Kentucky Snake Handler Bit During Church Service Refuses Medical Treatment and Dies

[graciew]

This is what I see and certainly worries me that attracts certain people to these religions : there is always something " too extrordinary " to tell. Persons who came back to life , very miraculous healings…
And I say it worries me because the persons I know who follow these pastors are simple and too good and tend to believe and be mezmerized by these stories.
I think the faith of people is something to.treat.with great.respect , and often times what I hear sounds strange and bordering with delusional. In other words ,there must be serious pastors and not so serious ones.

 

[bitterhope]

I’m not angry, at all. My heart rate isn’t elevated, I’m not mad. I’m sorry that I responded to your response, I guess? IDK.
How does my attitude lead to religious restrictions, exactly? I just thought that poisonous snake bite + refusal of treatment = death is common sense.
And please, don’t even go talking about my manners for the dead, I had a come apart when I experienced my first death at work. Maybe you should look up that prayer intention. I couldn’t sleep for days and I prayed A LOT for that lady. Once before I even left to get a confirmation. Have you ever gave a bed bath to a dead person and dressed them for the funeral home? Seeing that hearing is the last to go, my prayer may have been the last thing she heard. Now, I’m angry at you.

You are the one that was saying he was an idiot and basically deserved what he got. That is not the way people used to speak about the dead, especially before they are even buried. I am not going to keep going back and forth with you but yes, I have cared for people after they died(as well as before and during). My twins as well as several patients in nursing homes and my father and many other relatives. Like I said, you seem really angry so you might want to check that. You are the one that asked, I responded, now you just want to argue. I don’t get it.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

You are the one that was saying he was an idiot and basically deserved what he got. That is not the way people used to speak about the dead, especially before they are even buried. I am not going to keep going back and forth with you but yes, I have cared for people after they died(as well as before and during). My twins as well as several patients in nursing homes and my father and many other relatives. Like I said, you seem really angry so you might want to check that. You are the one that asked, I responded, now you just want to argue. I don’t get it.

I’m angry at you because you are talking about my manners towards the dead and you don’t know me.** I wasn’t angry until then**. And I’m not angry at anyone BUT YOU. It is very idiotic to play with snakes knowing that you could die. I will not change my position on that. Common sense tells you not to do such things.
I apologized for responding to your response to me. I don’t know what else you want from me.

 

[Isca]

It’s a shame the guy didn’t realise that God has given our scientists the knowledge to invent anti-venom drugs.

 

[graciew]

It’s a shame the guy didn’t realise that God has given our scientists the knowledge to invent anti-venom drugs.

I feel sorry for this pastor but what worries me are the followers. What are they led to believe ?
As 7 sorrows said ,I can t understand the point they try to prove.

 

[Reuben_J]

This is the second snake-handling pastor in a year to die this way!

In his church, does this make him a martyr?

He had the faith to believe Jesus’ words in Mark 16:17–18:
*
“These signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will . . . pick up snakes with their hands.”*

And he died because of his faith in those words.

.

What happened to the snake-handling pastor actually?

To me, Mark 16:17-18 is about protection that is accorded to those when they are endangered as they carry out the work of the Lord, not playing with the danger itself. In Acts 28, Paul definitely did not know that the viper was in the pile of brushwood which fastened itself on his hand as it was driven out by the heat from the fire he started on the brushwood.

So, what was the pastor trying to prove? If he was proving this verse by purposely handling snakes and that he would not be harmed when got bitten, then I believe he was wrong. The verses did not mean it that way. His faith was sadly misplaced and being a pastor he was, IMO, he was rather foolish in messing with poisonous snakes.

It is true, however, that there were stories of missionaries in their outreaching to natives in the jungle might step on or encounter with poisonous snakes or even been bitten by them but miraculously survived.

 

[graciew]

What happened to the snake-handling pastor actually?

To me, Mark 16:17-18 is about protection that is accorded to those when they are endangered as they carry out the work of the Lord, not playing with the danger itself. In Acts 28, Paul definitely did not know that the viper was in the pile of brushwood which fastened itself on his hand as it was driven out by the heat from the fire he started on the brushwood.

So, what was the pastor trying to prove? If he was proving this verse by purposely handling snakes and that he would not be harmed when got bitten, then I believe he was wrong. The verses did not mean it that way. His faith was sadly misplaced and being a pastor he was, IMO, he was rather foolish in messing with poisonous snakes.

It is true, however, that there were stories of missionaries in their outreaching to natives in the jungle might step on or encounter with poisonous snakes or even been bitten by them but miraculously survived.

Thanks. Your answer does help.

 

[Reuben_J]

Thanks. Your answer does help.

 

[Faxero]

Handling poisonous snakes is acceptable, should one have the proper permits needed to keep, train, and transport potentially dangerous animals; as well as the credentials associated with such permits.

I’m sure John David Brock had whatever permits needed to ensure his legal privilege in bringing snakes to public places.

