Why are Blacks,arabs and gypsies the outcasts of the world?

what is the curses of shem and ham?

europeans exploited everyone to get to were they are.

Originally posted by Xenopathic_Investigator
what is the curses of shem and ham?

europeans exploited everyone to get to were they are.

All humans throughout history have exploited other humans. It is human nature. Does that make it right? NO!

Here's what I pulled for you on Ham and the Curse of the Caananites.. Hope it helps. At least you know where to look now, if you're interested.

THE CURSE OF CANAAN

These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread. And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken: and he was uncovered in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.

Genesis 9:19-29


Many people believe that this passage explains the origin of races. They suggest that the Negro comes from Canaan because the black color was his curse. But notice two things: verse 22 "And Ham the father of Canaan," and verse 24, "And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him." It was Ham who saw his father and Ham who told his two brothers. Yet Noah says, "Cursed by Canaan." Why?

Ham was not involved in some gross immorality. The Bible simply states that Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father. The other two sons, Shem and Japheth, took a garment and, walking backwards, covered their father, not observing his nakedness. Previous to this action Ham evidently walked in, saw his father, came out and said, "Look at our dad. He has been telling us that we ought to be good boys, yet he is in there drunk." This was not an act of immorality on Ham's part, but disrespect.
www.parentcompany.com...

I'm not saying God told me this is the truth. It's something I've merely pondered.


[edit on 6/6/05 by EastCoastKid]

Sorry bout that. I had to edit out a bunch of stuff I dint mean to copy. It's right now.

People, I am not sitting at home watching the history channel.. this is right infront of you. Pickup the BIBLE and read it, I mean really read it. I know someone will respond with "I HAVE READ IT AND IT DOESNT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THAT IN THERE!" then I will tell you are a liar because the history of our people starts in the Old Testament.

Okay.. I knew there will be some people refusing this claim, and suddenly begin to question their bible school teachings when they were little siblings forced to adopt a religion because their parents forced it on them. There was one reply "HOW THE HECK ARE AFRICANS, PUERTO RICANS, AND CUBANS SHEM?" Well, because I am Puerto Rican, I can strongly confirm my people started with the Taino and the BLACK slaves that came to my country to slave sugar cane, the same with our brothers and sisters in CUBA, although some Boricuas can't accept the bloodline and think the lighter you are the better, that again stems from the programming of religion. So, if these Slaves came from Africa and remember a KING will never put his people in bondage, the "AFRICANS" that arrived to P.R., Cuba, and the United States are the people promised bondage. I don't think there were any White Europeans chained on those slave boats, only people of color.

I know this is hard to digest, but trust me.. I am right. We can debate this all day and I will continue to give you scriptures from the holy word to back the claim. I am waiting for some person to say "THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN BY MAN!"
I can't believe how programmed people are... the truth has always been infront of you. The best way to hide something from someone is to put it right infront of them.

Start with the Old Testament... and please don't say "Didn't people live before the bible?" Thats just an ignorant question. RESEARCH people, and stop accepting the lies you have been taught in the past, the Bible is right infront of you.. pick up one for less than $5.00.

For the person who said, "Didn't people live before the bible?", the children of Adam were destroyed after the floods, and Noah and his sons were chosen to populate the planet (A little bible history). Read my friend.. it a great pleasure and it decreases the utility bill, no need for TV.


[edit on 6-6-2005 by blaqmyst]

Originally posted by AceOfBase

Originally posted by blaqmyst
SHEM = African Americans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, and some Asians.

JAPETH = Caucasians, Modern day Israelites, Asians, Greeks, Russians (Not the original Hebrews).

HAM = True Africans, Arabs, Palestinians (They are at war with Jews over SHEMS land).

How the heck are African Americans, Puerto Ricans and Cubans SHEM?
Puerto Ricans and Cubans are the descendants of the Spanish so if they are SHEM then so are the people of Spain. I also don't see how African Americans can be SHEM but true Africans are not. It doesn't make sense.

I believe I answered this but I will do it again.
Put yourself in a Kings position. You are the King of Ethiopia and for hundreds of years your land as been occupied by another tribe. The word on the streets is this tribe are the lost children of Israel (The children of SHEM) and they are coverting people to the mighty Father's law. You have a base religion worshiping what you believe is the true way taught by your ancestors, but this tribe refuses to take part in such a religion. When slave traders arrive in your country, will you give your own tribe or will you cleanse your country of an invading tribe? Let me guess... answer B.

This has happened all throughout Africa during the slave trades. Many children of SHEM became slaves in Egypt, Asia, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Europe, and lastly the United States. The children of SHEM settled in Africa to escape from the Roman invasion, hundreds of years later the SHIP OF EGYPT (Slave Traders) came for them and GOD's promise became a reality.

You probaly say "Why don't they teach this today in church or bible school?" Well, I will leave that for you to figure out, but I can give you a clue... Money.. Money... Money....

[edit on 6-6-2005 by blaqmyst]

blacks and hispanics are inherently cursed form birth and they can do nothing about it?

what are both blacks and hispanics to do about this curse?

Originally posted by blaqmyst
People, I am not sitting at home watching the history channel.. this is right infront of you. Pickup the BIBLE and read it, I mean really read it. I know someone will respond with "I HAVE READ IT AND IT DOESNT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THAT IN THERE!" then I will tell you are a liar because the history of our people starts in the Old Testament.

