In a [brief article on the Trinity](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Articles_on_the_Westminster_Confession_of_Faith/4) by Gordon H. Clark, he makes a surprising claim about a popular trinitarian hymn: > The hymn book of one denomination has rewritten "Holy, Holy, Holy," so as to exclude all reference to "God in Three Persons, Blessed Trinity." I'd like to know what hymn book and denomination he's referring to. [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy,_Holy,_Holy) doesn't mention any such rendition, and he doesn't provide any other identifying information about this denomination. It's possible that the following paragraph's contrast to the "Presbyterian church" indicates that the change was made in a non-presbyterian hymnal, but that's not definitive. And this article was written in 1954, so the hymnal must have been published before then, but probably not long before. Which denomination and hymnal is Clark likely referring to?

Is there a bilingual, Greek-English version of St. Romanus's *Akathist Hymn* ?

Given various quotes and hymns from the mid 1700s onward, it seems some Reformed Protestants were showing how the Old Testament law only served to make it impossible to find the liberation that the gospel of Christ brings. From then, even till today, a popular claim in many Reformed Protestant circles is that the Law of Moses is the believers’ ‘rule of life’ – meaning the Ten Commandments which have the moral essence. One example of such a claim was a sermon preached on behalf of the Evangelical Association on 16th August, 1787 at a chapel in Artillery Lane. There it was stated from the pulpit that, *“The moral law is the foundation of all religion, both moral and divine.”* To substantiate it, the way Moses struck the rock so that water gushed out, was paralleled with Christians ‘smiting the law’ by keeping it, to get refreshing comforts from doing that. Another preacher of the time wrote at length about such claims. One instance was where he said, “A friend of mine once asked a certain divine in London what he thought of the law as the believer’s only rule of life. He replied, *"The believer must look with one eye to Christ, and with the other to the law."* (The author’s friend said to the divine that, then, every believer must be cross-eyed!) *Law and Grace Contrasted* William Huntington – Addresses, p.125, edited and abridged version published in 1999 **Was there something of a battle going on between two groups of Reformed Protestants on the matter of Mosaic law-keeping, and if so, why?**

I heard that a Polish anthem or hymn addressed Our Lady as the "Warrior Queen". Which hymn was this? Is "Warrior Queen" one of her official titles?

If the hymn [*Panis angelicus*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panis_angelicus) refer to the Eucharist (flesh of Christ, bread of life), why did St. Thomas Aquinas not say "Christ's bread" (*Panis Christi*, if that's the right Latin grammar) instead of "Angelic bread" (*Panis angelicus*)? Why switch the focus from Christ's body to Angels?

I seem to remember a passage in which a New Testament writer (the Apostle Paul, if I remember correctly) referred positively to boasting of Christ's death. It is a similar idea to the lines "Forbid it, Lord, that I should boast, / Save in the death of Christ my God!" from the hymn "When I Survey the Wondrous Cross," but I think there was a Biblical passage about this. Does this passage exist, and if so, where is it? I tried searching for "boast" in the King James Version, but the verse I was looking for was not in the search results. (As Andrew Shanks pointed out in a comment, the verse is Galatians 6:14; I did not find it because it uses "glory" rather than "boast" in the KJV).

Clint Anderson has composed the following hymn about the end times: > [**Thru Tribulation**](https://simple.uniquebibleapp.com/book/Hymn%20Lyrics%20-%20English/Thru%20Tribulation) > > > Though it is dark in this world of sin, > Though evil prospers it shall not win. > First tribulation, then with a shout > We'll be caught away 'fore his wrath's poured out. > > Refrain: > The Lord will come with ten thousands of saints, > He'll judge the earth for his righteous name's sake. > Through tribulation, though we must come, > There's naught can sep'rate us from his love. > > When sorrows increase, be not dismayed, > All must be fulfilled before that day. > The man of sin we will surely see, > The sun and moon darkened, then we shall be free. > > We must trust in him, though times seem dire, > These trials purify us with refining fire. > When these come to pass, redemption is nigh, > He'll catch us away in the blink of an eye. Is it biblical?

