Mar 03 2009
Does the Bible talk about Marijuana?
Someone said that Jesus used marijuana; that the anointing oil contained cannabis. Interesting.
Many who believe this cite the work of Dr. Sula Benet, an etymologist from Poland. In 1936 she concluded that the Hebrew words “q’nah-bosem” (Exodus 30:23
) were etymologically related to “cannabis” and then reached the further conclusion that the anointing oil included marijuana. She noted the similarities with words from other Middle Eastern language groups. She further noted that the word could be used to reference a reed plant or a hemp plant, but she reached the definite conclusion that in the Exodus passage it meant the hemp plant.
We find Benet’s arguments weak. Her logic fails in many areas.
We believe there are two fundamentals approaches to Scripture. One is to look for support for what you already believe. The other is to seek to find in Scripture how we should be changed. Those who use this second approach in their reading of the Bible may find this article of interest.
Read our article and tell us what you think.
Stumble it!
Subscribe to Posts
I appreciate this article so much. I have a lot of friends who try to justify marijuana by the Bible, and I was searching for evidence to argue with them. It makes me so angry when people do this…hypocrisy is keeping others from knowing the truth.
Thank you for your comments! We pray that you will continue seeking His truth in all you do. We’ve personally seen pot ruin lives. It can control a person to the point that they stop caring about themselves or their families. We do not believe Scripture condones its use in any way.
I’m amazed that anyone would actually try to make a case for pot use from the Bible. I enjoyed reading your thorough explanation Tim, thanks for shedding some light on this subject.
People use, and have used, the Bible to justify all sorts of things, including murder. But like you say, making a case that the Bible promotes the use of an illegal drug like marijuana does seem a little ridiculous!
although this is true back in biblical times marijuana or cannabis was not illegal so there wouldve been nothing moraly wrong with doing it
I am not sure who Sula Bennet is, but Aryeh Kaplan was a Great Great Scholar. You would be wise not to doubt his conclusion that Kaneh Bosm is in fact Cannabis. The question is why your mind can not wrap around this very simple and straight forward translation rather then your tortured logic to come up with calamus.
I do not dispute that Aryeh Kaplan was a great Jewish scholar and rabbi. But I have not been able to find where Rabbi Kaplan stated that he believed “Kaneh Bosm” was “cannabis.” All of the web sites I have found that say Rabbi Kaplan concluded “Kaneh Bosm” means “cannabis” cite to “The Living Torah” as the basis for their statements. But Rabbi Kaplan never states his opinion about the meaning of “Kaneh Bosem” in “The Living Torah.” He makes three statements as to the identity of “Kaneh Bosem”in his notes on Exodus 20:23
. First, he states that the ancient sources identify “Kaneh Bosem” with sweet calamus. Second, he states that other sources identify the words with the Indian plant “Cympopogan martini,” which has the form of red straw. Third, he states: “On the basis of cognate pronunciation and Septuagint readings, some identify Kaneh Bosem with the English and Greek cannabis, the hemp plant.” He provides pictures of each of these three different plants in his “The Living Torah.” He provides no indication of his own conclusion on this matter.
Many other equally great Rabbis conclude that the word does not mean “cannabis.” And I have given you my rationale for why the word cannot be read as meaning “cannabis.”
If you are searching for the truth, I would be happy to interact with any data you have to support a conclusion that “Kaneh Bosem” means “cannabis.” I think you will find, when you press the data, that it does not provide much weight to counter the long weight of the historical meaning of the term.
lmfao! i really doubt jesus used weed! and if so he didn’t smoke it. =D
I don’t think any amount of scholarship will convince someone that is closed to something they don’t already understand. No get ready for this, Marijuana is actually a reference to Mary and John, Maria y Juan the bringer of the Christ, Messiah, Moshiach the Anointed One. Believe it or, Marijuana is a reference to the inner experience of the Chirst/Messiah that is in each one of us, and that is what Mary and John (maria y juan) are symbols of. By “smoking” Mari y Juan, Mary and John, the inner christ is ignited. I know this will come as a shock to many, but that is what it is all about. Awakeing the “Inner Christ” “Messiah” “Moschiah” that is the real “truth” of the bible. ….and the truth shall set you free.
Hey Tim, you didn’tlook very hard, I found it in one search, here is the actual page from Kaplan’s book.
http://www.thc-ministry.org/thelivingtorah.html
I am not sure that you read either the page from Kaplan’s book or my earlier comment. I actually quote that very page of the book in my previous comment. Kaplan never says anywhere on this page that he thinks “kaneh bosem” is marijuana. The words highlighted in Hebrew are the words “kaneh bosem” as they appear in the Hebrew text of Exodus 30
. Rabbi Kaplan then comments on these words by stating that ancient sources say that this is sweet calamus. Others think it is an Indian plant. He then says that some see this cannabis. He never states that he thinks this third view is right. I am still trying to find where Rabbi Kaplan states that he thinks this is a reference to cannabis. This page does not state what his view is.
I do hope you are not playing the role of content editor in this alleged quest for the truth, and my comments well be posted.
Happy to have a point by point debate with you. Your point about the Mishna word being a foriegn word in Hebrew is correct, but that is also true of Keneh Bosem, and the Old Testament references as well. Benet’s etymological research regarding the Hebrew terms ‘keneh bosem’ and ‘keneh’ was based upon tracing the modern word ‘cannabis’ back through history to show the similarities between the cognitive pronunciation of ‘cannabis’ and ‘keneh bosem’ and as well as comparing the term to the names used for cannabis by contemporary kingdoms, such as the Assyrian and Babylonians terms for the plant ‘qunubu’. In fact the term ‘keneh bosem’, also rendered q’neh bosem’ is the Hebrew transliteration of an earlier Indo-European term for the plant ‘canna’. This term left traces through the vernacular ‘an’ seen in various modern terms for cannabis, such as the Indian bhang, the French chanvre, the Dutch canvas and the German hanf.
This use of an Indo-European word in the Semitic language shows that the ritual use of cannabis came to the Hebrews from foreign sources and, as an item of trade, likely via the Scythians, it retained the core aspects of its original name. Indeed, in both the Jeremiah 6:20
and Ezekiel 27:19
references referred to by Benet, cannabis is identified as coming as an item of trade from a foreign land, and indeed as the additional references noted by Benet tell when put into the context of the Biblical storyline, this foreign association with the plant may in fact have been the cause of its disfavour amongst the ancient Hebrews. Certain researchers, who claim the designation of ‘calamus’ as keneh bosem stands correct, have failed to note this situation, which excludes ‘calamus’ by the fact that it was a common marsh root in the area, not an item of trade. The term also has some similarities with the contemporary Assyrian terms, as well as identical uses in both groups, as shown above.
If you’ve written an article you want to link to, that is fine. Please do not paste entire articles in the comments or the comment will be deleted. Point by point debate is acceptable, and welcomed, but make it that – a point by point debate.
I am playing the role of content editor.
My reasons for this are not to “block” or “cover” up the truth. The truth can and will be found by any who truly seek, but it may not be found by those with an agenda (e.g., those who enjoy sin looking for confirmation that what they’re doing is acceptable in the eyes of Jesus).
Again, keep your comments short and concise and they will be welcomed. If you have an article to link to, link to it.
Eric
Thanks Chris Bennett, well said. And for those of you who rely on a translation only, 420 is the gematria of smoke. I know everyone has their theory as to the origin of the term, but I can not think of one that predates the “Old Testament”.
aleph shin nun = smoke = 420
Have the same regard for one another; do not be haughty but associate with the lowly; do not be wise in your own estimation.
Romans 12:16
It is curious that my well thought out repsonses are being excluded from this forum, the last post I wrote never showed up, and that is true of a number of posts I have submitted here, some not very long at all. This is disheartening to find on a site with a title like “truthsaves”.
My email is freeshiva@hotmail.com
I will post my point by point response on my blog
http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/blog/38
For a full account of Sula Benet’s article see
http://books.google.ca/books?id=CBXxnaGk0hwC&pg=PA40&dq=exodus+30:23+cannabis&lr=#v=onepage&q=exodus%2030%3A23%20cannabis&f=false
Support for Benet’s work
For an account on the keneh and keneh bosem references in the context of the Old Testament (I wrote that article over a decade ago, there is a mistake in there regarding seraphim) http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/1090.html
Christian references
http://www.cannabisculture.com/backissues/cc11/christ.html
http://hightimes.com/news/ht_admin/139
My point by point response
Tim
1
)You state that there are Christians who use Scripture to justify the use of marijuana. There are also people who claim to know Christ and use Scripture to justify everything from racial hatred towards others to turning a deaf ear to the cries of the immigrant and the poor. Not everyone who says “Lord, Lord,” will enter the kingdom of God (Matthew 7:21
).
Chris
A) There are also people who have used the Bible to justify the drug war, the burning of witches and other crimes. I’m not really sure what your point is, that there is a lot of mean stuff in the Bible?
2) Paul tells us in Titus 1:16
that there are people who profess to know God but in their works they deny Him. I say this, not to state that everyone who uses marijuana is going to hell, but to say that people have long twisted the words of Scripture to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:16
).
). For those who follow the first way, I suspect there is nothing that I or others can say to change their minds. For those who follow the second, I offer the following.
There are two fundamental ways of approaching Scripture. The first way is to seek to find in Scripture support for what we want to do. The second way is to seek to find in Scripture how we should be changed (see 2 Corinthians 3:18
B) Paul never met Jesus, initially he was persecuting Christians, and then when he converted, he is shown throughout the New Testament t be in conflict with Christians who were practicing the faith before his own timely conversion. The Roman Catholic church is based around the teachings of Paul and it was clearly in conflict with other early Christian groups now known by the collective name of Gnostics. These are key elements in the later suppression of cannabis and the Christian groups that used it, as well as the development of the Christian Dark Ages
As we shall see in this debate, these themes also play out in Tim’s analysis of the biblical references to cannabis, and are telling by what he leaves out of the discussion. One is left wondering if he was really on a quest for the truth of the matter, or merely out to discredit a perceived threat?
Before continuing, it should also be noted that there is other linguistic evidence for cannabis in the Bible, missed by Tim.
In different publications of A CYCLOPAEDIA OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE, the 19th century scholar John Kitto put forth two, potentially related, etymologies for “hashish”, through Hebrew terms Shesh, which originates in reference to some sort of “fibre plant”, and the possibly related word, Eshishah, (E-shesh-ah?) which holds connotations of “syrup” or “unguent”.
In a 1903 essay, INDICATIONS OF THE HACHISH-VICE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT A British physician, Dr. C. Creighton, concluded that several references to marijuana can be found in the Old Testament. Examples are the ‘honeycomb’ referred to in the Song of Solomon, 5:1, and the ‘honeywood’ in I Samuel 14
: 25-45” (Consumer Reports 1972). Creighton felt that in “the O.T. there are some half-dozen passages where cryptic references to hachish may be discovered… But that word, which is the key to the meaning, has been knowingly mistranslated in the Vulgate and in the modern version, having been rendered by a variant also by the LXX in one of the passages, and confessed as unintelligible in the other by the use of a marginal Hebrew word in Greek letters” (Creighton 1903).
