Does the Bible Back Marijuana? Politician Cites Scripture to Tout ‘Miraculous Plant’

“Then God said, ‘I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.’” The Blaze

9585 reads

There are 29 Comments

Aaron Blumer's picture

EditorAdmin

Another reason we need more people to read the Bible "literally."

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

Jim's picture

My observation is that we (in the US) have had our own "Reefer Madness" about marijuana. There may be something about that drug that is good! We (in the US) have also had an reactionary approach to industrial hemp This is an amazing plant  ("Hemp is one of our planet's most important natural resources, and we advocate using it to its full potential.") that is currently illegal to grow in the US.

Julie Anne's picture

I have completely changed my tune on this topic as a result of personal testimonies of friends and research.  A young man I know recently had a hip replacement because of a medical disorder.  He was in continuous pain even sitting or laying down.  With medical marijuana, he was able to completely get off of habit-forming pain meds (which produced negative side effects).  Another story I know about is a young child with a seizure disorder.  This child was on a cocktail of 10 pharmaceuticals  - some were anti-seizure meds, others were meds to combat the side effects of the anti-seizure meds.  This child lost the ability to function normally because of being in a drugged-up state from the medications.  Now the child's mom prepares medical marijuana in capsule form and was able to wean off all pharmaceuticals.  Seizures have subsided and the medical marijuana has given no side effects.  This child now has a life again. 

James K's picture

The arguments for marijuana can be interchanged with alcohol.  Congratulations drinkers.

1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.

dgszweda's picture

Julie Anne wrote:

I have completely changed my tune on this topic as a result of personal testimonies of friends and research.  A young man I know recently had a hip replacement because of a medical disorder.  He was in continuous pain even sitting or laying down.  With medical marijuana, he was able to completely get off of habit-forming pain meds (which produced negative side effects).  Another story I know about is a young child with a seizure disorder.  This child was on a cocktail of 10 pharmaceuticals  - some were anti-seizure meds, others were meds to combat the side effects of the anti-seizure meds.  This child lost the ability to function normally because of being in a drugged-up state from the medications.  Now the child's mom prepares medical marijuana in capsule form and was able to wean off all pharmaceuticals.  Seizures have subsided and the medical marijuana has given no side effects.  This child now has a life again. 

 

julie, I have had the same experiences from people that I know who take this.  One of the biggest benefits compared to current drug regimes, is that marijuana typically has no side effects, and when used for conditions, it doesn't have a halucigenic effect.  We should promote its use as a medical option and start promoting more legitimate research around it.

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

David,

The issue many Christians refuse to face is the difference between recreational and medical use of marijuana. You cited 6 reasons to keep all marijuana use illegal in your blog.

Biblical Reasons to Oppose Marijuana
Every biblical injunction against alcohol is also a condemnation of marijuana and other recreational drugs. 

1. Scripture describes in detail the dangerous effects of alcoholic wine and says not to even look at it (Proverbs 23:29-35). It’s not much of a leap to take the same low view of other dangerous drugs. 

2. Scripture directly says wine is a mocker (Proverbs 20:1). 

3. Scripture commands us to be sober (1 Thessalonians 5:6-8; 1 Peter 5:8; etc.). 

4. Kings are commanded not to drink wine lest they pervert justice (Proverbs 31:4-5). Believers are called kings and priests (Revelation 1:6; 5:10) and neither should we take drugs that would cause us to do things we’d never do in our right minds. 

5. A Christian is to honor God with his mind and body (Matthew 22:37; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20). Both are adversely affected by alcohol and other drugs. 

6. Drinking hurts your Christian influence and leads others astray (1 Corinthians 8:9; 10:23). 

These arguments are so vague they could be applied to any drug. Morphine was once used recreationally also, but has now been limited to medical use. There are many other drugs that are legal and helpful as medicine but that are also illegally abused recreationally. Each of them would be banned by this useless list of conditions you have laid out. Nothing in your statement would provide a biblical basis for the believer to use any kind of mind-altering drug for medical reasons. No more general anesthesia for surgery I guess; Christians just need to grin and bear it. While you're at it, I guess coffee and other caffeinated drinks also get prohibited since they also alter the mental state and conveniently fall within the parameters of the reasoning you used to equate marijuana with alcohol.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

David R. Brumbelow's picture

Historically Christians have not opposed useful drugs for strictly medicinal use; and I agree.

As the quote below points out, the pain relieving ingredient from marijuana has been available for some time.

But most clamoring for medical marijuana just want to smoke it.

