The practice of snake handling, sometimes called serpent handling, is a fringe ritual found in a small number of Pentecostal and Holiness churches in rural parts of the United States, especially in the Appalachian region. It arose in the early twentieth century and has never been more than a marginal phenomenon, but it claims biblical support and is often defended as a test or proof of faith. If we apply a conservative, historical-grammatical reading of Scripture, however, it becomes clear that snake handling is a dangerous distortion rather than an expression of genuine New Testament Christianity.

Historical Background of Snake Handling

Modern snake handling is generally traced to George Went Hensley (1880–1955). Around 1910 he began introducing snakes into the worship of a Holiness group in the mountains of Tennessee, arguing that true believers must “take up serpents” as a sign of salvation. Hensley eventually left the Church of God Holiness and formed independent congregations where handling venomous snakes became a required mark of obedience for those who wanted to be considered faithful.

From those beginnings, related churches appeared in scattered communities across Appalachia and the rural South. Services were often held in homes or simple meeting houses. Dress codes tended to be strict: women with uncut hair, long dresses, no make-up; men with short hair, long sleeves, and strong preaching against tobacco and alcohol. In addition to handling snakes, some groups added the deliberate drinking of poison, again appealing to certain words in Mark 16.

Despite the rhetoric of “divine protection,” the history of the movement is filled with tragic deaths. Hensley himself died from a snake bite in 1955. Later well-known handlers, such as John Wayne “Punkin” Brown and Pastor Mack Wolford, likewise died after rattlesnake bites suffered in the middle of religious services. Leaders often bear scars from multiple bites, living evidence that whatever is happening, it is not a permanent, guaranteed immunity.

Passages Used to Justify Snake Handling

Snake-handling advocates commonly appeal to three passages.

First is the long ending of Mark:

“These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.” (Mark 16:17–18)

Second is Jesus’ statement to the seventy:

“Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing will injure you.” (Luke 10:19)

Third is the narrative about Paul on Malta:

“However, when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks and laid them on the fire, a viper came out because of the heat and fastened on his hand. When the natives saw the creature hanging from his hand, they began saying to one another, ‘Undoubtedly this man is a murderer, and though he has been saved from the sea, Justice has not allowed him to live.’ However he shook the creature off into the fire and suffered no harm.” (Acts 28:3–5)

A careful, context-sensitive reading shows that none of these texts authorizes modern believers to seek out snakes as a ritual of faith.

The Textual Problem with Mark 16:17–18

The first and most basic issue with using Mark 16:17–18 as a foundation for snake handling is textual. The Gospel of Mark almost certainly ends at 16:8 in the earliest and best Greek manuscripts. Verses 9–20, which include the promise about picking up serpents and drinking poison, are absent from the two oldest complete copies of the New Testament and from several other early witnesses. Ancient writers like Eusebius and Jerome explicitly note that the longer ending was missing from most manuscripts known to them.

In addition to this external evidence, the vocabulary and style of Mark 16:9–20 differ noticeably from the rest of the Gospel. The passage feels like a summary patch, drawing together traditions from other Gospels and early Christian teaching. Even many conservative scholars who hold firmly to inerrancy acknowledge that these verses are a later addition, not part of Mark’s original composition.

This does not mean every statement in Mark 16:9–20 is false, but it does mean that building a mandatory ritual of handling venomous snakes on a disputed, likely non-original paragraph is reckless. Sound doctrine and practice should rest on passages whose text and meaning are clear, not on a late appendix whose authority is questionable even at the level of manuscript evidence.

Even if someone insists on treating Mark 16:9–20 as canonical, the text still does not prescribe snake handling services. It speaks of “signs” that would accompany those who believe in the period when the risen Christ was confirming the apostolic message. It does not command believers to seek out snakes or poison. The only narrative example we have that matches the description is precisely Acts 28, where protection occurs in an unexpected, involuntary encounter, not in a staged ceremony.

Luke 10:19 and Figurative Language

Luke 10 records Jesus sending out the seventy to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom with special authority over demons and disease. When they return rejoicing that even demons are subject to them in His name, Jesus responds:

“Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing will injure you.” (Luke 10:19)

To rip “serpents and scorpions” out of this setting and treat them as a permanent command for all believers to stomp on literal snakes is to ignore the way Jesus regularly uses symbolic language. The explanatory phrase “over all the power of the enemy” shows that He is talking about spiritual opposition, not about turning worship into a reptile show. Throughout Scripture, serpents and scorpions can function as images of danger, hostility, and satanic power. Jesus assures His commissioned messengers that the enemy will not finally thwart their mission.

Furthermore, the promise in Luke 10:19 is given to a specific group at a specific time under extraordinary conditions. It is not a general warranty that no believer will ever be harmed. The same Lord who spoke those words also warned His disciples that they would be hated, persecuted, and even killed (John 15:18–20). To turn Luke 10:19 into a blanket guarantee of physical invulnerability is to set Scripture against Scripture.

Acts 28 and Paul’s Viper Encounter

In Acts 28, Paul is shipwrecked on Malta, helping gather firewood when a viper fastens on his hand. The islanders expect him to swell up or drop dead, but he simply shakes the snake into the fire and is unharmed. They conclude, wrongly but understandably, that he must be some kind of god.

Nothing in this passage suggests that Paul was engaging in a ritual test of faith. He was not proving anything to himself or to others by handling snakes; he was simply serving, and danger unexpectedly struck. The Lord chose, in that moment, to protect His servant to advance the gospel among the islanders. That is providence and apostolic-era sign, not a template for deliberately courting death in worship.

Using Acts 28 to justify modern snake handling is like using Paul’s survival of shipwreck as an excuse to sail straight into hurricanes in the name of faith. The narrative shows God’s mercy in an unplanned crisis, not a command to create crises.

Testing God versus Trusting God

When Satan tempted Jesus to throw Himself from the pinnacle of the temple, he even quoted Scripture:

“For it is written, ‘He will give His angels orders concerning You’; and, ‘On their hands they will lift You up, so that You do not strike Your foot against a stone.’” (Matthew 4:6)

Jesus responded with Scripture as well: “On the other hand, it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.’” (Matthew 4:7)

The parallel to snake handling is painfully obvious. To pick up a rattlesnake or copperhead during worship to “prove” faith is not an act of humble trust; it is an attempt to force God’s hand. It is the same mentality Satan proposed: throw Yourself into danger and demand that God protect You because of a promise pulled from context. True faith rests on God’s Word and obeys His commands in ordinary life; it does not manufacture peril in order to demand a miracle.

Jesus and the apostles did experience miraculous deliverances, but they did not parade those possibilities as stunts. Paul told Timothy to take a little wine for his stomach and frequent ailments (1 Timothy 5:23); he did not tell him to drink poison by faith. The normal pattern for Christians is prudence, prayer, and obedience, not theatrics with venomous animals.

Miraculous Signs and the Apostolic Era

The broader New Testament picture is that miraculous signs, including unusual protections, belonged especially to the foundational apostolic period. They confirmed the new revelation of Christ and authenticated the messengers whom God had sent. As the church matured and the Spirit completed the New Testament Scriptures, those temporary sign-gifts ceased to be part of the ordinary life of believers.

From earlier chapters we have already seen that the Holy Spirit now works through the completed, inerrant Word, not through ongoing displays of apostolic-level miracles. To insist that believers must still perform such signs to prove genuine faith is to misunderstand redemptive history. Snake handling ignores that shift, clinging to a sensational reading of a disputed text and neglecting the Spirit’s actual emphasis today: holiness, sound doctrine, and loving obedience to Scripture.

Why Snake Handling Is Not Biblical Faith

When we bring all these strands together, the conclusion is clear. Snake handling is not a biblical command, not a pattern taught or modeled in Scripture, and not an expression of the Spirit’s work in the present age. It rests on a weak textual foundation, misreads figurative language as literal, confuses providential protection with prescriptive ritual, and directly contradicts the Lord’s own warning against testing God.

Christians are indeed called to present their bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God (Romans 12:1). That sacrifice is shown in daily obedience, self-denial, and service—not in waving vipers over one’s head. Believers are urged to examine themselves to see whether they are in the faith (2 Corinthians 13:5), but the test is doctrinal fidelity and moral fruit, not whether one can survive a bite from a timber rattlesnake.

Handled with a conservative, historical-grammatical approach, Scripture gives no warrant for snake handling. Instead, it calls us away from sensational misuses of isolated texts and back to a sober, reverent submission to the whole counsel of God.

You May Also Enjoy

The Path to Behavioral Change

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS