Do you prefer hymns over psalms?

Status
Not open for further replies.
To EPers, if I use the name of Christ in a song about Psalm 72, am I violating anything?

From an EP perspective on the RPW, if it is not part of the Word of God, it is a break; hence, it would be a violation.

I am presuming you are going to respond with, 'the metered Psalter is not scripture, verbatim. It is rearranged!'

Response, the Psalter renditions are mediately inspired; hymns are not.
 
Ryan,
Please don't be offended, but do u see how silly that sounds, given that the scriptures provide us with 'spiritual songs' in the Psalter. It's like trying to fit a square peg...well, u know what I am saying. The mining for answers is never ending and one ends up with nothing more than fools gold.
Not offended at all brother. Thanks for your gentleness. I see your point, but at the very least, I don't see how it could be wrong to sing the Word of God to God, even if it's not part of the Psalms. The song Mary sung to God, which is part of the Word of God, why would that be wrong to sing to the Lord? Or to sing Holy, Holy, Holy, the Lord God Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come. If others can sing it in heaven, why can't we sing it? I'm always searching to believe what is true even if that means change, but it just feels like EP is a narrow position that's limiting the Bible. I say this as no expert who may be wrong.
 
But I will ask this again, since maybe Scott ignored me or read past me:candle::

Currently I am an EP advocate when it comes to Corporate worship (but still chewing). In seeking to learn here as well, how would a Spiritual Song and hymn differ from a Psalm within the Book of Psalms itself? In other words, since an EP advocate would claim that they both are inspired, what is the distinction made by someone who is EP?

Could someone who is anti-EP not also give a similar distinction in answer?
:detective:

I think that the argument is made, that spiritual refers to all three. That is, modifies all three words.
 
I'm glad, at least, that your church includes psalms in worship. It is, after all, commanded. You're part of the way there, which is more than could be said for most churches today. But what do you mean by "all three [categories]"? Would you be prepared to give a definition of each? (I am aware you have already been asked about "spititual songs".)

I ask because, too often in these discussions, people force an interpretation into the biblical texts that cannot belong there. There are two verses in the New Testament that use this formula, "psalms, hymns and spititual songs". They are Col. 3:16 and Eph. 5:19.

Now, what was Paul thinking of as he was writing those words? Was is psalms, man-made hymns, and Hillsong? Now, it has been argued that hymns existed early in the church (some, without justification, even find them in the pages of the New Testament!) but as far as I can see it is not so.

Allow me to digress for a moment and explain my own experience. I grew up in Pentecostal and mildly charismatic churches and I never sang the psalms. The only "church music" I knew was the modern stuff by Chris Tomlin, or the stuff churned out by Hillsong or Jesus Culture (from Bethel Church in Redding).

I moved to Toronto, where I started going to a liberal Presbyterian church. They had an organ and, along with modern worship songs, they sang hymns. I had never experienced the like. I remember the first hymn I sang in church was "Crown Him with Many Crowns". My heart swelled (along with that organ) like never before. I developed a love for hymns and set out to memorize them, as, I thought, I had been deprived of my Christian heritage! (I still sang and loved many modern songs as well.) I have since gone through difficult times and have found some hymns to be a great comfort to me. I have wept singing "Amazing Grace" reflecting on God's goodness to me.

Now, some years later, I will not sing hymns or modern worship songs. (I might occasionally hum the former or play the tunes on the harmonica.) I did not arrive at this position easily. My love of man-made songs in worship was, in the end, defeated by Scripture. I know now that the organ, as well as other instrumentation, is used manipulatively and my enthusiasm was in part generated by it. And I know now that God commands no man-made songs. And I'm happier for it. For one thing, no longer must I test all the words that I sing. I know them to be true. And I know that I am singing with Christ, my Lord and God.

Modern Christians have a love of hymns and worship songs. A love of the psalms is certainly lacking. As I've said, I'm glad your church sings psalms. It's better than nothing; hopefully it gets the Lord's people to appreciate them more.

But let me be plain: "psalms, hymns and spiritual songs" do not refer to modern categories. That is simply an anachronism forced on the texts by modern readers. "Psalms", "hymns" and "songs" are all headings in the Septuagint psalms. (The word "spiritual" means "of the Spirit" and can in these verses be taken to apply to all three categories.) Ask yourself: What would a first-century Greek-speaking Jewish or Gentile Christian think upon reading these words in a letter from Paul? (I can tell you it's not "Oceans".)