“Don't be taken in. Marijuana is a dangerous drug with countless negative effects. The rush to decriminalization in the name of pain control or mental health cannot be justified.
Most people who use marijuana to relieve severe pain combine it with stronger pain relievers because marijuana is not effective enough by itself. Furthermore, marijuana's pain-relieving ingredient has been available by prescription for years. A person can purchase Marinol -- right now -- with a doctor's prescription…”
-Barrett Duke, ERLC

Read more on damaging effects of marijuana:

http://gulfcoastpastor.blogspot.com/2014/01/gleanings-on-damaging-effect...

I continue to oppose the recreational use of mind-altering drugs, whether alcohol or marijuana.

By the way, there is a very significant difference between alcohol and marijuana, and things like caffeine.

Even the government recognizes that.

David R. Brumbelow

Jim's picture

It's laughable how you consider yourself a subject matter expert in the medical arena. 

Vs the Mayo Clinic

http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/marijuana/background/hrb-200...

Cannabis sativa is widely used for recreation. It has been inhaled or taken by mouth to produce a feeling of relaxation or well-being. The plant has been studied as a potential treatment for many conditions, including chronic skin disorders, cancer-related weakness and weight loss, chronic pain, Huntington's disease, sleep disorders, eye disease, multiple sclerosis, and schizophrenia. The most significant benefits have been seen in the treatment of chronic pain and multiple sclerosis. Marijuana may help reduce eye pressure in people who have glaucoma.

Greg Linscott's picture

Jim said:

It's laughable how you consider yourself a subject matter expert in the medical arena. 

David said:

I continue to oppose the recreational use of mind-altering drugs, whether alcohol or marijuana.

Jim,

Why is David's articulated position laughable? He has not said that he is unilaterally opposed to medical use. He clearly says that he is opposed to recreational use. He provided a reputable quote demonstrating that some are using the medical use for recreational purposes. I am certain many do attempt to take advantage of that, from personal observations, as well as anecdotes of some I know who live and serve in areas where medicinal use is more open and recreational indulgence for the most part ignored, with laws unenforced.

Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN

Jim's picture

My view:

  • Opposed for recreational use [but]
  • Do not oppose legalization (the Colorado experiment)
  • Favor development of medicinal uses of the drug
  • And ... to be clear (because I grew up in the 60's): Never tried it ... had many opportunities .. and doubt I would ever use it
rogercarlson's picture

Greg,

In his article, David opposes the medical use of the drug as well.   I am not on one side or the other on this subject, but thought you should know. 

David,

Can you express in more detail why you are opposed to medical use?  Like I said above, I am not on either side, but would appreciate your input on this.

Roger Carlson, Pastor
Berean Baptist Church

David R. Brumbelow's picture

Greg, thanks.

Thanks for the apology, Jim.

In the first article on marijuana I say, “The argument for medical marijuana seems to just be a way of opening the door to the recreational use of marijuana.”

Roger, I should have elaborated a little more in the first article (I did so in my statement above).

The next article does offer a little more information along these lines.

The clamor for medical marijuana seems to be for the smoking of marijuana rather than using medicine developed from the ingredients in marijuana.

In other words, take away the recreational high or euphoria, and many are no longer interested in it’s medicinal use.

The great majority of folks arguing for medical marijuana do seem to primarily just want to open the door to its legalized recreational use.

When a state legalizes marijuana, two things seem to happen: First, most anyone can get a “prescription” and start smoking it. Second, the push then begins to completely legalize it for recreational use.

I am for any drug that has a legitimate medical use.

But I, and I believe Scripture, would caution against the use of recreational mind-altering drugs. And as mentioned in the article, we should even be very careful about using the legitimate, legal drugs; many get hooked on them.

David R. Brumbelow

dgszweda's picture

Dave,

Your blog posts that you reference are filled with numerous points of misinformation.  For example, you state that crime goes up in countries that have legalized Marijuana.  Seeing that Uruguay is the only country in the world that has legalized marijuana, and that was only legal in the last 60 days, provides you no evidence for that claim.  In addition, I work for the company that produces Marinol, and it is no he same thing as marijuana.  In addition, you at mismatching references on alcohol in the Scriptures and comparing it to marijuana, which is tenacious at best, especially since the Bible doesn't even state that alcohol should be legal or commands us not to drink alcohol.

 

i don't think think anyone is proposing that we as Christians should recreationally smoke marijuana.  But based on your arguments we should ban many of our current legal drugs like morphine, sleeping pills, OxyContin..... Since these are all misused recreationally as well.

