So John the Baptist Smoked Pot, What of It?


Recent evidence has surfaced which reveals that John the Baptist was high on pot—descending in a cloud of marijuana smoke—when he conferred the priesthood upon Joseph and Oliver.  Some may feel this is unbecoming of an angelic prophet, but I want to state for the record that I support John 100%.

To all the prudes and misinformed:

So John smoked pot.  So what?

A List of Evidences in Favor of Pot

Latest CBS News Polls Finds Majority Of Western Voters, Californians, Back Marijuana Legalization by Paul Armentano, April 27, 2010

End Insanity Of The War on Drugs—Start With Decriminalizing Marijuana at The Federal Level by Ron Paul, April 20, 2010

Marijuana: Recreational drug or natural health miracle? by Kevin Genovario, April 19, 2010

Anti-Pot Propaganda As Stupid As Ever – Yet Our Alarmist Media Continues to Hype It by Paul Armentano, March 10, 2010

The Feds Are Addicted to Pot – Even If You Aren’t by Paul Armentano, December 18, 2009

Marijuana Is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People To Drink? by Mark Thornton, December 1, 2009

Marijuana Is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink? by Paul Armentano, August 12, 2009

Why Condemn Phelps, When We Ought to Condemn the Laws That Brand Him a Criminal by Paul Armentano, February 4, 2009

Drug War’s Latest Tally: 872,721 Pot Arrests, an All-Time High by Paul Armentano, September 17, 2008

Pot Versus the ‘Superbug’ by Paul Armentano, September 2, 2008

So Where Did All The Ditchweed Go? by Paul Armentano, August 11, 2008

20 Years for Pot Possession? by Paul Armentano, July 29, 2008

The Death of Rachel Hoffman by Paul Armentano, July 28, 2008

When It Comes To Medical Pot, Rats Are Smarter Than Our Politicians by Paul Armentano, July 22, 2008

So What If Pot Can Cure Cancer; That’s No Reason For You To Use It by Paul Armentano, July 19, 2008

What the Government Knows About Cannabis and Cancer – and Isn’t Telling You by Paul Armentano, June 26, 2008

Is Senator Kennedy a Victim of Pot Prohibition? by Paul Armentano, May 22, 2008

It’s Official: Gordon Brown and Jacqui Smith Have Lost Their Minds by Paul Armentano, May 15, 2008

How to Tell If the Drug Czar Is Lying? His Lips Are Moving by Paul Armentano, May 14, 2008

Setting the Record Straight on Marijuana and Addiction by Paul Armentano, March 31, 2008

Pot Makes You Lose Your Mind! by Paul Armentano, March 21, 2008

Outrageous Anti-Pot Lies: Media Uses Disgraceful Cancer Scare Tactics by Paul Armentano, March 11, 2008

Ending America’s Domestic Quagmire by Paul Armentano, March 10, 2008

The Lies of the Drug War by Paul Armentano, March 1, 2008

Making Pot Legal: We Can Do It – Here’s How by Paul Armentano, February 13, 2008

What’s the Going Price for a Joint? by Paul Armentano, February 5, 2008

‘Pot 2.0’: Where Can I Get Some? by Paul Armentano, November 2, 2007

Could Cannabis Quell Americans Addiction to Pain Meds? by Paul Armentano and Chris Goldstein, September 20, 2007

Nothing’s Either Good or Bad – Unless the State Says So by William Norman Grigg, July 2, 2007

It’s Been an ‘All Out War’ on Pot Smokers for 35 Years by Paul Armentano, March 23, 2007

White House Requests Increased Funding for Failed Student Drug-Testing, Discredited Anti-Pot Ads by Paul Armentano, February 10, 2007

A Billion Dollars a Year for Pot? by Paul Armentano, October 19, 2006

Medical Marijuana and the Ninth and Tenth Amendments byAnthony Gregory, October 5, 2006

Another Marijuana Myth Goes Up In Smoke by Paul Armentano, June 9, 2006

Cannabis and the Brain: A User’s Guide by Paul Armentano, March 2, 2006

NFL’s Buzzkill: No Beer at Giants Stadium by Paul Armentano, January 14, 2006

Here’s Your Cup, Junior by Paul Armentano, October 12, 2005

Bad Trip by Paul Armentano, March 22, 2005

Crimes of the Other War by Paul Armentano, February 8, 2005

High Court Must Take Lead in Medical Marijuana Debate Because Politicians Will Not by Paul Armentano, November 30, 2004

Terror War Takes a Back Seat to War on Drugs by Paul Armentano, October 30, 2004

Exposing Potent Pot Myths by Paul Armentano, October 21, 2004

Federal Drug Use Surveys and Fuzzy Math by Paul Armentano, September 22, 2004

Unlocking a Cure for Cancer – With Pot by Paul Armentano, August 17, 2004

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Was John the Baptist on Dope?


Here is the protocol for conferring either of the two priesthoods:

1. Call the baptized, worthy male by name.

2. State the priesthood authority.

3. Confer the priesthood.

4. Ordain to an office.

5. Close in the name of Jesus Christ.

John the Baptist, though, who should have known better, did everything wrong.  Here are his errors:

Conferred priesthood on unbaptized men

Neither Joseph Smith nor Oliver Cowdery were baptized when they had the priesthood conferred on them.

Try getting your bishop to give you permission to confer the Aaronic priesthood on any unbaptized man.  See if he’ll authorize it. He’ll probably say something like, “Sure, I’ll authorize it, just as soon as he’s baptized.”  The principle is well established: first comes baptism, then comes priesthood.  If you attempt to reverse the order, every bishop, stake president and GA will INVALIDATE the conferral.

Did not call the men by name

Both Joseph and Oliver agree that the angel merely began his conferral by stating, “Upon you my fellow servants.”

Try conferring the Aaronic priesthood upon someone and start the ordinance by saying, “Upon you my fellow servant,” without stating the person’s name and see if the bishop or other presiding elder doesn’t stop you short and tell you to do it again, as the first time was INVALIDATED by your lack of specifying who you were talking to.

Conferred priesthood upon two men at once

This appears to be the only instance of one man conferring the priesthood upon two men simultaneously.  The conferral of priesthood ordinance is a uniquely personal experience.  One ordinance per person, not one ordinance per two people.

The next time two young men are ready to receive the Aaronic priesthood, try conferring them both simultaneously and see how quickly the bishop stops you.  If it doesn’t become instantly plain that you performed an INVALID ordinance, it will as the years go by and you are never allowed to perform another ordinance of record.

Did not state the priesthood authority

In the words of Joseph, the angel said,

“Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness.”  (See JS—H 1: 68-74)

Normally, an Aaronic priesthood holder would say something like, “…by the authority of the Aaronic priesthood which I hold” or something to that effect.  According to Joseph, though, the angel didn’t state that he held this priesthood, at all.  He only stated which priesthood he was conferring.

Try conferring the Aaronic priesthood without stating your authority and see if it flies.  Chances are, those around you are going to tell you to perform the ordinance again because it is INVALID unless you state the authority.

Did not state what priesthood was given

If we take the words of Oliver, the angel said,

“Upon you my fellow-servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer this Priesthood and this authority, which shall remain upon earth, that the Sons of Levi may yet offer an offering unto the Lord in righteousness!”  (See JSH Footnote)

Normally, when conferring the Aaronic priesthood, an Aaronic or Melchizedek priesthood holder would state which priesthood is being conferred, Aaronic or Melchizedek, but notice that according to Oliver, the angel only stated “this Priesthood and this authority” without specifying which priesthood was being conferred.

Try conferring the Aaronic (or Melchizedek) priesthood without actually stating which priesthood you are conferring and see if you are not told to perform the ordinance again because the first attempt was INVALID.

Did not ordain to an office of the priesthood

Now, technically, you don’t have to ordain to an office of the priesthood, but it is the protocol to do so when the priesthood is conferred.

Did not close in the name of Jesus Christ

Instead, he opened in the name of Messiah.   Christ is from Greek meaning “Anointed One” and Messiah is from Hebrew meaning “Anointed One,” so, since they mean the same thing, he essentially used the name of Christ, but he did not use Jesus’ first name.

Try opening prayers and ordinances with “in the name of Messiah” (and without any other closing use of the name of Jesus Christ) and see if you are not accused of performing the ordinance INVALIDLY.

Even More Unorthodox Stuff

Conferred Priesthood of Aaron upon non-descendants of Aaron

These were two Gentile men who were not descendants of Aaron.  One of the peculiar things about the Aaronic priesthood is that is was only intended for Aaron’s literal descendants.  The Priesthood of Aaron was not for the Levites, nor for the other tribes of Israel, only for Aaron and his sons.

