Mark 16 -- Literal?

July 19, 2008

17

July 19, 2008

Of course.
Really?

Why don't Believers drink poison as a way of witnessing?

It would pretty much be scientific proof of the Bible's truth! This is like the one thing that would get through to atheists.

Why doesn't someone do this?

It would not be witnessing. It would presumptuousness. In such a case, God would not be under any obligation to protect a person who knowingly put themselves in jeopardy to force His Hand. God does not do parlor tricks.

The devil wanted Jesus to throw Himself off a high place to "prove" whether He was or wasn't the Son of God. Jesus response was that we are not test God.

As for the atheists. Their problem is not a lack of evidence. It never has been. In the book of Revelation, we read that Jesus will literally be on the earth ruling the world for 1,000 years from Jerusalem. During that time, the devil be locked away. At the end of the 1,000 years, the devil is released for a short season, and many people who are alive at the end the 1,000 period, will side with the devil against Jesus in one final push to overthrow Jesus' rule.

Even though, they cannot deny the existance of God or the devil, even though Jesus is on the earth ruling in Jerusalem, many will still rebel. Even though they know He is real, they will still reject Jesus. So, it has nothing to do with a lack of evidence, but human pride and the rebeliousness of the human heart. God has provided all of the evidence people need and drinking poison will not convince any one who does not want to be convinced in the first place. No matter what God were to do, they would find a means to explain it away.

July 20, 2008

I think a good example of the "signs following" you speak of can be found in Acts 28:3-6. Link to Acts 28 (KJV)

3 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. 4 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. 5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm. 6 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.

Paul was not doing a parlor trick here. He was not deliberately testing God by putting himself in a dangerous situation, like what Satan tried with Jesus atop the Temple. Paul was displaying a servant's heart by gathering some firewood after having been shipwrecked and he gathered up a snake along with the sticks. The text does not say Paul knew the snake was there, just that it bit him and those watching knew it was a poisonous snake, and yet Paul didn't get sick or die from the bite.

redwing · July 20, 2008

I think a good example of the "signs following" you speak of can be found in Acts 28:3-6. Link to Acts 28 (KJV)

3 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. 4 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. 5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm. 6 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.

Paul was not doing a parlor trick here. He was not deliberately testing God by putting himself in a dangerous situation, like what Satan tried with Jesus atop the Temple. Paul was displaying a servant's heart by gathering some firewood after having been shipwrecked and he gathered up a snake along with the sticks. The text does not say Paul knew the snake was there, just that it bit him and those watching knew it was a poisonous snake, and yet Paul didn't get sick or die from the bite.

Paul kindly received at Melita.

God can make strangers to be friends; friends in distress. Those who are despised for homely manners, are often more friendly than the more polished; and the conduct of heathens, or persons called barbarians, condemns many in civilized nations, professing to be Christians. The people thought that Paul was a murderer, and that the viper was sent by Divine justice, to be the avenger of blood. They knew that there is a God who governs the world, so that things do not come to pass by

chance, no, not the smallest event, but all by Divine direction; and that evil pursues sinners; that there are good works which God will reward, and wicked works which he will punish. Also, that murder is a dreadful crime, one which shall not long go unpunished. But they thought all wicked people were punished in this life. Though some are made examples in this world, to prove that there is a God and a Providence, yet many are left unpunished, to prove that there is a judgment to come. They

also thought all who were remarkably afflicted in this life were wicked people. Divine revelation sets this matter in a true light. Good men often are greatly afflicted in this life, for the trial and increase of their faith and patience. Observe Paul's deliverance from the danger. And thus in the strength of the grace of Christ, believers shake off the temptations of Satan, with holy resolution. When we despise the censures and reproaches of men, and look upon them with holy contempt, having

the testimony of our consciences for us, then, like Paul, we shake off the viper into the fire. It does us no harm, except we are kept by it from our duty. God hereby made Paul remarkable among these people, and so made way for the receiving of the gospel. The Lord raises up friends for his people in every place whither he leads them, and makes them blessings to those in affliction.

commentary by matthew henry.

Leonard · July 20, 2008

Of course.
Really?

Why don't Believers drink poison as a way of witnessing?

It would pretty much be scientific proof of the Bible's truth! This is like the one thing that would get through to atheists.

Why doesn't someone do this?

A word (or two words, for that matter), enters into a wise man more than a hundred lashes......... Oh well, we all know the rest of THAT Scripture.

Smalcald · July 20, 2008

Excellent points shilo.

Also there is this from Luke:

27"He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, 28for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'

29"Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.'

30" 'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'

31"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "

There is no more proof than the Word of God itself, if people do not listen to that Word they will not listen to anything inlcuding people rising from the dead or drinking poisen or handling snakes.

July 20, 2008

There is no more proof than the Word of God itself, if people do not listen to that Word they will not listen to anything inlcuding people rising from the dead or drinking poisen or handling snakes.

Right on!!

ParanoidAndroid · July 20, 2008

Most scholars do not believe that this was a part of the original mss.
It took til the bottom of page 2, but the truth finally came out. The earliest and most reliable versions of the Bible do not contain the final passages of Mark 16 (that is, verses 9-21). It's a later insertion to address the resurrection of Jesus. The author of Mark's gospel was originally content to view Jesus' life and death, until some later scholar got a little over-zealous in wanting all the gospels to agree on the resurrection and added in this passage about the resurrection.

Thanks for the voice of reason, EricH

the author of Mark did speak of the resurrection even without the added passages.

Mark 16:

1When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body. 2Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb 3and they asked each other, "Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?"

4But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. 5As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.

6"Don't be alarmed," he said. "You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7But go, tell his disciples and Peter, 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.' "

Methinks you misunderstand my reasoning for posting this. I'm not disputing the resurrection, just putting Mark in its historical context. Sorry for taking a couple of days to respond to this but i don't get online (on Worthy Boards, at least) every day. You totally misunderstood my reasoning in stating this. Whether there is justification of the resurrection or not is irrelevant to the earliest copies of Mark, which have no reference to handling snakes.

I hope that explains any misunderstandings

Godfearer · August 6, 2008

Of course.
Really?

Why don't Believers drink poison as a way of witnessing?

It would pretty much be scientific proof of the Bible's truth! This is like the one thing that would get through to atheists.

Why doesn't someone do this?

this is no different than what the devil did when Jesus was fasting 40 days. also you are not supposed to tempt God.

Fraught · August 12, 2008

The context counts.
If Satan tries to kill you because you are a believer, you can count on God to be your protection. The required beginning point is that the person must be a believer. Jesus reproached them for their unbelief and hardness of heart. He then told them to, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation."
We, as believers, should expect that signs and wonders will accompany us. If nobody is healed when you walk down the street, please do not try to force God to protect you from snakes and poison. If you are out in the streets and see other signs and wonders around you, please to not be afraid if somebody throws a snake at you nor hesitate to drink the water your enemy offers. If you go out and find your own snake, you need to be careful because it is clear that you are depending on your own ability to catch snakes rather than God's ability to protect you from an attack.

it may be a little late to respond but i just saw this post and had to address this because it has the ring of truth to me but also raises additional questions. assuming the required beginning of being a believer, is a condition of the signs and wonders accompanying us the expecting. in other words, if i don't expect signs and wonders, they won't be there? and secondly, do you expect signs and wonders to accompany you and have they?

i look forward to hearing back from you and from anyone else who would like to address this specifically.