Oh, Sufferah Children of Jah: Unpacking the Rastafarian Rejection of Traditional Theodicies
The article maintains that the theological perspectives of RastafarI continue to be under-researched in the Caribbean context with perhaps more attention being paid to their contributions to the racial, musical and linguistic traditions of the region. In particular, Rasta theodicies are not as clear...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
De Gruyter
2020
|
| Dans: |
Open theology
Année: 2020, Volume: 6, Numéro: 1, Pages: 520-530 |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Babylone
B RastafarI B Theodicy B Jamaica B radical suffering B corporate evil |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Résumé: | The article maintains that the theological perspectives of RastafarI continue to be under-researched in the Caribbean context with perhaps more attention being paid to their contributions to the racial, musical and linguistic traditions of the region. In particular, Rasta theodicies are not as clearly articulated as other elements of its belief system even as it is recognised that RastafarI mansions and individual members do not hold homogenous beliefs about many things. The discussion takes as its starting point two prior reflections, "Just Desert or Just Deserts?: God and Suffering in these Perilous Days" (Perkins 2016) and "The Wages of (Sin) is Babylon: Rasta Versus Christian Religious Perspectives of Sin" (Perkins 2012); the former reflection highlights the insufficiency of traditional theodicy to answer the question: "if God is good, why does evil exist?" No one answer can sufficiently do justice to the many dimensions of the question. In that regard, Perkins (2016) argues for attention to the important "answer" that the radical suffering perspective offers to the discussion (Sarah Anderson Rajarigam (2004) too emphasises divine suffering or theopathos, as the response to radical suffering. She frames theopathos not just as an option within theodicy but as an alternative to theodicy, which she derides as "the spoilt child of enlightenment that self-destructively craves for theoretical and philosophical remedies for radical human suffering" (27).). Perkins (2012) explicates a particular Rasta understanding of sin and evil, which are important elements of any theodicy. For Rasta, sin is tri-dimensional - personal, inherited and corporate. Sin in its corporate or social dimension is the most salient as it is moral evil - a rejection of Jah’s will - which leads to the oppression of Jah’s people. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2300-6579 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Open theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1515/opth-2020-0134 |