Jesus 'healed using cannabis'

[Kuni]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/internatio...869273,00.html
Jesus was almost certainly a cannabis user and an early proponent of the medicinal properties of the drug, according to a study of scriptural texts published this month. The study suggests that Jesus and his disciples used the drug to carry out miraculous healings.

The anointing oil used by Jesus and his disciples contained an ingredient called kaneh-bosem which has since been identified as cannabis extract, according to an article by Chris Bennett in the drugs magazine, High Times, entitled Was Jesus a Stoner? The incense used by Jesus in ceremonies also contained a cannabis extract, suggests Mr Bennett, who quotes scholars to back his claims.

"There can be little doubt about a role for cannabis in Judaic religion," Carl Ruck, professor of classical mythology at Boston University said.

Referring to the existence of cannabis in anointing oils used in ceremonies, he added: "Obviously the easy availability and long-established tradition of cannabis in early Judaism would inevitably have included it in the [Christian] mixtures."

Mr Bennett suggests those anointed with the oils used by Jesus were "literally drenched in this potent mixture. Although most modern people choose to smoke or eat pot, when its active ingredients are transferred into an oil-based carrier, it can also be absorbed through the skin".

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.

"If cannabis was one of the main ingredients of the ancient anointing oil _ and receiving this oil is what made Jesus the Christ and his followers Christians, then persecuting those who use cannabis could be considered anti-Christ," Mr Bennett concludes.

[whitemajikman]

bump

[stuart_allsop]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/internatio...869273,00.html
Jesus was almost certainly a cannabis user and an early proponent of the medicinal properties of the drug, according to a study of scriptural texts published this month. The study suggests that Jesus and his disciples used the drug to carry out miraculous healings.

The anointing oil used by Jesus and his disciples contained an ingredient called kaneh-bosem which has since been identified as cannabis extract,

Ummm.... Not to put ti fine a point on it, but the Bible makes no mention AT ALL of Jesus anointing anyone, ever. Anointing is only mentioned a handful of times in the entire New Testament (fifteen to be precise) and only seven of those are in association with Jesus: four reports related to the occasion when a woman poured a jar of perfume over Jesus head (not oil, but nard); one when Mary wanted to go "anoint" the body of Jesus after he was crucified (but his body was nowhere to be found); and three others in Acts, where Jesus is referred to as having been "anointed by God".

The only other places where anointing is mentioned in conjunction with illness, is in Mark 6, where the DISCIPLES of Jesus anointed some people (but not Jesus himself), and in James 5:14, which was written several decades AFTER Jesus was crucified.

So any attempt to say that Jesus used cannabis in his anointing oil is pretty pointless, since there is no record Jesus ever actually used anointing oil himself!

The incense used by Jesus in ceremonies also contained a cannabis extract, suggests Mr Bennett, who quotes scholars to back his claims.

Ditto for incense. There are ZERO mentions of incense in the New Testament associated with Jesus. Only 9 in total, of which 8 are references to Old Testament ceremonies or future ceremonies in heaven, and the other one is in reference to the symbolic gift of incense given to Jesus by the magi when he was born. But not records AT ALL that Jesus or his disciples ever used incense.

Maybe Mr, Bennett should spend more time reading the Bible, and less time reading what "scholars" say about it, who obviously have never read it....

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.

I'd love to see which verses Mr. Bennett "quoted"! There are NO versus in the Bible that talk about Jesus using oil to anoint his disciples…

"If cannabis was one of the main ingredients of the ancient anointing oil _ and receiving this oil is what made Jesus the Christ and his followers Christians, then persecuting those who use cannabis could be considered anti-Christ," Mr Bennett concludes.

Now that has GOT to be about the weakest EVER argument for legalizing cannabis! he he he...

[Kuni]

Matthew 26:6 - Jesus Anointed at Bethany

no mention AT ALL of Jesus anointing anyone, ever

Mark 6:13 - They drove out many demons and anointed many sick people with oil and healed them.

14: King Herod heard about this, for Jesus' name had become well known. Some were saying,[a] "John the Baptist has been raised from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him."

[stuart_allsop]

Matthew 26:6 - Jesus Anointed at Bethany

Talk about being dishonest with misquotes from the Bible! Let's see what Matthew 26:6 REALLY says, shall we?

"While Jesus was in Bethany in the home of a man known as Simon the Leper, a woman came to him with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, which she poured on his head as he was reclining at the table."

Ooops! Looks like Jesus did NOT do any anointing at Bethany! Ooops! it looks like NO oil was used here, either!

