If you handle a poisonous snake for "religious" reasons-you DESERVE to die, slowly, terribly. That's just how it is.

There was a similar incident in Australia-according to the news broadcast at the time-he milked various poisonous critters for their venom, and made a good living at it.
He made 1 stupid mistake.

He tried to pet....

wait for it....

His Black Widow Spider-
Just stop for a minute-(IF you can stop laughing long enough, that is...)and ponder this-he tried to pet a BLACK WIDOW SPIDER. His partially decomposed body was found several weeks later, when his neighbors started complaining about the stench from his house.
He was a loner-hardly ever went anywhere-so it wasn't unusual for no one to see him for weeks at a time.

It's Sunday morning so after my coffee I'll put on my Sunday best and go
down to church to play with some snakes and sing "Allelujah!"

These people are nuts.

Frank,if his partially decomposed body was found weeks later, how do we know his last act was to "pet his black widow spider"?

...if his partially decomposed body was found weeks later, how do we know his last act was to "pet his black widow spider"?

Posted by Jomama at 2008-07-13

They found the Black Widow spider gripped tight in his cold, dead hand.

These people are nuts.

Not really. Your bogus religious doctrine has its own rituals just as their bogus religious doctrine does.

Read "Salvation on Sand Mountain" by Dennis Covington.

Not really. Your bogus religious doctrine has its own rituals just as their bogus religious doctrine does.

-- Axiom

Sorry, but my religious doctrine never required me to hold anything that bites and has poisonous fangs. When I went to Mass, "Holy Communion" with God was achieved by swallowiing a wafer and wine. I never had to take the chance of deadly snake venom being infused into my bloodsteam in order to pray.

As an add on to my above comment:

I believe that any religion which requires you to die -- or even take a chance on dying -- in order to be heard by God is nuts. Whether it's a branch of the Christian religion requiring you to handle poisonous snakes or radical Islam demanding jihaad in order to fastrack your way to God and your quota of 72 virgins.

Everyone who believes in God usually believes God gave them life. So why would God want you to willingly give up the most precious gift He could give you. That wouldn't make much sense, would it?

Oohrah

CHRIS-

God asked Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac.

Maybe so, but God came down and personally talked to Abraham. Big difference from some rural church preacher telling Abraham to kill his son.

If God shows up in person and asks me Himself to grab some snakes for Him, then fine I'd do it. But until He comes to me in person, it's a no go for me playing with poisonous vipers.

it's a no go for me playing with poisonous vipers

I'd much prefer a Dodge Viper.

I agree with your sentiment regarding snakes. It's not part of the plan of salvation and one's failure to do it has no bearing on the strength of one's faith in God or one's eternal resting place. Would you agree?

I was only speaking to your comment of, "... So why would God want you to willingly give up the most precious gift He could give you. That wouldn't make much sense, would it?"

In fact, God wanted Abraham to give up his son. He was testing Abraham.

On the larger issue, God wants us to die to sin. To follow Him - often giving up things we valued before accepting Christ.

CHRIS-
Regarding your comment, "If God shows up in person and asks me Himself to grab some snakes for Him, then fine I'd do it. But until He comes to me in person, it's a no go for me playing with poisonous vipers."

Food for thought: We tend to picture God/Christ as this massive all powerful entity when, for all we might know, He's right in front of us as the beggar on the street asking for a handout or perhaps the person stranded on the road who needs lots of help, etc. I think we ought to consider that aspect when making the comment you did - it reminds me of the old joke I've shared here before.

Flood waters approached a town. Everyone was told to take rafts/boats to safety. One guy stayed in his house and said, "God will save me." Waters rose, boaters came by to pick him up, but he refused.

"God will save me" he said as he moved to the upper floor. More rising waters and more rescuers... and now he's on the roof top, still waiting for God to save him.

Guy drowns. In Heaven he sees God and asks, "Why didn't you save me from that flood."

God responds, "Who do you think sent those rescue boats?"

I guess all I'm trying to say is God is alive in many forms, some perhaps quite magestic and others quite meek or mundane. It's easy to focus on perhaps our vision of what God is and how (literally) we see him manifested in our life.

Food for thought: We tend to picture God/Christ as this massive all powerful entity when, for all we might know, He's right in front of us as the beggar on the street asking for a handout or perhaps the person stranded on the road who needs lots of help, etc.

I think we ought to consider that aspect when making the comment you did

- it reminds me of the old joke I've shared here before.

OK, as well food for thought your God could be the oldest ruse / joke of civilization.

ZAP-
I'm referring to Christians and how they typically envision Christ, but thanks for playing.

Sorry, but my religious doctrine never required me to hold anything that bites and has poisonous fangs.

And thus you point to the biggest issue I have with Christianity and other systematic religions. Those who practice a specific doctrine are more concerened with the traditions and rituals of their doctrine than they are in being close to God.

Meanwhile, anyone who practices a different doctrine, even one as far out as snake handling, drinking strychnine, etc is "Crazy". The other, more mild traditions of Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Seventh Day Adventists are looked at from the other doctrines as odd or quirky.

This is one interpretation of a part of scripture that leads these folks to beleive what they are doing is right. There are far too many interpretations of the Bible to discern between which one is the closest one to what Christ intended.

Who are you to question their methodology?

I believe that any religion which requires you to die -- or even take a chance on dying -- in order to be heard by God is nuts.

To me (and it's part of that second Wikipedia listing) it's testing God. It's like saying..."OK God, if you're really God you'll protect me as I jump off this building and onto the street."

Like I said. Read "Salvation on Sand Mountain" by Dennis Covington. These people aren't taking up snakes or drinking poison to "be heard by God". This is a ritual they do when they are "in the spirit of the Holy Ghost".

Not everyone takes up snakes in the churches and the people who handle don't do it if they know they are not "in the spirit". It's not crazy to them. It's totally rational.

"There are far too many interpretations of the Bible to discern between which one is the closest one to what Christ intended." - AX

My first impression is to disagree with you, but before I leap to that, I would like your take on what you mean by "too many interpretations." What are some... are they central to really knowing what Christ intended... and is it possible to discern right from wrong (or correct vs incorrect) interpretations?

OOHRAH

I've mentioned before I grew up in evangelical Christianity - to the extreme.

The problem I see is that they mix in too much stuff that had nothing to do with what Jesus taught.

If they'd added the 11th Commandment (the one Jesus said was the MOST important), and lived by only the Red Print, Christianity could have done far more good.

I'm referring to Christians and how they typically envision Christ, but thanks for playing.

~OOHRAH

Doesn't sound as if that was where Chris was coming from...

AU-
I always enjoy our discussions. Please know there's never a "gotcha" mentality on my part on any thread.

On the faith thing, is it possible you rejected your "extreme" upbringing and went 180 degrees opposite? I don't remember where you are now, faith wise.

I was raised outside of church. Religion, faith, etc, weren't really discussed except to gently bash it. I'm a statistical anamoly in that I became a Christian as an adult without having really been exposed to it as a youth.

ZAP-
You'd have to ask CHRIS.

I was making a statement as an offshoot of her thoughts of God personally coming down to speak with her.

I put forth the concept God appears in our life in a variety of ways. The poor, downtrodden, those looking for us to help them. This concept is much different from a big ol' God in fuzzy white clothing speaking in a booming voice.

OOHRAH

You're one of the most decent people I've run across on the internet. Even though we don't agree politically (I believe Democrats are more Christian than the right wing idiots of these times), you're always a gentleman. I try to be, but I had a lot of stress this year with both mom dying here and my sister dying out of town. So, I haven't always done my best for sure. But, I try.

I believe in Jesus with all my heart and try to help others whenever they're put in front of me.

LOL

Strike the LOL. I had something else written but decided not to include it.

I put forth the concept God appears in our life in a variety of ways. The poor, downtrodden, those looking for us to help them. This concept is much different from a big ol' God in fuzzy white clothing speaking in a booming voice.

O, I'm a firm believer in what ever floats your boat. But there other possibilities than the one you've laid out.

I thought you only mentioned your sob stories once, late at night...

101

Go back to screwing your mother

What a fucking troll you are 101.

You just look for opportunities to be an asshole.

Whatever floats your boat.

At least you have to live near Buffalo. That's some justice to an idiot like you.

Why don't you go back to screwing yours...Oh, never mind.

Such as?

Actually, you've consistently been among my chief antagonists whenever I post regarding faith. You protest quite a bit for someone who's "a firm believer in what ever floats your boat." Why is that? Have I come after you in some way?

I've opined God can appear in a variety of ways. Bold, majectic, humble, the poor/weak, etc. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on other ways God appears to us.

Posted by OohRah at 2008-07-13 05:26 PM

Great Post Oohrah..;o) And very true.

Why is that? Have I come after you in some way?