 

since it has been illegal, we have never even had good research around it for useful medicinal purposes.  I am 100% behind legalizing for medical use.

David R. Brumbelow's picture

Marinol

Pronunciation

Generic Name: dronabinol (droe NAH bih nol)
Brand Name: Marinol

“Dronabinol is a man-made form of cannabis (also known as marijuana).”

-from drugs.com

David R. Brumbelow

dgszweda's picture

David R. Brumbelow wrote:

Marinol

Pronunciation

Generic Name: dronabinol (droe NAH bih nol)
Brand Name: Marinol

“Dronabinol is a man-made form of cannabis (also known as marijuana).”

-from drugs.com

David R. Brumbelow

 

It is good that you can Google.  I won't go into all the details, but there is significant differences.  Marinol contains a synthetic form of THC which is only one of many (>60) canniboids marijuana.  I was a pharmaceutical chemist at Solvay Pharmaceuticals, that manufactured the drug originally.  It is now owned by Abbott.

Rob Fall's picture

The one of the problems the medical use of marijuana has is the FDA and the DEA won't allow for THC to be put into widespread clinical trials in the US.  The Feds are seemingly intransigent in their position that marijuana\THC has no medical uses.

How available in the US is Marinol?  Is it available for distribution on a doctor's prescription?

dgszweda wrote:

 

David R. Brumbelow wrote:

 

Marinol

Pronunciation

Generic Name: dronabinol (droe NAH bih nol)
Brand Name: Marinol

“Dronabinol is a man-made form of cannabis (also known as marijuana).”

-from drugs.com

David R. Brumbelow

 

 

 

It is good that you can Google.  I won't go into all the details, but there is significant differences.  Marinol contains a synthetic form of THC which is only one of many (>60) canniboids marijuana.  I was a pharmaceutical chemist at Solvay Pharmaceuticals, that manufactured the drug originally.  It is now owned by Abbott.

Hoping to shed more light than heat..

Wayne Wilson's picture

My only contribution to this subject is to say that here in California, medical marijuana is a huge joke.  Anyone can get it to get high for ANY reason.  I know of no other "prescribed" drug treated in this way, except for the very rich.  There is no doubt it is a Trojan Horse.  

Sean Fericks's picture

While I agree that it is sin to use cannabis recreationally, I am for its legalization for the same reasons that I believe cigarettes, alcohol, gluttony, handguns, motorcycles, the SI Swimsuit issue, and skydiving should be legal.  The church should preach against, and I should guard against sin (including insobriety).  However, our nation was built on the principle of self-governance.  Sin is not the jurisdiction of the state.  Sin is the jurisdiction of the individual, family, and church.  

For those of you who argue that recreational cannabis should be illegal, how is your position consistent unless you are also for the banning of cigarettes, alcohol, the SI Swimsuit issue, motorcycles, and skydiving?  Do you really want to use governmental force to keep people from sin and unnecessary risk?  If so, what assurance do you have that the atheist will not use similar governmental force to prevent you from "polluting your child's mind with religion"?

dgszweda's picture

Rob Fall wrote:

The one of the problems the medical use of marijuana has is the FDA and the DEA won't allow for THC to be put into widespread clinical trials in the US.  The Feds are seemingly intransigent in their position that marijuana\THC has no medical uses.

How available in the US is Marinol?  Is it available for distribution on a doctor's prescription?

 

dgszweda wrote:

 

 

David R. Brumbelow wrote:

 

Marinol

Pronunciation

Generic Name: dronabinol (droe NAH bih nol)
Brand Name: Marinol

“Dronabinol is a man-made form of cannabis (also known as marijuana).”

-from drugs.com

David R. Brumbelow

 

 

 

It is good that you can Google.  I won't go into all the details, but there is significant differences.  Marinol contains a synthetic form of THC which is only one of many (>60) canniboids marijuana.  I was a pharmaceutical chemist at Solvay Pharmaceuticals, that manufactured the drug originally.  It is now owned by Abbott.

 

 

 

It is available for use from any doctor.  It is primarily prescribed to bring back hunger for patients undergoing chemotheraphy.  As with any medication in the US, any doctor can prescribe any medication for any condition (called off label prescriptions).  Some doctors have been prescribing Marinol for a variety of conditions.  Most of the people that I know, who legitimately take pot for medical reasons, find that smoking it, provides instantaneous relief, has essentially no side effects, is shorter lasting, and provides more benefits.  Marinol is a slower acting/releasing drug (on purpose) since you want your hunger to come back over longer periods of time.  While THC is the main ingredient in marijuana, there are more than 60 other cannabid related compounds in marijuana that are not found in Marinol.  I suffer from a condition where marijuana could be helpful.  I am not sure I would smoke it if it became legal.  I don't know what I would do.  I do feel that it is a natural drug that has been shown to have the potential of a lot of benefits, and I think science should get a crack to see what it does.  And if it does provide benefits, than we should allow it to be given by a licensed professional.

