Because in the year 1986 Mark Mohr was still in his own words, a "Rasta". He means to say the year 1996.

What Mark Mohr wants  to say, is that he and I are having contact since that time. initially, he asked for my help because of the trouble he was in, and I tried to help him out.

The "feud" came  later, after I began to criticize Mark Mohr for spreading false information about Rastafari and not rectifying it in public.

MORE ON THE SUBJECT

I have repeatedly try to address my concerns in private in the period 1997-2001. 

Then I wrote my article, and he asked me -again- not to go public but wait until he would publicly acknowledge what he now finally does in this response.

I have waited from 2001 to 2004 for this and then I went public. A few days later: there was the public acknowledgement. 

I tried to keep my cool and stay humble, waiting for this...

In the beginning, back in 1997, he replied with mails such as that I, "as fan", should be happy to receive an email from a "star" (really).

Later he called me a "prominent in Christian Reggae" in another attempt to keep me from going public with my concerns.

I have tried to address my concerns in a face to face meeting with him, but further then an -indeed- amicable vibe and some private exchange of things I couldn't get.

In short, I have found a closed door whenever I tried to address my concerns with Christafari in private from 1997 until 2004.

Then I decided I really had to go public with my concerns or wait until I'm dead.

Mark Mohr has been aware of my concerns since 1997. He acknowledges some of them in private from 2001 and on. They are no surprise to him.

I did not have an undercover reasoning. I simply asked Bob Beeman about the connection between sanctuary and lion of Zion. I even gave Bob Beeman the quote in my article and asked him to confirm what I wrote.

So yes, I have done research and asked people questions. I wanted my essay to be as documented as possible.

If I would not do research, the response would be that I had no proof of my thesis. But now I have, and not a single time does he respond to even one of them in his whole Response.

MORE ON THE SUBJECT

The laws concerning copyright clearly give permission for using material to review, research or criticize. Even unpublished material can be used legally.

MORE ON THE SUBJECT

Misuse of copy-written material would be, for example, to place a Dubroom review on the Lion of Zion website without permission to sell a CD. 

Which is a thing Lion of Zion has actually done. 

First off, I am sorry that he has grossly misunderstood our use of the word "Christafarian". It is not a belief system or sect of faith. The word has only personally been used a few times to my knowledge. First, it was the original name of my band Christafari. Second, it has been used in past Lion of Zion updates in reference to our listeners. It was never used to describe a certain belief system. When I think of the term "Christafarian," I think about a supporter or admirer of our music. Not a convert that has been conformed to my ways.

His biography is called "Meet Pastor Mark" for years. I'm sure he's gonna change that now, but it doesn't take away the fact. 

Further in his article he also says how he wants to make converts out of his listeners. He "ministers" to them and provides lists with numbers of "saved souls".

He writes doctrinal statements and articles while he constantly refers to his works as a "ministry" and teachings.

In private correspondence he even referred to his wife as a "his most important ministry".

He considers himself to be a spiritual example for others, as he repeatedly states in various articles. 

When he was having a divorce and people criticized him for having that, they pointed out to the very same fact. They stressed that Mark Mohr is considered a teacher by many people. Mark Mohr acknowledged that and listed his phone number. Everyone could ask him everything about his divorce because of "accountability". 

It is clear, that Mark Mohr does not consider his listeners just that, listeners to his music. And his listeners, whom he called Christafarians, look up to him as a teacher.

Okay... 

Members of this "community of Christ" are Christafarians. But I shouldn't compare them with members of the community of Christ, of which he is a pastor.

For then he says, a Christafarian is not a member of the community of Christ. Kind of confusing, but I'm not the one who authors this confusion. 

It's another hole in the facade... 

"Our music is original and unlike anything out there in the Christian industry. This unique roots sound cannot be replaced by the latest industry manufactured pop sensation that is on the cover of CCM. We have created our own culture within our fan base. And these fans are diehard. We may not have a huge crowd every night when we are out on tour, but the ones that come truly understand what we are trying to accomplish and often drive as far as 5 states away just to fellowship with us and praise God through reggae music."

I also see an admittance that Christafari's work is published in what he calls the "Christian Industry". 

I see Mark Mohr defining Christafarianism literally as "our own culture which we created within our fan base".

Then I see how he proposes this culture as an alternative to what he calls "the latest industry manufactured pop sensation that is on the cover of CCM".

He describes this culture as "fellowshipping and praising God" which seems like something completely different then just a band with some fans.

Especially not when you know that Christafari claims, that Mark Mohr is "chosen by God to be a leader like Moses and David to plug the gap in the Industry". Literally.

(...) this is how God works, (...) once again, this is how God works. (...) he chose me (...) this is how he chooses leaders; from Moses (...) to King David (...)

LINK TO THE PAGE

LINK TO THE PAGE

SEARCH GOOGLE FOR MORE

And yes, he might say now that he did not start a "cult", but I have never suggested this in the first place.

I do however remind Mark Mohr to the fact that he says Christafarians are members of "the culture we created with our fan base".

I point out to the fact that he also uses the word "cult" and "culture" interchangeably in his many descriptions of what he calls "Rastafarianism".

And actually, I am only mentioning it, not even draw a conclusion from it.

Another word he uses interchangeably is "gospel". But there are two completely opposing definitions of the word "gospel". 

The Message of Salvation to sinners is one. 

A music genre in the Christian Industrial Complex or CCM is another. 

He "preaches the gospel", but he also has a "gospel reggae" band. 

When I criticize the preaching of the "first gospel" aspect, his reply can be summarized as "just a band with just a fan base", a reference to the second definition.

With that he admits, between the lines, how his band and music should only be seen as such: a band with music. That is the other gospel.

I'm not making it that difficult, but I do think the necessity for a research center with a group of researchers and analysts is quite obvious. 

We have already seen how he says that he created a culture in the industry containing "Christafarians", he quoted it himself in his answer to describe who HE means are the Christafarians. They are members of "Christafarianism" in his own admittance.

Christafari's live agenda is a list of concerts at evangelizing projects from local churches from many different denominations. 

But Mark Mohr, as a pastor, "plants churches" as well. There he teaches lessons about the Christian Industry 

LINK TO THE PAGE

However, this very same person also states: "God Chose Me To Plug The Gap In The Industry With The Culture We Created With Our Fan Base Called Christafarianism".

I also quickly note that Mark Mohr calls the Bible and the Nicene Creed as well as his own "teaching statement". 

His own teachings I will fully criticize later on.

WE TEACH that there is one God, eternally existing in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (Genesis 1:1,26; Matthew 28:19; John 1:1-3, 4:24; Acts 5:3-4; Romans 1:20; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Ephesians 4:5-6)

Is it still so, that I can not criticize some of Mohr's teachings without running into the "band leader", but the "band leader" turns out to be a "pastor" who wants to make "Christians" according to, among other things, "his teachings".

