Is Snake-Handling in Church Biblical?

MARK 16:17,18

𝟏𝟕 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐬 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞; 𝐈𝐧 𝐦𝐲 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐥𝐬; they shall speak with new tongues; 

𝟏𝟖 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.

 

When I was a child an older relative took us out into the bush one day, showing us how to find snakes and how to pick them up. After that when my brother and I used to go out on our bicycles, I'd find snakes and pick them up - just because I could! I grew out of it though, fortunately.

 

On that part of Mark, I think that it was 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 not 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦. It didn't mean the apostles should deliberately handle snakes in public to show they could not be harmed, as a 'sign' (as some churches in the Appalachian Mountains and southeastern US have done) - it simply meant that as they would go out preaching the gospel and inadvertently pick up snakes or unknowingly drink poison, they wouldn't be harmed, as a sign.

 

There's actually an example of this happening, in the Book of Acts. When Paul was shipwrecked on the island of Malita (modernday Malta), and had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, a viper came out of the heat and fastened on his hand. When the natives saw the venomous reptile hang on his hand, they said among themselves, "No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live." But Paul just shook off the snake into the fire, and he felt no harm. Meanwhile the locals kept looking at him expecting to see him swell up, or drop dead suddenly: but after observing him a long while, and seeing no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god.

 

The island chief's father also happened to be lying down sick with a fever and diarrhoea. Paul went in and prayed, and laid his hands on him, and healed him. So after this others also who had diseases on the island came, and were healed. And they honoured Paul and his companions with many honours - and when they left they gave them all they needed.

 

Two of the signs mentioned in Mark left their impression with a whole island of people! And I've seen the sign of healing similarly impact a whole village. When I was 19 we visited a village in northern Thailand. The people were animist. The chief had such bad arthritis in his knees, he could scarcely bend his legs. My pastor at the time was with us. After prayer and the laying on of hands, the chief squatted up and down. A big smile came on his face. About a year later my pastor at the time traveled to Thailand and visited the village again. My pastor told me that as a result of that healing the whole village had converted from animism to Christ! 

 

I think it could also have been symbolic of the power of the enemy.

 

"Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you," Jesus said (Luke 10:19).

 

In Acts we find examples of the apostles casting out demons and yet being unharmed, while others who attempted to do the same were attacked and stripped naked! That was a sign which impacted many.

In Mark, Jesus foretold of incidental protection when picking up snakes - He wasn't commanding it.

Plus, I suspect the grammar of the Greek itself in Mark may rule it out. I don't have any innate knowledge of classical Greek though. For most of us, our knowledge of Koine Greek is only as good as the person's we learned from. But my parents both studied it, and it was often table conversation over dinner growing up in my parents' home. Discussing a Greek word in a New Testament passage just went along with "pass the Worcestershire Sauce" or "the mint sauce" at my father's table. 

 

So, with that disclaimer, "they shall pick up serpents" (ὄφεις ἀροῦσιν) I 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 was in the indicative mood; and "if they drink any deadly thing" (ἐὰν + θανάσιμόν τι πίωσιν) I 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 was in the subjunctive mood - not imperative. So, ‘when’, and ‘if’—not ‘you must’. 

 

(Similarly with foot-washing. We don't find examples in Acts nor do we find instructions in the Epistles, of foot-washing as a prescribed ceremony to be done whether people need their feet washed or not. But we do find instruction concerning the Lord's table, and concerning baptism.)

 

The mention in Mark of the sign of picking up snakes and not being harmed, is therefore not a reason for someone to think that tongues mightn't be for everyone, or that it has passed away. In the epistles we don't find instructions to the churches about how to have snake-handling services. But we do find instructions concerning the ministry of healing, and concerning speaking with tongues. Statements like "Is 'any' sick among you? Let him call the elders of the church..."; and "I would that 'ye all' spake with tongues." 

 

If anyone hasn't spoken in tongues, they need not feel inferior. Rather, ask and receive. Because our good Father is willing. 

 

But we have to do the speaking: the Spirit only gives us utterance. Beginning therefore requires a moment, not of passive 'faith', but of active faith.

A Glance at the Theme of Speaking in Tongues in the Bible

Let's take a glance for a moment at the theme of SPEAKING WITH TONGUES, in the Bible:

 

1. The first person to mention speaking with tongues in the New Testament, was none other than our LORD Jesus Himself:

 

 

𝐌𝐀𝐑𝐊 𝟏𝟔:𝟏𝟓-𝟐𝟎

𝟏𝟓 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦, 𝐆𝐨 𝐲𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞.

𝟏𝟔 𝐇𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐝; 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐭𝐡 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐝𝐚𝐦𝐧𝐞𝐝.

𝟏𝟕 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐬 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞; 𝐈𝐧 𝐦𝐲 𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐥𝐬; 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐘 𝐒𝐇𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐒𝐏𝐄𝐀𝐊 𝐖𝐈𝐓𝐇 𝐍𝐄𝐖 𝐓𝐎𝐍𝐆𝐔𝐄𝐒;

𝟏𝟖 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.

𝟏𝟗 𝐒𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦, 𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐝 𝐮𝐩 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐧, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐚𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐆𝐨𝐝.

𝟐𝟎 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐰𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐧.

 

 

Jesus said the sign of 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘴 would follow them that believe.

 

You're a believer, aren't you? Therefore the sign of speaking with new tongues shall follow you!

 

Paul said, "I would that ye all spake with tongues..." (I Corinthians 14:5). 

 

'All' would include you and me, as individuals, wouldn't it. 

 

That means God is willing that we all speak with tongues!

 

Paul said, "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all" (verse 18)

.

He meant, outside of the church—he was talking about praying to God by himself, in tongues

:

"For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but 𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘎𝘰𝘥: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries" (verse 2).

 

Speaking not to men, but to God, it says—which means praying, doesn't it.

 

"I will pray with the spirit [that is, in tongues] and I will pray with the understanding also..." he said (verse 15)

.

Those words 'I will' indicate volition. It means, once you have received the Holy Spirit and spoken with tongues as the Spirit gave you utterance (see Acts 2:1-4), thereafter you can continue to speak in tongues, or with your understanding, at will.

 

Paul chose to pray to God in tongues, outside of the church, more than all of them. And he said, I would that you all did! 

 

It is God's will that you and I speak with tongues. He is a good Father Who gives good gifts to His children. He will give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him. 

 

But tongues aren’t only for private prayer: they’re also for church gatherings, when "...the whole church be come together into one place..." (verse 23):

 

"And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘴" (I Corinthians 12:28). 

 

God has set diversities of tongues in the church, it says. 

 

"If any man speak in an unknown tongue [directly addressing the congregation] let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret" (verse 14). 

 

Two or three members taking their turn to hold the floor and directly address the audience in unknown tongues expecting everyone’s undivided attention would have been plenty before someone should be given the chance to interpret, wouldn't you agree—so the congregation could get something out of it.

 

That was really just common sense, in that scenario. (That's why Paul appealed to the common sense that even unbelievers would have.) If someone's going to singularly, directly address an audience, he ought to want them to be made to understand it so they can benefit. 

 

That's altogether a different scenario to when the Spirit fell upon 120 people in an upper room on the day of Pentecost and they all began to speak with other tongues; 

 

or different to Cornelius' household where the Spirit fell on them all while Peter was still preaching, and they heard them speak with tongues; 

 

or at Ephesus, where Paul laid hands on 12 newly baptized disciples and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. 

 

In each of those situations no-one was addressing an audience per se. 

 

That's why it's perfectly Biblical to have Holy Ghost meetings in which everyone sings, prays or speaks to God in tongues at once. It's not obtrusive at all, because no individual is holding the floor, as such.

But when someone is expecting an audience's undivided attention, addressing them in an unknown tongue, he ought to want someone to interpret it, so the audience can benefit.

 

Paul's advice in I Corinthians doesn't contradict his own experience, nor Peter's, nor the 120 on the day of Pentecost - it addressed a different scenario. 

 

Paul indeed said, "Let everything be done decently and in order' - but sometimes it's possible to place our own rules on what that means. 

 

For example, when Peter was preaching to Cornelius' household, the Spirit fell on them while Peter was still speaking! And Peter later said he'd heard them speaking with tongues. While Peter was still preaching! And more than two or three people too. Some might think that would be disorderly. But it's Bible!

 

"Let all things be done unto edifying," Paul explained. That was the real gauge of whether or not the proceedings in a gathering were decent and orderly.

 

When all are getting filled with the Spirit at once and all speaking with other tongues, all are receiving and being edified—so that’s not indecent nor disorderly. Because all are edified.

 

But if someone is singularly, directly addressing a congregation in an unknown tongue, expecting the whole congregation's undivided attention, then it's only common sense that he ought to want to make room for interpretation so everyone can benefit. 

 

That's talking about the gift of "...the interpretation of tongues" (12:10). 

 

Tongues evidently weren't always understood by the audience, even in Bible times—otherwise, if tongues were always understood by the audience there could never ever have been any need for the gift of the interpretation of tongues!

 

Jesus mentioned 𝘯𝘦𝘸 tongues; and here Paul mentioned an 𝘶𝘯𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘯 tongue (also 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴 of tongues [12:28]; 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘴 of tongues [verse 10]; tongues 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘦𝘯 and 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘭𝘴 [13:1]); and Acts 2:4 mentioned 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 tongues. It wasn’t always known by the hearers.

 

Since ‘other’ tongues were ‘new’, or ‘unknown’, and often not understood, the distinct gift of ‘interpretation’ was therefore also given by the Spirit so the congregation could profit.

 

Addressing a congregation in an unknown tongue is beneficial to the congregation, as prophecy is—when it's interpreted.

 

"Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret" (14:13).

 

If you speak in an unknown tongue, you can pray that you may interpret. 

 

Or, you can "...let one interpret" (verse 27). Someone else may be given the interpretation.

 

"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God" (verse 28). 

 

That meant that in any case praying privately in tongues is always a good thing. 

 

It is a way to speak "...unto God", Paul said. 

 

"He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself (verse 14). 

 

It builds you up!

 

"For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful".

Your mind doesn't understand it (unless one interprets, or you pray that you may interpret) - nevertheless your spirit is praying.

 

Praying in tongues has many of the benefits that praying with your understanding has with the added benefit that you're speaking exactly as the Spirit gives you utterance:

 

 

𝐀𝐂𝐓𝐒 𝟐:𝟒

𝟒 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐨𝐥𝐲 𝐆𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐭, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐛𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐞𝐬, 𝐀𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐒𝐏𝐈𝐑𝐈𝐓 𝐆𝐀𝐕𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐌 𝐔𝐓𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐀𝐍𝐂𝐄.

 

 

When we speak with tongues, it is 𝘸𝘦 who speak, as the 𝘚𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘪𝘵 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘶𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦.

 

The moment we pray in tongues, our spirit is immediately speaking to God about things we couldn't have known to pray for with our understanding, according to the perfect will of God.

 

We can "pray", "bless", "give thanks" and "sing" with our spirit (in tongues), (I Corinthians 14:15,16,17).

 

Jesus said this sign of speaking with new tongues would follow them that believe, while the gospel would be preached to every creature in all the world. 

 

The gospel is still being preached to every creature in all the world today, isn't it? And we still see believers being baptised today, don’t we. People still need to be freed from demons. There are still people that have need of healing. Speaking with tongues was categorised along with those other basic ministries. So, since those other basic ministries (like preaching, and baptising) are still crucial today, therefore tongues still belong to today too, because Jesus categorised them together. 

 

"So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

 

And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen" (Mark 16:19,20).

 

The Lord is still confirming the word with signs following.

 

2. Some select personal testimonies, for the sake of illustration:

 

a). One day a friend and I prayed that his father would be saved by the end of that year. Then, honestly, I forgot about the prayer. But on the last day of the year, the same friend and I decided to walk out into the bush and have a time of prayer. Both of us felt an unusual unction to pray in tongues. It just flowed! I didn't know what we were praying for, but after about 45min we felt that whatever it was, was accomplished. Then that night we went out to our church's New Years Eve activity. 

 

Afterwards, at about 2am, my friend's mother phoned my friend from another city to tell him that his father had accompanied her to a service at her church that night and he accepted salvation. Then we remembered our prayer earlier in the year. No doubt we'd been inspired to pray for his father again in tongues again that day. 

 

b). Another night, home alone with no other schedule, I decided to spend some time praying in tongues. About 10 minutes into it, I sensed my prayer take on a new urgency. Into my mind flashed the face of the wife of a friend of mine. I knew I was praying for her, but I didn't know why. After about 30min, I felt the urgency lift. 