I've opined God can appear in a variety of ways. Bold, majectic, humble, the poor/weak, etc. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on other ways God appears to us.
~Oohrah

Not at all, I always marvel at how faith in God becomes a cure all to all infected regardless of the lack of evidence. 2000 years is but a blink of time yet miracles so extreme they would leave no doubt can't be seen today by a deity supposedly so powerful. Maybe she got bored.

There are other possibilities......

"Miracles so extreme they would leave no doubt...."

The Gospels show no matter how immediate and concrete the manifestation of God, people continue to doubt. Or just have other priorities than believing.

The Apostles lived with Christ on a daily basis. It's obvious they rarely credited or understood what they were seeing.

"Regardless of lack evidence...."

Ah, evidence. Evidence is useless without eyes to see or ears to hear. God (He and/or She) never tires. It's we who suffer from ADHD.

"2000 years is but a blink of time..."

Christ understood men require miracles. It's obvious the requirement irked Him.

Major miracles have occured within the last century, witnessed by scores of thousands. I've posted about at least one of them.

The point is, miracles appear to offer no sort of confirmation to some. To them, a miracle is an event prepetually requiring yet more confirmation, from what authority is rarely specified.

Kind of like those moon-landing doubters---When they finally have enough evidence Neal Armstrong went there, they'll get back to us.

"Not really. Your bogus religious doctrine has its own rituals just as their bogus religious doctrine does."

If you can't tell what makes snake handlers different than 99.99999999999999999999% of religous people on the planet, you probably shouldn't advertise it.

Best line in article:

"... a Tennessee woman died after being bitten by a rattlesnake during a service in 1995. Her husband died three years later when he was bitten by a snake in northeastern Alabama."

The Darwin Awards Committee is a big supporter of this church.

"OK God, if you're really God you'll protect me as I jump off this building and onto the street."

Posted by OohRah

Ooh

You need to be more careful. I can think of several here who think that's a fine idea.

Not that I'm encouraging any of them to take you up on it.

Not really.

My first impression is to disagree with you, but before I leap to that, I would like your take on what you mean by "too many interpretations." What are some... are they central to really knowing what Christ intended... and is it possible to discern right from wrong (or correct vs incorrect) interpretations?

If I thought it was possible to discern right from wrong interpretations, I'd be a member of a church and would have no doubts about the existence of God.

But take for example one segment of Christians interpreting a piece of scripture in a completely different way than another segment.

The rapture, for instance.

There are a great number of Christians who believe that they will be spirited away secretly and the rest of the world, those left behind, will wonder just what the heck happened to Bob in accounting. It's been made into a very popular and profitable book and dvd series.

Then, the other segment of Christians who do not believe that Christ will come back secretly and take those folks away with him leaving others behind. In fact, this segment of Christians think the interpretation is all wrong, and that Christ, upon his return, will be welcomed with fanfare from all over the world.

The same exact piece of scripture, two very different interpretations.

This is no different than the part of scripture the snake handlers pull their practices from...

Mark 16:18 From the King James Bible

"16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

Now some Christians will tell you that Jesus was talking only to his disciples and speaking metaphorically. These, coincidentally, tend to be the same people who think that taking up snakes is a challenge to God. The people who handle snakes and drink poison and lay hands on the sick and speak in tongues are interpreting the statement literally.

Two different interpretations from the same piece of scripture.

If you can't tell what makes snake handlers different than 99.99999999999999999999% of religous people on the planet, you probably shouldn't advertise it.

I can tell just fine what makes them different. Calling out someone who questions the traditions and rituals of one doctrine while following their own unquestionably is not ignorance. If you can't tell the difference, YOU probably shouldn't advertise it.

"2000 years is but a blink of time..."
Christ understood men require miracles. It's obvious the requirement irked Him.
~ZED

LOL Design flaw...

There are other possibilities.

God sent his son, Christ, to earth in human form to live among us... to experience pain, temptation, etc, and to then willingly die for our sins.

Then god is nuts, too. Couldn't he just forgive us without having his own son brutally and savagely killed? Or if his son's death was necessary (?) for him to forgive us, why wouldn't a quick painless death do?

I never got all this "he died for your sins crap". One of the many reasons I'm an atheist.

This whole snake handling thing is prevalent in the appalachians. In west virginia, it is still legal.

In west virginia, it is still legal.

What a surprise..

"I can tell just fine what makes them different. Calling out someone who questions the traditions and rituals of one doctrine while following their own unquestionably is not ignorance. If you can't tell the difference, YOU probably shouldn't advertise it."

