Genesis 1:29 and cannibus

Ezekiel16 · #1 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 01:42 PM

Hello all,

Serious responses only please. What are your thoughts regarding the total prohibition of cannibus in this country (and many others) in light of Gen 1:29; 9:3?

If this has been covered before, please provide a link.

Many thanks...

Ezekiel16 · #2 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 01:44 PM

Dear Moderators,

Please feel free to correct my spelling error in the title of this thread.

VirginiaHuguenot · #3 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 01:49 PM

See this thread, this and this.

Ivan · #4 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 02:33 PM

Andrew,

Having read the threads you have provided, I must say that I have lived a sheltered life compared to many here at the PB.

Ezekiel16 · #5 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 02:46 PM

Hi Ivan!

Andrew,

I also read the links provided. I was hoping to discuss, though, not so much the opinions on medical marijuana or the dangers of intoxication, but more the flat out appropriateness (or dare I say sinfulness) of prohibition in light of God's Word. From reading your links I believe I know where you stand.

Maybe someone else has an opinion though. Is there a solid argument in support of a magistrate criminalizing God's provision?

Chris · #6 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 05:28 PM

If you want to use Genesis to justify the use of marijuana, you can't honestly stop there - you'd have to apply the same argument to other organic mind-altering substances, such as poppyseed derivatives, cocoa derivatives, etc.

I'd suggest that trying to justify marijuana through the use of Genesis 1:29 would be at least as intellectually dishonest as, say, trying to use Titus 1:15 to justify <insert pet besetting sin here>.

Ezekiel16 · #7 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 08:47 PM

Hello Chris,

Thanks for your comments. I definitely see and appreciate your concern. I'm still interested in a response to the question though.

Is it OK for legislation to criminalize that which God had specifically given to man?

*I understand that this subject can draw opinions about people, but I think it's worthy of discussion with regard to a magistrate's accountability or freedom thereof.

Exagorazo · #8 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ezekiel16

Is it OK for legislation to criminalize that which God had specifically given to man?

100% yes. God gives man sexual desires, and we criminalize child molestation, statutory rape and other sexual abuses. An example where God's gift is abused, and used irresponsibly.

I'm not going to post my opinion on Marijuana use, mostly because I don't have one. Just answering your question.

Ezekiel16 · #9 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exagorazo

100% yes. God gives man sexual desires, and we criminalize child molestation, statutory rape and other sexual abuses. An example where God's gift is abused, and used irresponsibly.

I'm afraid I do not see the relation. If your example paralleled the question properly, well, sexual desires would have to be illegal, not the misuse of them.

I am not asking whether or not God set apart cannabis to be smoked and inhaled or the government's opinion about that predicament. I am asking if it is OK for government to criminalize what is essentially a plant given by God to man.

ChristopherPaul · #10 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ezekiel16

I am asking if it is OK for government to criminalize what is essentially a plant given by God to man.

I would say no, government should not.

I for one think it would be overall more beneficial if drugs were legalized and harsher punishments were given for abuses of all freedoms (drunkenness/DWI, rape, etc.).

Exagorazo · #11 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ezekiel16

I'm afraid I do not see the relation. If your example paralleled the question properly, well, sexual desires would have to be illegal, not the misuse of them.

I am not asking whether or not God set apart cannabis to be smoked and inhaled or the government's opinion about that predicament. I am asking if it is OK for government to criminalize what is essentially a plant given by God to man.

The parallel I was drawing was the criminalization of something that is abused. Sex is a gift from God. Just as cannabis is. The abuse of sex is legislated against by the government (to a degree). It seems that the government's attitude to what the abuse of cannabis is is different to yours.

So, my point is; what should a Christian say is the difference between using Marijuana and abusing Marijuana? Just as sexual relations cross the line into abuse when it occurs outside of marriage, when does smoking pot cross that line?

Larry Hughes · #12 (**permalink**) 01-17-2007, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Is there a solid argument in support of a magistrate criminalizing God's provision?

No, by its very nature it's contradictory. Only the abuse of it is correct to be regulated. But man is clunky and very dull in fact closed to the idea of the fallen heart. Thus, man magistrates things of creation thinking they are causal, thus man blames God by assigning causality via such legistlation to the good Creation, e.g. alcohol, rather than addressing directly the crime issuing forth from the heart. Man thus merely mimics the old Adam, 'the woman you gave...led me astray, the wine did it, the cannibis did it, ad nausem. This is how utter confusion abounds when man attempts in vain to "do" the law of God. You end up with opinion discussions about what can and cannot be done, a never ending nightmare of do and don't. When the fundamental loss of the total depravity of the heart of man to do God's Law is lost sight of, this is the resultant chaos. The Pharisees had what, a few hunderd laws. Check out the "Code of Federal Regulations", and that's just federal law. We cannot even track the violations to our written laws any longer so monumental they are, only the one's high on the "radar" are of concern.

