Latest / Reformed Thinking / The Psalms in Present-Day Apologetics | Jesse Johnson

Transcript

The Psalms in Present-Day Apologetics | Jesse Johnson · Reformed Thinking

0:00
Welcome to reformed thinking. Glad to be here for this.
0:02
Yeah, we've got a really fascinating deep dive lined up
0:05
for you today. We really do.
0:07
It's it's a topic that I think will catch a lot of people off
0:10
guard. Oh, for sure, Because you know,
0:12
when you hear the word apologetics, you probably
0:15
picture a crowded university auditorium, right?
0:21
Or maybe a big debate stage? Right.
0:23
Yeah, two scholars standing at a podiums arguing over historical
0:26
timelines or manuscript evidence.
0:28
Yeah, or just a really heavy textbook filled with like dense
0:31
philosophical arguments. We tend to think of defending
0:34
the faith as this sort of intellectual combat sport.
0:37
Which is an activity reserved for, you know, the academic
0:40
elite. People with multiple theology
0:42
degrees on their walls. But in this 1907 essay by Jesse
0:45
Johnson, which is titled The Psalms in Present Day
0:48
Apologetics, we actually find a wildly different premise.
0:52
We really do, and it's a premise that hits a lot closer to home
0:55
for the average believer. It does because Johnson argues
0:58
that the absolute frontline of apologetics isn't at a podium at
1:01
all. It is literally in your hymnal.
1:04
Yeah, right there in your hands on a Sunday morning.
1:06
Right, he says. The most unassailable defense of
1:08
the Christian faith actually happens right in the church
1:11
pews, through the specific songs the congregation chooses to
1:14
sing. Which is just a massive paradigm
1:16
shift. It is so.
1:19
To really grasp what Johnson is saying here, we have to look at
1:22
the theological landscape he was standing in back then.
1:25
Right, We have to set the stage. So this essay is part of a
1:28
larger volume called The Psalms and Worship, which was edited by
1:31
John Mcnaughter. OK.
1:33
And in 19 O 7 the church was facing this massive rising tide
1:38
of higher criticism and theological liberalism.
1:41
Oh yeah, that was a really turbulent era for theology.
1:45
Very turbulent, these movements were aggressively questioning
1:48
the divine origins of the Bible itself.
1:50
Right. It wasn't just a disagreement
1:52
about, you know, a minor translation issue.
1:54
No, not at all. Scholars were advancing
1:56
theories, claiming that Moses did not write the Pentateuch or
1:59
that the accounts of miracles were just late additions.
2:02
Like they were saying the religion of Israel was just an
2:04
evolutionary human development, right?
2:06
Precisely. They were striking at the very
2:08
root, asking if the text was actually divine in origin.
2:13
So the stakes were incredibly high.
2:15
Very high. And in the midst of this this
2:18
huge controversy, Johnson steps forward with a brilliant
2:22
observation about the manual of praise a church uses.
2:25
And specifically, he focuses on the practice of exclusive
2:28
psalmody right singing only the biblical Psalms in public
2:32
worship. Yeah, that's his core focus.
2:34
And, you know, since we hold the Westminster Confession, the
2:37
regulative principle of worship is already our baseline here.
2:40
Right. We know God has specifically
2:42
instituted how He is to be worshipped in His Word.
2:44
We don't just get to make it up as we go.
2:46
Spot on. But Johnson takes this
2:48
established theological principle and shows how the
2:51
exclusive use of the biblical Psalter acts as a massive,
2:55
unified a public declaration of a Bible's supreme authority.
2:58
It's like it becomes a defense of the faith enacted by the
3:01
entire congregation every single week.
3:03
Yeah, it's not just a worship preference, it's a defensive
3:05
posture. Man, that really shifts the
3:07
responsibility for apologetics right onto your shoulders,
3:09
Doesn't. It it really does.
3:10
It brings it right down to the individual in the Pew.
3:13
Because it means defending the faith is not a spectator sport
3:16
where you just, you know, sit back and watch the professionals
3:19
do the heavy lifting. Right.
3:20
Your participation in the public gathering is a crucial part of
3:23
holding up the truth. I love how Johnson defines
3:25
apologetics, too. He says it concerns itself with
3:28
the grounds and defense of Christian belief and hope.
3:32
Yeah, he frames it as the practice of exhibiting the
3:34
abiding basis of our faith. And repelling whatever specific
3:37
attack happens to be happening at that particular time.
3:40
Which is key because the attacks change in every generation.
3:43
But the specific assault of his day is actually identical to the
3:48
assault we see today, wouldn't you say?