Hachish, which is the disreputable intoxicant drug of the East…is of unknown antiquity. It is known that the fiber of hemp-plant, Cannabis sativa, was used for cordage in ancient times; and it is therefore probable that the resinous exudation, “honey” or “dew”, which is found upon its flowering tops on some soils, or in certain climates (Cannabis Indica), was known for its stimulant or intoxicant properties from an equally early date…we may assume it to have been traditional among the Semites from remote antiquity. There are reasons, in the nature of the case, why there should be no clear history. All vices are veiled from view; they are sub rosa; and that is true especially of the vices of the East. Where they are alluded to at all, it is in cryptic, subtle…and allegorical terms. Therefore if we are to discover them, we must be prepared to look below the surface of the text. (Creighton 1903)
Dr. Creighton put forth the idea that the tale of Nebuchadnezzar eating grass gave indication of cannabis use. He stated that “in the case of Daniel’s apologue of Nebuchadnezzar’s fall, it arises from the eating of ‘grass’, the Semitic word having both a generic and a colloquial meaning (hachish), as well as from the introduction of the subjective perceptions of hachish intoxication as gigantic or grotesque objects” (Creighton 1903).
The German researcher Immanuel Low, in his DIE FLORA DER JUDEN (1926\1967) identified a number of ancient Hebrew references to cannabis, here as an incense, food source, as well as cloth, noting the keneh, and keneh bosem references amongst others in this regard independent of Benet . Interestingly, Immanuel Löw, referred to an ancient Jewish Passover recipe that called for wine to be mixed with ground up saffron and hasisat surur, which he saw as a “a kind of deck name for the resin the Cannabis sativa” (Low, 1924). Low suggests that this preparation was also made into a burnable and fragrant concoction by being combined with Saffron and Arabic Gum (Low, 1926\1967).
Botanist William Emboden the “shamanistic Ashera priestesses of pre-reformation Jerusalem… anointed their skins with… [a cannabis] mixture as well as burned it” (Emboden 1972).
http://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=nav…william+emboden
4) Second, the fact that the Mishnah used a different word spelled with different Hebrew characters to reference marijuana lends support to a conclusion that the rabbis did not think that the word “q’nah-bosem” was a reference to marijuana. This is not a situation where the words “qaneh” and “bosem” ceased to exist and were replaced by “qanabos.” The words “qaneh” and “bosem” continued to be used by Hebrew writers at the same time that “qanabos” came into the Hebrew vocabulary. And the words “qaneh” and “bosem” in post Biblical writings are not associated with hemp. Dr. Benet’s thesis that “q’nah-bosem” over time became “qanabos” is undermined by this continued use of “qaneh” and “bosem” to mean something other than “qanabos.”
D) Hebrew language changed throughout the period, just as English language has, compare words from just a few centuries ago. Such changes are even used to decipher the different periods texts were written in. The term qanabos is an obvious etymological evolutionary cognate development of q’aneh bosem. The term q’aneh bosem itself means “fragrant cane”, both words came to be used independently. Kaneh, meaning cane in references to the useful stalks of cannabis, came to be a generic term for stalks used for measuring, and the term later came to denote a measure. Bosem continued in its role as a reference to fragrance.
5) Third, the support for linking “qanabos” to “q’nah-bosem” is not particularly strong. Of the six letters in the two Hebrew words “q’nah-bosem” (Hebrew words do not include the vowels), that is, the letters “qof,” “nun,” “hey,” “bet,” “shin,” and “mem,” only three of them appear in the word “qanabos.” The letters shared are qof, nun, and bet. The letters hey, shin, and mem are not shared. Further, the word “qanabos” contains the letters “vav” and “samech,” letters not contained in the earlier “q’nah-bosem.” Given that three letters from the earlier word are left out and two letters are supplied, in a five letter word, does not provide great confidence to me that the source word for “qanabos” is “q’nah-bosem,” even if the sounds are somewhat the same.
While I acknowledge that the loss of the “hey” and the inclusion of the “vav” may be due to shifts in spelling, and while I acknowledge that the letters “shin” and “samech” sometimes cross over into each other’s territory, I am at a loss to explain the loss of “mem.” The “mem” in “bosem” is not a plural or other additive to a stem as it is in “elohim,” as some sites wrongly state. It is the basic stem of the word.
But an even bigger problem exists when one realizes how shaky the historical connection really is. Once, in the 15th century B.C., if one accepts a traditional dating for Moses, or in the 5th or 6th century B.C., if one accepts a post-exilic view of the dating for the Torah, the term “q’nah-bosem” is used. This is the only use of this term ever cited. The term does not appear again in ancient Hebrew. Somewhere around 200 A.D., in the Mishnah the word “qanabos” appears in the tractate Kil’ayim and in the tractate Nega’im. There is no evidence that the term “q’nah-bosem” or any intermediate forms of the term were ever used by the Hebrews during the intervening 7 to 17 centuries between the time the term was used in Exodus and when the new term appeared in the Mishnah. But we are asked to believe that the similarities of sounds in a word used centuries before supports a conclusion that it was the derivative of the word “qanabos.” Borrowing from the prophets, this is a shaky reed.
E) This linguistic shift is not hard to understand when you take into account that much of the Hebrew language was transmitted orally. First, it should be noted that Tim is clearly being disingenuous with his presentation. Benet clearly refers to the term q’neh being used without bosem in Song of Songs 4:14
, Isaiah 43:24
, Jeremiah 6:20
, Ezekiel 27:19
. The combined term q’neh bosem itself only appears in Exodus 30:23
Tim’s language problems disappear when the intervening use of q’eneh put forth by Benet are included. As Tim notes, the loss of the ‘hey’ in q’aneh and the inclusion of the ‘vav’ in qanabos “may be due to shifts in spelling”.
Further, the indications from the references to q’aneh cited by Benet, which Tim fails to acknowledge, indicate that use of the plant fell into disfavour and it was eventually prohibited. So its not like that cannabis or its name was widely being used.
7)Fifth, cannabis or hemp has long been a source of rope and yet the words for rope or cord in the Hebrew have no correlation to the term “qaneh.”
Nor do the terms in the English language. Quite likely the cannabis that came as an item of Trade, came at a point the Hebrews had already come up with some sort of rope of their own. Other researchers have however, seen the use of cannabis fibres in both the more ancient and Midrashic periods of Judaism. As Benet noted “Another piece of evidence regarding the use of word kaneh in the sense of hemp rather than reed is the religious requirement that the dead be buried in kaneh shirts. Centuries later linen was substituted for hemp (Klien 1908)” referring to Sigfried Kleins TOD UND BEGRABNIS IN PALISTINA. We can also point to the references to shesh noted by the 19th century Biblical scholar John Kitto, as referred to above. Religious scholar, Dr. Marinus de Waal, has commented that parts of the holy sanctuary made by Moses, under the Lords command, utilized the fibres of the hemp plant;
“Fabric from hemp fibre was used by the ancient Israelites for clothing, but was later replaced for this purpose by cotton and linen. It was more often cultivated for its strong fibers and hemp seed, used in carpets and rope. The latter was used in the days of Moses for making the sanctuary:”‘And let every wise-hearted man among you come, and make all that the Lord hath commanded…the hangings of the court, the pillars thereof, and their sockets, and the screen for the gate of the court; the pins of the tabernacle, and the pins of the court, and their cords…’-(Exodus 35:10,17,18
)” (De Waal 1994)
8)Sixth, Dr. Benet’s speculation is perhaps the best an etymologist can do, but it is hardly “proof” of the conclusion that “q’neh-bosem” is the source for “qanabos.” Several web sources state that Dr. Benet’s conclusions were confirmed by the Hebrew University in 1960; but no one seems to be able to say who at the Hebrew University provided the confirmation. Hebrew University is a big place. Unverifiable facts do not build credence to claims. As stated above, Raphael Mechoulam of Hebrew University suggests a different etymology, though he is far more cautious in asserting that his conclusion is the definitive statement on the issue
G) This is a fair point, the source of the Hebrew University reference was one Dean Latimer, in an article that appeared in High Times,
:23”(Latimer 1988)
“ Around 1980, etymologists at Hebrew University in Jerusalem confirmed that cannabis is mentioned in the Bible by name, Kineboisin (also spelled Kannabosm), in a list of measured ingredients for “an oil of holy ointment, an ointment compound after the art of apothecary’ to be smeared on the head. The word was mistranslated in king James version as ‘calamus’ .- Exodus 30
and when I was a less experienced researcher. I quoted Latimer, then later tried to track it down to no avail, even attempting to contact Latimer, but I never received a response, so it goes unverified at this point. However, as noted above, in my response (C) there is considerable and widespread academic support for Benet’s work, as well as my own contributions to this line of research.
I will give tim time to respnd to those comments, then continue with points 9-14
Chris, it seems that Tim is on vacation or something, maybe you can just continue with 9-14, he double hockey sticks may freeze over before he responds…thank you brother Bennett.
Tim,
What about mari & juan, you know Mary and john? One would really have to be blind to miss this
No point, my other reponses are not posted, and Eric, has written me stating many of my point by point responses have and will be deleted.
It says “comments are open” but that is a LIE.
The truth is the fist victim at http://www.truthsave.org
Chris, it is a lie to say that “many of your point-by-point responses” have been deleted. Some inconsequential posts were deleted (such as your insults which accuse us of suppressing the truth), and, as I’ve said before, I will not post multi-page comments that are excerpts from articles posted elsewhere online. I specifically told you in a personal email that we have saved your comments. They are in queue, and as we have time to respond to them we will post them along with our responses.
This article is but a small part of what we do here at http://truthsaves.org. Our main goal is to bring others to a knowledge of the Jesus of the Bible. Our testimonies, articles and poems trump this in terms of importance and we have many things to post. We post them as we get to them. In fact, I have over 60 things that I have yet to post on the site. I can only get to them as I have time.
Those who contribute to this site work full time. We have many other responsibilities as well, as do most people. This site is not our full-time job. It is something we take seriously, but something we take care of in our spare time. This debate is low on our list of priorities. But we will attempt to address your points as we have time.
Your comments are being held in queue at this time because I do not provide this space for people to advance their own personal causes. If you want to link to an article you’ve written, feel free. But don’t post multi-page articles here because they will not be accepted. In other words, your multi-page comments will not be posted. Take that as you will.
And because we do not reply to your comments immediately has no bearing on whether or not we want to promote truth. The truth is, indeed, what we’re after.