I disagree with KendraDZ1902’s assertion that Mr. Brock was an “idiot”. He likely had experience handling snakes before, or he wouldn’t have been confident in handling them. As others have said, he knew what he was doing and what he was getting into.

Handling poisonous snakes in a spiritual setting should be not considered as a purely negative action. Those who consider the pastor to be “extreme” or “out of order” would do well to remember the courage of biblical characters, such as Abraham in his willingness to sacrifice his first-born. Many of the Church’s saints have castigated themselves in repentance for their sins and the sins of the world.

The pastor’s mistake did not lie in bringing a poisonous snake into a church building and using it in his lessons. His mistake was the denial of medical attention. As Reuben J wisely stated, his faith in God was misplaced.

He did have faith in God, nevertheless, and now, we must have faith in God’s mercy.

 

[graciew]

Handling poisonous snakes is acceptable, should one have the proper permits needed to keep, train, and transport potentially dangerous animals; as well as the credentials associated with such permits.

I’m sure John David Brock had whatever permits needed to ensure his legal privilege in bringing snakes to public places.

I disagree with KendraDZ1902’s assertion that Mr. Brock was an “idiot”. He likely had experience handling snakes before, or he wouldn’t have been confident in handling them. As others have said, he knew what he was doing and what he was getting into.

Handling poisonous snakes in a spiritual setting should be not considered as a purely negative action. Those who consider the pastor to be “extreme” or “out of order” would do well to remember the courage of biblical characters, such as Abraham in his willingness to sacrifice his first-born. Many of the Church’s saints have castigated themselves in repentance for their sins and the sins of the world.

The pastor’s mistake did not lie in bringing a poisonous snake into a church building and using it in his lessons. His mistake was the denial of medical attention. As Reuben J wisely stated, his faith in God was misplaced.

He did have faith in God, nevertheless, and now, we must have faith in God’s mercy.

Could you give me an example of misplaced faith in a more common everyday situation ? Just to understand it better .

 

[bitterhope]

Handling poisonous snakes is acceptable, should one have the proper permits needed to keep, train, and transport potentially dangerous animals; as well as the credentials associated with such permits.

I’m sure John David Brock had whatever permits needed to ensure his legal privilege in bringing snakes to public places.

I disagree with KendraDZ1902’s assertion that Mr. Brock was an “idiot”. He likely had experience handling snakes before, or he wouldn’t have been confident in handling them. As others have said, he knew what he was doing and what he was getting into.

Handling poisonous snakes in a spiritual setting should be not considered as a purely negative action. Those who consider the pastor to be “extreme” or “out of order” would do well to remember the courage of biblical characters, such as Abraham in his willingness to sacrifice his first-born. Many of the Church’s saints have castigated themselves in repentance for their sins and the sins of the world.

The pastor’s mistake did not lie in bringing a poisonous snake into a church building and using it in his lessons. His mistake was the denial of medical attention. As Reuben J wisely stated, his faith in God was misplaced.

He did have faith in God, nevertheless, and now, we must have faith in God’s mercy.

The only thing I would add to this is the pastor’s faith may not have been misplaced (in not seeking medical attention) in the way Catholics are viewing it. To us, it only makes sense to go to a doctor for healing and therefore it’s hard to comprehend not doing so. There are many religions that believe that healing may not be an earthly healing, but his faith “saved” him in a spiritual sense. By not going to the hospital and allowing God to decide his fate was an act of faith in his part. It’s not unheard of for Christians of many denominations to avoid medical treatment and allow God to determine whether healing occur either here or in Heaven. The Catholic Church does not mandate that a sick or injured person MUST receive medical care. We don’t say a person MUST avoid medical either. It is up to the individual to decide for his or her self what they wish to do. Faith is never idiotic or foolish. The way we choose to express and live out our faith can be confusing to other Christians, and their ways can be confusing to us. We know the Catholic Church holds the fullness of truth, but if others are faithful in the ways they know how to be and are devoted to God, they may have a better chance at salvation than Catholics that are not quite as faithful and devoted.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

The topic, not each other please.

 

[ltwin]

There is an element most of the comments are missing. In these types of churches, snake-handling is sacramental. (They wouldn’t describe it this way, but it is). It is also something they would do under “the anointing” (i.e. moments when they feel the Spirit of God on them).

One of the “explanations” they give for people dying is that they did not have the anointing. Of course, they line of thinking gets more difficult when its a pastor and long-time handler who dies.

Early in the history of this snake-handling “movement” if you were bitten you were shunned as having unconfessed sin or lacking faith. Today, snake-handling churches acknowledge that adherents will be bitten occasionally. As explained by this article from Christian History Institute:

Believers say God allows snake bites, (1) to punish sins in daily life, (2) to prove the snakes have not been tampered with and are still quite deadly, (3) to try the faith of the victim and other worshipers, and (4) to show God’s healing power.

But one of the most common reasons given is that the handler did not have the “anointing.” Snakes must only be handled when a believer is completely under the power of the Holy Ghost: an experience marked by speaking in tongues and physical frenzy. Many receivers of this anointing have no recollection of the experience or even of handling the serpents.

