Well, this is just painfully ironic. I've never actually seen this show, Snake Salvation, which is now canceled, as I don't get the National Geographic Channel. But from my understanding, it chronicled Jaime Coots, a snake-handling Pentecostal preacher in Kentucky. Jaime Coots was the man who die after being bitten by a snake. He was found dead on Saturday night. After Pastor Coots was bitten, he was urged to seek medical attention, but refused. Last year, Coots pleaded guilty to violating Tennessee's exotic animal law.
Earlier this year, Coots' mentee, Andrew Hamblin, was quoted as saying
"When you feel the anointing and God moves on you to take up serpents, even if one of 'em lays fangs into you, you shall not be harmed."
As I said I have never seen the show "Snake Salvation", but I have seen footage of these so-called "Snake preachers", and I think they are completely insane.
Once again, I feel as thought I am late to the party but wanted to add to this thread.
According to Dr. Bart Ehrman, Director of Graduate Studies and the Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the oldest written copies (discovered so far) of manuscripts of the gospel of Mark ended at Mark 16:8. They did not have the additional 12 verses referring to snake handling and poison consumption till much later versions (still remaining the the current King James version) of the bible.
This is just one of the thousands of mistakes, additions and revisions to the bible manuscripts from 70 CE to 2014. This is a book that has be revised again and again for 2,000 years to support the the developing doctrine of a Christian church(s). As thinking individuals questioned the legitimacy of the bible, the apoligists continue(d) to revise the book to support their claims.
If you can't get a book corrected in 2,000 years, its time to drop the class!
Gene you might be late to the party but you come bearing a great gift of knowledge.
I suppose this means that even biblicly, Mr. Coots' death was a dumb mistake.
Mark is now considered to be the oldest of the three synoptic gospels—traditionally it was Matthew—and it is interesting to note it contains no account of either the virgin birth or the resurrection. It does not contain a genealogy of Jesus as Matthew and Luke do.
It is interesting that the genealogy of Jesus differs in Matthew and Luke. I believe in one of the genealogies Mary's Joseph is listed: wouldn't this make Jesus the Son of Man??
Yes, Gene. It would make Jesus the Son of Man. He said he was anyway. The important thing about genealogies here is that one is through Joseph and the other (said to be through Mary by theists) is simply made up! The writer did not have the same source material. He made up his genealogy. Then you have to ask yourself why Joseph's linage would be given if God was really Jesus' father. It just doesn't make sense!
His son said that he had recovered from rattlesnake bites before without medical help and believed that he would fare as well this time. Whether there is some gradually increasing sensitization to the venom I don't know, but he was relying on past experience and it failed him this time.