RE: Thoughts on Healing

Mike:

Thanks for the question. Since you've been studying Mark, I'm sure you already know that there is some question as to the authenticity of Mark 16.9-20 since other earlier copies of the gospel do not include those passages. In the discussions on this passage of which I am familiar, most people focus on the snake-handling and poison-drinking statements. I don't think I've heard many arguments disputing the driving out of demons, speaking in tongues or healing through the laying on of hands. As we discussed in class Saturday night, when faith is evident and present, Jesus/God can heal all physical, emotional, relational and spiritual wounds because he has been given supremacy over everything (Col. 1.15-20). I do not believe this passage is a command to the believers to start picking up snakes or drinking poison as a test of their faith, although there are bodies of believers that seemingly base their entire doctrine and worship on those two statements.

Is there a Biblical example of snake handling? Yes. When Moses was uncertain about confronting Pharaoh, God told Moses to throw his staff down and it turned into a snake. When Moses picked it up by the tail, it became a staff again. Aaron and Moses did this in front of Pharaoh, but there was a reason. Exodus 4.5 says: "This," said the LORD, "is so that they may believe that the LORD, the God of their fathers—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob—has appeared to you." (NIV) You see, the attention/glory for handling the serpent was to be turned to God, not the handler. As for the drinking of poison, I cannot recall any specific example, but I do recall a passage during the exodus from Egypt where bitter water was miraculously turned into sweet, drinkable water for the Israelites. Again, this was performed for the glory of God and not for an individual.

Even if we accept these passages as authentic and the Spirit-breathed Word to us, I do not see them as a command to engage in those activities as a test of one's faith which is how they are used most commonly today. I believe the intent by the author is to show that no attempt to squash the spread of the gospel message would work. Remember, that the early Christians were often persecuted. Both the leaders of Judaism who did not accept Christ and the civilian government wanted to put a stop to the spread of Christ's message because it was seen as a threat to their own "power" and "authority". Could it be that attempts may have been made to poison the leaders of this new radical movement? Possibly, but that may just be the conspiracy theorist in me coming out. The real point is this, I think: God's Son Jesus Christ came to bring reconciliation between God and mankind and, for those that live in faith and seek to share that good news, God will do mighty and wonderful things (yes, even supernatural) in their lives as a result of their obedience so that glory will be brought to His name. Does that mean that I should go out and pick up venomous snakes and drink poison as a test of my faith and a test of God's honoring of my faith? I don't believe so. However, if God so chooses to bring glory to His name in that manner when I am faced with that circumstance, then He will do so in His divine judgment and discretion.

That is just my thoughts on it. I guess you have to be careful what you ask for...;o)

John