Covenant Joel
Puritan Board Sophomore
A few days ago, I posted some thoughts on my blog about the Regulative Principle, and I would like to get some feedback. You can read the post here, but I'll summarize my thoughts below so you don't have to read the post if you don't want to.
For some time, I studied the RPW, and the something that consistently troubled me were verses from Deuteronomy such as 4:2 and 12:32 ("You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you." and "Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it.").
What troubled me is this: it does not seem to me that these verses specifically relate to corporate worship separately from the rest of life. It seems to be broader than just corporate worship, yet WCF XXI.1 uses them (12:32 at least) to defend the RPW.
Add to this the fact that John Frame (et al) have argued that there is no difference between the RPW for worship and the RPW for all of life, thus redefining the historic RPW into something that ultimately doesn't seem to really regulate worship.
So, as I have been thinking through all of this (particularly with ordination exams coming up in two weeks!), here are my thoughts which I would appreciate feedback on. I can summarize them in three points:
(1) These verses (and other similar ones throughout Scripture) do seem to put forward a Regulative Principle that applies to both worship and all of life. I just can't see how these verses and many others are contextually restricted to corporate worship. Before you crucify me for following Frame into his view, let me explain the second and third points.
(2) What these verses regulate is adding or subtracting anything from God's word. That is, particularly regarding what is not commanded, we can do things not commanded in all of life, but we can't make them obligatory as God's word.
(3) Regarding public worship, however, there is a crucial difference. Because worship is a duty of Christians, and they should joyfully participate in corporate worship, to add anything not commanded by Scripture to public worship would be to in effect add something to God's words regarding it. Unlike in all of life, in which I can't add anything to God's word, but I can do all sorts of things not commanded which are not then put on the same level of God's word, if I add anything to worship, I am in effect binding the liberty of conscience of Christians by making something be on par with God's word. Thus the confessional understanding of the RPW is still accurate.
Thoughts? Is this a reading of Scripture's teaching that is confessionally and biblically faithful? Does it fit with what the Puritans taught? Does it help to answer Frame's redefinition while taking the context of these verses carefully as well? Or is this what everyone has always said about these verses and I just didn't realize it?
For some time, I studied the RPW, and the something that consistently troubled me were verses from Deuteronomy such as 4:2 and 12:32 ("You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you." and "Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it.").
What troubled me is this: it does not seem to me that these verses specifically relate to corporate worship separately from the rest of life. It seems to be broader than just corporate worship, yet WCF XXI.1 uses them (12:32 at least) to defend the RPW.
Add to this the fact that John Frame (et al) have argued that there is no difference between the RPW for worship and the RPW for all of life, thus redefining the historic RPW into something that ultimately doesn't seem to really regulate worship.
So, as I have been thinking through all of this (particularly with ordination exams coming up in two weeks!), here are my thoughts which I would appreciate feedback on. I can summarize them in three points:
(1) These verses (and other similar ones throughout Scripture) do seem to put forward a Regulative Principle that applies to both worship and all of life. I just can't see how these verses and many others are contextually restricted to corporate worship. Before you crucify me for following Frame into his view, let me explain the second and third points.
(2) What these verses regulate is adding or subtracting anything from God's word. That is, particularly regarding what is not commanded, we can do things not commanded in all of life, but we can't make them obligatory as God's word.
(3) Regarding public worship, however, there is a crucial difference. Because worship is a duty of Christians, and they should joyfully participate in corporate worship, to add anything not commanded by Scripture to public worship would be to in effect add something to God's words regarding it. Unlike in all of life, in which I can't add anything to God's word, but I can do all sorts of things not commanded which are not then put on the same level of God's word, if I add anything to worship, I am in effect binding the liberty of conscience of Christians by making something be on par with God's word. Thus the confessional understanding of the RPW is still accurate.
Thoughts? Is this a reading of Scripture's teaching that is confessionally and biblically faithful? Does it fit with what the Puritans taught? Does it help to answer Frame's redefinition while taking the context of these verses carefully as well? Or is this what everyone has always said about these verses and I just didn't realize it?