So he keeps running in this circle of two gospels.

Mind you, he also didn't want to talk about my concerns in private.

After all, everything is just a "senseless argument" and "debate". 

In reality, Mark Mohr is aware that his argumentation and thesis can never stand the test of scrutiny.  

Fruits which are not necessarily good, as Mark Mohr admits and apologizes for in this very publication.

I also agree that it is impossible to separate the "Pastor" from the "Band leader".

But if that is so, you can't say that I should make this separation in my critique!

In short--"yes". I do acknowledge that there are certain self proclaimed Rastas that deny the divinity of Haile Selassie and believe that Jesus is Lord. I praise God for these brothers in the Lord that have seen the truth. So yes, some rastas may be Christians and some Christians do consider themselves rastas. On this point we can agree and I apologize for lumping all Rastafarians into the category of "Selassie Worshipers" in the past. Yet this concession comes nowhere close to justifying this person's slander.

This is not a recently discovered in-sight and the fact that he knows he should apologize in public for it, is also not new to him. 

In fact, it's almost since ancient times...

The mere publication of my concerns have brought him to fulfill the promise he made seven years ago.

He calls it a "concession".

How can acknowledging a fact be labeled as a concession?

A concession to what, and from what?

Not a concession, but a confession would be it it's place, right there on the left hand side. 

This means, that he knows all of this for many years but never acknowledged it in public.

Are you being truthful when you first admit facts in a response to a publication where your denial of these facts is exposed?

There's another little aspect in this paragraph. It seems to have totally passed his attention, that there was, in his words, "a growing fringe of Rasta believers that deny the divinity of Haile Selassie and worship Jesus Christ alone".

But wait a minute. Didn't he say to the Christian Media that HE was the one who was called by God to "achieve" that? I just mention it...

I'll briefly quote from a study that defines "political correctness". Even more important: the mind- sets that make people use political correct language.

LINK TO THE PAGE

Besides, the whole response of Mark's article radiates what the academic describes.

Mark Mohr calls his "apology" a "political correct" one. This means, he uses the idea of political correctness in his way of thinking.

When he's not simply concealing an unwillingness to acknowledge a fact, that is.

Here we see a practical application of the post-modern way of thinking of which political correctness is a part of.

Mark Mohr acknowledges, that Rastas can be Christian. That means he doesn't have to evangelize them. He doesn't have to teach to stop being a Rasta in order to be saved.

Still he calls them deceivers and he doesn't see the illogical reasoning behind it. It's perfectly normal to call your brother a deceiver and when one points you out to that, you call that one "divisive".

I love Rastafarians and I pray for them often. I do not view them as racist or hateful people, nor would I ever say such a thing to the press. In the same way that Selassie worshippers may want me to accept the divinity of His Imperial Majesty, I long for them to truly follow his teachings and worship the TRUE CHRIST. In this vast difference in views many toes have been stepped on. For this I apologize.

As you can see, he still uses the words "Rasta" and "Selassie Worshippers" interchangeably. 

And he perpetuates his own position as being consciously anti-Rasta. Rasta is "them", even when "they" are Christians according to his own definition given in this article.

Even though he admits the difference is vast and the hurt is worth an apology, he chooses to perpetuate ignoring the difference and calls it "political correct". 

When your thinking doesn't lead you to realizing this clear contradiction, your action are post-modernism in practice. Just look to the academic definition:

LINK TO THE PAGE

When you then apologize for not "keeping" people from "doing something", you're really not only a band leader with fans.

I also like to add, that this "problem" is absolutely not only present on the Christafari forum. I wish it were so.

Or as he puts it, "For those who have been offended by Christafari listeners, these offenses have been removed (and vice versa)."

In a phone conversation with Mark Mohr he told me many times: "I want to fix this problem now". I have answered him an equal number of times that the problem was already out there, leading it's life, making it's problems.

Some problems can't be "fixed" easily. This is one of them.

You have often heard me quote 1Corinthians 9:19 "Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to EVERYONE, to win as many as possible." For me this "everyone" includes reaching Selassie worshippers (those under the Law). I have become all things to ALL MEN so that by all possible means I might save some (1 Cor 9:22). If you read the context of this passage you can see that Paul was referring to spiritual groups not just cultural ones (i.e. those under the law, those not under the law, the Jews, etc..).

This is where we clearly step out of the band and fan facade and step into the doctrines.

This is Mark Mohr's "biblical" explanation for his "evangelizing" of "Selassie Worshippers", as he politically correct puts it.

This is where he starts to change into the Pastor. And when you try to have a theological debate on that, his answer is that he is only a band leader with a fan base.

For an in-depth analysis of Mohr's scriptural explanation for his way of "spreading the gospel" (or "plugging the gap"), see the book "Christafarianism".

In short: he says that he goes to Rastas dressed up as a Rasta without being a Rasta because a Rasta would not listen to a man with a suit and tie but only to someone who also looks like them.

This is nonsense, because Marcus Garvey was a Christian with a Suit And Tie and he was very much accepted. It is also an insult to state that Rastas would listen to someone who looks like them only to show them that they are wrong. They immediately recognize this as a "wolf in sheep's clothing method which it is". 

Does he "smell competition"? Given the fact that Christafarianism is in itself a strange mix of Babylonian marketing manipulation technology this is not a totally irrelevant question. 

Mark Mohr calls Rastas who he does not have to evangelize and who might fit the description he gives about himself much better because they don't have to put up some act "deceivers". 

But who is the deceiver here?

In the Bible, there's a huge difference between a term and a Name. Especially when we speak about the Name of the Most High!

The word "god"  (his preference) however, has no biblical roots. It's a word from pagan tribes which can be used for anything which is sacrificed to. 

LINK TO THE PAGE

• the proper name of the one Supreme and Infinite Personal Being, the Creator and Ruler of the universe, to whom man owes obedience and worship;
• the common or generic name of the several supposed beings to whom, in polytheistic religions, Divine attributes are ascribed and Divine worship rendered;
• the name sometimes applied to an idol as the image or dwelling-place of a god.

LINK TO THE PAGE

SEARCH GOOGLE FOR MORE

But why Africa? This is a thing you never hear Christafari about. They don't care. They found a nice slogan to dressup like a Rasta. That's all. 

Why not Europe? After all, that's where the term "god" comes from. The so-called "Judeo Christian Civilization".

Hmmm...

Rastas (and other conscious people such as Yesus Dreads)

WHAT IS A YESUS DREAD

Regardless what your stance on Selassie is or may be, the colors are to show BABYLON that they will fall, not "Selassie Worshippers" that they have to "become like a Rasta" and speak about "god". 