3:49
Oh. Absolutely.
3:50
The attack is aimed squarely at the inspiration of the
3:54
scriptures. Right.
3:55
The culture and even factions within the church were casting
3:58
doubt on whether the Bible is entirely God.
4:01
Breathe. And when Johnson talks about the
4:03
scriptures being God breathes, he is pulling directly from that
4:06
Greek word Theo Miostos in Second Timothy.
4:10
Which means breathed out by God. Yeah, and the debate he was
4:13
engaging with was not over whether the Bible contained
4:16
helpful moral guidelines, you know?
4:18
Right. Or just inspiring religious
4:20
thoughts. Because liberal theology in 19 O
4:22
7 was perfectly happy to say the Bible was inspiring.
4:26
Sure, they'd say it's inspiring in the same way a beautiful
4:29
sunset or a Shakespeare play is inspiring.
4:31
But the actual the debate was over its ultimate origin.
4:34
Did it come from the mind of man, or did it actually come
4:37
from the mouth of? God and Johnson identifies a
4:39
very specific danger that arises when a culture loses its grip on
4:44
a fully God breathed Bible. He calls it subjective
4:48
Christianity. Subjective Christianity.
4:50
Let's unpack that for a second. Well, when the absolute external
4:54
authority of God's Word is diminished, a vacuum is created.
4:58
Something has to fill that void. Because we can't just exist
5:01
without some sort of authority structure.
5:02
Exactly, or well, spot on. And what fills it is human
5:07
consciousness. Wow, so the human mind, human
5:10
feelings and human preferences just become the new law giver?
5:13
And the new judge? It's a total inversion of
5:16
authority. You see that everywhere today,
5:18
though, people start spinning their own web of religion based
5:21
on what feels right to them internally.
5:23
Yeah, rather than submitting to an external objective authority.
5:27
It's like religion stops being a window revealing the commands of
5:30
a holy God and it just becomes a mirror reflecting our own
5:34
internal desires. That is a great way to put it.
5:36
A mirror instead of a window. So to counter this sticky,
5:40
fragile, self generated web of subjective Christianity, Johnson
5:45
points to First Timothy chapter 3, verse 15.
5:48
Where Paul calls the church the pillar and ground of the truth.
5:52
And Johnson insists this title is not applied to a handful of
5:55
scholars. No, it belongs to the Church as
5:57
a whole, the entire body. It makes me think of a massive
6:01
structural load bearing wall in a grand cathedral.
6:04
Oh, I like that analogy. Yeah, because that wall holds up
6:07
the roof, keeping the entire structure intact, and every
6:11
single believer is a brick in that wall.
6:14
So defending the truth is the job of the entire load bearing
6:17
structure. Right.
6:18
It is not an elite task reserved for the architects who designed
6:21
the building. The sheer weight of the truth
6:23
rests on the collective body. And if every brick decides they
6:27
don't need to hold the line because of the master Masons can
6:29
handle it, what happens? The wall collapses.
6:32
It falls apart entirely. He stays clearly that every
6:36
member shares the responsibility and participates in the honor of
6:40
magnifying the church's high office with reference to the
6:43
truth. Defending an inspired,
6:45
authoritative Bible is a corporate duty.
6:47
It is so if the entire church is tasked with this massive
6:51
defense, we have to evaluate the actions the church takes
6:55
collectively. Which leads us to ask, what is
6:58
the most unified public corporate action a congregation
7:02
participates in every single week?
7:04
Well, in most Protestant churches, the only part of the
7:06
service where every single person is expected to join
7:09
together, lifting their voices in unison, is the singing of
7:12
praise. Yeah, because the pastor
7:14
preaches alone. And usually one person leads the
7:16
corporate prayer. But the singing is the United
7:18
voice of the entire body. Therefore, the song book the
7:22
Church chooses to use becomes a public theological document of
7:25
massive consequence. A massive consequence, yeah,
7:29
Because music sticks to our minds in a way that prose simply
7:32
does not. It really does.
7:34
You can probably recite the lyrics to a song you learned
7:36
when you were five years old, even if you haven't heard it in
7:39
decades. Oh easily.
7:40
I still remember all those little Sunday school jingles.
7:43
Right. And Johnson points out that
7:45
singing praise is a prominent, delightful exercise.
7:49
God actually designed us in such a way that combining truth with
7:53
melody makes it enjoyable. And more than that, it makes
7:56
makes it permanent in our minds. Yeah, this is especially true
7:59
during our formative years when we're kids.
8:02
The songs that congregation sings week after week, year
8:04
after year are actively molding their opinions and their
8:08
theological attitudes. The pedagogical function of
8:11
music just cannot be overstated here.
