Signs That Follow

Yesterday I acknowledged a comment from 'Stoneface' on Thursday's post. Today I would like to acknowledge a comment from 'Lin from Seattle' that was left on Friday's post. I get very few comments, really, but, I don't leave many comments on the blogs I read, either, so it really doesn't come as much surprise. In any case, I appreciate those people that read my blog (even though I have no reason to believe that there's more than a handful of you).

I want to spend a little bit of time on Mark 16:17. This seems to me to be one of the most misunderstood verses in the Bible (if not the most). In this passage, Jesus talks about speaking with new tongues, taking up serpents, drinking deadly things, casting out demons, healing the sick... He says all of these things shall follow them that believe. There are some churches out there that say that this proves that you have to speak in tongues to be saved. Let me point out, first, that it says that they shall speak with new tongues, it doesn't say that they shall speak with other tongues. There's a difference. Let me take a side trip, momentarily, into the story of Peter's denial. When confronted, he denies knowing Jesus, but one of the people there points out that he is a Galilean, and his speech 'bewrayeth' him. Now, I'm sure that it was well known that Jesus' followers were predominantly Galileans, but this is the time of Passover, there must have been hundreds of Galileans in Jerusalem that didn't have anything to do with Jesus. So what is meant by the phrase, '...thy speech bewrayeth you?" It seems to me that Peter answers that in the next verse. It says that Peter began to curse and to swear. So the accusation was not, "You talk like a Galilean," it was, "You talk like a Christian," so Peter made an effort to not talk like a Christian (yes, I know I split an infinitive there, but I'm trying to make a point). Speaking in new tongues means that some of the words that you used to say, before you knew Jesus, you don't say anymore; some of the things that you used to talk about, you don't talk about anymore, because you have new priorities.

Further, I have to wonder, most of these churches that teach that you have to speak in tongues to be saved, don't take up serpents. I am aware that there are 'snake-handling' churches out there, and most of them are Pentecostal (for those of you who are not aware, the term 'Pentecostal' refers to Acts chapter 2, on the day of Pentecost, when the 120 in the upper room began to speak in tongues). Last night a friend of mine told me he had heard about a church where they drink poison as part of their worship (he said some parishioners had died, but some had lived). I have to wonder, though, in these churches, if someone gets sick, do they pray over that person and recover that person every time? I mean, if you aren't considered a believer until you speak in tongues, can you be considered a believer if you pray for the sick and they don't recover?

It seems to me that Jesus was speaking more in spiritual terms than physical. There are two-legged serpents around us all the time, and, most of the time, as long as they mind their business, we'll leave them alone. When they start trying to keep us from doing what God has for us to do, then we need to put them in their place. We drink in deadly things from the conversations of these serpents at work or at school, but we don't let those things affect us. Some times we do see the sick get healed, but, more often, it's people that have a spiritual problem that we can work out through God's grace. Casting out demons? Sure, but usually before the demon gets enough of a hold in a person's life that anybody would say, "Oh, that person is possessed!"

Let me again take a side trip: I have heard people that complain that their mentally-ill friend or relative was 'diagnosed' as demon-possessed at some church because the symptoms were similar (or identical) to the symptoms described in the Bible of someone that Jesus cast a demon out of. These people get very critical of the Bible, because 'Christian' people tried to prevent this mentally-ill person from getting psychiatric treatment. The question is, does the Bible use the term 'possessed by a demon' to mean mentally ill? Personally, I don't think so, but, at the same time, I don't think, that in modern society, it should make any difference. The Bible was written by men long before there were any ideas about mental illness. If they saw a person who was mentally ill, they would probably assume that the person was possessed. It seems to me, though, that the important point in each of those stories is that, after they had been with Jesus, they were better. The point is more that Jesus healed--whatever was wrong with people--not so much what He healed people from.

Finally, an apology. Usually, I provide links to the scriptures that I refer to, but this week, I can't seem to get to the online resources that I normally use. Break out your paper copies (if you have them).