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.

Dispensations


AVBibleBeliever

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Well, according to some false teachers here, there are a few others and they are all different and only for certain people and for a limited time only.


That sounds like one of those TV sales shows: "For a limited time only......"
:lol:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 299
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I believe its the Son of God who hung on the cross that saves. Not the two pieces of wood, but WHO died there. Its WHO rose from the grave (the only begotten Son of God) not the rock tomb. What is more important, the two wooden cross timbers or who died there?

 

Paul said Christ 367 times in his letters alone (not counting acts), Paul said cross 10 times including acts. I think Paul was trying to tell everyone who saves. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I believe its the Son of God who hung on the cross that saves. Not the two pieces of wood, but WHO died there. Its WHO rose from the grave (the only begotten Son of God) not the rock tomb. What is more important, the two wooden cross timbers or who died there?

 

Paul said Christ 367 times in his letters alone (not counting acts), Paul said cross 10 times including acts. I think Paul was trying to tell everyone who saves. 

 

 

Right on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

HA, this is one argument of extremes for sure.

 

One side divides too much

The other too little

 

The Scriptural truth may very well elude both.

 

Huckster was referenced for the extreme dividers

 

Snake oil salesmen would suit the others

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

here are two more for you all to watch and consider.  Again there is no OBligation to watch it.  But I hope you do with open hearts to learn.

 

Covanetor I recommend the second one for you.  You wanted some scriptures to what I was sharing in a previous post and some of them are discussed in that video.

 

 

I persisted until 28 minutes when he said "there's not a baptist on this planet that tells his congregation they must accept Jesus as the Messiah."

 

How often do we need to post: 31 But these are written , that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

 

The whole idea of assigning Heb - Rev to the Jews in the tribulation period is serious heresy. These inspired writers were writing to real, living people, encouraging & warning. He is expressing a highly questionable opinion rather than expounding Scripture.

 

I must revive the Hebrews thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I persisted until 28 minutes when he said "there's not a baptist on this planet that tells his congregation they must accept Jesus as the Messiah."

 

How often do we need to post: 31 But these are written , that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

 

The whole idea of assigning Heb - Rev to the Jews in the tribulation period is serious heresy. These inspired writers were writing to real, living people, encouraging & warning. He is expressing a highly questionable opinion rather than expounding Scripture.

 

I must revive the Hebrews thread.

The first believers were Jews, the "Sect of the Nazarenes".  There are N.T. books written specifically for this audience.

Replacement Theology heresy teaches that Israel has been "replaced" by the Church (ie: "spiritual Israel");

and hence there is no future role for Israel.  Replacement Theology also sees no need for a literal Tribulation.

 

This leads to the heresy that there will be no return of the Sect of the Nazarenes (ie: Israeli Messianic Jews),

during the Tribulation, to continue with the work documented in the Book of Acts.  And hence, Replacement

Theology sees no future use, by Jews (Israelis), of the New Testament books, to guide them in the Tribulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

no NIC, stop acting like you know anything concerning what I believe.

 

This is what I believe 1Cor 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

 Ro 5:1 ¶ Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
 Ro 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
 Ro 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
 Tit 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

 

No one, NOT ONE is saved by believing Jesus is the Christ, or believing he is the Messiah or believing he is the son of God.  He may be everyone of those things but those things don't save.

 

If any of you got saved by believing Jesus is the son of God, or he is the Christ or the Messiah You are LOST LOST LOST.

 

Only belief in the substitutionary death of Jesus Christ on the cross SAVES and gives you eternal life. that he died on that cross for you personally and paid the penalty for your sin and rose again the third day.  that is the gospel of Grace and it is that grace alone through faith that saves.

 

The devils know Jesus is Christ, they know he is the son of God, and that he is the Messiah and they believe it all, but they are a lost. 

 

Actually, doesn't "the Christ" basically mean "the promised one", as in "the promised one that God sent to bring us redemption from our sins"? And "the messiah" means the same thing as well? So if I believe that Jesus is the Christ, am I not believing that he is the Son of God, the one that God promised all the way back in Genesis 3:15 to send to redeem me from my sins? How can I believe this and not believe that I am a sinner and need this redemption?And how can I believe that this historical figure that existed 2000 years ago was the answer to a 6000 year old promise from an unseen God to redeem mankind from their sin, if not by solely by faith? How can I "believe" it and not accept it? And so how in the world is this not resulting in salvation?

 

Sometime it almost seems to me like you're trying to split hairs on a bald man just for the sake of having a position no one else has.

 

I'm not trying to be ugly, nor am I trying to pick a fight, but your trail surely does double back over top of itself sometimes.

 

Just sayin'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I have a question about Dispensationalism.

