The debate "Is it possible that Jesus smoked weed or did any other drugs" was started by
September 17, 2015, 3:34 am.
By the way, bigB is disagreeing with this statement.
69 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 59 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
PsychDave posted 13 arguments, bigB posted 5 arguments, sloanstar1000 posted 4 arguments, historybuff posted 3 arguments, lolly1706 posted 1 argument, Triz posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
goldfox1987 posted 7 arguments, Zeno posted 1 argument, tryhard2s posted 18 arguments, Alex posted 2 arguments, Hitmenjr posted 1 argument, bigB posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
PsychDave, sloanstar1000, wayneSPEC, desght, historybuff, sidhant, Skeetc15, xbulletwithbutterflywingsx, Me123, gouthamabi, lolly1706, drumman22, fabby, pajrc1234, WaspToxin, athinus, Yuki_Amayane, carltonlasy, sageuraeus, ayu, shyanne, sighnomore99, carrot, Triz, hendra24, marvel_stomps_dbz, Digi10ve, Robert16, shawncola, Eechyobooty, fuckthehatersss, Gman119, omactivate and 36 visitors agree.
bigB, goldfox1987, AstroSpace, josejose, kayla, Zeno, Ryan, tryhard2s, Alex, ariel22, jbrothe4, Ego_edoga, steady_current, Tiger1738, J_Blue, abdulhadi, WilliamLewis, Hitmenjr, MoonlightX, pats4life, Adimario, stevenchen, ailasorecarg, AmericanScholar, Band_Nerd_24, KiwiSheepTrainer and 33 visitors disagree.
another effect is it boosts ones appetite. however Jesus was fasting and did preached against gluttony. yes incense may have been present. but these simple effects to prove that the incense contained weeds would be opposite of what Jesus taught and did. and incense was used in the old testament, if so, then it would be okk to write about it in the new testament. however Jesus did not burn incense. He was not praising as the Jews did. He wasn't even approving of their ways. so yeah I think I should study now.
for the first statement, it was only until the 7th century that people discovered that opium could be ignited to achieve its full effects. if it was already used as incense, then the historical record would be a little bit of invalid.
for the second statement, burned cannabis was found, and the specie found was the psychoactive specie. therefore, few years B.C.,people already knew of its effects. and knowing that it interferes with the mind, why would Jesus intentionally inhale it?
and the third statement is about the effects of cannabis. additionally, I've read about a person who smoked cannabis. he felt like he was floating on air. if so, why then was there no account that the disciples floated with Jesus, since more probably a smoke from an incense wouldn't enter only one person's lungs. I did not know that when you inhale weeds, you would get a sensation of other people floating and not you. because there were few disciples who saw Jesus' transfiguration.
THC can induce hallucinations, change thinking and cause delusions. On average, the effects last about two hours, and kick in 10 to 30 minutes after ingestion. Psychomotor impairment may continue after the perceived high has stopped, however
bigB why are you in the opposition/red side? I'd just be copy pasting because I have exams tomorrow too.
But by the 7th century, the Turkish and Islamic cultures of western Asia had discovered that the most powerful medicinal effects could be obtained by igniting and smoking the poppy's congealed juices; and the habit spread
Burned cannabis seeds have also been found in kurgan burial mounds in Siberia dating back to 3,000 B.C., and some of the tombs of noble people buried in Xinjiang region of China and Siberia around 2500 B.C. have included large quantities of mummified psychoactive marijuana.
I've been studying for test and haven't had the chance to reply. But I'll try my best....
You're right about the hookah (what westerners call it), it came about in the sixteenth century. However, archeologists have discovered Scythian bowls that date back twenty-four hundred years ago. They have found opium and marijuana residue on it. They were a nomadic people so they had to get it from a more advanced civilization.
You're right about ancients not having hospitals (what we think of them today). They did have doctors though and a very acute understanding of the human body. They had similar instruments that doctors use today to perform surgeries, such as Galen a Roman physician who had many of the same tools like for eye surgery or brain surgery. Hippocrates, the father of medicine.
Drugs have a major role in the development of mankind. It has been used for medicine and religious ceremonies. As I have mentioned before about the Scythian bowls, archeologists have agreed that it was a 'bong' type device that used for smoking. The ancient Egyptians used opium (before the ptolemaic dynasty) in religious ceremonies. If you would like to go back farther, ancient Mesopotamia used opium for social events ( the 'joyous plant'). Marijuana not only is smoked, eatin or used for its medical properties; but also, is/was used for building material and clothes. What is known today as industrial hemp.