 

[JustaServant]

There is an element most of the comments are missing. In these types of churches, snake-handling is sacramental. (They wouldn’t describe it this way, but it is). It is also something they would do under “the anointing” (i.e. moments when they feel the Spirit of God on them).

Itwin. as a Pentecostal I am sure you agree with the teaching that the signs and wonders depicted in the Bible have not ceased, but continue today. Such as tongues, healing, ect.
Do you see how that teaching leads logically to the belief in snake handling?
I’m not trying to attack what you believe, but do you think certain types of rationalizations based on the literal reading of the Bible appears to lead to this type of belief?

 

[ltwin]

Itwin. as a Pentecostal I am sure you agree with the teaching that the signs and wonders depicted in the Bible have not ceased, but continue today. Such as tongues, healing, ect.
Do you see how that teaching leads logically to the belief in snake handling?

I can see how it could, but I don’t think it has to. Only 2,500 people actually practice snake-handling. They can’t be the only one’s getting it right.

I’m not trying to attack what you believe, but do you think certain types of rationalizations based on the literal reading of the Bible appears to lead to this type of belief?

The problem is not “literal” (whatever that even means) reading of Scripture. The problem is making a ritual out of something that was never meant to be a ritual. Nowhere in Scripture do we see Christians purposely picking up snakes as demonstrations of God’s power. What we see is God empowering individuals to serve His will, and sometimes that means bestowing divine protection against poison and snake bites (though that’s not usually the case in modern church buildings).

As other posters have pointed out, a “literal” reading of Scripture also warns us not to test God.

 

[JustaServant]

I can see how it could, but I don’t think it has to. Only 2,500 people actually practice snake-handling. They can’t be the only one’s getting it right.

The problem is not “literal” reading of Scripture. The problem is making a ritual out of something that was never meant to be a ritual. Nowhere in Scripture do we see Christians purposely picking up snakes as demonstrations of God’s power. What we see is God protecting individuals and keeping them safe from harm.

I agree.
I remember years ago calling a local Christian talk show hosted by a Pentecostal. I forget the context of my question…and the question itself (hate being over 50), but I remember his answer:
“What did Jesus do, that I can’t do”?
Without missing a beat I replied, “well, resurrection pops to mind.” I received no answer and was cut off.
How prevalent is that kind of thinking among Pentecostals?

 

[ltwin]

I agree.
I remember years ago calling a local Christian talk show hosted by a Pentecostal. I forget the context of my question…and the question itself (hate being over 50), but I remember his answer:
“What did Jesus do, that I can’t do”?
Without missing a beat I replied, “well, resurrection pops to mind.” I received no answer and was cut off.
How prevalent is that kind of thinking among Pentecostals?

That we can do everything that Jesus could? Most Pentecostals would not agree since Jesus is God and we are not. Though we do believe that God can and will act in our world and that this is often accomplished through the prayers and faith of Christians. Expectation for the miraculous is higher than in most traditions. And there is the belief that “the same power that conquered the grave lives in me” (as Hillsong puts it). And we would not put it out of possibility that the prayers of a righteous person could raise the dead.

Outside of the mainstream Pentecostal and charismatic communities are groups that speak of the “Manifested Sons of God” and potential “supermen.” But once you get into all that craziness you are basically in UFO hunter territory.

 

[josie_L]

Read more at christianpost.com/news/kentucky-snake-handler-bit-during-church-service-refuses-medical-treatment-and-dies-142061/#gY9se041q6TW0rZV.99

My goodness, didn’t Jesus himself say to the devil, that we should not put our Lord God to the test?

 

[Kliska]

What happened to the snake-handling pastor actually?

To me, Mark 16:17-18 is about protection that is accorded to those when they are endangered as they carry out the work of the Lord, not playing with the danger itself. In Acts 28, Paul definitely did not know that the viper was in the pile of brushwood which fastened itself on his hand as it was driven out by the heat from the fire he started on the brushwood.

So, what was the pastor trying to prove? If he was proving this verse by purposely handling snakes and that he would not be harmed when got bitten, then I believe he was wrong. The verses did not mean it that way. His faith was sadly misplaced and being a pastor he was, IMO, he was rather foolish in messing with poisonous snakes.

It is true, however, that there were stories of missionaries in their outreaching to natives in the jungle might step on or encounter with poisonous snakes or even been bitten by them but miraculously survived.

In agreement!

 

[graciew]

There is an element most of the comments are missing. In these types of churches, snake-handling is sacramental. (They wouldn’t describe it this way, but it is). It is also something they would do under “the anointing” (i.e. moments when they feel the Spirit of God on them).

One of the “explanations” they give for people dying is that they did not have the anointing. Of course, they line of thinking gets more difficult when its a pastor and long-time handler who dies.

Early in the history of this snake-handling “movement” if you were bitten you were shunned as having unconfessed sin or lacking faith. Today, snake-handling churches acknowledge that adherents will be bitten occasionally. As explained by this article from Christian History Institute:

Very interesting. This explains what happened. The article too.
Thanks