Is this Bible verse about believers and poison to be taken literally?

You say that schraf is interpreting the passage to mean "all Christians". She says she is not. Sorry, in this case, I have to take her at her word.You use the context of the Bible to understand the passage to mean that not all Christians will be able to do these things. You also have said that these things happen now according to God's will. Where? Any specific instances come to mind?Several here say that Christians shouldn't do these things to prove God because that is tempting Him. The why did Jesus, Elisha, Paul and Peter do just that? They each healed someone by the laying on of hands. Were they wrong? If so, why did those people recover? Why does Paul state that the sick should go to the elders to be healed? Is Paul trying to get the elders in trouble with God?You see, MY understanding of Mark 16, when taken in Biblical context of a loving God whose prophets and apostles go around healing people, is that it means exactly what the words state. No adding or interpreting necessary.Frankly, I am very unclear of the context that you use to get the meaning that you claim is true.

Ok, perhaps her questions give you the impression that she feels that all Christians should be able to do all those things. How about we modify it to mean that some of them should be able to.Where are these "greater things", according to the Christ, that His followers are supposed to be doing? I would be happy with just one out of the more than one billion Christians having enough "faith" to heal the sick, or drink poison with no effect, or raise one dead person, or show that prayer actually does "availeth much" when fervently applied by a "righteous man". Unless I am mistaken, these things are not prohibited by any Bible verse and seem to be encouraged. Yet...they don't seem to happen except for anecdotal reports from "remote places".I apologize if my tone is overly direct. I am just interested if you could explain your interpretation of the passage. What support from the Bible do you have for that interpretation? I did not really follow how you supported it the last time and would really appreciate a "Bible for dummies" version of the connections that you made.

Ok so these "gifts" are no longer needed for Christians today?Certainly in Mark 16:16, Jesus is telling His disciples to preach to the world. This is the Great Commission which many in the Church consider as an order for all Christians. However, Mark 16:17 and 18 refer to those that believe. I don't see a time qualification in either passage. Therefore, that time limitation must be somewhere in the context from which you determined your understanding of the passage.What passages or group of passages helped you determine that there was a time limit on these gifts?Does this time limit apply to all the gifts mentioned in Mark 16:17 and 18?

And those who don't believe, whether beligerent or not, don't need His help? You just said that the miracles are for unbelievers. You then qualified the type of believer that they were for and I do not see the Biblical justification for that qualification. Could you provide me with the passage or groups of passages that have led you to this limitation on the type of unbeliever that gets to see the miracles or gifts?Well, these unbelievers are all around you. God does know what it takes for some to believe. Thomas required visual proof and was told that he didn't rank as high as those who believed without seeing. However, I bet he will be in heaven...his personal limitations won't keep him out. Why are the people here any different than Thomas? Do they deserve less than Thomas because they have the same limitations? Because they can't bring themselves to believe without some sort of proof?KGB eh? So, I guess there is no time limit on the gifts. Kinda throws out most of my last post. Perhaps the limitation is that He only provides those gifts in locations where the people are more credulous than those on this board. Something about that arrangement just doesn't feel quite like the right answer. Maybe I will understand better after you help me out with the question above.

Certainly God has reasons for what He does. We need to use the Bible as our window into what He wants and what we are required to do.The Bible says that God loves the world and wants all of us to be saved. That seems pretty clear cut and goes against the "He has mercy upon whomever He will..." statement you made. My impression of that statement is that God will make salvation availible to some as He sees fit (context of my message concerned salvation of unbelievers). Obviously, selective salvation by God (independent of the person's actions/desires) is in conflict with the Biblically stated fact that God wants all to come to Him. I don't think that is what you wanted to say unless you are a predeterminist. Then you will have to Biblically support this point of view. (off topic, though)On topic, you still need to Biblically support your position that the gifts and miracles from Mark 16:17 and 18 are for only particular types of unbelievers and not for those who, like Thomas, require physical evidence. You call them scoffers of God but they are not any worse scoffers than Thomas when he was told that Christ had risen.To me, those gifts and miracles would be better suited to convince the physical-evidence folks...but I'm not God.

