Jump to content
Online Baptist Community
  • Newest Sermon Entry

    • By Jim_Alaska in Jim_Alaska's Sermons & Devotionals
         33
      Closed Communion
      James Foley
       
      I Corinthians 11:17-34: "Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come."

      INTRODUCTION

      Historic Baptists, true Baptists, have believed in and still believe in closed communion. Baptists impose upon themselves the same restrictions that they impose on others concerning the Lord’s Supper. Baptists have always insisted that it is the Lord’s Table, not theirs; and He alone has the right to say who shall sit at His table. No amount of so called brotherly love, or ecumenical spirit, should cause us to invite to His table those who have not complied with the requirements laid down plainly in His inspired Word. With respect to Bible doctrines we must always use the scripture as our guide and practice. For Baptists, two of the most important doctrines are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper. These are the only two doctrines we recognize as Church Ordinances. The Bible is very clear in teaching how these doctrines are to be practiced and by whom.

      We only have two ordinances that we must never compromise or we risk our very existence, they are Baptism and The Lord’s Supper.

      The moment we deviate from the precise method God has prescribed we have started down the slippery slope of error. True Baptists have held fast to the original doctrine of The Lord’s Supper from the time of Christ and the Apostles.

      Unfortunately, in this day of what the Bible describes as the age of luke warmness, Baptists are becoming careless in regard to strictly following the pattern laid out for us in Scripture. Many of our Bible colleges are graduating otherwise sincere, Godly and dedicated pastors and teachers who have not been taught the very strict, biblical requirements that surround the Lord’s Supper. Any Bible college that neglects to teach its students the differences surrounding Closed Communion, Close Communion and Open Communion is not simply short changing its students; it is also not equipping their students to carry on sound Bible traditions. The result is men of God and churches that fall into error. And as we will see, this is serious error.

      Should we as Baptists ignore the restrictions made by our Lord and Master? NO! When we hold to the restrictions placed upon the Lord’s Supper by our Master, we are defending the "faith which was once delivered to the saints" Jude 3.

      The Lord’s Supper is rigidly restricted and I will show this in the following facts:

      IT IS RESTRICTED AS TO PLACE

      A. I Corinthians 11:18 says, "When ye come together in the church." This does not mean the church building; they had none. In other words, when the church assembles. The supper is to be observed by the church, in church capacity. Again this does not mean the church house. Ekklesia, the Greek word for church, means assembly. "When ye come together in the church," is when the church assembles.

      B. When we say church we mean an assembly of properly baptized believers. Acts 2:41-42: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers."

      The church is made up of saved people who are baptized by immersion. In the Bible, belief precedes baptism. That’s the Bible way.

      Acts 8:12-13, "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done."

      When we say properly baptized, we mean immersed. No unbeliever should take the Lord’s supper, and no non-immersed believer should take the supper. Those who are sprinkled are not baptized and cannot receive the supper. The Greek word for baptize is baptizo, and it always means to immerse.

      "In every case where communion is referred to, or where it may possibly have been administered, the believers had been baptized Acts 2:42; 8:12; 8:38; 10:47; 6:14-15; 18:8; 20:7. Baptism comes before communion, just as repentance and faith precede baptism".

      C. The Lord’s Supper is for baptized believers in church capacity: "When ye come together in the church," again not a building, but the assembly of the properly baptized believers.

      D. The fact that the Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, to be observed in church capacity, is pointed out by the fact that it is for those who have been immersed and added to the fellowship of the church.

      E. The Lord’s Supper is never spoken of in connection with individuals. When it is referred to, it is only referred to in reference to baptized believers in local church capacity I Cor. 11:20-26).

      I want to quote Dr. W.W. Hamilton,

      "The individual administration of the ordinance has no Bible warrant and is a relic of Romanism. The Lord’s Supper is a church ordinance, and anything which goes beyond or comes short of this fails for want of scriptural example or command".

      “The practice of taking a little communion kit to hospitals, nursing homes, etc. is unscriptural and does not follow the scriptural example.”