I am interested in the oldest Anglican hymns that are still in use either in the (https://archive.org/details/hymnalofprotesta0000prot/page/n5/mode/2up) or the [1982 Episcopal hymnals](https://archive.org/details/hymnal1982accord00epis/page/n3/mode/2up) .

Canons, troparia, kontakia, aposticha, stichera, etc. all have a tone/mode associated with them. How does the author of the hymn choose which mode/tone to use? Is it the same for all, or is it a little different for each type of hymn? (I'm referring here specifically to hymns written to commemorate Saints. Hymns composed for the Octoechos or for Pascha I already somewhat understand why they are written for a particular tone/mode).

We were singing Christmas Carols tonight and noticed that in the Mormon Hymn book , the following verse has been omitted from, "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing": > Christ, by highest heav'n adored:
Christ, the everlasting > Lord;
Late in time behold him come,
Offspring of the favored > one.
Veil'd in flesh, the Godhead see;
Hail, th'incarnate > Deity:
Pleased, as man, with men to dwell,
Jesus, our > Emmanuel!
Why don't Mormons sing this verse?

Horatio G. Stafford wrote lyrics for the hymn that has the chorus, ***"It is well, it is well with my soul"***. It may be more quickly recognised by that chorus than its title, *"It Is Well".* Verse 3 starts off well, and ends well, but there's a bit in the middle that disturbs me (put in bold) as this seems to show a muddling up of two different theological points about what happened at the cross. Here is all of verse 3: > My sin, O the bliss of this glorious thought! > > **My sin**, not in part but in whole, > > **Is nailed to His cross**, and I bear it no more: > > Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, O my soul! But does not Colossians 2:14 state that it was the handwriting of ordinances which were contrary to us that was nailed to the cross, removing them - "in whole"? Yes, 1 Peter 2:24 says that Christ, on the tree, bore in his own body our sins. However, the handwritten commands were perfect, not sinful, yet the time came for them to be removed. This seems to have happened alongside Christ bearing our sins in his body on the tree. That which was not perfect (our sins) was borne by Christ in his body, while the perfect law of God was nailed to the cross, to be removed. Does this not conflate those two truths, by fusing bits of both together, so that both truths are corrupted? Our sins are ours, personally. The law of God is perfect and is his. Is it not critically important for the sake of biblical theology to know how both those things were dealt with - one nailed to the cross, the other borne in Christ's body? (Note: this related question deals with Colossians 2:14 and may be helpful in clarifying the doctrine of that scripture, but it does not deal with the hymn in question and the other scripture it incorporates. https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/80218/whose-hand-wrote-the-document-that-listed-my-transgressions-colossians-214 )

There are numerous Christians hymns and references in Christian literature that Jesus was "forsaken by all mankind, yet to be in Heaven' enthroned", etc. In essence, there is this powerful image of Christ hanging crucified on the cross bearing the sins of all mankind, totally abandoned. (cf. Mark 15:34) The Gospels, however, at least the Gospel of John, presents the apostle John and Mary the mother of Jesus present at the crucifixion (cf. John 19:26–27), showing somehow that not every human betrayed or forsaken Christ. Are the Christian hymns a simple exaggeration to make a point, or was Jesus indeed literary forsaken by all humans? If so, how are we to interpret the passages cited in John's Gospel?

As I was listening to Christmas music over the holidays, I noticed that the popular Danish Christmas hymn "Dejlig er jorden" ("Beautiful is the world") shares a melody with the hymn "Fairest Lord Jesus", while there are only very vague similarities in the lyrics, such as the motif of the world's natural beauty. Curious about this I checked Wikipedia and learned that both hymns ultimately derive from a German hymn that first appeared in print in 1677. What are the historical details of the progression from the German hymn of 1677 to "Fairest Lord Jesus"?

