Copyright 2004 Worship is the supreme and only indispensable activity of the Christian Church. It alone will endure, like the love of God which it expresses, into heaven, when all other activities of the Church will have passed away. It must therefore, even more strictly than any of the less essential doings of the Church, come under the criticism and control of the revelation on which the Church is founded. 1 The purpose of this essay is to very briefly explore the issue of Christian Worship. Its underlying theme is that just any worship will not do, that only particular worship is true worship (and by true I mean worship which is acceptable to the LORD, not to people). This consideration of worship will look at the meaning of the words used to describe worship, the object of our worship, the attitudes involved in worship and the elements of worship—those necessary things we are to do when we gather together as God’s people to give Him honour and glory. The essay is shaped by one or two fundamental assumptions, the first being that there is a dynamic, living and organic relationship between both covenants as fully given in the Old Testament (OT) and the New Testament (NT) of the Christian Bible. Secondly, that the Bible is the reliable, sure, dependable word of God, sufficient unto itself, inspired by the Holy Spirit, given by God for the benefit of humanity and, in the original languages used, true in every respect that God requires for His own glory and the redemption of those He has foreknown and predestined for salvation. Let us begin with some qualifying remarks about worship in its personal context. Personal worship is what we do each hour and each day. It is what we purposefully do in acknowledgement of the reconciliation we have received through the blood of Christ. But it is equally what we do as a means for spiritual maturity or sanctification. Paul says, “Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.” He goes on, “And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.” (Rom 12:1-2) Paul is saying that we are to make the things we do, our various activities, into sacrificial acts. These sacrificial acts are our personal worship. It is through these personal acts of worship—these many and varied acts of love and sacrifice of self—that we ascribe worthiness to God. These acts may be mundane or great, they may be purposeful or the result of opportunity. He also tells us that we are not to conform ourselves to the world. That is, we are not to be in agreement with the values of the world that are apart from God’s Kingdom. Finally he says that when we act in this way—making all our activities worship and not allowing ourselves to be in agreement with the world—we will prove—that is demonstrate through trial and effort—that the will of God is good and beneficial. As a result, our whole demeanour becomes saturated with the fragrance of worship and all that we do becomes the natural expression of one who abides in the Kingdom. So we see that worship is not something that only occurs on the Lord’s Day. It ideally occurs daily, in our moment-by-moment lives. Having said the foregoing, I have considered personal worship—as an aspect of one’s total orientation to God and His kingdom, and how this is worked out through discipleship and sanctification—in a separate essay. Also, worship that is seen in its “horizontal” orientation as the edification of the church will not be considered here, important though it is. For a very full treatment of edification as the end and purpose of our corporate gatherings I whole-heartedly refer the reader to David Peterson’s fine work.2 The emphasis in this present essay is rather the more “vertical” orientation of offering praise, adoration and obedience as the fruit of our lips, to God as both Creator and covenant-making LORD.
Worship is also a central theme of the last book of the Bible, Revelation. In fact, some of the most moving language of Scripture is used to portray the heavenly hosts as they offer up worship to God. (Rev 4:8-11; 5:12) Between these two works, worship is mentioned, described or commanded in most of the books of the Bible. The divines who created the Westminster Shorter Catechism recognized the importance of worship when they formulated their first question “What is the chief end of Man?” and answered by saying “Man’s chief end is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.” To glorify God is to worship Him and to worship Him is to enjoy Him. To worship means to give credit, to ascribe worth or to give proper due to the one worshiped, “Ascribe to the LORD the glory due His name; Bring an offering, and come before Him; Worship the LORD in holy array.” (1 Chr 16:29) It means essentially to willingly, joyfully, and intentionally admit and proclaim the absolute value that is God’s because, and only because, of whom He is. God therefore is the fitting object of our worship. In two of the three languages used in the Bible, Hebrew and Greek, there are several words used to describe worship. In Hebrew, the words most often used to describe temple worship (segeed and shachah) have the meanings of bowing low, prostrating, doing homage, showing reverence and the like (see Gen 18:12 for