Not to mention that the original text for Matthew did not have the comment "Jesus Anointed at Bethany" in it. That is merely a heading added as an aid in finding specific scriptures, just like the chapters and verses. None of those were in the original text.

So, in summary, Matthew 26 says nothing at all about Jesus using oil to anoint anyone. Just like I said in my first post, it refers to an occasion where a woman dumped a load of perfume on the head of Jesus. Not oil, but perfume, and Jesus was the recipient of the "anointing", not the one doing it.

Mark 6:13 - They drove out many demons and anointed many sick people with oil and healed them.

Once again, it would be nice if you would quote the COMPLETE context, rather than carefully slice out only the part that looks like it supports your position. But that might prevent you from misleading people about what the Bible REALLY says, so I can see why you might not want to do that.

But let's take a look, anyway, shall we?

" Then Jesus went around teaching from village to village. Calling the Twelve to him, he sent them out two by two and gave them authority over evil spirits. These were his instructions: "Take nothing for the journey except a staff—no bread, no bag, no money in your belts. Wear sandals but not an extra tunic. Whenever you enter a house, stay there until you leave that town. And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them." They went out and preached that people should repent. They drove out many demons and anointed many sick people with oil and healed them..

So who was it that did the anointing? It wasn't Jesus. Nope. Read it again. It was "the twelve". Jesus called in his twelve disciples for a meeting, gave them some instructions, then sent them out, and it was THEM that did the anointing, not Jesus.

One more time, there is NO record that Jesus did any anointing of anyone, either with oil or with anything else. You can check your entire Bible, and you will not find any record of Jesus anointing anyone with oil. It’s quite obvious that you and the good Mr. Bennett both have an agenda regarding cannabis, and are desperate to grasp at any straw that might support your agenda. Unfortunately for you, the Bible doesn’t support your agenda, and in fact has much to say against it.

Next time, you might want to actually READ the parts of the Bible that you intend to misuse in support of your agenda, to make sure that they actually do support your position. That way you would avoid this kind of embarrassment when it turns out that you totally misquoted and misunderstood what the Bible actually says.

[Kuni]

Talk about being dishonest with misquotes from the Bible!

I was only pointing out the ‘honesty’ of the following quote you made earlier.

“. . . the Bible makes no mention AT ALL of Jesus anointing anyone . . .

So who was it that did the anointing? It wasn't Jesus. Nope. Read it again. It was "the twelve". Jesus called in his twelve disciples for a meeting, gave them some instructions, then sent them out, and it was THEM that did the anointing, not Jesus.

I love that kind of Logic; Jesus sent his disciples out to anoint people; but technically didn’t do it himself. Same difference.

I guess Bush never invaded Iraq either then, nor did he do squat in the War on Terror; the Soldiers did it all.

there is NO record that Jesus did any anointing of anyone

And I will also point out that the “Bible” is not the only Document from that time period.

[stuart_allsop]

I was only pointing out the ‘honesty’ of the following quote you made earlier.

“. . . the Bible makes no mention AT ALL of Jesus anointing anyone . . ..

That's correct: It is a totally honest statement. The Bible does not, in fact, make any mention at all of Jesus himself having anointed anyone. This is irrefutable fact. If you can find any reference in the Bible to Jesus having anointed anyone, then I'd sure like to see it.

I love that kind of Logic; Jesus sent his disciples out to anoint people; but technically didn’t do it himself. Same difference.

No, it is not the same difference. The author you quote claims that Jesus used anointing oil to anoint people, yet there is no record of this in the Bible. There are only records of other people doing it, but none of Jesus doing it. It's quite possible that Jesus DID, in fact, anoint people, but since there is no mention in the Bible of Jesus ever having done so, your author is simply lying when he refers to the "oil that Jesus used".

I guess Bush never invaded Iraq either then, nor did he do squat in the War on Terror; the Soldiers did it all.

Your analogy is invalid: It would only be valid if you were saying something like "Bush commonly picks up RPGs and fires them at the enemy in Iraq", which of course he does not do. Also not that the Bible does not say that Jesus told them to anoint anyone: He told them to do other things, but not specifically to anoint. That is apparently something that they did of their own accord, without having been told to do so.

One more time: Your author claims that Jesus HIMSELF anointed people with oil, not that Jesus sent out other people to do the anointing. Therefore, any analogy you draw with Bush must also parallel this, saying that Bush HIMSELF did the action in question, not that he sent out other people to do it.

