The Regulative Principle ignores the Old Testament, let alone Church History

Samuel Waldron explains the Regulative Principle in his “Exposition of the 1689” using the following example. “Mr. Anglican must use the materials of the Word of God, but has no blueprint and may use other materials. Mr. Puritan must use only materials of the Word of God and has a blueprint. It takes no special genius to discern which will be more pleasing to God.” Mr. Anglican represents the normative principle and Mr. Puritan represents the regulative principle.

Quoted from a 2017 post in the Feileadh Mor blog

Those who quote the regulative principle love to quote the various Old Testament prohibitions against false worship. They further quote the instances in which false worship was offered. In most cases, these are cases where someone is clearly sinning, instances in which I would agree there is sinful worship taking place.

The regulative principle actually sounds good at first reading. It appears to have a deep love for the Word of God, and only for the Word of God. But, deep down it makes a several claims that are actually not accurate. The first claim is that the worship of the Old Testament was so defined that it was possible for an Old Testament believer to know exactly how that person ought to worship, depending on what period in Old Testament history the person lived in. The second claim is that the worship of the New Testament is also equally easy to discern. The implied third claim is that all writings that are not explicitly New Testament writings, but speak of worship, are in error. All three of those claims are simply wrong.

It is important for the reader to realize that Old Testament worship changed continually throughout the history of the Old Testament. From Abel’s worship through Noah’s worship through Abraham’s worship through the traveling Tabernacle through the First Temple through the synagogues through the Second Temple worship was continually changing. Not all those changes came as the result of regulation from God.

I will skip the pre-Covenant worship, as it is not relevant to the regulative principle, but note that there are no regulations for worship during this pre-Covenant time period, although Cain manages to do something wrong. Under Moses, God gave the regulations for the Tent of Meeting, the original Tabernacle. The Tabernacle eventually settled at Shiloh before the ascension of David to the throne. After the capture of the Ark and the destruction of that first compound (Jeremiah records eventually that Shiloh had been reduced to ruins), the Ark is returned and moved to Gibeon (1 Chronicles 16) in the tent that “David had erected for it.” That makes sense, given that the original tent was quite probably destroyed in the destruction of Shiloh. Note that there is no record of God asking for such a rebuilding, but that is a minor quibble.

It should be noted that the regulations were not quite as strict as some would like to have them be. The early books talk about sacrifices taking place in various places, not just at Shiloh. For instance, the Mishna records:

4. Before the tabernacle was set up (in the wilderness), the high places were permitted and the (sacrificial) service was fulfilled by the first-born. But after the tabernacle was set up, the high places were forbidden, and the service was fulfilled by the priests …”

5. After they came to Gilgal (the tabernacle remained in Gilgal for fourteen years) the high places were again permitted …

6. After they came to Shiloh the high places were forbidden …

7. After they came to Nob and to Gibeon the high places were permitted …

8. After they came to Jerusalem the high places were forbidden and never again permitted …

M. Zevahim 14:4-8

Even during David’s time, you have conflicting pictures of how strictly God enforced the regulations. On the one hand, you have the death of Uzzah because he touched the Ark during its transport to Jerusalem, and on the other hand you have David eating the show bread which was forbidden to him. Yes, I know that the argument is that he was the King and a type of Christ, but he still broke the regulation. This is why Jesus cited this passage as an example of allowing his disciples to not fully follow the regulations.

Deuteronomy and Leviticus foresaw the time of the building of a more lasting Temple. Even then, if you compare the regulations carefully, you will see that various features of Solomon’s Temple were not mentioned in those two books, for instance, the antiphonal choirs. Worse, the Temple in which Jesus worshipped was not even the Temple ordered by God, but a rebuilt Temple in which Herod added quite a few architectural features not countenanced in the original regulations. Yet, Jesus fully considered Herod’s construction as THE Temple and only ever criticized the moneychangers and false worship.

But, the strongest example from the Old Testament is the synagogue. The synagogue is not mentioned ANYWHERE in the Old Testament regulations. It simply appears as a cultural response to the destruction of the First Temple during the Babylonian invasions. Jesus preaches and worships in an institution, in a building, following a liturgy that is nowhere spoken of in the Old Testament regulations. That, by itself, should defeat the regulative principle.

The New Testament worship is not that easy to discern. All you need do is read the writings of various Protestant groups to see how diverse the interpretation is of the few verses that are found in the New Testament concerning worship structure. What they all do agree on is that when either Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic see the Eucharist they must be wrong! LOL.

I am going to skip New Testament interpretative articles to simply say that the regulative principle can only stand if all the non-New-Testament writings of that time are discarded. Yet, I cannot resist pointing out the Book of Revelation. It is necessary for those who support the regulative principle to become some type of dispensationalist in their theology of worship. Incense is used in the Old Testament and in Revelation, but may not be used in the Church. There is an altar in the Old Testament and in Revelation, but there may be none in the Church. There are vestments in the Old Testament and in Revelation, but there may be none in the Church. I could keep going, but you get the idea. Those who believe in the regulative principle have to be a type of dispensationalist in their worship theology regardless of their apocalyptic theology.

From the Didache, through Ignatius, through Polycarp, through Clement, through Justin the Martyr, those who support the regulative principle are forced to argue that all these early writers are wrong and have stepped away from the faith. From Ignatius talking about bishops over a region, through the Didache speaking of prophets and apostles, through Justin the Martyr recording the weekly celebration of the Eucharist, it is clear that there is no Protestant regulative picture of worship in the Early Church. While the Early Church of this time period may not have an identical picture of worship, nevertheless, the worship that is pictured is overwhelmingly liturgical, with a hierarchical structure, and with an ongoing prophetic/apostolic ministry. It is no wonder that those who support the regulative principle have no choice but to discard the Church at around 100 AD and bring in the false Trail of Blood story!

Finally, those who claim the regulative principle have to claim that some type of perfect worship was delivered to the Apostles and that God had no intention of allowing any change. Thus, while the worship of the Old Testament showed ongoing development, the worship of the New Testament may show no such development. But, one of the first things that happened is that the disciples established a synagogue (read Acts). They were not called Christians for nearly two decades after the death of Christ. They appointed deacons, an order never before found in the history of Scripture. They stopped circumcising believers, receiving them only through Holy Baptism. And so on.

Those who believe in the regulative principle have to argue a twofold argument. First is that the Apostles were so special that they had the supreme power to change practice, otherwise there is no justification for deacons, loss of circumcision,etc. But, which Apostles? The New Testament does not record only The Twelve. There is a record of up to 70 apostles in the New Testament, and of some we know almost nothing. The Didache and the Revelation speak of multiple apostles. Saint Paul, by himself, establishes both Saint Timothy and Saint Titus as regional apostolic heads in his epistles to them. Both of the later Saints Ignatius and Polycarp speak of being apostolic bishops by direct appointment of one of the Twelve, and I have little reason to doubt them.

Just reading the New Testament, you can see a development taking place as the Church begins to grow. It is not only a geographical expansion, but a change in its structure, its worship, and its willingness to promulgate rules (which are later called canons). Neither in the New Testament nor in the Early Church Fathers is there any hint of the reception of a static structure and worship which must be kept in only a certain way. There is a clear indication of the reception of a set of traditions concerning worship that indeed must be kept, but the particulars keep developing through the New Testament and into the Early Church Fathers. In fact, there is little way to differentiate between the later New Testament Church and the earliest of the Church Fathers.

Just like there was development in the Old Testament from the simple worship of the Passover in Egypt to the Second Temple in which Jesus worshiped, so is there a development from that simple Upper Room first Eucharist to the more complex picture found in both the Early Church Fathers and in Revelation.

In parallel with the Old Testament, I will argue that just like the synagogue was a godly development, even though nothing in the Old Testament spoke of it, so is the liturgical development of the first few centuries every bit as godly as the development of the Israelite worship. The regulative principle is not biblical. Liturgical worship led by apostolic successors is.