Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Of Snakes and Men

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Of Snakes and Men

    "And these signs will accompany those who believe: by using my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes in their hands, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover." (Mk. 16:17-18).

    The following video depicts churches in the deep south that emphasize Mark 16:17-18. It seems to me that those in this video are well meaning but clearly misguided. They are carrying on a tradition that was undoubtedly ingrained in them since childhood. They believe they are being faithful to their flock, and to their God. I can envision such folk flipping through their bibles seeking the truth and how they may know it, and lo' and behold, they come across Mk. 16:17-18: "Well by golly looky here! Praise God! This is how I'll demonstrate that I truly believe: The word plainly states that these signs will accompany them that believe...amen...the word doesn't say they might pick up snakes, the word doesn't say they can under certain circumstances pick up snakes, nope, the word says that they WILL pick up snakes! Those who believe will pick up snakes! Jimmy-boy go out there and wrustle me up some of them there snakes and we'll properly worship the Lord."

    Look, I'm not saying this to mock those in the video. I am simply re-stating their reality. Some of these people are as simple as simple can be. They are not all there upstairs. How do we respond to an anomaly like this? "They are not doctrinally sound. They are heretics. They are going to suffer in hell, in torment, forever and ever". Really?

    Last edited by Scrawly; 06-24-2018, 12:47 AM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
    "And these signs will accompany those who believe: by using my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes in their hands, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover." (Mk. 16:17-18).

    The following video depicts churches in the deep south that emphasize Mark 16:17-18. It seems to me that those in this video are well meaning but clearly misguided. They are carrying on a tradition that was undoubtedly ingrained in them since childhood. They believe they are being faithful to their flock, and to their God. I can envision such folk flipping through their bibles seeking the truth and how they may know it, and lo' and behold, they come across Mk. 16:17-18: "Well by golly looky here! Praise God! This is how I'll demonstrate that I truly believe: The word plainly states that these signs will accompany them that believe...amen...the word doesn't say they might pick up snakes, the word doesn't say they can under certain circumstances pick up snakes, nope, the word says that they WILL pick up snakes! Those who believe will pick up snakes! Jimmy-boy go out there and wrustle me up some of them there snakes and we'll properly worship the Lord."

    Look, I'm not saying this to mock those in the video. I am simply re-stating their reality. Some of these people are as simple as simple can be. They are not all there upstairs. How do we respond to an anomaly like this? "They are not doctrinally sound. ...
    Right, they are not.


    "... They are heretics. They are going to suffer in hell, in torment, forever and ever". Really?
    They are not necessarily heretics doomed to hell. They may have correct views on "primary" issues. But they are certainly putting themselves in *earthly* danger. People do die from those practices.
    Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

    Beige Federalist.

    Nationalist Christian.

    "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

    Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

    Proud member of the this space left blank community.

    Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

    Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

    Justice for Matthew Perna!

    Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

    Comment


    • #3
      I certainly agree that they are wrong about Mark 16:17-18. From my understanding these were ancient idioms referring to being able to handle enemies (the snakes)[1] and withstand their attacks (the poison). It's a little clearer in the similar statement in Luke 10:19 ("Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you.").

      Still, this does not mean those that take what Mark 16:17-18 in an overly literal manner are in danger of damnation. It's just not an essential part of Christian doctrine. I've always been a supporter of the sentiment expressed in the oft quoted maxim that is usually, although incorrectly, attributed to St. Augustine: In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas ("In essentials, unity; in nonessentials, diversity [some times "liberty" or "charity"]").

      While it does indeed appear to have been a view that Augustine held[2] it seems to actually originate with the Catholic Archbishop of Spalato, Croatia (on the eastern shore of the Adriatic Sea), Marco Antonio Dominis in 1617. Shortly thereafter the Lutheran theologian Rupertus Meldenius (a.k.a. Peter Meiderlin) said essentially the same thing.

      So as long as they stick with the "essentials" they should be okay from a theological perspective.









      1. Note that Jesus referred to opponents as serpents or vipers elsewhere (Matthew 3:7; 12:34; 23:33).

      2. As can be seen by the following remark by Thomas Aquinas in his brilliant unfinished masterpiece, Summa Theologica (1274):
      "In discussing questions of this kind two rules are to be observed, as Augustine teaches. The first is, to hold to the truth of the Scripture without wavering. The second is that since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should adhere to a particular explanation only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it if it be proved with certainty to be false, lest Holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing."
      Last edited by rogue06; 06-24-2018, 07:58 AM.

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #4
        00000000000000ar1a.jpg

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #5
          There's also the fact that the "long ending" of Mark doesn't appear in the earliest copies. One line of thought is that it was added later, based on things the unknown writer knew happened, like the events of Acts 28:3-5.
          Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

          Beige Federalist.

          Nationalist Christian.

          "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

          Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

          Proud member of the this space left blank community.

          Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

          Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

          Justice for Matthew Perna!

          Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
            They are not necessarily heretics doomed to hell. They may have correct views on "primary" issues. But they are certainly putting themselves in *earthly* danger. People do die from those practices.
            What about the maxim that right doctrine leads to right practice? I think we might be skirting far too close to naivete if we are under the impression that they are sound on the primary issues.

            "Well you guys accept the Trinity and elucidate the hypostatic union, correct?"

            "Hey listen here buddy we don't wrangle over no words 2Tim. 2:14. We preach as the bible teach. And the bible plainly teach that those who believe will pick up snakes, cast out demons, etc. We believe in being taught by the spirit, interpreting spiritual things by those who are spiritual 1Cor. 2:12-13. We believe in the demonstration of the power of the spirit so that our faith may not rest on human wisdom but on the power of God 1Cor. 2:4-5. Once again, we don't wrangle over no words around here boy, we operate in the power of the spirit and we pick up them snakes and cast out them demons which the word tells us will be performed by those who believe. So boy, you might want to look elsewhere to have your tea and crumpets and lofty sounding discussions."
            Last edited by Scrawly; 06-24-2018, 10:49 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
              I certainly agree that they are wrong about Mark 16:17-18. From my understanding these were ancient idioms referring to being able to handle enemies (the snakes)[1] and withstand their attacks (the poison). It's a little clearer in the similar statement in Luke 10:19 ("Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you.").

              Still, this does not mean those that take what Mark 16:17-18 in an overly literal manner are in danger of damnation. It's just not an essential part of Christian doctrine. I've always been a supporter of the sentiment expressed in the oft quoted maxim that is usually, although incorrectly, attributed to St. Augustine: In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas ("In essentials, unity; in nonessentials, diversity [some times "liberty" or "charity"]").

              While it does indeed appear to have been a view that Augustine held[2] it seems to actually originate with the Catholic Archbishop of Spalato, Croatia (on the eastern shore of the Adriatic Sea), Marco Antonio Dominis in 1617. Shortly thereafter the Lutheran theologian Rupertus Meldenius (a.k.a. Peter Meiderlin) said essentially the same thing.

              So as long as they stick with the "essentials" they should be okay from a theological perspective.









              1. Note that Jesus referred to opponents as serpents or vipers elsewhere (Matthew 3:7; 12:34; 23:33).

              2. As can be seen by the following remark by Thomas Aquinas in his brilliant unfinished masterpiece, Summa Theologica (1274):
              "In discussing questions of this kind two rules are to be observed, as Augustine teaches. The first is, to hold to the truth of the Scripture without wavering. The second is that since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should adhere to a particular explanation only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it if it be proved with certainty to be false, lest Holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing."
              So would it fair to say that you would be charitable towards those who are dancing with literal snakes due to non-essential theological emphasis and differing hermeneutic? You don't think we ought to be something less than charitable towards those engaging in this behavior? As NR stated, some of these people do die from this. Would it be wise to let something like this continue as these families continue to lose their father and/or husband/wife thereby plummeting the surviving family members into hardship and distress?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
                So would it fair to say that you would be charitable towards those who are dancing with literal snakes due to non-essential theological emphasis and differing hermeneutic? You don't think we ought to be something less than charitable towards those engaging in this behavior? As NR stated, some of these people do die from this. Would it be wise to let something like this continue as these families continue to lose their father and/or husband/wife thereby plummeting the surviving family members into hardship and distress?
                I think they're nuts but that doesn't mean what they do is endangering their salvation.

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
                  What about the maxim that right doctrine leads to right practice? I think we might be skirting far too close to naivete if we are under the impression that they are sound on the primary issues.

                  "Well you guys accept the Trinity and elucidate the hypostatic union, correct?"
                  I would guess that maybe 10% of Christians would even recognize the term, "hypostatic union," about 20% would recognize the term, "elucidate," and maybe one in a thousand could really "elucidate the hypostatic union." I'm not confident that *I* could.
                  Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                  Beige Federalist.

                  Nationalist Christian.

                  "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                  Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                  Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                  Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                  Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                  Justice for Matthew Perna!

                  Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Many of these churches are Oneness Pentacostal so basically heretical to begin with.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                      [ATTACH=CONFIG]28501[/ATTACH]
                      As a young police officer, I found myself in a position to handle a rattler because a child had crawled under a house and a rattlesnake curled up next to her. I gently pulled the snake out, keeping it focused on me instead of the child, and the snake slithered off without harm. I believe God protected both of us in that, but I would never ever bring that snake into a situation of "testing God" just to prove I could.

                      (just before crawling under that house, I instructed dispatch to locate the nearest anti-venom source, just in case -- lack of faith? )
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        As a young police officer, I found myself in a position to handle a rattler because a child had crawled under a house and a rattlesnake curled up next to her. I gently pulled the snake out, keeping it focused on me instead of the child, and the snake slithered off without harm. I believe God protected both of us in that, but I would never ever bring that snake into a situation of "testing God" just to prove I could.

                        (just before crawling under that house, I instructed dispatch to locate the nearest anti-venom source, just in case -- lack of faith? )
                        I think there's a big difference in handling a snake as part of a job and handling one just to prove you can, though.
                        "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                          I think there's a big difference in handling a snake as part of a job and handling one just to prove you can, though.
                          Which was my point.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            My grandpa, that lived out in the country, had these two little spitz dogs. They would team up to kill snakes. I watched them one time with a copperhead. One would stand in front barking at it, just out of range, keeping it busy. The other would sneak up behind it and grab it near the head and start shaking it. The other would then come up and start playing tug of war till it was dead.

                            Comment

                            Related Threads

                            Collapse

                            Topics Statistics Last Post
                            Started by Thoughtful Monk, 03-15-2024, 06:19 PM
                            8 responses
                            38 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post Christianbookworm  
                            Started by KingsGambit, 03-15-2024, 02:12 PM
                            4 responses
                            43 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                            Started by Chaotic Void, 03-08-2024, 07:36 AM
                            10 responses
                            117 views
                            1 like
                            Last Post mikewhitney  
                            Started by Cow Poke, 02-29-2024, 07:55 AM
                            14 responses
                            71 views
                            3 likes
                            Last Post Cow Poke  
                            Started by Cow Poke, 02-28-2024, 11:56 AM
                            13 responses
                            58 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post Cow Poke  
                            Working...
                            X