example). This is the essential meaning of another Hebrew word histahawa found in the context of worship, but with a more literal meaning of "to bend over or bow low from the waist." In the Greek of the New Testament, the word most often used for formal worship is proskuneo or proskynein and has basically the same meaning as the Hebrew used in the Old Testament. Literally it means, “to kiss toward” (as in a dog licking his master’s hand) and so paying due respect and homage (see John 4 for examples). The word latreia or latreuein is also used in the NT but in the sense of sacrificial service as worship. This is the word Paul used in Rom 12:1-2 when he talked about the behaviour Christians ought to exhibit as their own personal worship. A third Greek word, leitourgein or leitourgia (in its noun form) is often used but more often in the context of priestly service or functions. From it we derive our English words liturgy and liturgical. The words we have
been looking at—especially
segeed, shachah and proskunein—refer
to the gathered, formal worship of God’s people together. They
refer to that aspect of worship we are calling corporate worship to differentiate
it from personal acts of service. We have seen from One condition imposed by the Mosaic covenant in regard to worship was that the Israelites were to worship in the tabernacle. The tabernacle was God’s first temple designed specifically for sacrificial worship. It was basically an elaborate portable temple (tabernacle means “tent of meeting”) that could be pitched as required. The Lord gave Moses the design of the tabernacle from the heavenly model. The instructions are detailed in the book of Exodus in chapters 25 to 30. The tabernacle was the place where God came to dwell with His people and receive their worship via the priesthood, who represented God’s people. It was here that the pattern of worship, including appropriate sacrifices, would be set and which was later transferred to the temple in Jerusalem. That the faithful people of Jesus’ time and before did not worship corporately other than at the temple is borne out by much recent research, which argues forcefully against the theories of earlier scholars who believed that corporate worship often occurred in the synagogues3 and this view is also recorded by ancient authorities such as Philo and Josephus.4 (Synagogues only became primary centres of worship after the destruction of the temple in AD 70. Prior to that, they were most often used as religious schools or even as community centres. In the synagogues, the Israelites learned how to worship, but the true formal worship, following the order of the feasts, was done in the temple at Jerusalem.) It is important to note that in the OT, God specifies to His people that they are to worship only in the place He would choose and only in the way He would choose (see Deut 12:1, 5-8, 11-14). He warns them then, “Be careful to listen to all these words which I command you and your sons after you forever, for you will be doing what is good and right in the sight of the LORD your God…. Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add or take away from it.” (Deut 12:28, 32, emphasis added) From the OT record we see that God sets out the various conditions and activities. He has shown His people how He should be worshipped as well as in what place. In His dealings with King David, the LORD stipulated that Solomon, David’s son and heir, would build Him a temple, “When your days are complete…I will raise up your descendant after you and I will establish his kingdom…. He shall build a house for My name and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.” (2 Sam 7:12-13) When the temple was finally built by Solomon, and during the dedication ceremony, “…then the house, the house of the LORD was filled with a cloud, so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the LORD filled the house of God.” (2 Chr 5:13-14) So God ratified the agreement made with David by filling the temple with His holy presence. From this point on,
until its final destruction by the Romans in AD 70, the temple was the
entire centre for the worship
of God
by His
people.
The temple
itself however, was not a new institution, and was really an
extension of the tabernacle and the sacrificial worship that took place
there.
But while
the
earthly tabernacle and temple are now gone, which were only foreshadows
of God’s true tabernacle and temple (Heb 8:5; 9:11)
we now, by the blood of the new covenant, have access to the
heavenly
temple where God lives eternally
and of which the earthly places were but imperfect copies (see
John 1:14 where “dwelt” has
connotations of a tent or tabernacle, reminiscent of the tent
of meeting from Ex 33:7-9; see also John 2:19-22). With the
inauguration
of the new covenant,
secured with Jesus’ body and His blood (even before the
destruction and passing away of the temple) a new form of temple
worship came
to be. This new
form of worship was no longer dependant on priests, contrivances,
rules, ceremony or location. All that went with the old covenant
was now made obsolete and
replaced with a better way. It was made obsolete because it was
perfectly fulfilled in Christ and so rendered no longer necessary.
