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.

Parents turned in for photos


Kitagrl
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,551760,00.html

This is absolutely ridiculous. Everybody's parents have taken some picture of their kid in the bath at some time or other, from the time cameras became standard equipment in the home!!!!

I hope they win their lawsuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

There have been other cases where parents have taken pictures of their babies in a bathtub or getting their diaper changed or some such thing and photo developers have called the police when they developed the film. I don't recall how those cases came out.

In Bible study a young couple has a 6 month old that had to have surgery to correct a circumcision problem last week. They were talking about the follow up to come and how it would be expensive to drive there, miss work and such, just for the doctor to look and see what they can see, that there is no infection and the swelling is gone. The mom jokingly said she could just take a picture and send it to the doctor and someone pointed out that these days that wouldn't be safe because that could be called child porn.

While they go after such innocent things, the American porn industry is allowed to grow and expand so that it now rakes in more dollars and is more pervasive than Hollywood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators

All the more reason to print pics at home!! Pretty soon, if you've got your child sitting on your lap, that'll be suspect.

Whenever we took photos of our son, we made sure nothing private could show. That was 22 years ago, but we knew even then that photos of naked babies in the tub (like what was quite common to be taken when I was little) could and would be used to claim abuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I don't much, but Jerry, its a mom thing. haha.

I know my mom took pix of us in the bathtub, and pretty much everyone else's mom I know did it too!


It never was a mom thing in my house, nor in my parents house, nor in my wife's parents house. I can testify at the age of 62 that I know many godly mothers who feels its ungodly to take any such picture of babies, children, unclothed.

I cannot fathom why any mother or father would want anyone to look at pictures of their children without their clothes and neither can I fathom why they would want to their self.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Oh good grief. When you're a mom and wanting pics of your babies at every stage and in lots of circumstances, that includes bathtub pics. Your baby/toddler is holding a rubber ducky or has soap bubbles on his head or they are just too cute or whatever...out comes the camera. It isn't porn.

The Wal-mart associate and social workers went overboard on this one. Straining at gnats...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lady Administrators

Oh good grief. When you're a mom and wanting pics of your babies at every stage and in lots of circumstances, that includes bathtub pics. Your baby/toddler is holding a rubber ducky or has soap bubbles on his head or they are just too cute or whatever...out comes the camera. It isn't porn.

The Wal-mart associate and social workers went overboard on this one. Straining at gnats...


Yep! I have a really cute pic of my son while he was in the kitchen sink bathing. He has bubbles on his head and his mouth on the tap trying to get a drink! It is so hilarious! Nothing showed, either. :icon_mrgreen:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I think it is a generational thing. No offense to Jerry and his 62 years, and may God grant you many healthy years to serve Him on this earth, but as cameras became less expensive and more prevalent, moms and dads had the ability to chronicle their children's lives at a variety of points. Some people take pics of baby eating cake, baby with mom's high heels on, etc, none of which is anything but a parent wanting to hold on to some sweet memory. People didn't smile in pictures in the old days, either. Pictures were a formal thing, not snapshots of everyday life, which may explain the absence of those kind of action shots in your home life. Things have changed because of technology. I can find nothing wrong (or antiScriptural) with a keeper of the home wanting to keep some cherished memories. If memory serves me, Kitagrl has boys, so a boy in the bathtub covered with bubbles and only shoulders showing is hardly an ungodly breach of modesty, imho. Additionally, she is keeping them in the confines of her home for the time when they are grown and she can look back at what fine young men God allowed her to raise. So, in this case, I rejoice with them that do rejoice! Congrats on having cutie baby pics HC and Kitagrl. As to the real story as posted in the news, the people reporting this evidently are robotically applying some imagined law that is past their comprehension. Hope no one takes a picture of a baptism. They might think you are drowning children! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I actually don't take many bathtub pix. I'm just sticking up for the rights of those who do. haha. I do have a few baby bathtub pix.

I will say I have a few pix of Andrew that might be considered "questionable" but they were ones I took to show the dermatologist re. his terrible hive breakouts back when we were still trying to figure everything out. Luckily they are digital and I only print them out at home. Of course they are shown to the dr so obviously its nothing terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I don't either, but people should be able to have those memories if they wish, without their spirituality being questioned or their parenting or their morality.


