Because communion is only commanded in the 1611, haymen?
Wow, idk what else to say.
Same here, PG.
I think the plaque on the altar is pretty sacrilegious, but there’s no way anyone could convince those church members of that.
To me, this says that their belief has now become idolatry.
What incredible irony that the Bible isn’t named here, only the king who authorized its translation. Had these church members lived at the time of King James, I doubt they would have been big fans of the man. This is the time period when devout Puritans were LEAVING England because of the persecution they felt and their inability to worship God freely. WHY would American Christians honor this king this way, unless they were utterly ignorant of history? And if you’re ignorant, why memorialize it on a plaque?
I have never seen a devout KJV Onlyist persuaded out of his stance. I know of KJVO’s who changed their ways but it was because their persuasion in the belief wasn’t very strong to begin with; it was something they grew up on and were taught.
Seriously, attending a Fundy U, only the crazy preacher boy type students would be KJVO’s that had some type of ‘substance’ behind their stance. And it’s really sad when the entire student body condemns any other version off the fact that it isn’t KJV, despite never reading the ESV, NKJV, or NASB, which are great translations.
I disagree with the idea that KJVO can’t be swayed. I was KJV only. I was raised with it from 3rd grade through college. I was thoroughly convinced. What swayed me in the other direction wasn’t the arguments. It was seeing fruitful, growing Christians who used other versions. It was seeing healthy churches who used the other versions. It was the fruit that convinced me that the other versions were fine. No argument could have done that.
I love that, Rebel: it wasn’t arguments but living examples that convinced you.
Same with me, Rebel. And the other side of the coin as well…KJVOs who had the perfect word and were more nutty and corrupt on average than the people I knew who used other translations. One of the arguments was that you couldn’t get clean (sanctified properly) if you didn’t have a clean water source, but I saw that the choice of a version made no difference.
Yes, fundies are generally ignorant of history, if they weren’t ingorant they wouldn’t be fundies.
Allow me to add my corollary: most Fundamentalists only know and quote the portions of history that either they agree with, or that support whatever point they wish to make.
So they prooftext history, too?
They only prooftext the history they have rewritten…
Ambrose Bierce once stated, “God alone knows the future, but only a historian can alter the past.”
He obviously had never met a Fundy mog.
PW – very well said (as usual). I have made the point many times that this is just another example of fundy duplicity…they claim that they (fundies) did not evolve out of the Reformation and would never associate with “protestants”, but they sure do like the Reformation bible (much moreso than Reformed people). And to top it off, if any of the KJV translators were alive today, be certain that the resident MOG would be denouncing them as heretics from the pulpit.
To be fair, I doubt most fundies would be very fond of actual Puritans, either.
I’ve always thought James would be a pretty big hit on the fundy circuit. Viewed women with either suspicion or outright disdain, wrote at length about God’s appointment of himself as the ultimate authority, enjoyed a good witch hunt. . .sounds right to me.
“Remember, Remember the 5th of November…” yeah, Jimmy was sooo well loved by all of his subjects.
To be fair, the people trying to blow him up were Catholics, so I don’t think the average fundy would mind too much about the subsequent hanging, drawing and quartering.
5th Nov – bonfire night – is not about celebrating an attempt on the king’s life, but that the attempt failed. On the 5th we level-headed peace-minded Brits celebrate the failure, capture and execution of those “heretic” catholics who tried to kill God’s lawful anointed. It’s Guido Fawkes we put on the bonfire, not king jimmy. Mind you, he did raise his son to be a “God-appointed” despot who led his country into the most bloody civil war it has ever experienced, so in many ways he was a real father to his people.
I found the answer!
If the King James is really perfect, how can so many preachers and scholars be wrong about it?
The majority is ALWAYS wrong.
I found this on http://samgipp.com/answerbook/?page=32.htm
This is, of course, by definition “Bull Gipp.”
But the theory that “the majority is always wrong” is a fascinating one. That little word “always” can be dangerous.
The majority of people are against feeding live children into wood chipping machines.
The majority would rather eat peas and carrots than horse manure.
The majority avoids drinking concentrated hydrochloric acid.
The majority disapproves of setting off bombs in the midst of crowds of sports spectators.
All wrong, according to Sam Gipp’s theorum.
You could continue on this road indefinitely.
The majority would rather not contract the Ebola virus.
Etc., etc., etc.
The sword is probably supposed to be a reference to the Bible being a two-edged sword.
However, it looks pretty threatening, especially when combined with the name of an actual monarch who COULD literally have you put to death.