Because this is exactly how most Rastafarians and Yesus Dreads perceive Christafari's message when they deeply check it. 

Mark Mohr calls it "the common identifier of Rastafarians". 

Again an interchangeable use of Rasta and Selassie Worshipper, especially in the light of him calling Rastas either deceivers of Selassie Worshippers of which he wants to divide himself from, an interesting explanation for wearing dreadlocks.

He has them stricktly for cosmetic reasons, as his explanation of Paulus "all things to all men" reveals, but that doesn't make you a dread. 

Samson, Samuel, and John the Baptist wore dreadlocks to scare the Babylonians and Pharisees with a symbol of their separation from Babylon System and the coming wrath of JAH on their heads. 

Today, a Dread would "use" Red Gold and Green, and call upon the NAME of JAH rather then "use" a proven Babylonian "term". 

And a Dread would never "use" these colors to symbolize Selassie not being JAH. 

That's not what the colors say, and that's not what it means to say JAH rather than "god".

Personally, I use the term "god" to reach Babylonians. But I call upon His Name JAH in my prayers when I not simply call Him "Father".

Which Christian Church? 

Certainly not the "Universal Brotherhood of Christ", of which he acknowledges "a growing fringe of Rastafarians" to have a place. 

And Reggae is not born in the "Christian Church".* It is born in JAMAICA. Many people attributed to this. The people of the world owe THE PEOPLE OF JAMAICA enormous gratitude for the gift of REGGAE MUSIC. 

It has gone international, but every non-Jamaican Reggae Artist (I am one) will always respect that Roots to the fullness. And not limit it to some vague term as "The Christian Church". For it was not the Universal Body Of Christ which gave birth to Reggae. It was (AND IS) the people of Jamaica, whether they "go a church" or "stay a yard". 

That's why he is called Lion of Judah or "Ikon of Christ In His Kingly Character". 

It is by no means an Ethiopian adaption of Revelation 6. Revelation 6 is a reference to the Book of Enoch, just like the Ethiopian Emperors are.

It's older. A spiritual significance which is very important but never acknowledged by Christafari.

And, just like all the Rastafarian and Christian elements you can recognize in Christafarianism, the original meaning an significance are either ignored to corrupted.

How can you possibly "use" the Ethiopian Image of the Lion of Judah to "reach" Selassie Worshippers?

The only logic behind it can be found back in marketing books. Not in the Bible.

In the meantime it is clear, that this whole situation is not about a band with fans.

And Mark Mohr's "response" also doesn't sound like that anymore, either. 

As a pastor, he "plants churches" and "makes Christians" (not Rastafarians).

His outward appearance and transforming of Rastafarian symbology into something Christafarian are the marketing tools for which he defends himself by saying that it is only a band with fans. 

But in the same time he has a complete biblical interpretation around it.

And he stresses the fact that he has taken away all the things he calls "Sinful".

The combination of the Band Leader with the fans and the Pastor planting churches and  isn't so far-sought from my side, but rather well hidden from his part.  

Mark Mohr got this philosophy from the Sanctuary Movement. Friend and foe admit this. 

He was ordained as a pastor in this same movement. This enables him to plant churches and to "create a culture with the fans". 

The sanctuary movement comes out of the Satanistic heavy metal culture and -perhaps unwittingly- inspired Mark Mohr to treat Rastafarians like Satanists.

When you exchange "metal" for "reggae" and "Satanistical metaller" for "Rastafarian" (or "Selassie Worshipper"), this becomes unmistakably clear, though, and the house of cards begins to fall. 

From a really in-depth analysis of the Sanctuary movement, I quote the following:

LINK TO THE PAGE

I find the fact that Mark Mohr treats Rastafarians like Satanists very offensive. 

That he makes JAH say so by giving this a biblical explanation and presenting it as "making Christians" I find straight out blasphemic.

This is exactly why I pointed out to the fact that there are Rastas who do not fit Mohr's description of "people who have to hear the Gospel through my Rasta Imitation".

For years, and years, I humbly pointed out to this fact. To make him realize what he was doing! 

Now he has to admit that not all Rastas are "Selassie Worshippers". He even planted a church with a Rasta in Trinidad. 

But still he calls them "Deceivers" and refuses to be a part of it. Instead he clearly identifies with "The Christian Church". 

He stresses his differentiation by using the theology of "Sanctuarism" to "reach the Satanists". 

Just like the people at Sanctuary do not want to be a Satanist, Mark Mohr does not want to be a Rasta and instead wants to reach them. Like the people at Sanctuary are trying to reach the Satanists.

Unfortunately, the whole theology of Christafari is based on Sanctuary and the activitities mainly take place within the Christian Industrial Complex too. 

Mark Mohr treats Rastas as Satanists and his acknowledgement of the fact that there are Rastas who he would consider as "a brother in Christ" has not made him realize this.

The tragedies that follow as a result of his "created culture" are numerous. 

They started soon after Christafari left the grounds of BIOLA UNIVERSITY and "encountered" the first Rastas. 

The tragedies grew analogue with the "plugging of the gap in the Christian industry". 

And they will continue to grow as long as Mark Mohr keeps teaching his "ways of spreading the gospel".

The Christafari Message Boards were a tip of the proverbial iceberg. 

The tragedies have come to a proportion in the year 2004, that deleting a forum surely doesn't "fix the problem".

Because it starts right there, with the first posting. The "Response of Mark Mohr To The Essay". 

In it, he "boldly" announces that Rastafarians for him now are either Selassie Worshippers or Deceivers and he apologizes to the Deceivers for lumping them in the Category of Selassie Worshippers.

Then he claims God chose him to "plug the gap". He is called to be a leader in evangelizing to the Rastas. 

But when he is confronted by another iceberg, namely that of the "growing fringe of Rasta believers that deny the divinity of Haile Selassie and worship Jesus Christ alone", he is surprised! 

He surely wasn't any part of that. He was to busy calling them deceivers and treating them like Satanists. And people who were trying to tell this to him were silenced and are silenced until this day.

I have numerous private responses to my essay in which people express their total agreement with me but say that they prefer to try to tell this to Mark Mohr personally. 

I wish them a lot of success from this place. A place with a history of seven years doing exactly that.

I really don't want to say too much about the reason why Mark Mohr calls Rastas whom HE acknowledges as Christian "Deceivers".

But if he acknowledges that these "brothers in Christ" as he calls them are born again in the Holy Spirit, he says with that, that the Holy Spirit gives birth to Deceivers.

I don't believe that JAH creates deceivers. And that is indeed exactly where the real contention begins.