Now, as promised, we worship
in the new temple (Ps 11:4a; Is 2:3; 66:20), which is
our Lord and Saviour Christ Jesus, who became our High Priest
forever
(Heb 2:17; 3:1)
as well as our Temple, when He offered up Himself a perfect Lamb
of Sacrifice (John 1:36; 1 Cor 5:7; 1 Pet 1:18-19;
Heb 9:12-14) once for all, on the alter of His cross. So the examples originally given in the OT by which we are to ascribe worth to God have not so much been abolished as rather fulfilled in the NT, in the sense of being made perfect in Christ and because of Christ’s ultimate sacrifice. He has told us, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” (Matt 5:17-18) If we take the position, as I do, that the Old and New Testaments are different expressions of a single redemptive history, then we should gladly accept the notion that God has never put into abeyance His commandments concerning worship. We do not worship two Gods, with two different agendas. It is the same Triune God we worship who has revealed Himself in all His covenants with His chosen people, from the very beginning with Adam, through Abraham, Moses and Jacob, and culminating in the person and work of Christ Jesus, God’s Messiah. The worship inaugurated in Solomon’s, and continued in Herod’s, temple has found its perfect expression and fulfillment in Christ, the Heavenly Temple. So then if this is indeed the case, how are we, as recipients of this new covenant, to ascribe to God the glory due His name? The divines who were used by the Holy Spirit in His program for Reformation of the Church were faced with the same critical question. The Reformation was the inevitable reaction to a Catholic church that had become powerful, wealthy, corrupt, worldly, openly sinful and abusive. The worship of the Catholic Church was corrupt and idolatrous. It had lost its ability to communicate the plain gospel as it was revealed in Scripture. It was full of human innovations that were nowhere to be found in the Word of God, but were nothing other than the inventions of sinful men who themselves had lost touch with the reality behind the mask and who, like the Pharisees and lawyers before them, prevented others from experiencing the reality. It was in the fiery crucible of the Reformation that the truth of the great ideas of Sola Scriptura: The Authority of Scripture Alone; Soli Deo Gloria: For the Glory of God Alone; Solo Christo: By Christ’s Work Alone; Sola Gratia: Salvation by Grace Alone; and Sola Fide: Justification by Faith Alone, were rediscovered. But it was the Church’s flagrant disregard for the final authority of Scripture that was considered by the reformers as perhaps the greatest danger and they believed—given the inherent sinfulness of men—that it was essential to get back to the objective standards given in the completely reliable Word of God. God, in the entire counsel of His Word, had determined how His people should worship and made it plain enough what he considered appropriate. This is evident from such verses as Deut 12:32 as well as others from both testaments. One outcome of this return to biblical authority is what came to be called the Regulative Principle of Worship (RPW). The Reformers reasoned that if God has not told us we should do a thing then we should not do it. This is the simplified essence of the RPW. The RPW is, historically speaking, a product of the Reformation. The RPW was clearly enunciated in the great confessions of the Reformation, most notably in the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) but also in the London Baptist Confession (1689), the Second Helvetic Confession (1566) and the Belgic Confession (1561). I acknowledge however, that this fact by itself is not sufficient reason to adopt the RPW, as those documents, wise though they may be, are not inspired. This is an important point. Since the great confessions are the products of uninspired human minds, they are of necessity inherently sinful to a degree and so cannot be considered foolproof and absolutely reliable guides, as can Holy Scripture itself. On the other hand, I believe we ignore such documents at our peril, for they are the summary of a huge deposit of godly wisdom and theological knowledge. As examples of the articulation of the RPW by the great confessions, let us look at what is said concerning the RPW, first by the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) and then by the London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689 (LBC):
For the purposes of this essay, the RPW is being put forward as a principle of prudence and caution. It is my contention that we need to understand what God has said in His Word and then we must faithfully practice what we have learned. For if we deviate too far from God’s Word we run the risk of falling into what the apostle Paul called “will-worship” (Col 2:23 KJV) defined by my concordance as self-willed (arbitrary and unwarranted) piety. But the RPW seems to be one of those wonderful deductions, made from a careful and humble study of Holy Writ, which is in complete agreement with the Word of God and intended to act as a hedge or protection against man’s very own sinfulness and disobedience. Even though it is, after all, a Presbyterian fundamental and not necessarily binding on other communions, to adopt such a hedge against disobedience seems to me a wise and prudent course of action, never trusting in ourselves but always falling back on the Word of God with confidence and assurance. Assuming then that our worship is not will-worship—and not anthropocentric or man