 

A couple of days later I told my friend about it. "When was it?" he asked. I told him the day and the hour. He then told me that at that very time he had to rush his wife to hospital because of a complication with her pregnancy. I couldn't have known their need - but the Holy Spirit gave me utterance to pray about it.

 

c). One day several of us were having a Holy Ghost meeting in a friend's lounge room. I said something in tongues to myself and to God. Someone happened to hear me, and began to laugh. He said he heard me say, "This revival [which we were experiencing in the room that night] shall impact our whole church, and other churches in the city, and spread interstate and around the globe". He said he'd heard me say that, and more, when I spoke in tongues. And it came to pass!

 

d). Another time I was invited to preach in a Finnish church. As soon as I stood to the pulpit, I was inspired to speak in tongues. After some time I stopped, and gave an interpretation. I preached not a prepared message but by the interpretation of tongues. What I said wasn't pre-meditated at all. 

 

Afterwards one of the elders' wives was re-filled with the Spirit. "I haven't felt this in a long time," she said. And the leader remarked, "This message was exactly what we needed to hear." 

 

e). One time many young people in the Philippines got filled with the Spirit and spoke in tongues. At the time, a mission team was visiting from Hong Kong. One of the team said she heard her Chinese dialect being spoken. 

 

One of the team members belonged to a denomination which didn't believe in tongues. She said she heard a young Filipina say in her dialect, "How long will you not believe that this is of Me?"

 

Another team member said she heard another young person, speaking in tongues, say, "I love you Lord. Cleanse me Lord." And at the moment she said, "...cleanse me, Lord" an evil spirit left the girl. And then she carried on in bliss with the Holy Spirit. 

 

Another person who'd been a missionary in Indonesia said he heard an Indonesian language, while some of the youth were speaking with tongues. I can't verify whether they were or not, but that's what he said.

 

f). In a number of meetings someone would speak with tongues, then one would interpret. It resulted in a move of God amongst the congregation: repentance, forgiveness, deliverance - and more people getting filled with the Spirit and seeing visions. 

 

g). Some young people were so filled with the Spirit that when they got to school they were still speaking with tongues. "Why didn't you tell me you could speak Chinese!" a teacher said to one teenage girl. But the girl had never learned Chinese! The whole class fell under the power of God. They got up off the floor in tears asking, "What have we got to do to be saved?"

 

What began with laughter for joy, then tears of healing, led to speaking in tongues, interpreting tongues, seeing visions, prophesying, and demons cast out - starting with young people, and spreading to adults, and other churches, in other towns. 

 

h). One time I was in church hearing our pastor speak about winning the city. I thought to myself, "The key to the city is the Holy Spirit - and to let Him move." 

 

Many of us were lying on the floor, in the Spirit. I quietly spoke in tongues. The person beside me laughed. 

 

He said that when I spoke in tongues, he heard me say, "But we've got the key to the city..."

A he said he saw a vision of a golden key. 

 

That is the key: learning to let the Holy Spirit have the room, to hold the floor, in our meetings.

 

i) Sometimes when I haven't known what to do, just one sentence in tongues, and I immediately felt refreshed, I might laugh a little in spirit, and sense a note of victory. That is being ‘edified’.

 

j). I heard of a minister who was thinking of retiring. He had to spend two weeks painting his house. He spent eight hours a day for two weeks speaking in tongues out loud while painting.

He had a dream telling him to move overseas, and to expect blessings. So instead of retiring he moved overseas and planted a new church in a difficult city. The church grew, impacted a nation and many leaders were raised up and the world was impacted. It was birthed by praying in tongues!

 

k) A truck driver decided to spend his eight hours a day in the truck speaking in tongues. After a while he started getting revelations and understanding of the Word. He started sharing it in free MP3 files online. He started preaching it publicly. And it benefited many around the world.

Spending that time speaking mysteries in the spirit, some of the revelation soon came up from his spirit from the Holy Spirit into his understanding. 

 

From truck driver to international exhorter—through speaking in tongues.

 

l). A pastor-friend of mine was about to preach, but first he said that he felt he ought to speak in tongues and that another particular brother would then interpret. 

 

So he spoke in tongues, and then the brother came forward and gave what he felt was the interpretation.

“Come and be healed,” says the Lord, “Be healed spiritually and emotionally.”

 

And with that the preacher said, Let’s respond to that straight away. People came forward, and there was much healing and deliverance.

