And the gene-pool gets a wee bit cleaner...

All religion aside... Play with a deadly snake, you might wind up dead.

It's kind of a no-brainer. It has nothing to do with faith, and everything to do with biology.

Now that Bailey Bud clarified his statement about "mishandled," I would still like to address the subject...

Do the various passages in the Greek scriptures (New Testament) prove or disprove the practice of snake handling, and how had this pastor in particular (and the Holiness movement in general) mishandled these passages?

And Homeagain can jump in anytime.

I was raised Unitarian in total Biblical ignorance as well as respect for those who adhere to its text -- but isn't it the basic gist of the New Testament that a person who is infused with "the Spirit" of Belief can experience miracles? and isn't that the more general, rather than specific, theme in support of the snake handlers' (in this case misguided) optimism?

My "bah humbug" sentiment ---

The point of being "spirit filled" is "deliverance from evil" as well as discerning and demonstrating ("Thy Kingdom come..... Thy will be done") the good and perfect will of the Creator. It's not showmanship, as many of the sects of Christianity have made it.

This isn't fancy or profound theology --- just take a look at "The Lord's Prayer"

ColoradoKathy wrote: I was raised Unitarian in total Biblical ignorance as well as respect for those who adhere to its text -- but isn't it the basic gist of the New Testament that a person who is infused with "the Spirit" of Belief can experience miracles? and isn't that the more general, rather than specific, theme in support of the snake handlers' (in this case misguided) optimism?

In general yes. The "Holy Spirit" can enable believers to perform and/or experience miracles (according to scripture). And for those believers not so "gifted" there are lessor external signs of spirit infusion such as speaking in tongues, prophesying or just an over all zealousness for ones faith.

But snake handlers take their cue from a number of passages in the Greek scriptures, and their favorite scripture for supporting their practice is...

And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. (Mark 16:17-18)

There's one small problem with Mark chapter 16, verses 9-20. These passages are probably later insertions in the text.

Although the vast majority of later Greek manuscripts contain Mark 16:9-20, the Gospel of Mark ends at verse 8 in two of the oldest and most respected manuscripts, the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. As the oldest manuscripts are known to be the most accurate because there were fewer generations of copies from the original autographs (i.e., they are much closer in time to the originals), and the oldest manuscripts do not contain vv. 9-20, we can conclude that these verses were added later by scribes. The King James Version of the Bible, as well as the New King James, contains vv. 9-20 because the King James used medieval manuscripts as the basis of its translation. Since 1611, however, older and more accurate manuscripts have been discovered and they affirm that vv. 9-20 were not in the original Gospel of Mark.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Mark-16-9-20.html

If you want deeper details that go into textual criticism (comparing the writing style, word usage and context) of these passages in Mark, you can find them on the internet.

So that leaves the snake handlers with only two other references.

Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you. (Luke 10:19)

And when they were escaped, then they knew that the island was called Melita. And the barbarous people shewed us no little kindness: for they kindled a fire, and received us every one, because of the present rain, and because of the cold. And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand. And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live. And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm. Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god. Acts 28:1-6

Luke 10:19 is certainly metaphorical and simply implies that the believer will have the ability to fight against non-believers or anything that may get in the way of his/her faith.

And in Acts 28:1-6 Paul was certainly not trying to handle the snake, he was not trying use the snake as some form of worship, and the fact that he was not affected by the snakes venom did not convince the barbarians to adopt Paul's faith. For a matter of fact, they mistook him for some kind of god.

There is no history of any sect of Christians using snakes as part of their worship. Even among the gnostic and other heretical Christian groups (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_heresies ) do we find snake handling as part of their worship.

Snake handling was first introduced in 1910 by George Went Hensley into the Holiness church movement.

Like many new Christians sects that popped from 1840 onward (Millerites, Campellites, Bible Students, Christadelphians and other adventist styled sects), the Holiness movement claimed that Christianity had strayed from the early teachings of the apostles, and they attempted to restore the "original" doctrines and church worship of the 1st century.

This infusion of new sects both brought some interesting and probably historically accurate doctrines back into Christian theology (although still not readily accepted by the larger denominations) and some odd practices that had no real basis in scripture, traditions or actual history.

So if you're coming from a historical and scriptural foundation, there is nothing to recommend this practice. But if you believe that someone like George Went Hensley was inspired, no amount of facts or proof will convince you otherwise.

Until you die of a snake bite, then it's too late.

I just saw this...

Pennington cited a study that said 92 people have died from snakebites during worship. Death has not been a deterrent to discontinuing snake handing in the past and Pennington does not think it will be in the future.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... n/5571403/

And a big whoop and a cheer and a round of applause goes up from Lady Jazzer.

LadyJazzer wrote:
For those obsessed with Obama-Derangement-Syndrome, they can insert Obama into ANY situation, whether it was there to begin with, or not. That's why I keep Rick on IGNORE. He hasn't learned how to wipe the foam from his chin and move on.

As Freud said, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." And sometimes, morons with snakes are just morons with snakes...and their elimination from the gene-pool is their own fault.

No, you keep anyone on ignore that offers up what you dish out every day in every post. You are a hit and run coward with skin thinner than your messiah's. Your tough talk means jack.

3_2_1____________

homeagain wrote: Your obliqueness is ASTOUNDING...... :Thud: ...What does MISHANDLE mean to you???

Would you like to apologize for comments like this that you made in this thread? I believe BB clarified what he was talking about, which I in turn tried to talk about with you.

My understanding of the issue is this.....the "phrasing" within that book was NOT INITIALLY
part of the Bible, it was INSERTED AT A LATER DATE.....(my understanding)....I am NOT an
expert on the Bible, however, I do understand when a text/content of something is REVISED/
or as BB indicated "mishandled".....the issue,from my POV is STILL one of translation....humans
have ATTEMPTED to interpret the Bible for eons and WITHIN THAT ATTEMPT lies the problem....
omissions/revisions/"mishandling" have created something OTHER than the ORIGINAL INTENT....

I STILL remain skeptical of mankind's meager attempt at understanding what the "word of God'
REALLY means......when the COMPLETE and unadulterated "word" is NOT available....so-o-o,
NO, I will not apologize for my thought process/postings on this issue.....WHEN would like to
discuss the OMISSION of the Gnostic Gospels and how THOSE ADDITIONAL books would have
RADICALLY changed the content of the "word of God".....??? :pop