The exact claim made was " The study suggests that Jesus and his disciples used ...." and also "The anointing oil used by Jesus ...". Since there is no record that Jesus every did use oil to anoint, the author of the study simply lied by implying that the Bible says that Jesus did.

And no, this is not just a matter of splitting hairs, or slicing linguistics very finely: It is simply a matter of fact. If you are going to draw an analogy, you must at least make sure it is valid.

And I will also point out that the “Bible” is not the only Document from that time period.

True. So what other verifiable and reliable document do you have from that time period, which states that Jesus used oil to anoint people? Please show us the document that you have found with this information.

In any event, your claim is irrelvant, since the "study" claims that it was based only on the Bible. The phrase reads: "according to a study of scriptural texts published this month.".

[jayreynolds]

The actual text from Bennet is here:
http://www.hightimes.com/ht/news/con...p?bid=31&aid=2

It contains some blasphemy.

[stuart_allsop]

The actual text from Bennet is here:
http://www.hightimes.com/ht/news/con...p?bid=31&aid=2

It contains some blasphemy.

Wow! I see what you mean.

But let's look at the claims again, shall we?

Bennett says that " original Hebrew version of the recipe in Exodus (30:22-23), contained over six pounds of kaneh-bosem, extracted into about six quarts of olive oil". What that passage ACTUALLY says is "Take the following fine spices: 500 shekels of liquid myrrh, half as much (that is, 250 shekels) of fragrant cinnamon, 250 shekels of fragrant cane, 24 500 shekels of cassia—all according to the sanctuary shekel—and a hin of olive oil." To start with, 500 shekels is not six POUNDS: it is about six KILOGRAMS, and a hin of olive oil is NOT six quarts, but rather about four liters. So Mr, Bennet cannot even get his weights and measures straight! And we are supposed to trust him on the rest?

So what about the original Hebrew then? In fact, the words "kaneh-bosem" do not form part of the text. What it ACTUALLY says in Hebrew is : "Laqach ro'sh besem d@rowr more chamesh me'ah besem qinnamown machatsiyth machatsiyth me'ah chamishshiym besem qaneh me'ah chamishshiym qiddah chamesh me'ah sheqel qodesh shemen zayith hiyn". It looks like Mr. Bennett has deliberately misread the term "besem qaneh", which means the sweet smelling calamus water-reed spice.

Ooops!

Misquoting the Bible is probably not a smart thing to do.

But let's go on to some of the claims about Biblical history, shall we? Such as this little gem, for starters:

"One ancient Christian text, The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles, which is older than the New Testament, estimated to have been recorded in the second century AD," Ummm... well, if it was written in the SECOND century, then how on earth can it be older that the New Testament, which was completed almost entirely in the FIRST century?

Or how about this MAJOR mis-quote from John? " "The anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him" (1 John 2:27). John wasn't talking about oil here! He was talking about the Holy Spirit! Talk about twisting scripture to try to prove a point....

Then this : " The New Testament, from where we get our image of the classical Jesus, was not selected as such until about 350 AD. The Roman Catholic church fathers who put it together..." Well, that pretty much proves that he's not much of a Bible scholar, doesn't it?

The guy then goes on to try to promote Gnosticism, pretending that Christianity was actually a form of gnosticism originally, when in fact large parts of the New Testament deal ver harshly with gnosticism, proving that Jesus and the disciples totally rejected it.

But then we get to this:

" Alternatively, the practice of the Catholic church emphasizes "faith"; the individual never knows God themselves, but is limited to the descriptions and religious edicts proposed by the church and administered at a painful cost by the hierarchy ...." What a load of TRASH! Where does this guy get off? How many more lies does he intend to repeat? Sheesh! what a nut....

Ask any born again Christian if he has experienced the direct presence of God personally, or if he simply relies on the church to tell him about it.... When you have Jesus, you most certainly DON'T need cannabis to know God. In fact, using any kind of mind-altering drug is totally rejected by Christianity.

To be honest, I just can't stomach any more of this ridiculous hacking and re-writing of the scriptures, and the ludicrous claims about the early church. They guy is so out of whack with reality that it seems like he has spent far too much time inhaling cannabis, and nowhere near enough on his knees, in the REAL presence of God.

[Kuni]

But let's look at the claims again, shall we?

I posted this more for it’s entertainment value than I did for anything else.

And I didn’t really invest a lot into checking out the details, or in my responses; but my gut feel is that there is some substance to the claims.

But seeing as that it has ruffled some feathers; I will look into this in much greater detail and try to support the claim made; and failing that I will concede that this is incorrect and I should not have posted it.