Don't worry, stick around here enough and some will question all three of those (after all, it is their God given mission).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I think it is a generational thing. No offense to Jerry and his 62 years, and may God grant you many healthy years to serve Him on this earth, but as cameras became less expensive and more prevalent, moms and dads had the ability to chronicle their children's lives at a variety of points. Some people take pics of baby eating cake, baby with mom's high heels on, etc, none of which is anything but a parent wanting to hold on to some sweet memory. People didn't smile in pictures in the old days, either. Pictures were a formal thing, not snapshots of everyday life, which may explain the absence of those kind of action shots in your home life. Things have changed because of technology. I can find nothing wrong (or antiScriptural) with a keeper of the home wanting to keep some cherished memories. If memory serves me, Kitagrl has boys, so a boy in the bathtub covered with bubbles and only shoulders showing is hardly an ungodly breach of modesty, imho. Additionally, she is keeping them in the confines of her home for the time when they are grown and she can look back at what fine young men God allowed her to raise. So, in this case, I rejoice with them that do rejoice! Congrats on having cutie baby pics HC and Kitagrl. As to the real story as posted in the news, the people reporting this evidently are robotically applying some imagined law that is past their comprehension. Hope no one takes a picture of a baptism. They might think you are drowning children! :lol:


As you said, no offense.

Yes, I fully understand everything has changed, there is not near the good morals nor judgment among Christians as there once was.

As for baptism, I surely want have to worry about that, we don't baptize infants, we leave that to the false teachers.

But to, we might need to think about this verse.

22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
1 Thess 5:22 (KJV)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Jerry, evidently I hurt your feelings. I am sorry. I did not consider that this was a sensitive area for you. Let me clarify, when I used the smiley face, I was joking. (I presumed that you would know that I am IFB and believe only in the baptism of believers and that I was referring to children who had been saved and were following the Lord in believer's baptism. I was using a silly comment as a point of commentary as to how silly I considered the reaction of the photo place people to have been.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

No, I did not get my feeling hurt, no apology needed at all. To be honest, I don't get my feeling hurt on this message board, if I did I would stop posting.

The verse posted is to all of us, whatsoever we do, we need to be sure it does not have the appearance of evil, that goes especially towards taking pictures of our children when they don't have their clothes on.

My humble opinion only on this subject as well aa many others.

Today it seems way to many Christians do not even think about how their actions may appear to someone else, as if they're saying, I'm going to do what I want to do, when I want to, and I don't care how others will view it. Yet the Holy Scriptures say, "Abstain from all appearance of evil."

Hope you have a wonderful weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

All the more reason to print pics at home!! Pretty soon, if you've got your child sitting on your lap, that'll be suspect.



Actually, I remember reading on worldnetdaily about men who are afraid to show affection to their children because of the pedophile witchhunt going on these days fueled by the media and internet. One man was even accused of molestation when his daughter was sitting on his lap. Somebody called the cops on him. Of course the accusers identity was never revealed.

Attorney Gibbs of CLA put out a book for dad's on how to avoid being falsely accused of child molestation or abuse.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Tools for the Ministry

No, I did not get my feeling hurt, no apology needed at all. To be honest, I don't get my feeling hurt on this message board, if I did I would stop posting.

The verse posted is to all of us, whatsoever we do, we need to be sure it does not have the appearance of evil, that goes especially towards taking pictures of our children when they don't have their clothes on.

My humble opinion only on this subject as well aa many others.

Today it seems way to many Christians do not even think about how their actions may appear to someone else, as if they're saying, I'm going to do what I want to do, when I want to, and I don't care how others will view it. Yet the Holy Scriptures say, "Abstain from all appearance of evil."

Hope you have a wonderful weekend.


Jerry,

Lets put this in context with the verses around it,
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
1Th 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
1Th 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Now can your prove the appearance of evil related to seeing your infant child naked during bathing? I'd certainly like to see the scripture to back that up.

C
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   2 Members, 1 Anonymous, 6 Guests (See full list)

  • 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...