Over a month ago I wrote a Christafari update that spoke of our last performance in Amsterdam while on my band's European Tour; " And God saved the best show for last," I wrote, "for it was in Amsterdam where even Rastas held up their hands after the sinners prayer!"

You can also see how the stories about the long list of "saved souls" needs a little side noting. 

During a "tour", at the last concert "even Rastas held up their hands". And Mohr was actually quite surprised. 

Every time something like this happens, Mohr speaks his of his surprise. Remember the "growing fringe" he didn't notice? Here's another one...

Or did he look to the "common identifier of Rastafarians"?

No, he only realizes that he should have called them "Selassie Worshippers" because he can not argue against the criticism that he receives for his facade.

You can also see how he has not really an urge to be accurate in his statements. "Leading the audience in the sinners prayer"? All of them?

You see, it's very easy to say things. Easy to say that you're saving souls as a daily occupation. It's another thing to actually do it.

Most Christafari concerts are not Christafari concerts at all. They are being invited by local churches who are doing the best they can to reach out to their surrounding. Then they invite Christafari to reach out to their neighbors. Christafari takes the mike and speaks the evangelical correct language and considers that to be their work.

Do you even hear a thing about people who invite them? No. You only hear about the many souls who are saved by Christafari. 

This is also a marketing technique, straight out of the book of the televangelists!

It makes people think that they want to invite Christafari. Or support them with money for the mission work they do.

It's all about "plugging the gap in the industry".

For some reason, he claims that I "lump all Christafari listeners into the same category". 

He doesn't say how and where. 

Again he claims a thing without backing it up, telling his readers they have to trust him. 

Hmm...

Here the real reason why Mohr refuses to quote me comes to the surface.

As he already admits, he doesn't want his readers to check for themselves if his claims are true.

He calls it a copyright infringement when I quote him in accordance with the US laws on copyright to show my readers where I get my info from.

He doesn't tell his readers how he stole a Dubroom Review and put it on the Lion of Zion website without even asking permission. 

Don't bother looking for it, though. 

It has been replaced with a review that calls on the reader to forget about the "ever enigmatic Yabby You and Messian Dread" and choose "a true Christian roots artist." 

LINK TO THE PAGE

He's not a Rasta, being a Yesus Dread is an enigma for him, but he claims that God chose him to reach the Rastas.

Yabby You and Messian Dread. They are an enigma for Mark Mohr. 

Is that because both artists incidentally don't happen to have any interest in being sold on "Lion of Zion"?

Just like the unsubstantial claim that I call myself a Rasta. A lie which is being parroted by people who take Mark Mohr for his word. But nobody can give the quotes that would back up Mohr's claims.

Mohr's claims that I "lump all Christafari listeners in the same category" are just as  unsubstantiated. 

The "flaw" is so blatant that he can't provide one single quote.

He says Christafari plays at many churches and even sometimes outside of the Christian Industrial Complex.

So what?

I have reported on Christafari's performance at Sunsplash Tour, for example.

He now says that I don't mention he has played on tours like Sunsplash and calls it a "blatant flaw" and sign of hypocrisy.

His main argument for that is that he calls his listeners "Christafarians". 

For a definition of Christafarians he points out to an interview where he refers to his fans. 

So everybody who listens to Christafari is a fan?

No, because in other publications he says that Christafarians are members of the "Community of Christ". 

But in this description of the Christafarians he stresses that they are not only Christians and when they are Christians they come from different denominations.

Here's the Band Leader again, hiding the Pastor for too much critique.

The point is, as we have seen before, that Mark Mohr has two gospels to spread. The first one is his message of "Be like a Rasta, but don't Be a Rasta", and the second one is simply "buy my music or visit my concerts".

When I criticize his teachings concerning "being all things to all men", the first gospel, he responds by saying that he's performing for aaaaall kinds of people. The second gospel. Plugging the Gap in the Industry.

Mohr seems to think my main frustration is that he "lumped all Rastas into the same category". And therefore he makes his own categories: Selassie Worshippers and Deceivers. Now I can't say anymore that he lumps all Rastas into the same category, and they're still all baaaad.

Problem fixed...

My problem, one of my main concerns, however is written in the paragraph on the left.

It's easily overlooked. But let me quote him.

"the fruit of my efforts. People are getting saved."

Forget about the churches that invite him. Forget about the thousands of people who send him thousands of dollars. Forget about the thousands of people who pray for him. Forget about giving praises to JAH.

Indeed. Mohr's efforts. Mohr's fruits. People get saved.

But it's not about that, it's about a band with fans, right?

What is it?

Which gospel will Mark Mohr choose in the end?

His efforts, or JAH works?

Why does he call Rastafarian Christians deceivers. Why are Yesus Dread enigmatic to him? 

Let me quote him: "Selassie worshippers are regularly coming to Christ."

Now let me quote him a few paragraphs earlier.

For 14 years I went on mission trips to Jamaica and never met one "Rasta" that denounced the divinity of Haile Selassie. Given my personal experiences, for a very long time I used the general term "Rasta" to describe such a person. But I realize now that there is also a growing fringe of Rasta believers that deny the divinity of Haile Selassie and worship Jesus Christ alone. 

Now what does this say? He says "Selassie Worshippers (Rastas) regularly come to Christ", but in 14 years time he has never met a Rasta who had come to Christ, and he was surprised to find out that Rastas were actually In Christ without his notice!

So that's why he calls them deceivers or "enigmatic" when he can't call them Rasta. 

It's not the fruits of his efforts, as he so arrogantly calls his claims. And this is important to realize.

Because Rastafarians and Yesus Dread know what it means to carry Red Gold and Green. They know why it is important to call on the Name JAH. For them, wearing dreadlocks isn't a tool to get acceptance.  

But all these things and more become mere marketing tools in the hands of Mark Mohr.

Marketing Tools to plug a gap in an industry.

Forget about the first gospel. For then he wouldn't call his brother deceivers and enigmatic. But these brothers are an obstacle in his aims, because they oppose his commercial use of Rastafarian symbology.

He takes every significance out of the red gold and green. His only argument is that they're "Christian". But he doesn't say why these colors are Christian and why they point to Africa and not to American of the Netherlands where I live.

He doesn't say so, because he doesn't know. It's an enigma for him, or a deception.

He can not "evangelize the Rastas" as he calls it in the next paragraph, without having to use Rastafarian symbology as marketing tools without any meaning.

People who know the true meaning, biblical meanings, are deceiver and enigmatic.

Is that the gospel, or is that a need to "plug the gap" by discrediting the "competition"?

LINK TO THE PAGE

He has explicitly said what his "methods of evangelizing" are. They include calling his Christian brothers "deceivers".

