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.

Saved before the Cross?????


DaveW
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

Excellent point Bro. Wayne. If we are to hold that salvation is the same for the OT as it is in the NT we are compelled to affirm that this includes eternal security.

 Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. 

Surely this verse would apply to the salvation found only in Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I am afraid that to simply thow out everything that David wrote in the way you have is simply ridiculous.

And you are now introducing another subject.

David OBVIOUSLY believed he had eternal security.

The work of the Holy Spirit is another subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On ‎1‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 9:45 AM, Baptist_Bible_Believer said:

My essential struggle with the issue was in Paul's explanation of the Gospel in I Corinthians 15 where it is specific that it is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Yet, in Hebrews it does say that the Gospel was preached unto them as well as unto us. I'm sure that Isaiah 53 was part of that Gospel. Even Paul tells us that the Gospel he preached is "according to the Scriptures" -- so certainly the Gospel is in the Old Testament.

Brother "Baptist Bible Believer,"

You made a similar comment earlier in this thread discussion, as follows:

On ‎1‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 12:58 PM, Baptist_Bible_Believer said:

For years, I believed that folks were saved in the Old Testament by looking forward to the cross, and in the New Testament by looking back at the cross. I had to reject that view, even though that was the view of my professors back at Bible College. Who in the Old Testament even understood what a cross was? Sure, they had Moses' serpent on a pole - but did they visualize the cross that Christ would die on?

At the original time wherein I read that comment, I had a thought to express, but simply did not have the time to post it.  Now I have that time, so here it is --

I believe that your perspective concerning the gospel is, not a greatly, but SLIGHTLY off center.  The Old Testament believers most certainly were required to focus their faith upward and forward.  However, the focus of their faith was NOT required to be upon an EVENT (i.e. the cross).  Rather, the focus of their faith was required to be upon a PERSON, that is -- upon the Person of God's promised Messiah/Christ, and in relation to Him upon any information that God had revealed about Him by that point in time.  In like manner, we New Testament believers are required to focus our faith upward and backward.  However, the focus of our faith is also NOT required to be upon an EVENT (i.e. the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ).  Rather, the focus of our faith is also required to be upon a Person, that is -- upon the Person of God's promised Messiah/Christ, and in relation to Him upon that information which God has revealed about Him.  We are NOT saved through faith in the CROSS of Christ.  Rather, we are saved through faith in the CHRIST of the cross and resurrection.  Even so, although the divinely revealed information about the promised Messiah/Christ has progressively become more detailed over the history of Scriptural revelation, the opportunity to place faith in the PERSON of God's promised Messiah/Christ has EVER been available from the time of Adam and Eve's sin unto the present time.

On ‎1‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 9:45 AM, Baptist_Bible_Believer said:

As mentioned above, I also believed that it is the earnest of the Spirit that assures our eternal salvation . . .

Yes, I also took note of a similar comment in one of your earlier posting, as follows:

On ‎1‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 9:20 PM, Baptist_Bible_Believer said:

I am simply trying to be an honest Bible believer. I see a distinction between OT and NT salvation. The sealing of the Spirit, in my understanding, is what guarantees the security of the believer.

I myself would certainly acknowledge that the sealing of the Holy Spirit is an important aspect for the New Testament believer's eternal security.  However, I would contend that the sealing of the Holy Spirit is NOT the only layer in the foundation of our eternal security, but that it is only one among a number of layers in the foundation of our eternal security.  Furthermore, while I would acknowledge that the Old Testament believer did NOT possess the sealing of the indwelling Holy Spirit, I would contend that they did possess the various OTHER layers in the foundation of their eternal security.

Consider one of those layers as follows:

1.  Does the epistle to the Romans indicate that Old Testament justification and New Testament justification are the same before God?
2.  Does the epistle to the Romans indicate that this justification before God is an eternal, unalterable justification?
3.  Does the epistle to the Romans indicate that those who are justified before God thereby cannot be separated from the love of God by ANY force?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Thank you for that as well. And I did come across Lot again. If he isn't a proof of eternal security, I don't know what is. I certainly agree with you that there are "layers" to faith. Of course, there will be things about our salvation that none will totally understand until we are in the presence of the One that provided it.

A few times I wondered, what difference does our understanding of Old Testament salvation make. It doesn't change anything to those that lived it, they are long in paradise. We are living in a different dispensation. But it is crucial that we treat the whole counsel of God correctly. My thoughts today are that Old Testament saints were just as saved as New Testament saved, they enjoyed the same promise of eternal security, and God is good.

Well, I do have one issue. Saul was given the Holy Spirit, but that Spirit departed from him. His trip to Endor and Samuel's rebuke makes me question his salvation - but that's a different discussion.

I appreciate your kind, and patient, replies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
9 minutes ago, Baptist_Bible_Believer said:

Well, I do have one issue. Saul was given the Holy Spirit, but that Spirit departed from him. His trip to Endor and Samuel's rebuke makes me question his salvation - but that's a different discussion.

I appreciate your kind, and patient, replies.

Brother "Baptist Bible Believer,"

Concerning King Saul, I would contend that his relationship with the Holy Spirit, about which you referenced, was NOT that of His regeneration, but that of His anointing for service (different, but similar, to the filling of the Holy Spirit for the New Testament believer).  I would contend the King David was speaking concerning the same matter for his own life in Psalm 51.  Furthermore, I would contend that such a work of the Holy Spirit could be lost by an Old Testament believer without that Old Testament believer losing his or her eternal security.

Concerning Lot, most certainly I would consider him as an example of eternal security in spite of his personal unfaithfulness.

Concerning your other question:

On ‎1‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 9:45 AM, Baptist_Bible_Believer said:

(btw, I used to live in Waterford, Mi until last year). Do you know Bob Nogalski?

 I do not recall anyone by that name; however --

1.  My circle of relationships is fairly small (although sometimes I find that it is bigger than I had imagined).
2.  Names and I do not get along well in my memory banks, so the problem may just be a memory problem on my part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Members
On ‎1‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 7:08 AM, DaveW said:

I always find it interesting when people try to suggest that salvation was not possible before the cross, or when they at least say that salvation was different before the cross.

I find it interesting because Paul doesn't agree with either of those propositions.

How can I state it so categorically? Oh I don't know...….

2Ti 3:15
(15)  And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
Which Scriptures do you suppose that Timothy knew from his childhood?

Act 17:10-11
(10)  And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.
(11)  These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
Which Scriptures do suppose the Bereans searched as they checked whether the things that Paul preached were so?

 

Well, When Timothy was a child I doubt that they had much in the way of the New Testament written, and the Bereans were checking before at least the vast majority of the NT was written.

Little Timmy knew the Holy Scriptures which are able to make him wise UNTO SALVATION. BEFORE most if not all of the NT was written.

That means that Paul said to Timothy that the OT Scriptures could tell someone how to be saved the NT way - through faith in Jesus Christ...………..

And what about those Bereans - they searched the Scriptures to check on what Paul was preaching. They searched the OT Scriptures to check on what Paul was preaching.

What was Paul preaching?

Act 17:2-3
(2)  And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,
(3)  Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ.
 

Notice that it was his manner to preach this, and what he preached was that Jesus Christ had to suffer and die, and rise again from the dead.

The Bereans believed Paul's preaching because hen they checked out the OT to see if Paul was preaching truth, they found it was true - FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT - and they got saved.

This means that the OT told people how to be saved through Jesus Christ.

Timothy read the Old Testament, believed it, and got saved - apparently when he was a little child.

The Bereans read the Old Testament, believed it, and got saved.

And in Timothy it says that those Scriptures are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ……. pretty plain to me - the OT tells someone how to be saved through Jesus Christ.

And the Bereans were able to confirm in the OT, that salvation is through Jesus Christ, because that is what Paul was preaching.

I dunno…… I am just a dumb bloke...…. but it seems pretty obvious to me.

The OT tells about Jesus Christ, and what He had to do to save men from their sins - people just had to believe it, just as now they just have to believe it.

 

The basis for anyone who has ever been saved by God was the Cross of Christ, as it has always been saved by Grace alone, received thru faith alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I believe in dispensationalism - in the sense that God has seven clear, distinct periods of mankind’s history where man was governed or lived differently (whether past, present, or future). The Greek word for dispensation literally means “house rules/laws”. Salvation has always been by grace through faith in the (coming - OT) Redeemer and the sacrifice He would make - whether understood by type or by actual Gospel presentation. Man’s amount of knowledge has different, the rules whereby he was to be governed have changed (ie. the NT believer lives differently than Israel under the Law, and Adam and Eve in their innocence in the Garden), etc. but believers have always been saved by grace through faith.

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

  • Recent Achievements

  • 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...