 

After seeing and hearing that, the people were twice as interested in hearing the Pastor preach, I can assure you!

 

After all these decades that service is still memorable, because of the expression of the gifts of tongues and interpretation and their impact.

 

3. Who is the gift of the Holy Spirit for?

 

"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

 

For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call" (Acts 2:38,39).

 

 

HOW YOU CAN BE FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT AND SPEAK WITH TONGUES

 

1. KNOW it is God's will for you

 

2. ASK the Father in Jesus' Name to fill you with the Holy Spirit

 

3. BELIEVE you receive 

 

4. Since you believe you receive, go ahead and SPEAK, trusting the Spirit to give you the utterance...

...and you shall HAVE IT! 

 

 

Whether for your first time - or whether you've already been filled - how about taking a moment right now to speak in tongues as the Spirit gives you the utterance.

 

"He [the Spirit] shall glorify Me," Jesus said. 

 

It's all about JESUS. 

 

All to JESUS' honour.

"All Israel Shall Be Saved"

It would be nice to see. And it's not impossible! But I'm not sure that's what Paul mainly had in mind when he wrote to the church at Rome. 

Even if there does come a future moment in history when every Israeli living at the time does get saved (such as at the end of what some people think of as ‘The Great Tribulation’, or at the start of what some call ‘The Millennium’, when they look upon him whom they pierced and mourn for him, after He shows them His wounds and they ask how it happened and he answers, ‘in the house of my friends’), could we really say then that ‘all’ Israel have been—given that the Jews have had 2,000 years already of the gospel being announced to them and yet most weren’t saved? 

Can it really be said that this is an example-passage that God has unconditional promises exclusively for Israel (as distinct from promises that were conditional or which really had the gospel scheme in mind), when for 2,000 years Jews were homeless and even still have repeat wars? Certainly God hasn't closed the door on Jews - but His promises pointed to the gospel, and gentiles are coheirs.

Paul didn’t say, And ‘then’ all Israel shall be saved. He said, and ‘so’ “all Israel shall be saved” quoting the Old Testament verse which had said ‘all Israel’. Not ‘and then’, but ‘and so’. Not just sequence, but also manner. After the manner he’d just finished describing. In other words he was nipping potential antisemitism in the bud in the congregation at Rome, by explaining that God Himself was still into saving Jewish people, God hadn’t slammed the door on them.   

His promise hadn’t failed Israel. He’d saved the remnant. The rest had been cut off because of unbelief. But any Jews who continued not in unbelief were still being grafted in again. And this would continue to be available to Jews as well, while ever the fullness of the gentiles were still coming in. That’s the ‘gospel’ scheme which Paul had celebrated in chapters 1-8, right. 

 

And ‘so’ (on that scheme, on that gospel interpretation of Prophecy) the prophecy about potentially all Israel being saved shall be fulfilled (and therefore on that scheme it’s still possible for Jews to be saved)—therefore the Gentile members in the church at Rome need not reflect any anti-Jewish sentiments that existed there in the capital city of the empire, but rather they should continue with God’s outreach to Gentiles and Jews alike, and model for the rest of society the one, new, unified humanity that now exists in Christ. That's likely something like what Paul was mainly getting at, I suspect.   

In Paul’s letters to churches in other cities, he hardly had to address anti-semitism in the churches: he mainly had to address intimidation by the Judaizers. But the church at Rome could potentially have both problems. Claudius had previously expelled all Jews from the city, Luke said in Acts. In Romans Paul was celebrating the one new man in Christ, and he reiterated the basis for that unity, and dealt with threats to it both ways, Jews against Gentiles, and Gentiles against Jews. So Paul's statement are probably best understood in light of their place in the overall flow of Paul's letter.

When you think about it: if Paul was instead mainly issuing an eschatological forecast about Israel, and explaining that for the next 2000 years God himself would actually not be very much interested in Israel, but that he would become interested in them again in the far-off future, that wouldn’t have helped the antisemitic inclinations at Rome much, it would’ve 

Seen this way, Romans 9-11 isn’t an add-on after Paul had reached his highpoint in chapter 8—rather, 9-11 follow seamlessly after 1-8, continuing to focus on the unity we have in Christ, stating its basis, and dealing with contentions about that, with the highpoint coming at the end of Romans, a celebration of God’s wisdom in all that, and added very practical family-like matters about how to live out that unity. 

