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.

Shame For A Woman To Speak In Church.


heartstrings
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church

During prayer meeting tonight, in the SBC we have been attending, a woman prayed aloud, during service, in the sanctuary. I must confess that I am still not used to that because In the IFB church I was a member of for 26 years, that was not permitted. This always puzzled me because "testifying" was always allowed and some women certainly weren't shy about exercising that privilege. The Bible plainly says "keep silence" "not permitted unto them to speak" and again "it is a shame for women to speak in church". My question is, are they to speak or aren't they? and why allow one form of "speaking" but not another?

Edited by heartstrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The Bible said it, I believe it. Society today would call this sexist and would label me as such just for saying I believe the Bible is the Word of God and therefore women shouldn't speak in church. I believe this would cover "praying" in church also. The IFB church I attended, after Bible study on Wednesday nights, would have prayer meeting. The men would go to one room and the women to another room and we would pray. I believe God is just as interested in hearing a woman pray as he is a man, but, in church, women are to be silent. I am too scared to go against God's Word and to lean on my own understanding. I might not understand why this is written, but I will not question the fact that it is written. It is my belief that your SBC church is wrong. As mentioned, I used to attend an IFB church, and they definately followed Biblical teaching on this. The Independant Baptist church I attend now does not follow this teaching. They also have women Sunday School teachers that have men in the class. The Bible states that a woman is not to subject authority over the man. I believe my church is wrong in this area too. The IFB church I attended did not have women teaching class that had older boys/young men in them.
I am very interested in replies to your question as I will be pastoring an IFB church starting in May and would like to read other views on this.
God Bless,
Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators

I would have to say that I believe that women should not be praying in a mixed congregation (meaning men and women present). When a person publicly prays, they are leading in prayer...meaning that the entire group present bows before the throne, following (and praying along with silently, in many cases) the person praying. Because woman is the glory of the man, I believe that for her to pray in public (with men present, I mean) is the same as having her head uncovered - it dishonors her head, her husband. Single women might not have husbands, but I do believe they would be dishonoring their Lord (just as married women would). Does that make sense?

Testimony is different, I believe. The person giving testimony is not leading spiritually in any way. They are, rather (at least supposed to be), giving glory to God. At the same time, a woman giving testimony needs to be careful that it doesn't come off as though she were preaching or teaching a truth (I have sat through testimonies like that and they are hard to sit through!).

There are churches I know of who don't allow women to testify. That is the business of that particular congregation. I think it cuts off some praise coming from that quarter, and don't totally agree with it, but again, that's that congregation's business and none of mine.

Business meetings are different. I know of churches where women don't even attend (and some where, if they do, they are silent and don't even vote). Again, church decision. And not one I am averse to at all.

I believe the scripture you mentioned, heart, applies more to actual teaching/preaching, as well as things like business meetings (women who want to control can often try to wrest control of the meeting and cause havoc. Men can too, but it's more often women). Business meetings are set to take care of the business of the church. I know many women who won't like this, but I don't think women necessarily need to be involved in that type of thing.

Positions of leadership are the target for verses on silence and not speaking, etc. And praying in public would fall in that category, IMO.

Congrats, robmac. Where will you be pastoring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Women are not to teach men either, but may be not so on forums?!! I believe e have some women here who act as Bible scholars, and presume to teach. I have heard women "Preach" during testimony, or before singing a special, but I cannot say I agree with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Did a man call on her to pray? If so she was saying a prayer for this group of people on behalf of the one that called on her. If she did this prayer on her on, them she was out of place, & if a woman called on her to pray them this woman usurp authority.

One last though, I did not think we were suppose to hang up our Christian cloak on the rack as we church services? If we do acting, behaving, holding to one set of values during church services, & another outside of church services that contradicts those in church services, them yes, we hang up our Christina cloak on the rack as we pass out of church services into the world.

Truth is both man & woman should behave, live, the same values, in church, or out of church, if we don't, we are not being what we claim to be.

Edited by Jerry80871852
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Women are not to teach men either, but may be not so on forums?!! I believe e have some women here who act as Bible scholars, and presume to teach. I have heard women "Preach" during testimony, or before singing a special, but I cannot say I agree with it.



Let your women keep silence in the churches:

I must say, Happy has more Bible sense than many "Bible scholars" and more wisdom than most of us men on this forum. But I believe she wouldn't teach men in church or usurp authority either.

edited to add Edited by heartstrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Did a man call on her to pray? If so she was saying a prayer for this group of people on behalf of the one that called on her. If she did this prayer on her on, them she was out of place,& if a woman called on her to pray them this woman usurp authority.

She did it on her own, no one asked. But we usually split the women and men up last night, the pastor had us stay together.


One last though, I did not think we were suppose to hang up our Christian cloak on the rack as we church services? If we do acting, behaving, holding to one set of values during church services, & another outside of church services that contradicts those in church services, them yes, we hang up our Christina cloak on the rack as we pass out of church services into the world.

Truth is both man & woman should behave, live, the same values, in church, or out of church, if we don't, we are not being what we claim to be.


Yes, VALUES and godly behaviour should be observed everywhere. But do you wear your suit and tie every day you're "out of church"? Do you take up offerings at Walmart or your favorite restaurant or anywhere else "out of church"? What am I saying" there are things to be done at church. The Bible simply says....... Let your women keep silence in the churches: Edited by heartstrings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I think it's also and maybe only, a practical reason. Men are SUPPOSED to be logical while woman are more emotional. Though biblical spirituality has emotion it is good to note that the majority of God's Word is practical and sound doctrine is always practical. Practicality and logic go hand in hand and anyone making sound spiritual (biblical) decisions in any leadership role needs logic and practicality. This includes teaching God's Word. Leadership in any form can never be emotional. Emotional decisions are inevitably bad decisions (not always, but mostly). If one looks at the modern charismatic or denominational churches where woman lead one will always see a higher emotional content rather than a practical and logical biblical one. In this day and age where woman are regarded as equal in the home, the church and the work place we see "harder" woman taking on the roles of men.
My wife is a nurse and as an artist I work from home - more often than not she brings in far more than I do and it is often commented upon by certain family members that I am the "wife" as these days "stay at home dads" are accepted as the norm and with job cuts, etc it is sadly often the case that men have to stay at home. Yet I am the leader of our household. I manage the finances, etc but we share all decision making though I have final say and I am blessed with a wife that very seldom says "I told you so!" :knuppel:
I say all this because a lot of what Paul said concerning woman has been abused by men for selfish reasons and when we put aside our pride, self and personal feelings we will see that men and woman are equal in God's eyes and are just DIFFERENT with different roles to play, neither one less or inferior to the other. Men are just as prone to make emotional decisions as woman are - usually in anger and always in pride, men are just not supposed to be RULED by emotions as woman can be - we are the father, they the mother. We the law giver, they the care giver (and by law I mean spiritual law, not chauvinistic law) and the list goes on.
It's when we reverse these roles that problems arise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

In the NT church, it wasn't like it is now...many men would get up to "preach" and share Scripture and teach. That's why the specific rules on speaking in tongues and interpreting, etc...because men would just take turns standing up and preaching. The women were not allowed to do that...and if they had a question about one of the lessons or discussions they were to ask their husband at home.

I sort of personally feel it should be that way across the board, since many "testimonies" end up turning into "preaching" and things, but.....eh. Whatever. We don't let women make motions in business meetings and we prefer they not talk during them as well, but of course we aren't going to kick one out if they do. (Had to make that rule EARLY on about 10 years ago due to problems. Thankfully, its a Bible rule anyway!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't have a problem with a woman speaking, per se. What I have a problem with is when she speaks and it is contrary to the Word of God.

From what I see in 1 Corinthians 14, the context is the speaking of tongues. A woman was not permitted to speak in tongues.

A woman is not usurping authority if the pastor of the Church hears what she has to say and gives her permission to share with the Congregation. Throughout the Word of God, we see women used over and over by God. I am reminded of the elect lady in John's second epistle. She had a Church in her house. There is no mention of whether a man or woman was the spiritual leader there, but I tend to believe the woman was or John would have written to a man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the church (body of believers present for the corporate worship of God).

Testimony - yes.
Preach/Teach - no.

Robmac, you're not far from me near Marietta, Oh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Hello. I am not trying to overstep my authority in the Lord's house, but I have an opinion. We women stand up and give testimonies of our salvation and the goodness of God. If I was asked to pray during the service I would not. I would look to my husband.
My understanding of the verse is that women were not to speak in other tongues. The gift of tongues was for the Jews. I do not believe the author meant that women ought not to speak at all during the service. However, it does state that the woman should ask her husband at home anything she doesn't understand.
I don't believe women are to create a disturbance. I don't believe men should either, but some men take this scripture and run with it. Not showing the love of God and the respect the Lord has for women.
No offense to the men who do treat women respectfully.
The Bible mentions a man and his own house. I believe some things are a little different if the woman is a widow or single.
I believe a woman should be able to shout an amen (as long as she is not too loud) or to sing in the service. I think all of ya'll allow women to sing. That would be in direct disobedience of your verse you are quoting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Hello. I am not trying to overstep my authority in the Lord's house, but I have an opinion. We women stand up and give testimonies of our salvation and the goodness of God. If I was asked to pray during the service I would not. I would look to my husband.
My understanding of the verse is that women were not to speak in other tongues. The gift of tongues was for the Jews. I do not believe the author meant that women ought not to speak at all during the service. However, it does state that the woman should ask her husband at home anything she doesn't understand.
I don't believe women are to create a disturbance. I don't believe men should either, but some men take this scripture and run with it. Not showing the love of God and the respect the Lord has for women.
No offense to the men who do treat women respectfully.
The Bible mentions a man and his own house. I believe some things are a little different if the woman is a widow or single.
I believe a woman should be able to shout an amen (as long as she is not too loud) or to sing in the service. I think all of ya'll allow women to sing. That would be in direct disobedience of your verse you are quoting.


You're in trouble now Tabitha...go to your room (just kidding). I appreciate your comments. I wanted to hear from the women at OB.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I don't have a problem with a woman speaking, per se. What I have a problem with is when she speaks and it is contrary to the Word of God.

From what I see in 1 Corinthians 14, the context is the speaking of tongues. A woman was not permitted to speak in tongues.

A woman is not usurping authority if the pastor of the Church hears what she has to say and gives her permission to share with the Congregation. Throughout the Word of God, we see women used over and over by God. I am reminded of the elect lady in John's second epistle. She had a Church in her house. There is no mention of whether a man or woman was the spiritual leader there, but I tend to believe the woman was or John would have written to a man.


Actually, it would go directly against Scripture if a woman was leading the church in her house. Unless the church was made up entirely of women, that is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If it were directly against Scripture, John would have written a reprimand in his epistle. It is clear that he did not.

As I said, if a pastor gives a woman permission to speak, then she is not usurping authority. A woman could lead the services in such a case.

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

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 10 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • Recent Achievements

    • Napsterdad earned a badge
      Thumb's Up
    • Napsterdad earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Napsterdad earned a badge
      First Post
    • StandInTheGap earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Mark C went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Tell a friend

    Love Online Baptist Community? Tell a friend!
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Popular Now

  • 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...