Every time Christafari will "evangelize the Rastas", they will show their difference with the Yesus Dreads and for example the 12 Tribes Rastas. 

So all Rastas know, that Christafari are not Yesus Dreads or Rastafarians. With that, Christafari clearly signals the message that their gospel is a different one then the gospel where for example the Yesus Dreads and 12 Tribes Rastas refer to.

For most Rastas, there are two different Christs. For the apostle Paulus too, by the way. 

Rastas know, that Babylon with her red white and blue "god" and "dreadlock hairstyles" has also a Geezus. 

Rastas equally know, that the Saviour of the Yesus Dreads and the 12 Tribes is the Yesus of which Haile Selassie was the Defender. 

And while Christafari may think that they are "preaching the gospel", they are signaling the babylon trademark by constantly stressing how THEY are NOT Rastafarian. Even Yesus Dreads are enigmatic.

I am a non-denominational born again Christian. In his writing I have been accused of being an evangelical--as if that is a bad thing. The word Evangelical comes from the Greek word evangelon and simply means "one who evangelizes" or "a preacher of the gospel". So yes, I am an evangelical Christian. I know some people that have gone to a Christian church their whole life and never heard the gospel--what a shame. That would never happen in my home church.

I have never "accused" him of being an evangelical. Let me quote myself in the essay of which Mark Mohr says he responds to in this article of his. 

No, I do not.

I grew up in a Pentecostal  enviroment. The Pentecostal church is originally a black church  and can be considered a part of the world wide evangelical movement. Generally spoken, the evangelicals  have a sound view on the Person of Yesus Kristos and Xianity  obviously preaches a false Christ .

In fact, the evangelicals form one of the many reform movements aimed at taking the people out of the ungodly Babylonian system into a genuine form of worshipping the Father through Kristos.

But on the other hand, there are many Babylonian influences to be found in the evangelical movement . Many evangelical churches make use of marketing schemes in their proselyting efforts . Not to mention the use of very authoritative hierarchical systems  when it comes to organizing the churches. This all in complete contradiction to the Biblical message of freedom and equality.

LINK TO THE PAGE

It's worse than what I say about the evangelicals...

But he can't quote me saying so. And therefore he does it like this.

He simply states it and doesn't refer to the material that makes him say so. 

The reason for this is, as he stated in the beginning, that he doesn't want to "fuel the fire".

No, indeed. Because if people would really know the scam, the fire would get hotter....

I simply refer to the picture of the Black Yesus on top of almost every page on the Dubroom. When you put your mouse on the picture you will read "Yesus Kristos". And when you click on it, you will read about the Gospel. The real one.

And is it a "superficial issue" to call  a brother a deceiver as essential part of your message? 

Hundreds of people getting saved? Really? How do you know that? There have been many studies and all of them point out to the fact that so called conversions at big concerts are often emotionally driven.

Let me give you an example from Mark Mohr's own hands. The fruits of his effort. Not his vain bragging about figures at festivals he didn't even organize but simple happened to hold a mike in his hand.

No, this is really the fruit of HIS efforts. 

LINK TO THE PAGE

The bible clearly says that JAH is the one who saves. When someone gets saved this is the fruit of JAH. Not of Mark Mohr or anyone else. Fire bun that.

Mark Mohr can pretend like he's some Reggae Billy Graham saving souls by the second, but that is one of the things you see with the television preachers all the time. The television preachers of which Mark Mohr is a welcome guest.

And even when you could speak about "man's efforts", they would not be Christafari's but the local believers who invite Christafari.

But Mark Mohr says that the Holy Spirit does the "harvesting".

What he says, is that Jah reaps the work of Mark Mohr's hands. I think this is a bit too much of the self-respect that I see reflected in so many of Mark Mohr's publication. But this one really goes way out of line. 

Yesus Dreads are an enigma. He differentiates himself from both groups as a necessary element in his "gospel". 

He presents this "gospel" as bringing Yesus Kristos to those Rastas who he says doesn't have Yesus because they are Selassie Worshippers.

His deliberate differentiation from Yesus Dreads and Christian Rastas and his usage of Rastafarian symbology as a mere marketing tool to spread this "gospel" give an additional message to that gospel.

Also to the ones he calls "Selassie worshippers who are going to hell". 

As I started to work on my response to his extensive writing, I was initially going to debate my accuser's words line by line--a tremendous waste of my resources. But then I realized that this writing was a distraction to say the least.

Most of what people consider to be the best parts in Mohr's "response" turn out to be lies or air bubbles presented as serious replies.

That's why he doesn't quote it, doesn't point out to it, doesn't even mention my name.

A distraction? yes. "This writing", as Mark Mohr calls his "Response" is indeed a distraction. 

To say the least.

The wrong questions, of course.

The answer doesn't matter.

You see, he draws attention to the "preacher" where I refer to the audience.

I'm not speaking about someone who is "going to lost souls to tell them the Gospel". 

I am talking about my brothers who are called deceivers and about other brothers who are called "enigmatic". 

And then as a reference to the ones he calls deceivers or enigmatic.

Another reason why he calls me enigmatic. Yet he never took the time to reason with me until his little interrogation after my essay.

I know quite a few people in his direct surrounding who totally agree with me. 

You know who you are, greetings. You still believe you can talk some sense into Mark Mohr. I don't believe that anymore.

I have the most bizarre experiences: It's like JAH tells me to look here, to look there. When I ask a question, I get an email from someone, out of the blue, telling me what I need to know.

I see the manipulation schemes and my only question is: does Mark Mohr realize what he is doing or not? 

Does the fact that he is criticized put him in a state of defense because the points of critique happen to touch the foundations of Mark Mohr's "life ministry"?

But if your "ministry" is based on calling other people in the Body of Christ "deceivers" you're either not part of that body yourself or you're simply not in the right place.

First, I tried for 7 (not 8 I believe) years to reason with Mark Mohr. My essay was a direct result of his unwillingness to communicate. And to rectificate!

Then when I published my essay and put a sample Chapter on the Lion of Zion website, it was deleted.

I mailed about that and got replies by Mark Mohr who, after a few exchanges of emails, started to write me these question. I initiated the contact, not him.

He didn't go to the source, the source was already trying to talk to him as he was doing for 7 years in a row.

So, did he wish he could ask questions? Not quite. 

He knew he could. 

He was just asking himself which questions would be the best.

(...) His focus was to find reasons to justify the divisiveness he was about to teach his followers. So the questions were all screaming: “Give me a point to spiritually justify our public execution.” 