I attend the Ordinary form of the Mass. In it the entrance hymn is sung more often than the Gregorian introitus. I've been thinking about the reasons for this. In the Extraordinary form we find no entrance hymns, I think. But the entrance hymn seems to fit the Ordinary form very well. It really does, although I have even been to Requiem Masses in the Ordinary form in which the Gregorian introitus was sung. It *also* worked very well. Personally, I found that Gregorian chant works very well in the OF. Therefore, I don't know why in the Ordinary form people often choose the entrance hymn rather than the introitus in the OF. **What has been the argument for the entrance hymn in the Church? What does the Church officially say about this?**

The meaning of Zion is uncertain. There is a hymn related to Zion . The refrain part says, > We’re marching to Zion, Beautiful, beautiful Zion; We’re marching upward to Zion, The beautiful city of God. What is the role and importance of Zion in Christianity?

I noticed the hymn *Redeemed* states the following in its chorus (emphasis added): > Redeemed, redeemed, > > Redeemed by the blood of **the Lamb**; > > Redeemed, redeemed, > > **His child**, and forever, **I am**. This chorus appears to state that Christians are children of "the Lamb," (i.e., Jesus). However, doesn't Hebrews 2:11-12 portray Jesus as considering Christians His *brethren* rather than children? Alternatively, might verse 13 involve us being called Jesus's children? Maybe Isaiah 9:6, which refers to the Messiah as "everlasting Father," supports this as well. According to the Bible, are Christians brethren of Jesus, children of Jesus, or both?

I was singing "Were you there..." to myself while planting potatoes yesterday evening after the Good Friday service, I got to the stone being rolled away and I couldn't help but think there were a lot more verses to this song when I was a kid and it just kept going on and on forever. Is there a complete list of verses (perhaps in multiple hymnals and by different authors) to the verses of "Were you there when they Crucified my Lord"?

The hymn *I Gave My Life For Thee* has the following verse (emphasis added): > My Father's house of light, > > **My glory-circled throne** > > I left for earthly night, > > For wanderings sad and lone It appears to present the speaker, Jesus, as having a "glory-circled throne" that He left when He came to this world. However, does Jesus instead teach that He won't sit on His throne before the Second Coming (Matt. 19:28; 25:31; Luke 1:32)? Furthermore, don't the Scriptures teach that at present, rather than being on the throne, Jesus is "seated at **the right hand of the throne** of the Majesty in the heavens" (Heb. 8:1, NKJV, emphasis mine; cf. 12:2)? It seems as if He isn't seated on the throne even now but is rather seated *next to* the throne. (Actually, this isn't entirely accurate. See "Update.") Am I missing something? Can Jesus be spoken of as having a "glory-circled throne" before His first coming, one that He left behind after coming to earth? **Update:** Jesus certainly can be spoken of as being enthroned ever since His ascension: "To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, **as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne**" (Revelation 3:21, NKJV, emphasis added). But is Jesus spoken of as being enthroned _prior to His incarnation_?

Can someone point me to the earliest source that contains the melody for *Adoro te devote*? I've checked on the Cantus Index, as well as MMMO database and have not been able to find anything on this hymn. I want to view the document. If you don't know the earliest one, can you point me to an early one? I'm guessing it would be 18th century.

In my experience, every church I've either been in or seen recorded ask the congregation to stand when they sing. Without having done a scientific study, it seems this is a near-universal practice among Christians (and please correct me if this is wrong). Is there a biblical basis for this, or is it merely a wide-reaching convention? If so, is there anything to suggest when or how this practice may have begun? *I recognise this question may be at the border of what's on-topic. I've tried to keep in on-topic by not asking why we sing, but for the biblical basis and history of this specific Christian practice. Given this practice seems to be the same amongst many denominations, I hope it's ok not to specify a particular group.*