Wayne Wilson's picture

Sean Fericks wrote:

While I agree that it is sin to use cannabis recreationally, I am for its legalization for the same reasons that I believe cigarettes, alcohol, gluttony, handguns, motorcycles, the SI Swimsuit issue, and skydiving should be legal.  The church should preach against, and I should guard against sin (including insobriety).  However, our nation was built on the principle of self-governance.  Sin is not the jurisdiction of the state.  Sin is the jurisdiction of the individual, family, and church.  

For those of you who argue that recreational cannabis should be illegal, how is your position consistent unless you are also for the banning of cigarettes, alcohol, the SI Swimsuit issue, motorcycles, and skydiving?  Do you really want to use governmental force to keep people from sin and unnecessary risk?  If so, what assurance do you have that the atheist will not use similar governmental force to prevent you from "polluting your child's mind with religion"?

 

Heroin and Meth, too, Sean?  Is the issue only sin, or does any society have an interest in controlling addictive and destructive substances?

Greg Long's picture

Sean, to compare skydiving and marijuana doesn't help your case.

-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)

Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA

Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

Sean Fericks wrote:

While I agree that it is sin to use cannabis recreationally, I am for its legalization for the same reasons that I believe cigarettes, alcohol, gluttony, handguns, motorcycles, the SI Swimsuit issue, and skydiving should be legal.  The church should preach against, and I should guard against sin (including insobriety).  However, our nation was built on the principle of self-governance.  Sin is not the jurisdiction of the state.  Sin is the jurisdiction of the individual, family, and church.  

For those of you who argue that recreational cannabis should be illegal, how is your position consistent unless you are also for the banning of cigarettes, alcohol, the SI Swimsuit issue, motorcycles, and skydiving?  Do you really want to use governmental force to keep people from sin and unnecessary risk?  If so, what assurance do you have that the atheist will not use similar governmental force to prevent you from "polluting your child's mind with religion"?

I agree that there needs to be an ongoing discussion about how and where to draw these lines, but I think scripture gives pretty clear general instruction on this topic. Romans 13:1-6 is comprehensive - Rulers are to be a terror to bad conduct. Government cannot accomplish that God-given task without making and enforcing laws against that which is wrong, and the only way to determine what is right or wrong is from scripture. Regardless of the the freedoms engraved in the Constitution, Christians must still interpret the Constitution within the over-arching framework of scripture. 

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Sean Fericks's picture

Chip, I think the solution to your question (where do we draw the line?) is found by viewing the problem through the framework of "jurisdiction". Romans 13 acknowledges that government should play a role in prohibiting evil. But I think we would all agree that secular government should not prohibit all forms of evil (pre-marital sex, gluttony, attending a heretical church, etc.). So where do we draw the line? I believe that the line should be well-defined, consistent, objective, and informed by Scripture and history. I suggest that we grant secular government the duty of protecting individual rights, and prohibit it from unnecessarily impeding these rights (along the lines of our federal Constitution). Our founders recommended this course, and it has brought us the most successful society in history. Other governments have gone beyond this “jurisdiction” and tried to enforce economic equity, societal morality, and even religious orthodoxy. History and Scripture do not provide us with successful examples of these types of societies. Rome (spoken of in Romans 13) persecuted our forefathers, and then coopted our religion for the sake of power. England, Spain, and France all attempted to enforce orthodoxy of faith and practice. Each, in turn, was responsible for great atrocities againts Jews, Protestants, and Pagans. To the extent that nations have attempted to enforce economic equity, they have impoverished the nation as a whole (China, Russia, even the United States under the Affordable Care Act). Even in the OT, where we have the clearest examples of secular moral legislation, Israel failed time and again. These things were recorded for our admonition, and we should take heed. When too much power is granted, kings will heap wealth and women to themselves. They will murder to cover their tracks. They will lead a nation to idolatry. So where do we turn for a solution to drug use, pornography, gluttony, and foolish sinful behavior in general? I suggest that this battle must be waged in the “jurisdiction” of the individual heart, the family, the church, and the community. Secular government is utterly incapable of enforcing personal morality in a fair, biblical, consistent way.