Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
LOL? :sarcastic
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I've always wanted to attend a service too. We don't have people that crazy in our neck of the woods though.Snake handlers are nuts, but they fascinate me. You can't say they don't take their Bible seriously. I've never been to one of their services, but I'd love to go -- as long as I can get a spot near the door.
Literalistic interpretations of such passages are never a good thing.
Not only do most early manuscripts omit this verse (signifying it was almost definitely a later addition), but this could be understood in terms of metaphor:
they will pick up snakes with their hands; = they will encounter sinful people
and when they drink deadly poison, = they will live and work with them, "drinking" the poison of a "wicked society"
it will not hurt them at all; = as they are righteous, they will not be tempted to 'poisonous ways
they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." = they will stop people from doing sinful things, and they will become like Christians.
It could be an addition, basically explaining how Christians should persevere in Hellenistic Roman society, and they will eventually gain the upper hand, as opposed to literally handling snakes.
Interestingly...
1 Corinthians 10:9: We should not test the Lord, as some of them didand were killed by snakes.
Looks like it's their fault if they get bit, for testing God.
It's a case of people going by the letter of the text as opposed to the spirit of it. The very thing Jesus is supposed to have preached against in Christianity, and many Christians keep to it.I agree with this. I think many tend to read the Bible way too literally for being an ancient document, or a collection of ancient documents, rather. The Bible doesn't have to be literal to be true on some level.
It is yet another perfect example of the lunacy of religious faith.
That's rather unfair. They are considered lunatics even by the vast majority of religious adherents, and I resent being lumped in with nutjobs because I have believe in something.
Yet my faith is a big factor in who I am as a person, and I mean a big part. My beliefs are an extension of who I am as a person. Therefore, you don't really respect me.I do respect you, I don't respect your faith.
Reason and faith do not have to be mutually exclusive.but I value reason too much to pretend that I think religious faith can play any constructive role in the future of humanity.
That's rather unfair. They are considered lunatics even by the vast majority of religious adherents, and I resent being lumped in with nutjobs because I have believe in something.
...I'm not exactly harming anyone with my faith, and acting as though simply because I have a faith that I'm somehow shunning reason is not a nice view that you hold of me. Only in a stereotypical world-view where religion equals fundamentalist, literal Christianity and Islam would this be appropriate, and I hardly hold such views.
However, I'm neither Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Amish.<<snip>>
Who doesn't?(Btw, I like snakes.)
An excellent b/w film, made in 1967, is available free on the internet:I'm willing to go, just to watch and see if anyone gets bit
What do you define as "moderate"? There are all colors and flavors of faith and religion in this world. Some have absolutely no issues with science and physical reality whatsoever. Some beliefs people hold affect no one outside of themselves. If a faith can give a person peace and balance then how can that possibly be any kind of a bad effect on humanity? And what do you mean by "water down"?Absolutely not. It is the moderate religious people who are fooling themselves the most, thinking that by lowering the bar and approaching reason that they validate their faith. IMO, faith is utterly flawed in it's nature, and to water it down is only trickery so as to appease onself by pretending that there is no partition in one's own head who holds faith. Again, it's sincerely not a personal attack. I simply can't imagine any way to word that in a way that it doesn't seem disrespectful. I hope not to hurt your feelings.
I'm a seeker. I've spent my time learning, questioning and rationalizing various theologies. It's how I've been able to exclude certain religions (which I will not mention here) from my path, but not the only manner. I'm hardly 'deluding myself' as I'm not accepting things like the validity of certain people as prophets based on their own words and holy books and so on.<<snip>>
You wouldn't hurt my feelings (I'm too thick skinned), although you ARE technically attacking who I am, when my belief is such an important part of who I am as a person. You're painting me with a very broad brush by putting me in the same box as whackjobs who adhere to faiths to the letter, and I find that quite insulting.Again, it's sincerely not a personal attack. I simply can't imagine any way to word that in a way that it doesn't seem disrespectful. I hope not to hurt your feelings.