Am I of cursed lineage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nanotwerp
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nanotwerp

Guest
When studying the first books of the Bible, I’ve noticed that most every early descendant of Ham turned out evil and corrupted…

For example: Ham didn’t cover Noah’s nakedness and was cursed
Canaanites were mostly deemed evil
Nimrod was a corrupted leader
Egyptians enslaving the early Israelites

I don’t get this; is Ham’s whole lineage cursed? The descendants of both of the brothers of Ham contributed greatly to the early Biblical history, while the descendants of Ham didn’t.
 
I doubt that the millions of descendants of Ham alive today are cursed. That would be a very strange way for God to run things!
 
Good question! I think that Jesus kind of replaced the ot and leveled the playing field so to speak, making salvation available to everyone. Just my opinion though, would love to hear others!
 
:mad: :mad:

You’re wrong in saying that the children of Ham didn’t contribute greatly to Biblical History. According to the Table of Nations, the Canaanites are the spawn of Ham.

The Canaanites include many of those who were *bitter *enemies of Israel: The Hittites, The Amorites, the Philistines, and the accursed Egyptians.

:onpatrol:
Israel allied with a sub-group of the Hittites known as the Gibeonites. These Gideonites became Israel’s slaves, in accordance with the Generational curse of Ham, and under God the Father’s protection, in accordance with Israel’s (rash) oath, and in addition to God’s love for all who seek shelter under his wings.

Joshua chapters 9 and 10— The Great Deception

Joshua 11 ----- There was not a city that made peace with the Children of Israel, except the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon; they took all in battle. :blackeye:

2 Samuel 21 – THERE IS BLOOD GUILT On Saul and his family, because Saul tried to exterminate the Gibeonites.
:onpatrol:
I wouldn’t say that Ham’s descendants weren’t destined to be evil. The bible verse in question suggests that Ham’s descendants are destined to be slaves.

God the Father accepted slavery during the times of the Old Testament, to the extent where he commanded Moses to create law defending the dignity of slaves.​

:coffeeread:
Early Christianity practiced slavery.
vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_05051888_in-plurimis_en.html
Corinthians 7:17-24
Ephesians 6:5-9

Masters were wisely counseled by the Apostle to treat their slaves with consideration in return for their services: “And you, masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatenings; knowing that the Lord both of them and you is in heaven, and there is not respect of persons with Him.”(14) They were also told to remember that the slave had no reason to regret his lot, seeing that he is “the freeman of the Lord,” nor the freeman, seeing that he is “the bondman of Christ,”(15) to feel proud, and to give his commands with haughtiness. It was impressed upon masters that they ought to recognize in their slaves their fellow men, and respect them accordingly, recognizing that by nature they were not different from themselves, that by religion and in relation to the majesty of their common Lord all were equal. These precepts, so well calculated to introduce harmony among the various parts of domestic society, were practised by the Apostles themselves.

:coffeeread:
The Vatican says that slavery done in malice is BAD!

vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_05051888_in-plurimis_en.html
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON THE
ABOLITION OF SLAVERY
To the Bishops of Brazil.
  1. In the presence of so much suffering, the condition of slavery, in which a considerable part of the great human family has been sunk in squalor and affliction now for many centuries, is deeply to be deplored; for the system is one which is wholly opposed to that which was originally ordained by God and by nature. The Supreme Author of all things so decreed that man should exercise a sort of royal dominion over beasts and cattle and fish and fowl, but never that men should exercise a like dominion over their fellow men. As St. Augustine puts it: “Having created man a reasonable being, and after His own likeness, God wished that he should rule only over the brute creation; that he should be the master, not of men, but of beasts.” From this it follows that “the state of slavery is rightly regarded as a penalty upon the sinner; thus, the word slave does not occur in the Bible until the just man Noe branded with it the sin of his son. It was sin, therefore, which deserved this name; it was not natural.”(4)
You believe that you are of cursed lineage? You are a descendant of Ham???

Have no fear, you won’t be punished for the sins of your evil ancestors, but for your own personal sin! You are your own soul! Think about Ruth, Christ’s great-great Grandmother! A Moabite!

And Caleb, the Kenizzite, with Edomite blood in his veins! Despite being a descendant of the careless, jealous older brother, he was one of the only two spies who trusted in the Lord!

Don’t forget about Mose’s Family! They were non-Israelites!!
Zipporah, who saved Mose’s life via circumcision!
Father and brother in-laws, Jethro, who gave Moses good advice, and Hobab, who helped guide Israel through the wilderness!

You can still be a saint!
 
