difference between public worship and worship in "all of life" minimal. That is not an apostolic view of worship.
> ...



Public worship is clearly regulated by the apostles. Note the clear distinction in Paul when rebuking the Corinthians. 


> 1 Corinthians 11:16-22
> 16 If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God. 17 But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because *when you come together *it is not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, *when you come together as a church*, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, 19 for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. 20 *When you come together*, it is not the Lord's supper that you eat. 21 For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. 22 What! *Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God *and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not.
> 
> 1 Corinthians 11:33-34
> ...



Clearly, the apostle Paul, who commands us to eat and drink to the glory of God (worship in all of life), also has a different standard for public worship. There are different rules in play when the church officially gathers together.


----------



## elnwood (Feb 27, 2008)

Puritan Sailor said:


> elnwood said:
> 
> 
> > Puritan Sailor said:
> ...



The elements are sooo not clearly defined. We don't know for sure whether the baptisms were sprinkling or immersion, we don't know if they practiced intinction or a single cup or what kind of bread, we don't know if they sang in harmony or a single melody, we don't know if they stand or sit during the singing, or the preaching, or how long the messages were, if they were expository or topical, etc. etc. We know a little bit about the order of praying and speaking in 1 Cor. 14, but I've yet to see these instructions followed in a Reformed service.

That an "element" is not well defined does not mean it should not be practiced, and certainly doesn't mean that the element must mean that everybody ought to participate.

Some people, due to health, age or inability, are not stand, or sing, so I would not require them to. I can imagine that in a Reformed service, a lot of people would have an inability to dance, so in the same way, I would not require them to.



Puritan Sailor said:


> Again, the beauty of the RPW is that it protects the church from human innovations and traditions, like dancing. You cannot impose or introduce elements of worship upon another without clear warrrant from Scripture.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



1 Corinthians 11 has nothing to do with the regulation of worship. It is saying not to exclude people when you gather as a body. Even someone who holds to the Normative Principle can also wholeheartedly agree with this.

1 Corinthians 14 does address worship, but is concerned with it being well regulated, not with what elements are included and excluded.

The New Testament, 1 Corinthians aside, contains no clear distinctions about what goes into public worship. Sometimes I feel like that there is a book of the Bible that contains liturgy that somehow I missed.

Where does the Bible clearly say that baptisms are a part of public worship? All the baptisms we see in the NT are not public gatherings of the church, nor are there instructions.

What about singing? Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 bring up singing in the context of admonishing, and yet admonishing is not an element of worship. Why should we assume that singing is meant for public worship?


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 28, 2008)

AV1611 said:


> When you are a seer/prophet and God speaks through you and you write some songs that God has written through you and when the Spirit of God places them in the Psalter and commands me to sing them, then I will.



Rebuttal here



> You have not demonstrated anything except you do not understand the basics of the EP argument and that you understand the psalms.



Let's see if I understand the basic EP argument:

p1 According to the RPW, the church should not worship God in any way He has not directly commanded.

p2 The NT is silent on anything other than the 150 Psalms being sung in public worship.

c - the 150 Psalms are the only songs allowed for public worship.

..............................................................

I rebut EP with what I call I am starting to call Psalmic Worship (PW):

p1 - the RPW stands and the NT is superior to the OT Psalms in determining the regulation of worship practice for the NT church

p2 - where the NT is silent regarding worship practice the OT Psalms stand as prescriptive - Colossians 3:16

c1 - new songs are allowable for public worship


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Feb 28, 2008)

elnwood said:


> The elements are sooo not clearly defined. We don't know for sure whether the baptisms were sprinkling or immersion, we don't know if they practiced intinction or a single cup or what kind of bread, we don't know if they sang in harmony or a single melody, we don't know if they stand or sit during the singing, or the preaching, or how long the messages were, if they were expository or topical, etc. etc. We know a little bit about the order of praying and speaking in 1 Cor. 14, but I've yet to see these instructions followed in a Reformed service.


These are concerns over the forms of the elements. The elements here are clearly commanded. The RPW allows for churches to organize these circumstances in an orderly fashion. Just because the form may not be clear doesn't mean the element is not clear. 



> That an "element" is not well defined does not mean it should not be practiced, and certainly doesn't mean that the element must mean that everybody ought to participate.


