Fatal Error In The Bible?

Question

Mark 16:17-18 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 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.- So believers would you really pick up snakes and drink poison and survive?

NO ATHEISTS!

Oh and Luke 1:26- 1:38 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Answer 1

There is a sect that actually practices this, I don't know what they call themselves but I saw it on dateline a long time ago. Though I believe that Christians through prayer and fasting may have the power to do this I do not see what will be gained through this. Even Jesus said it is an evil generation that seeks after signs and wonders. If they see and then believe then where does faith play a part? As for healing the sick, many Christians successfully practice this and it's benefits are clear.

Answer 2

i'm no longer being sarcastic once I say that to those human beings that God has given the grace to comprehend the Scriptures, there are no longer any errors in any respect, deadly or otherwise. the subject is that maximum of persons who declare to renowned and comprehend the Bible (such as you) say that the explanation you don't comprehend is using the fact the Bible is incorrect as a exchange of yourselves. there is nowhere in the Bible that asserts the Earth is in simple terms 6000 years old. stupid human beings who thought that they could decide how old the earth is via including up the age a individual replaced into while they died whether that's recorded and then further the 6 day creation say 6000 years however the Bible would not say that. once you're saying that there is no historic or archeological information to assist the account of the Exodus of the 12 Tribes of Israel from Egypt you're lacking some thing. whether you compromise with the Bible or no longer you are able to no longer deny that it comments actual events. The e book of Acts in the hot testomony replaced into written in the 1st Century advert at the same time as the books of the Bible that recount Moses greatest the Israelites out of Egypt have been written approximately 1500 years till now that. i might say that a e book that confirms that some thing befell 1500 years till now is "historic information". besides, there's a "deadly" flaw on your good judgment. to assert that considering which you are able to no longer discover information that some thing replaced into there and to end from that there replaced into no longer something there, isn't logical in any respect and likewise relatively boastful. What i hit upon aggravating is while somebody of low intelligence and obvious low training or awareness like your self criticize people who're extra clever and extra knowledgeable approximately some thing they have not have been given any direct awareness on. It in simple terms makes the guy sound silly and you're extra effective than that. So please brush up on your good judgment and documents base and write lower back. i will study it.

Answer 3

It should be noted that almost all Bible scholars agree that Mark 16:9-20 were not originally part of Mark’s Gospel.

Charles Ryrie, a noted commentator, said: "The doubtful genuineness of verses 9-20 makes it unwise to build a doctrine or base an experience on them (especially verses. 16-18).”

Even if these verses were authentic, they do not command the handling of serpents or the drinking of poison. So they cannot be read as a requirement for worship. In fact, the apostle Paul did encounter a serpent on the island of Malta but only by accident because it was in a bundle of sticks he was laying on a fire. Although Paul was bitten and was divinely protected from harm, he did not pass the viper around for others to hold. Instead, he “shook off the beast into the fire.” Far from feeling a burning pain as modern snake handlers do, he “felt no harm.” (Acts 28:3-6)

According to Gabriel's statement at Luke 1:28-33, Mary’s son was to be the promised Messiah. He was to be called with the same name as that of the high priest who returned with Zerubbabel from Babylon in 537 B.C.E., namely, Jeshua, or, in Greek, Jesus. Because of birth through Mary he was to be called the son of “David his father.” God would give him the throne or royal seat of King David. As with David, his kingly rule would be over “the house of Jacob,” that is, over all Israel.

Answer 4

first, it is very important to remember that there are some questions regarding whether mark chapter 16, verses 9-20 belong in the bible. there is some evidence that these verses were not originally part of the gospel of mark. some of the oldest and most reliable greek manuscripts of the gospel of mark don't contain verses 9-20. some other manuscripts contain mark 16:9-20, but set them apart from the rest of the gospel of mark. as a result, it isn't wise to use anything from mark 16:9-20 as the sole basis for a doctrine or practice. snake handling is one such example of a dubious concept.

Mark 16:17-18 does not contain any imperatives. It does not say, “go out and handle snakes.” It says “they will pick up snakes with their hands.” It is describing something that will occur, not commanding that something should occur

just as Jesus refused to jump off the pinnacle of the temple, even though God would send angels to protect Jesus, so are we to not intentionally put ourselves in situations that require God’s miraculous intervention. 1 corinthians 10:9, while not speaking directly of snake handling in churches, says it best, “we should not test the lord, as some of them did — and were killed by snakes.”

Answer 5

That Mark 16:9-20 is not part of God’s inspired Word, and that for the following reasons: (1) These verses are not found in two of the oldest and most highly regarded Greek manuscripts as well as others. (2) They are also not found in many of the oldest and best Bible translations or versions. (3) Such ancient scholars as Eusebius and Jerome pronounced them spurious. (4) The style of these verses is entirely different from that of Mark. (5) The vocabulary used in these verses is different from that of Mark. (6) And, most important of all, the very content of these verses contradicts the facts and the rest of the Scriptures.

Regarding these questionable verses, it might be noted that not only did the ones adding them do a very poor job but it may well be that they proceeded on a wrong premise. How so? In that Mark actually may have ended his Gospel with what is now verse eight.

Answer 6

There are hundreds of such errors. It is easier to find them in the OT, as much of that tries to be historical but can be shown to be fictitious. An obvious example is the tale of the flood, which can be shown to be fiction by anyone with a shovel and the ability to count: the annual layers of the Antarctic ice cap date back millions of years -- to before h. sapiens walked on the planet. A flood would have destroyed the ice cap. For more on this, see:

Answer 7

Believers are commanded to drink deadly poison rather what it means is that should we by chance drink it unknowingly then God will save us......glad you are reading your bible but do a little research first.

Answer 8

I have mentioned this verse before.

Why do christians not lay hands on themselves or others, and pray for healing? Why do they get rushed to the doctor or the hospitals?

Is it because they KNOW that God does not heal. Is it because they know their religion is a sham?

Why is that not one single amputee has had a limb regrown? Not one. Amputees just get a wooden or metal limb, or an artifical limb.

Answer 9

a) The scripture in Mark was specifically addressing those Jesus was directly sending out. They cast out demons, resurrected the dead etc. They were given extraordinary powers... for a TIME ... so that they too could lead people to God. We now have God's word. Those gifts became unnecesary.

b) The scripture in Luke? Jesus was referring to himself. He is still alive and is ruling as king.

Fatal error? Where?

Answer 10

Spend some money and buy a decent Bible, which will point out that the above is not actually part of the Bible. In fact it should not be printed at all.
.