L

Ezekiel16 · #13 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exagorazo

The parallel I was drawing was the criminalization of something that is abused. Sex is a gift from God. Just as cannabis is. The abuse of sex is legislated against by the government (to a degree). It seems that the government's attitude to what the abuse of cannabis is is different to yours.

So, my point is; what should a Christian say is the difference between using Marijuana and abusing Marijuana? Just as sexual relations cross the line into abuse when it occurs outside of marriage, when does smoking pot cross that line?

Hi Vaughan,

Hope all is well this morning. I understand the point you are making that both sex and marijuana plants are abused even though they are gifts from God. This issue I am concerned with, however, is that there is a big difference between how legislators have handled the two. It is perfectly legal to have sexual desires or intercourse up to the point where the state deems an act abusive, harmful, or immoral. But this model does not match well with how marijuana plants are handled. I'm not sure of the laws in Australia, but here it would be a criminal offense to simply have one growing on your property. The law criminalizes the plant's existence within a person's posession, far before we even have a chance to discuss abuse, harm, or immorality. This is why I mentioned that the example of sex does not parallel the question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Hughes

No, by its very nature it's contradictory. Only the abuse of it is correct to be regulated. But man is clunky and very dull in fact closed to the idea of the fallen heart. Thus, man magistrates things of creation thinking they are causal, thus man blames God by assigning causality via such legistlation to the good Creation, e.g. alcohol, rather than addressing directly the crime issuing forth from the heart. Man thus merely mimics the old Adam, 'the woman you gave...led me astray, the wine did it, the cannibis did it, ad nausem. This is how utter confusion abounds when man attempts in vain to "do" the law of God. You end up with opinion discussions about what can and cannot be done, a never ending nightmare of do and don't. When the fundamental loss of the total depravity of the heart of man to do God's Law is lost sight of, this is the resultant chaos. The Pharisees had what, a few hunderd laws. Check out the "Code of Federal Regulations", and that's just federal law. We cannot even track the violations to our written laws any longer so monumental they are, only the one's high on the "radar" are of concern.

L

Hello Larry. Thanks for your input. I agree that our system pretty much shoots from the hip on much of the laws. Here is the best I can do so far in defense of the legislation at hand. Forgive me, this is not well prepared, I am just thinking out loud.

Perhaps the magistrate is validated in their decision for a total prohibition of cannabis simply because God has ordained man's dominion over the plant. Instilled in this dominion is the authority to pick and choose--in this case collectively as a society.

Another not-so-perfect example would be God's provision that every moving thing that lives shall be as food for man (Gen 9:3). This is clear, and yet our government will imprison someone who attempts to consume an endangered species. However the distinction again does not match well with the marijuana plant where simple possession is a crime. I don't think anyone would fear incarceration if a snow leopard was discovered on their property (or maybe they would if it was caged). My suggestion is that perhaps dominion includes the authority to sort through the Lord's provision. Of course, this seems to open up a pandora's box of possibilities.

I'm not trying to end my own thread here. That is simply the best I can do as far as an argument in support of criminalizing God's gift. As of yet I do not find it entirely sound though and am appealing to the greater minds here to help weigh it out.

Please continue to share your thoughts.

mangum · #14 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

If you want to use Genesis to justify the use of marijuana, you can't honestly stop there - you'd have to apply the same argument to other organic mind-altering substances, such as poppyseed derivatives, cocoa derivatives, etc.

I'd suggest that trying to justify marijuana through the use of Genesis 1:29 would be at least as intellectually dishonest as, say, trying to use Titus 1:15 to justify <insert pet besetting sin here>.

Correct. This would be insane in the membrane.

Kevin · #15 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

If you want to use Genesis to justify the use of marijuana, you can't honestly stop there - you'd have to apply the same argument to other organic mind-altering substances, such as poppyseed derivatives, cocoa derivatives, etc.

I'd suggest that trying to justify marijuana through the use of Genesis 1:29 would be at least as intellectually dishonest as, say, trying to use Titus 1:15 to justify <insert pet besetting sin here>.

the distinction Chris is the "effect". I think halucenogenic drugs are in a seperate category and can legitimatly be banned based on the laws against "witch-craft".

Since pot is not (ordinarily) a halucenogenic as it is commenly used it would not fall under the ban that I see in scripture against other drugs.

I would say however that the nearly universal use of pot/hash is as an intoxicant. Since scripture clearly forbids drunkeness it would be a sin for a xn to use (abuse) it in this way.

py3ak · #16 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 10:18 AM

Whether marijuana is evil or not is not the point. The point is whether the government has any Biblical right to regulate it. Being joyless is wrong; but does the government have a right to castigate people who are not happy? I don't see any warrant for the government to restrict a plant of any kind.