Hey! That was my line of questioning!

Exodus quote: Out of context in the conversation between God and Moses concerning whether or not God would reveal His glory to Moses. I don't see how this relates to the subject of salvation.Romans quotes: They are within Paul's explanation of why he evangelizes the gentiles and the fact that they, too, are included in the plan of salvation. Certainly, the quote relates to salvation but I am reading it as God is not limited to extending his "mercy" to the original "Children of God". Besides, applying this passage to the idea that God chooses who will be saved flys in the face of the passages that state He wants all to come to Him. Plus, it kinda negates the need for evangelism because God doesn't need you to tell everyone about Jesus if God Himself makes the choice (or actually made the choice already) of who gets to be saved. Unless I am missing something, NONE of the "passages already provided" show any limitation on WHICH unbelievers that the "signs" are supposed to impress enough to convince them to be saved. Unless you are saying the the people of the United States (for example) actually do believe but refuse to accept. That is a bit of a stretch, I think.Your reasonable conjecture based on facts already presented?!! Those 'facts' are only the observation that the miracles are not seen in the "West" and assertions you made, without any Biblical backup.Look, I am willing to accept, for this discussion, that the Bible is absolutely true. That means that you can use the Bible to explain any conclusion that you have drawn about the passage in question. In fact, you must support your interpretation of these passages with the Bible since It is the source of revealed knowledge in the matters of God. Extra Biblical assumptions without support are just your opinion and carry no weight in this discussion.

Christians today don't preach that the kingdom of God is imminent? I wholeheartedly disagree! What was that entire "Left Behind" book series about? The evangelicals have been pointing to the sky since they took root. The Baptists have been waiting for the rapture from the time they were established. They have been baptising everyone they can get their hands on. All sects of Christianity preach repentance. I don't see one thing that you delineated that is not preached by Christians somewhere.Perhaps you need to explain more fully what you mean by "That is not what Christianity preaches today..."

How did you post the day before the post to which you are replying?Is your computer's clock off or what?

Although this has the earmarks of a drive-by, I'll bite.You appear to be saying that no "True Christian" will get an illness. Are you a True Christian? If so, then I guess you haven't ever been sick since your conversion.What poisons have you ingested since your conversion? What independent confirmation of that ingesting do you have?How many people have you healed from their sickness? Any independent documentation of those healings would be appreciated. Did that healing help them convert to True Christianity?BTW: James Randi has a million dollars that you could collect if you can demonstrate, under controlled conditions, this imperviousness to poisons or your ability to heal the crippled and sick. see: JREF - Home

I'm not sure what you are getting at here. This seems to be saying that Christ was in error in His determination of when the kingdom of heaven was coming. Actually He was discussing His own return, but kingdom of heaven or Christ...kinda the same. Which generation was He referring to anyway?Since you brought up the return of the Christ and seem to equate it with the return of the kingdom of heaven, here is what the Baptists say about the return of the Christ (same page that you quote mined).

quote:

---

Christian Baptist beliefs about THE RETURN OF CHRIST: We believe in the resurrection of the crucified body of our Lord, His ascension into Heaven, His present life there for us as our High Priest and Advocate, and His personal, bodily, visible, premillenial return to establish His kingdom on earth, to reign as the only potentate: the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. (Luke 24:26-43; John 20:24-29; Acts 1:9, 10; I Corinthians 15:20-25; I Timothy 6:14, 15; Revelation 1:7; 19:11-16; 20:6).

​

Christian Baptist beliefs about THE RAPTURE OF THE CHURCH: We believe that at any moment the rapture of the saved may occur, when the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven. . . ." to catch up His people to meet Him in the air; and so shall we ever be with the Lord. (John 14:1-3; I Thessalonians 4:13-18; I Corinthians 15:51-58).

---

From the United Wesleyan Church beliefs http://www.uwchurch.com/beliefs.html#second

quote:

---

18. The Second Coming of Christ
We believe that the certainty of the personal and imminent return of Christ inspires holy living and zeal for the evangelization of the world. At His return He will fulfill all prophecies made concerning His final and complete triumph over evil.