Grasping the wider flow of Romans, where Paul was going, helps understand the Israel passages in their intended light, and that helps understand the 'predestination' statements which are found within Paul's Israel argument. 

A future nationwide revival in Israel, through the gospel, is not impossible, just as it's not impossible among all nations, given the principles Paul was explaining here. But Paul was probably not giving a future forecast exclusively, but was likely mainly explaining why the congregation at Rome had every reason to always strongly be for both Jews and Gentiles.

Foreknowledge, Election, Predestination

Where  Paul talked about foreknowledge, election and predestination, I have a feeling that the emphasis in Paul’s mind was likely a polemic for his gospel, against the Judaizers. He was likely using those grand terms to defend his gospel, to defend his thesis that God’s kingdom really revolves around grace, Jesus, His cross and resurrection, and faith, and that the kingdom is for Jews and Gentiles alike in one new, real Abrahamic family, rather than the kingdom having to do with Jewish ethnicity exclusively through the Law.

Paul's claim, Paul’s gospel (about God’s grace, Jesus, His cross and resurrection, and about the church comprising of both Jew and Gentile, the international body of people whom God, simply because of their faith in Jesus, was declaring righteous)—was authentic, Paul was explaining, seeing God had already foretold of it in the Old Testament, He already foreknew the existence of a Jew/Gentile body, already planned that these would be the ones destined for glory, that his election of a people destined for glory would be these people, the faith-in-Jesus people irrespective of their ethnicity and without them needing to become Observant (of Judaism). It was to this age-old plan, that people were now being called by the gospel. Paul was defending his answer to the question of the day. He was reassuring believers against the controversy of their day. 

So that doesn’t primarily address the issue of the 1600s, which was: why don't some individuals believe. Paul doesn’t quite go there, one way or another, I suspect. He was addressing the issue of his day.

What Abraham's Promise Meant

The angel of the Lord said to Abraham:

"By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord...

That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

And in thy SEED shall ALL THE NATIONS of the earth be BLESSED; because thou hast obeyed my voice" (Genesis 22:15-18).

Wonderful words.

Now let's see what the Apostle Paul said that meant:

"And the scripture, foreseeing that God would JUSTIFY THE HEATHEN THROUGH FAITH, preached before THE GOSPEL unto Abraham, saying, In THY SEED shall all nations be BLESSED" (Galatians 3:8).

So according to Paul, Abraham's promise was a foretelling of the GOSPEL. The promised BLESSING foresaw that people of all nations would receive JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH.

(The promise was a description of the blessing of justification by faith coming upon the multi-national community of believers in Jesus, not just a description of the future of Israel or of those observant of Judaism - because the giving of the promise preceded the birth of Israel and preceded the giving of the Law. It just said, ‘all nations’. Potentially it could describe more of Israel, but only 'in thy Seed'.)

So now let's notice what Paul said about Abraham's SEED (in whom this blessing was to be received):

"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy SEED, which is CHRIST" (verse 16).

The promise wasn't made to 'seeds' (plural), but to Abraham's 'seed' (singular), whom Paul said is CHRIST.

So Paul didn't see Jesus Christ - the gospel - the Church comprising of both Jews and Gentiles - merely as something else - something unforeseen that God is only doing temporarily until He finally gets around to inaugurating the fulfillment of Abraham's promise sometime in the future. No, Paul's claim was that the gospel of Jesus Christ is exactly what the promise really actually meant all along.

Our Lord Jesus made the same claim about Abraham's promise:

"Your father Abraham rejoiced to see MY DAY: and he saw it, and was glad" (John 8:56).

According to Jesus, Abraham's promise foresaw JESUS Himself. It was about this gospel-time. Glimpsing the gospel of Christ in advance, gave Abraham joy.

The Lord God is now gathering together in one all things both which are in heaven, and on earth, people of all nations, through the gospel, to sit down with Abraham in His kingdom, new creation, as promised to Abraham long ago. This is precisely what Abraham foresaw!

I don't know about you, but as for me, I decided to just accept the way Jesus, Paul and the other Apostles unpacked Old Testament covenant, prophecy and Scripture, as radical as it may sound. It helps avoid tangents which can distract from the real message.

It's all about JESUS, the GOSPEL, and US in Him.