8:12
When we sing, we're not just expressing emotion, we are
8:16
instructing our own minds and the minds of those around us.
8:19
Which is why the Apostle Paul writes in Colossians about
8:22
teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and
8:25
spiritual songs. Yeah, the singing does the
8:27
teaching. And because familiar songs mold
8:30
public thoughts so effectively, Johnson argues that the choice
8:34
of a manual of praise takes a public, definitive stance on the
8:38
nature of the Bible itself. Let's trace the mechanism of how
8:41
this works in a practical setting, because this is where
8:43
it gets really interesting. Yeah, let's look at a real world
8:45
scenario. A child grows up in a church
8:48
where they sing Psalm 23, which is an undeniably inspired text.
8:52
OK. And then immediately after, they
8:54
sing a hymn written by, say, a 19th century poet.
8:57
Both are sung with the same instrumentation, right?
8:59
The same instrumentation, the same reverence led by the same
9:02
worship leader in the exact context of addressing the
9:05
Almighty. So over time, that child's mind
9:08
implicitly categorizes both texts under the single heading
9:12
of. Holy songs.
9:13
Exactly. The qualitative infinite
9:15
difference between a text breathed out by God and a text
9:19
penned by a well meaning human is entirely flattened.
9:22
Wow, it just erases the boundary line.
9:24
The implication, whether intentional or not, is a parody
9:27
between the two. It suggests that uninspired
9:30
writings are basically on par with the oracles of God.
9:33
When the congregation sings a human composition with the same
9:37
reverence and in the same context as an inspired Psalm,
9:41
public opinion regarding the unique supreme authority of the
9:45
Scriptures is influenced accordingly.
9:47
The boundary line between the divine and the human becomes
9:50
incredibly blurred in the minds of the people.
9:52
It does, and once that line is blurred, you start losing ground
9:56
on the apologetics front. Let's bring this down to a
9:58
practical level for you, the listener.
10:00
Right now good idea. Johnson refers to the biblical
10:02
Psalter as a nominated candidate for the church's song book.
10:06
I love this analogy he makes. Yeah.
10:08
So imagine you're the CEO of a company and you're hiring for a
10:12
highly critical, high stakes position.
10:14
The success of the entire organization rests on this hire.
10:18
So you put out the job description and the absolute
10:21
perfect flawless candidate applies.
10:24
The Unicorn candidate. Right.
10:25
This candidate has a resume that is literally out of this world.
10:29
They have millennia of proven experience.
10:31
They are universally acknowledged as perfect for the
10:33
role. And they come with a direct,
10:36
flawless recommendation from the highest possible authority, God
10:40
Himself. You hold that perfect resume in
10:43
your hands, you look at the flawless candidate and you say,
10:45
you know what, I think I'm going to pass.
10:48
I'm going to hire this other person who is pretty good but
10:51
definitely has some flaws and lacks that ultimate
10:54
recommendation. If you pass over the flawless
10:57
candidate for someone lesser, what does that say about your
10:59
judgement? Or what does it say about your
11:02
actual assessment of the flawless candidate?
11:04
You are functionally declaring that the perfect candidate is
11:07
somehow unfit or deficient for your needs.
11:10
And that logical dilemma is the the core of what we can call the
11:13
subtraction by addition problem. Subtraction by addition?
11:16
Yeah, Johnson points out a glaring historical and
11:19
theological fact here. The Bible already contains a
11:22
completed collection of praise songs.
11:24
The book of Psalms was inspired by the Holy Spirit and written
11:28
for the precise purpose of being the Church's Manual of praise.
11:32
It was used for that explicit purpose for thousands of years
11:35
by the people of God. It is an integral, undeniable
11:38
part of the inspired word. So Johnson argues that no church
11:42
approaches the task of selecting a praise manual with a blank
11:45
slate. Right.
11:46
The Psalter is already standing there, as you said, as the
11:49
perfect candidate. If there were no such distinct
11:52
book of praises in the Bible, a church could write its own songs
11:56
without necessarily making a statement about the sufficiency
11:58
of Scripture. But the Book of Psalms does
12:00
exist. It's right there in the middle
12:02
of your Bible. Therefore, the choice to use any
12:05
other manual necessarily involves taking a definitive
12:08
attitude toward the Bible. You cannot claim neutrality when
12:11
the perfect option is sitting right on the table.
12:13
No, you can't, and Johnson does some math to illustrate this
12:17
point, and it lays bare the underlying assumptions of a
12:20
church's editorial choices. Oh, the math part is
12:23
fascinating. Walk us through that.
12:25
So he says, imagine a church decides to create a new hymnal.
12:29
OK. They call 25 psalms from the
12:31
biblical Psalter, and they distribute those 25 psalms
12:35
throughout a volume that contains 1000 uninspired human
12:40
compositions. That's a.
12:41
Huge ratio difference. It is.
12:44
So what is the logical deduction we must draw from this editorial
12:48
choice? Well, by leaving out 125 Psalms,
12:51
the church is stating that those 1000 human compositions are more
12:55
worthy of a place in their corporate worship than the 125
12:59
songs of the Spirit that were omitted.
13:01
It is a mathematical statement about theological value.
13:04
You were essentially saying we looked at the songs the Holy
13:07
Spirit provided, but we found these human songs to be more
13:11
suitable or more necessary for our current needs.
13:14
And this brings us back to the reformed perspective, the
13:17
theological framework Johnson is operating within.
13:20
Right, the regulative principle. Yes, we understand the principle
13:23
that positive divine prescription is requisite to
13:26
warrant any form of worship. The logic there is that God is
13:29
completely sovereign over how he is approached.
13:31
We do not have the liberty to invent our own ways of
13:34
worshipping Him based on what we find appealing or culturally
13:38
relevant. God has prescribed the elements
13:40
of worship, and He has provided the very words we are to sing
13:44
back to Him. So when a church mingles human
13:46
compositions with a divine Psalter, it creates a serious
13:50
theological crisis. Johnson asks a really piercing
13:53
question about this. He says, can such mingling leave
13:56
the songs in their proper place of high superiority in the
13:59
public mind? And the answer, practically
14:01
speaking, is absolutely not. Because when you place a human
14:05
composition next to a divine composition and sing them both
14:08
as worship to God, you are functionally elevating pious
14:12
human thought to the dignity of divine inspiration.
14:15
You are muddying the waters concerning what is truly God
14:18
breathed. I have to pause you there
14:20
though, because I can hear a modern listener pushing back
14:23
aggressively on this right now. I'm sure they are.
14:26
And frankly, I feel the tension myself.
14:27
Sometimes a congregant might say, wait a minute, what if we
14:31
just want to sing a song that explicitly uses the name Jesus,
14:34
right? What if we want to sing about
14:35
the crucifixion with New Testament vocabulary?
14:38
Yeah, mentioning the cross or the empty tomb directly.
14:41
Does adding a hymn automatically disparage inspiration?
14:45
It's a fair question. It feels like we are just
14:47
expressing our current theological understanding of the
14:50
New Covenant in our own words. People will ask, how is that
14:54
functionally elevating human thought?
14:56
Aren't we just being faithful New Testament Christians?
15:00
Yeah, that is the most common objection to exclusive psalmody,
15:03
and it feels entirely intuitive to our modern sensibilities.
15:07
We live in a culture that prizes constant innovation and
15:10
explicit, highly specific personal expression.
15:14
But we have to look at the underlying assumption beneath
15:16
that desire. When we say we need New
15:19
Testament vocabulary to adequately worship God, what are
15:22
we implying about the vocabulary God provided in the Psalms?
15:26
That is a heavy question. The desire to write a new hymn
15:29
springs from a perceived inadequacy in the biblical text.
15:32
We are functionally saying the vocabulary and the theological
15:35
emphasis provided by the Holy Spirit in the Psalms is somehow
15:39
insufficient for the New Testament believer.
15:41
And therefore requires human supplementation.
15:44
The intent behind adding the hymn might be completely pure.
15:48
A songwriter might genuinely want to honor Christ.
15:50
But the theological consequence of the action remains the exact
15:53
same. You are replacing the infallible
15:56
with the fallible. You are deciding that your
15:58
modern articulation of the gospel is more suitable for
16:01
corporate worship than the Holy Spirit's articulation of the
16:04
gospel in the Psalms. That is a really tough pill to
16:07
swallow for a lot of people. It forces you to look at your
16:10
own motives, doesn't it? If I think my song is better
16:13
suited for worship than David's song, I'm making a staggering
16:16
assumption about my own theological clarity compared to
16:20
the Holy Spirit's inspiration. That perceived inadequacy of the
16:23
Psalms is precisely what led to the movement to write human
16:27
hymns in the first place. And this leads us directly into
16:30
a critical theological error that Johnson meticulously
16:33
dismantles in the essay. Yes, because when critics of
16:36
exclusive psalmody try to justify adding human
16:39
compositions to the worship service, they inevitably find
16:42
themselves forced into a corner. They have to elevate the human
16:45
writers to a sort of quasi divine status just to justify
16:48
their inclusion alongside scripture.
16:50
They. Have to make the human writer
16:52
look somewhat inspired to bridge that massive gap.
16:55
Johnson sites a really specific example from his era to show
16:59
this. He points to the late Reverend
17:01
Dr. Armichaine Edgar of the Irish Presbyterian Church.
17:05
And what did Doctor Edgar argue? Doctor Edgar explicitly argue
17:08
that God's inspirations were not exhausted when the Canon of
17:11
Scripture was completed. He actually asked, is it not
17:15
reasonable to suppose that he has inspired the poets who have
17:18
devoted themselves to sacred song?
17:21
Which is a very dangerous road to go down.
17:23
Edgar went so far as to list poets from Ambrose all the way
17:27
down to Francis Hevergel. Claiming we cannot fancy they
17:30
did their work without the inspiration of the Divine
17:33
Spirit. You see that same sentiment with
17:34
Isaac Watts, too. Oh, absolutely, Watts famously
17:38
proposed to make David talk like a Christian.
17:41
When you stop and look at the absolute arrogance of that
17:43
statement, it is mind. The implication there is that
17:46
the Psalms as inspired by the Holy Spirit are somehow pre
17:49
Christian or sub Christian. And they need a human editor to
17:53
upgrade them for the modern church.
17:54
By claiming that hymn writers are inspired, these advocates
17:58
are creating a fatal blur between two vastly different
18:01
theological concepts. And Johnson rigorously defines
18:04
this difference. And this is a crucial
18:06
distinction for anyone who wants to defend the authority of the
18:09
Bible. Let's breakdown that difference
18:11
because it's key. It's the difference between
18:13
inspiration and spiritual illumination.
18:16
This is where Johnson's argument becomes an impenetrable
18:19
fortress. Let's look at inspiration first.
18:22
OK, how does he define inspiration?
18:24
Johnson defines it as a special temporary intellectual equipment
18:28
given to chosen teachers to secure the correct expression of
18:31
God's communication. So it was given for the benefit
18:34
of others to ensure humanity had a flawless record of God's
18:37
truth. And importantly, this specific
18:40
gift ceased entirely when the Canon of Scripture was
18:43
completed. There are no more inspired
18:45
writings happening today. That boundary line is absolute.
18:48
Inspiration guarantees an entirely reliable statement of
18:51
what God communicated. It secures both adequate
18:54
apprehension and correct expression.
18:57
The prophet or apostle was kept from error by the direct
19:00
overriding influence of the Holy Spirit.
19:03
Now on the other side of the dividing line, we have spiritual
19:07
illumination. Right.
19:08
Johnson defines this as a personal grace given to all true
19:12
believers. Is the work of the Holy Spirit
19:15
opening our eyes to behold the beauty and feel the weight of
19:19
the truth that has already been given in Scripture?
19:22
Illumination is what happens when you read a Bible passage
19:24
you have read 20 times before and suddenly the truth of it
19:27
pierces your heart and makes sense in a new way.
19:30
We've all experienced that, yeah.
19:32
But here is the critical limitation Johnson highlights
19:35
about it. Spiritual elimination does not
19:37
communicate new truth. Furthermore, it does not
19:39
guarantee freedom from error. That's huge.
19:42
A believer can be genuinely illuminated by the Spirit to
19:45
grasp a vital truth but still hold on to various theological
19:49
errors. Or they might express that truth
19:51
in a faulty, imperfect way. That distinction is paramount.
19:55
When we talk about elimination, we are we're talking about a
19:57
subjective experience of an objective reality.
20:00
The objective reality is the inspired text.
20:03
The subjective experience is our illuminated understanding of it.
20:06
The problem arises when we take our illuminated yet fallible
20:10
understanding and attempt to codify it into a new text for
20:13
corporate worship. Treating it as if it holds the
20:16
same weight as the original inspired text.
20:18
It makes me think of a deep, ancient well.
20:22
Oh, let's hear the well analogy. So the meticulous digging of
20:25
that well, cutting through the bedrock to hit a source of pure,
20:29
flawless, uncontaminated water, that is inspiration.
20:34
The prophets and apostles were given the specific temporary
20:37
equipment to dig that well and provide the pure water of God's
20:41
Word. Exactly.
20:43
Now spiritual illumination is you taking your own bucket and
20:46
drawing that water up from the well so you can drink it.
20:49
OK, I track with that. The problem is sometimes your
20:51
bucket has some dirt in it. Yeah, a lot of dirt usually.
20:54
You might have cultural biases, personal blind spots, or minor
20:57
theological misunderstandings. The.
20:59
Water in the well is pristine, but the water in your bucket
21:02
gets a little muddy because of your own human error.
21:05
So when Doctor Edgar or anyone else calls him Writers Inspired,
21:09
they are making a catastrophic category error.
21:12
They're confusing a dirty bucket with the pure well.
21:16
They are looking at a human composition which might contain
21:19
wonderful illuminating thoughts, but is still mixed with human
21:23
fallibility and assigning at the same status as the pristine,
21:27
flawless water of Scripture. That analogy illustrates the
21:31
devastating apologetic consequence of this confusion
21:34
perfectly. If you Ellis the hymn writers to
21:37
the level of the Bible writers, or conversely, if you drag the
21:40
Bible writers down to the level of the hymn writers, you destroy
21:43
the defense of the Scriptures. Think about the logic of how we
21:46
interact with human compositions.
21:48
We subject human hymns to our own judgement all the time.
21:51
We absolutely do. We approve some stanzas and
21:54
reject others. We update the language.
21:56
We cut out verses we don't like because they don't fit our
21:59
modern sensibility. If you erase the line between
22:02
inspiration and illumination, you implicitly give people
22:05
permission to treat the Bible the exact same way.
22:08
You give them permission to subject the scriptures to their
22:10
own judgment, to approve the parts they like and reject the
22:14
parts that offend them. By mingling hymns with psalms,
22:17
the church inadvertently trains the congregation to view all
22:21
religious texts as subject to human editing.
22:23
The Scriptures inevitably decline in the estimation of
22:26
men. Once we fully grasp that only
22:29
the biblical writers had true inspiration, we begin to see the
22:32
immense, impenetrable defensive strength of using only the
22:36
Psalms in worship. Which brings us to the
22:38
apologetic shield of exclusive psalmody.
22:41
Johnson argues that limiting the church strictly to the songs of
22:43
the Spirit puts believers on and firm, unshakable ground.
22:47
It positions the church perfectly for defending the
22:49
whole Bible as uniquely inspired and absolutely authoritative.
22:54
And why is that? Because you are not just making
22:56
a theoretical argument, you are living it out in the most public
22:59
way possible. Johnson calls this witness borne
23:02
by deed. Witness borne by deed.
23:05
Words are cheap. They really are.
23:07
We can stand at a podium and declare that the Bible is the
23:09
sole supreme authority for life and faith.
23:12
But when the congregation gathers on the Lord's Day and
23:15
refuses uses to offer up any song to God other than the ones
23:18
He Himself provided in His perfect word, that is a witness
23:22
borne by deed. That arrests attention.
23:24
It forces the watching world and the congregants themselves to
23:28
reckon with the massive weight the church places on the
23:32
scriptures. It creates an undeniable
23:34
momentum. Johnson says that when we ask
23:37
the world to prefer the Bible, to Revere it, and to obey it,
23:41
our appeal carries tremendous weight if we prove our own
23:44
reverence by using it exclusively in our highest
23:48
moments of worship. If we tell world that the Bible
23:50
is sufficient, our corporate worship must reflect that
23:53
sufficiency. If our worship requires human
23:56
supplementation, our claim of biblical sufficiency just rings
24:00
hollow. This is all about institutional
24:01
integrity. Johnson does acknowledge that
24:03
this position might not always receive public favor, though.
24:06
No, it's definitely a minority position today.
24:08
He. Even admits that sometimes Psalm
24:10
singers themselves fail to articulate the reasons for their
24:13
practice or act inconsistently. But the underlying principle
24:17
remains sound regardless. The exclusive use of the Psalter
24:20
is a daily, weekly practical outworking of the doctrine of
24:24
Sola scriptura. It is the church saying we
24:27
believe this book is the very breath of God and we will not
24:30
mix it with the breath of men. Consider the concept of internal
24:33
consistency here. Yeah, let's go back to our
24:35
initial image of the apologist on the debate stage.
24:38
Right. Imagine a Christian scholar
24:41
eloquently arguing for the absolute supremacy and inerrancy
24:44
of Scripture on a Friday night against a skeptical opponent.
24:47
He makes a brilliant case that God's Word is perfect and lacks
24:51
nothing. But then on Sunday morning, that
24:53
same scholar goes to his church. And the congregation proceeds to
24:57
sing 5 songs, none of which are from the Bible, all written by
25:00
flawed humans within the last 50 years.
25:02
The internal inconsistency is glaring.
25:05
How can you successfully argue for the absolute supremacy of
25:08
Scripture in a debate while functionally sidelining the
25:12
actual text of Scripture in your liturgy?
