Originally posted by fredtgreco
Originally posted by Me Died Blue
Originally posted by Scott
Revelation is the clearest and most extensive text we have on the worship of God, not only in the hevenly realm, but also on earth and the sea. Shouldn't we use this as a model? It would make sense, given that we are presently seated in the heavenlies, Eph. 2:6, and have come to the heavenly Jerusalem and the thousands of angels in joyful assembly, Heb. 12:22. Revelation gives us a picture of what these thousands upon thousands of angels are doing.
Indeed, it does speak of worship both in the heavenly realm and the earthly realm.
As I explained in my previous post, the present worship in the heavenly realm does not necessarily parallel how we are to worship here and now, just as the present existence of special, extrabiblical revelation in the heavenly realm does not necessarily parallel its existence here and now.
As far as the earthly realm is concerned, every eschatological school of interpretation, as far as I know, interprets the activities described in Revelation on the earth and in the sea to be either metaphorical or else futuristic. If the former, then there is no literal song sung. If the latter, then it is not sung on earth until the eschaton, in which case the Psalter-canon parallel applies again, since special, extrabiblical revelation will return on earth in the eschaton as well, even though it has no place on earth during the present era.
Chris,
Unless the Regulative Principle of Worship is ceremonial, it is impossible for something that is
sinful (i.e. singing worthy is the Lamb in worship) to be conducted in the heavenlies - where
there is no sin. That is why why looking at the Revelation passages, you either have to conclude that the Bible does not say what it says, or be dispensational, or forsake EP.
I am not saying it is sinful in both places "“ in fact, I am saying that it is possible for it to be sinful here but not sinful in the heavenlies. The parallel example I am using that makes that seem like a possibly legitimate position is the fact that for someone here on earth at this time, to claim that he or she hears or sees God apart from Scripture is a sinful act (Deut. 18:20), for it is a lie. For someone in the heavenlies at this time, however, to claim that he or she hears or sees God apart from Scripture is not a sinful act, for it is not a lie. In light of that, the point I was attempting to make in the beginning of this thread is that the singing of songs with regard to the Psalter could possibly be seen as paralleling the claim of revelation with regard to Scripture. In other words, just as God ordained Scripture to be the sole means of seeing or hearing Him for us in this age, but not for those in the heavenlies in this age (since they see and hear Him apart from Scripture), so he might have ordained the Psalter to be the sole means of worshipping Him through song for us in this age, but not for those in the heavenlies in this age (since they worship Him through song apart from the Psalter.
Originally posted by Ianterrell
Okay I'm dusting off my
board membership card. Chris, in your initial argument you attempt to draw a parallel between extant prophecy and current "prophecy" and extant songs and non-Psalmic songs. This is an inadequate argument I believe because current prophecy is, from a Cessationist perspective, no prophecy at all, while the non-Psalmic songs are in fact inspired works produced by the Holy Spirit. And they were it seems used in worship (I am referring to songs which are indisputably outside the Psalm as canon, not the admittedly suspicious NT "hymn-fragments"), if these songs were used in worship and God has given no explicit command against their commited use then the Covenantal principle of continuity-unless-God-says-otherwise comes into play. So the prophecy of today which is not prophecy at all, cannot be compared to formerly legitimate songs of the OT which are fully within the realm of revelation.
My reply to Fred above may clarify what I mean somewhat. As you correctly noted, the reason someone today is sinning by claiming to receive a prophecy is because the prophecy is not actually a prophecy at all, hence the claim is a lie. The thing is,
if the RPW and the doctrine of EP are true, and non-Psalter songs are in fact violations of the RPW,
then they are not really worship at all, even if they are Scripture. In other words, someone claiming to be truly worshipping God through non-Psalter Scriptures is lying
if EP is true for the very same reason that someone claiming to be truly seeing or hearing God apart from Scripture is lying
if cessationism is true.
Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
The EP position has nothing to do with the worship of people in Adam's day, or Abraham's day, or any other day. It is dealing with the worship of Israel (the Church) in the New Covenant. Christ has fulfilled the feasts, ceremonies, sacrifices, etc. of the Temple worship, and we, the Church, are the Temple of God today. Paul and the apostles, on Christ's authority, were the new worship leaders, as David was in his day. And, on Paul's clear authority (along with the testimony of James and Christ), we are to sing the various songs contained in God's Book of Praise in the Old Testament as Christians.
This is not a dispensational distinction, it is a Biblical one, according to the author of Hebrews.
I´m somewhat confused by your statement that EP is only dealing with the worship of the Church in the New Covenant. I understand fully that it is not dealing with pre-Psalter worship or post-New Testament Church (eschaton) worship "“ but would you not say that in addition to applying to New Testament Church worship, EP is also dealing with Old Testament worship
after the completion of the Psalter?
Originally posted by fredtgreco
Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
The EP position has nothing to do with the worship of people in Adam's day, or Abraham's day, or any other day. It is dealing with the worship of Israel (the Church) in the New Covenant. Christ has fulfilled the feasts, ceremonies, sacrifices, etc. of the Temple worship, and we, the Church, are the Temple of God today. Paul and the apostles, on Christ's authority, were the new worship leaders, as David was in his day. And, on Paul's clear authority (along with the testimony of James and Christ), we are to sing the various songs contained in God's Book of Praise in the Old Testament as Christians.
This is not a dispensational distinction, it is a Biblical one, according to the author of Hebrews.
That's funny. I thought Covenant Theology was about continuity. I thought the EP argument was that the Psalter was the only songbook to be used in
both the Old and New Covenants. So far, the only response that I have gotten to song before the completion of the Psalter is that somehow the worship of God did not involve singing.
The impression I have is that EP adherents are only claiming the Psalter to be the only songbook in the era of the Church when the Psalter was complete, which of course includes the New Covenant and
part of the Old Covenant (I asked Gabriel to clarify that point above). In light of that, I don´t see that view of the Psalter as
necessarily Dispensational, for the same reason I don´t see the cessation of prophecy (which was in operation for the Old Covenant and
part of the New Covenant) as Dispensational. To elaborate on that point, Covenant Theology is about continuity, as you said, and of course it is not "œcontinuity on every point," but rather "œcontinuity until God says otherwise," and we of course know that there are several cases of changes being made due to God saying otherwise (such as the cessation of prophecy and of the ceremonial laws).
In light of that, the reason cessationism is not Dispensational is because we see instructions from God for the discontinuation of prophecy after the completion of Scripture. So in the same way, I fully understand that in order for EP to not be Dispensational, it is necessary for its adherents to produce instructions (explicit or through good and necessary consequence) from God for the discontinuation of songs such as the Song of Moses after the completion of the Psalter. In fact, that is one objection I presently have to EP. Would any of the EP adherents care to explain why you see songs such as the song of Moses to be discontinued at the Psalter´s completion, either explicitly or by good and necessary consequence? In other words, show me some passages that say the same things about songs like the Song of Moses in light of the Psalter´s completion as 1 Corinthians 13 and Hebrews 1 say about prophecy in light of the canon´s completion.