What is obvious to true believers is not so obvious to disinterested parties. As with many issues of word morphology, one can find scholars on many sides of this issue. The scholars one chooses sometimes is driven by the conclusion one wishes to make.
I have not read Immanual Low. Perhaps you have and can explain to me the basis for his conclusion. I have provided to you the bases for my conclusions. There is nothing in the pages of Scripture that would lead one to equate marijuana with “kaneh.” Scripture does not indicate that “kaneh” was used for smoking, ingestion, ropes, clothing, or other common uses of hemp. Nor are there any other Hebrew writings before the time of Christ that link “kaneh” to marijuana. We only know what words mean by how they were used.
However, there is strong evidence that the Jews equated the word with “calamus,” as I state in the article. The 72 Jewish scholars assembled in the third century B.C. said that “kaneh” meant “calamus.” Josephus in the first century A.D. said the same thing. There is NO evidence that any Jewish scholar at that time thought the word meant “cannabis.”
Such ancient evidence, in my view, is more persuasive than any analysis done by scholars in modern times. But as I note in my article, not even modern scholars uniformly accept the position of Immanual Low. In the face of competing scholarship in the modern world, the unanimous conclusion of those who had reason to know what the word meant is even more persuasive. And supporting the view of the ancient Jewish scholars is Scripture itself. The word “kaneh” is associated with rushes and water (Isaiah 19:6
; 35:7; Job 40:21
), something more consistent with a reed or calamus plant than with marijuana.
One final note. The thrust of Scripture is neither about calamus or marijuana. The thrust of Scripture is about Jesus Christ. The focus of our lives as Christians needs to be on Him, living out His commands, denying ourselves and taking up our cross and following Him (Matthew 16:24
). If our desire in life is to know, love, and follow Him, then we will find our lives blessed by His presence in our lives. Whether the word “kaneh” means “calamus” or “cannabis” is of no importance when compared to the importance of trusting in Him and doing His commands.
Eric: “Chris, it is a lie to say that your responses have been deleted. ”
Is it really? Here is what one of your emails said,
“One comment was deleted initially (the first excessively long one). I have also deleted a few comments that were inconsequential, like you saying, “I repeated this or that.”
I can tell you that your long comments will probably not be posted. If you want to link to an article, that’s fine. ”
Hopefully this is not anothe rpost that will not be included here.
In response to te misinformation posted on this site, I have prepared a point by point debate that is posted here:
http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/node/20688#comment-13136
Independent support for Benet’s view of the Semitic origins of the term kaneh can be found in THE WORD: THE DICTIONARY THAT REVEALS THE HEBREW SOURCE OF ENGLISH, by Isaac E. Mozeson. In reference to Hebrew kaneh, Mozeson follows a similar view to Benet’s that the “so-called IE root kanna… is admitted to be “of Semitic origin”….the IE word kannabis (hemp – a late IE word borrowed from an unknown source)” (Mozeson, 1989)….KANBOOS is an early post biblical term for hemp… The word HEMP is traced to Greek kannabis and Persian kannab… The ultimate etymon is conceded by Webster’s to be “a very early borrowing from a non-IE, possibly Semitic language…. In seeking related words… consider Aramaic… KENABH… and [Hebrew] KANEH…” (Mozeson, 1989) Interestingly Mozeson makes no reference to calamus in the context of the term kaneh.
Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan has noted of early Kabalistic magical schools who used magic and other means of communion for mystic exploration, that “some practices include the use of ‘grasses,’ which were possibly psychedelic drugs” (Kaplan, 1993). As mentioned earlier, Kaplan’s THE LIVING TORAH includes cannabis as a possible candidate for the Hebrew keneh bosem, “due to cognate pronunciation” (Kaplan, 1981). The Kabalistic text the Zohar records:
“There is no grass or herb that grows in which G-d’s wisdom is not greatly manifested and which cannot exert great influence in heaven” and “If men but knew the wisdom of all the Holy One, blessed be He, has planted in the earth, and the power of all that is to be found in the world, they would proclaim the power of their L-rd in His great wisdom.” (Zohar.2,80B)
Like the Zoroastrian royalty and priesthood, there are indications that early Kabbalists enjoyed the use of the herb, but prevented its consumption by the common people. In the P’sachim, “Rav Yehudah says it is good to eat… the essence of hemp seed in Babylonian broth; but it is not lawful to mention this in the presence of an illiterate man, because he might derive a benefit from the knowledge not meant for him.- Nedarim, fol. 49, col. 1” (Harris, et al., 2004). Other sources have noted a Kabbalistic comparison to the effects of cannabis with divine perception, noting an “intriguing reference to cannabis in the context of a fleeting knowledge of God: Zohar Hadash, Bereshit, 16a (Midrash ha-Ne’elam)” (Gross, et al., 1983).
Throughout the bible scriptures, men go into smokey tents and come out prophetic.
Isaiah Becomes a Prophet by having a ‘coal’ held to his lips. A smoking bud of cannabis could definitely be considered a ‘coal’.
Herbs were made by the Creator and said to be ‘good’.
Who would it be, that would say otherwise?
‘ marijuana does not have heads of grain’ is an untruth. Sometimes it has one huge head of grain at the top of the plant. The head, if pollinated, can contain hundreds of ultra nutritious seed. If cannabis has it’s top nipped, it branches out and forms several ‘heads’. I have SEEN a plant that has been pruned so that it formed several heads, and looked very similar to a menorah.
Several heads of grain, vs one head of grain is most certainly a sign of abundance.
Thanks for the information. There is a point with language that should be kept in mind. The origin of words and the meaning of words do not have a one to one correlation. A modern word can have its origin in an ancient word that means something entirely different from the modern word. For instance, today we have sugar cane, cannon, channels, and various other words that scholars trace back to the word “kaneh.” See http://www.getwords.com/words/index/getwords/view_unit/13/?letter=C&spage=1 But it would be a mistake to think that “kaneh” meant sugar cane, cannons, channels or other similar meanings to the ancient Hebrews.
There are somethings we know and somethings we have to hold with some degree of uncertainty. We know that the word “kanebos” means marijuana. We know this word first appears in post-Biblical times. As I state in my article, I suspect that this word came into the Hebrew from the Greek “kannabis” which word exists in extent literature long before the word “kanebos” appears in the Hebrew vocabulary. But where the origin of the word goes from there, as you point out, is not known. As you note, Webster’s states that it possibly has a Semitic root and Mozeson states that one should consider “kaneh” as a possibly related word. But both of these sources indicate the degree of uncertainty that exists with respect to the etymology of the word.
However, there is not a similar decree of uncertainty with respect to the meaning of the word “kaneh.” A word’s meaning is always known by its usage. And, in the Bible, the word “kaneh” is never used in a way that one can say: “Hey, that is clearly hemp!” Nor is it so used in modern Hebrew. In fact, no where in Hebrew literature have I been able to find where “kaneh” is used in a way that clearly in the passage means “marijuana.” But the word is used in the Biblical literature in ways that strongly indicate a reed and water plant. And to this day, in modern Hebrew, the word means reed plant. Further, as stated earlier, the Jews who lived during the Biblical time period and knew what the word meant tell us that it meant “calamus,” a reed plant.
Nevertheless, if you believe that “kaneh” means marijuana, such belief will neither get you to heaven nor condemn you to hell. In the face of eternity, the issue is of minimal importance. Jesus is the one who is important. We want to be followers of Him, to love as He loved, to give of ourselves and our lives for others. He taught us that if we are thirsty, we can come to Him and drink richly of the water of heaven itself. He came to bring us abundant life. And he offers this life freely to people like you and me, to everyone who will abandon themselves to receive Him, to those who make following Him their life purpose.
It is lame that most of my posts are appearing and that you post comments, which my posts discout, like the above. Again, this is disengenuous.
The identical use of Assyrian Qunubu to the Biblical Q’aneh bosem, also lend to the identification of cannabis.
In ancient Mesopotamia cannabis was used both medicinally and oils and incenses were prepared from the plant because its “aroma was pleasing to the Gods” (Meissner 1925). In the second quarter of the first millennium B.C., the “word qunnabu (qunapy, qunubu, qunbu) begins to turn up as for a source of oil, fiber and medicine”(Barber 1989). In our own time, numerous scholars have come to acknowledge qunubu as an early reference to cannabis .
Recipes for cannabis incense, regarded as copies of much older versions, were found in the cuneiform library of the legendary Assyrian king Assurbanipal, and records from the time of his father Esarhaddon, cannabis, ‘qunubu’ as one of the main ingredients of the “sacred rites”. In a letter written in 680 BC to the mother of the Assyrian king, Esarhaddon, reference is made to qu-nu-bu. In response to Esarhaddon’s mother’s question as to “What is used in the sacred rites”, a high priest named Neralsharrani responded that “the main items…. for the rites are fine oil, water, honey, odorous plants (and) hemp [qunubu].”
Apparently cannabis was used not only as an incense but in topical lotions as well. An Assyrian medical tablet from the Louvre collection has been transliterated: “So that god of man and man should be in good rapport:—with hellebore, cannabis and lupine you will rub him.” (Russo 2005)
I don’t think kenh bosem is a Seemtic word, I quoted someone who did. My view, like that of anthropologist Weston La Barre, is that keneh is the Semetic adoption of a Indo-European word for cananbis, “kanna”. As described in Jeremiah 6:20
and Ezekiel 27:19
keneh came as an item of trade, as such it retained the name from its origin. Further these passages exclude the possibilityof calamus, as it was a common marsh plant indigenous to the area, not a precious item of trade, as was cannabis.
Tim “Nevertheless, if you believe that “kaneh” means marijuana, such belief will neither get you to heaven nor condemn you to hell.”
There is no such thing as either Heaven or Hell, they are not part of Judaism, (they have the pit of Sheol) and came to Chrsitianity, like much of the restof their mythos, via the Zoroastrians. On the origins of Heaven and Hell, from Cannabis and the Soma Solution:
The Book of Arda Wiraz Namag takes place in a period where the Mazdaean religion was in the state of confusion and people were in doubt of the faith. In reaction to this the religious leaders gathered together in order to find a solution and the decision was that they needed to seek word from spiritual realm, using the time tested technique of ingestion of mang. The Priests gathered together 7 of the most righteous men in the community, and then through a picking of lots, Arda Wiraz was selected. After enjoying a luxurious last meal and saying goodbye to his 7 wives, the Book of Arda Wiraz continues with the account:
And this Viraz washed (his) head and (his) body, and put on a new garment; perfumed (himself) with an agreeable perfume, spread a new, clean blanket on some appropriate boards. At a (given) moment (he) sat down on the clean blanket, and performed the (rite of sacrifice), and remembered (the departed) souls, and ate food. And afterwards the theologians of the Religion filled three golden cups with wine and with the Vishtaspian narcotic [mang], and they gave one cup over to Viraz (in conformity) with the ‘good thought’, and the second cup (in conformity) with the ‘good speech’, and the third cup (in conformity) with the ‘good deed’. And he drank that wine and narcotic and consciously said grace and fell asleep on the blanket. (The Book of Artay Viraz, 2.25-31)
Arda Viraf drinks “three gold cups with wine and ‘vistaspic’ hemp (in other words hemp extract)…has some time to thank consciousness, and then falls asleep on the gown. He sleeps for seven days and nights, and during this time his soul visits heaven and hell” (Nyberg, 1938). After partaking of an extremely strong psychedelic dose of mang Ardu Viraf lay in what appeared to outsiders as a deathlike coma and had a classic out-of-body-experience, in which the ancient psychonaut believed he traveled on the mythical Cinvat bridge to Heaven where he witnessed: “All dwell among fine carpets and cushions in great pleasure and joy….Viraf, after returning to the bridge, was then taken to hell that he might see the lot of the wicked…He saw the ‘greedy jaws of hell, like the most frightful pit.’ Everyone in hell is packed in so tight that life is intolerable, yet all believe that they are alone…” (Hinnels, 1973).