Some hymns and worship songs are very nice, but that's not an argument for their inclusion in worship. At least not according to the Regulative Principle. I can't let my preferences to get in the way of God's worship.

My worship must conform to God's command. Sola Scriptura. If my doctrine or practice does not line up with what the Bible says, I need to stop and think carefully and payerfully.


I can sort of appreciate the effort your pastor's going to, but let's be straightforward: there is no such command in Scripture. Moreover, isn't he just reading a modern view into the text? Again, what would a first-century audience have understood by that word "songs"?
Thank you for the reply. As of now, here's how I would differenciate the categories:
The book of Psalms is the collection of songs written under the direction of the Holy Spirit (Mark 12:36; 2 Peter 1:21) by ancient Jewish leaders such as David, Moses, and Solomon. These inspired songs were part of the Hebrew Scriptures and used in corporate worship. The word psalm means “praise.” Although many of the psalms are cries for help, laments over Israel, or questions about God’s plan, the major theme in all of them is worship. Even when the psalmist was crying out his questions or frustrations to the Lord, he usually ended with a call to praise God in spite of everything (Psalm 42:11; 43:5; 71:13–14). The psalms have a timeless quality and are as relevant to our lives as though they were written yesterday. Many people find great comfort in reading or praying the psalms when they have difficulty finding adequate words to express their hearts to God. We can encourage, challenge, and extend comfort to ourselves and others by memorizing and sharing a psalm. Many of our modern worship songs are based on the psalms, and when we sing them, we are singing God’s Word.

A hymn is a song that gives praise, honor, or thanksgiving to God. Unlike psalms, hymns are not written by divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit and are not considered part of Scripture. However, the best ones often incorporate portions of Scripture and are filled with rich doctrinal truth. Hymns are often metrical poems arranged to be sung corporately. Even in Jesus’ day, hymns were part of Jewish worship. After the Last Supper, Jesus and His disciples sang a hymn (Matthew 26:30).

The term spiritual songs is more general. Believers are to express their faith in song—but not just any song; Scripture indicates the songs of believers must be “spiritual.” That is, the songs of the church deal with spiritual themes. They might not directly praise God, but they will teach a doctrine, encourage the body, or prompt others toward love and good works. A spiritual song might express the joy of one’s salvation, revel in the grace of Christ, or exalt the greatness and power of God—in short, a spiritual song can communicate a wide variety of sacred themes.

From Psalms to Revelation, the Bible encourages us to “sing a new song to the Lord” (Psalm 96:1; 144:9; Isaiah 42:10; Revelation 5:9; 14:3). Psalm 40:3 says, “He put a new song in my mouth, a hymn of praise to our God.” A new song is one that arises from the spirit of a person whose heart overflows with adoration for God. Paul’s instruction to the Ephesians about music is preceded by the command to “be filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18). When we are filled with the Spirit, then psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs are the natural expression of our hearts. A Spirit-filled person is a singing person. One clear indication that a person is filled with the Holy Spirit is a natural desire to sing and praise God. Musical ability has little to do with it. God created us to find great spiritual expression through music (Psalm 135:3; Judges 5:3). Scripture is filled with music, and God delights when we use what He created to worship Him (Deuteronomy 31:19; Psalm 33:2; 149:3).
 
Ryan,

I would be careful here as this would mean we have continuing revelation.
I see what you mean, but I don't think that was the writer's intention. I think they are just saying when we sing a portion of the Bible we are singing the inspired Word. I remember singing phrases in modern worship songs like "today is the day you have made, I will rejoice and be glad in it." Technically that is inspired because it's from God. There's a chapter and verse that correlates to it.
 
The Psalms were penned by the Spirit of Christ through David, the sweet psalmist of Israel (2 Samuel 23:1). Denny Prutow explains how David was the main OT type of Christ and how Christ is even called David in the Scripture:

“‘I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David . . . And I, the LORD, will be their God, and my servant David shall be prince among them’ (Ezek. 34:23-24). ‘My servant David shall be king over them, and they shall all have one shepherd . . . They and their children and their children’s children shall dwell there forever, and David my servant shall be their prince forever’ (Ezek. 37:24-25). ‘But they shall serve the LORD their God and David their king, whom I will raise up for them’ (Jer. 30:9). ‘Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God, and David their king’ (Hos. 3:5). In each of these citations, Christ is called David with the use of metaphor...Christ was called David in all those places because David was already, and is, a type of Christ.”