Okay.. I knew there will be some people refusing this claim, and suddenly begin to question their bible school teachings when they were little siblings forced to adopt a religion because their parents forced it on them. There was one reply "HOW THE HECK ARE AFRICANS, PUERTO RICANS, AND CUBANS SHEM?" Well, because I am Puerto Rican, I can strongly confirm my people started with the Taino and the BLACK slaves that came to my country to slave sugar cane, the same with our brothers and sisters in CUBA, although some Boricuas can't accept the bloodline and think the lighter you are the better, that again stems from the programming of religion. So, if these Slaves came from Africa and remember a KING will never put his people in bondage, the "AFRICANS" that arrived to P.R., Cuba, and the United States are the people promised bondage. I don't think there were any White Europeans chained on those slave boats, only people of color.

I know this is hard to digest, but trust me.. I am right. We can debate this all day and I will continue to give you scriptures from the holy word to back the claim. I am waiting for some person to say "THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN BY MAN!"
I can't believe how programmed people are... the truth has always been infront of you. The best way to hide something from someone is to put it right infront of them.

Start with the Old Testament... and please don't say "Didn't people live before the bible?" Thats just an ignorant question. RESEARCH people, and stop accepting the lies you have been taught in the past, the Bible is right infront of you.. pick up one for less than $5.00.

For the person who said, "Didn't people live before the bible?", the children of Adam were destroyed after the floods, and Noah and his sons were chosen to populate the planet (A little bible history). Read my friend.. it a great pleasure and it decreases the utility bill, no need for TV.


[edit on 6-6-2005 by blaqmyst]

For someone to rant on about how Ignorant people are for not reading the bible and for questioning there faith you seem to have things mixed up about who is Ignorant. YOU are the one who is Ignorant for saying that you are right and that anyone who objects to your belief system is wrong. YOU are the one who is PROGRAMENED and YOU are the one who feels that you are cursed because of your heritage. YOU are the one who should read more books other than the Bible and back up your claims that ALL none white people are cursed.

Why the hell should I go buy a Bible when it is supposed to be for free?

For many reasons racial questions continue to be an important area of
discussion in our day. Civil rights agitation and legislation have brought
these matters before the minds of people who were never concerned about them
before. Some churches have given sums of money to minority groups as
penance for past sins. Public school integration and busing have brought
the issue into almost every home. What does the Bible say about racial
differences, and what should be the believer's attitude toward those of
other races?
THE CURSE OF CANAAN (GENESIS 9:20-27) Unfortunately, some Christians still
seem to think that the Bible placed a curse upon certain races, making them
inferior. This is based upon a misunderstanding of the curse placed on
Canaan after the Flood. Since this misconception still persists, it would
be well to examine the account on which it is based.
THE SIN OF NOAH Some time had elapsed after the Flood, for Noah's son
Ham already had children, and Noah and his family had begun to rehabilitate
the earth. Noah's planting a vineyard was apparently not the first time
that had been done in the history of the world. The practice of agriculture
was as old as Cain (Genesis 4:2), and the excessive misuse of wine had
probably been previously experienced by men. Although the word drinking in
Matthew 24:38 does not of itself necessarily imply drunkenness, the word for
"eating" in that verse is used of horses or mules eating and pictures a
pre-Flood world filled with animal delights. Noah's culpability is
underscored by the fact that his was not the first case of drunkenness in
the history of the world. The fact that he was the seasoned saint who had
stood his ground against the whole world before the Flood makes his sin all
the more terrible.
Growing grapes led to making a drink from the, and the taste of the wine
led to excess, and the excess led to stupor, which led Noah to lie down;
then the warmth from the wine made him uncover himself (the verb in Genesis
9:21 is not passive "was uncovered" but reflexive "uncovered himself"), and
the stage was fully set for the drama that followed.
In came Ham and saw his naked father. The verb saw means more than a
harmless or accidental look. It indicated that Ham gazed with satisfaction
at his father. Though there was no overt inordinate act on Ham's part with
his father, his unclean thoughts were fed by gazing on his father, and his
act bespoke a complete lack of proper unassuming respect. He then went to
tell his brothers what he had seen.
In contrast, Shem and Japheth went into their father's tent backward, so as
not to see Noah's condition, and they covered his naked body. In this day
of nudity and casualness, disrespect, and insolence on the part of children
toward their parents, the actions of Noah and his sons almost seem trivial,
if not irrelevant. But God did not consider them so, for they indicated
then, as now, that something was wrong within the hearts of those involved.
THE PROPHECY OF NOAH When Noah woke up, he inquired ("knew," verse 24,
means to find out by inquiring) what his younger son had done to him. Then
he pronounced a blessing on Shem and Japheth and a curse, not on Ham, but on
one of Ham's four sons, Canaan (Genesis 10:6). In this point lies the
mistake many people make concerning this prophecy. They think that the
curse was placed on Ham and thereby on African people. The identifications
of Ham's other sons are as follows: Cush --- Ethiopia; Mizraim -- Egypt;
Phut -- Libya. They were the progenitors of the tribes that populated
Africa. However, anyone who thinks about it will recognize that Canaan was
the father of those who occupied Phoenicia and Palestine, the Canaanites.
Canaan's sons (Genesis 10:15-18) were Sidon, inhabitants of the Phoenician
city in Lebanon; Heth, the Hittites, Syria, (Joshua 1:4); Jebusites,
dwellers in the hills around Jerusalem; Amorites, who inhabited the hill
country on both sides of the Jordan; Girgasites, inhabitants of Canaan
(Genesis 15:21); Hivites, who were early inhabitants of Syria and Palestine;
Arkites, dwellers in Lebanon (1 Chronicles 1:15); Sinites, inhabitants of
the Lebanese coastal area; Arvadites, dwellers on an island off the coast of
Syria, 50 miles north of Byblos; Zemarites, who lived in the territory of
Benjamin; and the Hamathites, who lived near the Orontes River. Clearly
none of these were inhabitants of Africa. The Canaanites were wicked
inhabitants of Palestine whom God commanded to be destroyed under Joshua.
The subjugation of these people was the primary fulfillment of Noah's
prediction of servitude. But because the Israelites failed to destroy them
completely when they went into the land, the heathen religion of the
Canaanites was embraced by the Israelites, resulting in the worship of a
kind of Canaanized Yahweh. Phoenician religion also centered around Baal
worship and fertility cults.
The Assyrians captured Phoenician cities in 842 BC. After the fall of
Assyria, the Babylonians controlled the territory, then the Persians, and
then Alexander the Great, who captured the territory in 332 BC. Greek and
Aramaic replaced the Phoenician language, and although the cities continued
to be important until they fell to Moslem invaders in AD 600, as a
distinctive people the Phoenicians were pretty well diluted by the time of
the Roman conquest in 64 BC.
Clearly the curse was placed on Canaan and not on Ham, but the question of
why Canaan was singled out is difficult to answer. Some suggest that since
Ham had already been blessed (Genesis 9:1), he could not have been cursed by
his father; thus the curse had to fall on Canaan. Others point out that
although Canaan apparently had no direct involvement in Ham's actions, Ham's
failure to respect his father was punished by his having a son who would
dishonor him. In other words, Ham was punished in his son. Whatever the
answer, the punishment was clear, and it was from God.
To summarize: the curse on Canaan was from God; it did not include Ham or
3 of his 4 sons (and therefore was not on the Negroes); it was deserved in
its outworking because of the extreme wickedness of the Canaanites; and it
is irrelevant today since it would be difficult, if not impossible, to
identify a Canaanite.

