1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The Regulative Principle

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by J.D., Mar 13, 2008.

  1. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    As Samuel Waldron has said, "It seems that one of the major intellectual stumbling blocks which hinders men from embracing the Regulative Principle is that it involves the idea that the church and its worship is ordered in a regulated way different from the rest of life. In the rest of life God gives men the great precepts and general principles of his word and within the bounds of these directions allows them to order their lives as seems best to them. He does not give them minute directions as to how they shall build their houses or pursue their secular vocations. The Regulative principle, on the other hand, involves a limitation on human initiative in freedom not characteristic of the rest of life. It clearly assumes that there is a distinction between the way the church and its worship is to be ordered and the way the rest of human society and conduct is to be ordered. Thus, the Regulative Principle is liable to strike many as oppressive, peculiar, and, therefore, suspiciously out of accord with God’s dealings with mankind and the rest of life." True enough. From http://www.apuritansmind.com/PuritanWorship/McMahonRegulativePrinciple.htm
     
  2. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    Likes Received:
    1,670
    Faith:
    Baptist
    JD: I agree that the regulative principle should be followed in areas of worship.

    Much of the problem lies in discerning those elements that are "incidental" to worship (where you meet, the time you meet, using air conditioning/electricity...etc), from those that are essential to God-pleasing worship (Hebrews 12:28-29: .....by which we may offer to God an acceptable service with reverence and awe: (29) for our God is a consuming fire.)

    Reverence and Awe are essential to God-pleasing worship. Any worship that is presented in a irreverant manner would not be pleasing.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  3. Jerome

    Jerome Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    9,796
    Likes Received:
    700
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Enthusiastic sixteenth-century proponents of JD's "principle" turned to smashing stained glass windows and desecrating gravestones.
     
  4. TCGreek

    TCGreek New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Regulative Principle (RP) is Irregular.

    Those who adhere to the RP, Do they use pianos in worship?

    I've even heard that Paul in Eph 5:19 is referring to just Psalms:

    "speaking to one another with psalms, hymns and songs from the Spirit. Sing and make music from your heart to the Lord" (TNIV).

    It seems odd to me that Paul would use three different Greek terms, if he were only referring to the Psalter.
     
  5. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    By the way you may be interested to know that it wasn't the 1689 London Baptist Confession or CH Spurgeon that introduced me to the regulative principle. It was TOM MALONE. Yes, that Tom Malone. Now, he didn't use the words "regulative principle", he just called "do it God's way". His text was from the narrative of Uzzah touching the ark. "God told them how to move the ark and they ignored Him! So somebody got killed for it!"

    Everything he said was a description of the regulative principle. He was decrying "modern inventions" which were "strange fire". What an impression he made on me that night! It never left my mind.

    Now, I'll have to agree that the boundaries can be clouded, but if you don't have a principle that says that God has prescribed, very specifically, how He is to be worshipped, then you have no basis by which to exercise discernment in worship. How would you reply to someone that says "let's use bananas and soda pop for the Lord's supper"? After all, the Bible doesn't expressly forbid the substitution of the elements, does it? (source of example: aforesaid Tom Malone).

    To deny the RP is to deny sola scriptura. The reformers understood it. To do elsewise was to agree with Rome - a man-made, normative principled religion. Do it God's way, and no other way.
     
  6. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    Yes, you are right - an important distinction. Thank you. Places to meet are incidental, not prescribed. The mode and persons of baptism is regulated (professing believers, immersion), but the place of baptism is incidental (river, pond, baptistry).
     
  7. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    You have highlighted two of the relatively few areas of dispute among RP adherents. To disagree over the application of the principle is one thing, but to deny the principle itself is another.
     
  8. TCGreek

    TCGreek New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    Help me understand this minor dispute: How does the RP apply to Eph 5:19?
     
  9. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    So far, JD has supported his use of the "regulative principle" with the arguments of men.

    It would seem to me that if this were a Biblical issue, he could justifiy it with Scripture.

    Oh well.
     
  10. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    Under the RP, singing is a valid form of worship because it is authorized by the word of God. Some dispute whether instrumental accompaniament is incidental (and therefore sanctioned) to singing or not. The old Psaltry vs Hymnal argument is an exegetical argument. I have not taken a side in that debate, but when I do, I'll be sure to pronounce anathemas on everyone that disagrees with me. [​IMG]
     
  11. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    Scripture proof was given. I guess you missed it.
     
  12. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    I apologise. I know I said I was leaving the debate and i fully intended too. However, the "cloudy but specific" issue really has me intrigued. How can it be both?

    Could someone tell me, with scripture, specifically, exactly how I am to worship the Lord? Or is the issue to cloudy for that? Since the instructions are prescribed by God I should be able to get a yes or no, with Bible support of course. I will even be content if you could tell me which are incidental and which are prescribed - with scriptural support of course since God has specifically prescribed how we are to worship.

    Can I project hymns on the wall?
    Am I even allowed to use a hymnal?
    Can I use a piano?
    An organ?
    A keyboard?
    A guitar?
    A violin?
    Drums?
    Must I sing only psalms?
    Are modern hymns permitted?
    Do I have to wear clerical robes when I preach?
    May I wear clerical robes?
    How about a suit and tie?
    Is my order of service prescribed?
    May I have Sunday school?
    May I have a creche (nursery)?
    May we meet anyplace except a private home?


    I guess what I am looking for is which of these are cloudy and which are specifics. Since I have no liberty when it comes to worship according to a post above I really need to get this sorted so that I am in line with sola scriptura.
     
    #32 NaasPreacher (C4K), Mar 15, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2008
  13. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    While I see the Emerging Church as problematic we need to be fair concerning Mark Driscol. He has repented , renounced, and apologized for this. Because he has it should be brought up no more.
     
  14. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,356
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I believe we are talking about PCs and tape machines. When carried out to its logical extreme, the RP can indeed deal with such things as PCs and tape machines and buildings and the like. This is where the hypocrisy comes in. You can't just say, "I'm going to worship exactly like the NT and then meet in a building like the Church of Christ people do without being hypocritical.

    The regulative principle doesn't just deal with "the elements of Biblical worship," it deals with the entire Sunday service (which, by the way, is never called a "worship service" in Scripture) and other elements not even part of the Sunday service. The RP has been used in history to attack such things as Sunday School and musical instruments. These things are beyond the Biblica principles of worship, and are about how we carry out other principles given in the Bible.
     
  15. TCGreek

    TCGreek New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, Mark has repented and is in good company. Revmitchell, you're correct, and we need to get pass this.
     
  16. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,356
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I've been thinking about this and meaning to get back to it.

    First of all, Nadab and Abihu were not punished for disobeying the regulative principle and adding to the worship God commanded. They were killed for direct disobedience against God's command on how to offer incense. They were killed for "strange fire" that was competition to God's fire.

    Again, Uzzah was not killed for adding anything to God's plan of worship, he was killed for direct disobedience, for touching God's holy ark with his hands!

    In fact, the story of Uzzah proves that God did not mean to add a RP to His commands. Note that the ark was being carried on a cart, something God never commanded, when Uzzah touched it. But Ahio, the brother of Uzzah who helped put the ark on the cart, was not punished with Uzzah because he did not touch the ark--that is, he was not in disobedience. They did not displease God with adding the cart to their methodology, but Uzzah angered God by his direct disobedience.

    Also, at the time of the transportation of the ark, David had all sorts of music going. Was that commanded for the transportation of the ark? No! And David was not punished nor rebuked.

    Again, later on David danced before the Lord as the ark was transported. That was not commanded for the transportation of the ark, yet David was not punished nor rebuked. So, these incidents in the OT actually disprove the RP. :type:
     
  17. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    If there were a regulative principle, I would say it's found in John 4:23-24. They that worship the Father must worship Him in spirit and in truth. It appears that at the heart of this debate is what constitutes true, spiritual worship.

    So, I'd like to see someone address that.
     
  18. Dale-c

    Dale-c Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, no, no, we are NOT talking about PCs and tape machines.
    Tape machine are fine for recording sermons.
    PCs are fine for use with projectors to replace printed hymnals and notes.

    We are only talking specifically with ELEMENTS of worship, not CIRCUMSTANCES.

    Elements being:

    Prayer
    Singing
    Preaching of the Gospel
    Reading of the word of God.
    Baptism
    The Lords Supper.


    How you go about these is not so important.
    For instance:

    What order you do these in is a circumstance and is not proscribed.
    Whether you use printed hymnals or a projector does not matter.

    Whether you have a piano or a guitar or both to accomany your singing is up to each congregation to decide.

    WHether you sit or stand while you sing is a circumstance.

    Adding a puppet show to list of element is NOT ok.

    So to reiterate, we are only talking about elements. PCs and tape machines, time of worship heating andd cooling devices are all circumstances.
     
  19. Dale-c

    Dale-c Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good point.
    And how may we know how to worship Him in truth ? By adhering to the elements proscribed in scripture and not adding or subtracting.
     
  20. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80

    Sounds pretty balanced Dale, thank you for clarifying.

    I just don't know that we can condemn all additions based on an argument from silence.

    But thank you again for being balanced and recognising soul liberty.
     
Loading...