Nanotwerp said:
When studying the first books of the Bible, I’ve noticed that most every early descendant of Ham turned out evil and corrupted…

For example: Ham didn’t cover Noah’s nakedness and was cursed
Canaanites were mostly deemed evil
Nimrod was a corrupted leader
Egyptians enslaving the early Israelites

I don’t get this; is Ham’s whole lineage cursed? The descendants of both of the brothers of Ham contributed greatly to the early Biblical history, while the descendants of Ham didn’t.
Click to expand...
I have to back up a level or two. You motivated me to pull out my Strong’s concordance and look up the instances and meanings of “curse.” “Cursed” occurs before the word “curse” occurs. Like so many words in the Bible, it is virtually assumed that the reader knows what the word means. Like when Adam and Eve are sent out of the garden, a cherubim is stationed there to guard the path to the tree of life – so it is assumed that the reader knows what a cherubim is.

The first thing that is cursed is the serpent who tempted Eve in the garden. Then, because of the transgression, Eve is cursed by implicitly with the pain of childbearing. And, then the ground is cursed so that Adam will have to live by the sweat of his brow to make a living.

So, those cursings seem to have a perpetual and irrevocable application. Even in Isaiah 44:27 God recalls to Israel in the Babylonian captivity that “Your first father sinned.”

The word curse/cursed occurs in the New Testament and I won’t even get into that here or now.

I’m winging it now: the idea of curse in scripture seems to be a self-imposed designation indicating evil from personal guilt, but there is the sense of inherited guilt from primeval sin, the sin of Adam. so, I guess you could throw in Ham there and be guilty for his vaguely stated sin, too (the Jewish commentary says that the ancient readers/listeners would have understood the nature of his sin, which is why Genesis says so little about it).

Speaking for myself, I’m more worried and concerned about my personal sin. I look at Christ as the way, the truth, and the life, the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world, etc. and that, in the reckoning, is our sure hope.
 
Faxero said:
:mad: :mad:

You’re wrong in saying that the children of Ham didn’t contribute greatly to Biblical History. According to the Table of Nations, the Canaanites are the spawn of Ham.

The Canaanites include many of those who were *bitter *enemies of Israel: The Hittites, The Amorites, the Philistines, and the accursed Egyptians.

:onpatrol:
Israel allied with a sub-group of the Hittites known as the Gibeonites. These Gideonites became Israel’s slaves, in accordance with the Generational curse of Ham, and under God the Father’s protection, in accordance with Israel’s (rash) oath, and in addition to God’s love for all who seek shelter under his wings.

Joshua chapters 9 and 10— The Great Deception

Joshua 11 ----- There was not a city that made peace with the Children of Israel, except the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon; they took all in battle. :blackeye:

2 Samuel 21 – THERE IS BLOOD GUILT On Saul and his family, because Saul tried to exterminate the Gibeonites.
:onpatrol:
I wouldn’t say that Ham’s descendants weren’t destined to be evil. The bible verse in question suggests that Ham’s descendants are destined to be slaves.

God the Father accepted slavery during the times of the Old Testament, to the extent where he commanded Moses to create law defending the dignity of slaves.​

:coffeeread:
Early Christianity practiced slavery.
vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_05051888_in-plurimis_en.html
Corinthians 7:17-24
Ephesians 6:5-9

Masters were wisely counseled by the Apostle to treat their slaves with consideration in return for their services: “And you, masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatenings; knowing that the Lord both of them and you is in heaven, and there is not respect of persons with Him.”(14) They were also told to remember that the slave had no reason to regret his lot, seeing that he is “the freeman of the Lord,” nor the freeman, seeing that he is “the bondman of Christ,”(15) to feel proud, and to give his commands with haughtiness. It was impressed upon masters that they ought to recognize in their slaves their fellow men, and respect them accordingly, recognizing that by nature they were not different from themselves, that by religion and in relation to the majesty of their common Lord all were equal. These precepts, so well calculated to introduce harmony among the various parts of domestic society, were practised by the Apostles themselves.

:coffeeread:
The Vatican says that slavery done in malice is BAD!

vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_05051888_in-plurimis_en.html
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON THE
ABOLITION OF SLAVERY
To the Bishops of Brazil.
  1. In the presence of so much suffering, the condition of slavery, in which a considerable part of the great human family has been sunk in squalor and affliction now for many centuries, is deeply to be deplored; for the system is one which is wholly opposed to that which was originally ordained by God and by nature. The Supreme Author of all things so decreed that man should exercise a sort of royal dominion over beasts and cattle and fish and fowl, but never that men should exercise a like dominion over their fellow men. As St. Augustine puts it: “Having created man a reasonable being, and after His own likeness, God wished that he should rule only over the brute creation; that he should be the master, not of men, but of beasts.” From this it follows that “the state of slavery is rightly regarded as a penalty upon the sinner; thus, the word slave does not occur in the Bible until the just man Noe branded with it the sin of his son. It was sin, therefore, which deserved this name; it was not natural.”(4)
You believe that you are of cursed lineage? You are a descendant of Ham???

Have no fear, you won’t be punished for the sins of your evil ancestors, but for your own personal sin! You are your own soul! Think about Ruth, Christ’s great-great Grandmother! A Moabite!

And Caleb, the Kenizzite, with Edomite blood in his veins! Despite being a descendant of the careless, jealous older brother, he was one of the only two spies who trusted in the Lord!