THE NEW TESTAMENT ETHIC

CONCERNING IMPARTIALITY Several important passages in the New Testament
relate God's impartiality toward ethnic issues. Peter recognized that today
God sends the message of salvation through faith in Christ to all men,
regardless of ethnic background (Acts 10:34-35). Thus the believer should
be concerned about getting the gospel to all men without distinction of
racial or national background. The New Testament also reminds us that the
judgments of God are without partiality (Romans 2:11; I Peter 1:17).
Employers are especially warned to treat their employees impartially
(Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 3:25).
In the assembly partiality is outlawed (James 2:1-9). James deals with the
particular problem in the early church of preference being show to those who
had money. They were given seats of honor, whereas poorer people were
shunted to the rear. Although the passage is speaking against partiality
because of economic differences, it also applies to similar instances that
might arise because of racial differences. To reject or to seat in an
obscure place a person who is of a different race than the majority of that
church is not to "have respect to persons" and thus to "commit sin" (verse
9).
The church at Antioch exemplified impartiality. The leaders mentioned in
Acts 13:1 were probably all Jewish believers. One of them, Simeon, had the
nickname Niger, which is Latin for black. It may mean that he was a Jew of
African origin or possibly that he was an African Gentile who was a convert
to Judaism, but he shared equally in the leadership of the church with those
of differing backgrounds.
To sum up: believers are to be impartial in giving out the gospel, in
employer-employee relationships, and in accepting all who come into the
church.
CONCERNING DISTINCTIONS Impartial actions do not necessarily mean
similar actions toward everyone. The New Testament teaching also includes
the principle of distinction. Unity and diversity need not be
contradictory, and the New Testament insists on both within the Body of
Christ. The diversity of spiritual gifts is to create unity within the Body
(Ephesians 4:11-13). Unity of position and possessions in Christ does not
obliterate distinctions of nature or spheres of opportunity (Galatians
3:28). That verse cannot mean that men and women cease to be distinct when
they become Christians; nor does it mean that the Jewish and Gentile peoples
are no longer recognizably distinct. Indeed, although Jews and Gentiles
were members of and workers together in local assemblies, the fact that they
are different people is still noted (I Corinthians 10:32; Galatians 6:16).
When differences in their backgrounds erupted in serious differences of
opinions regarding Christian conduct, the early church sought to bring
harmony among the races by suggesting regulations for conduct (Acts
15:19-20; I Corinthians 9:20-21).
To sum up: distinctions, including racial distinctions, remain even after
salvation. They do not affect spiritual possessions, but they may affect
the kind of spiritual activity (as in the case of men and women) or the
conduct of spiritual living (as in the case of those with different
backgrounds).

CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS AND PRACTICE

CHRISTLIKENESS The pattern and goal of the Christian's life and conduct
is Christlikeness. That can best be understood by a continual reading and
study of the gospels, where Christ is portrayed, and by a Spirit-directed
application of all the principles revealed therein. Perhaps the most
instructive passages in connection with the question of this subject are
those that relate His teachings concerning Samaritans (Luke 9:52; 17:16;
John 4:9,39). Of those passages, undoubtedly the story of the good
Samaritan in Luke 10:30-37 is the capstone. The story was given in answer
to the question "Who is my neighbor?" (10:29). The answer is: the person
who is in need and particularly the one whose path crosses mine, regardless
of economic, political, national, or racial differences.
That phrase whose path crosses mine is important. It is easy to talk about
concern for the needy or the poor without having concern for any particular
needy or poor person. This is not to say that the believer has no
responsibility to those whom he has never seen, but it is to say that
concern for a group can only be genuinely demonstrated by doing something
for one or more in that group.
INVOLVEMENT The Christian should be an involved person. Top priority
should be given to presenting the gospel to all people, for this is our
Lord's command. Doing good to all men, especially to fellow believers, is
also commanded (Galatians 6:10). No individual or nation is condemned for
being wealthy by comparison with others. It is how the wealth is acquired
and the uses to which it is put that concern God. Standing and working
within the law against illegalities and injustices is a Christian duty;
being a political revolutionary is forbidden (I Peter 2:13-15). Every
command that relates believers to other believers is to be obeyed without
racial prejudice. This certainly includes receiving into a local church all
believers who present themselves to that church.
The path of obedience to these commands as they work out in various
practical situations is not always as clear as the commands. Many of the
practical problems Christians face involve more sociological than
theological factors. The believer will not find specific answers in the
Bible to every problem and situation he may face, and he cannot help but be
influenced by sociological factors. For example, we recognize that the New
Testament does not forbid interracial marriage but neither does it command
it.1 Yet the factors involved in raising children of such a marriage may
influence the decision to contract the marriage. And those factors are
different in California, for instance, from what they are in any southern
state.
The Bible does not condemn a man's preferring to belong to one sound church
instead of a different, equally sound one. But it severely condemns
partiality in any group, whatever be the manifestation of it. Class
prejudice is as wrong as racial prejudice.
The question of the gospel and society is tangent to but really beyond the
scope of this subject. Suffice it to say that the principal message of the
New Testament is centered in the death of Christ for our salvation. When
the message is stated it is not stated in terms of the social, cultural, and
other human benefits of the truth (1 Corinthians 15:3-5). We must never
put the cart before the horse in our Christian witness. A.N. Trition has
given a fine summary of the matter: "The Bible is concerned for society,
but there is no such thing as a social gospel. There is social law. There
is also a gospel of salvation in Christ which has far-reaching repercussions
in society when men who have entered into the experience of the gospel go to
live it out. True Christians will seek to grow increasingly like Christ.
We must follow Him 'who went about doing good,' or we are bogus
Christians."2

1. Timothy was born into a home of mixed parentage, his father being a
Gentile and his mother a Jew
(Acts 16:1). Whereas anthropologists generally do not use the word
race to refer to Jews and Gentiles,
Webster's Third New International Dictionary defines race as "a class
or kind of individuals with
common characteristics, interests, appearances, or habits as if derived
from a common ancestor" and
gives the Jewish race as an example.
2. A.N. Triton, Whose World? (London: InterVarsity, 1970), 182-83.

I think when your talking about colored people being cursed, you are talking about the mark of cain. God put a mark on him so all would know not to kill him and he was the first to have killed. or at least thats they way the story goes, so some say blacks are the cursed decendants of cain.

Blaqmyst, are you saying God promised to put blacks in bondage? why would he do that? I think your are confusing the exodus of the israelites from egypt.

Also arabs are the decendants of Ishmael, so i dont think they are the cursed ones.

It's a BOOK. There's thousands of religious texts with all kinds of weird theories. Why do people choose to believe one instead of another?

Originally posted by Killak420

Originally posted by blaqmyst
People, I am not sitting at home watching the history channel.. this is right infront of you. Pickup the BIBLE and read it, I mean really read it. I know someone will respond with "I HAVE READ IT AND IT DOESNT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THAT IN THERE!" then I will tell you are a liar because the history of our people starts in the Old Testament.

Okay.. I knew there will be some people refusing this claim, and suddenly begin to question their bible school teachings when they were little siblings forced to adopt a religion because their parents forced it on them. There was one reply "HOW THE HECK ARE AFRICANS, PUERTO RICANS, AND CUBANS SHEM?" Well, because I am Puerto Rican, I can strongly confirm my people started with the Taino and the BLACK slaves that came to my country to slave sugar cane, the same with our brothers and sisters in CUBA, although some Boricuas can't accept the bloodline and think the lighter you are the better, that again stems from the programming of religion. So, if these Slaves came from Africa and remember a KING will never put his people in bondage, the "AFRICANS" that arrived to P.R., Cuba, and the United States are the people promised bondage. I don't think there were any White Europeans chained on those slave boats, only people of color.

I know this is hard to digest, but trust me.. I am right. We can debate this all day and I will continue to give you scriptures from the holy word to back the claim. I am waiting for some person to say "THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN BY MAN!"
I can't believe how programmed people are... the truth has always been infront of you. The best way to hide something from someone is to put it right infront of them.

Start with the Old Testament... and please don't say "Didn't people live before the bible?" Thats just an ignorant question. RESEARCH people, and stop accepting the lies you have been taught in the past, the Bible is right infront of you.. pick up one for less than $5.00.

For the person who said, "Didn't people live before the bible?", the children of Adam were destroyed after the floods, and Noah and his sons were chosen to populate the planet (A little bible history). Read my friend.. it a great pleasure and it decreases the utility bill, no need for TV.


[edit on 6-6-2005 by blaqmyst]

For someone to rant on about how Ignorant people are for not reading the bible and for questioning there faith you seem to have things mixed up about who is Ignorant. YOU are the one who is Ignorant for saying that you are right and that anyone who objects to your belief system is wrong. YOU are the one who is PROGRAMENED and YOU are the one who feels that you are cursed because of your heritage. YOU are the one who should read more books other than the Bible and back up your claims that ALL none white people are cursed.

Why the hell should I go buy a Bible when it is supposed to be for free?

Please tell me what your post is suppose to accomplish? The book is right infront you my man.... take one week out of your busy life and read it. Then we can have a real bible study, but I don't think 5 million Yisraelites around the world can be wrong. Learn my friend and before attacking me, support your claim. The only person who used the words IGNORANT is you... so before showing your lack of intelligence.... THINK BEFORE WRITING.

By the way, I am not here to get in a pee pee contest with you about something you obviously have no experience in. Before you decide to name call my friend, present supportive evidence that your claim is factual, I believed I presented you with many resources, and inside is one real big one called the bible. Read the Old Testament..its a good start

[edit on 6-6-2005 by blaqmyst]

Originally posted by Xenopathic_Investigator

For many reasons racial questions continue to be an important area of
discussion in our day. Civil rights agitation and legislation have brought
these matters before the minds of people who were never concerned about them
before. Some churches have given sums of money to minority groups as
penance for past sins. Public school integration and busing have brought
the issue into almost every home. What does the Bible say about racial
differences, and what should be the believer's attitude toward those of
other races?
THE CURSE OF CANAAN (GENESIS 9:20-27) Unfortunately, some Christians still
seem to think that the Bible placed a curse upon certain races, making them
inferior. This is based upon a misunderstanding of the curse placed on
Canaan after the Flood. Since this misconception still persists, it would
be well to examine the account on which it is based.
THE SIN OF NOAH Some time had elapsed after the Flood, for Noah's son
Ham already had children, and Noah and his family had begun to rehabilitate
the earth. Noah's planting a vineyard was apparently not the first time
that had been done in the history of the world. The practice of agriculture
was as old as Cain (Genesis 4:2), and the excessive misuse of wine had
probably been previously experienced by men. Although the word drinking in
Matthew 24:38 does not of itself necessarily imply drunkenness, the word for
"eating" in that verse is used of horses or mules eating and pictures a
pre-Flood world filled with animal delights. Noah's culpability is
underscored by the fact that his was not the first case of drunkenness in
the history of the world. The fact that he was the seasoned saint who had
stood his ground against the whole world before the Flood makes his sin all
the more terrible.
Growing grapes led to making a drink from the, and the taste of the wine
led to excess, and the excess led to stupor, which led Noah to lie down;
then the warmth from the wine made him uncover himself (the verb in Genesis
9:21 is not passive "was uncovered" but reflexive "uncovered himself"), and
the stage was fully set for the drama that followed.
In came Ham and saw his naked father. The verb saw means more than a
harmless or accidental look. It indicated that Ham gazed with satisfaction
at his father. Though there was no overt inordinate act on Ham's part with
his father, his unclean thoughts were fed by gazing on his father, and his
act bespoke a complete lack of proper unassuming respect. He then went to
tell his brothers what he had seen.
In contrast, Shem and Japheth went into their father's tent backward, so as
not to see Noah's condition, and they covered his naked body. In this day
of nudity and casualness, disrespect, and insolence on the part of children
toward their parents, the actions of Noah and his sons almost seem trivial,
if not irrelevant. But God did not consider them so, for they indicated
then, as now, that something was wrong within the hearts of those involved.
THE PROPHECY OF NOAH When Noah woke up, he inquired ("knew," verse 24,
means to find out by inquiring) what his younger son had done to him. Then
he pronounced a blessing on Shem and Japheth and a curse, not on Ham, but on
one of Ham's four sons, Canaan (Genesis 10:6). In this point lies the
mistake many people make concerning this prophecy. They think that the
curse was placed on Ham and thereby on African people. The identifications
of Ham's other sons are as follows: Cush --- Ethiopia; Mizraim -- Egypt;
Phut -- Libya. They were the progenitors of the tribes that populated
Africa. However, anyone who thinks about it will recognize that Canaan was
the father of those who occupied Phoenicia and Palestine, the Canaanites.
Canaan's sons (Genesis 10:15-18) were Sidon, inhabitants of the Phoenician
city in Lebanon; Heth, the Hittites, Syria, (Joshua 1:4); Jebusites,
dwellers in the hills around Jerusalem; Amorites, who inhabited the hill
country on both sides of the Jordan; Girgasites, inhabitants of Canaan
(Genesis 15:21); Hivites, who were early inhabitants of Syria and Palestine;
Arkites, dwellers in Lebanon (1 Chronicles 1:15); Sinites, inhabitants of
the Lebanese coastal area; Arvadites, dwellers on an island off the coast of
Syria, 50 miles north of Byblos; Zemarites, who lived in the territory of
Benjamin; and the Hamathites, who lived near the Orontes River. Clearly
none of these were inhabitants of Africa. The Canaanites were wicked
inhabitants of Palestine whom God commanded to be destroyed under Joshua.
The subjugation of these people was the primary fulfillment of Noah's
prediction of servitude. But because the Israelites failed to destroy them
completely when they went into the land, the heathen religion of the
Canaanites was embraced by the Israelites, resulting in the worship of a
kind of Canaanized Yahweh. Phoenician religion also centered around Baal
worship and fertility cults.
The Assyrians captured Phoenician cities in 842 BC. After the fall of
Assyria, the Babylonians controlled the territory, then the Persians, and
then Alexander the Great, who captured the territory in 332 BC. Greek and
Aramaic replaced the Phoenician language, and although the cities continued
to be important until they fell to Moslem invaders in AD 600, as a
distinctive people the Phoenicians were pretty well diluted by the time of
the Roman conquest in 64 BC.
Clearly the curse was placed on Canaan and not on Ham, but the question of
why Canaan was singled out is difficult to answer. Some suggest that since
Ham had already been blessed (Genesis 9:1), he could not have been cursed by
his father; thus the curse had to fall on Canaan. Others point out that
although Canaan apparently had no direct involvement in Ham's actions, Ham's
failure to respect his father was punished by his having a son who would
dishonor him. In other words, Ham was punished in his son. Whatever the
answer, the punishment was clear, and it was from God.
To summarize: the curse on Canaan was from God; it did not include Ham or
3 of his 4 sons (and therefore was not on the Negroes); it was deserved in
its outworking because of the extreme wickedness of the Canaanites; and it
is irrelevant today since it would be difficult, if not impossible, to
identify a Canaanite.