It’s simple: he put me on a position where only Yesus Kristos can be and then publicly used that to portray me as someone who shouldn’t be sitting there.  "

LINK TO THE PAGE

In a letter, I challenged this person to answer 10 simple "Yes" or "No" questions. He then gave me permission to publish his response to these questions. But before he answered them, he wanted to clarify his response with the following statement:

He wanted me to tell him about groups of people, if they were going to heaven or not. Then he asked me if it was right that I said there is a difference between worshipping the wrong God and worshipping God wrong. And finally he wanted to know if someone’s personal use of marijuana is a sin or not.  In this case, my alleged use of marijuana. 

The questions were obvious. Disguised as “do you think that people should know about the Message of Salvation”, the real one was: “what can I use against you?”

LINK TO THE PAGE

Here are my questions and his answers:

They had obviously not accepted Yesus as their Lord and Saviour. But they were good to what Yesus calls "the Least of my Brethren".

And that's why Yesus will tell them: Enter, for ye have given me food to eat.

Go ahead, pick up your Bible, Matthew 25.

Yesus is the Only Way to JAH. This means, that YESUS KRISTOS holds the keys. 

It doesn't mean, that when someone never had the chance to get to know the Real Yesus (for example because all the so-called Christians around him worship the babylonian white geezus)  that this one will "go to hell". 

It is up to HIM to decide who goes to heaven or not. 

Not to Mark Mohr or me or whoever else but YESUS KRISTOS, JAH!

And it is up to us to share our faith in Yesus Kristos with everyone who likes so. I never done anything else, I will never do anything else, and Mark Mohr knows it. 

But still he chooses to portray me in a way that I have to send the complete interrogation correspondence to certain people who were worried by his abuse of my answers. 

But he does so to his own guilt.

Talking about "accusing"...

Anyway, here are the questions of the interrogation.

1. Do you believe that a Muslim that lives his whole live praying to Allah and keeping his Lord's commands yet never accepts Jesus as his Lord and Savior will go to heaven?

His answer: If they are against Jesus they will go to hell. If this person is not against Jesus, they will go to heaven.

2. Do you believe that a Buddhist who lives his whole life meditating and fasting and keeping the teachings of Buddha, yet never accepts Jesus as his Lord and Savior will go to heaven?

His answer: If they are against Jesus they will go to hell. If this person is not against Jesus, they will go to heaven.

3. Do you believe that a Rasta that lives his whole life praying to Jesus Christ his Lord and merely views Haile Selassie as a Christ-type, (but not God) will go to heaven?

His answer: YES

4. Do you believe that a self proclaimed Rastafarian that was raised up into Rastafarian by his parents and lives his whole live believing that Jesus is Lord and that Haile Selassie IS this Jesus Christ (in the second advent) will go to heaven?

His answer: YES

5. Do you believe that a self proclaimed Rastafarian that was raised up into Rastafari by his parents and lives his whole live believing that Haile Selassie is Almighty God, sitting on the throne (The Trinity) will go to heaven?

His answer: If they are against Jesus they will go to hell. If this person is not against Jesus, they will go to heaven.

6. Is it true you have said that there is a difference in worshipping the wrong God and worshipping God wrong.

His answer: YES

7. Would you say that someone who prays to Selassie because he honestly believes that he is Christ, is worshipping the right God in a wrong way.

His answer: YES

8. Will this person (as mentioned in question 7) go to heaven if they remain in this belief until they die:

His answer: YES

How would I know?

I just know I love Yesus Kristos and I tell everyone I know that I love Yesus Kristos. 

But I need no marketing tools and long lists of saved souls and I also would never call it "fruits of my effort" when maybe people get to know Jah Yahoshuah ha Mashiach through something JAH made me say.

9. If someone is not going to heaven, do you think that someone should evangelize them and prayerfully lead them to repentance?

His answer: YES

But because I say YES, I am an enigma for him. 

He doesn't feel it, he doesn't know it. I see. Do you see?

10. Do you think that your personal smoking of marijuana is a sin?

His answer: NO

FOR HIM OR AGAINST HIM:

After reading his surprising answers, I had to respond to his e-mail with another question for clarification. Are you saying that "If they are against Jesus they will go to hell? And if this person is not against Jesus, they will go to heaven?" I asked.

Of course, an enigma. 

Even the ten question didn't reveal to him who he was speaking with.

But hey, he should have asked all of these questions to YESUS KRISTOS and not to me.

But I think he wouldn't get an answer. And the reason for that is, that it is not up to us as mere humans to decide over such issues.

He then went on to further clarify:

"When Jesus told me that the time had come for me to grow my dreadlocks (around 1986), I asked Him how I should look at things and He pointed me to this scripture, I looked it up and it said 'who is not against Me is before Me.' I know the opposite is also there but the one here is not often mentioned. Jesus told me to look the scripture up and that was it. I believe Jesus told me to always have that scripture in mind when "dealing" with any people, whether they profess to be Christian Rastafarian or both or none."

JAH told me to leave these people alone.

But He also showed through this scripture, that there are many people who are not against Him.

But they might not know Him. Or maybe they do.

JAH knows, I don't.

Mohr speaks about "spreading the Gospel" and he also speaks about "witnessing".

One of my songs is called Eye Witness. 

First he puts me on the Throne of Judgment. Bringing groups (not individuals) to me and forces me to speak judgment on them.

But when I try to hint to him, how he puts himself on JAH Throne of judgment all the time by judging people who only know a white Geezus and therefore look to Selassie I.

And while he may think that he "brings the gospel" to "Selassie Worshippers" and JAH in His Grace might touch the hearts of a view wannabee Rastas during a Christafari concert, in reality something more tragical is happening.

His methods come from Sanctuary. In this article again you can see that he uses dreadlocks, red gold black and green, as well as Reggae Music and the Ethiopian Image of the Lion of JUDAH as an outward tool.

He doesn't respect the true meaning of these symbols, even though none of them are "unbiblical" in their original meaning.

But still he must change them to fit his ways. Because he refuses to be a Rasta even though he has to admit that the reason for that is not that you can not be a Christian and a Rasta.

It goes further. I quoted the review in which Mark Mohr abuses one of the artists he is selling on his shop to present him as a "true Christian roots artist", as opposed to the "ever enigmatic" Messian Dread and Yabby You. So even being a Yesus Dread is something which is not in his way of thinking.

Again: Who Feels It, Knows It.

Who Does NOT Feel It, Does NOT Know it.

And Mark Mohr really doesn't know it. He even calls it deception and enigmatic, even though he admits it's Godly origin.

In interviews, he even says how he hated Reggae at first but started to like it because it justified his use of marijuana.

LINK TO THE PAGE

The picture that Mark Mohr paints for the Christian Press speaks volumes.

He was born and raised in an evangelical family in a protected environment.