      IT IS RESTRICTED TO A UNITED CHURCH

      A. The Bible in I Cor. 11:18 is very strong in condemning divisions around the Lord’s table. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
      19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
      20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

      There were no less than four divisions in the Corinthian church.
      I Cor. 1:12: "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ."

      Because of these divisions, it was impossible for them to scripturally eat the Lord’s Supper. Division in the local church is reason to hold off observing the Lord’s Supper. But there are also other reasons to forego taking the Lord’s Supper. If there is gross sin in the membership we do not take it. Here is scriptural evidence for this: 1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us:
      8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
      10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

      B. At this point, I want to ask these questions: Are there not doctrinal divisions among the many denominations? Is it not our doctrinal differences that cause us to be separate religious bodies?

      IT IS RESTRICTED BY DOCTRINE

      A. Those in the early church at Jerusalem who partook "continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine" Acts 2:42. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

      B. Those that do not hold to apostolic truth are not to partake. This means there is to be discipline in the local body. How can you discipline those who do not belong to the local body? You can’t. The clear command of scripture is to withdraw fellowship from those who are not doctrinally sound.

      II Thes 3:6: "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."
      Rom. 16:17: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them."
      To commune together means to have the same doctrine.
      II Thes. 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
      II John 10-11: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."

      C. Some Baptists in our day have watered down this doctrine by practicing what they call “Close Communion.” By this they mean that they believe that members of another Baptist church may take communion with us because they are of the same beliefs. Once again, this is unscriptural.

      The welcome to the Lord's Table should not be extended beyond the discipline of the local church. When we take the Lord’s Supper there is supposed to be no gross sin among us and no divisions among us. We have no idea of the spiritual condition of another church’s members. If there is sin or division in the case of this other church’s members, we have no way of knowing it. We cannot discipline them because they are not members of our church. This is why we practice “Closed” communion, meaning it is restricted solely to our church membership. 
      So then, in closing I would like to reiterate the three different ideas concerning the Lord’s Supper and who is to take it. 
      Closed Communion = Only members of a single local church. 
      Close Communion = Members of like faith and order may partake. 
      Open Communion = If you claim to be a Christian, or simply attending the service, you may partake. 
      It is no small thing to attempt to change that which was implemented by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 
      Mt. 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. 
      Many of our Baptist churches have a real need to consider the gravity of the act of observing The Lord’s Supper. It is not a light thing that is to be taken casually or without regard to the spiritual condition of ourselves or our church.
      1Co. 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

       28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

       29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

       30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Video: What's the Big Deal about the King James Version of the Bible? By Sam Gipp


Recommended Posts

Hmmm...I liked it.

However, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a little more encompassing than death, burial, and resurrection.

I like to use an old Navy acronym... CBDR (constant bearing decreasing range) that is Christ's Birth, Death, and Resurrection. I believe when the Gospel is given it must include Christ's birth to be the whole Gospel.
The birth was miraculous - a virgin birth.
He led a sinless life - all of his life.
He gave himself freely to the cross - his death.
He was buried - three days.
He arose from the dead - conquered death and sin's grip on man.
He ascended into heaven - very God returned to heaven.

I believe you can tell part of the Gospel but the whole gospel means none can be left out. Part of the gospel can point a man to Christ and the Holy Spirit can use it to lead a man to salvation. If a version leaves out any part or changes any part of the Gospel of Christ it is a version that only contains the word of God. I believe the KJV preserves the word of God and tells the whole gospel. I use the KJV however, I can use any of the versions to point a man to Christ. After that the Holy Spirit provides the increase.

I think we have to be careful when we say we cannot point someone to Christ using a version. Philip didn't use a version with the Ethiopian, nor did Paul with Dionysius. They used the whole gospel, the OT, and the Holy Spirit's persuasive power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As I have said, the problem I have with the "any version" theory (and that is all it is) is the fact that the Christ that most of these versions point to is not qualified to die for mankind. These other versions present another Gospel, another Christ.

And Paul said if they bring another Christ, let them be accursed.

Sorry, I still contend that these other versions, such as the CEV, do not point a man to Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

A you have said, faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. One can present the Gospel (Word of God), which is found in most (if not all) Bible versions, and the Holy Ghost can and does use this to bring folks to salvation.

Now, what they do after salvation, what Bible they choose to study, can have a dramatic impact upon their walk, but if they diligently seek the Lord in this matter He will guide them to growth through the KJB.

Too many men have been saved before the KJB was available and in lands without the KJB for folks to not be able to come to Christ without the KJB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites




Wasn't that Constant Bearing Diminishing Range??? hehehe


Nope its "decreasing." Hey I have a devotional that can be shared among swabbies about this...wanna look it over? In another thread or I'll just send it via email.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

A you have said, faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. One can present the Gospel (Word of God), which is found in most (if not all) Bible versions, and the Holy Ghost can and does use this to bring folks to salvation.

Now, what they do after salvation, what Bible they choose to study, can have a dramatic impact upon their walk, but if they diligently seek the Lord in this matter He will guide them to growth through the KJB.

Too many men have been saved before the KJB was available and in lands without the KJB for folks to not be able to come to Christ without the KJB.
It is not the Gospel if it is pointing to a different christ. A study of the Alexandrian manuscripts reveal that they are not preaching Christ Jesus, but rather a lying Jesus, a sinful Jesus. They do not preach the true Gospel, but rather another Gospel.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

For one Bible to say Jesus died for your sins, was buried, and rose again and also to say Jesus lied to his brothers reveals that the one they claim died, was buried and rose again was not the pure spotless lamb that takes away the sin of the world.

It would be no different than me saying the Jesus that saved me had an earthly father named Ahab and an earthly mother named Jezebel.

Both would be lies.

The Jesus that saves is spotless, sinless, and well qualified to take away sin through the shedding of his own blood.
The one that is a liar is not.

It's not really that hard to understand. What these translations based on the Alexandrian texts have done is taken Gospel truth and tainted that Gospel with lies making that Gospel a lie itself. Their Gospel is pointing to the Jesus they write of in their translations... a lying sinful Jesus, no different from fallen man because he himself is fallen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


It is not the Gospel if it is pointing to a different christ. A study of the Alexandrian manuscripts reveal that they are not preaching Christ Jesus, but rather a lying Jesus, a sinful Jesus. They do not preach the true Gospel, but rather another Gospel.


I'll cut to the chase...Neither Peter, Philip, or Paul used the KJV or one of the versions to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Knowing (KNOWING) that Peter and Paul could never have used the exact same words each time they preached the gospel. Why would you strain at this gnat?

My point is you can preach the gospel without the KJV. I wouldn't listen to you reading texts from other than the KJV but, I would support your effort to give the Gospel message.

I personally know there were people who used close but different versions of the Gospel of Jesus Christ in witnessing in the early centuries after Christ ascended and they were successful.. Edited by 1Tim115
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Did Philip, Peter, or Paul preach the same Christ found in the Alexandrian text? or did they preach the Christ of the Antiochan text?

Paul warned the Church at Galatia:

Galatians 1:8-9 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

The fact of the matter is, though they did not have a KJV (an impossibility in itself) they did preach the true Christ... and warned against any other Gospel and any other Christ.

I am not straining at a gnat at all. I am pointing out the fact that though the Alexandrian text translations may appear to preach the Gospel, the reality is they present another Gospel... one of which a sinner dies for man's sins.