THE NEW TESTAMENT ETHIC

CONCERNING IMPARTIALITY Several important passages in the New Testament
relate God's impartiality toward ethnic issues. Peter recognized that today
God sends the message of salvation through faith in Christ to all men,
regardless of ethnic background (Acts 10:34-35). Thus the believer should
be concerned about getting the gospel to all men without distinction of
racial or national background. The New Testament also reminds us that the
judgments of God are without partiality (Romans 2:11; I Peter 1:17).
Employers are especially warned to treat their employees impartially
(Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 3:25).
In the assembly partiality is outlawed (James 2:1-9). James deals with the
particular problem in the early church of preference being show to those who
had money. They were given seats of honor, whereas poorer people were
shunted to the rear. Although the passage is speaking against partiality
because of economic differences, it also applies to similar instances that
might arise because of racial differences. To reject or to seat in an
obscure place a person who is of a different race than the majority of that
church is not to "have respect to persons" and thus to "commit sin" (verse
9).
The church at Antioch exemplified impartiality. The leaders mentioned in
Acts 13:1 were probably all Jewish believers. One of them, Simeon, had the
nickname Niger, which is Latin for black. It may mean that he was a Jew of
African origin or possibly that he was an African Gentile who was a convert
to Judaism, but he shared equally in the leadership of the church with those
of differing backgrounds.
To sum up: believers are to be impartial in giving out the gospel, in
employer-employee relationships, and in accepting all who come into the
church.
CONCERNING DISTINCTIONS Impartial actions do not necessarily mean
similar actions toward everyone. The New Testament teaching also includes
the principle of distinction. Unity and diversity need not be
contradictory, and the New Testament insists on both within the Body of
Christ. The diversity of spiritual gifts is to create unity within the Body
(Ephesians 4:11-13). Unity of position and possessions in Christ does not
obliterate distinctions of nature or spheres of opportunity (Galatians
3:28). That verse cannot mean that men and women cease to be distinct when
they become Christians; nor does it mean that the Jewish and Gentile peoples
are no longer recognizably distinct. Indeed, although Jews and Gentiles
were members of and workers together in local assemblies, the fact that they
are different people is still noted (I Corinthians 10:32; Galatians 6:16).
When differences in their backgrounds erupted in serious differences of
opinions regarding Christian conduct, the early church sought to bring
harmony among the races by suggesting regulations for conduct (Acts
15:19-20; I Corinthians 9:20-21).
To sum up: distinctions, including racial distinctions, remain even after
salvation. They do not affect spiritual possessions, but they may affect
the kind of spiritual activity (as in the case of men and women) or the
conduct of spiritual living (as in the case of those with different
backgrounds).

CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS AND PRACTICE

CHRISTLIKENESS The pattern and goal of the Christian's life and conduct
is Christlikeness. That can best be understood by a continual reading and
study of the gospels, where Christ is portrayed, and by a Spirit-directed
application of all the principles revealed therein. Perhaps the most
instructive passages in connection with the question of this subject are
those that relate His teachings concerning Samaritans (Luke 9:52; 17:16;
John 4:9,39). Of those passages, undoubtedly the story of the good
Samaritan in Luke 10:30-37 is the capstone. The story was given in answer
to the question "Who is my neighbor?" (10:29). The answer is: the person
who is in need and particularly the one whose path crosses mine, regardless
of economic, political, national, or racial differences.
That phrase whose path crosses mine is important. It is easy to talk about
concern for the needy or the poor without having concern for any particular
needy or poor person. This is not to say that the believer has no
responsibility to those whom he has never seen, but it is to say that
concern for a group can only be genuinely demonstrated by doing something
for one or more in that group.
INVOLVEMENT The Christian should be an involved person. Top priority
should be given to presenting the gospel to all people, for this is our
Lord's command. Doing good to all men, especially to fellow believers, is
also commanded (Galatians 6:10). No individual or nation is condemned for
being wealthy by comparison with others. It is how the wealth is acquired
and the uses to which it is put that concern God. Standing and working
within the law against illegalities and injustices is a Christian duty;
being a political revolutionary is forbidden (I Peter 2:13-15). Every
command that relates believers to other believers is to be obeyed without
racial prejudice. This certainly includes receiving into a local church all
believers who present themselves to that church.
The path of obedience to these commands as they work out in various
practical situations is not always as clear as the commands. Many of the
practical problems Christians face involve more sociological than
theological factors. The believer will not find specific answers in the
Bible to every problem and situation he may face, and he cannot help but be
influenced by sociological factors. For example, we recognize that the New
Testament does not forbid interracial marriage but neither does it command
it.1 Yet the factors involved in raising children of such a marriage may
influence the decision to contract the marriage. And those factors are
different in California, for instance, from what they are in any southern
state.
The Bible does not condemn a man's preferring to belong to one sound church
instead of a different, equally sound one. But it severely condemns
partiality in any group, whatever be the manifestation of it. Class
prejudice is as wrong as racial prejudice.
The question of the gospel and society is tangent to but really beyond the
scope of this subject. Suffice it to say that the principal message of the
New Testament is centered in the death of Christ for our salvation. When
the message is stated it is not stated in terms of the social, cultural, and
other human benefits of the truth (1 Corinthians 15:3-5). We must never
put the cart before the horse in our Christian witness. A.N. Trition has
given a fine summary of the matter: "The Bible is concerned for society,
but there is no such thing as a social gospel. There is social law. There
is also a gospel of salvation in Christ which has far-reaching repercussions
in society when men who have entered into the experience of the gospel go to
live it out. True Christians will seek to grow increasingly like Christ.
We must follow Him 'who went about doing good,' or we are bogus
Christians."2

1. Timothy was born into a home of mixed parentage, his father being a
Gentile and his mother a Jew
(Acts 16:1). Whereas anthropologists generally do not use the word
race to refer to Jews and Gentiles,
Webster's Third New International Dictionary defines race as "a class
or kind of individuals with
common characteristics, interests, appearances, or habits as if derived
from a common ancestor" and
gives the Jewish race as an example.
2. A.N. Triton, Whose World? (London: InterVarsity, 1970), 182-83.

Please read the Old Testament... it should guide you in the right direction.

and curse doesn't exist. But eurocentrism does.

Originally posted by Aether
Boils down to eurocentrism

IMo it boils down to karma.If you hurt people in this life eg saddam hussain,bush then prepare to be born as a black\arab\gypsie in your next life.ITs all based on karma:what goes around comes around.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WHY CAPITALISM NEEDS RACISM

The social pyramid of capitalism is black at the base and white at the top. In South Africa it was legally instituted this way. Elsewhere slavery has been outlawed for a century, but still the richest are the whitest and the poorest the blackest.

Racism suits capitalism. It's an important way of justifying economic discrimination. It's no accident that wherever you find racism someone seems to be taking advantage of it to make money.

In 1492 Columbus colonised the Americas. Here, he said, "all of Christianity will do business''. The indigenous people were enslaved and massacred where they resisted. According to Columbus, they were only useful "for ordering and putting to work, farming and doing everything necessary, building houses and learning to wear clothes and use our customs''.

In Australia the British did the same. Australia was declared Terra Nullius, land belonging to nobody, nevermind the hundreds of Aboriginal tribes. The British needed another colony to get rid of prisoners and later as a source of raw materials. No indigenous population was going to get in the way.

Now, in place of the early colonialism, we have imperialism. The US freely walks into Third World countries to save the people from themselves. No one is enslaved by law, but their wages are kept to a dollar a day, as in the Philippines and Brazil, to make sure they don't go anywhere.

Spreading racism also helps capitalism get away with superexploiting migrants, and racial and ethnic minorities at home. It helps Australian business to preserve myths like, "Those wogs don't mind dirty, hard work, and they'll be glad to get any wages at all.'' And it's another way of dividing worker from worker. When unemployment is on the rise it's always handy to blame ``the wogs'' for taking jobs away from ``real Australians''.

LINK:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please tell me what your post is suppose to accomplish? The book is right infront you my man.... take one week out of your busy life and read it. Then we can have a real bible study, but I don't think 5 million Yisraelites around the world can be wrong. Learn my friend and before attacking me, support your claim. The only person who used the words IGNORANT is you... so before showing your lack of intelligence.... THINK BEFORE WRITING.

By the way, I am not here to get in a pee pee contest with you about something you obviously have no experience in. Before you decide to name call my friend, present supportive evidence that your claim is factual, I believed I presented you with many resources, and inside is one real big one called the bible. Read the Old Testament..its a good start

First off I AM NOT YOUR MAN!!!
I have read the bible from Genesis to Revelations and in my readings I have come to the conclusion that NOT EVERY THING IN THE BIBLE IS CORRECT. And I really don’t want to have a bible study with someone as closed minded as you. Why don’t you give supporting evidence that your claims are factual? You did not present any sources other than YOUR brain washed translation of the Bible. You have showed that you have accepted what Races Europeans have been trying to do for centuries which is twist the truth so THEY can feel superior to everyone else.


[edit on 7-6-2005 by Killak420]

Originally posted by Xenopathic_Investigator
and curse doesn't exist. But eurocentrism does.

well, something exists, otherwise why would so many people be so agitated? This is a very heated conversation. Folks are talking about the Bible, its contents, and slinging mud at one another. That will get us nowhere.

Can we all agree on one thing... today is very new day in history. At least in the USA anyone, of any origin, skin color, race, creed, sexual identity can go as far as their talents and dreams will take them.

Thank God for that!

Xeno,

You raise an interesting question that there are no easy answers to. I won't get into the religious aspects of it because it's been covered over and over by people with far more formal theological and anthropological education than myself and they can't even agree. I can say, however, that this is not something unique to any one race, people, or religion. At some points in time, one may get picked on more than the other, but otherwise, on a large enough timeline, everyone gets their share of the hatred.

Humans are, by nature, Xenophobic. We dislike that which is different, and sometimes even that which is the similar, but acts or thinks differently. Consider the situation between China and Japan, if you will. For the most part, neither country can stand the other, and while the knolwedgable observer can tell the physical differences between the two, both their appearance, language, cultures, and histories are quite similar to the outsider. Yet a bitter hatred has lasted between them for ages. Consider the Sunni vs. the Shiite Muslims, who are even of the same land, language, appearance, and basically, religion, with only a few subtle differences in the way some of the Qu'ran passages are interpreted. Yet they have had bloodier conflicts for centuries.

I could go on with the examples for days on end without stopping, but the point is that, given a large enough timeline, worldwide, everyone is someone else's demon. It all boils down to what's the popular enemy at the time.

Now, perhaps the real question is "Why do we need an enemy?"

I cannot answer this for other countries, but in America, we do best when we have an enemy we can point at and say "This is the reason everything is wrong with the world". Our whole country has been founded on this. First it was the English, Spanish, and French. Later it was the Native Americans, then the Mexicans, then the Germans, then Japan, then the Russians, then China, then (briefly) the Canadians, then Middle-Easterners...