 

Are there teachers or commentators from, say, the 1400's to the 1600's that taught this?

 

I do know there are teachers and commentators from the 1500's that teach Covenanters belief. (I lean mostly that way too.)

 

This is a serious question, and I would like names of preachers or teachers. Baptist or otherwise, if possible.

If there aren't, are there, (or is there), any that have taught Dispensationalism since the 1500's, say anytime in the 1600's or 1700's?

 

I have my own views, as I am sure everyone here has also, but for clarity, I would like to know, is Larkin the most recent 'teacher' of the past, of this belief?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I have a question about Dispensationalism.

 

Are there teachers or commentators from, say, the 1400's to the 1600's that taught this?

 

I do know there are teachers and commentators from the 1500's that teach Covenanters belief. (I lean mostly that way too.)

 

This is a serious question, and I would like names of preachers or teachers. Baptist or otherwise, if possible.

If there aren't, are there, (or is there), any that have taught Dispensationalism since the 1500's, say anytime in the 1600's or 1700's?

 

I have my own views, as I am sure everyone here has also, but for clarity, I would like to know, is Larkin the most recent 'teacher' of the past, of this belief?

> You will find a discussion here.

It starts with post #47

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I have a question about Dispensationalism.

 

Are there teachers or commentators from, say, the 1400's to the 1600's that taught this?

 

I do know there are teachers and commentators from the 1500's that teach Covenanters belief. (I lean mostly that way too.)

 

This is a serious question, and I would like names of preachers or teachers. Baptist or otherwise, if possible.

If there aren't, are there, (or is there), any that have taught Dispensationalism since the 1500's, say anytime in the 1600's or 1700's?

 

I have my own views, as I am sure everyone here has also, but for clarity, I would like to know, is Larkin the most recent 'teacher' of the past, of this belief?

Tertullian (220AD) was about the last to publish anything of the pre-millennial belief of the early church,

before Origen corrupted the early church beliefs concerning the coming Tribulation and Millennium.

 

Origen, and later Augustine of Hippo, along with the Roman Emperor Constantine formed the heretical

doctrines of the Holy Roman Catholic Church (which are retained to this day, and are increasingly incorporated

into some "Baptist" as well as other Protestant denominations).  In essence, what the trend seems to be among many "Baptists",

is to incorporate 1,500 year old "Catholic" Replacement Theology.  1 Timothy 4:1

 

I know, I know... "my pastor said"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Tertullian (220AD) was about the last to publish anything of the pre-millennial belief of the early church,

before Origen corrupted the early church beliefs concerning the coming Tribulation and Millennium.

 

Origen, and later Augustine of Hippo, along with the Roman Emperor Constantine formed the heretical

doctrines of the Holy Roman Catholic Church (which are retained to this day, and are increasingly incorporated

into some "Baptist" as well as other Protestant denominations).  In essence, what the trend seems to be among many "Baptists",

is to incorporate 1,500 year old "Catholic" Replacement Theology.  1 Timothy 4:1

 

I know, I know... "my pastor said"...

 

You seem to be really stuck on the Holy Roman Catholic Church. You mention it in exactly that manner each time you post. I have never heard anyone call it the Holy Roman Catholic Church except you. Most people just say Catholics, or Roman Catholics. It just makes me wonder if you are one yourself. Which gives me cause to ask; are you a Baptist? I ask this sincerely because some of the things you have posted are not at all baptistic.

 

You also persist in the idea that Baptists are "Protestants."

Perhaps if you had done as much research on Baptists as you have done on the Holy Roman Catholic Church, you would understand why we are not protestants. Baptists are not, and have never been Protestants. Read real Baptist history.

 

I also have one more question. If "the trend seems to be among many "Baptists",

is to incorporate 1,500 year old "Catholic" Replacement Theology." could you please enlighten us as to who and where these Baptists are? To me the word, "many" would indicate more than just a couple or a few.

 

If you have actual experience with this and have heard it yourself, then you should be able to name names. If you are simply parroting what you have heard, shame on you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

It actually doesn't matter what ancient men believed any more than it matters what modern men believe. Just because you can find someone 1200 years ago who believes something doesn't make that thing any more or less right.
There are after all warnings in the Bible about false teachers.
What matters is what the Bible actually says - and the majority of it is pretty simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
 

If you have actual experience with this and have heard it yourself, then you should be able to name names. If you are simply parroting what you have heard, shame on you.

OBviously you have no experience with other "Baptist" boards.  In that case, I really cannot help you.

 

In many cases, many "Baptists" have (in essence) just swapped the Pope for the Bible, because they

have adopted 1,500 year old doctrines which were formed when the Church married the State under Constantine.

 

2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine;

but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • 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

  • 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...