So these songs are unique. They’re the songs of Christ that he promised to sing with the congregation after his resurrection (Psalm 22:22, Hebrews 2:12).
 
Thank you for the reply. As of now, here's how I would differenciate the categories:
The book of Psalms is the collection of songs written under the direction of the Holy Spirit (Mark 12:36; 2 Peter 1:21) by ancient Jewish leaders such as David, Moses, and Solomon. These inspired songs were part of the Hebrew Scriptures and used in corporate worship. The word psalm means “praise.” Although many of the psalms are cries for help, laments over Israel, or questions about God’s plan, the major theme in all of them is worship. Even when the psalmist was crying out his questions or frustrations to the Lord, he usually ended with a call to praise God in spite of everything (Psalm 42:11; 43:5; 71:13–14). The psalms have a timeless quality and are as relevant to our lives as though they were written yesterday. Many people find great comfort in reading or praying the psalms when they have difficulty finding adequate words to express their hearts to God. We can encourage, challenge, and extend comfort to ourselves and others by memorizing and sharing a psalm. Many of our modern worship songs are based on the psalms, and when we sing them, we are singing God’s Word.

A hymn is a song that gives praise, honor, or thanksgiving to God. Unlike psalms, hymns are not written by divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit and are not considered part of Scripture. However, the best ones often incorporate portions of Scripture and are filled with rich doctrinal truth. Hymns are often metrical poems arranged to be sung corporately. Even in Jesus’ day, hymns were part of Jewish worship. After the Last Supper, Jesus and His disciples sang a hymn (Matthew 26:30).

The term spiritual songs is more general. Believers are to express their faith in song—but not just any song; Scripture indicates the songs of believers must be “spiritual.” That is, the songs of the church deal with spiritual themes. They might not directly praise God, but they will teach a doctrine, encourage the body, or prompt others toward love and good works. A spiritual song might express the joy of one’s salvation, revel in the grace of Christ, or exalt the greatness and power of God—in short, a spiritual song can communicate a wide variety of sacred themes.

From Psalms to Revelation, the Bible encourages us to “sing a new song to the Lord” (Psalm 96:1; 144:9; Isaiah 42:10; Revelation 5:9; 14:3). Psalm 40:3 says, “He put a new song in my mouth, a hymn of praise to our God.” A new song is one that arises from the spirit of a person whose heart overflows with adoration for God. Paul’s instruction to the Ephesians about music is preceded by the command to “be filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18). When we are filled with the Spirit, then psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs are the natural expression of our hearts. A Spirit-filled person is a singing person. One clear indication that a person is filled with the Holy Spirit is a natural desire to sing and praise God. Musical ability has little to do with it. God created us to find great spiritual expression through music (Psalm 135:3; Judges 5:3). Scripture is filled with music, and God delights when we use what He created to worship Him (Deuteronomy 31:19; Psalm 33:2; 149:3).

There are too many problems with this to address here. I would urge a more careful treatment of the Scripture passages used in this article.
 
After the Last Supper, Jesus and His disciples sang a hymn (Matthew 26:30).
Ryan, do you really think that Christ sang uninspired hymns? Here again we see modern people imposing their own categories on Scripture.
Many of our modern worship songs are based on the psalms, and when we sing them, we are singing God’s Word.
This is problematic, as Grant has pointed out.
I see what you mean, but I don't think that was the writer's intention. I think they are just saying when we sing a portion of the Bible we are singing the inspired Word.
Whatever the writer's intention, the above is what he wrote. It suggests that singing of man-made hymns is singing the Word of God, just because some portions are taken from the Bible. This is, at best, faulty reasoning. I hope that you can see that.
I remember singing phrases in modern worship songs like "today is the day you have made, I will rejoice and be glad in it." Technically that is inspired because it's from God. There's a chapter and verse that correlates to it.
That line is inspired. It's from Psalm 118. What about the rest of the song? It has no such claim to inspiration.

