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

Here is a link to this page:

We don't come from evolution but we come from Creation

1 - 1011 - 2021 - 3031 - 4041 - 5051 - 6061 - 7071 - 77
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 10/21/2022 5:02:15 PM

Black heart: All life was created by one force,

I agree.

Black heart: all de many diverse living n non living organisms were created by dis one force n de force is Jah.

Our ancestors wanted to understand this force. So what did they do? They studied the works. They studied nature. They were all trying to understand. So some of them divided the force into a small number of gods/powers that represented the more primordial forces of nature. And then others broke those down into the products of those forces and they became gods too. One force was divided into many forces like splitting white light through a prism into all the colors of the rainbow. Some of our ancestors used personification to help teach this early understanding of science. They made the forces of nature into "persons". This blended logic/reason with the more artistic side of mythology and literature. Some of our ancestors attempted to fuse all of these forces back into the original but still have it as a "person". And why people? Because people have certain characteristics; but mainly that a person can hear and respond to requests. And so the notion of "spirits" prevailed because humans needed help. It wasn't enough to try and simply understand the forces of nature. Humans wanted to influence them. This is why many nations and people all had similar systems for sacrifice and oblation. However, people at different levels of the knowledge spectrum understood spirit to mean energy rather than a ghost-like person or all-powerful superhero. Humans who wanted control made this one force into one person that they or their priests could speak for. This was a reaction to different people being influenced by different gods. You can see this in the bible with the story of Laban, but later on in Kemet(Egypt), Akhenaten failed to bring about the same monotheist revolution.

Whether you see this... Force... as one or many it is still true that the many came from the one. All these gods and their stories all EVOLVED from the same idea that traveled into different parts of the world and further changed in isolation. The same thing happened to humans and thus created different cultures. Many find this hard to understand because their minds were grown in an isolated culture and so it's like that's all there is. If you study different cultures and history that's how you can follow all these separate strings back into the original "genetic" rope. Everything split off from one. This is why all life on this planet has cells and DNA. And that's how we can read that DNA like a map to see where everyone and everything came from.

No human understands the origins of life itself. A big part of this, I think, is because we are biased against what we believe life is. So we look at simple forms of life and don't classify them as alive, Therefore we don't see all the states in between energy and sentient biological life. What if the energy was already sentient? Or what if there are such grades of life and sentience that would render many forms undetectable? Either way, I think one can either call this one Force Jah or just call it "The Force". And to say that it created everything... at that point... is really just semantics. For example... we can clearly see many ancients worshipped the sun even if they thought sun was a lesser product of the Force (which makes sense because it wasn't always visible). Seeing that life grows in the light and less so in the darkness this also sets up stories between light/dark, good vs evil, etc.

If you just want to believe dogma that's fine. It's all love. I just wanted to give you a little window into ancient thinking and philosophy so you could understand why everyone didn't take everything literally. The people who wrote all these "answers" were themselves the ones asking the questions. The answers are exactly what they believed to be the answers rather than scientifically proven fact.

black heart: Fo de fact dat scientist found dat all living things have DNA so they blieve dat all evolved from one organism. Not true. Jah created d many defferent organisms with d DNA in deir cells. Mutation is also effected by Jah.

I understand why you think this way. I really do. But as a computer scientist, someone who handles code for my job, I can tell you that I would not make the same errors in the same place in a bunch of separate files. If a bunch of separate files has the same error in the same place it is because those files were copied from the oldest copy that contains that error. Looking at the genetic code is a lot like looking at the different strata of the earth where you can clearly see changes in the environment at different times that affected that layer of the soil differently from the prior layer.

As far as Jah affecting mutation I don't think I would blame that on Jah. Most people would blame mutation on "Sin". However, imho, mutations are probably caused by the body trying to adapt to changes in environment in a way that the mutation isn't bred out but isn't necessarily functional or useful either. Hence, "junk DNA"

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 10/27/2022 2:46:32 PM

The thing that allowed the first life on Earth to spring from inanimate elements was the addition of H20 Water onto the planet thanks to Theta crashing into the Earth during its early formation. Or at least so the theory goes as i trust nobody was there to witness.

