By Rev Clarence Lee (2020)

Rev Clarence Lee has been a TRAC pastor since 2010, and is currently pastoring at Rangsit Methodist Church in Thailand, under the Methodist Missions Society. 

The views expressed in this article are personal and may not reflect the official position of The Methodist Church in Singapore.

Summary

Some churches in the US handle snakes in their Sunday Services, and claim that it should be part and parcel of our Christian faith. They back this practice up with Scripture, and have now become better-known in the world, through the help of modern media. Yet, is this a practice that we Christians should really adhere to? Is there a solid scriptural basis for this practice? May the following article help us find a clear answer.

Should all disciples handle poisonous snakes?

     When I first came across this question, my thoughts were not how to answer it, but: “Why the question?” For us who live in Singapore, or Asia in general, we may be far removed from the idea that snake-handling should have any association with our Christian faith. However, this is not the case if you live in the Appalachian region of the United States. 1Snake-handling had been a practice in some churches there since the early 20th Century and is still prevalent today 2And since American Christianity still has a strong influence upon us, who are part of the English-speaking world, there is good reason to discuss this topic.

Some researchers argue that the beginnings of snake-handling rituals in churches could not be attributed to any one person, and possibly arose independently on multiple occasions.3But historians agree that the one who popularised this practice throughout southeast United States was a pastor of 

_______________________________________________
From the Southern tier of New York to northern Alabama and Georgia; 
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachia
2  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_handling_in_religion
 Ibid. 

the Church of God Holiness Movement called George Went Hensley (1880-1955), who travelled the region to promote it.4

Hensley required snake handling as evidence of salvation. He argued that if believers really have the Holy Spirit within them, they should be able to handle rattlesnakes and any number of other venomous snakes. They should also be able to drink poison and suffer no harm whatsoever. 5The basis for his teaching comes from Mark 16:17-18, which says:

  17And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Verse 18 here seems to suggest that all disciples should be able to handle poisonous snakes, and that no harm should come upon them as a result. Is this true? To help us arrive at an answer, let us explore some questions on these verses and the biblical evidence in general.

First, how reliable are these verses?

  Many of us would have a line in parentheses at the end of Mark 16:8 in our Bibles that tells us: some of the earliest manuscripts do not include Mark 16:9-20. What does this mean? In brief, the New Testament is not derived from “autograph copies” – i.e. the original written document by the biblical author (Mark in our case) – since they are lost to us. Rather, the New Testament is put together by manuscripts – i.e. handwritten copies of the original – of which more than 5000 exist, and they show remarkable agreement in general. These manuscripts are dated from about AD 135 (or earlier) to AD 1200 at the latest.Naturally, many would assume that the earlier the date of the manuscript, the more reliable it would be on the accuracy of its account, since it is closer to the

_______________________________________________
Ibid.
Ibid.
Edwards, J. R., The Gospel according to Mark, (Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: Eerdmans; Apollos, 2002), p. 497.

time of the actual events. Yet we are told in our Bibles that the earliest manuscripts we have do not include verses 9-20!

New Testament scholar, James R. Edwards, tell us: “The two oldest and most important manuscripts of the Bible, codex Vaticanus (B) and codex Sinaiticus (א), omit 16:9–20, as do several early translations or versions, including the Old Latin, the Sinaitic Syriac manuscript, about one hundred Armenian manuscripts, and the two oldest Georgian manuscripts.”7Even early church fathers like Clement of Alexandria and Origen do not show any awareness of the existence of the longer ending, and Eusebius and Jerome attest that verses 9–20 were absent from the majority of Greek copies of Mark known to them.8

Moreover, the non-sequitur nature of its contents, coupled with its obvious knowledge of subject matters in the other three Gospels9(which were dated later than Mark), all cause scholars to conclude that this “longer ending” of Mark must have been inserted later on (perhaps by the early church) to smoothen out what seems to them an inadequate ending or an ending that was lost10Nevertheless, this does not necessarily render its contents inauthentic. We just need to know that it was most probably not written by Mark himself.

Second, do we really have an instruction here to pick up snakes?

The verb “will pick up” in verse 18 (ἀροῦσιν) is an indicative verb, not an imperative one. And it is the same verb that occurs in Matthew 4:6 and Luke 4:11, when the devil tempted Jesus to throw himself off the highest point in the temple. The devil persuaded him that, as the Scriptures promised, God will command his angels to “lift you up” (ἀροῦσιν). This suggests a “lifting/picking up” that may come as a response to a previous action, rather than an instruction to actively go and do something.

_______________________________________________
Ibid.
Ibid.
For instance, John 20:1–8 (the story of Mary Magdalene), Luke 24:13–35 (the story of the Emmaus road), and Matthew 28:18–20 (the great commission).
10Cole, R. A., Mark: An Introduction and Commentary - Vol. 2, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1989), p. 342.

Verse 17 supports this drift by clearly saying: “And these signs will accompany those who believe…” We can therefore safely say that the actions, which follow this line, are actions that come by way of accompaniment, rather than a mode of conduct to be initiated.

As such, what initial circumstances could the author(s) of this verse possibly be thinking of, when they write about Christians having to pick up snakes in response, and not being harmed in the process? Scholars believe that it is most probably the incident in Acts 28, where Paul and other prisoners were ashore on the island of Malta, following a shipwreck. The islanders treated them with unusual kindness and built a fire to keep them warm. A viper, however, emerged from the firewood and fastened itself on Paul’s hand, causing the islanders to think Paul must be so evil he could not escape death, even after having escaped the shipwreck. But when they saw that Paul suffered no ill-effects whatsoever, they then concluded that he must be a god, which then probably facilitated his witness somewhat.

It is very likely that the author (whoever he or she was) had this incident in mind, since we know now that these verses appear in an ending that was later included to the Gospel of Mark. And if this was indeed the author’s reference, we can once again confirm that the actions in verses 17-18 are more of responses to situations that occur, rather than initiatives to prove a position, or a feature to be made a regular in the life of the church.

Third, what is the biblical stance towards snakes in general?

There are at least 53 verses in the Bible that refer to snakes or the like.11Most of these verses speak of snakes in a negative light. For example, they are described as dangerous to both animals and humans12,  as poisonous13,  and

_______________________________________________
11 Manser, M. H. Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for Topical Studies. (London: Martin Manser, 2009)
12 Ge 49:17. See also Ge 3:15; Ex 4:3; 7:9-13; Pr 23:32; Ecc 10:8,11; Isa 30:6; Ac 28:3-6
13 Isa 14:29. See also Dt 8:15; 32:33; Job 20:14,16; Rev 9:19

creatures we hope to render harmless one day14 They are used to refer to Israel’s enemies15, to things harmful16 , to the ungodly17 , and to Satan18.

Only a handful of verses see the creature used to convey something positive. In John 3:14-15, for example, it is used to compare to the crucifixion of Christ and the salvation that gives us. John’s reference for these verses was Numbers 21:7-9, where Moses made a bronze snake and set it on a pole, under the Lord’s instruction, so that those bitten by fiery serpents would look at it and live on.

Nevertheless, this bronze snake that “saves” doesn’t erase the fact that the people’s affliction came by way of snakes in the first place. And interestingly, even the image that Moses made later became an idol that Hezekiah had to destroy, as people were making offerings to it.19

We see, therefore, that by and large, the biblical witness takes a rather grim outlook on the creature, and is certainly not a source that promotes an active handling of it. The snake is, in general, a harmful creature, which occasionally, may also be used by God to mete out His judgment.  

In fact, on this theme, allow me to highlight one verse in particular. 1 Corinthians 10:9 says:

“We should not test Christ, as some of them did—and were killed by snakes.”

This verse tells us clearly not to ‘test’ Christ (or “the Lord” in some manuscripts). New Testament scholar Leon Morris says that “testing” here has the idea of “seeing how far one can go” with God.20 Some people have tested God’s limits in this way, Paul tells us, and were consequently killed by snakes. Some scholars believe that Paul was probably making a reference here to the incident in

_______________________________________________
14 Isa 11:8 
15 Isa 27:1; Jer 46:22; 51:34
16 Mt 7:9-10 pp Lk 11:11
17 Ps 58:4-5  See also Ps 140:3; Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33; Ro 3:13
18 Rev 12:9  See also Ge 3:1-13; 2Co 11:3; Rev 20:2
19 2 Kgs 18:4
20 Morris, L., 1 Corinthians: an introduction and commentary – Vol. 7. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1985), p. 141.

Numbers 21 as mentioned above21, but of course, Paul could also be referring to something else.

Whatever it might be, I can’t help recalling, when I read this verse, that many of the snake-handling preachers of our time also died because they were bitten by poisonous snakes. George Went Hensley (mentioned above) died after being bitten by a poisonous snake he brought into a Sunday Service. 22Jamie Coots, another famous snake-handling preacher, who appeared in a National Geographic documentary on this topic, also died this way. And so did many others.23 Weren’t these not consequences of their “testing” God too?  

   In conclusion, it is quite clear that the Bible does not instruct us to handle poisonous snakes as some snake-handling preachers still teach. On a practical note, I am rather thankful for this result. For there are many snakes within the vicinity of our church here at Rangsit in Pathum Thani, Thailand. It is not difficult to find one for Sunday Service. But I think my members will protest! They are more than familiar with the harm and potential danger snakes can pose to their children and the community. Their animosity for the creature is evident, when I saw how they responded to a sneaky one, which slithered into our canteen where some children were playing. A brother-in-Christ smacked at it valiantly with a garden hoe, and chased it with such haste and vigor that it slid away and never returned. I thank God for members like that. And after this study, I am glad that I can continue thanking God for them.

_______________________________________________
21  Ibid.

22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Went_Hensley
23 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_handling_in_religion