I can think of plenty of songs that use phrases and vocabulary from Scripture. That is no argument in favour of their use in worship.
 
For it has been reported to me by the PB that there is quarreling among you, my brothers.
What I mean is that each one of you says, "I sing Hymns," or "I sing Spiritual songs," or "I sing songs based on Psalms," or "I sing Psalms."
 
I prefer the Psalter! I attend a PCA church that uses both hymns and psalms, but I really enjoy the Psalms. I was raised in a liberal Methodist church so we rarely sung either the hymns or the psalms. I had never even heard of singing Psalms until I was in my 20's!
I am not sure that I could sing them without the use of musical instruments though. I feel like those that oppose the use of instruments don't have a very firm biblical footing...
 
But I will ask this again, since maybe Scott ignored me or read past me:candle::

Currently I am an EP advocate when it comes to Corporate worship (but still chewing). In seeking to learn here as well, how would a Spiritual Song and hymn differ from a Psalm within the Book of Psalms itself? In other words, since an EP advocate would claim that they both are inspired, what is the distinction made by someone who is EP?

Could someone who is anti-EP not also give a similar distinction in answer?
:detective:

From the 1947 minority report from the OPC General Assembly:

"In the Septuagint psalmos occurs some 67 times in the titles to the Psalms. In most cases it is the translation of the Hebrew mismor, but in a few cases it translates other Hebrew words. Psalmos means simply "song of praise." The frequency with which the word psalmos occurs in the titles is probably the reason why the Book of Psalms is called in the LXX version simply psalmoi. In the Hebrew it is called tehillim."

"As we found, the word hymnos appears some 17 times in the Septuagint version. In thirteen cases it appears in the Book of Psalms. In five or six cases it appears in the titles of the Psalms as the translation of the Hebrew neginoth or neginah. It is significant that on several occasions in the text of the Psalms hymnos translates the Hebrew word tehillah, which is the word used to designate the Book of Psalms in the Hebrew. This shows that psalms may be called hymns and hymns are psalms. Psalms and hymns are not exclusive of one another. A psalm may be not only a psalm but also a hymn."

"The word odee occurs much more frequently in the titles of the Psalms than does the word hymnos, but not as frequently as does the word psalmos. There are some 36 instances. It usually translates the Hebrew word shir but not always. Occasionally it is the translation of mismor, the word generally translated by psalmos. Odee occurs so frequently in the titles of the psalms that its meaning would be definitely influenced by that usage."

https://www.opc.org/GA/song.html#Minority
 
I think that the argument is made, that spiritual refers to all three. That is, modifies all three words.

A feminine modifier ("spiritual") is modifying both masculine "psalms" and "hymns"? "Odes" is the only feminine noun of the three... I think most of our translations get it right.
 
Earl,

Cutting through the noise a little, what are you thoughts on the responses as they relate to the OP?

From my point of view, the OP question is loaded, though I don't think intentionally. If I say that I prefer hymns over Psalms, the accusation tends to come back as, "you mean you prefer man-made words over God's?" However, if I say I prefer Psalms, the answer might come back "then why sing anything else?" A couple thoughts:

1. "Prefer" is problematic. I think we all agree that we ought to sing praises in worship.

2. Some of us who may be termed inclusive in our definition of "praises" are being presented with a dichotomy that doesn't really represent our own position.

3. Sometimes in worship I would prefer to sing one Psalm over another as it more appropriately relates to the subject of the sermon. In this sense, a hymn might be prefered at some points, not because we think they are better than Psalms, but rather they seem a more appropriate response to the subject, just as one Psalm may be more appropriate than another in relation to a subject.

*Observation: Without a pole and a problematic OP, this thread seems to lack any focus and is more confusing than helpful. ***End of observation. :)
 
Earl,

Cutting through the noise a little, what are you thoughts on the responses as they relate to the OP?

From my point of view, the OP question is loaded, though I don't think intentionally. If I say that I prefer hymns over Psalms, the accusation tends to come back as, "you mean you prefer man-made words over God's?" However, if I say I prefer Psalms, the answer might come back "then why sing anything else?" A couple thoughts:

1. "Prefer" is problematic. I think we all agree that we ought to sing praises in worship.

2. Some of us who may be termed inclusive in our definition of "praises" are being presented with a dichotomy that doesn't really represent our own position.

3. Sometimes in worship I would prefer to sing one Psalm over another as it more appropriately relates to the subject of the sermon. In this sense, a hymn might be prefered at some points, not because we think they are better than Psalms, but rather they seem a more appropriate response to the subject, just as one Psalm may be more appropriate than another in relation to a subject.

*Observation: Without a pole and a problematic OP, this thread seems to lack any focus and is more confusing than helpful. ***End of observation. :)

Scott did a great job answering any questions that arose.

To your other points on the word "prefer" my point is in your opinion sometimes man made hymns would be better (or preferred) than inspired psalms. If such is so another "loaded" question arises of the concept that scripture is sufficient for faith and practice. Is it not enough? :)
 
Scott did a great job answering any questions that arose.

To your other points on the word "prefer" my point is in your opinion sometimes man made hymns would be better (or preferred) than inspired psalms. If such is so another "loaded" question arises of the concept that scripture is sufficient for faith and practice. Is it not enough? :)

Earl, do you prefer an inspired sermon (e.g. Hebrews) or a man-made expository sermon?

Do you see the problem? I think you would probably answer that you would want both. Preference has nothing to do with it in that sense.

Likewise, what might be a preferred sermon text for a young church? Leviticus or Philippians?

Finally, which song do you prefer? The inspired Psalm 123, or the inspired words that the angel sang in Revelation?

Do you see the problems with the questions I'm asking?
 
Earl, do you prefer an inspired sermon (e.g. Hebrews) or a man-made expository sermon?

Do you see the problem? I think you would probably answer that you would want both. Preference has nothing to do with it in that sense.

Likewise, what might be a preferred sermon text for a young church? Leviticus or Philippians?

Finally, which song do you prefer? The inspired Psalm 123, or the inspired words that the angel sang in Revelation?

Do you see the problems with the questions I'm asking?

Tim, the issue with this is that preaching, singing, and praying are all distinct parts of the worship service. Just because they are all parts of the worship service does not mean that the same rules apply to each one.

Let's consider teaching.

In Acts 17, we read that the Bereans tested Paul's sermons against the scriptures to determine if they were legitimate. We can obviously assume then that Paul was teaching by expounding the scriptures, not simply quoting them word for word. If he was, there would be no need to test "the word" (17:11). Therefore from inspired example, it is suitable to preach by simply expounding the scriptures in one's own words.

As for praying, we read of many instances of believers praying (like in the upper room), and these words are not recorded in sacred scripture. I think we can safely say that our prayers do not necessarily have to be the scriptures word for word.

Now let's consider singing.

In Acts 16 we have Paul and Silas "singing hymns to God". They probably were not singing Amazing Grace :p Based on the usage of the word "hymn" in the NT, I am pretty comfortable with saying they were singing selections from the book of Psalms. In fact, looking through the NT, I am not sure there is a single example of the believers definitively singing their own man-made hymns, psalms, or spiritual songs. The Revelation passage is not really applicable to how we live life here and now - I mean, Jesus says in the future people will not be married or given in marriage, and we still marry.
 
Earl, do you prefer an inspired sermon (e.g. Hebrews) or a man-made expository sermon? Do you see the problem? I think you would probably answer that you would want both. Preference has nothing to do with it in that sense.

Josh gave this earlier.

"2. Preaching - We have examples of extemporaneous preaching, not dictated to be verbatim scripture."


Likewise, what might be a preferred sermon text for a young church? Leviticus or Philippians?

What the Pastor prefers.

Finally, which song do you prefer? The inspired Psalm 123, or the inspired words that the angel sang in Revelation?

Do you see the problems with the questions I'm asking?

I prefer to sing Psalm 123 and let the angels sing their song. The "problem" to your questions is that you seem to prefer hymns over psalms. May I ask why? :)
 
Tim, the issue with this is that preaching, singing, and praying are all distinct parts of the worship service. Just because they are all parts of the worship service does not mean that the same rules apply to each one.

Let's consider teaching.

In Acts 17, we read that the Bereans tested Paul's sermons against the scriptures to determine if they were legitimate. We can obviously assume then that Paul was teaching by expounding the scriptures, not simply quoting them word for word. If he was, there would be no need to test "the word" (17:11). Therefore from inspired example, it is suitable to preach by simply expounding the scriptures in one's own words.

