I know that many of you are having a lot of enjoyment taking pop shots at one another, and some even some shots at these folks who we have more in commone with than differences in the article.... but if I may interrupt the nastiness for a moment to ask some questions about the Scriptures at the heart of the practice here.
The "signs following" beleivers consider
Mark 16:16-18 to be commands. They believe they are fulfilling a mandate from Jesus.
But consider this for a minute. What if Jesus' words here were being not a mandate, but actually prophetic. That he was saying in more literal terms, there will be true believers of me that will do various things in their expression of their relationship with me. And yes, even some of them will take up serpents....etc.
What if Jesus is actually foretelling, not mandating, or even saying it's something that should be done, but that He's stating it's something that will be done in His name?
Could it be? And if that were the appropriate approach to this Scripture, would that change your thinking of this practice?
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 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.
Threaded Mode
