My Understanding of Mark 16:17-18 with Acts 28

I'm amazed at the heresy called snake-handling or the name it and claim it. I even heard that a pastor who tried to defy the social distancing order died of Coronavirus. There's also that quack preacher named Eliseo Soriano challenges the legitimacy of Mark 16:9-20. Soriano is hardly a Bible expositor and takes many verses straight out-of-context. Now, Mark 16:17-18 is a very difficult verse. For years, I wonder what did it mean for the apostles and for us. I was thinking about it as a sign and wonder from God for the apostles but not for us today. I can't just pick up a rattlesnake and claim it that God will protect me. On the contrary, I'm testing the Lord my God if I do that!

I decided to go with Vernon McGee's explanation on Acts 28. It would be very interesting to read his commentary on Acts 28:3 which drives my speculation that the sign was only meant for the apostles. In his commentary, he stresses the following points that will go against the heresy of snake-handling: 

• The signs are confined to that time before the New Testament canon was completed. The sign gifts were there to substantiate the Gospel.
• It's inadvisable for anyone to pick up a rattlesnake. 
• Paul did not deliberately pick up the viper that was in that chapter. He was a man who had bad eyesight so he didn't see the viper either.

Furthermore, McGee also provides a good explanation for Mark 16:17-18 with the following points:

• The signs there are meant to be signs for preaching the Gospel. However, they weren't signs to continue the preaching. So, if I drink poison today then I truly deserve to suffer its ill effects for putting the Lord to the test.
• Sometimes, they may take place but not if you put the Lord your God to the test. The true test is correct doctrine, not signs (2 John 10). 

Hopefully, this will clear out the misunderstanding and misapplication of Mark 16:17-18.