25:15
The practice undermines the proclamation.
25:17
But by adopting exclusive psalmody, the Church aligns its
25:20
practice with its proclamation, creating a unified, coherent,
25:23
apologetic front. That unified front is not just
25:26
for the benefit of the watching world, either.
25:28
No, it's for the church as well. It is also for the internal
25:30
protection of the Church itself. This is where Johnson shifts his
25:34
focus from the outward defense to the inward formation of the
25:38
believer. A church that uses only the
25:40
Psalms is making the best possible provision for the
25:43
doctrinal health of its people. Johnson points out that the
25:46
Psalter is doctrinally complete and divinely proportioned.
25:49
This idea of divine proportion is absolutely crucial.
25:52
Because when humans write song books, we tend to fixate on our
25:56
favorite theological themes. We write hundreds of songs about
25:59
God's love, grace and comfort and completely ignore His just
26:03
wrath and the reality of lament. Our human hymnals become
26:07
lopsided, reflecting our own cultural moment rather than the
26:10
full counsel of God. But the Psalter gives us God's
26:14
own proportions. It contains soaring praise, deep
26:17
sorrow, corporate confession and righteous anger against
26:21
injustice. It shapes the fabric of the
26:23
thought and life of its users, according to a divine blueprint.
26:27
Divinely proportioned, that phrase forces us out of our
26:30
theological echo chambers. It does.
26:32
Johnson gives a very specific example of how this internal
26:35
protection works. He says a person cannot hold a
26:38
low view of the atonement if their view of God and their view
26:41
of sin has been rigorously shaped by singing the Psalter.
26:46
Because the Psalms paint a picture of God's holiness that
26:49
is terrifying in its purity. And they paint a picture of
26:52
human sin that is devastating in its depth.
26:55
When you have sung those truths into your bones year after year,
26:59
you inevitably realize that a massive, bloody substitutionary
27:03
sacrifice is the only possible solution to bridge that gap.
27:07
A flimsy modern therapeutic view of the cross simply cannot
27:11
survive in a mind that has been shaped by the Psalms.
27:13
Now, Johnson does make sure to clarify that the chief purpose
27:16
of the Psalms is praise. It is about calling men's
27:19
thoughts out of themselves and setting them entirely upon the
27:22
living God. But attached to this primary
27:24
duty of praise is the secondary blessing of rigorous theological
27:27
training. That theological training
27:29
happens almost subconsciously too.
27:31
It is what we might call spiritual muscle memory.
27:33
When a congregation sings the Psalms exclusively, they're
27:36
essentially memorizing the precise proportions of God's
27:39
characters and his redemptive plan.
27:42
They are building a robust spiritual immune system.
27:46
Consider how heresy usually operates.
27:48
It rarely announces itself as a direct attack on central
27:51
doctrines. No, it usually begins as a
27:54
subtle shift in emphasis and over focus on one attribute of
27:58
God to the exclusion of others. But when a heresy eventually
28:01
comes along and tries to take root in a Psalm singing
28:04
congregation, the listener spiritual immune system detects
28:08
it. The Heresy simply feels out of
28:10
tune with the massive body of truth they have been singing
28:13
their entire lives. The definitely built and
28:15
articulated structure of truth in their minds rejects the error
28:19
because the error does not fit the divine pattern.
28:21
If you have listened to perfectly tuned music your whole
28:23
life, a sour note jars you immediately, even if you don't
28:26
know the music theory behind why it's wrong.
28:29
You just know it doesn't belong. This internal formation through
28:31
singing brings up a terrifying alternative, though.
28:34
What happens when we willingly open the door to human
28:37
compositions? This leads to Johnson's urgent
28:40
warning guarding against the incursion of error.
28:43
Johnson states plainly that error is more dangerous than we
28:46
know. The Church goes to great lengths
28:48
to protect its people from false teaching.
28:51
We aggressively guard the pulpit.
28:53
A pastor is examined by a presbytery.
28:55
His sermons are scrutinized. His theology is vetted.
28:58
We guard the professor's chair in the seminary, ensuring the
29:01
men teaching the next generation of pastors hold to the
29:04
confessions. But.
29:05
Johnson notes a tragic historical irony.
29:07
While the church locks the front door of the pulpit to keep error
29:11
out, history shows the church has frequently left the back
29:14
door of the hymnity wide open and error has flooded in.
29:18
The historical record absolutely validates Johnson's concern on
29:21
this. The Church of God has suffered
29:23
repeatedly from error carried along in its technology.
29:26
Think back to the early church controversies.
