Log in or Sign up

Black History Culture : Negro Slavery and The Myth of Ham's Curse

Discussion in 'Black History Culture' started by I-khan, Jul 13, 2006.

Page 7 of 10

- PREMIUM MEMBER
Clyde Coger Clyde C. Coger, Jr.

Member Since:

Nov 17, 2006

Message Count:

22,219

Likes Received:

5,461

Trophy Points:

113

Gender:

Male

Location:

Canton, MS
istlota said: ↑

You did not answer my query as to who this power is you seem to be saying is preventing private interpretations. Obviously, there have always been private interpretations of scripture. Jesus took issue with private interpretations the Pharisees had of scripture. You and I have our own private interpretations of scripture. Even the presumed authors of the 66 canonical books of the bible had their own private interpretations.

Which is a good seque to II Peter 1:20. I remind you that none other than Paul and Peter had their own private interpretations of scripture. As II Peter 1:16 states, Peter felt that his interpretations had to be correct because, unlike Paul, Peter had the advantage of being an eyewitness to Jesus and, hence, had heard the Word of God face to face.

Yet, even so, Paul had to correct Peter's erroneous interpretation of what scripture meant by circumcision:

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/petevspaul.html

There is only one perfect Word of God. And there is only one perfect interpretation of scripture, strictly speaking. But, in practice, what has happened is that the perfect Word Of God has been interpreted privately by imperfect authors of the 66 books, which is why the bible is imperfect.

Surely, you understand that if God did not prevent one of the 12 disciples, Peter, from getting some of the Word wrong, it is certain that the authors of the 66 canonical books were bound not to have done any better of a job.

As I have posted previously, man needs the guidance of the Comforter to discern the perfect meaning of the Word Of God from readings of the imperfect bible.

In the Spirit of Sankofa,

.......The reason I didn't answer the specific question is because you should already know the answer; and this shouldn't be played as a game of "stomp the professor" or "answer the answer." Also, why would you ask me that question, as though you have no idea what my answer would be. The only possible answer to that question is the Comforter or Holy Ghost.... John 14: 26:

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I've said unto you.

The example of Paul vs Peter proves the point that there's only one interpretation of scripture and no private interpretations are allowed. In this case, Paul was correct.

Here's were you've erred, God did prevent one of the disciples from getting it wrong, and by the writings (Word of God/Bible), even you are able to capture the proper interpretation of that argument, agreed?

Peace In,

Clyde C. Coger, Jr.
Author:

Does Color Matter? Only When Misrepresented!: The Bible depicts the Colors of Man and Consequences of false Representation

Clyde Coger, May 13, 2012

#31 Like Reply
FDR New Member

Member Since:

May 11, 2012

Message Count:

26

Likes Received:

12

Trophy Points:

3

Gender:

Male

Location:

Charlotte, North Carolina

Clyde Coger said: ↑

In the Spirit of Sankofa,

"God did prevent one of the disciples from getting it wrong"

Peace In,

I have never heard anyone within any Christian Church utter that Disciples of Yeshua were "wrong." (Other than Atheists)
Who are you to judge that the Disciples of Yeshua are wrong or right? Not even I go that far... And you seem to despise my opinions.
And this is another fine example, once again, of YOUR own interpretation lol

FDR, May 13, 2012

#32 Like Reply
largo Active Member

Member Since:

Nov 15, 2009

Message Count:

432

Likes Received:

197

Trophy Points:

43

Gender:

Female

My comments below in green. Not directed at you cherryblossom, just the article.

cherryblossom said: ↑

The Nakedness of Noah and the Cursing of Canaan (Genesis 9:18-10:32)
Study By: Bob Deffinbaugh

The Cursing of Canaan
(9:18-29)

......Regardless of Noah’s source of information, his response was one with broad implications. Canaan, the youngest son of Ham, was cursed. He was to be the lowest servant to his brothers. While some understand the “brothers” of verse 25 to refer to his fellow man, I believe it refers specifically to Canaan’s earthly brothers, the other sons of Ham. In this way, Canaan’s curse is intensified in these three verses. In verse 25, Canaan will be subservient to his brothers; in verses 26 and 27, to his father’s brothers, Shem and Japheth.

Viewed in this way, it is impossible to see any application of this passage to the subjugation of the Black people of the earth. Ham was not cursed in this passage, but Canaan. Canaan was not the father of the Black peoples, but of the Canaanites who lived in Palestine and who threatened the Israelites.

In verse 26, it is not Shem who is blessed, but his God: “He also said, ‘Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant” (Genesis 9:26).