centred—is there anything from Scripture that teaches us what our attitudes should be when we approach God (and here I include the entirety of worship, including edification and personal sacrificial service)? When we look to the Bible for such teaching and advice, we need look no further than the book of Psalms. In these songs and prayers of praise and petition we are given a clear understanding of what God requires, “O LORD, open my lips, that my mouth may declare Your praise. For You do not delight in sacrifice, otherwise I would give it; You are not pleased with burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, O God, You will not despise.” (Ps 51:16-17) And the call of God in Isaiah reminds us both of God’s transcendence and His immanence (Is 57:15) in that God is sufficient unto Himself, not requiring anything from the sacrifices we give Him. He gains nothing from such sacrifice, as He makes clear in passages like this: “I shall take no young bull out of your house nor male goats out of your folds. For every beast of the forest is Mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. I know every bird of the mountains, and everything that moves in the field is Mine. If I were hungry I would not tell you, for the world is Mine, and all it contains. Shall I eat the flesh of bulls or drink the blood of male goats? Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving and pay your vows to the Most High; call upon Me in the day of trouble; I shall rescue you, and you will honor Me.” This is not to deny the central place of sacrifice in the OT (as well as the NT) but it is to say that sacrifice that was given with lip service only was an offence to God and this would (and did) rebound on the one making the offensive offering. As well as a contrite heart, God makes clear that He wants His true worshippers to worship Him with humility, as is fitting. In passages such as Ps 25:9 and Mic 6:8, we are told unequivocally what kind of worship pleases God and therefore what is His just and proper due, “He has told you O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” And we have a wonderful teaching to drive home the very point, in the story of the Pharisee and the tax collector (Luke 18:10-14). Here we get a glimpse of what God has been talking about. We have the proud, self-righteous and presumably well-to-do Pharisee and beside him also praying, the sinful tax collector. The Pharisee gloats over the fact he is not like others (we can see him sending furtive glances over his shoulder toward the other man) as he lists his spiritual accomplishments. On the other hand, the poor tax collector realizes all that he has to offer God in prayer is his brokenness and contrition in absolute, heartfelt humility. What an incredible picture the Lord has painted for us here. Nor is it a coincidence that these very attributes of contrition and humility, found so plentifully in both testaments, are also characteristic of the very One who was to come and redeem us from our sins. Throughout the OT the Messiah was portrayed as humble, lowly, gentle, contrite, dejected and obedient. God has used the various books throughout Scripture to teach us about the core values that matter most, even embodying those very values and qualities for us so we could not go wrong nor misunderstand (Is 53:1-12; Phi 2:5-9; Matt 11:29). But this is not all. We have one other attitude or quality of supreme importance in the context of this discussion. I’m referring to the attitude or quality of obedience. We have seen already that empty lip service or sacrifice without repentance was not what God asked or expected from His worshippers. He wanted (and wants still) heart-felt repentance and sincere adoration, but—and again, this is central to our entire argument—only in obedience to what He has prescribed. This is made obvious in such passages as this: “Samuel said, ‘Has the LORD as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices As in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed than the fat of rams.’” And this is not only given to us in the OT but in the NT as well, especially in the oft quoted passage from Matthew: “You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you: ‘this people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far away from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’” (Matt 15:7-9, quoting Is 29:13) Over and over again, we are admonished to be obedient to the Word of God and not to worship in ways that are invented by men. We come now to the form of praise and worship used in both the OT and the NT. The vehicle used in both testaments for musical worship was, until recent times, the Psalter or book of Psalms. At the outset, there is, to my knowledge, neither complete nor even fragmentary evidence of songs or hymns in the writings of the early church that are not already found in the Psalter. In fact the early church fathers, such as Athanasius, Ambrose and Chrysostom to name a few, were almost unanimous in their endorsement of the Psalms. It was not until the 4th century that the practice of uninspired hymns as part of worship became common, primarily as a reaction against Gnostic influence. Nor are we given warrant, either explicit or implicit, anywhere in Scripture (so far as I have been able to find) to create or use new works for corporate worship. By the time the Reformation was under way, the Protestant church had largely abandoned uninspired hymns in favour of the Psalms found in the Bible. This was certainly the case with the WCF, which recognized the Psalms as forming the only legitimate content for sung praise, which was in keeping with the overarching RPW and Sola Scriptura. But as helpful as the WCF is, we must turn to Scripture for the final decision. When we consider the Scriptural evidence, we must remember that it is not how we understand word meaning today that matters most, but what the meaning would have been to the biblical writer, writing in his time. It is evident to even a casual reader that the book of Psalms is primarily made up of compositions called psalms but also compositions called songs. For instance, referring to my copy of the NASB, I counted 63 works described as psalms, 14 described as songs, 13 described as both a psalm and a song and 22 other works variously described as song, prayer, maskil (which means used for instruction) or miktam (which means a permanent record) and others. The word húmnos (or hymn) is also found seventeen times in the Septuagint (LXX), the version of the Bible used by Christians and Jews (including Jesus and Paul) during NT times, thirteen in the book of Psalms alone. The title of the book of Psalms itself in Hebrew is tephilla or tehillim, which is invariably rendered as praise or praises. The general meaning of the Hebrew tehillim includes all that is worthy of praise or celebration and especially of the works and ways of the LORD. The Greek psalmói is from the LXX and is a good representation of the Hebrew tehillim as it means essentially songs but, by association and implication, songs of a spiritual kind directed toward the LORD. Paul, in such passages as Col 3:16 and Eph 5:19, was not referring to specific psalms but the works in general from the book of Psalms, for the word he used is the word used most often in the NT in reference to that book as a whole: Luke 20:42; 24:44; Acts 1:20 and 13:33 for instance. The Hebrew word for any specific psalm is mizmór while the word for a song is shir. We find both words included in the titles of individual psalms, often together, as we have seen, (Psalm 72, for example). In Col 3:16 we read, “Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you, with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God.” and likewise in Eph 5:19, “…speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord.” As I have said, the word Paul used in both verses is psalmói. He also uses the word hymns (húmnoi) that are spiritual songs characterized by the proclamation of greatness—in this context, God’s. Odé is the word used for “spiritual songs” and means songs of either praise or confession. It is worth noting at this point, by way of comparison, that just as the Holy Spirit used various other synonymous terms in different contexts, terms such as “His commandments, and His statutes and His judgments” (Deut 30:16) or “miracles and wonders and signs” (Acts 2:22) so He just as easily used “psalms, hymns and songs” to mean one and the same thing when referring to worship. Also note the following. At the close of Jesus’ Last Supper, it is recorded of Him and His disciples that “After singing a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.” (Matt 26:30) Bible authorities and expositors are in almost total agreement that this so-called hymn was in fact the second part of the Hallel Psalms (Pss 113-118). Matthew called this a hymn, because he understood that word to mean a composition from the book of Psalms. In the same way, the writer of Hebrews quotes Psalm 22:22 by using the word "humneo” to describe the singing of a celebratory song (a mizmór from the Psalms) praising the LORD. The same is the case in Acts 16:25, where we are told that after being thrown in jail, Paul and Titus prayed and sang hymns. The word used is the same word used by Matthew in 26:30. Lastly, the word humnos, (humnoi, humneo) is a word that must be describing a work from the OT psalter because when Matthew used that word in his gospel (and even when Paul used it many years later) there simply was no other hymnic material available. The psalter was all Jesus and His disciples could use because as yet, nothing else existed for this purpose. To be sure, there were hymnic elements within the burgeoning documents that would in time be canonized as the NT, but there was no complete and recognized corpus of hymnic material for Christ or His disciples to draw on for their own worship. The only material then available was from the OT psalter. This fact alone should put to rest any argument about the validity of the terminology used in the biblical prescription for exclusive psalmody. To summarize then, it is my opinion that to interpret such passages, for instance Col 3:16 and Eph 5:19, as being songs or hymns other than from the Psalter is to disregard the direct meanings of the words by Paul and others and to do violence to the integrity of the verses and to their larger context. (The reference
to a new song, found in Rev 14:3, “And
they sang a new song before the throne and before the four living
creatures
and the elders; and no one could learn the song except the one
hundred and forty-four thousand who had been purchased from the
earth” can
mean a new song or a song that is sung in a completely, qualitatively
new way, for a new reason. This is certainly the context in which
the verse
is found. Here is a picture of worship as it shall be, not how
it is. In Revelation we have a symbolic picture of the kind of
worship
that will
occur when the end times come to a close. I believe it is not until
we get to heaven that we are able to offer God new songs for His
worship.
