Use the drop-down boxes above to navigate through the Website  
Return to Reasoning List
 

Here is a link to this page:
http://www.jah-rastafari.com/forum/message-view.asp?message_group=5414&start_row=591


Burn JC and Burn bible

1 - 1011 - 2021 - 3031 - 4041 - 5051 - 6061 - 7071 - 8081 - 9091 - 100
101 - 110111 - 120121 - 130131 - 140141 - 150151 - 160161 - 170171 - 180181 - 190191 - 200
201 - 210211 - 220221 - 230231 - 240241 - 250251 - 260261 - 270271 - 280281 - 290291 - 300
301 - 310311 - 320321 - 330331 - 340341 - 350351 - 360361 - 370371 - 380381 - 390391 - 400
401 - 410411 - 420421 - 430431 - 440441 - 450451 - 460461 - 470471 - 480481 - 490491 - 500
501 - 510511 - 520521 - 530531 - 540541 - 550551 - 560561 - 570571 - 580581 - 590591 - 600
601 - 610611 - 620621 - 630631 - 640641 - 650651 - 660661 - 670671 - 680681 - 690691 - 700
701 - 710711 - 720721 - 730731 - 740741 - 750751 - 760761 - 770771 - 780781 - 790791 - 800
801 - 810811 - 820821 - 830831 - 840841 - 850851 - 860861 - 870871 - 880881 - 890891 - 900
901 - 910911 - 920921 - 930931 - 940941 - 950951 - 960961 - 970971 - 980981 - 990991 - 1000
1001 - 10101011 - 1020
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 1/15/2019 11:26:23 AM
Reply

Give thanks bredda.

I deal in the idea of a creative force more than a creator. There are forces which are present and binding within all forms of matter.

The binding ever present none individualistic, I


Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 1/15/2019 11:31:59 AM
Reply

So let me answer the question you're naturally going to ask. If I don't believe in a Creator why am I on this site?

Most of our religions are based on ancient writings... based on the people who thought volcanoes were angry gods and who would have worshiped the first airplane or helicopter they saw. They were superstitious and we have to accept that. They had every right to be because at that time none of these stuff existed to them. Even volcanoes. It's not like they knew what they were or why they happened.

Since we live in their future we have to evolve the idea of religion. What is God? Is God limited to what superstitious people think is God? Or can we have a more evolved understanding of the concept? At the same time I do think there is a need for balance. We have to learn from the past, not simply dictate to it our arrogance.

Arguably the biggest God in ancient superstition was personified references to the Sun. And if you think about it... without the sun life on earth would be impossible. It is a consistent source of life/energy. Plants have solar panels called leaves and they live off the land and they can infinitely reproduce because of this. In a way we're stupid in comparison.

For me, God is the very energy that permeates and connects all life. When people need help that's when it helps them to have a personified personalized God that listens to them and uses their power to help. I don't need or want help; only acceptance of the truth. And that truth is that the same energy flows through you and me. If we are righteous then, through us, the energy has a positive effect and is creative. If we are wicked then, through us, the energy is destructive and has negative effects. We are part of the algorithm; God's hands and feet, continuing the work of Creation and Yes, Destruction too.


Messenger: Nesta1 Sent: 1/15/2019 11:50:30 AM
Reply

The materials and construction of a living organism are one thing: While it's pretty far out there to imagine a long sequence of random probabilistic natural events eventually producing (and then reproducing reliably for thousands of years) a protozoa from a mineral assemblage, let alone a chromosome or a human eye; i suppose we can say that it's possible for the sake of discussion (just like it's possible, i suppose, that if you just leave some naturally-occurring silicon, germanium, gallium, arsenic, cadmium and/or selenium in the environment for a few millions years they might eventually arrange themselves and morph into a semiconductor, and left even longer-- with some more energy and elemental inputs -- into a laptop computer).

But simply identifying the processes to which we attribute the creation of the physical human structure cannot explain what animates it. Or what give it consciousness and self-awareness. We sort of fall flat on our faces if we simply try to say: "Well, it's nothing more than electrochemical energy utilized by the human body that animates it, directs it to age & heal itself, and imparts to it a consciousness".

There would appear to be another crucial "Life-giving" factor at play here. How you conceptualize that factor and what you call it have been the topics that mystics, holy men, philosophers, theologians, scientists, and ordinary people have been debating for millennia.

As a RastafarI, we have our own I-deas of what (and/or who) comprises that factor.


Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 1/15/2019 1:09:34 PM
Reply

eyes and fingers don't simply pop out of nowhere on their own. They are sensors that are built on a foundation that requires those sensors the same way that less complex organisms have their own versions of these things. One has cilium. Different organisms haven't agreed as to how many protruding sensors are needed. That's why different organisms have different numbers. If there was one designer that designer might say the perfect number of digits is 10. But obviously the environment plays a role and as organisms adapt to their environment their senses adapt too. The point is, eyes are not all the same. We simply think of the most complex eye and question how that could come about on its own. But not even the least complex eye came about on its own. It came about as an adaptation so that the organism could be sensitive to light. The more complicated the organism, the more it consumes other organisms, perhaps possibly altering its DNA based on what it eats (just like we have humans who look different because of their environment and sources of food).

Think about what animates a computer. What gives a computer life? Electricity. What animates us? We produce energy from a chemical process breaking down sugar. We even have a way to store energy chemically as fat similar to a battery. When we think of life we need to think of it in the micro sense and not just the macro. We are a whole person but we are also billions of cells.

A person with brain damage may have less brain "capacity" so people used to call them "retarded" and mock their behavior and their ability to understand or integrate data. Therefore, it is logical to deduce that the number of neurons you have is what raises your capacity to go from simple thinking to complex thought to integrating multiple streams of complex thought into a singular consciousness. So a single cell organism will never be as smart as you because it lacks the capacity. By the same token we can build machines that are "smarter" than us by giving them greater capacity for processing data.

When you consider the multiplying capacity of combining all these billions of cells with different functions its easier to make the jump from one level of consciousness (let's say a rabbit) to another. We still have a lot in common with that rabbit but that rabbit doesn't have enough neurons to compete with the processing power in your brain that we use to discuss and reason higher levels of knowledge with each other. Even larger animals don't necessarily have more compute power in their brains. Because its kind of like the old PC motherboards. Newer ones are often smaller with more miniaturization and concentration of transistors and circuits. And because thinking in both the brain as well as a computer requires power the size of an animal can also limit its capacity for thought because of the limited amount of power it generates and how it uses that power for physical speed vs mental.

All I'm saying is that the utilization of energy is part of the algorithm; part of what decides how many cells the system can support without dying and how many of those cells can be dedicated to mental functions. And because we're constantly consuming life for energy we're constantly destroying it on one level while using it to build new cells on another. The energy from the sun that is absorbed in plant biology becomes the body of the plant, gets eaten by animals, gets eaten by us. I guess the real question is when did this cycle start? When was the first organism alive? But again, the point I'm making is that life is subjective. Plants are alive but they don't appear to be intelligent and most of them cant really move on their own. But a plant's offspring can travel a great distance helped by the wind and other animals. So what I'm saying is that the first form of life wasn't likely something we'd now consider to be alive at all. And this is what scientists are searching for on other planets.

But energy itself... is alive in the sense that it is animated. That animation can change forms because energy can change forms. Thermodynamics. Because energy can change forms if the energy is constantly passing through an algorithm and systems that have rules because physics is like applying rules... these rules can turn into logic which can then be integrated and turn into logical systems. Everything in your computer is based on human rules which is based on machine rules which is based on the laws of physics. Therefore the laws of physics is the base code or foundation from which all logical systems are built/designed from. Those laws of physics are influenced by the environment. Fish can swim in the water because of physics. Birds can fly in the air because of physics. So when organisms adapt they're adapting based on the laws of physics which why everything seems to adapt in ways that make some sense.

As a Rasta what would you say is your idea of what comprises that factor and is this something all Rastas have to share in common? And if sharing it in common is part of the Rasta identity then is it possible that this is a self-imposed limitation on your own conscious thought? Is it possible to be a Rasta and disagree with other Rastas about certain beliefs? What central belief defines what a Rastafarian is?


Messenger: Nesta1 Sent: 1/15/2019 1:29:38 PM
Reply

I&i think you may find quite an array of positions in answer to such questions on this forum. i'm not sure that you'll find much more universal agreement other than RastafarI is a way of living and a journey centered, to varying degrees, on H.I.M. Haile Selassie I. It wouldn't even surprise me to have someone on this forum contradict that.
Truth, if that is what you are seeking, is Iternal so if we are all sincerely seeking Truth, in theory we'll end up on the same page together eventually.


Messenger: Rasmi Sent: 1/15/2019 1:36:25 PM
Reply

Jah gave us a brain to utilize things in this world. I love science, but when it come down to the most High, ain't nothing higher than the most High. I was in a relationship with a woman that was majoring in Physic Science. She didn't believe in God. She told me everything is explained by facts of logic. Lol (Yeah, we went through many reasoning). In my opinion, science has always have been stumbling to find answers. That's because it can't go more higher than the most High. Jah see these things, and he overstand when the mind can play tricks on someone to not believe in him. But overall to anyone that don't believe in Jah, as long you are not bringing evil into this world, you good. The I only fight against evil.


Messenger: Nesta1 Sent: 1/15/2019 1:49:52 PM
Reply

Here's a nice lyrics (you probably know them) from Bob Marley & the Wailers who many (but not all) RastafarI see as Song Prophets sent to deliver & spread across the earth with a New Song His Holy Name, Haile Selassie I, JAH RastafarI to dem dat hath ears to hear it.

WE AND DEM

We no know how we and dem a-go work this out,
We no know how we and dem a-go work it out


But someone will have to pay
For the innocent blood
That they shed every day
Oh, children, mark my word
It's what the Bible say, yeah

But in the beginning JAH created everything
He gave man dominion over all things
But now it's too late
You see, men has lost their faith
Eating up all the flesh from off the earth, eh

But we now have no friends
In a high society, yeah
We no have no friends
Oh, mark my identity
We no have no friends.







Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 1/15/2019 2:56:51 PM
Reply

Nesta, I think that's a great answer. I most certainly do agree on H.I.M. but I'm glad you took the position of neutrality because the idea that everyone has to agree or to think the same thoughts and believe the same thing is something that has always held us back as a species. Because then the question is whose thoughts are we thinking? Whose ideas are we believing? Who are we really following?

Is it someone who knew? Or someone who believed they knew?




Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 1/15/2019 3:14:02 PM
Reply

Yes, absolutely science does stumble. But it stumbles in a way that separates what we believe from what we know so that what we learn is the difference. I still have a lot of scientific theories but I know not to confuse them with facts. That's why I like science.

Let's say someone a long time ago wrote a book about God. At some point there had to be a first book. At some point someone had to invent the word that first users of language used for "God". At some point God was a new concept to humans. So what do we know about those first believers? What were they motivated by? What about the world did they understand? Were they capable of lying? And did people create myths and legends for other purposes? Like teaching morality? Are we assuming that they believed the gods were literal people?

I believe many if not most ancient cultures didn't believe their gods were literal people because they were well aware of the fact that they invented and named them. They named them after stars, after forces of nature. They represented everything they saw and were trying to understand. So when I think of Jah I think of Jah in this form; not trying to apply one culture's theology that might have been politically motivated.

I mean, let's honestly look at Hebrew culture. Were they not as violent as others? Did they not enslave others? Did they not take other's land? Did they not take other's women and especially their virgins? They had a motive to use a silent God or a mute God because a mute God could only cosign whatever they really wanted to do. The things they condemned, Yahweh condemned. The things they wanted to justify, Yahweh justified for them. Moses is credited for leading his people out of slavery but not necessarily for the genocide that he inflicted on his own people when he forced them to believe in Yahweh. But was that really Yahweh or Jah? Or was that his own version of Jah? Everyone who writes of Jah has their own version of Jah. It's their interpretation that speaks through their words. David was beloved by Yah according to anyone loyal to David. What if he was simply corrupted by the power he had obtained? Would he tell you? Would one of his multiple wives tell you? Would any rich Hebrew who had multiple wives, concubines, and slaves tell you that he was wicked? No.

