|
Where
Satanists have their "black metal
",
the Christians will have "white metal
".
While
the music may sound the same, familiar words and
approaches are being transformed into Christian. Symbols
and culture language of the satanic heavy metal world
are being used. A visit to the Sanctuary
site will illustrate this better then words can do.
You
can easily see how this served as a source of
inspiration for Mark Mohr's approach to Rastafari.
And
Mark, in his own might, is very creative in coming up
with double layer names.
You
might recall “The Gathering
”
in Trinidad and how it was planted there after Mark Mohr’s
wife was so brutally denied access to the USA. Various
publications in the Christian press described the
structure and philosophy behind this “church 2.0” as
Mark Mohr calls it.
According
these articles: “The Gathering is founded on four key
pillars: Worship, Instruction, Fellowship and Evangelism
(W.I.F.E.)
.”
For
Mark, being able to plant the Gathering was directly
related to the situation in which the US government had
put his w.i.f.e.
I’m
not saying that it is wrong to do things like that.
Creativity must come out and there is nothing wrong with
giving some “private praises” to Jah in this manner.
I’m
simply establishing that the founder of Christafari is
creative and sometimes putting more layers in his titles
and descriptions, referring to some personal situations.
When
I check the name "Christafari", it can
easily be identified as a derivative of
"Rastafari".
Christafari
themselves do deny this, and they come up with all kinds
of explanations why they use the name.
One
is that it’s the name “Christopher
”
and they give the explanation for the Greek name. For
Rastafarians, though, the name Christopher is indeed a
symbol, but a symbol for the Babylonian Christianity.
For was it not CHRISTOPHER Columbus
that “discovered” “America”?
These
kinds of things make you wonder.
For
a real cynic, it could be a sign that Christafari is
doing a perfect job in confirming for the Rastafarians
the existence of the White Geezus
Xianity
that want to change Rastafari into a Babylon thing.
After
all, Babylonian groups do have their hidden meaning or
identity often hidden in a deeper layer of their name.
But
I’m not that cynical.
But
it’s a sign of sheer ignorance to say the least. In
zeal to get a nice sounding name, it’s forgotten how
Rastafarians think and feel.
On
the Christafari website it is made clear, that the only
reason why Christafari is using the colors
Red Gold and Green, dreadlocks, Jamaican and Iyaric (Rasta
language), is to fulfill a missionary purpose.
For
this, a bible scripture is used in which the apostle
Paul
says that he is always adjusting himself to other people, in
order to win people for Christ.
The
Christian Heavy Metal scene
uses this scripture often too, in order to biblically justify
their choice of looks and music to the Christian
establishment.
And
maybe they can do that.
But
it is also used by Christafari to explain their usage of
Reggae, Dreadlocks and other parts of Rasta Culture to
this very same Christian establishment.
It's
needless to say, that out of this all a "we vs.
them" mentality comes to exist. Where most
Rastafarians will at least be respectful towards genuine
Christianity
,
Christafari makes a strong effort in establishing a
clear distinction between Christianity and Rastafari.
Not only by choosing to interpretate this bible
scripture as scriptural foundation for wearing
dreadlocks, also within their further reasoning it
becomes clear that they view Rasta as a
"Christ-less" (without Christ) teaching
.
I
will quote some remarks from the Christafari website.
First,
part of the answer to the question: "Why do you
wear dreads?"
.......
I guess that you could say that "To the Rastas I
became like a Rasta, to win the Rastas." Yet people
still ask; "Isn't this just an attempt to justify
your lifestyle?" Aren't you compromising?" No.
You must set limits. We cannot fall into sin or attempt
to imitate it. But something as neutral as hair is not a
sin issue. I wear locks so that I can go into places and
be accepted in areas that a "Crazy Baldhead"
would not. For me they have proven very fruitful. If I
approached a Rasta in a suit and tie they would most
likely put up a wall that I could never break through.
However, with long dreads I can enter a Rasta territory
and receive respect, in turn, they let their guards
down. It is then, through reasoning with Rastas that I
can share the Gospel in a non threatening way. I do it
all "for the sake of the gospel", so that I
might win some."
Analyzing
the bible scripture brings me to the conclusion that
this is a mention of integrating into a culture, not a
religion, in order to win people who are outside the
body of Christ
into
Christianity. Paulus
, the
writer of this scripture, sat down with peoples, he
reasoned with them, ate and drink with them. Worked
together with them. Like Yesus did, too.
How
different Xianity
has been, colonializing one half, plundering the other halve,
all in the name of enforcing "Christian Rule".
So
can this scripture be used in the situation of
Rastafari, especially when Rastafari is being presented
as a non-Christian religion?
Let's
suppose Rastafari is a non-Christian religion, does the
Bible say it is good to use symbolism from a
non-Christian religion and give them a Christian
interpretation? I believe one can seriously doubt that,
for a variety of reasons.
The
Catholics
did it all the time, for example. They built their cathedrals
on the places where the druids came together, picked
names out of the Bible to put on all the statues of
pagan idols, and gave Christian interpretations to pagan
festivals such as Christ mass.
The
New Agers
do it all the time too. They come to for example the
Christians, pretending to be Christians
too, and then they give their own interpretation to all these
things that make the Christian faith unique in it’s
kind.
In
fact, it’s a classic method of infiltration and
subsequent manipulation. It’s the method we know as
“the wolf in sheep’s clothing
”.
Nowhere
you can read that Paul pretended to be a believer of
other religions to identify himself with the believers
of those religions.
Paul
talked about cultural differences
.
Translated
to today, you can put it this way: "Paul
didn't say he became like a Hindu to win the Hindu's, but he
said he became like an Indian to the people of
India."
Paul
was saying that you should abide by the different cultures. If
he would visit a Greek he would be like a Greek, that is
he would enjoy hospitality of the Greeks and so on, he
would adjust himself to the Greek culture.
But
he wouldn't be like an idol worshipper.
He
wouldn't go to an idol's temple, and do everything that
the people in that temple did except for worshipping
that idol.
Mark
Mohr is using a scripture talking about cultural
movements and applying it to a movement that he himself
defines as another religion from Christianity. I think
that this kind of scripture interpretation is
potentially destructive and confusing.
One
thing is for sure; this scripture does not suggest that
you have to take things of another religion in order to
win those people within that religion for Christ.
Christafarianism
identifies Rastafari as a religion. Therefore, their use of
this scripture is inappropriate and cannot be a biblical
explanation of his wearing of dreadlocks.
What
illustrates this better than the fruits of the
Christafari works itself?
In
2003 they made an important announcement. No longer
would they “use” the Name JAH in their new releases.
On
the Christafari website, the audience was told: “my
primary goal was to see the rasta church become
Christian, yet one of the regrettable fruits of my
labor, (due to uneducated imitation by other artists) is
the Christian church becoming more rasta. This was never
my intention. It was not my desire to have a Christian
congregation in Trinidad shouting out the name
"JAH!" in their church services.”
In
an interview with the Dubroom, it became clear that this
was not the only change. Rastafarians themselves would
no longer be the “main target group”
if you will.
After
years of explaining, justifying even, their whole
appearance by pointing out to their alleged “Rastafarian
target audience”, I thought it was interesting to know
how much the change of target audience would be followed
by a change of appearance. Consequently I asked Mark
Mohr if this shift meant that he would also change the
use of Rastafarian symbology et cetera.
And
his strong answer was: “No, absolutely not!”.
So
it is obvious, that this whole interpretation, or should
I say, justification, has absolutely no basis in
either scripture neither in common sense.
Christafari
base their whole appearance, name, even identity, via
this wrong interpretation of a scripture on having
Rastafarians as their “target group” so to speak.
Now that they no longer want to “reach the Rastas”,
there is no sign of them changing their appearance in
accordance with their next “target group”.
They
say they are what they are because they want to reach
the Rastas
but now they no longer want to reach the Rastas they do not
change the way that they are so there we have a
contradiction.
Still,
many Christafarians
think it is a very valid thing to do and in their zeal, they
do a lot of damage.
And
then I haven’t even fully addressed the point from the
Rastafarians themselves.
When
you use certain outward aspects of Rastafarian culture
,
such as the wearing of dreadlocks, or the usage of the
colors Red Gold and Green, stricktly for cosmetic
reasons, this will be labeled as "commercialization
of Rastafari
"
and will most certainly not contribute to an open
reasoning between Rastafarians and Christians
and the many that are caught in between the two because they
do not want to be a part in this Christianity that only
accepts aspects of Rastafarian culture when they are
totally stripped down from their importance.
There
are many artists without any affiliation to the movement
of Rastafari using the language and the symbols
nevertheless, for commercial gain
.
These
people are called "riding along the Rastaman
bandwagon
".
In
a way, Christafarianism is doing the same thing.
And
this doesn’t go unnoticed.
One
Rasta website describes Christafarianism
like this: (using) “the image/ideology of Rastafari to
denounce Haile Selassie the father of the order to
convert Rasta to the religion of a fictitious Christ is
a crime against the Rastafari movement
.”
These
are really hard words! Hard to swallow, and some might
even think that this judgment is coming from a militant
and extreme faction within Rastafari and would therefore
not represent the common sentiment within the movement.
But
every Rastafarian that I asked, or heard, has this same
reaction to Christafarianism.
Without
even one exception!
And
they all have the same reason. A reason having nothing
to do whatsoever with Yesus Kristos and the Christianity
that the Divine Saviour stands for.
There
is nobody in the Rastafarian movement who hates the
Saviour of Whom Haile Selassie spoke of, but there are
many who think Christafari represents the white geezus.
It’s
not for nothing that the Rasta website mentions a
fictitious, or false Christ.
It
doesn’t mean they think that Christ doesn’t exist.
They
feel that this white geezus
is being promoted because of the way Christafari is using the
Rastafarian culture and symbology, not because
Christafari speaks about Jesus Christ.
You
can read that directly in the text by applying
grammatical analysis.
We
had grammar lessons at school. If we wanted to know what
a certain sentence really meant, we had to find the
subject and all that by formulating questions involving
words from the sentence.
Take
the text from the website, and simply ask the question:
what is “a crime against the Rastafari movement”?
The answer is “using the image/ideology of Rasta to
denounce Haile Selassie.”: a perfect description
of Christafarianism, but not of Christianity!
It
is really important to see that all the negative
responses to Christafari can be boiled down to a
critization of Christafarianism, and not Christianity
itself.
For
Christafari this is apparently not clear, because you
can find a lot of articles and interviews in which
accusations and critiques are described as Rastas
attacking Christianity.
For
the Rastaman however, it’s a simple issue: would Yesus
Kristos require His disciples to use forms of
manipulation to promote Him and His message? Would Yesus
Kristos tell His disciples to deny the faith of
the Rastafarians? Of course not.
Maybe
because these things are so simple for a Rastaman, he
has to make the conclusion that Christafarianism is a
manipulation scheme of the Babylonians in order to break
the movement of Rastafari, just like they tried by
killing Bob Marley and shipping in the Cocaine to
Jamaica.
For
a Rasta it isn’t so obvious that behind
Christafarianism there can still be a good intention.
Because the flaws, contradictions and false information
are so apparent.
This
can all be related back to Bob Beeman
and his Sanctuary
Organization.
Where
some of Beeman’s “methods of communication” may
very well be appropriate and could have a biblical basis
as well in the case of spreading JAH’s Message to
Satanistic Heavy Metal fans
,
applying these same principals to the movement of
Rastafari has disastrous results.
As
the saying goes, the road to the fire is paved with good
intentions.
How
would you feel if someone would come to you, looking
just like you, talking just like you, only to show you
how wrong you are? And if this person then claims that
“The Bible Told Him So”, wouldn’t you feel a
little weird about this person and his believes? Or even
about the Bible itself?
Just
a thought.
Fortunately
the Rastaman knows that the proclaimed crime against
the Rastafari movement
cannot
possibly come from Jah or from the Bible.
No,
there is no way that the Bible would contain a
justification for such a thing.
It’s
cosmetic, it will therefore only appeal to those who are
“cosmetically involved” with Rastafari, so to speak.
They
like to wear the colors, nat up their head, smoke a lot
of weed and say “Rastafari” all the time.
But
they have nothing to do with the things Rastafari stands
for.
One
of these things, and not the least one either, is
identifying Babylon system and her perverted form of
Christianity, which has been used for centuries now to
keep people in slavery.
Another
thing is an appeal to live “from the heart”, that
is, to be real. Not to have an outward appearance which
does not harmonically interact with the inward man.
It
is easy to see how Christafarianism
with its focus on image and the Christian mainstream doesn’t
land too well with most Rastafarians.
It’s
equally easy to see how it is not Christianity that
offends the Rastafarians.
And
still there is that question. Is Rasta really a
religion?
Can
it be defined as a Christ-less religion, as it is done
over and over again in the evangelical Christian world?
This
is one of the most crucial issues, and that becomes
clear if I ask that question in a different way.
Are
Rastafarians enemies of Yesus Kristos?
Fighting against the message of salvation?
Are
they, because of the fact that they are Rastafarian,
outside of the Body of Kristos?
It
is clear that in order to be in the body of Christ,
scriptural spoken one has to believe that Jesus Christ
is God Incarnated in the flesh, and accepted as one's
Lord and Saviour.
So
the question I should ask myself is: "Do all Rastas
deny Christ as their Lord and Saviour as a key element
of the definition of Rastafari?
"
The
answer is “no", as proof can be found on the
Dubroom Website (Gad
and
Yesehaq
interviews).
Haile Selassie
said that there were “certain” Rastafarians who regarded
him in a way he didn’t want to be regarded,
and he said about all Rastafarians: “who am I to deny
their faith?”
There
are actually many Rastafarians who do not believe that
Haile Selassie is God
.
They
are most certainly Christians, for they have accepted
Yesus Kristos as their Lord and Saviour and they are
expecting Kristos any day now.
So
simply because of this fact alone, it cannot be said
that Rastafari is a religion that worships Selassie as
God.
When
I address this issue in the midst of people working with
Christafari and it is admitted that there are
Rastafarians who do not believe Selassie to be Yesus
but still believe in Yesus as their Lord and Saviour, they
often come up with the argument that “it’s a small
minority and we’re speaking generally and generally
our definition applies”…
Here’s
an example:
Many (not all) rastas agree with the doctrinal
statement of the "Ethiopian World Federation
," "We now declare again H.I.M. Haile
Selassie is Christ the Son, Jehovah the Father united
through the Spirit to bring to man the fullness of the
Holy Trinity."
(…)
when I say "Rastafarian," I am usually
thinking of the Ethiopian World Union's Definition,
while keeping in mind that there are twelve tribers and
others like yourself that differ in views.
I
must think about something that I have read in a book
called "Dread Jesus
",
which investigates the connection between Rastafari and
Christianity. I recommend it to everyone!
The
writer quotes Judy Mowatt
, who
tells us she had to give a concert in a place where many
Rastafarians were, and she had just recently given her
life to Christ so she was quite nervous, but after the
concert she witnessed that Rastafarian elders came to
her to say that they also believed the same thing.
There
is something going on within the movement of Rastafari,
there are many who are Christians according to the
Nicean Creed
,
which is accepted by the Ethiopian Orthodox Church
as well as the evangelical movement
.
Unfortunately,
this truth is being ignored by many, including
Christafari, so the truth is that there are many
Rastafarians who have accepted their Lord and Saviour,
Yesus Kristos, and who do not worship Haile Selassie as
God.
Because
the western Christian world refuses to see the spiritual
significance of Ethiopia
, as
the first Christian Nation on earth, they are also
unaware of the real situation within the movement of
Rastafari. In the meantime, the Ethiopian Church has
baptized many Rastafarians
, in
the Name of Yesus Kristos, our Lord and Saviour.
So
even if you would apply the strictest definition of a
Christian
, you
would have to admit that a part of the movement of
Rastafari consists out of Christians.
There
is another thing I would like to draw into this
reasoning again. Another question I would like to ask
myself.
If
Haile Selassie
would really be the Incarnation of Jah (whether Father, Son or
Spirit), would I then have to worship him?
The
answer to this question is yes, for I do not worship
Selassie where I do not believe that he is Jesus. If he
would be, I would have to worship him.
Because
I worship Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour and I know
that His Return will be dread, as Lion of the tribe of
Judah, for the Lion of Judah
and the Lamb of God are one and the same. It’s written in
the Bible!
This
same thing is being acknowledged by the multitude of
Rastafarians as motivation for believing Selassie to be
Jah
.
How
can that be, you say?
For
that, we have to go to Ethiopia
,
that land with so much biblical references integrated in
its rich and ancient culture. That land with so many
references in the Bible itself!
The
Kings of Ethiopia have various titles. One of such a
title is “King of kings”. Another one is Lion of
Judah. Many people think that this is because the
Ethiopian monarchs think they are God. But that is not
the case.
The
Ethiopian kings
did not name themselves after this Bible verse. They were
called that way long time before this scripture was
written. So while it is correct that this scripture does
refer to Haile Selassie, in the same time it doesn’t
point out to His Majesty in the way many perceive it.
“Lion
of Judah
”
and “King of kings” are titles. Another example is
“Father”. Or “Son of Man”. They refer to a
function. The Bible makes use of such titles many times.
Let’s
take “Father” and keep in mind that the same
principal applies to “Lion of Judah
”.
How
many times can you find the good Lord God JAH described
as “Your Father In Heaven”? Numerous times.
In
order to see what Jah means when He describes Himself to
us as our Father, we look around us to see if we can
find something called “father”. And then we get an
impression as to what is meant with this particular
description or title of Jah.
There’s
more to it.
Because
when we look around us for a “father”, not all of us
will find someone who loves us, who wanted us to live
and who wants to raise us to be a grown up, solid
person.
So
we know that Jah is the perfect father, and that there
are people on earth that we also call father, who have
the responsibility to show their children in a loving
way how to grow up.
That’s
why Yesus says: “And call no [man] your father upon
the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.”
Exactly
this is how many Christian people view the Lions of
Judah that we know the Ethiopian rulers to be
.
They point out to Yesus Kristos and they say: “This is
the Lion of Judah. The One and Only. And you shall call
no one else Lion of Judah”.
And
of course Yesus Kristos is THE Lion of Judah, just like
Jah is THE Father.
But
that doesn’t take away the fact that there are fathers
on earth and that we can look at them to get an
impression as to what it means when it is said that Jah
is our Father.
And
it doesn’t take away that there are Lions of Judah
on earth and that we can look at them to get an impression as
to what it means when it is said that Yesus Kristos is
the Lion of Judah
.
The
Ethiopian kings
, by
way of their function, point out to the coming reign of
Yesus Kristos. The Ethiopians do not see Haile Selassie
as Yesus Kristos. But they do know, every time when they look
at him, that Yesus Kristos will reign.
Fathers,
by way of their function, point out to the loving full
and educational way our Creator deals with us, his
creations. We as creations do not see our fathers as
Jah. But we do know, every time we look at them, that
Jah is our Creator who loves us and educates us.
Nowhere
it is said in the Bible, that Yesus Kristos is the only
Lion of Judah. But it is said in the Bible, that you
should call no one your father but Jah.
Still,
after Yesus Kristos said that, this is done. Lukas
writes about “Timotheus, the son of a certain
woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father
[was] a Greek”.
Of
course, everyone knows that Jah is The Father. And we
know this also when we refer to the father of Timotheus.
So
when we look in Revelation and we see that Yesus Kristos
being presented as the Lion of Judah
who will break the seven seals and take over the world,
downstroying Babylon, that doesn’t mean that He is the
only Lion of Judah
.
We
can take a look at Haile Selassie and learn a lot about
the coming reign of Yesus Kristos, the Lion of Judah.
Much more then we can learn about Jah Love by many “fathers”,
even Christian ones…
According
to people of the Ethiopian Church
with whom I had communication with over the years many people
make that mistake that they think Haile Selassie
is God because Haile Selassie is anointed in the Name of Yesus
Kristos, as King representing the coming eternal
physical reign ship of Yesus Kristos.
Another
Ethiopian priest gave me an analogy. It happened to the
apostle Paulus and his friend Silas too. They were
speaking about the Good Lord and the people thought that
they were gods and started to worship them. Paulus and
Silas did not deny the faith of these people but they
merely pointed out to the fact that if the people would
worship Paulus and Silas, they were worshipping God in a
wrong way.
Haile
Selassie
did exactly the same.
So
while I am in full agreement with Christafari, that
Selassie is not Jah and that Jah does not want that
Selassie is being viewed as Christ, and also Selassie
did not want it himself, I believe in my heart, that
worshipping God wrong is something different than
worshipping a wrong God.
In
my opinion this is also what Selassie himself wanted to
say when it comes to Christianity's "answer"
to Rastafari, when he asked that key-question: “Who am
I to deny their faith”
|