Does praying and preaching not require the same accuracy as is argued for by exclusive psalmists with regard to our praise? There is no logic in only restricting our singing to what has been given in the Scriptures. If a preacher is permitted to employ his own words and even quote a hymn in prayer or in preaching how is this different to the employment of hymns in singing?
Are we required to sing in praise to God that which the Old Testament church never did sing themselves in a corporate fashion? This is grossly illogical.
The book of Psalms could equally well be called a book of prayer. There is a whole section of the 150 Psalms which are classed as the prayers of David, Psalms 42-72, cf. Psalm 72:20: The prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended. This is a fifth of the Psalter at the very least. There are other prayers in the Psalms outside of this section. Therefore, why does this belief in exclusive psalmody only apply to singing and not to praying?
There is a pattern prayer in the Bible, given after a request by the disciples to the Saviour to be taught how to pray. In response to this request there is an express command given by the Lord Jesus in Matthew 6:9: After this manner therefore pray ye…. There are also many other recorded examples of prayer in the Scriptures.
If Ephesians 5:19 or Colossians 3:16 is so narrowly interpreted as to require us to sing inspired praise and nothing else, then on the same basis of interpretation why should we not have inspired praying? After all, is the command not present: After this manner therefore pray ye….
No one in their right mind limits these words to only praying the inspired words of Scripture. The more a believer knows their Bible the more they will populate their prayers with biblical language and expression. But prayer is not limited to the words of Scripture alone.
The same argument could be applied to preaching. All preachers are commanded to: Preach the word, 2 Timothy 4:1. There are many sermons recorded in the Scriptures both in the Old and New Testaments. Why then are preachers not restricted to repeating these sermons when preaching is the primary act of worship? Why not, if our choice of words and terminology are so important as exclusive psalmists repeatedly say with respect to praise? Surely theological accuracy in preaching is just as necessary as theological accuracy in praising.
These words are never taken as a command for a preacher to only confine what he has to say in a sermon to the inspired words of Scripture. But why a different standard and rule of interpretation by exclusive psalmists for these texts? Consistency would argue that if inspired praise is required then so is inspired praying and preaching.
What about the realm of spoken praise? Is this permitted to be in our own words or must it also only be from the Psalter? If it is so, then why is it only the praise which is sung that must be in the language of the Psalter?
There is no consistent, logical interpretation of Scripture in arguing solely for inspired praise and not for inspired praying or preaching!
1. The terms 'Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs' inEphesians 5:19 & Colossians 3:16 do not refer to the 150 Psalms of the Book of Psalms.
2. Old Testament and New Testament saints did not live by this exclusive psalmist rule.
3. The angels and glorified saints did not sing the psalms.
4. There are possible remnants of hymns/canticles/doxologies quoted in the New Testament.
5. Progressive Revelation argues against Exclusive Psalmody.
6. Exclusive Psalmody leads to different levels of worship.
7. The Exclusive Psalmist's position requires them to reject ever singing the 'very best song' in public worship.