As long as we can point a finger, we can take the focus off our own problems, and our own differences, and work together to fight a common enemy. America was founded on war, and has thrived repeatedly because of it. Left to ourselves, institutions like the KKK and skinheads start egging on the differences between Americans and brew hatred within the country. People start picking away at the federal, state, and city governments. They get bored, and need something to fight. We're a lot like Scotland in that respect.

But give us an enemy to point at, and suddenly all races and religions in America start walking hand-in-hand, happily producing, in order to fight off Enemy X.

Now, in America, I'd say that blacks and gypsies are far from demonized. Black culture is mainstream at the moment. The previous white icons of cool, such as Tom Cruise or Harvey Keitel, cannot hold a candle to Samuel Jackson, or James Earl Jones, or that guy who plays President Palmer on "24". Gypsies... I don't even think most Americans know what a Gypsy is, outside of "someone who rides around in a colorful wagon and wears a bandana on their head". While ignorance usually breeds bigotry towards someone, Gypsies are unknown enough in America that most wouldn't even know who to hate, or why. It'd be like trying to agree with someone who says "I hate Snarflebloggers". There's some vague impression of what a blogger is, but what the hell is a Snarfle?

Arabs... well... I don't know that they are exactly demonized at the moment. Fortunately, our oil-thirst is enough that we've got a barely decent idea of who's who in the Middle East. If you say "Arab", most are going to think of Saudi Arabia, or the Unite Arab Emirates. And while this does conjure a stereotypical image of a guy in robes, with a checkered headband, a collection of Caddies, and oil fields in the background, at least it doesn't call to mind the image of a gun-toting, bomb-swallowing, bloodshot-eyed terrorist...which is unfortunately what the word "Muslim" has become to many of our more ignorant citizens. Which is sad, really, since every Muslim I've ever personally known has been more educated and tolerant than Christians.

Because of one very stupid sect of an otherwise great religion, right now, the current popular attitude is that the Muslims are out to try and destroy America. Which is a pity, because those of us reasonable enough to recognize the difference, and stand up and say "Wait! Listen to Reason" are downed out by the droning buzz of hornets getting ready to sting the crap out of whatever poor sap threw rocks at their nest. And if they can't find the person who threw the rock, they'll just fly around stinging anything close by.

Anyway, I hope this answers the question. It's not so much that any one people are made pariahs of for a particular reason, it's just that humans have always done it, to someone, and probably always will.

Your treatise on racism is absolute textbook along party lines and counts on the typical textbook default setting of being able to play through unchallanged by using racism to neuter others to silence. It doesnt work with me. I dont give makeovers like Rikki Lake for hurt feelings.
Racism, Sexism or any other isms are today often used to allow one group to play through unchallanged while automatically silencing others. These are great political tools against unthinking uninformed peoples conditioned by having radio ,public education and television.peer groups do their thinking for them.

I have news for you Ghost rider. Racism exists in all peoples...everywhere. The standard default setting that it is a white capitalistic western phenomonon is pure bunk and often used by others to play the "victimization card" in order to silence other dissent.
Pay close attention to what is happening in the Sudan. Ever heard of it?? This doesnt seem to be in your long treatise. How about Zimbabwe. You dont seem wont to mention this ..Why ?? It is pure racism...in both areas...whether under a religious guise or not ...it is racism. In Zimbabwe they are seizing the productive farms from people and distributing it to non productive sectors of the populace resulting in impending starvation among the populace. I am waiting for the standard "victimization " to occur with the UN begging other nations to contribute carte blanche or get huge guilt verdicts heaped on ones head for not giving freely to make up for poor economic decisions....in otherwords as guilt trip based on entitlements.
Ghost rider...do you know what a Gaigin is..sometimes spelled Gaijin??
How about a barbarian...the Chinese version.
How about a Goyim??? or Goi for short.
REmember Ghost rider...racism only exists in western men and only among white peoples.....right......
Watch politics in America. You are going to see more racism take place as it is one of the few venues left for which certain political partys can gaurantee votes when properly stroking a certain sector of the populace. A necessary thing at election time. To bad the voters never seem to catch on. You must keep racism alive to gaurantee votes...sexism too et al.

My point is all these isms are weak, wimpy, and standard victimization politics. I have seen enough of them in my lifetime. I see the same pattern in our local union at election time or contract time to play upon the emotions of a unsuspecting unthinking sector of the membership for gauranteed votes. This local union line follows very closely the socialist propaganda technique of good guy , bad guy , victimization/entitlement. It gets olde when you can spot it over and over....even in nationwide politics.

Now....what you do not say or tell the public ...or others in the "victimization" buisness...is that of all the nations on this earth ..the United States has made more and further strides in racial equality ..than any other nation in the world. Our economics alone has changed the way people think and believe about race..in a way which is not happening in other places in the world for which you are wont to speak. Economics is the great equalizer...not education..per say ..or politics...but economics..the fair distribution of choices in life through economics.
This is a huge quantum leap that most socialist countrys have not been able to achieve...while wrecking the productive sectors of their economies...ie...Zimbabwe.

I will never buy into the Racism dogma that you preach...it does however work well among people who have developed cottage industries in this racism and the ability to live well off of it and misue Racism or any other ism to gaurantee votes.
Not all of us Ghost soldier are stuck in a time warp just waiting idly for you to invoke the standard racism setting .others before you have worn it out to the point of tiresome and wimpy.

Thanks,
Orangetom

I got a question. Why is there no mention of North or South America in the bible or the Native American tribes that inhabited these lands before them. Why is it we have a book with a rich history or European, Jewish, Chirstian, Greek, Roman, African but there are not any detailed in depth books expanding on the history of these native americans. Were they all destroyed when the people from the east came to this world and took it over? I have no native american friends to discuss this with so it is hard for me to figure anything out.