Don’t forget about Mose’s Family! They were non-Israelites!!
Zipporah, who saved Mose’s life via circumcision!
Father and brother in-laws, Jethro, who gave Moses good advice, and Hobab, who helped guide Israel through the wilderness!

You can still be a saint!
Click to expand...
Is being destined to be a slave a good thing…?
 
Nanotwerp said:
When studying the first books of the Bible, I’ve noticed that most every early descendant of Ham turned out evil and corrupted…

For example: Ham didn’t cover Noah’s nakedness and was cursed
Canaanites were mostly deemed evil
Nimrod was a corrupted leader
Egyptians enslaving the early Israelites

I don’t get this; is Ham’s whole lineage cursed? The descendants of both of the brothers of Ham contributed greatly to the early Biblical history, while the descendants of Ham didn’t.
Click to expand...
First of all, what makes you think you are a Hamite?

And ad for the descendants of Ham not contributing to Biblical history, well, I would have thought Egypt was pretty significant.
 
Nanotwerp said:
Because I’m black.
Click to expand...
That hardly means anything. What’s the basis for such a correlation?

From what I’ve read, the only people who appear to like this correlation are white supremacists and slaveholders. I don’t think that’s the kind of company you want to identify with.
 
porthos11 said:
That hardly means anything. What’s the basis for such a correlation?

From what I’ve read, the only people who appear to like this correlation are white supremacists and slaveholders. I don’t think that’s the kind of company you want to identify with.
Click to expand...
The ‘correlation’ comes from the fact that my ancestors from West Africa originally came from Ethiopia, or somewhere near. What white supremacists believe is that black people are the descendants of Canaan, which I do not believe, since the Canaanites were the Phoenicians.
 
Nanotwerp said:
When studying the first books of the Bible, I’ve noticed that most every early descendant of Ham turned out evil and corrupted…

For example: Ham didn’t cover Noah’s nakedness and was cursed
Canaanites were mostly deemed evil
Nimrod was a corrupted leader
Egyptians enslaving the early Israelites

I don’t get this; is Ham’s whole lineage cursed? The descendants of both of the brothers of Ham contributed greatly to the early Biblical history, while the descendants of Ham didn’t.
Click to expand...
There are obviously parts of the bible that are not to be taken literally.
And you’re reading some of them.
 
Nanotwerp said:
The ‘correlation’ comes from the fact that my ancestors from West Africa originally came from Ethiopia, or somewhere near. What white supremacists believe is that black people are the descendants of Canaan, which I do not believe, since the Canaanites were the Phoenicians.
Click to expand...
So why don’t you read the passage again and tell us who it was who was cursed? You will find that it was not Ham.
 
porthos11 said:
So why don’t you read the passage again and tell us who it was who was cursed? You will find that it was not Ham.
Click to expand...
I understand that it was Canaan who was cursed, but it seems like the other descendants of Ham turned out evil, too.
 
Nanotwerp said:
I understand that it was Canaan who was cursed, but it seems like the other descendants of Ham turned out evil, too.
Click to expand...
But you’ve gotten off the hook, so to speak. There was no curse on Ham himself, therefore, you’re in the clear.

But all that said, even if the curse was indeed on Ham, or if you were of Phoenecian descent, that does not mean the curse comes down all the way to you. I’m of Filipino origin and I don’t know who my Noahide ancestor was; it could easily be Ham or even Canaan and I don’t care.

I don’t worry about it simply because of this: I am baptized. When I was baptized, I was baptized into the death of Christ and became a new creation (Romans 6:3-4). When we are in Christ, the justified are reckoned as children of Abraham (Galatians 3:7-9), heirs to the promise God made Abraham that all nations will be blessed in him. When I was baptized, who I was was washed away. I arose transformed as an adopted son of God, and therefore part of the covenant family of Jesus.

This means the baptized are descendants of Abraham, and therefore of Shem, regardless of what their physical lineage was when they were born. All curses were borne by Christ and nailed to the Cross (Galatians 3:13).

This is why Pope Pius the XI could rightfully say: “Spiritually, we are all Semites.” He was not talking just out of solidarity with the Jews. He was stating a real theological truth.
 
Nanotwerp said:
And how so?
Click to expand...
How so? There are stories, songs, poetry…there is metaphor, allegory, parable…much of it, especially in the Hebrew scriptures is not to be taken literally.
That’s why it’s useful to study the bible with guidance, rather than on your own. So someone knowledgeable can tell you who wrote something, what their style was, why they wrote it, and what it was intended to convey.
 
MacQ said:
How so? There are stories, songs, poetry…there is metaphor, allegory, parable…much of it, especially in the Hebrew scriptures is not to be taken literally.
That’s why it’s useful to study the bible with guidance, rather than on your own. So someone knowledgeable can tell you who wrote something, what their style was, why they wrote it, and what it was intended to convey.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that Canaan wasn’t cursed at all, or that the reason of being cursed isn’t to be taken literal, which is what I already know?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top