Referring to Ardu Viraf’s hemp inspired heavenly voyage, Mircea Eliade wrote, “…we must take… into consideration the symbolic value of narcotic intoxication. It was equivalent to a ‘death’, the intoxicated person left his body, acquired the conditions of ghosts and spirits. mystical ecstasy being assimilated to a temporary ‘death’ or leaving the body, all intoxicants that produced the same were given a place amongst the techniques of ecstasy” (Eliade 1964). “The most explicit detailed Iranian account of intoxication for religious purposes is the Arda Wiraz Namag… [it] demonstrates the belief that pharmacologically induced visions were the means to religious knowledge and that they were at the basis of the religion that the Magi claimed to have received from Zoroaster” (Flattery & Schwartz 1989).
The thing about the Tree of Life movement is its not about any imagery afterlife, but about the real life here on this planet, and the beautiful plant that can heal both humanity and the Earth we call home.
ooop, I meant imaginary. I don’t beleive in imaginary beings, the tree of life is about what we can do here in reality.
There was a man who was very wealthy and many lands, who had a bumper crop of grain. He wondered what to do and decided to tear down his adequate barns and build bigger ones to hold his crop, then eat, drink and enjoy life. Jesus said he was a fool, because that night his soul would be required of him (Luke 12:18-21
). At another place, Jesus asked what it would profit a person if he gained the whole world and lost his own soul, or what would a person give in exchange for his soul (Matthew 16:26
).
Daniel speaks of a coming day when some would rise to everlasting life and others to shame and everlasting contempt (Daniel 12:2
). Job says that after the worms destroy his body he knows that in his flesh he would see God (Job 19:25-27
). The Psalmist speaks of God guiding him with God’s counsel, and afterward receiving him to glory (Psalm 73:24
). The Psalmist also states that the Lord would not leave his soul in hell (Psalm 16:10
). The Pharisees believed in a heaven and hell. Jesus taught that He would raise up on the last day those who believe in Him (John 6:39-40
). Jesus taught us to lay up treasure in heaven where it is safely stored (Matthew 6:19-21
). Jesus taught that there were rewards in heaven for those who follow Him, and punishment in hell for those who do evil (Matthew 25:31-46
).
Christianity is not sourced in Zoroastrism, but in the Old Testament. And the Old Testament itself condemns the practices of the nations around in their religious practices. The fact that the Assyrians may have used marijuana probably is good reason to think that the prophets of Scripture were against it. There is not much in the surrounding cultures that the Old Testament finds to be positive.
But while the prophets condemned the practices of the nations around them, they spoke of a coming Messiah. Isaiah teaches that there would be a redeemer, one who would cover over our sins as prophesied by Moses, one who would free us and bring us peace. There is no doctrine in the New Testament that has its source in Zoroastrism. They are all sourced in the Old Testament.
This is not to say that you have to believe any of these things. Each person is free to believe what they want. But for those of us who believe that there is a right and a wrong and it is important to think rightly (which given the effort you have placed into your argument you demonstrate that you also believe), it is important to get the purpose of life right.
There has been a consistent story told for 3400 years about a God who created us, loved us, who sought us in our sin, who redeemed us, and calls us to Himself. I do not lightly throw that story away as a myth to be ignored. The call of the prophets, the lives of the saints, and the testimony of God’s people is to me a compelling story. The weight of such testimony in the light of history and the goodness of Jesus in the face of the inhumanity of humanity provide to me a strong reason to give the testimony of Scripture a hearing. And having given it a hearing and having come to acknowledge it as true, my life has been truly enriched and blessed. And this is without any use of marijuana, other drugs, or alcohol. I have experienced the abundant life Jesus promised. I am very happy in this life, being enriched whether by myself or with my many friends. And this is true notwithstanding an ongoing battle with cancer. I am truly blessed. Having tasted of His goodness here, I only want others to have the same opportunity to find the same joy and peace and life that is overflowing that I have found in Jesus Christ and to be ready for the judgment to come.
Re, the “72″ translators of the Old Testament text. ( you know Testament come sform the same root as testicle right?) Well these supposed translators Tim identifies were not very good, as the Vulgate is well known for its mistranslations, and this has been noted in numbers of books. Such as The Vulgate the Source of False Doctrines?, by, G. Henslow.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=p2-eBmwaXwEC&pg=PA2&dq=vulgate+mistranslations#v=onepage&q=vulgate%20mistranslations&f=false
Re, the “72″ translators of the Old Testament text. ( you know Testament come sform the same root as testicle right?) Well these supposed translators Tim identifies were not very good, as the Vulgate is well known for its mistranslations, and this has been noted in numbers of books. Such as The Vulgate the Source of False Doctrines?, by, G. Henslow.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=p2-eBmwaXwEC&pg=PA2&dq=vulgate+mistranslations#v=onepage&q=vulgate%20mistranslations&f=false
In regards to the “72″ translators of the Old Testament text: (I wonder if Tim knows the term “Testament” come sform the same root as testicle?). Well these supposed translators Tim identifies were not very good, as both the Septuagint and Vulgate are well known for their mistranslations, and this has been noted in numbers of books, such asthe Hebrew Bible and ancient versions: selected essays of Robert P. Gordon?
http://books.google.ca/books?id=SPKam-0tPwYC&pg=PA176&dq=Septuagint+mist...
and The Vulgate the Source of False Doctrines?, by, G. Henslow:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=p2-eBmwaXwEC&pg=PA2&dq=vulgate+mistransl...
It is a great assumption on Tim’s part, that the translators of the Hebrew text into Greek, would have been competent botanists. By the Biblical accounts, it was a rare and precious foreign item. That a mistake could be made is clearly plausible, and that is why there is so much controversy around this particular term, with experts like Kaplan listing calamus, cinnamon bark, and cannabis as candidates. The above information regarding the identical use of qunubu amongst the Assyrians, strengthens the case for cannabis considerably, as does a wealth of other information, yet to be dealt with.
The number of 72 translators is likely a mythical number relating to the 72 names of God
The “72 Names of God”
There are three verses in the Old Testament which, in Hebrew, are made up of exactly the same number of letters. These are Exodus 14
: 19-21.
14:19 And the angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them:
14:20 And it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel; and it was a cloud and darkness [to them], but it gave light by night [to these]: so that the one came not near the other all the night.
14:21 And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the LORD caused the sea to go [back] by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry [land], and the waters were divided.
Kabbalists believe that by lining up each verse, one atop the other, and then selecting the three letters that are aligned from top to bottom (starting from the left, as Hebrew is written from left to right), one derives 72 “names of God”. The nature of these verses are such that they represent great power: the power of God to part waters and call forth his angels.
The “72 names” primarily appear in Jewish Kabbalah and are particularly prevalent in the current manifestation of Kabbalah taught through the “Kabbalah Centre” in Jerusalem. (www.kabbalah.com)
Like much of the Bible, this cannot be regarded as a historical event, but more likely a mythical one. How many Hebrews rely upon the Vulgate? The Vulgate is a Christian document. As well, the later references to cannabis, under the term q’aneh, indicate their was clear motivation for leading Hebrews to suppress the use of cannabis.
JONAH AND THE “GOURD” AT NINEVEH:
CONSEQUENCES OF A CLASSIC
MISTRANSLATION
Jules Janick
Department of Horticulture & Landscape Architecture, Purdue
University,
625 Agriculture Mall Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2010
Harry S. Paris
Agricultural Research Organization, Newe Ya’ar Research Center,
P. O. Box 1021, Ramat Yishay 30-095, Israel
ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS. Citrullus colocynthis, Lagenaria siceraria, Ricinus
communis, plant iconography
ABSTRACT. The fast-growing plant referred to in the biblical Book of Jonah is
most often translated into English as “gourd.” However, this is a mistranslation
that dates to the appended Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew
Bible, in which the Hebrew word qiqayon (castor, Ricinus communis,
Euphorbiaceae) was transformed into the somewhat similar-sounding Greek
word kolokynthi (colocynth, Citrullus colocynthis). In translation of the Greek
into Latin, kolokynthi became the similar-sounding cucurbita (gourd). This is
reflected in early iconography, the plant most often depicted being a long-fruited
Lagenaria siceraria (bottle or calabash gourd), a fast-growing climber.
Others have noted the many mistranslations in the earlier Septuagint as well
http://books.google.ca/books?id=SPKam-0tPwYC&pg=PA176&dq=Septuagint+mistranslations#v=onepage&q=Septuagint%20mistranslations&f=false
most notable is the mistranslation of the Hebrew word for “young woman” in Isaiah, to “virgin” in Greek, resulting in the later misbelief that the messiah must be born of a virgin.
Overall, I have to thank Tim for publishing his critique, he brought up some points that needed to address, and he added to the evidence of cannabis being kaneh, through his identification of the Genesis references and also the Temple of Solomon account.
I sincerly hope Tim follows this line of reasoning to its obvious conclusion. the time has come to put away the childish beliefs of our ancestors, and make way for the once and future Tree of Life.
The above comment represents a common misunderstanding in Christian and non-Christian circles about the Septuagint. The seventy two scholars did not translate all of the books we know as the Old Testament. They only translated the Torah, or the first five books. The rest of the books were translated later, though still before the time of Christ. Most scholars believe that the translations of the 72 were very good, and scholastic. Unfortunately, the rest of the books were not subject to the same critical scrutiny.
As for the Isaiah 7:14
passage, the “young woman” is the commonly accepted translation by many scholars. However, in looking at the use of the Hebrew word “almah” in ancient Hebrew, the matter is not so clear. Nowhere in the Old Testament is the word used clearly of a woman who has had sex, nor is such use even reasonably implied. The word is used to describe a woman who has reached puberty, marriageable, but not married. This holds open the possibility that “virgin” may not be such a wrong translation of the passage. I understand that some have argued that a different Hebrew word was used to denote “virgin,” but even that is debatable. There are Biblical passages where that second word is used that clearly refer to a woman who has had sex, something that never occurs with “almah,” the word used by Isaiah.
