Christian Liberty

[Northern Crofter]

I, for one, would not like to see the thread closed as of yet. I’d much rather people exhibit maturity and recognize a good faith discussion is being engaged in here.

Andrew, if I understand you correctly, you are asking whether or not marijuana was part of the original creation and, if so, what would that mean concerning legitimate/illegitimate us, correct?

Yes.

Were plants like marijuana created with the properties they currently have (like fermenting grapes in Genesis 9?) which means they are still "good" to some degree? Or have they devolved/mutated (like the thorns and thistles of Genesis 3?) into such "not good" plants due to the entrance of sin and its general corrupting influence on creation that they are now "off limits" as to their usefulness (morally and physically)?

 

[MarrowMan]

I, for one, would not like to see the thread closed as of yet. I’d much rather people exhibit maturity and recognize a good faith discussion is being engaged in here.

Andrew, if I understand you correctly, you are asking whether or not marijuana was part of the original creation and, if so, what would that mean concerning legitimate/illegitimate use, correct?

I don't know that that question can be answered with any certainty. Personally, I'm of the mind that marijuana, as a naturally occurring plant, was most likely part of the original created order. I believe that because of a.) its ancient pedigree, b.) the fact that it is not itself a hybrid (though it has been cultivated into various hybrid strains), and c.) it is not a "thorn" or "thistle" that intensifies and makes man's labor sorrowful. However, the properties of the original are certainly lost to us. I'm personally of the mind that we have most likely cultivated it to be much more potent than whatever pre-Fall/post-Flood form it would have had in the original, as that is the tendency of fallen man - to take what God has given and pervert it in search of an immoderate use. Take the coca leaf, for instance. Chewed in its plant form, it is beneficial for human consumption, non-addictive, and mildly stimulant in nature. It is the processing and concentrating of the cocaine within it that constitutes man's fallen predilection for perversion of God's good gifts. Could original marijuana have had a similar construction in which a tea made from its leaves could have had medicinal value without necessarily causing a high? Perhaps. I don't think that matters much, though. The reality is that humanity has been cultivating it for potency for quite some time. I do think it could be cultivated for medicinal use (yes, there is research suggesting that THC does produce various health benefits and, in fact, the synthetic THC drabinol is used in some cancer treatments) that reduces THC levels to such a degree as to render it incapable of producing immoderate "highs".

That said, I would not advocate for the recreational use of marijuana.

 

[Pomopu]

We have no objection to the idea shrooms are likely not functioning as God originally intended. That ingesting shrooms likely isn't the way. But technology (the devil loves technology) allows us to pervert these things, no? The poppy is no longer a nice flower, but a tool to make us unsober. And think of all the poisonous things, inedible things, that humans could eat that would kill us. Isn't marijuana like those things, but instead of poison to kill or paralyze, it is a poison to paralyze our brains and souls and spiritual vitality?

Coffee, clearly, is of a different sort of a thing. Tomatoes. Apples. Etc. I think plain common sense should tell us that any substance that unavoidably stupefies the person and produce a state of un-soberness is a perverted thing. But by all means use hemp. THC seems to be the culprit. And grow marijuana for aesthetics, for all I care. Like succulents. A smattering of thoughts.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

I'd like to note here that Andrew and I have communicated privately, and have reconciled, being grieved and saddened at how our interaction turned out, yet affirming our care and respect for one another.

 

[jwright82]

Brethren, this is a public site. Your information is in the public domain. Please think twice before divulging personal information that is going to prejudice you in the public eye. Think of Prince Harry's Memoirs and the confession of drug use. You don't know what trouble you might stir up for yourself or your family into the future.

I appreciate your concern. I mentioned no names or anything specific because I don't think they are around anymore. Nor did I mention the commission of any crimes. In America, don't know about Australia, you must be caught in the act or currently engaged in said crimes.
But will do. Thanks for your wisdom Reverend Winzer.

 

[ZackF]

Brethren, this is a public site. Your information is in the public domain. Please think twice before divulging personal information that is going to prejudice you in the public eye. Think of Prince Harry's Memoirs and the confession of drug use. You don't know what trouble you might stir up for yourself or your family into the future.

A moderator could move this thread to a more protected subforum.

 

[davejonescue]

A moderator could move this thread to a more protected subforum.

I can see a possible reason for that. But our American context tends to be a little different, in that Americans are much more forgiving of past indiscretions as possibly other societies. George Bush Jr., and Barack Obama both admitted to past drug use and still won the presidency.

 

[ZackF]

I can see a possible reason for that. But our American context tends to be a little different, in that Americans are much more forgiving of past indiscretions as possibly other societies. George Bush Jr., and Barack Obama both admitted to past drug use and still won the presidency.

I am talking about working schlubs being vetted by an HR department.

 

[davejonescue]

I am talking about working schlubs being vetted by an HR department.

For some reason, I tend to think Presidents are held to a bit higher standard, at least in the public's eye, then Danny's desk job, or Johnny hanging sheet-rock. But I guess there is always the chance.

 

[Northern Crofter]

For some reason, I tend to think Presidents are held to a bit higher standard, at least in the public's eye, then Danny's desk job, or Johnny hanging sheet-rock. But I guess there is always the chance.

See Hunter Biden's handgun application.

 

[Alethes]

Wow. Great read.

This thread is a perfect example of the brilliance of Chapter 20 of the WCF.

There are a few (maybe just one) person(s) ITT that should remind themselves of the spirit of the Chapter. Meaning, we are not to forbid what Scripture doesn’t forbid. We can forbid the outcome of certain substance use (I.e., drunkenness). Just because a substance could lead to drunkenness does not, in and of itself, warrant forbidding. As we have a perfect example, Scripturally, with Alcohol.

There are challenges re: Marijuana use and that should be noted. To outright forbid an entire plant because of its potential for harm would be to forbid many, many plants.

Furthermore, to disallow the use of Marijuana while allowing/supporting the use of Pharmaceutical Drugs that are (in many/most cases) concocted or derived of similar plant origins seems to, perhaps in multiple ways, violate Chapter 20 of the WCF.

Yes we have rampant, pagan, abuse of Marijuana in this country; however, we have perhaps even more rampant abuse of prescription medication in this country. Many times under the false veil of medical approval, or even “necessity”! Or, what’s worse, under the false veil of “science” leading to “necessity”! Many telling folks that using them is better for your health!

There are many traps one can fall in here and this is what Chapter 20 is there to hopefully prevent.

TLDR

-Anything that alters your mind in a similar way to drunkenness is forbidden by Scripture
-However, because we have the inherit example of Alcohol in the same context, there obviously are non-forbidden uses of the same substance providing they are upstream of drunkenness
-Addiction that alters behavior in an unbiblical manner is also forbidden
-What is illegal (this gets gray - remember most “hard” drugs weren’t illegal just a short while ago)

It seems most reasonable to me to apply this logic across the board…to any substance.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Hello @Alethes (I don't see a name for you in your signature),

You said, "There are challenges re: Marijuana use and that should be noted. To outright forbid an entire plant because of its potential for harm would be to forbid many, many plants." And, "It seems most reasonable to me to apply this logic across the board…to any substance."

Your reasoning is fallacious in light of Scriptural precision. But this thread has run its course, and I will demonstrate it (the fallacy) in an upcoming thread, seeking to fine-tune the matter so that certainty is attained. Despite there being dissenters.

 

[Alethes]

Hello @Alethes (I don't see a name for you in your signature),

You said, "There are challenges re: Marijuana use and that should be noted. To outright forbid an entire plant because of its potential for harm would be to forbid many, many plants." And, "It seems most reasonable to me to apply this logic across the board…to any substance."

Your reasoning is fallacious in light of Scriptural precision. But this thread has run its course, and I will demonstrate it (the fallacy) in an upcoming thread, seeking to fine-tune the matter so that certainty is attained. Despite there being dissenters.

Dear Brother,

Please demonstrate the fallacy. I’m happy to be corrected if I’m wrong. That said, I would ask you to be consistent. If you are unwilling, for example, to also forbid the entire use of any form of Opioid…poppy derived medicines…(including for surgery, etc) then our discussion will likely be unfruitful. This would also include any substance which could possibly lead to drunkenness (as part of the Biblical definition of drunkenness I would include hallucinations, etc).

Furthermore, please make sure you’re hearing my main point bc I am not in any way promoting the use of Cannabis in any such fashion that could be considered drunkenness or addiction. I am simply pointing out that the road you seemingly are on is one that leads to forbidding things Scripture does NOT forbid or requiring things that Scripture does NOT require. This is the very essence of WCF Chapter 20.

Once again as it seems to me for your reasoning to be sound and Scriptural in nature, you need to demonstrate that Marijuana is specifically forbidden, in any quantity or form, Exegetically.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Hello Jacob (Alethes),

To clarify a few things:

I am talking about a specific sin which is Scripturally spoken of as "sorcery". I am not talking about "any form of Opioid…poppy derived medicines…(including for surgery, etc)"

(What do the letters ITT and TLDR stand for?)

I am not talking about "any substance which could possibly lead to drunkenness (as part of the Biblical definition of drunkenness I would include hallucinations, etc)".

I understand you are not "not in any way promoting the use of Cannabis in any such fashion that could be considered drunkenness or addiction" [emphasis added, your emphasis omitted]

There is much use of cannabis that could not be considered drunkenness or addiction. Would such be okay?

Let me note what WCF 20. 3, 4 says:

III. They who, upon pretence of Christian liberty, do practice any sin, or cherish any lust, do thereby destroy the end of Christian liberty, which is, that being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve the Lord without fear, in holiness and righteousness before Him, all the days of our life.

IV. And because the powers which God has ordained, and the liberty which Christ has purchased are not intended by God to destroy, but mutually to uphold and preserve one another, they who, upon pretence of Christian liberty, shall oppose any lawful power, or the lawful exercise of it, whether it be civil or ecclesiastical, resist the ordinance of God. And, for their publishing of such opinions, or maintaining of such practices, as are contrary to the light of nature, or to the known principles of Christianity (whether concerning faith, worship, or conversation), or to the power of godliness; or, such erroneous opinions or practices, as either in their own nature, or in the manner of publishing or maintaining them, are destructive to the external peace and order which Christ has established in the Church, they may lawfully be called to account, and proceeded against, by the censures of the Church, and by the power of the civil magistrate. [emphases added]​

You had said, Jacob, "To outright forbid an entire plant because of its potential for harm would be to forbid many, many plants." And, "It seems most reasonable to me to apply this logic across the board…to any substance."

The marijuana plant — hemp — is well-known for producing rope. That is fine. What is at issue here is "any substance" that is involved in what Scripture calls sorcery, in the Greek, pharmakeia φαρμακεία.

You said, "Once again as it seems to me for your reasoning to be sound and Scriptural in nature, you need to demonstrate that Marijuana is specifically forbidden, in any quantity or form, Exegetically."

I agree. Though, when marijuana, or any derivatives thereof, do not have the psychoactive properties of the natural plant, this is not considered forbidden. So-called "medicinal" use has been the proverbial "foot in the door" to allow its use both "therapeutically" and recreationally.

Jacob, I gather you do not have actual experience with marijuana, and yet you presume to comment on it. Please correct me if I am wrong in gathering so.

But to the issue of sin. I have started a new thread to deal with this specific aspect of it, without which we do not go to the heart — the essence — of it.

What, specifically, is the sin of sorcery in the New Testament?

 

[Alethes]

Hello Jacob (Alethes),

To clarify a few things:

I am talking about a specific sin which is Scripturally spoken of as "sorcery". I am not talking about "any form of Opioid…poppy derived medicines…(including for surgery, etc)"

(What do the letters ITT and TLDR stand for?)

I am not talking about "any substance which could possibly lead to drunkenness (as part of the Biblical definition of drunkenness I would include hallucinations, etc)".

I understand you are not "not in any way promoting the use of Cannabis in any such fashion that could be considered drunkenness or addiction" [emphasis added, your emphasis omitted]

There is much use of cannabis that could not be considered drunkenness or addiction. Would such be okay?

Let me note what WCF 20. 3, 4 says:

III. They who, upon pretence of Christian liberty, do practice any sin, or cherish any lust, do thereby destroy the end of Christian liberty, which is, that being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, we might serve the Lord without fear, in holiness and righteousness before Him, all the days of our life.​

​

IV. And because the powers which God has ordained, and the liberty which Christ has purchased are not intended by God to destroy, but mutually to uphold and preserve one another, they who, upon pretence of Christian liberty, shall oppose any lawful power, or the lawful exercise of it, whether it be civil or ecclesiastical, resist the ordinance of God. And, for their publishing of such opinions, or maintaining of such practices, as are contrary to the light of nature, or to the known principles of Christianity (whether concerning faith, worship, or conversation), or to the power of godliness; or, such erroneous opinions or practices, as either in their own nature, or in the manner of publishing or maintaining them, are destructive to the external peace and order which Christ has established in the Church, they may lawfully be called to account, and proceeded against, by the censures of the Church, and by the power of the civil magistrate. [emphases added]​

You had said, Jacob, "To outright forbid an entire plant because of its potential for harm would be to forbid many, many plants." And, "It seems most reasonable to me to apply this logic across the board…to any substance."

The marijuana plant — hemp — is well-known for producing rope. That is fine. What is at issue here is "any substance" that is involved in what Scripture calls sorcery, in the Greek, pharmakeia φαρμακεία.

You said, "Once again as it seems to me for your reasoning to be sound and Scriptural in nature, you need to demonstrate that Marijuana is specifically forbidden, in any quantity or form, Exegetically."

I agree. Though, when marijuana, or any derivatives thereof, do not have the psychoactive properties of the natural plant, this is not considered forbidden. So-called "medicinal" use has been the proverbial "foot in the door" to allow its use both "therapeutically" and recreationally.

Jacob, I gather you do not have actual experience with marijuana, and yet you presume to comment on it. Please correct me if I am wrong in gathering so.

But to the issue of sin. I have started a new thread to deal with this specific aspect of it, without which we do not go to the heart — the essence — of it.

What, specifically, is the sin of sorcery in the New Testament?

Dear Brother,

1) I apologize for using forum terminology. I’m still adapting to our discourse here. ITT means “In This Thread” and TLDR is a euphemism for “Summary”.

2) I’m not sure why you’re asking about individuals personal experience with Marijuana. It seems to be either irrelevant, distracting and/or a potential “got ya”. Neither mine, nor your, experience is relevant bc it is distracting us from the primary issue: does Scripture forbid it or not? Just because I’ve never committed the sin+crime of murder doesn’t mean I cannot comment on it or “presume” upon it. Same for you.

3) Would you like me to respond to the rest of your position here or in the other thread re: “Sorcery”?

4) I appreciate your time!