At a certain moment his brother (who was an initiate in a fraternity and currently a fund raiser for missionaries) has "taken his little brother into sin". 

Mark got into trouble many times and was involved in violence and hard drugs but also went to Christian camps.

At many of these camps he "gave his life to Christ", but then one time was the last one. 

A few days later, Christafari was born and Mark Mohr went to Biola University, where he wrote his book about Rastafari which got him into trouble with Buju Banton. 

At Biola, they teach discipline in a way that reflects the "tour morals" quoted in my essay. It is evidently that Mark Mohr's mind-set is significantly formed at that place.

Take a look at the following, and tell me if this is not mental slavery.

Biola students have chosen, freely and willingly, to abide by the following standards. We regard any violation of these standards to be a breach of integrity, since each member has voluntarily chosen to associate with the Biola community and to accept, uphold, and live by the following standards.

LINK TO THE PAGE

"Be Perfect, Or Be Viewed As Deceiver".

Wheel!!!!!!!

"Be Perfect, Or Be Viewed As Deceiver".

In anyway, this is the school where Mark Mohr wrote his book(s) on Rastafari. It was during a "project on cults".

He did not finish his education at Biola University and became involved in the Sanctuary movement. 

Bob Beeman ordained him as a Pastor in that community.

Until this day, Christafari is deeply connected with the evangelical world. With the Babylonian and with the true Christian elements in them.

They perform at TBN (Terrible Babylon Nonsense) which is a known Televangelist TV Station with the same ease as they perform in a church where people are genuine.

So that is their culture, and they're into every element of it. 

The Evangelicals consider themselves to be the best communicators of the Gospel. Mark Mohr reflect this mind set in this "Response" when he describes his Evangelical Identity.

I'll quote it here.

"I am an evangelical Christian. I know some people that have gone to a Christian church their whole life and never heard the gospel--what a shame. That would never happen in my home church."

Now when I started to think about the many clashes between Christafari and Rastafarians back in 1997, I came to realize how ignorance concerning the movement of Rastafari in it's complete richness and context was the main cause.

The fact that he calls Christian Rastafarians "Deceivers" and Yesus Dreads "Enigmatic" confirms this.

The fact that he is surprised that there's a growing group of Rastafarians, spearheaded by the leader of the biggest Rastafarian organization in the world, who don't believe Selassie to be JAH, is another confirmation.

This is not about spreading the gospel. the gospel is being spread, but not in a way that Mark Mohr notices it.

It is beyond his mind-set.

I try to hint to him, many times. When I try to tell him, that there are Christian Rastafarians, I mean with that that there is a group of Rastas who he doesn't have to "evangelize". I don't do that to make any division, but I am trying to tell Mark Mohr that he treats Rastafarians as Satanists.

And because I have to step into his mind set to tell him this, I try to point out to him that there is a group within Rasta who he can not treat as a Satanist so easily. I hoped, that this would make him realize that he was treating Rastas like Satanists. 

And I had hoped that he would realize how his facade of using Rasta as marketing was unnecessary. I had hoped he would see Babylon around him and be a Yesus Dread, chanting down babylon. Not playing the Reggae Man for the Television Preachers at TBN and the Pat Boone Show.

He didn't feel the hint.

Instead he constantly refers to my "marijuana use".

Mark Mohr's response is a typical evangelical response to Rasta Culture. And the fact that Yesus Dreads are enigmatic to him  makes this even stronger.

So Mark Mohr, with many evangelical brothers and sisters, is like the Disciples of Christ. 

Totally unaware that outside of their world, in different cultures, the gospel is also being preached.

And that is what I tried to hint at when I told him my personal story. The story of which I believe JAH told me who I was. A YESUS DREAD who is to Chant Down Babylon.

Yesus tells Mark Mohr, there are certain people who are not against Him. 

And change the words "this man" for "Rasta".

I wasn't speaking about "going to heaven" anymore. I wasn't following his interrogation. I was simply trying to hint to him that this had nothing to do with that. That it had to do with being a Yesus Dread.

If you treat a disciple of Kristos like dung, He will see it as being addressed to Him.

If you treat a disciple of Kristos good, like you visit him in jail, He will also see it as addressed to Him.

This is about two disciples of Kristos, who indeed may both know the Saviour personally but can not really overstand each other.

I think this is the situation Mark Mohr has with a lot of Rasta and Yesus Dread. 

But unfortunately he thinks I'm a New Ager or at least presents me as such to his readers. 

His poor readers, who are being deprived from any reference material as far as Mark Mohr is concerned.

And the verse wasn't about someone who is against Yesus. 

Or against the disciples.

Just different. 

Besides, here we also have an indication again, "the fruits of my efforts" remember? There's a different in the works of the disciples and the works of Yesus in the mind set of Mark Mohr.

Who taught to do Mohr Work?

I rather do JAH Work.

And it can be, that there are people "with Him" that do things which you may not immediately recognize because it is not a thing you have been introduced to.

But sadly you present yourself as an expert on those people and you don't even recognize your own situation in the bible verse I gave you.

Not to go into a discussion about who is going to hell. I don't know, you don't know. JAH knows.

I presented this bible verse to you to tell you something as a Yesus Dread to an Evangelical Christian who thinks he must treat Rastas like Satanists.

But again: Mark Mohr is the Band Leader, The President of Lion Of Zion, The Pastor, The Teacher. 

But not a Yesus Dread. And not a "Christian Rastafarian" or Christafarian. He says so himself and stresses it to a point in which he starts to teach idiocy such as that Jah creates deceivers.

Man oh man, what a situation.

WORSHIPPING THE RIGHT GOD IN THE WRONG WAY?

How can this individual say that if someone is praying to Jesus, but believes that Haile Selassie IS this Jesus then it is okay? He also stated that this person is merely worshipping the right god in the wrong way--a minor infraction in his mind--an abomination in the eyes of God.

If I had thought so, I would have done so myself. Kind of natural...

But remember, he bases this allegation on his absurd interrogation of ten questions.

In his idea, everything is "okay" as long as you're not going to hell. 

And here he also brings a more interesting part into the article.

It is at this place, that he's going to teach something which has as consequence, that Jews are praying to Satan. Just watch it.

He uses it, to expose that his preference for the word "god" over the Name JAH is completely in-line with the meanings of "god" and JAH. 

Because he thinks, that when people say they worship Yesus and do it not, this is the same as people who think they worship Yesus when they pray to Selassie. 

People who say they worship Yesus and do it not, are what the Rastas call the Xians, the followers of the White Geezus.

These people know the Name of Yesus very well. they use it to make money. To gain popularity. Even to drive out demons and "save souls".

But by doing these thing in Yesus Name without committing JAH Work, they paint the white geezus in front of many people.