The priests must be Aaron’s sons (Num. 16: 3-10, 40; Num. 18: 1) and free from all important bodily blemishes or infirmities or diseases.  (BD: Priests)

Additionally, Joseph had a bodily blemish from the operation he had when an 11-year old child, which also disqualified him.

Conferred Levitical Priesthood upon non-descendants of Levi

Again, we have two Gentile men receiving Levitical priesthood, or priesthood that pertains exclusively to the tribe of Levi.  Aaron and Levitical priesthood is the same, except that Aaron and sons held the offices of priest and high priest while the non-Aaronite Levites held lesser offices of that priesthood (like teachers and deacons.)

The terms Aaronic and Levitical are sometimes used synonymously (D&C 107: 1, 6, 10), although there are some specific differences in the offices existing within the Levitical Priesthood. For example, the lesser priesthood was conferred only upon men of the tribe of Levi. However, within the tribe, only Aaron and his sons could hold the office of priest. And, still further, from the firstborn of Aaron’s sons (after Aaron) was selected the high priest (or president of the priests). Thus Aaron and his sons after him had greater offices in the Levitical Priesthood than did the other Levites.  (BD: Aaronic Priesthood)

A high priest of the Melchizedek priesthood can officiate in all the offices of the lesser priesthood, but neither Joseph nor Oliver were high priests of the Melchizedek priesthood when they received the Priesthood of Aaron from the angel and baptized each other (a power associated with the office of a priest of the Aaronic priesthood.)

The angel’s instructions: baptize each other

Joseph said that the angel “gave us directions that I should baptize Oliver Cowdery, and that afterwards he should baptize me.”

This means that an unbaptized man baptized a man into the church of Christ.  Today, were this to happen, the authorities of the church would INVALIDATE the baptism and would insist that the man be re-baptized by some baptized man who held at least the Aaronic priesthood.  By today’s standards, then, Oliver’s baptism was INVALID.

Continuing this logic, if Oliver’s baptism was invalid, then he was still unbaptized when he baptized Joseph, which, by applying the same standards of today, would make Joseph’s baptism INVALID.

As all baptism in the church is traced to the authority obtained by Joseph and Oliver from this angel, this would mean that all church baptisms are INVALID because protocols were breached from the very beginning, starting the church off on the wrong foot from the get-go.

The correct (modern) procedure is to baptize first, then confer priesthood.  Had the angel baptized one or both of the men first, then conferred the priesthood upon the one or both of them that was baptized, or instructed the one baptized and conferred to baptize and confer the other, the protocols would have remained intact.

The angel’s instructions: ordain each other

Said Joseph, “Accordingly we went and were baptized. I baptized him first, and afterwards he baptized me—after which I laid my hands upon his head and ordained him to the Aaronic Priesthood, and afterwards he laid his hands on me and ordained me to the same Priesthood—for so we were commanded.”

They were instructed to ordain each other to the Aaronic Priesthood.  Not to an office of the Aaronic Priesthood, but to the Aaronic Priesthood.

Another curious thing is that Joseph stated that the angel “ordained us” before they baptized each other and then commanded them to ordain each other after they baptized each other.  This would make a double ordination.

INVALID any way you look at it

By modern LDS standards, the Aaronic priesthood ordinations of the non-Aaronic, non-Levite, physically blemished Gentiles, Joseph and Oliver, and their subsequent baptisms and ordinations (of each other), as well as those of all the other people who received baptism and authority to baptize from their hands, on down through the generations of the church, are all invalid.

So, was John the Baptist on dope when he was sent by Peter, James and John to confer priesthood authority on Joseph and Oliver?  Certainly the above list of evidences would be typical actions of one who abused substances.  Such “turning of things upside down” may bring into question whether John was even sent by Peter, James and John, as was his claim!  Perhaps he was just acting alone and doing his own thing?

Even more evidence of drug use

Joseph, an eyewitness, stated, “a messenger from heaven descended in a cloud of light.”  And Oliver, another eyewitness, stated, “the angel of God came down.”  So, we know for a fact that John was high during this event.

An alternate interpretation

May I offer another interpretation that could possibly explain all the strange behavior listed above?  Consider the following scripture, which speaks of John:

For he was baptized while he was yet in his childhood, and was ordained by the angel of God at the time he was eight days old unto this power, to overthrow the kingdom of the Jews, and to make straight the way of the Lord before the face of his people, to prepare them for the coming of the Lord, in whose hand is given all power.  (D&C 84: 28)

Now, think for a moment.  Who goes around trying to overthrow governments? That’s right.  John the Baptist was obviously an anarchist!

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist