Moses was high?

[Aelswyth]

I just found this article about an Israeli researcher who claims that, like many other cultures, the Hebrews used mind-altering ritual substances to experience visions and communicate with God.

Moses was high on drugs.

I've heard theories of this kind before, usually pointing out that the recipe for incense given in the Torah includes cannabis, which could conceivably inspire visions etc. if it included the flowering buds.

Opinions?

[aisling]

the mild effect of non cultivated marijuana used in an inscense could create a receptivity to visions,primarily through our neurochemical systems. heavenly father works through the holy spirit in us,creating visions as we are carried away by the spirit, through dreams, the still small voice, the presence or ministering of angels,the burning in the bosom, ect. there is a difference in the other worldly drifting of thought that comes from psycoactive substances and the true manifestations of the holy spirit. i think that often times in articles published now there is an effort to put the gospel into a worldly context, as if it is nothing more than a progressing cultural group think. in this, the authors deny the reality of a real heavenly father who has his loving hand in our lives and uses the priesthood to act under his guidance here. if an author caused us to atribute moses visions to the action of a drug, then what he was told could have been done by anyone, without the need for priesthood, righteousness or actualy seeking father for what he wants.

[pushka]

Interesting theory..I'd like to see more in depth information to back up the claim of the article tho. :)

[Aelswyth]

the mild effect of non cultivated marijuana used in an inscense could create a receptivity to visions,primarily through our neurochemical systems. heavenly father works through the holy spirit in us,creating visions as we are carried away by the spirit, through dreams, the still small voice, the presence or ministering of angels,the burning in the bosom, ect. there is a difference in the other worldly drifting of thought that comes from psycoactive substances and the true manifestations of the holy spirit. i think that often times in articles published now there is an effort to put the gospel into a worldly context, as if it is nothing more than a progressing cultural group think. in this, the authors deny the reality of a real heavenly father who has his loving hand in our lives and uses the priesthood to act under his guidance here. if an author caused us to atribute moses visions to the action of a drug, then what he was told could have been done by anyone, without the need for priesthood, righteousness or actualy seeking father for what he wants.

But what about the idea that Heavenly Father provided these substances for the sole purpose of communicating with Him in this way? That they are given as a kind of gateway to these experiences? I've heard it suggested that the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil that Adam and Eve ate in Eden was actually some kind of mind-altering substance, and that by it they became aware of things that had previously been unknown to them. If these things were true, it would throw some light on the ritual uses of these substances in other cultures, and would also be a strong condemnation of how people in our modern culture abuse drugs recreationally. That would really be a form of blasphemy. Like in the Word of Wisdom, how red wine is okay for the sacrament, but drinking it for any other reason is forbidden, because doing so removes it from its sacred nature and turns it into just another thing to corrupt the mind and satisfy the desires of the flesh.

There are still people who have the ancient traditional knowledge of these substances and how to safely prepare and use them to commune with God. But they all say that they would not let most modern people do so, because most of us are unprepared and don't have the discipline and spiritual awareness to do it properly. I think there is a lot of truth in that. Our culture (not LDS, but the Western world in general) is very spiritually immature. It would not be safe.

[Ray A]

There are still people who have the ancient traditional knowledge of these substances and how to safely prepare and use them to commune with God. But they all say that they would not let most modern people do so, because most of us are unprepared and don't have the discipline and spiritual awareness to do it properly. I think there is a lot of truth in that. Our culture (not LDS, but the Western world in general) is very spiritually immature. It would not be safe.

I'm not entirely averse to this line of thinking at all. If the brain is a "conduit" to a higher consciousness, then altering certain parts could theoretically open up those avenues. Researchers of near death experiences report that after a "strong" NDE, the brains of NDErs fundamentally change in the way they operate, and this in turn changes their values and focus on life. They become much less materialistic, more focused on spiritual things, and are often "loners" in that sense. Often marriages are ended after the NDErs radical change in lifestyle and thinking, as they are no longer compatible with former values and ideas. Not entirely different to the way some marriages go astray when one spouse embraces a new religious lifestyle, which is incompatible with the former basis of the marriage.

Athletes who take performance enhancing drugs also make the body do things it normally could not do. So the real question is whether such activities are good, or bad. Of course taking performancing enhancing drugs are illegal now, but there's no question they improve performance - hence the term.

Incidentally, my brother emailed Professor Shanon (the subject of the media article), who replied that the media reports were "distorted". I read his reply to my brother, and I think he means that one needs to study the subject more fully, rather than jumping to sensational conclusions - "Moses was a fraud", etc.

[skalenfehl]

I heard about his on the radio. Very silly. Just my opinion.

[Flyonthewall]

I find it fascinating how people need to find "rational" explainations to all the miracles of the Bible. In college, for one of my classes, I read a book about the story of Moses, and in it, the author tried to give rational explainations for everything. I can't remember details, but I remember that the rational explainations, were just as improbable as the miracles themselves.

[Ray A]

"Aids" for revelation are not new. Joseph Smith used the Urimm and Thummim, and a seerstone. If he could have done it all on his own, he would just have used his natural brain processes, without any aids. Once he grew used to the process, he could do it without the aids.

[skalenfehl]

I agree with Flyonthewall.

"Aids" for revelation are not new. Joseph Smith used the Urimm and Thummim, and a seerstone. If he could have done it all on his own, he would just have used his natural brain processes, without any aids. Once he grew used to the process, he could do it without the aids.

Yes, but aids such as the seer stones, the Liahona, etc all had purposes and similitudes given. This peyote nonsense is conjecture.