29:28
Like Arias who denied the full deity of Christ.
29:32
Arias famously spread his devastating heresy not primarily
29:35
through dense theological treatises, but by writing catchy
29:39
songs for sailors and travelers. The people sang the catchy tunes
29:43
and in doing so, they internalized the heresy.
29:46
This is the phenomenon Johnson calls singing error into
29:49
themselves. Because music possesses a unique
29:52
ability to bypass our standard intellectual defenses.
29:55
When you are listening to a sermon, your critical faculties
29:58
are usually engaged. You're analyzing the pastor's
30:01
arguments, checking his scripture references.
30:03
But when you are singing a soaring melody surrounded by
30:06
your friends and family, your emotional defenses are lowered.
30:11
The aesthetic beauty of the music carries the lyrics
30:14
straight past the intellect and plants them deep in the
30:16
affections. It is the ultimate Trojan horse.
30:19
It reminds me of how modern contemporary Christian music
30:22
charts function today. Oh man, a church leadership
30:25
board will rigorously vet a 30 minute sermon to ensure every
30:29
single sentence sentence aligns perfectly with historic
30:32
orthodoxy. They will debate the nuances of
30:34
justification and sanctification with the pastor.
30:37
But that same leadership board will often turn around and allow
30:41
the congregation to enthusiastically saying highly
30:44
questionable, anthropocentric, or even blatantly false theology
30:48
simply because the melody is catchy, the tempo is upbeat, and
30:53
the song is currently charting on the radio.
30:55
We strain out a Nat in the pulpit and swallow a camel in
30:58
the choir loft. Theological shifts often happen
31:01
through the song books long before they ever show up in
31:03
official church decrees or council meetings.
31:05
Once the people have sung A doctrine into their hearts, the
31:08
formal theology of the Church inevitably follows suit.
31:12
That is precisely why adopting the God Breathe manual is so
31:15
critical as a defensive measure. Johnson argues that if truth
31:19
unalloyed can be found, it ought to be used in a service that
31:21
reaches the people so powerfully.
31:23
We have a manual of praise that is guaranteed to be entirely
31:26
free from error because it bears the stamp of God Himself.
31:30
When a church adopts the Psalter and it alone, it can rest in the
31:34
absolute assurance that it is not putting its own seal of
31:38
approval on falsehood. The Church is not inadvertently
31:41
setting error before the people, tempting them to sing poison
31:44
into their own souls. The congregation is protected.
31:46
The theological integrity of the Church is maintained.
31:49
And the apologetic witness to the world remains clear,
31:53
consistent and uncompromised. The essay by Jesse Johnson
31:57
presents a massive paradigm shift for us.
31:59
We began by looking at apologetics as a debate and
32:03
intellectual sparring match. But we have seen that the choice
32:06
of a church song book is in reality a high stakes
32:09
theological declaration. When a church chooses to sing
32:12
only the Psalms, they are building a protective fortress
32:15
for the minds of the congregation.
32:17
Ensuring they are formed by divine proportions rather than
32:20
human preferences. Furthermore, they are mounting a
32:22
massive, public, unified defense of the absolute authority and
32:27
sufficiency of Scripture. They're proving their reverence
32:30
for the Bible by using it exclusively in their bias
32:33
moments of worship. They are holding the line.
32:35
Standing is that solid load bearing wall, the pillar and
32:38
ground of the truth. The implications of this are
32:41
vast for how we structure our corporate worship and how we
32:44
view our individual responsibility within the
32:47
church. It challenges us to align our
32:49
practices with our stated theological beliefs.
32:52
If we truly believe the Scriptures are the breezed out
32:56
Word of God, uniquely inspired and fully sufficient, our
32:59
liturgy should be the loudest proclamation of that belief.
33:03
As we conclude our analysis of this material, I want to leave
33:06
you with a final, lingering thought that builds directly on
33:09
Johnson's urgent warning about the danger of singing error into
33:13
ourselves. We have focused extensively on
33:16
the corporate worship of the church today.
33:18
But this principle of musical formation extends far beyond the
33:21
sanctuary doors. Think about the lyrics of the
33:23
songs, both sacred and secular, that you interact with daily.
33:26
The music you stream in your car, the playlist you listen
33:29
listen to while working out, the songs playing in the background
33:32
of your life. If music possesses such an
33:34
unmatched ability to bypass our intellectual defenses, to shape
33:38
our opinions and mold our affections, consider the
33:41
constant input you are receiving.
33:43
What unwritten theology, what view of the world, of humanity
33:46
and of God are you inadvertently setting to music in your own
33:49
mind right now?