Interestingly, the Jews after the time of Christ were not enamored with the earlier translation here in the Isaiah passage. In later Greek translations of “almah” in the first and second centuries A.D., the Jews used a different Greek word “neanis” to translate the word, making clear to their readers that they thought the Hebrew word meant “young woman.” But the word used by the translators before the time of Christ was the Greek word “parthenos” a word that commonly means “virgin.” This translation, occuring before the time of Christ, was not a result of Christian theology, but represents pre-Christian Jewish thought. It cannot be simply swept away as a bad Jewish translation, unless one’s theological position forecloses the possibility that it may have been an accurate understanding of pre-Christian Jews.
http://sabdiscussionboard.yuku.com/topic/4124
The OT supposedly took its form in a version known as the Septuagint, a word that means ‘the seventy’ because the myth is that it was miraculously translated inerrant simultaneously by six representative translators from each of the tribes of Israel. It is the oldest known surviving version of the OT. This should actually would mean there were seventy-two translators, not seventy but there is a bigger problem with the myth.
You see the translation was done ~285-246 BCE at the request of Ptolemy II for the library of Alexandria.
And, according to Jewish history, ten of the tribes of israel had been lost during the Babylonina captivity which lasted from ~ 930-537 BCE.
Which means that ten of the tribes of Israel no longer existed to send translators for Ptolemy. So there were no seventy or seventy-two translators, at most there could have been twelve, six from each of the surviving tribes.
The whole basis for the oldest version of the OT is a myth, i.e: a lie.
Part 2 of the Great Keneh Bosem Debate:
http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/node/20803
In Part 1 of The Great Keneh Bosem Debate, we discussed a critical essay at the Christian website http://www.truthsaves.org “Does the Bible talk about Marijuana?” which raised some questions about the correctness of the research of the Polish anthropologist Sula Benet, regarding the identity of the Hebrew term Keneh bosem with cannabis One of the more notable points of contention I have with the Truth-Saves article, is that the author only chose to use one of the five references that Sula Benet referred too, and when we examine these references in their context an identification with cannabis becomes even more clear. More over these other references also answer the inevitable question “If cannabis played such an important role in the Hebrew religion, how did it come to disappear?”
http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/node/20803
http://ahura.homestead.com/files/IranZaminSeven/F_Influence_on_Religions_link.pdf
This is a good article explaining the influence of Zoroastrianism on other religions.
I don’t agree on all points, but this is very good. Nearly every serious scholar of ancient religious history agrees that the Zoroastrians had impact on other religions.
Chris,
The facts are not so clear that the Septuagint is a myth. While I will not defend some of the more supernatural claims of later writers with respect to the Septuagint translation, the allegation that the tribes were not known at the time of Ptolemy II (the sponsor of the Septuagint) is inaccurate historically. Certainly, the northern tribes of Israel had gone into captivity in 722 B.C. This, however, does not mean that their identity was lost at this time. There is a great deal of evidence to support a conclusion that the identity of the tribes had not been lost at this time. I will provide some of that evidence.
Tobit, who wrote around the time of Ptolemy II identifies himself as of the tribe of Naphtali (Tobit 1:1). Judith, a book written a century later, identifies Uzziah as being of the tribe of Simeon (Judith 6:15). Anna, in the book of Luke, is identified as being from the tribe of Asher (Luke 2:36
). James sends his little letter to the twelve tribes that were scattered (James 1:1
), indicating that at that time they were scattered, but not lost.
Further support for that fact that twelve tribes existed and were known in the 3rd century B.C. is contained in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The War Scroll speaks of all of the tribes, with their future chiefs, many times. Fragment 1 of 4Q372 and in 4 Q371, written after the time of Ptolemy II, speaks of the northern tribes coming to repentance after their captivity and indicating that they had not been lost at that time. In the Temple Scroll, we are told of future work to be done by each of the twelve tribes, with specific tasks assigned to each tribe, again indicating that the tribes were not “lost” at that time.
Further, we have the testimony of Aristeas, who wrote in the 2nd century B.C., who gives the account of Ptolemy’s request for the translation within approximately 100 years of when the request was made. Even if you discount his account, you must agree that Aristeas thought that the identity of the 12 tribes existed. His account purports to be historical, and to be believable in his day the tribes had to have existed.
One does not have to accept “calamus” as being the proper translation of “kaneh.” However, one’s rejection of “calamus” cannot stand on the basis of historical evidence. It must be based on other evidence, such as etymology. This is because the best historical record that exists supports the claim that 72 scholars translated out the Torah, the first five books, as Aristeas tells us. And they chose “calamus,” not “cannibas,” for the translation. Further, they had every reason to know what the Hebrew text actually meant, since the anointing oil was still being made at that time.
I continue to believe that the strength of this historical evidence trumps what I see as weak etymological evidence on the issue of what “kaneh” means. You, of course, are free to disagree.
But I would invite you to consider Jesus Christ. A close and personal relationship with Him is far more rewarding and fulfilling than any marijuana. As He Himself said, He came to give us life and to give it more abundantly. Paul’s great prayer in Ephesians 3
is that the Ephesians may know the extent of God’s love which passes all understanding. There is a place with Christ that is rich and deeply satisfying, and will make all that is in this world seem empty.
Marijuana in the Bible is the Tree of Life and the Way of Redemption for our Health, Wealth and the Fallen State of our Souls with cognate study of KNH, BSM & MKNH in the literal Word with Genesis 4:1
; 14:19,22; 1st Kings 14:15
, Ezekiel 31:9
, Matthew 11:7
, Luke 7:24
for the revelatory Word.
The ultimate conspiracy is the falsification of the Word of God by antichrist priests and is unrelenting to this day. But the Genuine Truth of the Word is revealed through the ministry of a prophet of the Holy Writ and is presented for curing this worldwide ignorance for free. All references in the Hebrew Word to the cognate KNH are to the cannabis, hemp or marijuana in the Bible along with the Aramaic Gospels and Revelation where this term spoken by our Lord is KNYH. The Jews falsified this word as “calamus” in the Greek Septuagint which is the authoritative Greek translation of the Hebrew Word. This falsification is sustained by the Greek or Hellenized Christianity. The original tongue of the Gospels and Revelation was Aramaic and so were the first texts of that Word. KNYH in the Aramaic cognate is falsified into “calamus” by the Greek Gospels and Revelation to continue this conspiracy that came to be termed the “disciplina arcani” or discipline of the secret. And by the Divine Providence to protect men from profaning the holy but now that the Last Judgment occurred on June 19th, 1770 the Lord has provided that profanations will not take place. In Apocalypse Explained (1757) Passage 375 [5] & [6] http://www.heavenlydoctrines.org
To see the rest of this article in its entirety, click here . . .
http://www.brothersformercy.com/Marijuana%20in%20the%20Bible.html
Anna,
The age of Zoroastrianism is subject to some debate. The traditional date of its inception is the sixth century B.C., a date established by those writing shortly after Alexander the Great, who stated that Zoroaster lived 258 years before Alexander. Recent scholarship has pushed the date back on the basis of comparison of textual language. How one views the weight of this linguistic evidence verses the historical statements of early followers of the religion determines what date one assigns to the founding of the religion. If the traditional date is right, then it is not likely that Zoroastrianism influenced ancient Judaism. And since Christianity is sourced in the Jewish prophets, it is hard to sustain a position that Christianity borrowed from Zoroastrianism, if one follows the traditional dating for the founding of the religion.
If Zoroastrianism dates back to the 10th century B.C. as some assert, it is still after the time of Moses, and therefore cannot be said to be an influence on the first five books of the Scriptures. And the first five books of the Scriptures provide the foundation for the rest of Scripture. I do not find any support within Scripture for a doctrine not sourced in the first five books of Moses. Therefore, I am skeptical of any claim that a later religion impacted Judaism or Christianity. It is almost like saying that Islam impacted Christianity, although all of the books Christians hold as their truth existed before Islam arose. The logic simply does not follow. The Torah could not have been influenced by Zoroastrianism unless Zoroaster lived before Moses and Moses knew about Zoroastrianism, both of which seem unlikely.
Moses, through his writing of the Torah, establishes much of what Christianity and Judaism believe. He establishes that God is one, the rewarder of good and the punisher of evil. He establishes the sacrificial system and the need for atonement. He establishes the promise of a coming Messiah. He promises that God will provide atonement (a covering for sin) for His people. He establishes that this life is not all that there is; there is a life to come.
Of course, one can find many sites by those who have a bias towards Zoroastriansim that will postulate that Zoroastrianism was the source of all sorts of matters, just like you can find many sites by those who have a bias towards Christianity who advance things that simply are not true. What we know is that the Apostle Paul, who laid down the groundwork and foundation of Christianity, was influenced most by the Hebrew Scriptures, in which Scriptures he was well trained, having been a student of the great rabbi, Gamaliel. Christianity is ultimately what Jesus and Paul taught, who both were rabbis steeped in Jewish tradition. There is no solid evidence that either of them had the slightest exposure to Zoroastrianism.
the Gnostic tractate, The Apocryphon of John, has Jesus make mention of Zoroaster’s teachings himself, declaring to John the son of Zebedee: “if you wish to know them, it is written in the book of Zoroaster.” The main teachings of the tractate are believed to have historically existed since 185 C.E., and was still in use up until the eighth century by the Audians of Mesopotamia (Wisse, 1988)-Nag Hammadi. By comparison, the NEW TESTAMENT in its present form was compiled between 367-397.
Another tractate that was popular with early Gnostics had the title of Zostrianos, and the author has been identified as a person in “the lineage of the famous Persian magus Zoroaster” (Sieber 1988), and by others the Persian shaman Zoroaster himself; “[I]n the Nag Hammadi document Zostrianos,…the ancient Iranian prophet is [Zoroaster] portrayed, in accordance with the ideas of late antiquity, as the proclaimer of secret doctrines. His wisdom he obtains in the course of a heavenly journey which he experiences in the desert” (Rudolph 1987).
One of the more significant and widespread Gnostic sects, the Manicheans, which survived into the twelfth century in parts of Europe and China, worshipped Jesus right alongside Zoroaster, and performed ceremonies similar to the one that Jesus is described as presiding over. As noted in Chapter 9, Tocharian speaking people are thought to have brought the Manichean religion into China, and there the “general opinion of their religion was that it involved drug-induced ecstasy, for their leaders had titles like ‘spirit-king’ and ‘spirit-father’ and ‘spirit-mother,’ but the common folk deliberately mispronounced the word for ‘spirit’ (mo) as ‘ma,’ meaning ‘cannabis sativa’ (as if ‘Pater’ were changed phonetically to ‘pothead’)” (Ruck et al. 2001).
I would say the Zoroastrians influneced Christian concepts such as Christmas, (originally the Persian god Mithra’s birthday), End of the World, the ressurection, heaven and hell, and many others.
Tim you make your statemnt above without considering the wealth of information to the otherwise, beyond etymological arguements, like the Assyrian use of Qunubu for temple incenses and annionting oils used to aid in the “rapport between man and god”. You also ignore references to the grains or seeds of q’aneh that you yourself brought forth, and referencs that q’aneh came from a distant land, where as calamus was a common marsh root in the area…
You can only make such a statemnt here due to the way you delete and hold my own comments in queu (over two weeks now….)
The annointing oil started to fall out with the playing down of the role of the Levites, and then finalized with Israels and Judah’s loss of atonomy. As I explain in Part 2 of the Great Keneh Bosem Debate
http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/node/20803
the further q’aneh references noted by Sula Benet, and ommitted in Tim’s biased presentation, tell the story of that dissapearance.
Tim, you say that Christianity is sourced from the Jewish prophets. We see in biblical scripture how Ezra is ‘planted’ by the Persian king, in order to make sure that the Jews in Jerusalem keep in line. (The Persian line) We see how the Persians are willing to help ‘rebuild the temple’. Have you addressed this biblical scripture and i missed something?
Cannabis can be considered a reed plant. It grows very well along rivers. The main stem is often hollow. It is often as sweet smelling as bubblegum, or flowers, or candy. It has glands on the leaf, that when removed is usually a beautiful golden honey color and is sticky. It definitely qualifies as a reed plant or a fragrant cane.
Cannabis also comes in ‘tree/bush’ form and size. It can express itself as a vine, either trailing or creeping.
Tim, you said:”There is one other aspect to this debate that often goes ignored. We have societies south of us in Mexico and other countries that are falling apart because of the drugs this country consumes. Our use of drugs is funding the murder and destruction of many people in other lands. We can wash our hands and say that it is not our fault that drugs are illegal here. However, I have a strong suspicion that when we stand before God, He will call us to account for our direct role in the slaughter of innocents by funding drug cartels. Whether we buy drugs or we fund terrorists by giving money to them, we share in the evil deeds that such people do. ”
It is my opinion that there will be an accounting for the destruction brought about by the WAR ON DRUGS. It IS our fault, that we have swallowed the lies about the dangers of Cannabis. It IS our fault that we’ve allowed the lies of individuals in government and elsewhere to result in the ruin the lives and families of people who are ‘caught’ harming no one and living their religion faithfully.
Unless you come out and specifically say that Cannabis is definitely NOT the ‘Tree’ that many Christians believe in, how can you condone the WAR that is being waged against them? The biggest drug cartels are the ‘legal’ ones which kill many more folks each year than Cannabis.
You seem to leave room for Cannabis Church folk maybe being correct. Which side of the fence? Which ’side’ are you choosing to be on, when this ‘judgement’ that you have strong suspicions about, comes along?
When that day of judgement comes, might you be surprised to hear Jesus saying that he healed the blind (glaucoma?)and lepers,etc with the Tree that the priests were hoarding and that He died because he dared get in the face of the priests? That he was doing what the Creator intended, by bringing relief to the poor when the priests would not? What if he asks you if you defended his flock or caused it harm?
Now, alcohol kills and maims and destroys. Are you involved with any of that ‘destruction of innocents’? Do you suspect that there will be a judgement over those who are involved with that?
Your logic is actually troubling my soul.
Chris,
I know you are not saying that the Apocryphon of John was written before the New Testament books were written, at least I do not read you as stating this. All of the New Testament books were written long before 367 -397 A.D., and almost every authority I know will state that they all were written before, and most of them significantly before, the Apocryphon of John. It is hard historically to hold any other position. The Apostolic Fathers, those who lived in the time of Jesus’ apostles, show knowledge of 25 of the 27 New Testament books, omitting only the two short books of 2nd and 3rd John. They do not show knowledge of the gnostic texts, which texts all arose in the second century A.D. Ireneus, who has a direct line back to the apostles through his mentor Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna, tells us that the Apocryphon of John was a forged document. He should know, as Polycarp was a friend of John’s and Ireneus grew up under Polycarp’s bishopric and was sent by Polycarp’s church to assist the mission to the Gauls. So, if anyone in the early church knew what John said, it should be Ireneus.
I do not know if you have read any of the gnostic texts, but they are nothing like the Old Testament and New Testament books. Most deal with “secret teachings,” which contradicts the statements of God and Christ in both Testaments. God does not tell us secret statements. Jesus said that whatever He taught, He taught openly. Christianity, as it was instituted by Jesus, is an open religion.
I realize that some have distorted the fellowship of Christ into some secret thing. But God did not reveal Himself to this world to be hidden from people, but He came to make Himself known to the world.
As for the influence of Persian thought on Christianity, I would argue to the contrary. I suspect that Daniel and the Jewish captives had a big influence on Persian thought. The concept of heaven and hell in Scripture arises long before Zoroastrism, Isaiah speaks of the destruction of the world in the 8th century B.C., and the resurrection was taught at least as far back as Job (Job 19
) and David (Psalm 19
). Ezra was not reflecting Persian thought, but the heart of the God of Israel as He had revealed Himself from the earliest days of written Scripture. The monotheism of God appears in every book of the Bible, including those written long before the exile. But you are right that what Scripture wrote and what the people of Israel practiced were not in agreement. Israel practiced polytheism, as we learn from the Pentateuch, the early prophets and the later prophets, as well as from the Psalms and historical books. But the patriarchs were monotheistic, as were the great leaders such as Moses, Joshua, Jephthah, Samuel, and David. And the prophets were all monotheistic.
Anna,
Scripture never says that Ezra was planted by the Persian king to ensure that the Israelites were kept in line. Have you read Ezra? And yes, I know something about cannabis, having had to cut it out of fields of corn, soybeans, and out of pastures where we grazed cattle. It is not a water plant, although it takes water to grow. I never knew it to grow in standing water like a marsh plant would grow. And though it may smell sweet to you, it never did to me. Your point on the problem of alcoholism is well taken. While it is not my goal or desire to seek a return to prohibition, I only note that we pay a high price in our society, and in many societies in the world, for the privilege to drink. My heart goes out to the families who have to bear the burden of that price in the memory of lost loved ones.
My argument is that there is something much better for our lives than marijuana or alcohol. That something is a personal relationship with the God of the universe, the maker of all things, Jesus Christ. Millions of people have found this to be true, while others accept a substitute or a facade of what Jesus has to offer. Christianity is not about some set of rules, but it is first and always about loving God, who came to us in the person of Jesus Christ, with all of our hearts, souls, strength, and mind, and loving our neighbors as Christ loved us. As we seek His kingdom to come and His will to be done, we find a peace beyond comprehension, and a joy that has no end. I encourage you to read some of the testimonies on the truthsaves site.
I talk to my friends about the bible all the time, I don’t believe that it talks about Marijuana in the bible, my mom and dad split apart because of Marijuana but are now back together, if smoking marijuana wasn’t bad it would never have the way of break families apart and people would not be put in jail for it, it also says in the bible obey the laws of the land, so clearly smoking marijuana is a sin unless you have cancer and you have it prescribed to you.
michael, that was prohibition and negative stigma that split your family and other families. Not marijuana. Jesus broke all sorts of laws.
Tim,
The Apocryphon of John was referred to by Irenaeus in Adversus Haereses, written about 185 CE, so it is at least older than that. The synoptic gospels are thought to have been written between 60 and 115 AD. The New testament however was not put into its present form till around 350 AD. So much was lost due to the murderous siege of early Catholocism, that led to the Dark Ages. so it is really hard to say what was around in that early period. Gnostic elements are pre-Christian and there is no reason to think that Jesus did not know Gnostics. There is an undeniable Persian infleunce in both Gnosticims and Christianity.
I have read all the Gnostic texts, the Church father’s condemnation of the Gnostics, and a number of books by Gnostic scholars, all of which are discussed in my book, Sex, Drugs, Violence and the Bible
http://www.forbiddenfruitpublishing.com/SexDrugs/Book
Articles on Jesus, the Gnostics and Cannabis
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/1301.html
http://hightimes.com/news/ht_admin/139
So its been months and still numbers of my posts have not been released “Your comment is awaiting moderation. ”
That is disinengenuous to say the least. Tim is hiding information in order to set his agenda.
Tim is not hiding information. I’m the administrator of this site and I decide which comments are posted and which are not. As I’ve said multiple times to you, I will not accept “comments” which are direct copy / pastes from other websites. People can go to your website to read your articles. I do not copy and paste my articles from my site onto your site or other sites. My site is for my articles – your site is for your articles. Your “comments” that are still awaiting moderation are direct quotations from your articles and in some cases are literally thousands of words. I will not post “comments” like these. I have given you this information multiple times.
Great now my posts are not just “waiting for moderation” they have been deleted.
That is kind of how the New Testament was put together too, in around 350 AD, lots of selective editing…..
Maybe you should change the title “comments are open” to “comments we agree with, or at least think we can sufficicently answer too, will be posted” ?
Chris, thanks for posting your comments.
I will tell you again, as well as other site readers, that multi-page comments that are direct quotations from an article on your site (or any other site) will not be accepted. In fact, your excessively long “comments” are what forced me to implement a character limit (3,000 characters allowed at this time). Many of your “copy and paste comments” were approaching 20,000 characters. If one googled portions of your “comments” they could be found as articles already posted on your site.
Again, you may use your own site for whatever you wish. My site is for my articles and for real comments. I will not allow you to use my webspace as a platform for advancing your agendas.
If you post a comment that’s a comment, and not a “cut n’ paste” from your site, and it’s under 3,000 characters, and it’s relevant to the conversation and not defamatory, I will post it, as I have all your others that meet that criteria.
I’m not sure how many times I’ll have to say the same thing . . .
Chris,
I appreciate the interaction on these matters.
There has been nothing lost to Scripture due to the “murderous siege of early Catholicism.” In fact, I do not know what you are talking about. Early Catholicism, if we take Catholicism to be the church hierarchical organization centered in Rome with control over other bishoprics, with due respect to my Catholic friends, was not even in existence before 350 A.D. And the Catholic plunge into heresy trials and killing opponents did not occur until many centuries later. I challenge you to find any historical evidence that the Catholic Church engaged in any killings prior to 350 A.D. Though I am not a Catholic, I think it is important to be historically accurate as much as is possible.
