What TV1A Believes (not necessarily in order.)

[Falla39]

Originally Posted by tv1a

You haven't proven or disproven the other viewpoint is an incorrect one. It's not something I would do, but I don't see in scripture they will burn in hell for picking up a snake.

TV1a,

I wasn't trying to prove or disprove. Who said anything about burning

in hell for picking up a snake. My response was really in response to Bro.

Price's post. Paul wasn't having a snake handling service. It accidentally

fastened onto his arm or hand. He shook it off into the fire and felt no harm.

Blessings,

Falla39

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by tv1a

I don't remember a huge blow up. I remember the discussion was... Don't tempt the Lord. I asked what part of picking up the snake is asking God to sin.. Then it was said, tempting means to test God and we were not supposed test God. Then I provided multiple scriptural evidence which God says to test him and prove him. My point is if your are going to take the signs and wonders mentioned in Mark 16 as literal, one should take the picking up snakes as literal. It makes sense.

Gee... based on that logic, why not just jump off a building and ask the Lord to let you bounce harmlessly off the pavement??

I don't see any brave Apostolics doing that!


I think a better way to read that would be that if serpents attack a believer he could handle him safely and not be harmed, because of the Lord's protection. (As with Paul in Acts 28):

3 Paul gathered a pile of brushwood and, as he put it on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself on his hand. 4When the islanders saw the snake hanging from his hand, they said to each other, "This man must be a murderer; for though he escaped from the sea, Justice has not allowed him to live." 5But Paul shook the snake off into the fire and suffered no ill effects.

I don't think Jesus was advocating for saints to go around grabbing snakes as a way of testing their faith, or testing God's power.

[Sept5SavedTeen]

So if we all agree that snake-handlers that have obeyed the Gospel are saved and whatnot, what's the difference between us and tv1a? tv1a and us here on AFF don't handle snakes, but none of us would say that a one-GOD, saved, ect. ect. snake-handling believer would be lost because of snake-handling, so there's really nothing separating us, except for a few interpretations on dress standards. Oh, yeah, and wine, which I agree with tv1a on anyways- and I consider myself conservative!

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[tv1a]

Based on your logic the signs following the believers should fall in your lap. If I were to interpret your logic I would say the healings, speaking in tongues just happen. Either you take the entire passage literally or take the passage as symbolic piece.

I think the best way to read the passage is the way it is written.

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Gee... based on that logic, why not just jump off a building and ask the Lord to let you bounce harmlessly off the pavement??

I don't see any brave Apostolics doing that!




I think a better way to read that would be that if serpents attack a believer he could handle him safely and not be harmed, because of the Lord's protection. (As with Paul in Acts 28):

3 Paul gathered a pile of brushwood and, as he put it on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself on his hand. 4When the islanders saw the snake hanging from his hand, they said to each other, "This man must be a murderer; for though he escaped from the sea, Justice has not allowed him to live." 5But Paul shook the snake off into the fire and suffered no ill effects.

I don't think Jesus was advocating for saints to go around grabbing snakes as a way of testing their faith, or testing God's power.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by tv1a

Clarification Thad. I don't believe a person is going to hell for handling snakes in church. I beleive it is ridiculous to take all of mark 16 literally except for handling snakes. Inconsistant.

Originally Posted by tv1a

You haven't proven or disproven the other viewpoint is an incorrect one. It's not something I would do, but I don't see in scripture they will burn in hell for picking up a snake.

That's a "straw man" argument. No one is saying people will go to hell for picking up a snake. You're the only one even bringing that up .

Originally Posted by tv1a

You haven't proven or disproven the other viewpoint is an incorrect one. It's not something I would do, but I don't see in scripture they will burn in hell for picking up a snake.

Why wouldn't you do it, since you seem to think of it on the same level as the other signs listed in that passage.
you would have no problem speaking in tongues would you? or laying hands on the sick to be healed? Or casting out a devil.

So why all of a sudden when it comes to this.. you declare it's not something you would do? There's a glaring inconsistency there, and I think we both see it.

Originally Posted by tv1a

Based on your logic the signs following the believers should fall in your lap. If I were to interpret your logic I would say the healings, speaking in tongues just happen. Either you take the entire passage literally or take the passage as symbolic piece.

I think the best way to read the passage is the way it is written.

*sigh"
Tv1...No, healings, speaking in tongues etc, happen when appropriate for the situation.

I think based on wisdom that God gives us, and a common sense reading of scripture, we see these signs are done when called for.

Theres a proper time for all things, as even Solomon himself said.

Applying that to Mark 16.
There are times when casting out devils is called for.
There are times when speaking in tongues is appropriate. There are also times when its not.
There is a time to lay hands on the sick, so they can recover.

Tell us.. when is it necessary to drink something deadly just for the sake of doing it? Do we see in scripture anyone ever doing it? No.

When is it necessary for anyone to pick up serpents just to "test God" ? Do we see anyone in scripture doing it like that? No. The only time anyone
handles a serpent is when Paul does it in Acts 28 because it was necessary at in that situation. His life was threatened by the situation so the Lord gave him protection.

(We see the apostles in the book of Acts healing, casting out devils, laying hands, etc all the time. We never see them gather round and put on a show drinking poison or handling snakes in front of everybody to "test" or "prove" God's power. Why do you think that is? Think about that.)


So my question to you is, if God wants us to take up serpents in church just to "prove" him.. by your logic, and your reading of scripture He must want us to drink deadly things too in church. So why is it you dont see "cyanide drinking services" like you have "snake handling services"? Is it perhaps because snake handling is seen by some as more "thrilling"? If the Lord directed these people to have "snake handling services" I cant figure why it seems He never asked them to drink from vats of cyanide-laced Kool-aid too. Wouldn't that be a good way to "test' God too?

As a matter of fact, TV1a, if you think we should just indiscriminately take the verse at face value ,without applying common sense to the situation... lets see you drink from a vat of cyanide, just so you can prove God's power in your life. Then come back and tell us how it went. If we dont hear back from you, I guess we'll just assume you're "absent from the body, but present with the Lord" .

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by tv1a

You haven't proven or disproven the other viewpoint is an incorrect one. It's not something I would do, but I don't see in scripture they will burn in hell for picking up a snake.

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Burn in hell?? Heavens no! I fully believe the feeble minded are taken care of.

While I might be persuaded to go with Stephen's jocular view, I would be concerned about the effect such assent would have on others of a feeble mind.

Thad says this horse has been beaten to death so I don't want to hijack the thread for it- but the example of Jesus standing on a pinnacle of the temple and being enticed by Satan, says, "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God..."

Wouldn't the act of deliberately picking up a poisonous snake, just to "prove something" fall into the same catagory as "tempting the Lord thy God?" And then to encourage others in a church service, especially where children are present, would constitute gross error and sin. Why not purposely drink poison? For that matter, why not throw yourself from a very high elevation?

TRFrance has some good thoughts, above.

Originally Posted by TRFrance

[tv1a]

In earlier coversations on other threads it was suggested snake handlers were going to hell.

My point is the knee jerk reaction of insinuating that sign is any thing less than what it means. Multiple translations suggests the phrase take up serpents means exactly what it says. The NKJV says they will take up serpents. The Message says they will take snakes in their hands. The NIV says they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; The Good News Translation says if they pick up snakes or drink any poison, they will not be harmed; The Bible in Basic English says They will take up snakes. Each suggesting this is not a wait and see, but suggesting a proactive approach.

It has been documented a lot of the snake handlers also drink poisen so onto the next point.

Your point about a time and place for everything applies to the snake handlers. Any research shows snake handling it is not an everyday occurance.

Funny how common sense gets in the way of faith. What those people lack in percieved common sense, they more than make up for it in faith.

Originally Posted by TRFrance

That's a "straw man" argument. No one is saying people will go to hell for picking up a snake. You're the only one even bringing that up .

Why wouldn't you do it, since you seem to think of it on the same level as the other signs listed in that passage.
you would have no problem speaking in tongues would you? or laying hands on the sick to be healed? Or casting out a devil.

So why all of a sudden when it comes to this.. you declare it's not something you would do? There's a glaring inconsistency there, and I think we both see it.




*sigh"
Tv1...No, healings, speaking in tongues etc, happen when appropriate for the situation.

I think based on wisdom that God gives us, and a common sense reading of scripture, we see these signs are done when called for.

Theres a proper time for all things, as even Solomon himself said.

Applying that to Mark 16.
There are times when casting out devils is called for.
There are times when speaking in tongues is appropriate. There are also times when its not.
There is a time to lay hands on the sick, so they can recover.

Tell us.. when is it necessary to drink something deadly just for the sake of doing it? Do we see in scripture anyone ever doing it? No.

When is it necessary for anyone to pick up serpents just to "test God" ? Do we see anyone in scripture doing it like that? No. The only time anyone
handles a serpent is when Paul does it in Acts 28 because it was necessary at in that situation. His life was threatened by the situation so the Lord gave him protection.

(We see the apostles in the book of Acts healing, casting out devils, laying hands, etc all the time. We never see them gather round and put on a show drinking poison or handling snakes in front of everybody to "test" or "prove" God's power. Why do you think that is? Think about that.)


So my question to you is, if God wants us to take up serpents in church just to "prove" him.. by your logic, and your reading of scripture He must want us to drink deadly things too in church. So why is it you dont see "cyanide drinking services" like you have "snake handling services"? Is it perhaps because snake handling is seen by some as more "thrilling"? If the Lord directed these people to have "snake handling services" I cant figure why it seems He never asked them to drink from vats of cyanide-laced Kool-aid too. Wouldn't that be a good way to "test' God too?

As a matter of fact, TV1a, if you think we should just indiscriminately take the verse at face value ,without applying common sense to the situation... lets see you drink from a vat of cyanide, just so you can prove God's power in your life. Then come back and tell us how it went. If we dont hear back from you, I guess we'll just assume you're "absent from the body, but present with the Lord" .

[tv1a]

The devil was the only one told not to tempt the Lord. Scriptures asks multiple times for people to test God, or to prove God so they would know he keeps His Word. I've asked this question before and the silence is deafening. What sin is one expecting God to commit when they pick up a snake.

Originally Posted by pelathais

While I might be persuaded to go with Stephen's jocular view, I would be concerned about the effect such assent would have on others of a feeble mind.

Thad says this horse has been beaten to death so I don't want to hijack the thread for it- but the example of Jesus standing on a pinnacle of the temple and being enticed by Satan, says, "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God..."

Wouldn't the act of deliberately picking up a poisonous snake, just to "prove something" fall into the same catagory as "tempting the Lord thy God?" And then to encourage others in a church service, especially where children are present, would constitute gross error and sin. Why not purposely drink poison? For that matter, why not throw yourself from a very high elevation?

TRFrance has some good thoughts, above.

[tv1a]

I almost forgot in all the hussle why the conservative to legalist posters have all but ignored the list of principles I abide by. Is there not one principle that you have a problem with?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by tv1a

The devil was the only one told not to tempt the Lord. Scriptures asks multiple times for people to test God, or to prove God so they would know he keeps His Word. I've asked this question before and the silence is deafening. What sin is one expecting God to commit when they pick up a snake.

You and I usually agree on most things, or at least it seems to me that we do. However, this is one thing that really stands out as a point of controversy. Innocent people have been badly injured, sickened or killed because they wanted to "prove God." I feel that it is important to speak out against this.

Deuteronomy 6:16

This is the passage that Jesus was quoting when He said, "It is written, thou shalt NOT tempt the Lord thy God." And it has nothing to do with the devil. It's a rule governing the conduct of the people and their God.

If no one has ever explained this to you before then I am saddened. A simple reference Bible makes the point quite clear. The behavior under discussion is dangerous to physical well being and according to the Bible, it is fatal spiritually. I find it hard to believe that "the silence is deafening" or has been deafening on this issue.

Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

See also Exodus 17:1-7; Psalm 95:8; 1 Corinthians 10:9; Hebrews 3:8-9.