Was Moses high on psychedelic drugs?

[Zzyzx]

.

Was Moses high on psychedelic drugs?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/was-mo ... 97518.html

High on Mount Sinai, Moses was on psychedelic drugs when he heard God deliver the Ten Commandments, an Israeli researcher claimed in a study published this week.

Such mind-altering substances formed an integral part of the religious rites of Israelites in biblical times, Benny Shanon, a professor of cognitive psychology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem wrote in the Time and Mind journal of philosophy.

"As far Moses on Mount Sinai is concerned, it was either a supernatural cosmic event, which I don't believe, or a legend, which I don't believe either, or finally, and this is very probable, an event that joined Moses and the people of Israel under the effect of narcotics," Shanon told Israeli public radio on Tuesday.

Moses was probably also on drugs when he saw the "burning bush", suggested Shanon, who said he himself has dabbled with such substances.

"The Bible says people see sounds, and that is a classic phenomenon," he said citing the example of religious ceremonies in the Amazon in which drugs are used that induce people to "see music".

He mentioned his own experience when he used ayahuasca, a powerful psychotropic plant, during a religious ceremony in Brazil's Amazon forest in 1991. "I experienced visions that had spiritual-religious connotations," Shanon said.

He said the psychedelic effects of ayahuasca were comparable to those produced by concoctions based on bark of the acacia tree, which is frequently mentioned in the Bible.

Is this possible?

Can it be supported or dismissed?

[The Nice Centurion]

"For Bart Ehrman its a sure thing that Jesus existed (his book: DID JESUS EXIST?), but he assures also that Christ was an alcoholic among other unbiblical things."

I didn't realize Bart Ehrman said Jesus was an alcoholic. Can you provide a reference for that?

It must be in his book, which I own, but didnt find time to read. I was informed from reading a book critique.
Luke 7:34 might play a role.

"Further, for developing such hypothesis, one must believe in the whole Moses story or at last part of it! But why believe in one part and not in the other?"

That should be obvious. Some parts are more probable than others, so some parts are kept, some parts removed. Alternatively you could assume the written accounts are literal and accurate, a position that requires an awful lot of unreasonable mental gymnastics.

It is not uncommon among believers to do that.

And also some Alan Atwill wannabees have to accept, say miracles. For example: If one wants to prove that martians helped Jesus perform miracles, he just has to read the miracle accounts literally.

Therefore its not as easy as you think.

[LittlePig]

Therefore its not as easy as you think.

What's easy is imagining alternative scenarios like aliens or inhaling bush fumes. What's not easy is providing historical evidence for any of these imagined scenarios, including divine miracles. Even easier is admitting that nobody knows and leaving it at that.

However, some scenarios play nicer with our current understanding of the universe than others. Even UFOs benefit from massively more evidence than divine miracles. We have actual videos of that, and supposedly a whole lot more.

[1213]

Is this possible?

Can it be supported or dismissed?

Who would then have made the stone tablets? God?