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

Here is a link to this page:

if you a ras who doesnt accept the bible

1 - 1011 - 2021 - 3031 - 4041 - 5051 - 6061 - 7071 - 8081 - 9091 - 100
101 - 110111 - 120121 - 123
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: Ark I Sent: 12/21/2015 9:27:14 PM

Joseph I, does the I think this behavior of Lot described below is God's way?

Several examples have been mentioned in other Reasonings, in addition to those, look at Lot. He is saved from Sodom and Gomorrah because he is somehow considered righteous, but he is a vile pig and devil that I would not associate with in any way, he disgusts me, I am not part of that lot, I am a different kind of Man.

When the devil neighbors Lot likes to live around come to rape the men/angels whatever, he had the filth and wickedness to beg them to take his daughters and do what they please with them, but spare these men. Then later he decides to have his way with his own daughters. He is filth, and has no place in RasTafarI. If there is a pit of fire, then that is where he belongs.

I would never under any circumstances even think for a split second to offer I children to wicked men to do as they please, or do wickedness to my own children. Neither would Haile Selassie I, He also is not part of that lot, but is a different kind of Man, the Highest of High.

If you are able in defend that lot then maybe you are of the same lot. It is madness to be afraid to speak against or turn away from a book. The bible is very good at presenting itself as some kind of requirement, and making people afraid of punishment both in life and death if they dare to question or speak against anything in the Bible.

Religion comes from the French word religare, which means to bind (tie up) quickly. And that it does. RasTafarI people are anti-(tie down). Binds get in the way of Irits Rising.

Messenger: Ark I Sent: 12/21/2015 9:40:53 PM

Here is a Reasoning from 2003, when I started the forum.

I used to just accept every word from the bible. And if something didn't seem justified to I, I would think of a reasoning to make sense of it. But after some time, I would see that the reasoning I made was weak and did not justify it at all, so I would think of another reasoning to justify it. But after some more time, I would see that my new reasoning didn't justify it either.

So now I only accept what is justified within myself. Because I won't go against the Spirit of Truth within I and deal with something that I see as wrong. If I later come to an Iverstanding, and sight the justification, then I will accept it, but if not, I won't.

I already showed the examples that Christ spoke about to point out what I and I should or should not worry about concerning the law. Here are some examples of scriptures that I sight are not justified within Iself:

Leviticus 21
17 Speak unto Aaron, saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God.
18 For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous,
19 Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded,
20 Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken;
21 No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God.
22 He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy.
23 Only he shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries: for I the LORD do sanctify them.

I don't see why a person with a broken foot or crooked back, blind or dwarf should not offer bread unto Jah. I feel this is from man, not Jah.

And in Corinthians 11, where Paul speaks against man wearing long hair. That is not justified for I, so I don't deal with that.

And I don't accept that a woman has no say, and should just do whatever a man say. Many men out there are not good examples of Jah livity, and all they will do is teach a woman foolishness. And a woman shouldn't go against God, because a man tell her to do it.

And also, I sight that the men who don't consider the instruction and opinion of their wife will be weak. I will never refuse good instruction, or correction, no matter who brings it to I. I don't have any desire to continue in foolishness because I am too stubborn to deal with what a woman say.

A man and woman come together as One, and Jah should be their guide and light. A woman often times will think of things that a man doesn't, and a man will often times think of things that a woman doesn't. So as One, I and I should rise and come closer to Jah, as One mind.

There are also other parts in the scripture that are not justified within Iself, and I am not blind, so I will not be lead by the blind. If I can see for Iself why something is so, then I will deal with it. And if the parts of the bible that are not justified to I are written by people that can see, then there should be a way to explain the justification.

Here are more

misunderstandings of man in the Bible

Messenger: Joseph I Sent: 12/21/2015 9:55:35 PM

Not at all Ark I, that was a incredibly ungodly decision that Lot made in that time. Scripture doesn't reveal why he made that decision. However, looking from a optimistic perspective, this "possibly" could be his reasoning although it was wrong.

In Eastern tradition, it was extremely important for visitors to be treated well. Their well-being, safety, and happiness were often placed above anything else, because if they were mistreated, it would reflect badly on the host, or even the city. In this situation, perhaps Lot placed the angels safety above even his own family.

Thankfully we can see in the story that the Lord’s messengers protected Lot and his daughters in spite of Lot’s lack of character and worldly viewpoint.

Messenger: Joseph I Sent: 12/21/2015 10:05:10 PM

Lot's daughters slept with him without him knowing, so that's dealing with the choices of his daughters although it was also foolish of him to be drunk.

But Jah calls Lot righteous in 2 Peter 2:8, so at some point He repented and turned to The Father, making him righteous.

Messenger: Ark I Sent: 12/21/2015 10:22:45 PM

No, that is only his version of the story, I don't believe that for a second, especially after he had already shown the kind of vile person he is. He more than likely raped them and used that story so he wouldn't look as bad, in those times his daughters would have to keep their mouth shut because he is the man of the house.

Messenger: Joseph I Sent: 12/21/2015 10:27:39 PM

On the Leviticus passage, this passage restricts those in Aaron’s line from functioning as priests if they have any kind of defect physically. The reason that might have made sense to the Israelites was that like the sacrifices they offered that had to be perfect, so the priests who offered them had to be “perfect” in order to please God. They would certainly have also had some idea that a perfect sacrifice was representative of the need for a blameless substitute for their sin and guilt. When they offered the animal in their place it was the “just” for the unjust that was being offered. Likewise, the priest who offered it could not be “unjust” symbolically speaking, but needed to be perfect to get the desired result – forgiveness from God.
This is the Levitical priesthood, different from the order which exits after Yeshua's perfect sacrifice. Now instead of the Levitical order, we have the order of Melchizedek.

On the Paul passage, this has been debated since its existed, but my personal stance on it is this - Paul himself took a vow, most likely the Nazarite vow which at the end of it you shave off all the hair on your head. Paul was speaking on men who grew their hair long for vanity, not for the vow, which made them to appear feminine. I'm sure we can all agree that a Nazarite in no shape or form appears feminine with his long beard and locs.

Messenger: Ark I Sent: 12/21/2015 10:29:02 PM

What is repenting, according to you?

Messenger: Joseph I Sent: 12/21/2015 10:37:27 PM

In Biblical Hebrew, the idea of repentance is represented by two verbs: ש;ו;ב; shuv (to return) and נ;ח;ם; nacham (to feel sorrow).
Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.
You asked according to me, but I feel that this gives a better overstanding than the picture that I could paint for the I.

Messenger: Ark I Sent: 12/21/2015 10:40:01 PM

So if you repent, could you then sin the next day, or hour?

Messenger: Joseph I Sent: 12/21/2015 10:45:33 PM

If one is struggling with a addiction which is sinful, I would say yes, no man is perfect. But to repent means to turn back to Jah and what is right. If one is genuinely repenting, they wouldn't want to return to sin.

1 - 1011 - 2021 - 3031 - 4041 - 5051 - 6061 - 7071 - 8081 - 9091 - 100
101 - 110111 - 120121 - 123

Return to Reasoning List

Haile Selassie I