Hi all. This is my first post; good to be here, (posting from Geelong, Australia).
Long story short: After coming out of the Pentecostal/Charasmatic church, I joined an exclusice psalms (e.p) church, where I was told the reasons for singing unaccompanied psalms. I thought it sounded nice and safe, and so I preached e.p whenever I had the opportunity, giving the Scriptural reasons which I had been told.
Having now wrestled in prayer and Scripture study myself, (something I should have done before), I am not convinced that, as New Covenant believers, God would restrict His worship to Old Covenant Theology songs, and that from only one book.
To never sing the name "Jesus Christ" in worship, (please don't give me the public vs. private worship thing) doesn't make sense to me. To never sing New Covenant
reality (as opposed to O.T shadow) songs such as, "
It's no longer I that liveth, but Christ that liveth in me" doesn't make sense to me.
Having said that, and more to the point of my title, I love the Psalms!! I have dedicated the last 15 years of my life composing music to the Psalms,
Ministry of Psalms - Jason Coghill But my desire is to see more Christians sing them as they appear straight from the text, ( I use mainly NIV) without the restriction of rhyme and metre and in the language that my unsaved friends can understand; and utilising the God given blessing of musical instruments, (appropriately as I can).
I welcome any feedback.
Jason Coghill
Jason,
I remember when you were touring in the States for one of your new CDs (2005, I think)... I was unable to attend your performance at our church (Springs Reformed Church, RPCNA), but got to hear you teach the Sabbath School. I was just listening to one of your CDs last week.
I myself came from a non-psalmody background, and through study became convinced of the position. I hope that some of us here on the board (with similar histories) can help answer some of your questions.
I take it for granted that "the regulative principle of worship" (contained for substance in the Confession of Faith, 21.1; and in the Larger and Shorter Catechisms' treatment of the second commandment) is not in question; and that all are agreed that we are to worship God only as He has appointed in His Word.
1. It is not (or rarely) disputed that God restricted His church under the Old Testament to the singing of the Book of Psalms, or at least to inspired songs. This restriction reflected His appointment of that book to serve in that capacity in His worship -- because those songs were particularly appointed, all other songs, lacking that appointment, were thereby excluded. This demonstrates that, under the Old Testament at least, particular songs required God's particular appointment for their use in worship. This is how the regulative principle applied to song in worship under that dispensation of the church.
The problem is, I don't see where this regulation has been relaxed, altered, etc. under the New Testament... where it is stated or implied that songs do not require God's particular appointment for their use in the church's worship. If that regulation is still in effect (and it is), then particular songs or songbooks still require God's particular appointment, for them to be used in His worship. This would automatically disqualify all uninspired hymns, since there has not been and will not be any revelation subsequent to Scripture giving approval of any such hymns (we are cessationists, after all). That automatically narrows the field of inquiry tremendously, to the question of the use of other songs contained in Scripture.
2. The mere appearance of a text in Scripture which seems vaguely poetic (the "Lucan canticles," the "Pauline hymns," etc.) does not constitute such approval. None of these texts are identified as psalms, hymns, or songs, and are never commanded (explicitly or implicitly) to be psalmed, hymned, or songed in worship.
3. To resolve the dilemma regarding singing the name of Jesus Christ, we ought to go to the regulative principle of worship. Are we commanded to sing the name of Jesus Christ? I know that we are to sing
in the name of Jesus Christ, as we are to do all things in His name; but I know of no command that we are to sing the words "Jesus" and "Christ," making sure to pronounce those particular sounds. Many Psalms speak of "salvation" ("Yeshua") and the "anointed" ("Messiah" in Hebrew, "Christ" in the Greek Septuagint). But again, without a command to sing the name "Jesus" (and particularly in view of the employment of this "argument" to justify the composing and singing of uninspired or noncanonical songs containing the name "Jesus"), such is contrary to the regulative principle, and therefore forbidden.
4. Christ, who Himself inspired the Psalms by His Spirit, knew that they were to be used after His ascension, into the dispensation of the New Testament, and was more than capable of fitting the Psalms for the perpetual usage of His church. It is a
non sequitur to argue from the fact that we have moved from the Old Testament to the New Testament, that we should now supplement the Old Testament
inspired, canonical Book of Psalms with
uninspired, noncanonical hymns. In the transition of dispensations, the Old Testament was not "supplemented" by uninspired compositions, but by the inspired New Testament, given by Christ for that purpose.
But the Psalter was given by Christ, by inspiration, as a part of the canon of Scripture, for the particular purpose of providing a perfect Songbook for His people to use. If this Songbook is to be supplemented under the present dispensation, it must be found in the New Testament canon, or else the argument from the progress of redemptive history breaks down. It would look something like this:
Canonical Old Testament ----Supplemented by----> Canonical New Testament
Ergo,
Canonical Psalter ----Supplemented by----> Noncanonical Hymns
There is no correlation between the two.
I hope that this may help to answer some of your questions.