The Regulative Principle of Worship - by Derek Thomas

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-------------------------

This is a muddled mess. The author attempts to teach us biblical principles, but he never explains worship, he never explains corporate worship, he never tells us what worship means or his view on what the Bible says about how it is to be practiced.

Plus, this Bible teacher manages to quote only a single Scripture, plus some snippets of a few more, in over 1400 words. But he is able to quote theologians and statements of faith, sometimes at length.

For the author, worship is what happens in church on Sunday. His entire presentation is regarding proper conduct and procedure in a Sunday service. But he will never discuss worship itself.

Worship is proskuneó, which means to kiss the ground when prostrating before a superior; to worship, ready "to fall down/prostrate oneself to adore on one's knees..." Does the author's church proskuneó, or does it simply follow rules taught by men and call it worship?

We don't need to appeal to rarefied principles or lofty terminology. This is our Regulative Principle of Worship: 

Jn. 4:24 God is spirit, and his worshippers must worship in spirit and in truth. 

What does God require? 

Mi. 6:8 He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.

We suspect the author does not want to discuss these simple things because he doesn't understand worship. He wants to obscure it behind long, pedantic explanations that don't really explain anything. He wants to make a case for his traditional understanding of how church is practiced on a Sunday morning. He wants to avoid the clarion call to offer God the glory due His name [Ps. 29:2], and worship Him in the splendor of His holiness [Ps. 96:9]. 

He thinks we need a Regulative Principle, dressed up in arcane explanations, when we just need to know how to be worshipers.

If our speculations about the author are false, we apologize. We are simply judging by what he has written.

-------------------

Put simply, the regulative principle of worship states that the corporate worship of God is to be founded upon specific directions of Scripture. (The author will never quote or even discuss any passage of Scripture with corporate worship as its subject matter.)

On the surface, it is difficult to see why anyone who values the authority of Scripture would find such a principle objectionable. Is not the whole of life itself to be lived according to the rule of Scripture? This is a principle dear to the hearts of all who call themselves biblical Christians. To suggest otherwise is to open the door to antinomianism and license.

But things are rarely so simple. After all, the Bible does not tell me whether I may or may not listen with profit to a Mahler symphony, find stamp-collecting rewarding, or enjoy ferret-breeding as a useful occupation even though there are well-meaning but misguided Bible-believing Christians who assert with dogmatic confidence that any or all of these violate God’s will. Knowing God’s will in any circumstance is an important function of every Christian’s life, and fundamental to knowing it is a willingness to submit to Scripture as God’s authoritative Word for all ages and circumstances. But what exactly does biblical authority mean in such circumstances?

Well, Scripture lays down certain specific requirements: for example, we are to worship with God’s people on the Lord’s Day, and we should engage in useful work and earn our daily bread. In addition, covering every possible circumstance, Scripture lays down a general principle: “present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect” (Rom. 12:1–2). (An excellent Scripture choice, but the author doesn't discuss it!)

Clearly, all of life is to be regulated by Scripture, whether by express commandment or prohibition or by general principle. There is therefore, in one sense, a regulative principle for all of life. In everything we do, and in some form or another, we are to be obedient to Scripture.

However, the Reformers (John Calvin especially) and the Westminster Divines (as representative of seventeenth-century puritanism) viewed the matter of corporate worship differently. (Hmm. We finally get to the author's premise, after a long and largely irrelevant explanation, but he appeals to non-biblical sources.)

In this instance, a general principle of obedience to Scripture is insufficient; there must be (and is) a specific prescription governing how God is to be worshiped corporately. (The author has a gift for stating things with more words than necessary. Doesn't our general obedience to Scripture include obedience to specific prescriptions?)

In the public worship of God, specific requirements are made, and we are not free either to ignore them or to add to them. (Good. The author is going to provide us with important biblical requirements for corporate worship...)

Typical by way of formulation are the words of Calvin: (Waaait. He starts with Calvin? What about the Bible?)

“God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by his Word” (“The Necessity of Reforming the Church”); and the Second London Baptist Confession of 1689: “The acceptable way of worshiping the true God, is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshiped according to the imagination and devices of men, nor the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representations, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures” (22.1). (This "regulative principle" apparently means that anything not in the Bible is not permitted. This would be an Argument from Silence. That is, because something is not mentioned, it isn't allowed.

The other side of the coin would be, because Scripture is silent, it is permitted. 

Neither of these are biblical arguments.)

Where does the Bible teach this? (Now he finally gets to the Bible...

We are supposing that the author intends to demonstrate from Scripture the proper way to conduct corporate worship.) 

In more places than is commonly imagined, including the constant stipulation of the book of Exodus with respect to the building of the tabernacle that everything be done “after the pattern . . . shown you” (Ex. 25:40); (The construction of a building is not worship. God provided specific instructions regarding this building because it was a representation of the heavenly tabernacle [He. 9:24]. It was to be built according to the heavenly pattern. 

The tabernacle was the place of sacrifice, the dwelling place of God [Ex. 25:8] for the nation of Israel: This is to be a lasting ordinance among the Israelites for the generations to come [Ex. 27:21]. There is no "Regulative Principle of Worship" here. It is not prescriptive, it is descriptive.)

the judgment pronounced upon Cain’s offering, suggestive as it is that his offering (or his heart) was deficient according to God’s requirement (Gen. 4:3–8); (There is no mention of what God required of Cain.)

the first and second commandments showing God’s particular care with regard to worship (Ex. 20:2–6); (The reader should consult this passage, and as you read you will note that God names several things we shall not do. There is absolutely nothing regarding corporate worship.)

the incident of the golden calf, teaching as it does that worship cannot be offered merely in accord with our own values and tastes; (Naw, this was simply pagan revelry. There are no prescriptive principles here.)

the story of Nadab and Abihu and the offering of “strange fire” (Lev. 10); (...they offered unauthorized fire before the LORD, contrary to his command. [Le. 10:1] These men violated a specific command of God.)

God’s rejection of Saul’s non-prescribed worship — God said, “to obey is better than sacrifice” (1 Sam. 15:22); (**Sigh** This is a specific disobedience of a specific person. 1Sa. 15:19: Why did you not obey the LORD?)

and Jesus’ rejection of Pharisaical worship according to the “tradition of the elders” (Matt. 15:1–14). (Again and again the author offers examples of Israelites breaking the law... but nothing about corporate worship.)

All of these indicate a rejection of worship offered according to values and directions other than those specified in Scripture. (Does the author have a Scripture that actually illustrates his point?)

Of particular significance are Paul’s responses to errant public worship at Colossae and Corinth. At one point, Paul characterizes the public worship in Colossae as ethelothreskia (Col. 2:23), (**Sigh** again. There is nothing here about "public worship." Paul is offering a series of admonitions to the Colossian church, including warnings about those who would disqualify them from the prize [Col. 2:18]. In this case it was asceticism, with its harsh rigidity and many rules. 

Ironically, the author wants a different form of harsh rigidity. He wants a particular practice of what he calls worship, and deems all else to be non-biblical.)

variously translated as “will worship” (KJV) or “self-made religion” (ESV). The Colossians had introduced elements that were clearly unacceptable (even if they were claiming an angelic source for their actions — one possible interpretation of Col. 2:18, the “worship of angels”). Perhaps it is in the Corinthian use (abuse) of tongues and prophecy that we find the clearest indication of the apostle’s willingness to “regulate” corporate worship. He regulates both the number and order of the use of spiritual gifts in a way that does not apply to “all of life”: no tongue is to be employed without an interpreter (1 Cor. 14:27–28) and only two or three prophets may speak, in turn (vv. 29–32). At the very least, Paul’s instruction to the Corinthians underlines that corporate worship is to be regulated and in a manner that applies differently from that which is to be true for all of life. (Finally. The author cites a passage dealing with conduct in a church gathering.

Because the author confuses corporate worship [the exaltation of God] with the processes of the gathering [a "worship service"], he is unable to articulate what worship is. So this passage is not the regulation of corporate worship, it is the regulation of behavior in the context of the gathering of the brethren.)

The result? Particular elements of worship are highlighted: reading the Bible (1 Tim. 4:13); preaching the Bible (2 Tim. 4:2); (Neither of these mention worship or even the gathering of the brethren. These are specific instructions to Timothy as duties for him.)

singing the Bible (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16) (Yay! The author again cites something instructive to the church gathering and its behavior, and the verses are relevant to actual worship. Let's actually quote them: 

Ep. 5:19 Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord...

Col. 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God.

Are these governing rules? No, they are encouragements. And once again the author passes on an opportunity to explain.

So his whole premise is that there is a "proper" way to conduct a corporate worship service, and that we cannot worship outside of the specific commands of the Bible. Yet here we have a couple of Scriptures that could have broad application regarding corporate behavior. Spontaneous singing, for example. Interaction within the assembly. Extended musical worship.

But notice that neither Scripture actually mentions worship. Singing is often combined into the idea of worship, but that isn't necessarily true. We defined worship in our introduction. So if corporate singing expresses the bowing down before a holy God, if dance does this, if drama does this, it is worship.)

— the Psalms as well as Scripture songs that reflect the development of redemptive history in the birth-life-death-resurrection- ascension of Jesus; praying the Bible — the Father’s house is “a house of prayer” (Matt. 21:13); and seeing the Bible in the two sacraments of the church, baptism and the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38–39; 1 Cor. 11:23–26; Col. 2:11–12). In addition, occasional elements such as oaths, vows, solemn fasts and thanksgivings have also been recognized and highlighted (see Westminster Confession of Faith 21:5). (Hmm. Another appeal to a non-biblical source.)

It is important to realize that the regulative principle as applied to public worship frees the church from acts of impropriety and idiocy — we are not free, for example, to advertise that performing clowns will mime the Bible lesson at next week’s Sunday service. (Why? The author gives us an example, deems it to be improper, but doesn't tell us how the regulative principle applies.)

Yet it does not commit the church to a “cookie-cutter,” liturgical sameness. Within an adherence to the principle there is enormous room for variation—in matters that Scripture has not specifically addressed (adiaphora). (Remember when the author wrote, there must be (and is) a specific prescription governing how God is to be worshiped corporately.

Remember when the author quoted Calvin? “God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by his Word.” 

But now he asserts there is plenty of room for variety where the Bible is silent. 

This is why we characterized his presentation as muddled.)

Thus, the regulative principle as such may not be invoked to determine whether contemporary or traditional songs are employed, whether three verses or three chapters of Scripture are read, whether one long prayer or several short prayers are made, or whether a single cup or individual cups with real wine or grape juice are utilized at the Lord’s Supper. (The average reader is now left helpless. One one hand there are principles we must not violate, but on the other there is lots of room for all sorts of things. It is impossible to distinguish what is permitted and what is not. 

So much for having a regulative principle.)

To all of these issues, the principle “all things should be done decently and in order” (1 Cor. 14:40) must be applied. (A simple, pertinent principle for the corporate, after many paragraphs of vagaries and aimlessness. But again he forfeits the opportunity to explain.)

However, if someone suggests dancing or drama is a valid aspect of public worship, the question must be asked — where is the biblical justification for it? (Having just stated there is room for a lot of other things, the author suddenly pops in a prohibition.)

(To suggest that a preacher moving about in the pulpit or employing “dramatic” voices is “drama” in the sense above is to trivialize the debate.) The fact that both may be (to employ the colloquialism) “neat” is debatable and beside the point; there’s no shred of biblical evidence, let alone mandate, for either. (Whaaaaaaat? The author's yes/no is getting frustrating. He pulls these things out of thin air, not to clarify, but rather to impose his version of church.) 

So it is superfluous to argue from the poetry of the Psalms or the example of David dancing before the ark (naked, to be sure) unless we are willing to abandon all the received rules of biblical interpretation. (This is getting to be a real adventure. The author provides a summary dismissal, based on what? What are these received rules of biblical interpretation which prevent us from worshiping via dance? Why can David dance before the Lord, but we cannot? Why should we ignore the biblical testimony provided by the Psalmist?

Ps. 30:11 You turned my wailing into dancing; you removed my sackcloth and clothed me with joy...

Ps. 149:3 Let them praise his name with dancing and make music to him with tambourine and harp.

Ps. 150:4 praise him with tambourine and dancing, praise him with the strings and flute...

What Regulative Principle allows us to dismiss these principles with a wave of the hand?)

It is a salutary fact that no office of “choreographer” or “producer/director” existed in the temple. (Was there a Sunday School director in the temple? What about a CEO pastor? Were there baskets passed around for the offering? Did people sit on benches in rows in the temple?)

The fact that both dance and drama are valid Christian pursuits is also beside the point. (Another summary dismissal. So now they are valid expressions, but before they violated received rules of biblical interpretation. How is this possible? The author has now descended into irrationality. There is nothing of value to be gleaned from this irregular, obfuscating, and unbiblical presentation.

We hope the author is not employed as a teacher or pastor.)

What is sometimes forgotten in these discussions is the important role of conscience. Without the regulative principle, we are at the mercy of “worship leaders” and bullying pastors who charge noncompliant worshipers with displeasing God unless they participate according to a certain pattern and manner. (The author himself is guilty.)

To the victims of such bullies, the sweetest sentences ever penned by men are, “God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are, in anything, contrary to His Word, or beside it, in matters of faith or worship. So that to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commands out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience: and the requiring of an implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience, and reason also” (WCF 20:2). To obey when it is a matter of God’s express prescription is true liberty; anything else is bondage and legalism.