Mark 16:18 Commentary: Handling Serpents and Poison

Mark 16:18 stands within the so-called 'Longer Ending' of Mark (16:9-20), which appears in the vast majority of later Greek manuscripts and was accepted by the church as canonical. The verse follows Jesus' Great Commission (v.15) and a list of signs that 'will accompany those who believe' (v.17): casting out demons, speaking new tongues, and now handling serpents and drinking poison without harm. The cultural background includes the Old Testament promise of Psalm 91:13 ('You will tread on the lion and cobra') and Jesus' own earlier words in Luke 10:19 ('I give you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions … Nothing will in any way hurt you'). In the ancient world, snakes and poison were real threats to travelers and missionaries. The early church saw these promises fulfilled literally: Paul at Malta (Acts 28:3-6), and tradition preserved about the apostle John and Barsabas. The laying on of hands for healing was already a known practice, seen in Jairus's daughter (Mark 5:23) and in Peter and John at the temple (Acts 3:6-8). Mark's context emphasizes that these signs confirm the preached word (v.20) and demonstrate God's power over creation and disease, just as Jesus had done during his ministry.

Mark 16:18 is part of the 'Longer Ending' of Mark (16:9-20). This passage is absent from the two earliest Greek manuscripts (Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus) and is marked with asterisks or notes in others. Early church fathers such as Irenaeus and Eusebius were aware of it, but its authenticity has been debated since the fourth century. The supplied commentaries treat the passage as canonical Scripture, and it has been widely accepted in the church's tradition. No significant textual variants are noted for this specific verse in the sources consulted.

Early church tradition preserved stories that align with this promise: Papias (recorded by Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. iii.39) reported that Barsabas, a candidate for the apostleship (Acts 1:23), drank deadly poison unharmed. The Cambridge Bible also notes a tradition that the apostle John drank hemlock without injury. Augustine and others interpreted the verse as a metaphor for spiritual protection from the poison of heresy. In later centuries, the verse was used to encourage missionaries facing real dangers. In the late 19th and 20th centuries, some Appalachian and Pentecostal groups adopted literal snake-handling as a test of faith, a practice uniformly rejected by mainstream Christian bodies as a misreading of the text. The majority tradition has consistently read Mark 16:18 as a promise of God's providential care, not a command to court danger.

Three-point outline

1. Divine protection on mission. Jesus does not command believers to handle snakes or drink poison; he promises that when such dangers arise in gospel work, God will protect them. Paul's experience on Malta (Acts 28:3-6) shows this promise in action.
2. Healing as a sign of the kingdom. Laying hands on the sick continues Jesus' own ministry. The power is not in the human touch but in Christ's name, as seen in Acts 3:6 and Acts 28:8.
3. A word of caution. Wesley and the broader tradition agree: deliberately testing God by drinking poison or handling venomous snakes is not faith but presumption. The promise is for providential protection, not for experiments.

Five-point outline

1. The verse is part of the Great Commission context (Mark 16:15-18), signs confirm the preached word.
2. Handling serpents echoes Psalm 91:13 and Luke 10:19; victory over the enemy's power.
3. Drinking deadly poison: the Greek κἂν ('and if') suggests a hypothetical, not an imperative. Commentators agree it refers to accidental or forced ingestion.
4. Laying on hands for healing was a regular practice in the early church (James 5:14-15, Acts 28:8).
5. The promise is for 'those who believe' (v.17), but must be understood within Christ's mission, not as a stand-alone guarantee.

Illustration hooks

• A missionary working in a remote area where snakebites are common; the verse brings comfort, not a test.
• A medical worker in a conflict zone who survives a poisoning attempt, seeing God's protection.
• Churches that practice regular prayer for the sick, laying on hands with faith, not spectacle.

Questions your congregation is asking

• Does this verse mean Christians should pick up snakes in church services?
• If God promises protection, why do some missionaries still die from snakebites or poison?
• Can we claim this promise today when we face danger in sharing the gospel?

Mark 16:18 is one of the most misunderstood verses in the Bible. It has been used to justify dangerous practices that Jesus never intended. This small-group study will help you understand the original promise in context: protection for those on mission, not a command to test God. Let the commentaries and cross-references guide the discussion.

Discussion questions

1. Read Mark 16:15-18. How does verse 18 connect to the commission in verse 15? What is the purpose of the 'signs'?
2. What does the Greek construction οὐ μὴ βλάψει ('it will in no way hurt them') tell us about the strength of this promise?
3. How does Acts 28:3-6 shed light on the meaning of 'taking up serpents'? Was Paul testing God or was the danger unexpected?
4. Wesley wrote that God never calls us to try experiments like drinking poison. Why is this distinction between protection and presumption important?
5. What does the laying on of hands for healing look like in the New Testament? (See Mark 5:23, Acts 3:6-7, Acts 28:8.) Is this practice still valid for today?
6. How would you respond to someone who says they must handle snakes to prove their faith?
7. In what situations today might Christians trust God for protection from serious danger as they share the gospel?