I can't even tell what you are trying to say. I'm pretty sure that 2nd sentence is incopmrehensible to all. But we all make typos.....

More important is that you expect to everyone else to act as if snake handling isn't a deadly practice. You want to pretend that the rituals of other religions are no different. Quite obviously, they are in that they can't kill you. If you can't even be honest enough to acknowledge such a difference, then don't expect anyone to take you seriously.

That's what happens when your show snake turns and bites you: a reptile dysfunction.

God sent his son, Christ, to earth in human form to live among us... to experience pain, temptation, etc, and to then willingly die for our sins.

Posted by OohRah at 2008-07-13 04:52 PM | Reply

Actually, I think his name was supposed to be Jesus--I don't think anyone called him Christ. Also, was Jesus around before Mary gave birth to him? If Jesus was always around and Jesus was the Son of God--who was his mother?

"God sent his son, Christ, to earth in human form to live among us... "

BUAHAHAHAHAHAA

What a load of crap.
It's a myth for idiots.

And suckers.

Of course eweewwraw is stupid enough to somehow think Rasch Lardbutt imparts "wisdom."

I know you're a nice guy, but your superstitious presumptions are crap. Keep 'em to yourself.

Of course eweewwraw is stupid enough to somehow think Rasch Lardbutt imparts "wisdom."

I know you're a nice guy, but your superstitious presumptions are crap. Keep 'em to yourself.

Posted by Zatoichi

Zat - stick to reality. I've never known Oorah to be a big Rush Limbaugh supporter.

Also, your above statement of your own faith is offensive to Christians but you don't see 'em insulting and dogpiling you.

" I've never known Oorah to be a big Rush Limbaugh supporter."

Then you haven't read his posts.

His EXACT QUOTE is "the wisdom of Rush Limbaugh."

And he said he subscribed to the Limbaugh Letter, he's welcome to refute either.
But, in fact I think he's an honest man and, if he'd keep his religion to himself I probably would like him more than most here.

You may now die in a fire.

Zat, that's pretty harsh and not a favorable debate style at all. Very sorry for you. May God bless you and not let you die in a fire.

And in any case, I can't find that quote you attribute to Oorah. It must be from another thread. Does he often refer to the wisdom of Rush Limbaugh?

Recently, Zat does not appear happy unless he's hoping for someone else to meet a very nasty end. Because he's smart, we suppose.

"Design flaw...."

Just gets us into a debate concerning the nature of art.

"One of the reasons I'm an atheist...."

Christ died to be resurrected. It was a concrete example of what is possible for we very concrete human beings. History was rebooted at that point.

ZAT's right... I'm a ditto head and have been one since first hearing him in either the late 80's or early 90's. I'm a Limbaugh Letter subscriber and a Rush 24/7 subscriber. I agree with most all of his points (one exception being his bashing of Chelsea when she was a little kid) and another being his take on the non-effects of second hand smoke.

"I never got all this "he died for your sins crap". One of the many reasons I'm an atheist." - GOAT

You and I are usually of like mind. I don't know if that's a shot at you or me...

We are on differing sides on this topic. If you are serious about wanting this Christian's view on that, let me know.

"Actually, I think his name was supposed to be Jesus--I don't think anyone called him Christ. Also, was Jesus around before Mary gave birth to him? If Jesus was always around and Jesus was the Son of God--who was his mother?" - BUFF

I just registered that name. Use that name again without permission and I'll have some Associated Press lawyers put you on their speed dial.

Christ was around from the beginning of time. He is God. (In the beginning was the Word, etc)

While Scripture never specifically mentions the Trinity, clearly it refers to Christ as God's son. God don't need no steekin woman to make no baby, yo. To quote Archie Bunker, "Dat's how he got to be God!"

These people are nuts.

Not really. Your bogus religious doctrine has its own rituals just as their bogus religious doctrine does.

Read "Salvation on Sand Mountain" by Dennis Covington.

Posted by Axiom at 2008-07-13 03:43 PM | Reply

I read that book several years ago. I enjoyed it.
As I recall, the author was a professor at University of Alabama who wrote about southern culture for the New York Times. During some investigative work into snakehandlers in Appalachia, the author discovered that he had ancestors who had been snake handlers. He spent some time among a few groups of snakehandlers throughout the south and eventually became a snakehandler himself.

One man's insanity is another man's epiphany .... and vice-versa.