With the regards to wine, yes wine was produced and drunken on a wide scale, it was the fruit of labor. It was consumed on a daily basis, they're body would need to consume more to get more of an effect. Some scholar 's write of a concoction that was consumed during parties that was not just wine or alcohol alone.
To answer one question, the lighting and intentional inhalation of smoke would be smoking, so yes everyone who is inhaling smoke is smoking. Otherwise it would be easy to circumvent the law against drugs by only indirectly inhaling it.
Good night. I look forward to your response when you get up.
and does inhaling second hand smoke means that i am smoking? ok good night.
i was referring to the construction of the statement. that made and makes me disagree. to clarify, just answer me this last question (because I have to sleep). are you saying that when an incense is lighted in a mass, everyone attending the mass is smoking the incense? I do know that whether one smokes it or inhales it (whether unintentionally or not) the end would still be that the substances enter the lungs. but the construction of the statement forms an image of Jesus doing intentional smoking and other drugs.
Whether you inhale the smoke from a pipe, hookah, or indirectly from incense the end result is that you are inhaling smoke. Where do you see the distinction?
because in small amounts, wine specifically, cleanses the body because of its antioxidant effects. while weeds when SMOKED even in small amounts, would have chemical reactions that would do something in your brain and make it crave for more. smoking even not pots is somehow connected to depression and sadness so that one depends upon the chemical reaction happening to uplift his spirit. while I can drink wine because it's delicious and not get addicted to it.
I just don't know what you're talking about.
it was just because of the statement. "smoking weeds and did any other drugs". inhaling incense with weed is not smoking it. intentionally inhaling the incense with weed/s would make you feel its whatever effects, and would therefore make someone conclude that they would somehow become independent of smoking it since it would still have its addictive effects. but unintentional inhalation when used for rituals and healing, i really just can't agree that it's qualified to be classified as a term for smoking weeds and doing drugs. hey I thought you debate for constructive purposes.^_^
Drinking wine can be addictive, that is why there are AA groups all over, but he did that. Why does potential negative effects of overindulgence mean that it is impossible for one substance but not another?
First of all, it's called smoking weed, no one says "smoking weeds", not picking on you, just saying.
secondly, its a VERY mild hallucinogen, no one hallucinates on pot,
Thirdly, it's not physically addictive, as an ex-pot smoker I know this first hand.
again if we are talking of possibilities, it would have been possible had the matter at hand not been about SMOKING WEEDS. because smoking weeds would have had irreversible addictive properties.
I was just saying that circulating "physical evidences" in articles online are kind of crazy because I recently read some of them. and also, according to references from China B.C., the weeds already have hallucinatory effects when used too much but still were of great medicinal value.
..if in masses or any celebratory rituals one uses incense, people who smell it SMOKE it? I thought for all those years I just inhaled incense and not smoke it. weeds may have been incorporated since they have medicinal values but incorporating it in incense would mean that the addictive and hallucinatory effects would have already been observed. Addictive.
You seem to be missing the fact that there IS references to the medical practices in ancient China. You are citing a lack of evidence as an evidence of lack. Incense and smoke has been a part of religious beliefs for a long time so, while there is no physical evidence, it is POSSIBLE that he did. Do you feel that the fact that we cannot find physical evidence means that it is impossible?
you know, people say that they were able to find cannabis in the bodies of people in Jesus' time, HELLO? are you crazy? even the most active ingredients from an organic source would decompose even just decades after. there are lots of circulating IDEAS, going back to my first argument, we do anything to fit Jesus into our image and likeness.
#we look at the deeds, not random "facts"
For in today's generation, even the truths about your neighbor can be twisted, how much more things that have happened thousands of years ago.
just imagine, the oldest physical evidence that weeds were used by Hebrews was already in the 18th and 19th century. and people are saying that the Hebrews were illiterate that was why they never mentioned weeds for they never wrote medicinal books. yet, hundreds of years B.C., the Chinese were already able to write about the weeds. historians were able to identify the usage of cannabis in China hundreds of years B.C., but not for the Hebrews at the time of Christ?
can you give me your reference for that? i haven't found one except for theories linking not proven facts about weeds and the time of Jesus.
well, no matter how people twist things, i really only have these questions in mind..