It is an impossibility to get saved looking to a lying and sinful Christ... which is exactly what the Alexandrian text translations point to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Did Philip, Peter, or Paul preach the same Christ found in the Alexandrian text? or did they preach the Christ of the Antiochan text?
Yep agree there preaching Gospel would have agreed with Antioch.
Paul warned the Church at Galatia:

Galatians 1:8-9 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
I will not argue against scripture. We need to keep in mind scripture, with the exception of the letters, was oral much of the time.
The fact of the matter is, though they did not have a KJV (an impossibility in itself) they did preach the true Christ... and warned against any other Gospel and any other Christ.
Yep agree.
I am not straining at a gnat at all. I am pointing out the fact that though the Alexandrian text translations may appear to preach the Gospel, the reality is they present another Gospel... one of which a sinner dies for man's sins.
But if there is enough gospel there to present Christ in truth then neither of us would limit the Holy Spirit.
It is an impossibility to get saved looking to a lying and sinful Christ... which is exactly what the Alexandrian text translations point to.
If it were me and the truth were there I could point it out to an unbeliever; and I believe you, with your knowledge of the errors, could too. The rest is up to the Spirit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Though I agree with SFIC in regards to the danger of the new versions and their depiction of Christ, I have to disagree concerning the salvation argument. Yes these versions portray Christ as a sinner, liar, etc; yet the unlearned sinner doesn't know this when he is presented with the gospel. I personally believe that the presentation of the gospel - the how and method of presentation - are of dire importance. Yet my question still is: does a lack of understanding of the Word, an incomplete presentation of the gospel and the version used take away, bind or stop the Holy Spirit from working in the life of the receiver at the moment of salvation when they believe on Jesus to save them. They are not believing in the Jesus of the KJV, CEV, NIV, NASV, etc, they are basing there believing on the cross of Christ, the Jesus who died and rose again. Most, if not all at least have that right - He was sinless, He died, He rose on the 3rd day, man's a sinner, etc. I again state that I would stake my life on the fact that most who read these versions would be shocked to see the evidence of these false teachings, yet sadly they do not look for it nor see it when it's right before there eyes. The funny thing is that most non KJV advocates still use the gospel presentation use by KJV believers for the last 400 yrs, though these denominations now use new versions, the majority of these churches started out with the KJV 100 yrs ago and still adhere to the same basic gospel mesaage, even if their other doctrines have gone astray.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


One cannot lead another to Christ with a perverted Gospel that points to another christ. It is an impossibility.

That would be like me telling you to look at the hippopotamus at the zoo and all the while pointing to a polar bear.

By the way, with my knowledge of the errors, I would not be using a perverted gospel to point one to Christ. And neither should any christian. Edited by Standing Firm In Christ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You say all we have to do is tell them Christ died on the cross? Great.

Now tell me, which Christ was it that died on the cross? Was it the Christ of the Alexandrian text translations? or the Christ of the Antiochan text translations?

See, you can't just leave a person hanging. You have to tell them who Christ is. If you say He is the Son of God who was able to go to the cross because He was sinless, then that disqualifies the Christ of the Alexandrian text translations.

If you don't specify who Christ is, you could be leading the hearer into error. There are many false christ's in the world even now. You must present the true Christ else you are not effective in your witness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Most people who present the Gospel are not going into detail about other matters within the Bible no matter what version they may hold in their hand. Those who are born again in Christ and sharing the Gospel are sharing the same Jesus who saved them, not some false Jesus that one may be able to find in some MVs or elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Most people who present the Gospel are not going into detail about other matters within the Bible no matter what version they may hold in their hand. Those who are born again in Christ and sharing the Gospel are sharing the same Jesus who saved them, not some false Jesus that one may be able to find in some MVs or elsewhere.
But if the "Gospel" they are presenting is the Gospel of the Alexandrian text translations, then they are presenting "another Gospel" and not the Gospel of the true Christ. One cannot be saved using those Gospels that are found in the Alexandrian text translations.

Now, it is possible that they can make one desire to know who Jesus is, but until they believe the true Gospel, they cannot be saved no matter how much one tries to say they can.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Not adding requirements at all.

Did not Jesus tell the Jews, "if ye believe not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins"?

One must believe in the true Christ, or one will die lost. The true Christ is not in the Alexandrian text translations. Those translations present a false christ, one that is a sinful man. And that christ also said if one does not believe in him one will die in his or her sin.

The good news presented in the Alexandrian text translations turns out to be deceiving news. The christ being presented is not the Son of God, but rather a deceitful man.

Edited by Standing Firm In Christ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If I was trying to win someone over to the Lord using one of the Alexandrian text translations, and they accepted my statement that Christ died for their sins, was buried, and rose again, the Christ they would be believing would be the Christ found in the pages of that translation I was using. They either reject the Christ you present, or they accept him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recent Achievements

    • Mark C earned a badge
      First Post
    • Razor went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • Mark C earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • KJV1611BELIEVER earned a badge
      First Post
    • KJV1611BELIEVER earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Razor

      “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect).”
      ― Mark Twain
      · 0 replies
    • Razor

      “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect).”
      ― Mark Twain
      · 1 reply
    • Razor

      Psalms 139 Psalm 139:9-10
      9. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; 10. even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy righthand shall hold me. 
       
      · 0 replies
    • Bro. West  »  Pastor Scott Markle

      Advanced revelation, then...prophecy IS advanced revelation in the context of the apostles.
      I really do not know where you are going with this. The Bible itself has revelations and prophecies and not all revelations are prophecies.
      Paul had things revealed to him that were hid and unknown that the Gentiles would be fellow heirs.
      How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Eph 3:3-9
      And I do not mean this as a Hyper-dispensationalist would, for there were people in Christ before Paul (Rom. 16:7). This is not prophecy for there are none concerning the Church age in the O.T..
      Israel rejected the New Wine (Jesus Christ) and said the Old Wine (law) was better, had they tasted the New Wine there would be no church age or mystery as spoken above. to be revealed.
      It was a revealed mystery. Sure there are things concerning the Gentiles after the this age. And we can now see types in the Old Testament (Boaz and Ruth) concerning a Gentile bride, but this is hindsight.
      Peter could have had a ham sandwich in Acts 2, but he did not know it till later, by revelation. But this has nothing to do with 1John 2;23 and those 10 added words in italics. Where did they get them? Did the violate Pro. 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. Where did they get this advance revelation? Was it from man, God or the devil?
        I just read your comment and you bypassed what I wrote concerning book arrangement, chapters being added and verse numberings and such. There is no scripture support for these either, should we reject these?
      Happy New Year
      · 0 replies
    • Bro. West

      Seeing it is Christ----mas time and I was answering question on Luke 2:33 concerning Jesus, Mary and Joseph . I thought it would be fitting to display a poem i wrote concerning the matter.
      SCRIPTURAL MARY

      I WALK NOT ON WATER NOR CHANGE IT TO WINE
      SO HEARKEN O’ SINNER TO THIS STORY OF MINE
      I, AM A DAUGHTER OF ABRAHAM SINNER BY BIRTH
      A HAND MAID OF LOW ESTATE USED HERE ON EARTH
      MY HAIR IS NOT GENTILE BLOND, I HAVE NOT EYES OF BLUE
      A MOTHER OF MANY CHILDREN A DAUGHTER OF A JEW
      FOR JOSEPH MY HUSBAND DID HONOUR OUR BED
      TO FATHER OUR CHILDREN WHO NOW ARE ALL DEAD
      BUT I SPEAK NOT OF THESE WHO I LOVED SO WELL
      BUT OF THE FIRST BORN WHICH SAVED ME FROM HELL
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY SO TRUST ME NOT
                                               2
      WHEN I WAS A VIRGIN UNKNOWN BY MAN
      THE ANGEL OF GOD SPOKE OF GOD’S PLAN
      FOR I HAD BEEN CHOSEN A FAVOUR VESSEL OF CLAY
      TO BARE THE SON OF THE HIGHEST BY AN UNUSUAL WAY
      FOR THE SCRIPTURE FORETOLD OF WHAT WAS TO BE
      SO MY WOMB GOD FILLED WHEN HE OVER SHADOW ME
      BUT THE LAW OF MOSES DID DEMAND MY LIFE
      WOULD JOSEPH MY BETROTHED MAKE ME HIS WIFE
      I THOUGHT ON THESE THINGS WITH SO NEEDLESS FEARS
      BUT A DREAM HE RECEIVED ENDED ALL FEARS
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY SO TRUST ME NOT
                                              3
      THEN MY SOUL DID REJOICE IN GOD MY SAVIOR
      HE SCATTERED THE PROUD AND BLESS ME WITH FAVOR
      O’ THE RICH ARE EMPTY, THE HUNGRY HAVE GOOD THINGS
      FOR THE THRONE OF DAVID WOULD HAVE JESUS THE KING
      BUT BEFORE I DELIVERED THE MAN CHILD OF OLD
      CAESAR WITH TAXES DEMANDED OUR GOLD
      TO THE CITY OF DAVID JOSEPH AND I WENT
      ON A BEAST OF BURDEN OUR STRENGTH NEAR SPEND
      NO ROOM AT An INN, BUT A STABLE WAS FOUND
      WITH STRAW AND DUNG LAID ON THE GROUND
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY, SO TRUST ME NOT
                                                  4
      MY MATRIX WAS OPEN IN A PLACE SO PROFANE
      FROM THE GLORY OF GLORIES TO A BEGGAR’S DOMAIN
      SO WE WRAPPED THE CHILD GIVEN TO THE HEATHEN A STRANGER
      NO REPUTATION IS SOUGHT TO BE BORN IN A MANGER
      HIS STAR WAS ABOVE US THE HOST OF HEAVEN DID SING
      FOR SHEPHERDS AND WISE MEN WORSHIP ONLY THE KING
      BUT HEROD THAT DEVIL SOUGHT FOR HIS SOUL
      AND MURDER RACHEL’S CHILDREN UNDER TWO YEARS OLD
      BUT JOSEPH MY HUSBAND WAS WARNED IN A DREAM
      SO WE FLED INTO EGYPT BECAUSE OF HIS SCHEME
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY SO TRUST ME NOT
                                               5
      SO THE GIVER OF LIFE, THE ROCK OF ALL AGES
      GREW UP TO FULFILL THE HOLY PAGES
      HE PREACH WITH AUTHORITY LIKE NONE BEFORE
      PLEASE TRUST HIS WORDS AND NOT THE GREAT WHORE
      HER BLACK ROBE PRIEST FILL THEIR LIPS WITH MY NAME
      WITH BLASPHEMOUS PRAISE, DAMMATION AND SHAME
      THERE ARE NO NAIL PRINTS IN MY HANDS, MY BODY DID NOT ARISE
      NOR, AM A DEMON OF FATIMA FLOATING IN THE SKY
      THERE IS NO DEITY IN MY VEINS FOR ADAM CAME FROM SOD
      FOR I, AM, MOTHER OF THE SON OF MAN NOT THE MOTHER OF GOD
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY, SO TRUST ME NOT
      6
      FOR MY SOUL WAS PURCHASED BY GOD UPON THE CROSS
      FOR MY SINS HE DID SUFFER AN UNMEASURABLE COST
      I WILL NOT STEAL HIS GLORY WHO ROSE FROM THE DEAD
      ENDURING SPIT AND THORNS PLACED ON HIS HEAD
      YET, IF YOU WISH TO HONOR ME THEN GIVE ME NONE AT ALL
      BUT TRUST THE LAMB WHO STOOL IN PILATE’S HALL
      CALL NOT ON THIS REDEEMED WOMAN IN YOUR TIME OF FEAR
      FOR I WILL NOT GIVE ANSWER NEITHER WILL I HEAR
      AND WHEN THE BOOKS ARE OPEN AT THE GREAT WHITE THRONE
      I AMEN YOUR DAMNATION THAT TRUST NOT HIM ALONE
      MY FLESH SAW CORRUPTION MY BONES THEY DID ROT
      MY PAPS ARE NOT HOLY, O’ SINNER TRUST ME NOT

                       WRITTEN BY BRO. WEST
       
      · 0 replies
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...