​

Job 19:25-27; Isa. 11:1-12; Zech. 14:1-11; Matt. 24:1-51; 25; 26:64; Mark 13:1-37; Luke 17:22-37; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-11; I Cor. 1:7-8; I Thess. 1:10; 2:19; 3:13; 4:13-18; 5:1-11, 23; II Thess. 1:6-10; 2:1-12; Titus 2:11-14; Heb. 9:27-28; James 5:7-8; II Peter 3:1-14; I John 3:2-3; Rev. 1:7; 19:11-16; 22:6-7, 12, 20.

---

From the beliefs of the Assemblies of God: Assemblies of God (USA) Official Web Site | AG

quote:

---

13. The Blessed Hope
The resurrection of those who have fallen asleep in Christ and their translation together with those who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord is the imminent and blessed hope of the church.

​

1 Thessalonians 4:16,17 [KJV/NIV]
Romans 8:23 [KJV/NIV]
Titus 2:13 [KJV/NIV]
1 Corinthians 15:51,52 [KJV/NIV]

---

That is just 3 denominations that preach the imminent return of the kingdom. Sure they don't talk about it in every surmon....that would be boring. However, if you hang around them, you will surely hear about how bad it is these days, how it must be the last days before Christ returns, and how the rapture is just around the corner.It appears that by your standard of sharing the good news, at least some people should be able to access the powers mentioned in Mark 16:17 and 18.

If you don't equate the two then you have a point. However, many denominations equate Jesus with God. Trinity dontcha know. Therefore, from their point of view, they are preaching the imminence of the kindom of god.What is your definition of the kingdom of god and it's imminence?

Ok...throw out the idea of drinking poisons. How about healings? How many have you performed?Or is that "tempting the Lord thy God" also? If it is then Jesus, Peter, John and Paul are all guilty of "tempting" God. Plus Paul is even more guilty because he actually asks the elders of the church to lay hands on the sick. Better a millstone be tied around his neck and he be cast in the ocean. He has caused others to sin.However, if you don't think trying to heal someone is tempting God, then please provide a list of some of the people you have healed.One more thing. If you spew scripture at me without actually addressing the questions that I have then I will respectfully ignore you as a drive-by Bible thumper with no real substance.

I don't see that definition as stemming from Biblical interpretation. Could you specify which Bible passages point to this conclusion?Are you saying that Paul's efforts at saving the Gentiles was wrong? His call to reach out to them is also not right?

Well I didn't know it was a tradition....that's another one I didn't get told. That's what happens when you have to count the offering money. You miss part of the sermon.Regardless, I thought that you would be using multiple related scripture verses to support your point of view. Since you only provided one prophet's words I guess that I can comment on these alone.

quote:

---

Malachi
2:2
Now it will come about that In the last days The mountain of the house of the LORD will be established as the chief of the mountains, And will be raised above the hills; And all the nations will stream to it.
2:3
And many peoples will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, To the house of the God of Jacob; That He may teach us concerning His ways And that we may walk in His paths." For the law will go forth from Zion And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
2:4
And He will judge between the nations, And will render decisions for many peoples; And they will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, And never again will they learn war.

---

This does say the the House of the Lord will be established in the future but does not define the "House of the Lord". The description is of a judgement and establishment of a kingdom along with continuous peace. (Argueing from a bit of a vacuum, since I don't know what other prophets you are going to trot out) How does this relate to what Christ was saying? Malachi was just using ideas that he and his audience understood. He didn't know about Christ's death and resurection. Besides, the Christian view of the return of Christ's millenial kingdom fits with this prophecy. Remember, the God of Jacob is also the God of Christ. Maybe you can point to the parts that specifically negate the majority Christian view of salvation through Christ being the "good news".I guess I need more information to understand your position.However, I have a question related to the OP.
Are you saying that the stuff Christ said in Mark 16:17 and 18, cannot be accomplished by modern Christians because of their spreading of the wrong "good news"? Is there any group of believers in God that can perform these amazing feats?