if people in the time of Jesus SMOKED weeds, and most probably they'd get high, why then was Jesus the only one "who proclaimed that He was the messiah"...I really had not known that the effects of weeds for example: when SMOKED by many, would be different and specific for only one person. where in the effects for the rest of the people (like his disciples) were different and the same. like a scripted addiction.
have you really seen high people immersing themselves in community works and the like? for all I know, when a person gets high, most probably he would just be sitting around the corner doing nothing and imagining things.
and lastly, isn't it amazing that the effects of the great weeds were to make the intentions of the people as one, to promote kindness, love, and care for the poor, for the detachment of worldly things and such? it's just so amazing I wonder why the effects have completely gone the opposite since the 19th century of the discovery of SMOKING weeds up to this moment.
Only thing I can think of is opium...Even then I don't think he would of used it...He only drank during meals...so I find it unlikely that he actually used opiates.
I think it's definitely possible. Recent studies indicate that fire and exotic plant matter were indeed in existence around the time of jesus christ
if it was the Lord's problem if people would get insulted, if he desires to please everyone, He wouldn't have gone against the Jews. by the way historybuff, are you implying that everything in the Bible was inspired by weeds? so then where are the addicts in this world? why aren't they the most productive, loving, kindest etc people?
wine was significant for the people during their time. it was the fruit of their hard works. grapes were one of their main sources of food and livelihood. they were able to harvest masses of grapes. collecting their juice and storing them in their container would inevitably lead to fermentation. you couldn't have been expecting them to throw the juices just because they developed alcoholic substances. but the weeds? even if you do not get addicted, SMOKING weeds would somehow impair one's cognitive ability. it's synonymous to implying he was not fully himself or aware of what he was teaching.
meaning that if the plants were already SMOKED B.C., then people would've started getting high and addicted. and historical records would have at least been noticed. IF ever it really was already used culturally, socially, traditionally, then why not even the tiniest hint of its existence? something done socially, culturally, traditionally would have at least made its way to the records and would seem to deserve a mention even just once. and don't even try to use the "they're guilty or hiding something" excuse because it wasn't until the 18th or 19th century that SMOKING weeds became illegal due to the observed effects of SMOKING them.
why is smoking weeds below God? may i ask you then what significance does SMOKING weeds have in history? there was never any law forbiding the use of these plants especially since they also have medicinal properties. you can't expect them to be narrow minded since they don't have doctors and hospitals during their time yet. but smoking is quite different. ever since the start of the era when people learned to smoke weeds etc, the effects have been noticed by people. it gained popularity due to its addictive, narcotic and whatever effects. now THAT is the historical significance for SMOKING weeds.
my point is, why was the term SMOKING used? realistically speaking, smoking wasn't even developed yet until the advent of tobacco smoke, pipes etc. and that was already years after Christ's death. (yes even the hookahs and the rituals and tribe ceremonies). how did you know that IF they did it, it wouldn't have been done in excess? because I think, the plants, regardless of when in history's timeline people started SMOKING them, would always have the addictive, and whatever effects associated with them
It is possible that He did partake in a social gathering. I'm not saying He was a drug addict or anything, I think He could of done them socially with people. I referred to you Dave because you said alcohol is a drug, which I agree
never said it was. said if.
if you smoke too much it is a sin, or if smoking it causes you to sin.
How is smoking a hooka a sin?
If it is a sin then no. Jesus never sinned. Jesus also did many things that were socially unacceptable, so the argument he did it to fit in is false.
I am not advocating that Jesus got stoned. There is no evidence if that and it would be incongruous with the other stories about him. He was not a puritan however. He did drink alcohol socially, and gave it significance at the last supper. Based on this, it is possible that he smoked from a hookah socially, which would not have been socially unacceptable, while speaking with people. I cannot claim that he did, merely that it is possible.
Jesus was purely human and purely divine. why would it be below Him to do drugs socially? Because we think it bad? Dave said it earlier that alcohol is a drug, Jesus taught us not to do it in excess. He didn't say that it's wrong to partake
yes possible out of desperation to keep God leveled with us, to find justification. I think a lot of people have never even smoked weed throughout their lives. but since we want us to look good or even better, we want God to be molded according to our images and imperfections. bring Him down because we are too whiny to bring ourselves up.
I think all is possible?
It could aid his mission in that to refuse hospitality can be taken as an insult. In addition to his mission as savior, he was also a man if the people. He fed the hungry, cured the sick and talked with everyone from the poorest to the wealthy. As small amounts would not be harmful, and it would be culturally acceptable, I don't see why he would refuse if someone offered and potentially insult them for no reason.
That said, I have absolutely no evidence that he did use any kind of drugs. I agree simply because the topic is that it is possible and in my view there is the possibility.
fair enough, but I would offer that even though it is not mentioned anywhere in Scripture, and its effect in micro doses would be minimal, I would proffer the idea that the God of the universe sent to experience the fullness of being human (suffering, happiness, laughter, sorrow, etc) would not want or need to use such things as opiates. not in condemnation of said herbs, but instead looking through the eyes of Jesus whose sole mission was our salvation, and everything He did was used for this purpose, that use of those herbs would not advance or aid us in following Him for salvation. it doesn't follow logically.
It would have a similar effect to a small amount alcohol. Small enough dose and very little effect. As the dose gets larger it would have an analgesic effect as well as giving a euphoric feeling. The main chemicals are morphine and codeine, so if you have ever had surgery you may have experienced it.
tell me rhis, what would a small amount of opium do to the mental state of the smoker?
True, but if he smoked opium while talking to people, it would not necessarily have made it into the Bible any more than they included every meal he took. Smoking a hookah socially is not necessarily done to excess. It would have been normal and therefore not really an important detail. If he was willing to drink wine but refrain from drinking to excess, why would he treat other substances differently?
including wine as a drug seems to be outside the spirit of the question. we only very broadly see alcohol as a drug in todays culture. while the strictest definition of words lends credibility to your argument, the spirit of the question does not. that being said, never once do you see Jesus drinking to excess or using wine as a drug is used today.
Actually, as alcohol is a drug, he most certainly did use at least one drug.
Getting high is not the only time people use drugs. Just like alcohol they are often used socially.
I am not saying it is a sin to use the poppy or marijuana, my point is that Jesus would have no use for it, and getting high would not be useful for any kind of salvific mission. Jesus' only purpose on earth was to save humanity. His whole life was purposed for this task. getting high not only does not help this but infact detracts from it. therefore, if it is not useful for salvation, it would not have been done
"The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good." -Genesis 1:12. Pot and the poppy plant are natural plants found in the wild. Why would God put them here if He didn't want us to use them. the poppy plant has been around for thousands of years, and was commonly used by many ancient civilizations. So their would be a possibility that God (Jesus) could have used it. If Jesus was purely human and purely divine the Jesus would have to sin, that's what humans do. Society says it's a sin and therefor it's wrong (judeo-christian teachings); however, during the time of Christ it was a widely used substance. (pot is also used in this argument)
Because he was sent to earth to experience life as a human. To experience the joy, the sorrow, and the pain. Also, nowhere that I know of is it a sin, meaning he would have no reason not to in a part of the world where smoking was normal.
To "inspire" him to think he is the son of God. it would explain some things.
first off, the Bible doea have parts that are to be taken literally, the history in the Gospels for one. secondly, myrrh has more than one use, just like marijuana today. myrrh was chiefly used as a burial spice.
and you are right, there are sections of Jesus' that are not in the Bible, that being said, the Bible also says that God (Jesus included) is the same yesterday today and tomorrow.
on a deeper note, why do you think He would want to use drugs? just curious
Even beyond that, he was given gold, frankincense and myrrh as gifts in the nativity story. If you consider myrrh a drug, and he refused it, that is rather insulting to the wise man whose gift was wasted.
The Bible clearly isn't literal. so you can't be certain. also there are large chunks of his life that aren't even mentioned in the Bible. So again it is entirely possible.
jokes aside, He was not delusional. and we can see that He never did accept drugs because the scriptures point out after His scourging He was offered wine mixed with myrrh on the way to calvary and He refused.
Zeno, first of all it was a joke, secondly I was raised by a Baptist preacher and have studied the bible more than most people. One of the reasons I'm an atheist.
you're ignorant to Christian beliefs, Sloan.
with Jesus' delusions of grandeur, he was probably smoking other things like meth or pcp
would it not be cultural to do so. opium has been used for thousands of years. Jesus was from Jerusalem which is next to petra, a major trade city. the smoking of the hookah has been around for as long as all natural drugs (i.e. pot, opium)
the God of the Universe, sent to suffer for the sins of all man kind, power over all...no. no way.
I have never seen any evidence to support it, but it is possible.