Jesus used Cannabis?

[Druidus]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,869273,00.html

What do you think?

I've long been certain the Jesus was a user of cannabis; mainly from sources arbitrarily banned by the Church (Gnostic and other texts).

 

[dawny0826]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,869273,00.html

What do you think?

I've long been certain the Jesus was a user of cannabis; mainly from sources arbitrarily banned by the Church (Gnostic and other texts).

Somehow, I don't think so. But the thought does make me giggle.

 

[Valjean]

Your heading's a tease, Druidus. I thought you were contending He was a midnight toker or something.

Oil? I can buy a bottle of hempseed oil at the local co-op. Heck, He probably wore a hempen robe, too.

Give us something juicy, Druid.

 

[Mister Emu]

I've long been certain the Jesus was a user of cannabis; mainly from sources arbitrarily banned by the Church (Gnostic and other texts).

Nothing was arbitrarily banned by the Church, especially gnostic texts...

Also... the last paragraph in particular was preposterous...

Postulating that cannabis oil is what made Jesus the Christ... lol

 

[Faint]

I'm not surprised that their source on this is "High Times" magazine. Still, if Jesus' followers were getting high, that would explain a lot.

 

[Druidus]

Somehow, I don't think so. But the thought does make me giggle.

Why not?

Oil? I can buy a bottle of hempseed oil at the local co-op. Heck, He probably wore a hempen robe, too.

This oil would be vastly different from that oil, Sey. This oil would give you a psychotropic effect.

Nothing was arbitrarily banned by the Church, especially gnostic texts...

Depends entirely on opinion, Emu, yours no more valid then mine. Not all are gnostic either. Some are part of the earliest portions of the Bible, and were removed because they didn't fit the new Christian's beliefs, amongst other reasons. A bunch of priests/bishops and etc. cannot choose what is and what is not God's word based on their own opinion.

Also... the last paragraph in particular was preposterous...

No it wasn't. Just because you disagree with it (on entirely unfounded grounds) doesn't make it preposterous.

Postulating that cannabis oil is what made Jesus the Christ... lol

It's in General Debates because I didn't want to argue this from a religious perspective. It's just not connected to the OP. I want to look at it from a historical point of view. Historically, cannabis was used for it's psychotropic effects long before Jesus in that area, and it was certainly a part of the original oil of annointment.

 

[Mister Emu]

Depends entirely on opinion, Emu, yours no more valid then mine.

No, it depends on historical fact... either they banned certain things(in this case texts) on a whim and without reason, or they didn't. Support your position that the non-acceptance of gnostic and other texts was arbitrary, or please withdraw it...

Not all are gnostic either

I said especially...

Some are part of the earliest portions of the Bible

The Bible was not defined until the canon was made...

were removed because they didn't fit the new Christian's beliefs, amongst other reasons

So you agree that the banning was not arbitrary? Also, could you support your position that the Orthodox belief system of those who defined the canon was new...

No it wasn't. Just because you disagree with it (on entirely unfounded grounds) doesn't make it preposterous.

I was refering to the last paragraph of the article, which as I understood it, stated that Jesus was the Christ because of cannabis oil... which is preposterous...

 

[YmirGF]

* tries to imagine Jesus rolling a big fatty whilst the Apostles lolligaggle about nibbling on bits of moldy rye bread *

 

[Unedited]

There are a lot of 'ifs,' 'maybes,' and 'could haves' in that article. It's not illogical to suggest that Jesus used Cannabis in someway, but I don't see any real evidence to support suggestions beyond that.

 

[cardero]

“Quoting the New Testament, Mr Bennett argues that Jesus anointed his disciples with the oil and encouraged them to do the same with other followers. This could have been responsible for healing eye and skin diseases referred to in the Gospels.”

It certainly explains why it took the disciples over 30 years to getting around to writing those Gospels.

 

[YmirGF]

“Quoting the New Testament, Mr Bennett argues that Jesus anointed his disciples with the oil and encouraged them to do the same with other followers. This could have been responsible for healing eye and skin diseases referred to in the Gospels.”

It certainly explains why it took the disciples over 30 years to getting around to writing those Gospels.

"Jesus who?"
"Pffffffffffftttttttt."
"oh yeah, I see him", Pfffffffftttttttttttt, "too!"
"We should really write a book about this guy?"
"Yeah!" Pffffffftttttttt.
"Who were we talking", pfffffffffffttttttttttt, "about?"

:biglaugh:

 

[No*s]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,869273,00.html

What do you think?

I've long been certain the Jesus was a user of cannabis; mainly from sources arbitrarily banned by the Church (Gnostic and other texts).

It was mostly unimpressive. How do they know the contents of the oils Jesus used? What texts tell them? We don't have anything of the sort. How do they know about hallucinagens used in Judaism? I can see lists, but they get no more exotic than myrrh, olive oil, and cassius. Basically, there are a lot of assertions and not a lot of proof.

This doesn't surprise me given the source, and its goal is admitted in the end: to render "Anti-Christ" the condemnation of drugs, which Bennet calls "persecution." The only rebuttal necessary, then, is to point out the lack of evidence.