Worship is a corporate activity in which everyone participates. They are lead by the session of the church in this acticity. The church gathers at the command of Christ through his elders. This is not optional. And as the elders lead in worship, we are required to follow, so long as they are faithful to Scripture. This is the very basics of public worship. Christ's appointed men lead, we follow. Thus, the elders can only lead where Christ commands, and do not have liberty to lead His people by their own preferences, nor lead Christ's sheep into an activity which Christ does not require. This is about the Lordship of Christ, not about personal choice or preference. When Christ commands us to worship him, participation is not voluntary. 



> Some people, due to health, age or inability, are not stand, or sing, so I would not require them to. I can imagine that in a Reformed service, a lot of people would have an inability to dance, so in the same way, I would not require them to.


It is already understood that physical inability is an allowable exception, to which the Church must make accomadation. But to impose a new requirement of dancing upon the Church requires clear Scriptural warrant. Are you willing to say that Christ commands dancing as an element of worship that all must participate in if able? 



> 1 Corinthians 11 has nothing to do with the regulation of worship. It is saying not to exclude people when you gather as a body. Even someone who holds to the Normative Principle can also wholeheartedly agree with this.
> 
> 1 Corinthians 14 does address worship, but is concerned with it being well regulated, not with what elements are included and excluded.


Both deal with the regulation of worship. 1 Cor 11 is dealing specifically with public worship. Note the headcovering in public prayer/prophecy directions and the specific instructions on the Lord's Supper, all performed in the official gathering. Paul is talking about public worship. And it was clear the Corinthians had gotten out of control in their public worship and needed to be reigned in. 



> The New Testament, 1 Corinthians aside, contains no clear distinctions about what goes into public worship. Sometimes I feel like that there is a book of the Bible that contains liturgy that somehow I missed.


No one is advocating a liturgy. Not even the Westminster Divines did that. They wrote a directory. Why? Because Scripture didn't give us a liturgy. The commands are there. We have liberty to organize the elements in such an orderly way as best facilitates the performance of those elements. This may very from culture to culture or even town to town. But the elements of Christian worship are to remain the same no matter what part of the globe you go to.


----------



## MW (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> I rebut EP with what I call I am starting to call Psalmic Worship (PW):
> 
> p1 - the RPW stands and the NT is superior to the OT Psalms in determining the regulation of worship practice for the NT church
> 
> ...



What an excellent formula to allow us to bring the Apocrypha back into the public reading of holy Scripture!

p1 - the RPW stands and the NT is superior to the OT Books in determining the regulation of worship practice for the NT church
p2 - where the NT is silent regarding worship practice the OT Books stand as prescriptive.
c1 - new writings are allowable for public worship.

Of course anyone with a keen eye for equivocation will see that a jump has been made between p2 and c1. In p2 the prescription is for songs/writings of the same nature as the source from where the prescription comes, i.e., inspired. The argument falls apart when one tries to make inspired p2 provide a warrant for uninspired c1.


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 29, 2008)

Whatdayall think of John Frame's book, "Worship in Spirit and Truth"?


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 29, 2008)

Here's a debate between John Frame and D.G. Hart on the Regulative Principle. It's from 10 years ago and took place on the Warfield list.


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> Let's see if I understand the basic EP argument:
> 
> *p1* According to the RPW, the church should not worship God in any way He has not directly commanded.
> 
> ...



EP is not an argument from silence but take the whole of revelation into account. 

*p1* According to the RPW, the church should not worship God in any way He has not directly commanded.

*p2* Psalms have been commanded to be sung

*c1* Therefore psalms are to be sung.

*p3* Only praise that is inspired is to be sung.

*p4* psalms are inspired praise.

*c2* Psalms are to be sung


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> I rebut EP with what I call I am starting to call Psalmic Worship (PW):
> 
> p1 - the RPW stands and the NT is superior to the OT Psalms in determining the regulation of worship practice for the NT church
> 
> ...





armourbearer said:


> What an excellent formula to allow us to bring the Apocrypha back into the public reading of holy Scripture!
> 
> p1 - the RPW stands and the NT is superior to the OT Books in determining the regulation of worship practice for the NT church
> p2 - where the NT is silent regarding worship practice the OT Books stand as prescriptive.
> ...



I fail to see how your exercise in ad absurdum is equivocal - you are supporting a false dichotomy (all songs to be sung in public worship = Scripture) - you have not proven that new song singing in the assembly has been revoked as taught in the Psalms - Particularly in light of the individual gifting of the priesthood of believers and new covenant worship.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

AV1611 said:


> panta dokimazete said:
> 
> 
> > Let's see if I understand the basic EP argument:
> ...



You are assuming your conclusion in your premise in p2 and p3 in that you have failed to proof that the Psalms teach Exclusive Psalmody and that all praise is commanded to be inspired in the same manner that Scripture is inspired.

(BTW - nobody argues that the Psalms aren't to be sung...)

Refute that NT believers are to be taught how to worship by the inspired Psalms, that the NT church is an individually gifted royal priesthood and bearers of the Holy Spirit, thus capable of non-autographic yet HS directed activities such as preaching, prayer and song and I will begin to buy into EP.


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 29, 2008)

What about dancing? Kneeling, raising hands, prostrating yourself on the floor. The EP thing has been done to death and I cannot believe I cannot even sing the name of Christ in church...but about about these other RPW issues?


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

All things prescribed in the Psalms are allowed in worship as long as they edify and are orderly.


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 29, 2008)

imprecations too?


----------



## Coram Deo (Feb 29, 2008)

Whats wrong with imprecations?

I sing and pray imprecations everyday.......

One of my favorites is Psalms 83 and Psalm 137 sung to the tunes in the The Book of Psalms for Singing...







Pergamum said:


> imprecations too?


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> imprecations too?



you lost me?

Also - allow me modify my statement somewhat:

All things that are prescribed in the the Psalms that have not been abrogated or nullified by the NT are allowed as long as they edify and are done in an orderly fashion.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

I believe imprecations have been abrogated by Christ:

Matthew 5:44
"But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,


----------



## Coram Deo (Feb 29, 2008)

But the imprecations are calling for the destruction of not my enemies but of God's enemies......

I was just praying this morning that The False God Allah of the system of Islam might be destroyed and that those lost in Islam might be saved... That the Reprobates and evil ones that have hearten their hearts to God might be destroyed... Crush this evil system oh God that have ensnared millions of people into it's wickedness. May all of God's enemies be destroyed. Oh God your are righteous and Holy and you have have commanded us to be Holy, Sanctify us oh Lord more and more each day ... 




panta dokimazete said:


> I believe imprecations have been abrogated by Christ:
> 
> Matthew 5:44
> "But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

thunaer said:


> But the imprecations are calling for the destruction of not my enemies but of God's enemies......
> 
> I was just praying this morning that The False God Allah of the system of Islam might be destroyed and that those lost in Islam might be saved... That the Reprobates and evil ones that have hearten their hearts to God might be destroyed... Crush this evil system oh God that have ensnared millions of people into it's wickedness. May all of God's enemies be destroyed. Oh God your are righteous and Holy and you have have commanded us to be Holy, Sanctify us oh Lord more and more each day ...
> 
> ...



I absolutely concur as qualified. Even so, Lord come quickly!


----------



## Davidius (Feb 29, 2008)

Could we pray that the rebrobate be destroyed and the elect be saved?


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

hmmm - should we pray that the reprobate be destroyed...We know that God will/is condemn(ing) the reprobate as He will/is save(ing) the elect. I think that Christ had it right - that we pray for His will to be done according to such things - on earth as it is in Heaven.


----------



## MW (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> I fail to see how your exercise in ad absurdum is equivocal - you are supporting a false dichotomy (all songs to be sung in public worship = Scripture) - you have not proven that new song singing in the assembly has been revoked as taught in the Psalms - Particularly in light of the individual gifting of the priesthood of believers and new covenant worship.



I don't need to prove anything as I'm not making a case, but simply evaluating yours. The ad absurdum stands. You need to answer how your formula does not open a door for reading the Apocrypha and other uninspired writings in the worship of God. The Apocrypha is new revelation of an uninspired nature. Your view of "new songs" opens the door for the introduction of new revelation of an uninspired nature into the worship of God. That is a problem you are obliged to resolve before proceeding further with your line of reasoning.


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> > imprecations too?
> ...



Isn't that a dispensational hermenutics? And even granting your point, how do you know which imprecations have and haven't been fulfilled by Christ?

Even assuming you can know that, how do you know that the word *fulfill* means *abrogate?*


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 29, 2008)

Your verse,

"But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,

in no way contradicts the cry for justice in our lives by saying the psalms _out loud_. 

It simply adds another dimension to the Christian life.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> panta dokimazete said:
> 
> 
> > I fail to see how your exercise in ad absurdum is equivocal - you are supporting a false dichotomy (all songs to be sung in public worship = Scripture) - you have not proven that new song singing in the assembly has been revoked as taught in the Psalms - Particularly in light of the individual gifting of the priesthood of believers and new covenant worship.
> ...



Resolved: New song is just like new prayers and new preaching - the same rationale for not preaching or praying the Apocrypha stands for new song. The worship of God must be aligned to His inspired Word and Holy Spirit.


----------



## MW (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> Resolved: New song is just like new prayers and new preaching - the same rationale for not preaching or praying the Apocrypha stands for new song. The worship of God must be aligned to His inspired Word and Holy Spirit.



This is a false resolution because, as has been previously pointed out, the prayers and preaching are extemporaneously delivered by an individual and judged by others, whereas the songs are "forms" introduced into the worship of God to be sung by the whole congregation and implicitly received as true. Further, you are really only presenting a new argument at this point, and not resolving the dilemma opened up by your previous line of reasoning.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

New songs are to be experienced congregationally, but composed individually, just as prayer and preaching and in the Psalms


----------



## MW (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> New songs are to be experienced congregationally, but composed individually, just as prayer and preaching and in the Psalms



Your "new songs" are read and sung by all, thus opening the door for uninspired revelation to be imposed on the congregation and received as implicitly true.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

If the new song is aligned to the Word and the Holy Spirit it is as implicitly true as a sermon or prayer imposed on the congregation.


----------



## MW (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> If the new song is aligned to the Word and the Holy Spirit it is as implicitly true as a sermon or prayer imposed on the congregation.



This applies to "new writings" as well. So you have your same dilemma, that your line of reasoning opens the door to the Apocrypha. If men's compositions can be imposed on the congregation to sing, then men's compositions can be imposed on the congregation to read.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

Written out sermons and prayers are "new writings" in your context - the rationale just doesn't work, Rev.


----------



## MW (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> Written out sermons and prayers are "new writings" in your context - the rationale just doesn't work, Rev.



The sermons are only written out to assist the preacher, and are not imposed on the congregation to implicitly receive. They are still a second person judging what the first person says, whereas in the case of songs the congregation does the singing with implicit faith.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

I don't follow your rationale - we are to "panta dokimazete" and keep the good, and not just the preaching and prayer.


----------



## MW (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> I don't follow your rationale - we are to "panta dokimazete" and keep the good, and not just the preaching and prayer.



God prescribes what is for His doxa, seeing as finite creatures cannot by searching find out God. God has prescribed the forms to be used in congregational singing, and has not given liberty for uninspired men to compose these forms and impose them on the congregation, for that would add to His word. He has given liberty to men to preach and to pray extempore, and for the congregation to judge whether or not said preaching and praying does in fact glorify God, according to the rule of the Word.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 29, 2008)

If I may,

God prescribes what is for His doxa, seeing as finite creatures cannot by searching find out God. God has prescribed the forms to be used in congregational singing, and has through the application of His Word and Spirit given liberty for His children to compose these forms as they are gifted and present them to the assembly, just as the Psalms teach us. He has given liberty to men to sing, preach and to pray extempore, and for the congregation to judge whether or not said singing, preaching and praying does in fact glorify God, according to the rule of the Word and the Spirit.

so once more - we agree in spirit if not in this one area. Thanks for the engagement.


----------



## MW (Feb 29, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> so once more - we agree in spirit if not in this one area. Thanks for the engagement.


----------



## elnwood (Mar 4, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> panta dokimazete said:
> 
> 
> > If the new song is aligned to the Word and the Holy Spirit it is as implicitly true as a sermon or prayer imposed on the congregation.
> ...



Many Reformed congregations read the Confessions and Catechisms aloud. Do you have a problem imposing those men's "composition" on a congregation?


----------



## MW (Mar 4, 2008)

elnwood said:


> Many Reformed congregations read the Confessions and Catechisms aloud. Do you have a problem imposing those men's "composition" on a congregation?



If the congregation reads it, yes. If the minister reads it as a part of his sermon, no.


----------