It is instructive that it is the idea of renewal that is behind
the Greek, kainós or new song, and that is the
overall theme of the book of Revelation itself, To me it is evident from the NT record that singing the psalms was an expected part of worship; but the singing was never described as being accompanied by musical instruments. Nowhere in the NT do we find language either describing worship this way or giving instructions in the use of musical instruments during worship, except in the book of Revelation. But in this highly complex and symbolic work, worship is described as it is carried out in heaven, by the redeemed and the angelic hosts. This is such an extraordinary setting that we can in no way, with any honesty, affirm that this is the way we are to worship now. We can affirm however, that this is how we will all worship one day. In all occasions where worship is described in the NT in the context of song, it is the singing of the psalms, and with voice only. In the OT there are numerous passages describing the instruments used to accompany worship by the priests, and in the NT there are many references to musical instruments but none, apart from Revelation, in the context of worship. Why are there so many inspired passages in the OT where musical instruments are mentioned in the context of worship yet none in the NT? Could it be that the inspired writers of the NT simply thought it so obvious as to be unworthy of mention? It is clear that musical instruments were a mandated necessity as part of OT temple worship from many passages including, but not restricted to, 1 Chr 25:1-7; 2 Chr 5:12-14 originally under the direction of inspired seers and prophets. All this was done at the command of the Lord, through His prophets. (2 Chr 29:25) At first blush this might seem to support the idea of instrumentation in NT worship, but such is not the case. As far as the use of inspired songs (the psalms) is concerned, the few references we find in the NT seem to indicate voices only, without accompaniment. Unlike the OT record, which was rich with references to instruments used in worship, in the NT there is not a single one, excepting Revelation. Such is the case in Col 3:16 as well as Eph 5:19 and such also is the case in Heb 13:15 which for me is perhaps the most eloquent reference. In it we are reminded of the humility and sincerity that are at the heart of all true worship. We are reminded that worship is a kind of loving sacrifice: “Through Him then, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name.” While I grant that it is possible to argue against the singing of psalms, I must ask: why would one wish to? If we believe that God deserves the best we have to offer, why would we presume to give Him worship-song that is not inspired? God inspired the Psalms and gave them to us so that we could give them back to Him for His own glory. Are we then so proud as to think we can improve on that which God has created for us and which is sanctioned by Him by being included in His Scripture, as well as by being used by His chosen people from at least the time of King David, God’s king and prophet? Others, such as John Frame 6 have attempted to use a circuitous logic that I believe tends to undermine the overarching authority of the Scriptures. It seems we want to read the Bible as if it were simply a compendium of suggestions coming from just another uninspired source, instead of being the self-revelation of God. If God has not made it clear that we are to do otherwise, is it not prudent and reverent to follow the examples He has given us in His Scripture and to use them as the models for our own worship? Let us recall the words of the Westminster Confession: The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. I have come to believe that for me to knowingly do otherwise would amount to willful disobedience (James 4:17) and I take personally and seriously the words of the Psalmist, “Your word I have treasured in my heart, that I may not sin against You.” (Ps 119:11) We must understand that when we come in worship, it is to the God (Elohim) who created the entire cosmos from the greatest galaxy to the tiniest fragment of matter/energy, and who as LORD (Jehovah/Yahweh) entered into covenant faithfulness with His chosen people, His “called out ones”. Such a realization should leave us not only with strong feelings of love and thankfulness for His incredible and essentially mysterious gift of grace, but also fear and humility in the face of His infinite majesty and holiness. Churches that do not regularly acknowledge God’s transcendence (His holiness), but only His immanence (His love and mercy), are at best worshipping in an incomplete manner and at worst in an us-centered and not Him-centered way. As a result, we find born-again Christians acting in ways and holding values that are not so different from the secular society, which they are called to be in but not of. When we create God in our own image—when we say for instance that God is love and mean that God is only love and ignore His other attributes as revealed in Scripture—then we are in danger of becoming idolaters. Let me close this discussion with a final reflection. In Exodus, we find the following instruction, given to Moses after God has given him and the people the Ten Commandments, “If you make an altar of stone for Me, you shall not build it of cut stones, for if you wield your tool on it, you will profane it.” (Ex 20:25) This might seem to be out of context in the current argument, but I don't think so. It would seem that God did not want His alter of worship to be “improved upon”. He had provided Moses with everything necessary for worship. Not only did He provide the sacrifice, He also provided the very stones to be used for building the alter. I believe God is saying that dressed stones are not an improvement; they are in fact an offence to Him because it is an act of proud arrogance to think that we can improve on God’s own handiwork; the stones used for the alter are perfect just as they are. Could not this argument be applied to the modern trend of using uninspired worship-song? I believe it can. Do we think that by using modern innovations such as drama, dance, praise bands, “special” music and the like that we can improve on what God has already provided for our worship? Perhaps God sees such things just as He saw the use of the dressed stone for His alter. When all is said and done then, it is hard for me not to follow the opinions of Michael Bushell 7 and others of his ilk and concede that the only biblically sanctioned and fitting form of musical praise that should occur during our corporate worship (while we are still on earth and before the final Day of Judgment) must be the unaccompanied singing of the Psalms. Nor should a congregation, in my opinion, be content with singing uninspired songs that merely incorporate phrases or individual verses or refrains from the Psalms. This is tantamount to saying to God, "Your songs are not, on their own, sufficient for our spiritual needs. We need to edit them, and contain them in a more acceptable form of packaging, more suitable for our cultural milieu." As I said at the beginning of this essay, like many Christians I have taken my worship for granted, never wondering whether there might be a right or a wrong way to do it, and never thinking that perhaps God was the rightful judge as to its acceptability. Nor did it ever occur to me that my own feelings might not be the best guide. I have worshipped thinking that my emotional response was what really mattered, not considering whether there might be an objective dimension to worship. But I’ve come to think somewhat differently of late, partly as a result of the research and writing of this essay, partly because of often heated discussions with my wife over this issue and partly as a result of much prayer and (I believe) leading by the Holy Spirit. I’ve now come to realize that worship is far too important to take for granted, that it’s not my own (or other’s) feelings that matter most during corporate worship (as opposed to edification), but my faithfulness and obedience to the LORD as revealed in His inspired writings. Along the way, my understanding of the Regulative Principal as it pertains to worship has truly become a sure protection against my own ingrained sinfulness that often blinds me to that which is so plain. I have come to believe that God, in His Word, has prescribed all that we need for faithful worship, even the very elements of such worship. I believe as well that we are not to look outside of Holy Writ—and certainly not to ourselves—for permission to worship otherwise and this includes the very words of praise we are to sing to His glory. I believe that in today’s churches there are two streams of worship, just as there are two streams of Christianity. I believe there to be a direct link between the kinds of worship we practice and the kind of Christians we are. Thoroughly Reformed congregations should have little trouble in agreeing with most of what I’ve said, whereas Arminian Christians will probably disagree with just about everything. This is so because for Arminians, freedom is seen as fundamental to the Scripture’s message. For Reformed or Calvinistic Christians however, there will be more of a tendency to submission to the message found in Scripture. The Arminian says that he, in the end, is free to choose Jesus as his Lord and Saviour. This being the case, it follows that he would also be free to choose how to worship Jesus. The Calvinist on the other hand believes himself to be chosen by Jesus, his Lord and Saviour, and therefore is not free in how he worships. I count myself among the latter. Finally, I believe that if what I have said is true, (and this is a huge if) then it must be binding on us regardless of the communion to which we belong, whether Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian or any other. When we realize that God has, in His infinite care and loving mercy, not only given us salvation in His Son but has also provided for the very ways in which we may worship Him in spirit and truth, what else can we do but praise Him and bow down before Him in thankfulness and joy, fear and trembling. 1. W. Nicholls, "Jacob’s Ladder: The Meaning of Worship," Ecumenical Studies in Worship No. 4 (London: Lutterworth, 1958), p. 9. Quoted in David Peterson, Engaging with God: A Biblical Theology of Worship, Downers Grove, Intervarsity Press, 1992 2. David Peterson, Engaging with God: A Biblical Theology of Worship, Downers Grove, Intervarsity Press, 1992 3. Steven Fine, This Holy Place, Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame, 1997 4. H. H. Rowley, Worship in Ancient Israel, Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1967 5. Rev. Peter J. Wallace, “Which Regulative Principle? A Response to Steve Schlissel and Brian Schwertley”, www.michianacovenant.org/sermons/rpw.html 6. John M. Frame, Worship in Spirit and Truth, Phillipsburg, Presbyterian and Reformed, 1996 7. Michael Bushell, Songs of Zion: A contemporary case for Exclusive Psalmody, Pitsburgh, Crown and Covenant, 1999
|