posted
Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. Blessed be the LORD GOD of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Ja'pheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?
Posts: 2088 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
As already posted on another older thread..
In Genesis 10, Moses notes the sons of Ham as composing Mizraim (Egypt), Cush, Punt, Caanan and Libya. Ironically, assorted Jewish, Arab and European writers at certain times did not hesitate to pile on and say Ham was black, because some tinge of inferiority could be placed on his descendants. Weirdly enough though, that tune changes when their logic is followed through consistently. Egypt, Cush, Punt, etc suddenly became "non-black" when the realization struck that the Nile Valley civilizations and those of the Horn and Sahara would have to be credited to these "inferior" sons of Ham. Suddenly and curiously, the "Hamites" became "white" or "Middle Eastern", 'Eurasian" or a mysterious "Mediterranean brown race".
Moses at least was consistent. He assigned no racial characteristics to the tribal groupings he wrote about in Genesis 10, nor did he cast any badges of inferiority. The so-called "curse of Ham" doesn't exist in the Bible. It is entirely a creation of later Jewish, Arab and European writers, repeated and amplified over time. Moses noted that Caanan (the Lebanon/Sinai region peoples) would be conquered by the Semitic Hebrews, but there is no "curse of Ham". It is entirely bogus. Ironically, Moses also writes up Nimrod, son of Cush, in commendable terms, noting his descendants as among those most advanced culturally, materially and militarily. Since Moses' conception of Ham includes peoples with a wide range of physical variation, his "anthropology model," or concept so to speak, is much closer to modern researchers like Keita et al, than Aryanists who posit the artifical "Mediterranean" or "Eurasian" model where the only "Africans" are those located somewhere far south of the Sahara.
And even more ironically, the Hebrew prophet himself married a Cushite, as documented in Numbers 12. He certainly would not be welcome on the campus of Bob Jones University, although the denizens thereon quote his writings frequently.
--------------- Who did Moses say are the sons of Ham, which means hot, heat, or brown in Hebrew according to most translations?
-- Mizraim- Egypt -- Cush- Mesopotamia/Ethiopia and perhaps adjoining areas in the Sudan and across the Red Sea -- Phut- Libya or Somalia -- Caanan- the Palestine, Lebanon area
Who did Moses say built the first large-scale civilization? Was it a "white" "Japhetic" man? No, it was Nimrod, son of Cush, whose descendants built Babel, Akkad, Sumer, etc. Cush is used interchangeably in many places for the area the ancients knew as Ethiopia. Indeed the word Cush in Hebrew means black. There is no mistaking it sometimes refers to skin color- for a proverb used by the prophet Jeremiah to illustrate a moral principle goes: "Can the Ethiopian [or Cushite] change his skin, or the leopard his spots?"
Notice a pattern here from the Biblical narrative? All these powerful, prosperous large scale civilizations are derived from people strongly suggestive of "dark" Hamites- in particular, Mizraim and Cush. Mizraim, one of the greatest, means 'Egypt' in Hebrew. Those who built Babel and Sumer, etc did so under the line of Cush, meaning 'black', under the line of Nimrod, son of Cush.
Now some ask- Is there any modern research to back up Moses as to his language suggesting the involvement of these dark peoples as large scale civilization builders?
1) Hanihara 1996 analyzed remains from Iraq, the heart of the Babel area. His conclusions: "early West Asians looked like Africans."
2) Brace 2005 analyzed Neolithic remains incoming into Europe. His conclusion: The incoming Neolithic clustered with dark African types, and did not look like today's white Europeans. Brace also found that the early inhabitants of the Palestine area, the Natufians, (which would correspond to Moses' Caanan area), also had a distinct black sub-Saharan element.
c) Limb proportion studies cluster the inhabitants of ancient Egypt closer to dark tropical fellow Africans, than to whites.
Thus as can be seen, neither the writings of Moses for the period he wrote about above (4000-3000 BC roughly), or modern research in the 20th and 21st century support the notion of "white Hamites." We know all these people had physical variability, like most human populations, but those looking for Biblical support for a "white Ham" notion usually fail when the evidence is looked at.
Some wonder though: Did Moses have insight into the essential unity of the Nilotic peoples?
Interestingly enough one of the descendants of Mizraim recorded by Moses is Lud or the Ludim, renowned as bowmen. Jeremiah 46:9- "let the mighty men go forth: Cush and Phut that handle the shield, and the Ludim that handle the bow."
Isa 66:19 also refers to Pul or Put and Lud "that draw the bow."
Notice how Cush, Lud and Phut are all linked together- all related in the Biblical text. Could the "Ludim who handle the bow" possibly refer to the renowned archers of Ta Seti or various in the Sudanic area, since Lud descends from Mizraim (Egypt)? Not saying it is so, just speculating, for Moses, ties all these peoples together- Ham, Cush, Mizraim, Phut, Caanan...
If as Moses says, Lud descend form Mizraim, and Lud is renowned for the bow, then it seems that Moses is tying together a great area of the Nile Valley under the rubric of Mizraim, into the deserts and the nearby Sudan, from whence sprang the bowmen of "Nubia." Could it be argued then that Moses had insight into the essential unity of the Nile Valley or Nilotic peoples? Indeed he would have the background to provide such insight for (a) he spent a great deal of time in Egypt and was learned in the knowledge of Egypt and (b) Moses himself married a Cushite, a descendant of Ham, as the Book of Numbers records.