But i know what the I dem mean.

Studies of the Quantum world have lead to talks of God, divine forces, God particles and so on, for about a Century now. Anything man cant understand see or touch, worse if all 3: den it must be divine or devil according to some.

All I know for certain,
Haile Selassie is the one and only sovereign ruler of African peoples at home and abroad

And we most probably all come from LUCA


At some point we as a people will have to examine the wordsound JAH outside of culture and tradition; outside of Bible, the same way that my mother has to examine the wordsound West Indian.

Israels King is Israels God. That doesn't mean the man we are saying was born 23rd July 1892, was there at the Earths formation 4.5 billion years ago.l, or 'rested on the 7th day' after Genesis
I dont know about that. Whereas i am certain that Haile Selassie is I King and rallying point for all African peoples.

Give thanks onto HIM

Messenger: RasTafarIWork Sent: 11/8/2022 1:30:37 PM

I perceive that creation was made perfect and if anything, only regression may have happened.
I don't subscribe to Charles Darwin and his peeps, though they fascinate.

Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 11/9/2022 5:48:41 PM


If by "peeps" you're talking about the generations of scientists who have all studied parts of evolution or who work in the field of evolutionary biology... um ok? But I do want to reiterate for everyone that evolution has been CONFIRMED in laboratory conditions.

There has been a long-running experiment over many years, studying evolution in bacteria. They can actually see and track the changes as bacteria evolve, not simply adapt.

And I'm saying this is because when we get religious there is a tendency for us to use our religion to fight science. We act like this is good. I say it is the worst thing ever.

And I mean no disrespect. Here's why I say it.

If you believe in a personal deity as your God, is your God weak or strong? If your God is strong, then he doesn't need your ignorance to protect the knowledge (if you agree to call it that) he wants you to have. If your God is strong and "in control", as people often say, then he/she/it is fully capable of leading scientists to find evidence of his/her/its existence, not evidence to the contrary. And if your God knows the future in order to give you prophecies about it, then indeed he/she/it would know that humans would study nature and eventually find out that evolution is a natural process that creates different forms of life from a common source and he/she/it would be the one telling you about it or giving you a creation story that shows this as he/she/it's method.

And I'm not changing or removing gender in order to be disrespectful. I'm doing it because, in reality, gender is a BIOLOGICAL trait for reproduction. The "first being" would not logically have any self-reproducing trait unless that ability evolved prior to his existence. So I'm saying it because when we apply gender... We are already imbuing the idea of God with human traits based on our own desire to see ourselves in that celestial mirror. But this is simply a bias that we are searching for. The reason I love science is because it casts off this bias. Evolution doesn't say we came from monkeys but what if if it did? Whether a person's ego wants to accept it or not, does that really matter? Many people can't accept their real parents. Science allows for the truth to be something other than what we want to hear. And often this is the exact opposite of religion because many religions (not all) find a basis in telling people what they want to hear in exchange for power/influence/money.

THIS... is why religion and science tend to collide. One is about what you want to hear (or maybe need to hear on some level). And the other simply offers the truth. Kind of like fruit from a certain 2 trees.

Messenger: RasTafarIWork Sent: 11/11/2022 10:44:41 AM

If by "peeps" you're talking about the generations of scientists who have all studied parts of evolution or who work in the field of evolutionary biology... um ok? But I do want to reiterate for everyone that evolution has been CONFIRMED in laboratory conditions.

Todays, pseudo-scientists even want to confirm more, e.g. the third and/or forth gender etc.
I man don't subscribe to such.

Have you read Stollen Legacy by George G. M. James? Unfortunately, Modern Science (Empirical), is not founded on reality or truth . . .

Messenger: jessep86 Sent: 11/15/2022 1:02:47 AM

Cant study Rastafari.

Cant rationalize spirit.

Be heartacle. From the heart the oracle pours forth living waters to quench the thirsty souls.

Darwinism and all that science based on his theory is the most racist and oppressing ideology of the modern world.

Modern science has a foundation of ethiesm.
Idigenous science is ancient. Check out book called Native Science if want to explore a science....a way of perceiving, exploring and understanding that is just as valid, if not, more so than modern science.

And really, we must bring these ways together as one because modern technology at war clashing with the indigenous ways of life is defiently not sustainable for generations to come.

Rasta can bring the balance. We must bring the balance.

Haile Selassie Lives

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 11/16/2022 12:21:20 AM

Darwin didn't invent evolution, evolution is a scientific fact.

Darwin is accredited with the hypothesis of Natural selection and Pangenesis. Pangenesis, as Jesse points out, was very racist white supremist in thought

The difference between theory and hypothesis; hypothesis is just an independent thought.
When a hypothesis can be reproduced under test conditions and becomes more accepted after peer reviews from other researchers, so it becomes a theory. And when a theory can be reproduced and observed so many times consistently over and over and globally peer reviewed beyond any logical doubt, it becomes a scientific fact

Natural selection has gone on to become a theory and a scientific fact.

Pangenesis has since been ridiculed as a nonsensicle hypothesis. Not only has it been disproved with other Scientific reasoning, it never made it to the stage of reproducible evidence. Yet and still for a short time, it was promoted among white supremacist countries as though it were based in Fact, and 'proof'

Rasta have to know weh dem a fight

Rasta have to rise above many misconceptions of old times in this new age.

Nobody claimed man come from monkey, the wordsound to meditate on is common source an progenitor. Not from monkey. And why do people always stop at the monkey anyway? How did life on eart begin Rasta?

Messenger: RasTafarIWork Sent: 11/16/2022 5:13:26 AM

How did life on eart begin Rasta?


Bible say so, Kemet say so.

Even modern science borrow so much from Kemet, eg. the word ATOM = ATUM.

Modern science is authored by criminals such as Aristole and Alexander the great with their companions, Pythagoras, ... Devon and Napoleon Bona Pate with their party in Egypt, Galileo, Darwin, Kepler, Edison, Marconi, Einstein,and all dem plagiarists unmentioned....

Much respect to Nikola Tesla.

Messenger: RasTafarIWork Sent: 11/16/2022 6:08:02 AM

Vivant Denon, not Devon,

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 11/16/2022 7:16:46 AM

Saying life on earth began with Utterance is poetic semantics, which I may or may not agree with but depends on what you mean. We are at a point where you have to decide whether by that you are being symbolic or you are being literal.

Kemet has several genesis stories (cosmologies) that I can think of. They commonly reference the idea of primordial waters. Science come around and theorize water, and heat, being the most important medium for life developing on earth as small RNA protein chains begin to form early genetic material, something reproducible as a scientific test under certain conditions. This is a theory to be interpreted literally. Utterance?.......

So are you saying these Biblical and Kemetic references of utterance are to be taken as literal historical fact? Or as symbolism and allegory? If its allegory then there is no contention with matters of fact, science is only in contention sith biblical *Literalism* The bible does a good job of being in contention with itself too in terms of literal fact or maybe the earth had vegetation before there was any light as it literally states in Genesis.

If we can move away from Literalism.... Then I would reference and encourage ones to take a quick look into 'Theta and early life forming on earth' and see what the consensus of modern thought is. And then research Nun / Nunet Kemetic cosmologies, and tell me they aren't in direct agreement with each other. Only the literalist has problem


1 - 1011 - 2021 - 3031 - 4041 - 5051 - 6061 - 7071 - 77

Return to Reasoning List

Haile Selassie I