By this, the godly line is to be preserved through Shem. From his seed the Messiah was said to come. As it happens, the Messiah came be way of the seed of Shem and Ham. Does his genealogy not show this? The blessing comes not from Shem, but through Shem. The blessing flows out of the relationship which he has with Yahweh, the covenant God of Israel. And the servitude of Canaan is one of the evidences of this blessing.

----------------------------------
The Lord will cause your enemies who rise up against you to be defeated before you; they shall come out against you one way and shall flee before you seven ways. The Lord will command the blessing upon you in your barns and in all that you put your hand to, and He will bless you in the land which the Lord your God gives you. The Lord will establish you as a holy people to Himself as He swore to you, if you will keep the commandments of the Lord your God, and walk in His ways (Deuteronomy 28:7-9).
-----------------------------------
^ This whole passage is taken completely out of context and does not directly apply to Shem and was not said to him at all. This was spoken to the Elders of the twelve tribes of Yisrael when The Almighty was establishing his covenant with them. If Yisrael kept the covenant they would be blessed ^ if they kept not the covenant they would be cursed. The Scriptures say Yisrael kept not the covenant and was cursed.

Just as Shem’s blessing consists in his relationship to Yahweh, Japheth will be blessed in his relationship to Shem. Not Scriptural in the way he is implying.

May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant (Genesis 9:27).
Luke 21:24

The name “Japheth” is thought to mean ‘to enlarge’ or ‘to make wide.’102 By a word play, Noah blessed Japheth by using his own name.103 The blessing of Japheth is to be found in relationship to Shem and not independently. This promise is stated more specifically in chapter 12, verse 3: “And I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse. And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” Again, not speaking to Japheth or Shem, but to Abram. And the word enlarge is used in English translations, and many consider that a blessing. I suggest checking a concordance and viewing the other words available besides enlarge. And enlarge also means reproduce in the land. Luke 21:24

God promised to bless Abram, and the other nations in him. All who blessed Abram would experience God’s blessing, while all who cursed him would be cursed. If you know your Scriptures well, then you know that this is something yet to come. <Canaan will be subjected at those times when Japheth is found in union with Shem. > Not Scriptural.

There is a clear correspondence between the activities of Ham, Shem, and Japheth and the curses and blessings which follow them. Shem and Japheth honored God when they acted together to preserve the honor of their father. Ham dishonored both his father and his God by relishing the humiliation of Noah. So Ham was cursed and Shem and Japheth were blessed in cooperative unity. None of what he has stated here, is Scriptural. Further more, it is quite probable that Japheth's wife brought that whole abominable situation about. And again, Ham was not cursed, his son was.

The problem which must arise from the cursing of Canaan is this: Why did God curse Canaan for the sin of Ham? Beyond this, why did God curse the Canaanites, a nation, for the sin of one man? The Almighty did not directly curse anyone, Noah did.

The explanation which best seems to answer these questions is that the words of Noah convey not only a cursing, and a blessing, but a prophecy. The only one Noah said blessed be was the Almighty himself. While it is true that the sins of the fathers are visited on the sons, this is only “to the third and fourth generations” (Exodus 20:5). If this principle were to be applied, all the sons of Ham should have been cursed.

By prophetic revelation, Noah foresaw that the moral flaws evidenced by Ham < (Moral flaws? You would think he himself would have been cursed then and all of his offspring. It could be that Ham was very much coerced.) would be most fully manifested in Canaan and in his offspring. Knowing this, the curse of God falls upon the Canaanites because of the sinfulness Noah foresaw.104 Not Scriptural.

The emphasis thus falls upon the fact that the Canaanites would be cursed because of their sin, not due to Ham’s. I think this explains why Canaan is cursed and not Ham, or the rest of his sons. Well, just Canaan was cursed and not because he himself sinned or because of anything Noah foresaw, but because he came into the world by way of a sin, an abomination. A good portion of his offspring are tied to the son's of Anuk/Anak. The goats. And others of Japheth's kin. If you do not know who Anuk/Anak is, read your scriptures, he and his offspring are in there. Their seed lived on both sides of the deluge. Others in history wrote about them. The Ancient Egyptians referred to them as the impure ones (who could not receive resurrection from Ausar). Their identity is well hidden in the terminology Hyksos. A name created by Josephus from his mistranslation of Ancient Egyptian writing.

The words of Noah, then, contain a prophecy. Canaan will most reflect the moral flaws of his father, Ham. Not Scriptural. And the Canaanites will manifest these same tendencies in their society. Because of the sinfulness of the Canaanites foreseen by Noah, the curse of God is expressed.

The character of these three individuals and their destiny will be corporately reflected in the nations which emerge from them.....

Canaan, it would seem is the product of an incestuous relationship between Ham and his mother. (Very likely coerced by Japheth's wife and quite possibly to be a sacrifice). Thus he was cursed (stripped of all inheritance). Then made a servant of servants. A servant of the Almighty Yahweh of Shem and a servant of Japheth.

Genesis 9:21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
Genesis 9:22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father

Leviticus 18:8 The nakedness of they father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.
Deuteronomy 27:20 Cursed be he that lieth with his father's wife; because he uncovereth his father's skirt.
Leviticus 20:11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness:

As for Japheth's wife, it is very possible that she is of the offspring of Cain (down the line). Cain, as Scripture suggests took a wife from the offspring of Eve and the Serpent. The ways and beliefs of Japheth's wife (if it is indeed true of her lineage) were quite different than the ways of her in laws.

Genesis 3: 15-16, 20.
Genesis 4:14-17.

>>>>>COMPLETE ARTICLE HERE: http://bible.org/seriespage/nakedness-noah-and-cursing-canaan-genesis-918-1032

largo, May 13, 2012

#33 Like Reply
rapunzal24 Well-Known Member

Member Since:

Apr 2, 2011

Message Count:

807

Likes Received:

564

Trophy Points:

93

Gender:

Female

Location:

Chicago

istlota said: ↑

You did not answer my query as to who this power is you seem to be saying is preventing private interpretations. Obviously, there have always been private interpretations of scripture. Jesus took issue with private interpretations the Pharisees had of scripture. You and I have our own private interpretations of scripture. Even the presumed authors of the 66 canonical books of the bible had their own private interpretations.

Which is a good seque to II Peter 1:20. I remind you that none other than Paul and Peter had their own private interpretations of scripture. As II Peter 1:16 states, Peter felt that his interpretations had to be correct because, unlike Paul, Peter had the advantage of being an eyewitness to Jesus and, hence, had heard the Word of God face to face.

Yet, even so, Paul had to correct Peter's erroneous interpretation of what scripture meant by circumcision:

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/petevspaul.html

There is only one perfect Word of God. And there is only one perfect interpretation of scripture, strictly speaking. But, in practice, what has happened is that the perfect Word Of God has been interpreted privately by imperfect authors of the 66 books, which is why the bible is imperfect.

Surely, you understand that if God did not prevent one of the 12 disciples, Peter, from getting some of the Word wrong, it is certain that the authors of the 66 canonical books were bound not to have done any better of a job.

As I have posted previously, man needs the guidance of the Comforter to discern the perfect meaning of the Word Of God from readings of the imperfect bible.

I think that this is a good example of private interpretations. This is a good time to refer to what God has said, God is the one who gave the circumcision as a covenant, He gave specific boundaries and how it should be done. This is a time when I think it is best to refer to what God has said because we have two disciples who disagree....who should be the tiebreaker...Jesus and His words. Anything that God has amended He has let us know about it, this was not one of those things.

rapunzal24, May 13, 2012

#34 Like Reply
- PREMIUM MEMBER
Clyde Coger Clyde C. Coger, Jr.

Member Since:

Nov 17, 2006

Message Count:

22,219

Likes Received:

5,461

Trophy Points:

113

Gender:

Male

Location:

Canton, MS
FDR said: ↑

I have never heard anyone within any Christian Church utter that Disciples of Yeshua were "wrong." (Other than Atheists)
Who are you to judge that the Disciples of Yeshua are wrong or right? Not even I go that far... And you seem to despise my opinions.
And this is another fine example, once again, of YOUR own interpretation lol

In the Spirit of Sankofa,

.......Its apparent that you are not keeping up with this 3-way conversation, and have allowed things to become personal. And now, your true colors are showing with this comment: "Not even I go that far..." What on earth could you possibly mean with that statement? I know you are a comedian, but that's over the top... smh.

No, your opinions aren't despised, the problem has been explained to you many times; there is no biblical basis to support your posit, none.

Peace In,

Clyde C. Coger, Jr.
Author:

Does Color Matter? Only When Misrepresented!: The Bible depicts the Colors of Man and Consequences of false Representation

Clyde Coger, May 14, 2012

#35 Like Reply

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Page 7 of 10

XenPorta © Jason Axelrod from 8WAYRUN.Com

We Are About Loving, Encouraging, Embracing, Teaching and Building With Black People. No Hate Allowed.