"For ALL the PROMISES of God IN HIM are yea, and IN HIM Amen, unto the glory of God by US" (II Corinthians 1:20).

Now, look at this next particuar promise about the seed:

"...thy SEED shall possess the gate of HIS enemies..." it said.

Through JESUS, Abraham's SEED, principalities and powers were spoiled and made a shew of openly, being triumphed over in his cross. God made peace through the blood of his cross, and by him reconciled all things unto Himself.

Jesus possessed the gate of his enemies, so in him we also receive the blessing of possessing the gate of our enemies, as coheirs of the promise.

Here's how Jesus said the blessing is actually received:

When Simon Peter confessed, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," Jesus answered and said unto him, "BLESSED art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

What that meant is that knowing JESUS is HOW one is BLESSED with the promise. Having Jewish ethnicity wasn’t how.

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the GATES OF HELL SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST IT".

Since the gates of hell didn't prevail against Jesus, they shall not prevail against his church either, because we are his body, his kingdom people. That's a promise.

Isaiah foretold of One coming, "And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open" (Isaiah 22:22).

Then Jesus said to John, "These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth" (Revelation 3:7).

Jesus is the One who was to receive the key, then he gave the keys to us his body, his kingdom people, in him.

"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (see Matthew 16:16-19).

Since sin, death and the devil were conquered by the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, so we also because we have been buried with him in baptism and also risen with him through the faith of the operation of God who raised him from the dead, are more than conquerors over sin, death and the devil too.

(And the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.)

We are all the children of Abraham by faith. You have received the blessing of Abraham by faith. We are coheirs with Jesus of the promise. You are.

Have a blessed day with Abraham's family today, Christ's body, his church, his anointed kingdom people, inheriting all the promises of God in Him to the glory of God!

Ezekiel's and John's Visions

 

A popular interpretation of Bible Prophecy is that the animal sacrifices described in the Book of Ezekiel shall be required during what they call 'The Millennium', only not for actual atonement but as a memorial.

But in Ezekiel it stated that the animal sacrifices would be for atonement: it didn't say anything about it merely being a memorial.

It also stated that the Levite priest would officiate the sacrifices. But the New Testament states that the Levitical priesthood has been superseded by the endless Priesthood of our Lord Jesus Christ. His sacrifice was once for all.

So, Ezekiel's vision wasn't all about the future: part of its purpose was to provide inspiration and instruction for the Jews who would be returning from captivity, while the Old Covenant still stood.

But the grandiose scenarios described by Ezekiel never came to pass, some may say. But Ezekiel was describing visions - he wasn't writing in prose, unlike Moses who saw face to face Moses wasn't describing visions, he gave instructions for the building of the former tabernacle, in prose. It is the nature of visions that they need interpreting. So, the imagery in Ezekiel required interpreting: it wasn't meant to be taken as prose. That's just how a lot of ancient Jewish vision and prophecy worked.

Ezekiel was also told upfront that his hearers wouldn't do what they were being told through his prophesying. So, the fact they didn't fully complete all that was intended in Ezekiel's visions doesn't mean it is instead all about the future.

And yet, everything that was said and done in the Old Testament also foreshadowed New Testament realities. So, Ezekiel's visions were also pregnant, we could say, with the eternal spiritual realities which were later to be birthed, which have now have been birthed by the New Covenant. In the Book of Revelation John described seeing much of the same imagery and themes as Ezekiel but with a completely Christ-centred gospel shape to it all.

It's a mistake therefore to take visions like Ezekiel's and try to treat it as if it was all a video of the future-still. That forces an unintended meaning onto the prophecies, and attempts to artificially place things in the future when the future is meant to be different since Jesus came.

Ezekiel's visions were intended as inspiration and instruction for the Jews returning from captivity - and all of that also foreshadowed the eternal realities which we all now enjoy in Christ Jesus.

The Levitical priesthood has been superseded by Jesus' high priesthood forever.

Sacrifices were done away with by His own once-for-all sacrifice.

Earthly Jerusalem is no longer the required place of worship: we have come to the heavenly Jerusalem.

The true river is the river of life that flows from above.

It's all about JESUS now. The future won't be about pilgrimages to a stone temple in Jerusalem with Levite priests to offer blood sacrifices either for atonement or for memorial. Isn't that freeing!

Plus, the term 'The Millennium' isn't in the Bible anyway. Give that some thought!