And if Moses had such insight into Nile valley unity, could it be argued that those who use his writing for a racist agenda are ironically undermined by said writings? Indeed his marriage to a Cushite (Book of Numbers) would seem to make him persona non grata in many places among some of those who claim to believe his writings..
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^I think I get what you are saying, and I agree with some things you said. Where is the information that Moses noted that the Canaanites will be conquered by Hebraic Semites. I think you may have knowledge of biblical regional areas and nations, but the scripture of 'Cursed by Canaan' has no affiliation to Egypt or Egyptian's people nor to Cush or Cushitic people.
I'm really curious to get people's thoughts of what that scripture mean. I agree wholeheartedly that there isn't a curse of Ham no where to be found in the scriptures. You seem knowledgeable. Tell me what you think the scripture is speaking of in biblical terms.
'Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarged Ja'pheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.'
What does 'cursed' means and what did it do?
Posts: 2088 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am no expert on the topic per se. There are some books floating around on it like:
--The Black presence in the Bible and the table of nations, Genesis.. --Walter Arthur McCray --The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, ... - by David M. Goldenberg - 2009
which break down some of the falsehoods regarding the "curse."
"Cursed be Caanan" is a prediction of the future, not a slam of the Caananites per se. The prediction said "servant of servants shall he be." Well this prediction of Moses came through when the Hebrew ex-servants from Egypt conquered Caanaan and made the Caanites tributary servants. Hence people like to Gibeonites had to pay tribute to the Israelites or perform labor. That is all it meant basically. It is true that Moses had issues with Caanaanite religion, like their multiple gods or child sacrifices, but it is also clear that he freely finds their culture advanced and superior in some ways to the Hebrew migrants. The "cursed be Caanaan" does not cancel out this acknowledged superiority, only predicts that parts of Caanan would be conquered by the Hebrew ex-servants outta Egypt.
Jewish, Arab, and European Christian theologians later transformed this into a non-existent 'Curse of Ham' but as the books show, no such "curse of Ham" by Moses exists. And in fact as others have pointed out elsewhere Moses freely credits the Canaanites with superior technology and material culture, noting that the Hebrews received a windfall of already constructed cities and thriving agriculture as part of the Israelite conquest. Moses mentions opponents with superior iron and chariot technology as well. So it is clear that the "Hamitic" peoples, except in matters of religious belief, get their due from Moses, as the pacesetters in civilization. Note how he refers to Nimrod, son of Cush for example.
I don't buy any "racial" assignations to any Mosaic writings, nor racist theories therefrom. It is clear that the whole "Hamitic" thing, or Gentile "Table of Nations" has nothing to do with modern racial obsessions, but rather with those nations or peoples, RELATIVE to Jews, or that would interact with Jews and their religion. Moses is not dealing with any "races." He notes some geographic locations of peoples and their cultural/material developments, RELATIVE to Jews and who would interact with Jews in various eras, not so-called "MOngoloids" or any such modern era piffle.
Still some seem to want to inject modern "race" notions into Moses. Curiously though, they don't want to follow the guidelines laid down by Moses. For example, it is clear that that the supposed "black Hamitics" would include world famous Egypt, and also the mightest empires immediately after the flood, according to Moses. So if anyone were looking for bragging rights, Moses clearly gives "Ham" the front-line credit- something later Jewish, Arab and Christian writers (who claim to follow his writings) conveniently dodge. Diop quotes approvingly from Moses, suggesting that the Hebrew lawgiver gave the brothers credit where due. He married an Ethiopian too, that Moses, another "black mark" against him ...
Likewise you sometimes run into Bob Jones Univ types who try to argue that Shem (Jew), Ham (black and Asian) and Japheth (white) represent the "three races". Their hypocrisy is quickly exposed when you find them trying to subsequently make the Egyptians white because they realize that Moses put them into the "black" column. Suddenly they ain't Bible thumpin anymore when that inconsistency is exposed. How come there are "3 races" until you find out black folk will get credit for Egypt? Oh no, can't have that.. "reinterpretation" required..
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Thanks for this. I get that the knowledge of 'Cursed be Canaan' comes from those with intellectual thought and those who may have knowledge of "old" history, but I don't agree with any of the intellect except for 'Cursed' is a prediction. Rather, in more accurate terms, it is a promise, prophecy, or oath. 'Cursed be Canaan' is an affirmation, declaration, or promise.
What people do not see is that there isn't a "curse" on anyone. The 'curse' is the promise of the testament God will have with his people through Judah (that is the Christ). The scripture is speaking of the excommunication of Israel due to sin and the new testament he will have with his people through Judah (Christ) to all those who believe (not just Israel).
If people take the time out to read it they will see the spiritual aspect of it. The scripture doesn't have anything to do with anything physical per se, not even the word Canaan is physical.
Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
-Canaan will serve [a purpose] for God's chosen people.
Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
-Canaan will serve [a purpose] for God.
God shall enlarge Ja'pheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
-Canaan will serve [a purpose] for the heathen or gentiles, and the once lost will be communicated in the same kingdom of the chosen (or called).
This scripture has nothing to do with race or anything physical. Noah prophesied God's plan for salvation for the world through Shem (Christ).
The physical part of Canaan served as a dwelling place of worship for the Israelites till the death of Christ.
Posts: 2088 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just now i felt the hunger, I'm so glad I found this site!!!
Posts: 1 | From: 1529 Concord Street, Charlotte, NC | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic