printIf you are reading translations of the Tanach (acronym in Hebrew for all books of the Hebrew Bible: Pentateuch or Torah, Prophets and Writings)—you’re likely reading a lot of porcelainized nonsense
Funny thing how Christian commentary “changes” what my Hebrew Bible says, plain and simple. (I am sure politically correct, Americanized rabbis will join in this textual finessing.)
See, not only can I read Biblical Hebrew perfectly well—I’m looking at the tract now—but my Israeli teachers decades ago confirmed the commentary that claims Ham and descendants were cursed.
Ham did something unspeakable to his father, Noah. Noah, cursed him and descendants.
“And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.”
But not according to King James commentary, which is still better than most. Accordingly, the biblical author didn’t know what he was saying. Ham’s descendants were never cursed in the Hebrew Bible.
Yeah they were. It says so in Genesis 9:24.
That’s why I say: If you are reading translations of the Tanach (acronym in Hebrew for all books of the Hebrew Bible: Pentateuch or Torah, Prophets and Writings)—you’re likely reading a lot of porcelainized nonsense.
UPDATED (11/28/022): Interesting thread on LinkedIn.
ME: The biblical tract doesn’t say today’s blacks originated in Ham. And I, of course, claimed nothing of the sort. I said quite clearly that Ham and descendants were cursed in the Hebrew Bible, and pious scripture should not develop creative ways of pretending they were not.
I don’t know who Ham begot. I do know that his excuse-making defenders say he begot the greatest civilization ever. ? Why, of course. Next they’ll claim ancient Egyptians were really Africans. Wait a sec, they have already.
Ask Mary Lefkowitz, Greek classicist, author of “Not Out Of Africa: How “Afrocentrism” Became An Excuse To Teach Myth As History.”
AND:
Yes, let us demonize non-aggressor Noah for objecting to his abuse. I have not disputed your point. I only questioned the hubbub of white-noise commentary around what seems to be straightforward biblical text.
Now, what I would like to know is where it says in any of the Jewish or Christian scriptures that the descendants of Ham are the African Negro.
Right. The original tract doesn’t say Ham originated today’s blacks. Did I claim it did? Of course, I did not. I said quite clearly that Ham and descendants were cursed in the Hebrew Bible, and pious scripture should not develop creative ways of pretending they were not. What’s your issue?
Here’s a reference in Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ham_(son_of_Noah)] which clearly describes the [erroneous] idea that “Ham originated today’s blacks”. Equally clear is that the idea is a creation of non-Jews/non-Jewish Biblical interpretation.
Non-Jewish (Xtian) translations of the Tanach are rife with mistranslations and misunderstandings — many/most are the result of Xtian “agendas”, as well as the Xtian rejection of the Oral Law that accompanies the Written Law.
1Mo 9:24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
1Mo 9:25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
296 / 5.000
Übersetzungsergebnisse
It just says Canaan was cursed
and not all of Ham’s descendants.
And who is Canaan today?
Ge 10:15 And Canaan begat Sidon his firstborn, and Heth,
Ge 10:16 And the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgasite,
Ge 10:17 And the Hivite, and the Arkite, and the Sinite,
For interest sake, or curiosity, or for whatever it’s worth, there’s a book not written many years ago, by R. Dawson Barlow. He was a Christian, a King James Bible believer, and a missionary to China. The Name of the book is: “The Origin Of the Races.” The book could be under his name in Chinese which was Sun Ming. I read it and thought it was very interesting and I think I agreed with his take. Can be ordered from bibleambassadors.org
I sincerely apologize Ilana Mercer. I put down what seems to be a bad link for bibleambassadors. I only checked now, I should have checked before. (It’s not.com, either.) But that is the website address that’s in the book and which book I have. Again, I’m sorry and I apologize. I did happen to meet Bob Barlow some years ago and heard him speak. He since has passed on, but the man and the book can be vouched for if requested. Matt Coyle
Ilana: You showed a photo of Ham being black by Shem and Japheth being white. Thus, you are implying that the curse of Ham applies to all black Africans.
GS, that Ham was black is common lore, represented widely through time. I have no idea if this is fact or fiction (although increasingly the Bible is proving quite valid as they match archeological findings to it). All I am saying is that a suspicious amount of PC interpretation has arisen around the Genesis 9:20–27 passages.
https://brill.com/view/journals/bi/30/4/article-p399_001.xml?language=en
Coincidentally, I’m currently taking a class on Genesis (on DVD’s at home). Interesting things brought out recently. Similarities between Adam and Noah: We are sons of each. Both were told to replenish the earth. Both had three sons named in scripture: from Adam, Cain, Abel and Seth. From Noah, Shem, Japeth and Shem. Adam and Noah each had a son who was a type of Christ, Abel and Shem. Adam and Noah each had a son who were a type of the antichrist, Cain and Ham. Each had a son involved in a curse of God, Cain and Ham. Adam and Noah were naked and ashamed when they sinned. Both connected with a garden. Both faced satanic beguilement. Both connected with dry land and the appearance of growing vegetation. Both connected with animals multiplying after their kind. Both followed a judgment on the Earth which left it in ruins.
Just today the teacher kind of made a funny on the race question, especially because there is so much attention given to skin color today. He, being white, wonders more where white came from since Adam was made from red clay. He can better see how people of color came from red clay than people of white skin color.
Correction for my previous post today. I mistakenly typed: “From Noah, Shem, Japeth and Shem.” It should have been: From Noah, Shem, Japeth and HAM. That is, Noah’s three sons.
Got to Genesis 9 in my class today. The teacher tends to think (can’t prove it) that what happened between Ham and Noah was sex, immorality, sodomy. Genesis 9:24 says Noah, “… knew what his younger son had done unto him.” Though it wasn’t a criticism of the wording of the Bible at all, the teacher thinks Leviticus 18: 6-9 is not talking about just lifting up the skirt of kin (including a father) and seeing their bare legs. What I found interesting, because I hadn’t thought of it this way before, was that the teacher said when Ham went out and told his brother’s, he did so in a joyful, bragging kind of way. I had thought Ham was just owning up to the fact that he saw his father naked. The teacher does think Hams’s descendants are the black race. He said it was Canaan who was cursed, not Ham. Gen. 9:1 says God blessed Noah’s sons. The teacher said the execution of the curse was when Israel displaced Canaan in the promised land. Ham’s other descendants went to Africa.
Ham, the servant to Shem and Japheth. The teacher said that is a most positive attribute, not negative. A servant “par excellence.” All the things at the end of Gen. 9 has to do with the 4th institution God ordained: Nationalism. Nationalism, for the protection and privacy, of volition, marriage, and family. He said the prophecies concerning the descendants of the 3 sons have to do with the positive contributions they’re supposed to make to the nations which came from them and then on to the world. It’s a divinely appointed division of responsibility to care for the specific needs of mankind at 3 fundamental levels of need. Shem, the spiritual, inner strength. Ham, the physical, skill. Ham’s line is about “getting the job done.” In charge of technology. An inventor. Japheth, the intellectual, provides purpose and direction. Japheth expands and develops on what Shem and Ham do. “Often at their expense.” Nationalism. Why? Among other reasons, Acts 17:27 explains: “That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him,..”
I realize some or a lot of this has been heard before, perhaps. So, just sharing for any interest sake.