Two Questions

[Jaewon]

I am thinking of starting a blog in Korean about exclusive psalmody, and I need some inputs on that since I am still learning about this doctrine. I read some articles and books and concluded that there are essentially two strong arguments for exclusive psalmody.


(1) An Argument from the Book of Psalms (An Appeal to the Sufficiency of the Book of Psalms)
P1. God deserves the best in the public worship.
P2. Singing Psalms is the best.
C1. Therefore, we sing psalms in the public worship.

(2) An Argument from the Regulative Principle of Worship
P1. In the public worship, God only receives the elements of worship that He Himself appointed in the Scripture.
P2. In the Scripture, singing Psalms is appointed by God as an element of worship.
C1. Therefore, we sing psalms in the public worship.


And usually historical support is followed. My questions are:

(1) Putting an argument from the Book of Psalms first or putting an argument from the regulative principle of worship first -- which is more effective, in your opinion?

(2) Is there any other arguments besides above two?

 

[Miss Marple]

Personally I find the regulative principle argument to be the basis for psalmody, from the vantage point of this pew warmer, so I recommend starting with that.

Once we agree that only what is required by God is acceptable in worship, the next logical question is, what does God require? So the argument flows well.

 

[MW]

Once we agree that only what is required by God is acceptable in worship, the next logical question is, what does God require? So the argument flows well.

Yes; logically, the regulative principle is the major premise, and the canonical psalter is the minor premise.

Of course, sadly, the modern emphasis on "personal journey" means that the logical presentation is not always the most appreciated.

 

[Pilgrim Standard]

You may find these helpful:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f124/complete-sermon-series-exclusive-psalmody-69670/

I most certainly agree here.

 

[Scottish Lass]

Once we agree that only what is required by God is acceptable in worship, the next logical question is, what does God require? So the argument flows well.

Yes; logically, the regulative principle is the major premise, and the canonical psalter is the minor premise.

Of course, sadly, the modern emphasis on "personal journey" means that the logical presentation is not always the most appreciated.

I agree.

 

[JP Wallace]

It could be you are encompassing this under the RPW argument, but surely as with any other discussion you need to begin with the exegetical evidence before the principled evidence. So in my opinion you would need to be begin by dealing with texts such as Eph 5:19 and Col 3:16 which are exegetically strong in defence of EP.

 

[Kaalvenist]

I would recommend occasionally attending First Reformed Presbyterian Church over at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary. Some of the folks there might be able to give you advice, as well. ;-)