The church before 350 A.D. was composed of independent bishoprics across the Mediterranean area, Asia, Africa, and Europe. Though there were some differences and much discussion in the early church about many things, there was remarkable consistency of all churches in accepting the four gospels and the epistles of Paul as being Scripture, and rejecting all of the other purported late gospels. Even Tatian, the Syrian gnostic, did not include any gnostic gospel in his Diatessaron (harmony of the gospels). The purported “early Catholicism” did not control the North African Church, the Coptics in Egypt, the Ethiopian Church, the Armenian Church, the Georgian Church, the Persian Church, the ancient Marionite Church, or any number of other independent churches. And I am sure that my Orthodox friends would take great exception to any allegation that they were controlled by the Catholic Church. Yet, each of these ancient Christian traditions, though they may vary on certain doctrinal points, accepted the same New Testament Scriptures as the later Catholic Church, with only very minor variations within the Coptic, Syrian, Armenian, and Ethiopian Church. None of them found the gnostic writings to have the authenticity of the faith handed down by the apostles.
If you have read the Church Fathers condemnation of the gnostics, then this means you have read Ireneus. I am floored that you can read Ireneus and continue to believe that there is some validity to the gnostic viewpoint. The gnostics were detached from reality more than the most drug induced hallucination. And the early gnostic gospels were simply lists of purported sayings of Christ. Lists of purported sayings of Christ were never included in the sacred Scriptures, whether they were those by the gnostics or those by the “mainstream” Christians.
And to say that there is an undeniable Persian influence on Christianity does not prove the asserted point. As I have stated earlier, each of the ideas of Christianity that you have said support a Persian influence are found in even more ancient Hebrew writings. It is far more likely that Jesus and the apostles derived these ideas from their own ancient Scriptures, rather than from Persia.
Calamus was nard
“There has been nothing lost to Scripture due to the “murderous siege of early Catholicism.” In fact, I do not know what you are talking about. Early Catholicism, if we take Catholicism to be the church hierarchical organization centered in Rome with control over other bishoprics, with due respect to my Catholic friends, was not even in existence before 350 A.D. ”
Yes, documents written prior to 350 AD, such as Gnostic Christian texts, were destroyed after 350 AD by the Catholic Church
try to stay accurate.
“I challenge you to find any historical evidence that the Catholic Church engaged in any killings prior to 350 A.D. Though I am not a Catholic, I think it is important to be historically accurate as much as is possible”
The Assault upon Paganism
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/theodosius.html
A triumphant Christian Church, far from unifying the Roman world with a single faith, rent division and civil conflict throughout the empire. Every measure designed to crush and stamp out non-Christian belief met with renewed resistance, disaffection from the imperial cause and civil commotion. Yet the fanatical intolerance rampaged on, with increasingly more severe rescripts from the imperial court. The campaign to wipe out heterodox opinion realized its zenith with the reign of Theodosius I late in the 4th century.
Theodosius – Murdering Fanatic Arrives from Spain
“The statesmanlike decision of Gratian to elevate to the purple the competent son of a convicted traitor was of great significance in Roman history. Ultimately the dynasty of Theodosius presided over the dismemberment of the Roman Empire in the West.”
(Ferrill, p68)
Theodosius, one of those luminaries of the Church accorded the honorific “Great”, showed that a Christian Emperor could best any pagan emperor for folly, indulgence and cruelty. While a Caligula or a Nero could unleash murder and mayhem on his family and entourage, Theodosius criminalized and punished a large part of the population of the whole empire, of which his treatment of Thessalonica is one notable example.
In 390 the Romano/Greek population of the city was involved in a riot over the intimidating presence of the local Gothic garrison. In the tumult, Botheric, the garrison commander, died. Enraged, Theodosius ordered his Gothic mercenaries to massacre spectators who happened to be trapped in the circus. Records Theodoret (393-466 AD) in his Ecclesiastical History:
“Thessalonica is a large and populous city, in the province of Macedonia. In consequence of sedition there, the anger of the Emperor rose to the highest pitch, and he gratified his vindictive desire for vengeance by unsheathing the sword most unjustly and tyrannically against all, slaying the innocent and guilty alike. It is said seven thousand perished without any forms of law, and without even having judicial sentence passed upon them; but that, like ears of wheat in the time of harvest, they were alike cut down.”
More
In the spring of 415 C.E., the situation reached a tragic conclusion when a band of Christian monks seized Hypatia on the street, beat her, and dragged her body to a church where they mutilated her flesh with sharp tiles and burned her remains.
http://cosmopolis.com/people/hypatia.html
You don’t know much about history Tim.
“The gnostics were detached from reality more than the most drug induced hallucination. ”
And this comeing from a guy who beleives humanity started in Eden, LMAO
Here is a Gnostic creation myth
The fragmented writings of the Gnostic teacher, Basilides, who taught around 120-130 A.D., found in the early Church father Hippolytus’ refutations of Gnostic teachings , give us a taste of the radical Gnosis which was already popular by this early time . Referring to the pre existent state before the Universal Seed took form and gave birth, and sounding like a physicist trying to describe the pre-omega state before the Big Bang, Basilides explained the Gnostic creation cosmology;
There was when naught was; nay, even that “naught” was not ought of things that are…. But… conjecture and mental quibbling apart, there was absolutely not even the One… And when I use the term “was”, I do not mean to say that it was [that is to say, in any state of being]; but merely to give some suggestion of what I wish to indicate, I use the expression “there was absolutely naught”. For that “naught” is not simply so-called the ineffable; it is beyond that .
Hippolytus,(Died 235 A.D.), summarized Basilides’ explanation of non-being, which transcends all being, and its eventual will to create the Seed of Universality, or Mother Source, of the created Universe.
Naught was, neither matter, nor substance, nor voidness of substance, nor simplicity, nor impossibility-of-composition, nor inconceptibilty, nor imperceptibility, neither man, nor angel, nor god… neither anything at all for which man has ever found a name, nor any operation which falls within the range either of his perception or conception. Such, or rather far more removed from the power of man’s comprehension, was the state of non-being, when [if we can speak of "when" in a state of beyond time and space] the Deity beyond being without thinking, or feeling, or determining, or choosing, or being compelled, or desiring, willed to create universality.
Returning to the words of the Gnostic master Basilides, Hippolytus recorded:
When I use the term “will”, I do so merely to suggest the idea of an operation transcending all volition, thought or sensible action. And this universality also was not [our] dimensional and differentiable universe, which subsequently came into existence and was separated [from other universes], but the Seed of all universes.
This universal Seed contained everything in itself, potentially, in some such fashion as the grain of mustard seed contains the whole simultaneously in the minutest point–roots, stem, branches, leaves, and the innumerable germs that come from the seed of the plant, and which in their turn produces still other and other plants in manifold series.
Thus the Divinity beyond being created universality beyond being from elements beyond being, positing and causing to subsist a single something… containing in itself the entire all-seed-potency
cont….
Thus the Divinity beyond being created universality beyond being from elements beyond being, positing and causing to subsist a single something… containing in itself the entire all-seed-potency of the Universe.(Basilides 120-130 A.D.)
Writing in 1900, G.R.S. Mead, from whose work we got the above excerpts, summarized:
“From such a ‘Seed’, which is everywhere and nowhere, and which treasures in its bosom everything that was or is or is to be, all things must come into manifestation in their ‘proper natures and cycles’ and times, at the will of the Deity beyond all”(Mead 1900). Basilides is unclear as to what brings this about, and refers to an indefinable “supplementary development”;
For of what sort of emanation is there need, or of what sort of matter must we make supposition, in order that God should make the universe, like as a spider weaves its web [from itself], or mortal man takes brass or timber or other matter out of which to make something? But ‘He spake and it was’, and this is what is the meaning of the saying of Moses, ‘Let there be light, and there was light’. Whence then, was the light? from naught. For it is not written whence, but only from the voice of the Speaker of the word. And he who spake the word, was not, and that which was, was not. For the Seed of the universe, the word that was spoken, “Let there be light”, was from the state beyond being. And this was what was spoken in the Gospel, “it was the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world”. Man both deriveth his principles from that Seed and is also enlightened by it.(Basilides 120-130 A.D.)
Chris,
Nothing you have cited or written support the claim that the Catholic church was murderous prior to 350 A.D., as you stated earlier. And the the fact that an Emperor who claimed to be Christian was murderous is no reason to assert that the Catholic Church was murderous. It would be like saying that the Southern Baptists are responsible for whatever Jimmy Carter did; or that Al Gore did; or that the Catholics are responsible for anything that John F. Kennedy did. The church is responsible for what the church does and sanctions. It is not responsible for those who do not follow the church’s teachings.
And you are right that Hypatia was cruelly killed by a mob who claimed to be Christian. However, this happened in Alexandria, Egypt, not Rome. There is nothing to link her killing to the Roman Church. And such killing was not sanctioned by the church, though I know that some have sought to link the killing to Cyril, the bishop of the Alexandrian Church at that time.
I do not defend everything that is done in the name of Jesus. I do not believe that just because someone claims His name that they are therefore a good person. It is the life that is lived, not the claims that one makes, the demonstrates whether one is a follower of Jesus Christ.
As far as gnosticism, I realize that it comes in many forms. But if you have read Ireneus, you will understand my reference to a drug induced hallucination. It can get pretty far out.
Jesus is not like the Jesus the Gnostics present. You can read Paul, who wrote within 20 years of the death of Christ. You can read the synoptic gospels which were written 30-40 years of the death of Christ. These were all written before the Gnostic writings by those who had reason to know what Jesus was like. Matthew was one of the apostles. You are free to accept or reject their writings. For me, they tell a fairly compelling account of who Jesus was, what He was like, and what He did.
According to their gospels, Jesus taught us to love another, to love our enemies, to be kind, to practice patience, to endure affliction, to love God, to trust Him, and to have hope. He taught us to pray and serve others. He taught us how to live in a way that brings meaning to life, joy, and peace. To me, their description is compelling.
Why are the references which note calamus as Biblical nard not being posted?
You note the birth of Catholocism around 350AD and then state “Catholic plunge into heresy trials and killing opponents did not occur until many centuries later.”
Those murderous references above happened about 50 years after that, and in reality from the time of Constantine’s conversion on…. You know how murderous Constantine was right? Constantine had his eldest son Crispus put to death by poison, and had his wife, the Empress Fausta; killed at the behest of his mother, Helena. Fausta was left to die in an over-heated bath. Their names were wiped from the face of many inscriptions and references to their lives in the literary record were erased.
So where are the records of the church’s opposition to such murdering in the name of the Prince of Peace? The church just went on and on for centuries slaughtering all sorts of “heretics”. You are in denial.
Catholocism came to power via the Roman Emperor Constantine’s conversion after seeing the cross emblazened with the banner “In this sign though shall conquer”. The Bible you know is Ceasar’s Bible. Ever heard of the Council of Nicea that Constantine organized? Yes? No?
You have put your faith in Ceasar’s Bible, and you run your open comments section like one of the Catholic Church censors.
You know that right, the New Testament is Ceasar’s Bible? You do now. Christianity was sold to Rome by its loyal citizen Paul, citizenship has its price!