Chris · #17 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ezekiel16

Hello Chris,

Thanks for your comments. I definitely see and appreciate your concern. I'm still interested in a response to the question though.

Is it OK for legislation to criminalize that which God had specifically given to man?

*I understand that this subject can draw opinions about people, but I think it's worthy of discussion with regard to a magistrate's accountability or freedom thereof.

I think I undedrstand your question now - sorry that I took the liberty of broadening its context.

With regard to gov't regulation of that which God has given to man, I'd have to resoundingly say 'Yes!'.

This gets tricky, I admit, and I don't want to set myself up as giving any sort of definitive answer, but here's my thoughts:

-Gov't regulates man's use of woman in some ways - a man can't beat his wife, hire her out for sex, etc. These are things that constitute abuse of the gift God gave to man.

In the same vein, gov't has regulated activitites inextricably tied to alcohol abuse - such as DWI. Gov't has regulated the abuse of firearms (too much, IMO) even though it was God who originally gave men the means of defense.

I could go on, but there's no use, because few items are directly comparable to marijuana. Most tangible gifts from God to man - woman, clothes, alcohol (I'm a baptist - am I allowed to use that example?

), food, ad nauseum, can be abused, and said abuse is harmful to society as a whole.

Chris · #18 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

the distinction Chris is the "effect". I think halucenogenic drugs are in a seperate category and can legitimatly be banned based on the laws against "witch-craft".

Since pot is not (ordinarily) a halucenogenic as it is commenly used it would not fall under the ban that I see in scripture against other drugs.

I would say however that the nearly universal use of pot/hash is as an intoxicant. Since scripture clearly forbids drunkeness it would be a sin for a xn to use (abuse) it in this way.

In the context of whether Genesis justifies its regulation, can we consider the effects?

I agree that it's sin to abuse it. The question is, where is the line between use and abuse?

py3ak · #19 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 10:33 AM

Trevor --I would answer your last question in the above post by saying that government protects its citizens from violence (whether from other nations in war or from other citizens in crime); but it shouldn't protect us from ourselves.

Chris · #20 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 10:41 AM

No, not at all.

Let me clarify a couple of things:

I used marijuana in high school. Lots of it. And alcohol en masse. I grew out of marijuana, and stopped drinking when it lost its appeal.

I continued smoking cigarettes until I got saved, at which point God made it clear that I no longer had that liberty.

Right now, I could probably (not sure, never tried) go smoke a cigar, drink a beer, and smoke a joint, and not violate my conscience, except for concerns of offending other people's consciences.

(If, of course, I had any desire to do so...)

So, please don't assume that I'm coming from a strict moralist/legalist mindeset here.

Right now, my concern is this - are we all looking at the question the same, and has it been properly defined? Your reply made me review my own (second) answer, and I have to admit, I'm still not sure whether I'm answering the original question specifically and fully yet staying strictly within the context within which it was asked.

To answer your question specifically, no, gov't does not have that right. Someone forgot to inform them, though.

Gov't has, IMHO, the right to regulate behavior that results in imminent threat to society. That would include driving under the influence of marijuana - but not smoking it per se.

The *real* question, though.....who are we to question them? Government is concerned with this world. My treasure doesn't lie here. Let government do as it will. Our job is to spread the Gospel.

Chris · #21 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 10:42 AM

Quote:

but it shouldn't protect us from ourselves.

Amen, amen, amen!

Ezekiel16 · #22 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 03:37 PM

Thanks for expanding on your answer, Chris. Quick question for now, when you mention this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

No, not at all.
The *real* question, though.....who are we to question them? Government is concerned with this world. My treasure doesn't lie here. Let government do as it will. Our job is to spread the Gospel.

You ask who are we to question them? I could see this being valid if we lived under some kind of monarchy, but do you think the same in our current system of government? Shouldn't we be exactly the ones to question them?

It's not so much the discussion of marijuana here but it is the principle of this situation that is so interesting.

Chris · #23 (**permalink**) 01-18-2007, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ezekiel16

Thanks for expanding on your answer, Chris. Quick question for now, when you mention this:

You ask who are we to question them? I could see this being valid if we lived under some kind of monarchy, but do you think the same in our current system of government? Shouldn't we be exactly the ones to question them?

It's not so much the discussion of marijuana here but it is the principle of this situation that is so interesting.

Does the principle in Romans no longer apply when Christians find themselves in a democracy?

(I'm not asking to draw you in a particular direction - I'm asking because I find the question fascinating. Who am I to waste ti