Psalm 31:5 says, "Into your hands I commit my spirit; deliver me, LORD, my faithful God." We know from Luke 23:46 that Jesus quoted this: "Jesus called out with a loud voice, 'Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.' When he had said this, he breathed his last."
So even though Jesus, in agony, quoted Psalm 31 on the cross, when the same psalm was found saying, "Do not let me be put to shame" and "rescue me O God" then its author David was complaining in his distress, according to the RecV footnote, and desiring to avoid suffering, instead of following the NT principle of "living and gaining Christ". Hmmm.... seems to be a lot of effort here, expended to avoid seeing the Christ plainly coming into view. And similarly we've seen the RecV footnote panning Psalm 1, which speaks of the blessing to the righteous man. Sorry, folks, no righteous men allowed. Salvation in the NT is rather "unmerited grace to sinners". So the "assembly of the righteous" in Psalm 1:5 is naturally ignored - by definition it can't exist. Because there aren't any righteous, see?
But when Christ is found praising the Father in the midst of the assembly, (Psa 22:22; Heb 2:12), suddenly the interpreter forgets that there wasn't supposed to be an assembly of the righteous! Poof - on cue an assembly appears... likewise Psalm 26:12; 35:18; 40:9,10; 68:26; 107:32; 109:30 and so on. When the argument didn't want an assembly, there wasn't one; but when the argument needed to allow one it magically appeared on cue. How convenient; just like when the psalmist groans or cries in distress he's just complaining, unless of course it's Jesus Christ who's pictured groaning and crying out to the Father, which is of course okay. Disconnect, much?
And so I ask, why can't the LC flock include these words of scripture in their NT economy? Why can't they say, "Thy words were found and I did eat them" to these passages, as with those in Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy? I can think of two reasons: first off, WL discouraged it. So there it is, everyone: the oracle has spoken. Doesn't matter if Paul repeatedly encouraged it. "Nope", goes the reply, "We may profitably 'eat' Paul's recommendations, but we don't have to follow them! We're indeed hearers of his word, even eaters, but certainly not doers! Likewise, when Peter quotes the psalms we can dismiss Peter as being 'low' and lacking vision. Got that? Our 'apostle' WL had the high peak NT vision, like today's Paul (though we'll ignore Paul when necessary) but Peter the ignorant Galilean fisherman who composed it unfortunately didn't have sufficient revelation."
So the LC are willing to ignore Paul and dismiss Peter, if it means to closely follow their own apostle. If WL dismissed the word, then so does the LC. And if he subjectively picked through it, ignoring obvious contradictions arising in his exegeses, then his acolytes also choose that path. Because their oracle has spoken.
Second, suppose that somehow the Blendeds managed to side-step WL's ministry and figured out how to allow the LC flock to profitably exercise their spirits in this text. What then? What if they quietly ignored WL's discouraging words and - surprise, surprise - found the Spirit of God's Christ, there in those scriptures (e.g. Eph 5:18,19)? Well, another threat would soon arise. Then, unfortunately, the gates to dreaded Christianity might open! They might see others, not meeting on the precious ground of locality, who're currently enjoying Christ in the Psalms. What then? The whole foundation for being 'God's particular people' might be undermined. The whole reason for being the LC is to separate from fallen Christianity, right? No bridges allowed to Babylon - none! So if someone is seen profitably enjoying, and ministering to others from their enjoyment in the text of God's word, then the "One Trumpet" edict is in question and the whole edifice totters and shakes. "And the crash of the house was great"... who knows, there might be another Keith Green out there today, singing something like, "Create in me a clean heart, O God" from the Psalms. Then what? What if God was found moving outside of the demarcated "central lane of God's economy"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv16...ature=youtu.be
No, better to ignore Paul, dismiss Peter as ignorant, and just hold tightly to the letter of Lee. Ministry uber alles.