“As far as gnosticism, I realize that it comes in many forms. But if you have read Ireneus, you will understand my reference to a drug induced hallucination. It can get pretty far out. ”
Yah right, and this from a guy who doesn’t believe in evolution? believe’s virgins can have babies and in imaginary beings like angels and devils.
I have read all the Gnostic texts and all the catholic father’s condmenantions of them…. The Gnostics had a much deeper understanding of things than the silly child’s story of the Bible.
Here is what the Gnostics said about Christianity
” They will cleave to the name of a dead man, thinking that they will become pure. But they will become greatly defiled and they will fall into the name of error and into the hand of an evil, cunning man and a manifold dogma……there shall be others of those who are outside our number who name themselves bishop and also deacons, as if they have received their authority from God. They bend themselves under the judgment of the leaders. These people are dry canals.”
– ‘The Apocalypse of Peter’
Indeed!
There is more healing power for body and soul in a single cannabis plant, than in all the Christian churches in the world. The Tree of Life appears at the end of the Bible and its appearance now marks the begining of the end of the Biblical age.
Hi Mr. Bennett,
I hope things are well with you.
I’m going to say this one more time . . . if you continue to try to circumvent the 3,000 character limit by posting multiple comments and if you continue to post pre-written content instead of simply referencing the article you got the content from – I will delete your comments.
posting multiple commetns? so what are you saying one post per customer.
You can’t quote source material here? The material posted is often not available online.
You have clearly control issues, and you are clearly frustrated how this debate has got out of your control.
Do you really want the truth? Or do you just want to feel safe in your faith?
Btw I hope things are well with you too
Wierd, Tim or Mr. E keep deleting references that indicate that calamus was the Biblical nard, not keneh.
The new perfume handbook? – Nigel Groom – Science – 1997 – 435 pages
“…the Calamus of the ancients… was a different plant to that known as calamus today. It grew, according to classical authors, in Arabia, and Syria as well as Egypt, and was probably the plant known as Lemon grass.”
http://books.google.ca/books?id=UYrDPqLVD-kC&pg=PA189&dq=plants+mideast+calamus&as_brr=3&cd=10#v=snippet&q=calamus&f=false
In reference to Lemon Grass (Cymbogon citratus) “It is believed to be the Calamus* of the Greeks and Romans and was the Nard or Spikenard of the Old Testament (Song of Solomon), known as Nerd in Hebrew and Nardos Pistike to the ancient Greeks”
http://books.google.ca/books?id=UYrDPqLVD-kC&pg=PA189&dq=plants+mideast+calamus&as_brr=3&cd=10#v=snippet&q=calamus%20nard&f=false
See also spikenard
http://books.google.ca/books?id=UYrDPqLVD-kC&pg=PA189&dq=plants+mideast+calamus&as_brr=3&cd=10#v=onepage&q=spikenard&f=false
According to perfume expert Groom, the New Testament Spikenard was different than the Old Testament Hebrew plant name,
“Nardostachys jatamansi.. was the precious or pure nard of the New Testament, used by Mary to anoint Jesus, but the Nard or Spikenard of the Old Testament applied to a different plant, Camel Grass (see under Lemon Grass oil)”
http://books.google.ca/books?id=UYrDPqLVD-kC&pg=PA189&dq=plants+mideast+calamus&as_brr=3&cd=10#v=onepage&q=spikenard&f=false
Groom is an expert
http://books.google.ca/books?q=+inauthor:%22Nigel+Groom%22
As you are claming keneh is cannabis, but Nigel Groom, a noted expert with over a dozen books published in different languages, says calamus was the Biblical nard, how are my posts discussing this not relevant to the discussion? Why do you keep deleting them?
What are you afraid of? The Truth?
Most “debates” work in the following fashion: one person says something and the other person responds directly to that. We try to respond to one point, then you post literally pages and pages of stuff (that CAN be found online . . . I googled portions of your “comments” and every time I’ve done so I’ve found the articles you’re quoting). Some of the stuff you post relates to our comments and some doesn’t. I put a 3,000 character limit on the comments so that you (in particular) would perhaps attempt to address one point at a time instead of just rambling on and on and on. I’d like it to at least LOOK like a debate, so people can follow it, instead of reading through your reams of information that can be found elsewhere online. If you think that’s a control issue, so be it. You are taking advantage of our webspace to further your agenda. That’s not what the space is for. Try simply responding to our posts (like you did above – very nice) instead of posting reams of pre-published information.
Anyone can copy and paste large amounts of information as a “debate” but that is not a rational debate. It’s like you’re thinking, “If I post tons and tons of information, it’ll look like I’m winning the debate.” At least that’s the feeling I get. Try to address specific points. If one reads through all these comments, it’s literally impossible to follow any stream of thought. It’s too random and there’s simply too much unorganized information. It’s not a rational, organized debate. If I want to make an argument, I make the argument, and I may augment the argument with additional information. I’ve asked you multiple times to simply cite the source instead of posting the entire batch of information.
Of course you’re not limited to one post, but you’re purposely ignoring what I’m asking, which is this: don’t post pre-published information unless you’re just giving a short quote. Just reference the article. Try to stay on topic. This conversation (if you can call it that) is all over the board.
Mr. E, I have no idea what you are refering to, since you mentioned that before, I have posted much shorter comments. If you are finding things online in things I wrote, it does not mean wrote them , if they are a quote form the Nag Hamadi library or somewhere else.
The references to calamus being nard, for instance, are all from another author and an expert.
As well, my 7 point questions regarding the identification you have put forth as calamus as keneh, is very short, but still being held back.
Why is that?
So, now to bring the discussion back on topic. Do you acknowledge that the murderous Emperor Constantine orderd the Councul of Nicea which put the New Testament together?
Is the NT then not “Ceasar’s” Bible? and put together on order by a self promoting murderer?
It would be great if you could also respond to my shor 7 point questions regarding the identification of calamus as keneh as well, which is still “awaiting moderation”
As well, the intitial persecutions were The Church of ome’s persecution of other Christian sects, and this started as early as the Roma Church seized power.
See Pagans & Christians: the personal spiritual experience By Gus DiZerega
http://books.google.ca/books?id=z17cRsEqs-UC&pg=PA193&dq=catholic+murdered+pagans&lr=&as_brr=3&cd=3#v=onepage&q=tragic%20dilemma&f=false
Further Cyril was a “Bishop” of Alexandria, and that does not mean he was not part of the Roman church, rather a Bishop in another area.
Ceasar’s Bible was written in blood.
Chris you are grasping at straws. Israel has to get the u.s.a. To legalize cannabis now so that they can get anointing oil to the sons of Moses and David. Holy oil gets both Christians and Jewish people closer to being Jesus and to Yahweh. Only Satan would keep the people from embracing gods peaceful tree of life. Honestly chris you sound like an agent of Satan with all of your confusing double talk and gobbeldygook
Chris,
Thank you so much for your tenacity and persistence in your quest for truth. You are truly a soldier of the light.
Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all.
If your leaders say to you, Look, the kingdom is in the sky, then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, ‘It is in the sea,’ then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is within you and it is outside you.
When will the kingdom come?
It will not come by watching for it. It will not be said, ‘Look, here!’ or ‘Look, there!’ Rather, the Father’s kingdom is spread out upon the earth, and people don’t see it.
Gabe,
What the Hell do you mean by “confusing double talk and gobbeldygook”? and how am I “grasping at straws”? those are just unfounded sensationalized statments with nothing to back them up.
Chris,
As an individual who is interested in this subject, I was really trying to read your information, but then you just reminded me of a long winded old man who wont let the other person respond. I know this is post-style and not conversation, but still. Let the man respond to your thought-provoking comments. Your’s or someone elses. That would be awfully amateur if you are the guy who cuts and pastes every bit of their argument from others. I hope that isnt true, my friend.
If the article/blog is about whether the Bible talks about Marijuana why not stay on the subject people? Other eastern religions are irrelevant.
Help me out here, fellas: It appears that the core part of the argument is on etymology and whether or not certain words are found in the Bible, correct? Chris seemed to make a good point about kaneh bosom possibly being a non-Hebrew word. (did i read that right?) Are scholars mixed regarding this?
Also, even if the ancient Hebrews used cannabis, where does it speak of them smoking it?
I mean, anyone who has an ounce of knowledge would have to agree to the many uses of hemp/cannabis, but isnt it a stretch to say that just because they used it for food meant they were getting ripped behind the tent?
I appreciate some good interaction…
Thanks
Oh, one more thing… I heard this argument once. Please give feedback.
If cannabis use was prevalent (i.e. smoking it) back then, why doesnt the New Testament writers even mention such an issue, when they mention many other types of issues going on?
From my browsing through the New Testament I havent found anything about smoking anything… why?
Thanks
Chris,
There is simply no truth in the statement that Constantine ordered the Council of Nicea to put the New Testament together. I do not know where you are getting your information. You can read the documents from the Council at http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3801.htm. They do not address the canon of Scripture.
Moreover, long before Constantine, the church had accepted as important for the church the books that are in our present New Testament.
Clement of Rome (95 A.D.) quotes 10 of the 27 books of the New Testament.
Ignatius (107 A.D.) quotes 15 of the 27 books; that is, all books but Mark, Galatians, 2 Thessalonians, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, 1 & 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation.
Polycarp (107 A.D.) quotes from 16 of the New Testament books.
The Shepherd of Hermes (160 A.D.) quotes from every book but 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, 3 John, and Jude).
Ireneus (175 A.D.) quotes from every book except Philemon and 3 John.
The Muratorian Fragment (180 A.D.) lists as the received books the four gospels (although the first two are implied as the fragment begins with “The third book of the gospel is that according to Luke.”), Acts, Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, 1 & 2 John, Jude, and Revelation. It lists other books but does not hold them to the same level as those received from the apostles. It includes the “Wisdom of Solomon” as the only book outside of the New Testament books that is a received book.
Clement of Alexandria (200 A.D.) quotes from every book but Philemon, 2 and 3 John.
Tertullian (200 A.D.) quotes from every book but 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John.
Origen (230 A.D.) quotes from every book except Philemon, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John. Origen also listed those books not subject to dispute (4 gospels, Acts, 13 Pauline epistles, 1 Peter, 1 John and Revelation. He lists as disputed Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, and Jude. He says of 2 & 3 John that “not all agree that they are genuine.” He commends Hebrews and says it is not inferior to any of the apostolic books, but does not believe it is apostolic. He says of 2 Peter that there is some doubt (Ecclesiastical History, Book 6, chapter 25). He quotes James 4:17
as authority (Origen de Principiis, Book 1, Chapter 3, Section 4). He is not clear as to his view of Jude. He also seems to include the Didache and Epistle of Barnabas as Scripture.
Thus, long before Nicea (325 A.D.) and Constantine, there is remarkable consistency in what books were deemed to be canonical. They reflect a consistent remarkable story of Jesus, the Son of God, the Savior of the world.