Abstract 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.

中文翻译：

---

哦，Jah的受难者之子：解开传统神学的拉斯塔法里亚式排斥

摘要文章认为，在加勒比海地区，对RastafarI的神学观点仍在研究不足，也许更多地关注了RastafarI对该地区的种族，音乐和语言传统的贡献。尤其是，即使人们认识到RastafarI的豪宅和个人成员对许多事情都没有同质的信仰，但Rasta神学的思想并未像其信仰体系的其他要素那样清晰地表达出来。讨论以两个先前的思考为出发点，“只是沙漠还是正义的沙漠？：这些危险日子里的上帝与痛苦”（珀金斯，2016年）和“（罪孽的工资）是巴比伦：拉斯塔与基督教对罪孽的看法”。 （珀金斯2012年）；前者的反思突出了传统神学论不足以回答以下问题：“如果神是善良的，为什么邪恶存在？” 没有人能够充分回答这个问题的许多方面。在这方面，珀金斯（Perkins，2016）主张关注激进的苦难观点为讨论提供的重要“答案”（萨拉·安德森·拉贾里甘（Sarah Anderson Rajarigam，2004）也强调神的苦难或异端症，作为对激进苦难的回应。她不仅认为神学中的一种选择，而且还可以作为神学中的一种替代，她认为神学是“被宠坏的启蒙之子，自我毁灭性地渴望为人类的巨大苦难提供理论和哲学上的补救”（27）。珀金斯（Perkins，2012）阐述了拉斯塔对罪恶的特殊理解，这是任何神学的重要组成部分。对于拉斯塔来说，罪是三维的，是个人的，继承的和公司的。