With respect.

[Ray A]

It could very well be complete nonsense, but I don't mind looking into claims. Most outsiders think Joseph Smith's claims are "nonsense", and unless they look further, they will likely retain that idea. The idea that the Book of Mormon was produced through the use of a seerstone doesn't sit well with most outsiders, and even some members. But the "fruit" of the revelation is there for all to see, and examine.

[skalenfehl]

Yes, I can only imagine the prospect of many claims to members of other faiths, but within our faith I just don't subscribe to such things. The author of that article admits that he doesn't believe that the events were supernatural or legendary but inserts his own theory.

Of course I can accept or reject the fact that Moses even existed or that the Lord inscribed the ten commandments on stone tablets, or that Moses really parted the Red Sea, etc. I can even accept that some of the Israelites exposed themselves to mind altering substances, but that Moses did so in order to speak with God...I reject.

Respectfully.

[Moksha]

"Aids" for revelation are not new. Joseph Smith used the Urim and Thummim, and a seerstone. If he could have done it all on his own, he would just have used his natural brain processes, without any aids. Once he grew used to the process, he could do it without the aids.

Many cultures throughout history have used psychoactive-type substances to enhance their receptivity to spiritual experiences.

Personally, I find that taking a large dab of wasabi on top of some sushi induces a quasi-religious experience whereby my focus of attention in acutely narrowed for a brief time. Perhaps the pickled ginger aids in this process too.

[Alaskagain]

Where have I heard this before?

Perhaps it was from my Rastafarian friend who claimed that marijuana grows on the grave as Moses, therefore this is a sign from above that the drug is to be used on a daily basis . . . . , but perhaps I am remembering wrongly. Not to be casting aspersions on the group, just a vague memory. . . . I will search and if I am wrong, I will retract later . . . . .

edited: that should be "grows on the grave of Moses", not as Moses..

[prisonchaplain]

I find it fascinating how people need to find "rational" explainations to all the miracles of the Bible. In college, for one of my classes, I read a book about the story of Moses, and in it, the author tried to give rational explainations for everything. I can't remember details, but I remember that the rational explainations, were just as improbable as the miracles themselves.

I was blessed with a professor who had a label for such explanations--anti-supernaturalism. The idea that Moses communed with God through narcotic-induced stupor strikes me as intentionally offensive. There is no need for me to ponder such slights with psuedo-intellectual 'objectivity.' Most things are possible or plausible. Nevertheless, my faith is that Moses spoke with God because he was the man God chose to lead his people. I commune with God because my soul has been blood-bought by his Son, not because of some self-induced mental euphoric experience.

tsk tsk, what will they come up with next?

[prisonchaplain]

Many cultures throughout history have used psychoactive-type substances to enhance their receptivity to spiritual experiences.

Personally, I find that taking a large dab of wasabi on top of some sushi induces a quasi-religious experience whereby my focus of attention in acutely narrowed for a brief time. Perhaps the pickled ginger aids in this process too.

I'm not sure that accutely sensing the stinging of the nostrils, followed by the rapid flow of nasal fluids quite fits the spiritual experience category we're looking for in this string.

[Alaskagain]

"anti-supernaturalism". good word, thanks, pc!

[Ray A]

Many cultures throughout history have used psychoactive-type substances to enhance their receptivity to spiritual experiences.

Personally, I find that taking a large dab of wasabi on top of some sushi induces a quasi-religious experience whereby my focus of attention in acutely narrowed for a brief time. Perhaps the pickled ginger aids in this process too.

Definitely now on my "to do" list. Anything for rapture and receptivity.

[Aelswyth]

I was blessed with a professor who had a label for such explanations--anti-supernaturalism. The idea that Moses communed with God through narcotic-induced stupor strikes me as intentionally offensive. There is no need for me to ponder such slights with psuedo-intellectual 'objectivity.' Most things are possible or plausible. Nevertheless, my faith is that Moses spoke with God because he was the man God chose to lead his people. I commune with God because my soul has been blood-bought by his Son, not because of some self-induced mental euphoric experience.

tsk tsk, what will they come up with next?

Who said anything about a stupor? You obviously have your own preconceived biases against the idea of sacred herb use and are giving a knee-jerk reaction without really thinking about the possibility at all. But, I expected that would be the most common reaction, coming from the background most of us do.

As for labeling such ideas "anti-supernaturalism", well, that depends entirely on where one draws the line, if any, between natural and supernatural. In the LDS Church, we don't define that line as hard and fast as some other denominations. Personally, I think the use of a sacred herb to open up the lines of direct communication with God certainly qualifies as one of those things that falls into both camps. Any time God communicates with man He has to use some kind of "natural" conduit to do so. A bush, fire, smoke... simply appearing to someone requires His Presence in the natural world. Everything we perceive is through our mind.

God made everything, both the "physical" and the "spiritual". LDS scriptures teach that there is no discontinuity between matter and spirit, it's an illusion of our limited mortal perspective. So, clearly, rejecting an idea on the basis that it utilizes natural means to a spiritual end is not so safe as it might first appear. LDS scriptures also teach that all living thing have spirits and were created for a purpose, even plants. Does God creating little spirit plants to provide man with a means of directly experiencing and encountering the Divine count as "supernatural"? Seems like it to me.

I'm not saying it's true. I reserve judgment. But I don't think dismissing it out of hand based on our own enculturation biases as 21st century Americans is really the humble and seeking response of the wise man, either.

[WANDERER]

Aelsa, forgive me, but I just find it funny.