As for praying, we read of many instances of believers praying (like in the upper room), and these words are not recorded in sacred scripture. I think we can safely say that our prayers do not necessarily have to be the scriptures word for word.

Now let's consider singing.

In Acts 16 we have Paul and Silas "singing hymns to God". They probably were not singing Amazing Grace :p Based on the usage of the word "hymn" in the NT, I am pretty comfortable with saying they were singing selections from the book of Psalms. In fact, looking through the NT, I am not sure there is a single example of the believers definitively singing their own man-made hymns, psalms, or spiritual songs. The Revelation passage is not really applicable to how we live life here and now - I mean, Jesus says in the future people will not be married or given in marriage, and we still marry.

Izaak,

I know all these arguments. My purpose is not to argue them here. The very line of reasoning you promote above is not one that someone with my convictions can accept as a premise. The OP asks if we "prefer" Psalms or hymns. This question is by default primarily directed to those who include hymnody (uninspired) since the answer to the question by an EP is obvious, as it is not a matter of "preference" but law.

Since the question was primarly directed to those who include hymnody in their worship, by definition, both schools of thought cannot accept the premise of the other side.

Earl, who is EP, asked a question that only has a meaningful answer from a non-EP. I asked rhetorical questions to demonstrate how this line of questioning is loaded against non-EP and does not even account for their own thinking on the matter.

Therefore, you can explain the rationale behind your view all you want, but it does not change the fact that the OP questions those with a different accepted premise than the EP. My purpose was only to show how the OP line of reasoning imposes a false dichotomy that is either ignorantly constructed or purposefully aimed at trying to "trap" the non-EP.
 
Izaak,

I know all these arguments. My purpose is not to argue them here. The very line of reasoning you promote above is not one that someone with my convictions can accept as a premise. The OP asks if we "prefer" Psalms or hymns. This question is by default primarily directed to those who include hymnody (uninspired) since the answer to the question by an EP is obvious, as it is not a matter of "preference" but law.

Since the question was primarly directed to those who include hymnody in their worship, by definition, both schools of thought cannot accept the premise of the other side.

Earl, who is EP, asked a question that only has a meaningful answer from a non-EP. I asked rhetorical questions to demonstrate how this line of questioning is loaded against non-EP and does not even account for their own thinking on the matter.

Therefore, you can explain the rationale behind your view all you want, but it does not change the fact that the OP questions those with a different accepted premise than the EP. My purpose was only to show how the OP line of reasoning imposes a false dichotomy that is either ignorantly constructed or purposefully aimed at trying to "trap" the non-EP.

All well and good. Now is their an answer that holds mustard to why one prefers hymns? Every "answer" was rebutted handily.
 
Josh gave this earlier.

"2. Preaching - We have examples of extemporaneous preaching, not dictated to be verbatim scripture."




What the Pastor prefers.



I prefer to sing Psalm 123 and let the angels sing their song. The "problem" to your questions is that you seem to prefer hymns over psalms. May I ask why? :)

Brother, you're putting words in my mouth. Please re-read my posts and let me know when you want to interact with my arguments and not a straw man.
 
Earl, do you prefer an inspired sermon (e.g. Hebrews) or a man-made expository sermon?

Sermons are not inspired. the verbatim citation is, not the exposition. All sermons are man-made. So, I think the statement is flawed.


Finally, which song do you prefer? The inspired Psalm 123, or the inspired words that the angel sang in Revelation?

Is the Song of Solomon an actual songbook? Are all denotations in God's word where 'song' is used, is to be interpreted as if someone is actually singing it?
 
All well and good. Now is their an answer that holds mustard to why one prefers hymns? Every "answer" was rebutted handily.

Has anybody here said they prefer hymns over Psalms generally? I know I haven't... All I've said is that in some contexts I would prefer a hymn over a Psalm and in others I'd prefer one Psalm over another Psalm or hymn.

If it is this statement that makes you think I have answered affirmatively that I prefer hymns over Psalms, the OP would have been much better stated, "is there ever any context in which one would prefer a hymn over a Psalm?"

If that is the question you are trying to ask, I would answer affirmatively for the reasons given above.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top