Jesus Needs New PR

Jesus Needs New PR


Does the Bible support smoking pot?


Well… one Facebook group says yes. The group Every Seed Bearing Plant suggests that Genesis 1:29 offer biblical support for the extracurricular use of marijuana.

“And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.” Genesis 1:29.

The group’s mission is simple: Establishing the God connection to the Marijuana, Poppy and Coca plant, and why it is against God’s law to make any plant illegal.

You can read more about this group’s high agenda here.

Scott Overpeck sent this to me!



Advertisement
Comments read comments(26)
post a comment
Jesse

posted March 23, 2011 at 9:00 am


They’re right, it does say that but I’m sure it also says treat your body like a temple… I’m also sure the bible say something about not lacing your pot with PCP…



report abuse
 

    Elemenope

    posted March 23, 2011 at 9:55 am


    …but I’m sure it also says treat your body like a temple.

    The Bible is against Big Macs?! I wouldn’t spread that one around middle America. There would be weeping and gnashing of teeth…



    report abuse
     

      VorJack

      posted March 23, 2011 at 10:39 am


      There would be weeping and gnashing of teeth…

      “If some have no teeth, then teeth will be provided.”



      report abuse
       

Jason

posted March 23, 2011 at 9:01 am


You have such a gift! As much as posting controversial or amusing articles, the titles draw you in. How could I not click the link on a tweet asking if the Bible supports smoking weed? You sly little devil…



report abuse
 

Jesse

posted March 23, 2011 at 9:04 am


PS: is that even something we should be worried about? Millions die, daily, because of starvation and water shortages, but God, please don’t let them liberals outlaw my pot! Amen!



report abuse
 

    Jonathan

    posted March 23, 2011 at 9:29 am


    God, such an automated response. I hope after you cooked your breakfast this morning you decided to pack it up and send it to Africa instead of eating it. In the meantime…I’m going to keep working on which heat intensity makes the best scrambled eggs…because even though it may not be as important as world hunger and unclean water it sure makes my day better when I have some awesome scrambled eggs in the morning. Ooo and Irish steel cut oats.



    report abuse
     

    James Williams

    posted March 23, 2011 at 9:37 am


    Liberals are the ones who’d like to outlaw pot? News to me.



    report abuse
     

      Elemenope

      posted March 23, 2011 at 10:08 am


      It shouldn’t be. Social conservatives and communitarian liberals have been allied on this issue since pretty much the beginning. Classical liberals and libertarian conservatives are on the other. Seeing as how those two factions are pitiful minorities of their respective political coalitions, at least in the US, the continuity of the drug war is no surprise.



      report abuse
       

        LRA

        posted March 23, 2011 at 12:51 pm


        Yes, but I think the terms liberal and conservative here might respond to blue and red break-downs… and wasn’t it Reagan who started the “war on drugs”?

        I dunno… your average pot-smoking “hippie” (at least the ones I know in Austin) strike me as “blue”.



        report abuse
         

          LRA

          posted March 23, 2011 at 12:52 pm


          ack! repspond = correspond. dang typos!



          report abuse
           

          Elemenope

          posted March 23, 2011 at 2:09 pm


          Nixon could be said to have properly begun the war on drugs, though their prohibition occurred much earlier for the most part. Nixon enjoyed the enthusiastic support of both parties in this. So did Reagan, Bush, and Clinton, who each in turn intensified the response to drugs.



          report abuse
           

          Elemenope

          posted March 23, 2011 at 2:11 pm


          I should also note that the few dissenters at the beginning (e.g. Barry Goldwater, William F. Buckley, Jr.) were nearly all on the right, not the left.



          report abuse
           

          Silica

          posted March 23, 2011 at 2:09 pm


          I don’t know, most of the high school students I taught who smoked pot (of course, that’s based on rumor and overhearing hallway talk) were definitely conservative – but that fit the school community in general, and 14-18 year olds do grow up and change their minds about things.

          Most adults I know who smoke pot do prefer liberal social policy if nothing else.



          report abuse
           

Superstarseven

posted March 23, 2011 at 9:07 am


Well the Bible does advocate staying sober at all times.
I’ve been high and laughed for 25 minutes straight once. I don’t think I advanced the Kingdom one bit during that.



report abuse
 

Shana

posted March 23, 2011 at 9:07 am


I’m with Jesse on this one. Use does not equal abuse. Marijuana and other plants can be used for medicinal purposes, but overindulgence leads to addiction, even if it is “only” psychologically.



report abuse
 

Christian M.

posted March 23, 2011 at 9:46 am


Superstarseven, maybe you did more good than you realize. After all, “a merry heart doeth good like a medicine.”



report abuse
 

Brad S

posted March 23, 2011 at 10:35 am


Just goes to show you that by proof-texting you can legitimize pretty much anything.



report abuse
 

    Elemenope

    posted March 23, 2011 at 11:16 am


    Is there anything about the wider context of the passage that would contradict this interpretation? For that matter, is there any passage that could untorturously be applied to disapproving of cannabis use?



    report abuse
     

      Ric

      posted March 23, 2011 at 12:41 pm


      Prooftexting does not necessarily mean taking a verse out of context. Rather, prooftexting is taking a contemporary issue or argument, coming to a conclusion, and then going to Scripture to find support.

      If I am against smoking pot, and then go and find the scriptures that disapprove of it (like everyone in this blog thread has already done), then its just prooftexting the other way.

      Maybe we should look at it this way:

      The Bible doesn’t say anything about marijuana (or stem cell research, internet privacy, collective bargaining, or public education). The Bible is concerned about God, revealed in Christ. Pattern your lives accordingly (sacrificial love).



      report abuse
       

        Elemenope

        posted March 23, 2011 at 2:17 pm


        Maybe we should look at it this way:

        The Bible doesn’t say anything about marijuana (or stem cell research, internet privacy, collective bargaining, or public education). The Bible is concerned about God, revealed in Christ. Pattern your lives accordingly (sacrificial love).

        That does not follow at all from the actual text of the Bible, which it should be noted says load and loads and loads about how people should or should not live (in the pragmatic day-to-day sense, not the more abstract “everything for God” sense). A text which tells you what you should and should not eat, what clothes you can wear, how to cut your hair, how to make war, how to dispose of your assets, what to do about rule-breakers in the community, and so forth, is very obviously concerned with matters as mundane as intoxicants and plant-usage.

        That’s how its been understood for thousands of years; your interpretation (ignore all the pragmatic stuff and just concentrate on the relationship with God and godly matters) discards the lion’s share of the text.



        report abuse
         

          Ric

          posted March 24, 2011 at 11:48 am


          oh my. Interpreting “The Bible is concerned about God, revealed in Christ. Pattern you lives accordingly (sacrificial love).” as “ignore all the pragmatic stuff and just concentrate on the relationship with God and godly matters” is missing what I am saying, and lumping me in with a view that I’m sure you have in mind and disagree with. I’m not saying that at all. My purpose for that post was to say that you cannot proof text issues that are not in the Bible, like which internet browser to use or voting for collective bargaining. Rather, we must pattern ourselves after Christ, which is very pragmatic, involving laying down our rights for the Gospel (1 Cor. 9).

          Christian ethics should never start with an issue, then go to Scripture to defend a position. Rather, Christian ethics must start with the paradigms present in Scripture and worship, then take those paradigms to our current issues. Richard Hays (professor of New Testament at Duke Divinity School) finds that the paradigms present in Scripture that should help form our ethical decision are the Cross, the Community, and the New Creation.

          Now, viewing the “lion’s share” of Scripture as ethical propositions is an interpretive view. There’s just as much reason to say that the lion’s share of Scripture is narrative. But if we do look at those ethical propositions, most of which Gentiles are not required of (Acts 15 among others), we see that those rules and laws are concerned about order and safety, but also about revealing who God is. So, we cannot ignore them! They reveal who God is! Therefore, paradigms rise from those laws that inform our ethical decisions. For instance, Philo interpreted many of those dietary laws as authoritative for how to live in social circles, who to associate with. I’m not sure many Gentile Christians today view those practical everyday laws that you mentioned as authoritative for for all peoples everywhere and at all times. For instance, most of Christendom does not honor the sabbath on the actual sabbath day, and our entire economic system is built on interest bearing loans, which are also forbidden in the laws.

          All this is to say, if you are looking for a knock-down, drag-out verse that argues for or against specific type of marijuana use, you will not find it. However, the Bible does not leave you without an ethic from which to formulate these practical decisions, I am not advocating antinomianism. Rather, allow the whole of Scripture to speak its message, then allow its paradigms to inform how to live.

          reading suggestions:

          Reading the Bible in the Strange World of Medicine, by Allen Verhey

          The Moral Vision of the New Testament, by Richard Hays

          Christian Ethics, ed. by Stanley Hauerwas and Samuel Wells

          Improvisation: the Drama of Christian Ethics, by Samuel Wells



          report abuse
           

BMH

posted March 23, 2011 at 11:26 am


I’m with them. But this would fall under 1 Corinthians 6:12, I think:

All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be enslaved by anything.



report abuse
 

Charlie's Church of Christ

posted March 23, 2011 at 1:32 pm


I could almost buy that reasoning. But natural marijuana that grows in the wild without humans influencing it has 1% THC – which is a minor buzz really. Most marijuana these days is around 15-20% THC, and up to 40% for potent stuff because of growing techniques that manipulate the stimulation of more THC. Some could probably argue around that, but I still think that says something about what “God intended,”

(by the way I’m not a grower or anything, just the opposite – a drug & alcohol counselor)



report abuse
 

    LRA

    posted March 23, 2011 at 2:01 pm


    So, agricultural techniques to enhance plants for human uses are wrong? We must all stop eating seedless bananas, grapes, and watermelons immediately!

    (I know, I know… people don’t get high off fruit. I’m not a pot-smoker either, but I never really hear of people dying from a pot overdose… or a pot-head beating his wife. And wasn’t there a passage in the NT when Paul (?) tells Timothy (?) to go ahead and drink alcohol to settle his stomach or something like that? So it would seem that medicinal uses of such products are ok… if one believes in that sort of thing.)



    report abuse
     

Adam

posted March 24, 2011 at 8:49 am


As a Christian who smokes pot every once in awhile I must say, it does not hinder my spiritual life. Like alcohol, sex, swearing, soda, candy, the internet, starbucks, carbon based transportation, angry birds, and nearly everything else weed can be abused and lead to broken relationships which should be avoided. However, used in moderation and with forethought all these things are not going to cause someone to stumble.

On an aside. I love this blog, however, some of the advertisements don’t seem to support the rest of the content on the blog. Matthew, if you see this, at least for this reader, it would be appreciated if you weeded (pun intended) out some of your advertisers.



report abuse
 

nazani14

posted March 25, 2011 at 5:30 am


The body is a temple? Oooh, all kinds of wild and scary stuff has taken place in temples over the ages- dancing to collapse, self-mutilation, sacred prostitution, animal and human sacrifice, and of course many kinds of drug use. Does your body have an Ark that will kill you if you touch it?

Anyway, there’s nothing new about this group. Tokin’ Christians have been around for a couple of centuries, at least, Rastafarians being the best known.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More Blogs To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Jesus Needs New PR. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Red Letters with Tom Davis Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!  

posted 10:19:20am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

A Baptist mom meets the Black Eyed Peas…
Aw… my mom dances like that, too. A Baptist mom meets the Black Eyed Peas… is a post from: Jesus Needs New PR

posted 11:21:43am Dec. 30, 2011 | read full post »

Pat Robertson blasts SNL over Jesus, Tebow skit!
Hmm. SNL has poked fun with Jesus before… Chances are, Pat wouldn’t have said anything about this skit had it not been poking fun at Tebow… SNL has used “Jesus” in skits many many times. There seems to be a double standard among some Christians when the religious sati

posted 9:16:03am Dec. 22, 2011 | read full post »

Pirates, bubbles, and Jesus
Merry Christmas… Pirates, bubbles, and Jesus is a post from: Jesus Needs New PR

posted 9:02:42am Dec. 22, 2011 | read full post »

Bad nativity…
@gveitinger Bad nativity… is a post from: Jesus Needs New PR

posted 8:18:59pm Dec. 21, 2011 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.