The poor were always the most ignorant. Most of them (in the ancient world) couldn't read or write. Moses and his family became rich off this version of Yah. Cities were built for them. They concentrated power and wealth, not based on free democracy or whoever was most qualified, but based on who was in Moses and Aaron's descendants. And so with this system in place the poor have a tendency to stay poor. The rich have a tendency to stay rich on the backs of the poor. When I hear certain Israelites on the streets preaching about how whites are going to suffer when Yah puts the power back into Hebrew hands it makes me sad because they really don't understand righteousness. If the book calls it righteous or doesn't say its not then it becomes something for them to copy. And if they were to copy they would live in the past and creating the very conditions that make people rebel; even against their own bodies and their own sexuality. A lot of these people are born and raised in the church.

Rasta teaches love. If Rasta is against homosexuality its good because if you love yourself then you should accept who you are and what you are. If you want to act like the other gender then you should understand why and not make it a lifestyle choice.

I'm not trying to bash the bible. However, it needs to be understood in the context in which it was written. We should understand how people benefited from it and how they used it against other people. It didn't outlaw slavery. It simply policed it. It didn't protect women and elevate them to equal status. It simply policed the ways in which they could and could not be abused as property of men. Much of what actually transpired in the bible was evil and wickedness that we should leave in the past. Because the more we interpret love through the lens of an unjust corrupt system the more people will rebel, commit crimes, and become the opposition as both sides think they're righteous because the definition has been muddied with selfishness and greed. Now we have a mess in which selfish and greedy people think they are religious and use their religion and their power as a weapon against the poor. We're dealing with the same issues generation after generation because each generation feels justified in abusing each generation.

So at what point do we say, this whole idea of religion needs to evolve into something that is purely and universally love. Reggae kind of is that for me. Its the vocalization of positive vibrations, justice, unity, freedom, righteousness/virtue, and love. These are all the things I stand for. And if you add to that, the teachings of H.I.M as a Christ figure just like Jesus or Buddha then you have Rastafari. But how much every Rasta is rooted to the bible's version of Jah I think is up to every Rasta.


Messenger: Jahcub Onelove Sent: 1/15/2019 3:57:55 PM
Reply

Man claiming that man made Jah and that Jah did not make man, sounds like Tower of Babel talk to I, where Nimrod told the people at Babel to worship him and not Jah, that there is no Jah. "The fool says in his heart there is no Jah."

The story of Nimrod and the Tower of Babel is in the Book of Jasher. It's not in the Bible, but the Bible mentions the Book of Jasher a few different times.

This is the age we are living in, when man has forgotten about Jah and all that Jah has done. An age where man try and claim to be the highest in creation and as if man is the creator of what created man. It's an age of arrogance, ignorance and just plain CONfusion.

Blessed are those that seek and remember Jah! They rejoice in the Love and the Guidance of the Iverlasting Jah.

One Perfect Love
Jah RasTafarI


1 - 1011 - 2021 - 3031 - 4041 - 5051 - 6061 - 7071 - 8081 - 9091 - 100
101 - 110111 - 120121 - 130131 - 140141 - 150151 - 160161 - 170171 - 180181 - 190191 - 200
201 - 210211 - 220221 - 230231 - 240241 - 250251 - 260261 - 270271 - 280281 - 290291 - 300
301 - 310311 - 320321 - 330331 - 340341 - 350351 - 360361 - 370371 - 380381 - 390391 - 400
401 - 410411 - 420421 - 430431 - 440441 - 450451 - 460461 - 470471 - 480481 - 490491 - 500
501 - 510511 - 520521 - 530531 - 540541 - 550551 - 560561 - 570571 - 580581 - 590591 - 600
601 - 610611 - 620621 - 630631 - 640641 - 650651 - 660661 - 670671 - 680681 - 690691 - 700
701 - 710711 - 720721 - 730731 - 740741 - 750751 - 760761 - 770771 - 780781 - 790791 - 800
801 - 810811 - 820821 - 830831 - 840841 - 850851 - 860861 - 870871 - 880881 - 890891 - 900
901 - 910911 - 920921 - 930931 - 940941 - 950951 - 960961 - 970971 - 980981 - 990991 - 1000
1001 - 10101011 - 1020

Return to Reasoning List




RastafarI
 
Haile Selassie I