The more I think about this pic, the more disturbed I am simply by the imagery of the sword on the communion table in which we remember the Lord’s death. He could have called ten thousand angels, but He didn’t even allow Peter to defend Him. He didn’t fight back; He went to death meekly as a lamb, in love.
The sword seems to be a symbol of defiance and belligerence not gratitude and thankfulness as we take communion.
or…. the image of the Sword references Luke 22
35 And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing.
36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.
38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.
The fundies see this as a call to arms…
but the passage demonstrates that it was not a call to arms against the government or spiritual authorities… rather more for defense against evil doers, criminals, robbers and such. Unfortunately the religious patriot types elevate individual freedom above even a biblical command to submit to the powers God has established to rule over us.
I’m afraid that American Christians are in for a rude awakening when they find themselves being ruled by a Sovereign King. That pesky “submit ye” is going to be a hard pill to swallow. (and yes, I am included in that group who will have to learn to bow the heart as well as the knee)
or it could just be a reminder to keep up their SOTL subscription
Considering that the only use they had of the swords was condemned by Christ, I see his telling them to take the swords as an object lesson.
They took the swords. The damage Peter did with the sword Jesus summarily fixed — and went to the cross anyway. He rebuked the use of the swords, for those who determine to live by them will die by them.
And when Jesus appeared before Pilate, He told him that His Kingdom was not of this world. If it were, His servants would fight. But that they did not fight (at His own command) was proof that Christ’s Kingdom was not worldly nor political.
A very powerful object lesson. After this, those who are martyred for Christ’s name are praised and promised rewards in heaven. But nowhere is there a call for Christians to arm themselves. Nowhere. Not even against thieves or robbers. Not against governments, nor against spiritual wickedness.
“For the weapons of our warfare are not human weapons, but are made powerful by God for tearing down strongholds. We tear down arguments and every arrogant obstackle that is raised up against the knowledge of God, and we take every thought captive to make it obey Christ.” 2 Corinthians 10:4-5.
Eph 6: “and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:”
Every good Fundy knows that the KJV is The Word of God.
I love Lurch!!!!
Always thought it was a reference to Hebrews 4:12, dividing asunder, etc.
I believe the sword is a reference to the times in which the KJV was written. It does look like a prop from the Renaissance Festival
If the KJV were written in 1911, there would be an engraving of a Colt .45
Either way, fundies do love their weapons.
Not to split hairs, but I think you mean the Model 1911 .45 auto. The Colt 45 is a revolver from the 1800’s.
Good catch Uncle. I’m glad I didn’t have to point that out
.45 ACP stands for Automatic Colt Pistol, doesn’t it?
Yes. And 45 LC refers to 45 Long Colt.
And 45rpm is a 7 inch single with a “B” side.
to wander into digression………………
45 GAP is 45 Glock Automatic Pistol. Like the ACP it is rimless nd designed for semi-autos (the LC is a rimmed revolver round). GAP is high pressure, and has a higher muzzle velocity than ACP.
Ooooh, gun porn… ^^^^
Lol, Kreine…you just made me choke on my coffee
The sword is just a reference to the Bible, which is called “the sword of the Spirit”.
I saw this is a reference to the Bible, not to King James (who just agreed with the idea). The “1611” is significant because of the Bible; I don’t think it refers to anything regarding King James’s reign.
We know that, Guilt Ridden, but we’re trying to look at it with the eyes of someone not raised in the church.
Forget what you know and just imagine coming into that church. Up at the front is a table that says, “This do in remembrance of me” and then a shield with a fierce sword emblazoned on it and the words King James and a date.
It doesn’t convey what they think it does.
Ah, yes, didn’t think about the effect on visitors who don’t know the Bible…
In that case, it would look like King James was some kind of great warrior who in 1911 started the communion ceremony.
Yes, 1611… George strikes again!
Adolf Hitler wanted to set up a “Reich Church”, which would feature his bloody ideas superimposed on the Bible, one major part of this was to have a sword lying on the alter. Hmmm…
I meant “altar” but the other suits all the changing and nitpicking Fundies love to force on their victi-er converts.
Fascinating. I remember reading about that, Panda, but had forgotten.
Funny how raising my collar (back when I was a teenage) was somehow damaging to my Christian testimony over associations, but putting a sword on the altar in church is OK.
I always thought those who taught me not to do something because it was associated with something evil were doing so out of a scrupulous desire to be holy. I’ve finally realized that it was just a way to control people.
They had better have the Apocrypha in that Bible, then. That’s all I’m saying. Want to be authentic? Do it right!
Yep, as I like to remind them, they are not even using a 1611 edition. If they were, it would contain the apocrypha, which they despise so terribly.
Wasn’t King James homosexual?
King James did like some sword play
King James: “I see your Schwartz is a big as mine”
May the Schwartz be with you!
Eh. Today he’d probably be called bi-sexual. He was married to a Danish princess, Anne, with whom he had three sons and five daughters, though only three of the children survived infancy–Henry, Elizabeth, and Charles. He was also reported to have a number of male “favorites,” with whom he likely had sexual relationships.
This flies in the face of the false Fundy belief that God can’t use a person unless they are following all the Fundy rules. They think God used King James to help bring about the 1611, so they refuse to believe the accounts of him having sexual relations with men. Of course, we are also told not to trust the NIV because allegedly there was a lesbian on a committee. They have a huge interest in denying King James bi- sexuality.
BTW, Pharoah was used by God to accomplish His will even though he was defiant. God can use anybody.
I’m not so sure. He had a duty to the state to provide children; the historical consensus seems to be that he “did his duty”, but not that he enjoyed it. He enjoyed his courtiers. So it is possible he was just plain old gay, but a man of his times too.
I think this is testimony to the extreme disregard for the Lord’s Supper in Baptist circles. I doubt they really thought about it much– probably didn’t even occur to them that it was a communion table, it was just a way of putting the KJB logo front and center.
A more liturgical church, especially a Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox church, would never dream of putting anything like that on their altar.
It is no different than worshiping a golden calf. Disregard for God is an easy thing to accomplish when the one you truly fear is the preacher.
Exactly so, EC. The low regard may be masked in part because of the way a typical Baptist church administers Communion – in general, the only thing the table does is hold the elements until Communion is administered, generally by deacons passing grape juice and wine down each pew. Sigh. Nonetheless, it’s dismaying to see what is clearly the centerpiece of the sanctuary conflating remembering the Lord with the KJV,
I was well into my early 30’s before I realized the original purpose of that table. I’d seen it in many different kinds of churches, all fundagelical or country churches, but don’t know if I ever saw it used during communion.
Stupid is as stupid does…
Stupid does as stupid is…
S T U P I D and ignorant of their stupidity!
Exhausting to watch!
I dare anyone to post this poem about King James in a fundie church or school:
THE child of Mary Queen of Scots,
A shifty mother’s shiftless son,
Bred up among intrigues and plots,
Learnèd in all things, wise in none.
Ungainly, babbling, wasteful, weak,
Shrewd, clever, cowardly, pedantic,
The sight of steel would blanch his cheek,
The smell of baccy drive him frantic.
He was the author of his line–
He wrote that witches should be burnt;
He wrote that monarchs were divine,
And left a son who–proved they weren’t!
The author is that famous left-wing liberal atheist, Rudyard Kipling.
Outside the Darrell’s subject, but the Wiki article on Kipling makes no reference to his atheism. Indeed, it records how he moved the proposition that “Known unto God” be etched on the graves of unknown servicemen suggests otherwise. The same article portrays him as Imperial.I came across him through his very pro British “Ulster 1912″ poem. Anyway, very much outside the matter above on how a Scottish King ended up with his name enscribed on a Communion table.
Weecalvin: You may want to take your sarcasm detector to the shop. I think it’s broken.
“The smell of baccy drive him frantic.”
There, see, he’s against smoking! He’s still One Of Us!
Ah, and so was Adolf Hitler, who wanted to put cancer warnings on cigarette boxes 20 years before the surgeon general. So put that in your pipe and smoke it!
The Encylopedia Americana describes the good King thusly:
“He disdained women and fawned unconscionably on his favorite men”
“Elizabeth was our king; now James is our queen.”
I can’t remember the precise Latin phrase they used in 1611 but that’s the translation.
I thought maybe you had been to London and taken a picture of King James coffin.
So they worship the 1611 KJV, while reading from the 20th century “updated” KJV?
¶ For God so loued þe world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life. 1611 KJV
Looks like the phonetic spelling for just about every sermon I have ever heard shouted from behind, beside, and “on top of” the sacred desk , Heymen?!
The church I attend is Fundy-lite. Many of the folks there are KJV because they always have been. The pastor is, but it hasn’t ever been an issue between us. In the class I teach, we start with the King James, but usually use the NASB, ESV, NIV, Amplified, and often the NKJV. I would really like to make and put up a poster with KJV 1769 on it just to see how long until someone outside the class sees and comments.
That just might be my swan song there. Who knows?
If someone had never been in a church, and read the writing, they might think that they were doing that in honor OF King James. There’s not really a way to tell if you haven’t been taught. Oops.
Either Jesus is our King, or James I is.
It can’t be both.
It does show total disregard for Holy Communion. It was after I became a United Methodist that I really appreciated the sacrament. Christ is present in the sacrament, in a spiritual way. I love the ritual we use when we have communion, part of the liturgy is proclaiming the mystery of faith – Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ is coming again. I also love the fact that we go forward to the altar, not passively sit there. A few weeks ago I got to help serve communion. I was holding the chalice. An older lady with a visual impairment couldn’t see the chalice to dip her bread. I reached out and guided her hand. Then a homeless man, with dirty fingers and clothes came forward. I held the chalice and said “the blood of Christ shed for you”. As he was dipping the bread he looked me in the eyes and said , “God bless you”. I almost stated to cry.
The sacrament is about love and peace – not swords!
This is a cool and laid-back series about Methodist faith and practice, with nods to the practice of other denominations. Thanks for showing it to us!
“Whichever way your congregation shares the bread and the cup, the motiviation’s always the same. To give thanks, for all that God has done – and will do for us in Christ – including his death, resurrection, and coming again. And we do it, as he said, ‘in remembrance of Me’. In this way, Christ is especially present.”
I’m trying to think back to what I would have answered when I was a Fundamentalist, and I’m pretty sure I can honestly say that while was in FundyStan I would have NEVER identified the Lord’s Supper as primarily a time of thanks-giving. I don’t think it would have even broken the top 10 reasons/ideas around communion.
My dear Chuck, I wish I had understood it then as you do now. Praise God I understand it now, however!
In liturgical churches. after we confess our sins, we begin the liturgy with the Great Thanksgiving.
Minister: The Lord be with you.
People: And also with you.
Minister: Lift up your hearts.
People: We lift them up to the Lord.
Minister: Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.
People: It is right to give our thanks and praise.
It is right, and a good and joyful thing,
always and everywhere to give thanks to you,
Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth.
You formed us in you image and breathed into us the breath of life.
When we turned away, and our love failed, your love remained steadfast.
You delivered us from captivity, made covenant to be our sovereign God,
and spoke to us through your prophets.
And so, with your people on earth and all the company of heaven,
we praise your name and join their unending hymn:
Holy, holy, holy Lord, God of power and might,
heaven and earth are full of your glory,
Hosanna in the highest.
Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.
Hosanna in the highest.
There is even a scriptural basis for this prayer.
1 Timothy 4:4-5 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, provided it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by God’s word and by prayer.
In the West, I guess… in the East it goes like this:
Deacon: Let us be attentive. Having partaken of the divine, holy, pure, immortal, heavenly, life giving, and awesome Mysteries of Christ, let us worthily give thanks to the Lord.
People: Lord, have mercy.
Deacon: Help us, save us, have mercy upon us, and protect us, O God, by Your grace.
Deacon: Having prayed for a perfect, holy, peaceful, and sinless day, let us commit ourselves and one another, and our whole life to Christ our God.
People: To You, O Lord.
Priest (in a low voice): We thank You, Lord, our God, for the communion of Your holy, most pure, immortal, and heavenly Mysteries which You have granted us for the benefit, sanctification, and healing of our souls and bodies. Grant, Master of all, that the communion of the holy Body and Blood of Your Christ may become for us faith unashamed, love unfeigned, fulness of wisdom, healing of soul and body, repelling of every hostile adversary, observance of Your commandments, and an acceptable defense at the dread judgment seat of Your Christ.
Priest: For You are our sanctification and to You we give glory, to the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and forever and to the ages of ages.
We Kat-o-licks don’t say “And also with you” anymore. We have reverted to “And with your spirit” (from “Et cum spiritu tuo”). Our new translation of the Novus Ordo liturgy is much closer to the original Latin and much more reverential than the banal “old translation.” Prettier, too.
If you ask me…
The table looks like professional church “furniture” but the shield was probably fashioned by the preacher’s kid in his wood working shop, choosing one of the topics of the many repetitive sermons. His daddy preacher just had to say yes or couldn’t say no to his son’s gift, especially under wifey’s scrutiny and therefore they have given place to foremost, a gift and have secondarily accepted the message without true consideration…
But… I could be so monumentally wrong! Just a thought.
A charming thought on one hand. OTOH, it’s still squickily inappropriate. Because it is the Communion table.
I totally agree with you but in my experiences in the Fundamental churches, the preacher and his family run the place like its their own house… nepotism in all sorts of ways always sneaks in where Fundamentalists are concerned.
While they have their own children running amuck in the church because of the familiarity of the building, the reverence of ceremonies such as communion is often not held in proper esteem and in this case it has gone even further.
I have never seen any sort of decor or propaganda on a communion table and hope I never do. To me it’s disrespectful! Gosh, kinda reminds me of an advertisement.
This is a mistake on the preacher’s behalf.
King James was an English (and most likely homosexual) King.
We object to the mis-appropriation of him, and the work he commissioned by Americans. You chaps decided you didn’t like the crown, so stop trying to claim it back.
Up until I was about 21, I was always terrified to take communion! Whenever we had it (which, in the Baptist tradition, was few and far between) we were presented with a full sermon on the importance of being pure and spotless before you took it. We were always given “illustrations” (fictitious, no doubt) about people who took communion unworthy,and then left the church only to get hit by a car and killed. Or run over by a train, etc. I remember being terrified as a child that I would forget to confess some little sin, and feeling sick with worry for the next week that God was gonna strike me dead!!
I was so confused & scared by the conflicting messages from the pulpit when I was a child. “God loves you” vs “God is a God of vengeance.” “God seeks and saves the sinner & outcast” vs “You must be pure to come before God!”
It’s almost as if Fundy God is playing “good cop/bad cop” all the time.
Well put. The fundy god does tend toward schizophrenia.
Actually, “schizophrenia” means “shattered mind”. It doesn’t mean they flip-flop from one extreme to the other. That behavior is probably actually much more consistent with borderline personality disorder.
I think you are right. In many ways, religious fundamentalism (regardless of the religion) resembles Borderline Personality Disorder on a corporate level.
Too angry to think of anything to say.
How dare they.
HOW DARE THEY.
I think it’s safe to say that some fundy preachers wouldn’t know the edge of daring if they fell over it – and they do.
Shameless blog promotion. But it’s honestly to save time typing everything again that I wrote then.
Honestly, how could anyone ever take Communion if you had to be pure and without sin to do it?
… And if you were “spotless,” you wouldn’t need Communion.
Well, I went to visit the home church last week and they had the obligatory American flag sitting on the Table.
They should have had the Union of the Crowns Royal Badge, not the Stars and Stripes.
King James I was, after all, the first King of the the union of the English and Scottish crowns.
I think the table should be turned around except for the four times a year most Fundys partake of communion. It is more of an offering plate table in most churches, which makes the offering the memorial more so than communion.
“THIS DO IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME”
George posted before I was finished typing. It was supposed to say:
“THIS DO IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME”–pass the plate, boys!
Four times a year? FOUR TIMES A YEAR?!
I don’t want to turn this into a mediocre rip-off of Monty Python’s Four Yorkshiremen, but at my old church, it was more like every 3-4 YEARS. Believe me, I WISH it had been four times a year.
To the shamefully misguided people who would put something like that on the communion altar:
Please be honest and admit that you worship a book and not the God of all Creation.
My condolences for your choice.
Not at all surprised that the Communion Table would be sullied by such sophomoric affections of the KJV. Especially since one time just before communion, the demented, deranged, lunatic Bap reminded us, “There is no siginifcance in these elements of which we are about to take. They’ll just go into your belly, and come out as waste like the rest of your food in a day or so…” Nice way to describe remember our Lord! So that a church would elevate the King James who funded the 1611 translation is in keeping with the (shallow) tradition of the IFB ignoramuses. I was not aware of James’ sexual preferences, but the anti-homo IFB Baps have a major conundrum: they vilify gays, but elevate the person behind the translation. This is one of those topics that makes you go “Hmmm…”
Oh, they just say accusations of his homosexuality are just people trying to discredit the Bible.
Could it just be … that there are two declarations here. One that the time of communion is a remembrance and not sacrament and that they hold to a King James Version stance? It’s a TABLE, it’s not sacred, the observance of the death burial and resurrection of Christ is.
Al, the main problem is their KJV stance. It says 1611 when they don’t even have enough sense to know that the KJV they’re using is not a 1611 edition. Most of them have never seen or read a 1611 edition. They are using the 1769 Blayney edition, or later. So, for starters, they need to remove the “1611.” And they need to stop worshiping a version of the Bible. God hasn’t declared English a sacred language and He didn’t give His word in English, yet many KJO teachers today claim the KJV Bible and the English it is written in are the only versions. Falsehood. God doesn’t like false teaching.
These KJO fundies have no remote idea that the KJV they’re using is NOT the 1611. It’s the 1769 Blayney edition, or later. How simple can people be?
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.