High On Heresy: Exposing The Biblical Cannabis Myth
(ANALYSIS) A recent essay published by Patheos by Dr. Micah Ben David Naziri stretches for thousands of words trying to prove what centuries of biblical scholars have rejected: that Scripture not only permits but prescribes cannabis use.
Published under the provocative headline "Yes, the Bible Really Talks About (and Allows) Cannabis," the piece attempts to baptize modern drug culture in ancient authority. This isn’t the first effort to combine cannabis with Christianity, and it won’t be the last.
The desperation is palpable. The reach is breathtaking. The scholarship is shoddy.
READ: Faith Deserves Better News Coverage — And Here’s How You Can Help
This argument crumbles under scrutiny. Not because cannabis is inherently evil. Not because ancient peoples never encountered psychoactive plants. But because the evidence simply isn't there. The linguistic leaps are ludicrous. The archaeological interpretations are overblown. The theological implications are ignored.
The entire edifice rests on one archaeological find. Cannabis residue at Tel Arad. From this single data point, advocates construct elaborate theories about biblical drug use.
Context matters. Tel Arad wasn't the Temple in Jerusalem. It was a frontier fortress. A backwater outpost. What happened at Tel Arad tells us nothing about mainstream Jewish worship. It's like finding beer bottles at a modern military base and claiming Christianity endorses alcoholism.
The residue dates to 760-715 BCE. This is the period when Israel was fragmenting, when foreign influences were flooding in, when religious practices were becoming corrupted, the very era the biblical prophets were condemning apostasy and calling for reform.
Finding cannabis at Tel Arad is evidence of religious declension, not divine prescription.
Moreover, the Hebrew phrase "qaneh bosem" means "aromatic reed." Not cannabis. Reed.
Yes, the words sound similar across languages. Greek “kannabis,” Hebrew “qaneh.” But phonetic resemblance proves nothing. English “dog” sounds like Spanish “dos” (two). That doesn't make dogs numbers.
Professional lexicographers have examined this claim for decades. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament rejects the cannabis identification. The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew dismisses it. The authoritative Brown-Driver-Briggs lexicon never entertains it.
Why? Because “qaneh” consistently refers to reeds, canes, and measuring rods throughout Hebrew literature. Never once to cannabis. The semantic field is established. The usage is consistent. The cannabis connection is pure speculation.
Even if we accepted "qaneh bosem" as cannabis, the argument falls apart on practical grounds. Ancient extraction methods couldn't produce psychoactive oils suitable for topical application.
Modern cannabis oil requires sophisticated processing. Heat. Pressure. Solvents. Chemical extraction. Ancient peoples had none of these. They had olive oil and heat. That's it.
THC isn't water-soluble. It barely dissolves in olive oil without modern techniques. Any ancient cannabis oil would have been essentially non-psychoactive. The "entheogenic” anointing oil is a pharmacological impossibility.
Beneath the linguistic tricks and archaeological acrobatics lies a clear misunderstanding of biblical spirituality. The Bible’s central message is clarity, not confusion. Awareness, not anesthesia. Sobriety, not stupor. When it speaks of intoxication, it does so in metaphor—the “wine of God’s wrath,” the “cup of salvation.”
Symbols, not substances. Proverbs warns again and again: “Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler.” And Ephesians drives the point home: “Do not get drunk with wine… but be filled with the Spirit.” The contrast couldn’t be any sharper. Divine inspiration versus chemical alteration.
The cannabis interpretation turns this on its head. It makes God the great drug dealer. Scripture the ultimate stoner's manual. Sacred worship a sanctified smoke session.
As mentioned earlier, this isn't the first time drug advocates have hijacked religious texts. They've claimed Jesus used psychedelic mushrooms. That Hindu gods consumed soma. That Native American shamans endorsed DMT.
The pattern is always the same. Superficial research. Sensational claims. Scholarly veneer hiding flimsy evidence. Ancient peoples dragged into modern debates they never imagined.
It's intellectual imperialism. Forcing dead languages to speak contemporary concerns, making ancient texts validate modern choices.
Cannabis may have legitimate medical uses. Some people find spiritual value in altered states. These are separate discussions requiring honest examination.
But don't drag Scripture into it. Don't baptize your behavior with biblical authority. Don't make the ancient text say what it never said.
The Bible doesn't endorse cannabis use. The evidence is absent. The arguments are weak. The implications are dangerous.
Want to use cannabis? Make your case on medical grounds. On personal freedom. On philosophical principles.
But leave the Bible alone. Scripture speaks clearly about mind-altering substances; the message is consistent across cultures and centuries. Awareness, not escape.
Cannabis advocates can contort language and corrupt archaeology. They can construct elaborate theories and invoke ancient authorities, but they cannot change what the text actually says. They cannot transform reeds into cannabis. They cannot make the forbidden permissible through scholarly sleight of hand.
The Bible doesn't endorse getting high. It endorses getting holy. There's a difference — and it’s a crucial one.
John Mac Ghlionn is a researcher and essayist. He covers psychology and social relations. His writing has appeared in places such as UnHerd, The US Sun and The Spectator World.