And some people look to Selassie because they only see a white geezus when they look to Christianity. I would blame Christianity more then any Rasta for this. 

But according to Mark Mohr, Selassie never said he was JAH. So why does Mark Mohr use this scripture? 

He's got to watch it then, with all his "fans". For fans have "idols", which means just that: idols.

A false Christ is someone who says he is Christ but is it not.

The Bible verse he quotes says that many will come and say I am Christ and that there will be many false Christs.

In the Bible, Paulus was one time worshipped as a god because of the many gifts he had. did that make him a false Christ? Is Paul a false Christ?

No.

Mark Mohr didn't get my hint. And he thought I was proving to him why this group was going to heaven and that group not. Oh man. What a drama.

CHRISTIAN-ISH UNIVERSALISM:

Needless to say, the answers to the above ten questions ooze of universalism, a teaching adhered to by many in the reggae community from Big Mountain to Luciano. Yet Christianity and universalism are diametrically opposed at the most crucial point.

I have written about New Age and the false Christ it presents. I have exposed "universalism" years before Mark Mohr realized it was even there.

But that doesn't bother the quote less responder....

Because if you follow the teachings of Selassie you will accept Christ as you Lord and Saviour as Mark Mohr always uses this evangelical term. 

So I'll leave his quote of the Colossians right there for him to meditate on, and establish that he is now going into a rant concerning heaven and hell, a subject he raised in his interrogation and has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of my essay or my correspondence with him.

It only took place in his mind. 

Or should I say, mind set?

It is up to us, to show Yesus Kristos and His Message to people around us. It is up to those people what they do with it.

It is up to JAH to say who will go to hell. And Mark Mohr forced me to go and sit on that throne and now he uses it to say I should not be on that throne.

WHY EVANGELIZE?:

If all peoples of all faiths are going to heaven UNLESS they are AGAINST Jesus, then that gives us little need to evangelize. We might as well believe what we want. But whatever you do, just don't curse Christ. With this worldview, every day is "choose your own religion day", with no ramifications for one's sinful actions.

He claims that I teach that you can pick any religion you want as long as you're not against Yesus and he totally forgets how all these religions are against Yesus...

Maybe it's not possible to be a Muslim and not against Yesus?

But I prefer not to see people as Muslims, Buddhists and all that. Religions come from Babylon. They bring mental slavery. I prefer to see people as people. 

And as far as I'm concerned, my salvation comes from Yesus Kristos. I am not ashamed for it, my page on Redemption is very clear. 

But since Mark Mohr doesn't want to bother his readers with the truth, he hopes nobody will read it.

In the first part of the article he more or less tries to deny it and give the word "evangelical" a more universalistic meaning in the Kingdom of Yesus. But here it becomes really clear. But not a single time does he use the word "Christian" here. 

The Ethiopian Church teaches Rastas that Selassie is not JAH and as a result there are many Rastas who do not believe Selassie to be Jah as a result. Because the Ethiopian Church doesn't say to the Rastas to stop being a Rasta and become like a Rasta.

But that doesn't matter to Mark Mohr who tries to proof to his readers that I am unaware of this all where an article about it has been on the Dubroom website since about 1998.

But how would the reader know if they only have to take Mark Mohr's words for it?

This is exactly one of the things I have addressed in my essay.  That within the evangelical world Mark Mohr presents himself as the authority on "reaching Rastas" and all that.

I was blessed to transcribe an interview with the Prophet Gad. In it, he says Selassie is not God. This transcription is authorized by Gad and has gone from pole to pole. it is quoted in books with my name as transcriber. For example in the book Dread Jesus. 

I have also sent Mark Mohr the interview. He was very surprised. And now he says to his readers that I am so stupid that I don't even know that the 12 tribes say. I know that they say. I told Mark Mohr what they say.

But as far as Mark Mohr is concerned everybody must think that he is the authority.

And usually I don't deal with these kind of things.

But now I just point out to it, because it simply confirms that Mark Mohr claims God chose him to plug the gap and only through his and his efforts shall Christian get reggae. 

Otherwise they will be labeled as deceivers or enigmatic and the artists he sells are the "true Christian roots artists".

But when it comes to proving how I am a new ager, the Rastas in the Twelve Tribes are suddenly good enough.

Well, anyway, it's good to see Mark Mohr knows at least that there ARE Rastafarians who know Jesus and make no secret about it.

Because with that, he reveals he's not that ignorant.

And his motives for not wanting to associate himself with the Rastas he now so boldly quotes are deeper then many think.

While his readers are still thinking that he is factually defending spreading the Gospel of Yesus, he is going on a total rant based on ten trick questions.

He's approaching the point in which he is exposing himself to such an extend that I doubt that when people would really research the Dubroom they would still consider Mark Mohr's response valid.

I think the fact that he calls me Satan and claims that quoting me or pointing out to "my" site is absolutely unnecessary takes him into a spiritually very dangerous situation.

I told him I knew that even if I have pain through a church whatever, I know that he didn't do it.

One forum moderator summed it up best by stating the following:

"I see you doing your best to destroy any chances of spreading the Gospel of Christ to any who need Him. I see you not as some one that is concerned for the souls of the lost. I see that you want to discredit without trying to build up. You have lowered yourself to a mere accuser of the Brethren.

They only make Yesus and Paulus say it and apply it to me.

And they're not ashamed to call me Satan either.

A Yesus Dread is called Satan by Christafari because the Yesus Dread tells Christafari he exists, and many brothers and sister in Rastafari with him.

Because the existence of Yesus Dreads and Christian Rastafarian, the ones who would rightfully be carrying that name Christafari which he prevented from being used truthfully by patenting it as a trade mark for business.

In my phone conversation with him, I asked him why he was talking with me anyway.

After all, in the "final rebuke"  I was given to Satan and they also made Yesus say I was to be treated as a "publican and pagan man". 

He agreed that he was not acting according to the biblical process they initiated to me.

More simply put: The Bible tells you that when you give someone to Satan you don't talk with him anymore.

To "fix that problem" he then said: "Do you want me to take it off, then"?

I answered him to leave it, as it already happened.

Like so many things already happened.

I don't think it is so final, though. This whole response is just a small part of it all.

I wanted to write a more general response, kind of like the one he wrote here, but with quotes and links of course.

However, the research for the follow-up of my essay will take longer as a group has formed and the research goes deeper.

In the meantime the so-called response goes around like some kind of thought out piece that is a sufficient answer to my essay.

I hope therefore to have satisfied those people who were waiting for my comments on this "response" a little more.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. The Christafari Research Center has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is The Christafari Research Center endorsed or sponsored by the originator.

ORIGINAL URL