Posted by COUNTER PSYCH [Bibleman] on October 24, 1999 at 00:39:08 {f8eW6hUOe2MSSTtTA17sslyACFuF8c}:
In Reply to: JW's and Blacks - Bergman posted by Kent on October 23, 1999 at 07:40:15:
Okay, I wasn't going to do this, but since there were so many quotes I thought I'd just put in my "counter psychology" as far as the Biblical issues pertaining to the "curse" of blacks in relation to the curse of Caanan. Just to have a counter argument.
As noted above, some believe that Caanan's curse involved his being given black skin and so the Christian culture have thought of blacks are being cursed. But is tha what the Bible really says? My examination says, NO!
What I believe actually happened was that Ham in fact, was the first son to have a child and his name was Caanan. Noah had been influenced by wine that might have contained a substance later used by the prostitute culture to cause sustained erection and orgasm. It was what was put into the wine given to Lot by his daughters who thus could have sex with him while he was unconscious and get pregant. Ham walked in on his father during this kind of orgasmic-epileptic seizure, being naked and having thrown the covers off himself and that's what made Ham run out to tell his brothers about it. He was not concerned about the simply nudity of his father. But this was "nakedness" which is associated with sexual arousal.
His brothers were concerned but didn't want to embarrass their father and likely rebuked Ham and told him to go in and cover up their father. Ham didn't accept the rebuke and refused, thinking this would force his brothers to witness what he had, thus he would not have been the only one to witness his father's shame. So Shem and Japheth devised a way to back into the tent without looking at their father's sexual excitement and voer him up.
When Noah came to, he found out about this. And since Ham was already probably bragging about having the oldest grandson, suggesting he would be the first to have a helper and a servant in his tent, Noah punished Ham by cursing his already-born first son, Caanan, requiring him to serve in the literal tents of Shem and Japheth as their servants, thus depriving Ham of the advantages of having this first-born child as well as a male to serve in his tent.
And that's all it was. It just meant that Ham would be punished by having his son be the servant and slave of his older brothers, likely related to Ham's bragging about this earlier. This was a specific and direct reward for Shem and Japheth's prudence and Ham's indescretion. Not his indescription of any sexual nature by looking upon his father, but by refusing to cover him up after he was told to do so, showing gross disrespect.
And that was the END of the curse! It did not have anything to do with later generations.
How do we know?
Because the children of Ham were great nations and never, ever were in a position of servitude or slavery to the degree of the Jews, Shem's children.
Remember, the Egyptians were a "black" culture. They were descendants of Ham. The Jews were in slavery to them for 215 years! So Shem's children actually became slaves to Ham's children.
Furthermore, the Caananites themselves were friends to the Jews. Unfortunately, too friendly since they led them into false worship. But the Phoenecians were Caananites. They were the Tyrians and the Sidonians. And the king of Tyre, as we know, is the one who helped to build the temple since they had more expertise in building than the Jews did.
So one must ask, when were the Caananites in particular ever slaves to Japheth's children or Shem's, compared to the other way around. Even the Babylonian culture was started by Nimrod who was black.
So when you think of how the sons of Ham did in later years, and look at the Egyptians, who were a black culture, you don't get the idea that there was too much of a curse going on to the descendants of Ham, or with the Caananites who continued to prosper, especially Tyre and Sidon.
Furthermore, Melchizedek was a Caananite, and he was a king and high priest of the True God. To him Abraham bowed and gave tithing (1/10th of his belongings), and thus showed that the Jews ultimately would be subjective to a king like Melchizedek.
So even symbolically, with God's people in particular, their subjection to Melchizedek as the high priest and to the taunting of Egyptian Ishmael and later the Egyptians themselves, shows a much stronger history of Ham dominating Shem than the other way around.
So the question is, where is the strength of the curse? The Egyptians are considered the first world power in the march of nations dominanting Israel. And there is a strong question whether even the Babylonians were still considered a "Hamitic" culture, even in later times though it is claimed they were "Semitic." The Babylonians were called the "black-headed ones" and "Chaldean" means "copper colored". So like the Egyptians, the Babylonians were not white but people of "color" and originally a Hamitic culture. In fact, their land is often called the "Land of KUSH".
As a final note, though, it is of curiousity that often the WTS does note the Hamitic vs Japhetic vs Semitic backgrounds when talking about these nations which is a reflection of their "race consciousness."
For instance, in the "Aid" book under "Persia, Persians" it says "A land and people regularly mentioned in association with the Medes, both in the Bible and in secular history. The Medes and Persians evidently were related people of the ancient Aryan (Iranian) tribes..."
It also points out how the Egyptians were of "Hamitic" descent. So "Aryan" consciousness was always a subtext for the Society, if only subconsciously. That is, it clearly saw the "competition" or breakdown of the races in terms of "Aryan", "Semitic" or "Hamitic."
None the less, there doesn't seem to be a clear indication that the Caananites, who included the Phonecians, Tyrians and Sidonians who did very well and had diplomatic ties with Israel and were great shipbuilders and a great sea people, or the Hamitic cultures in general which would be early Babylonia and in particular Egypt, an incredibly advanced and artistic black culture which directly subjugated the Semitic children of Abraham, suffered any great deal because of this "curse" of Noah, which could have been completely fulfilled with Caanan himself, being the servant in the literal "tents" of Shem and Japheth.
Furthermore, it would seem that the Bible does refer to the Ethiopians as a people apart from the Caananites and we might presume that these are the true descendants of those tribes settling in Africa, some of whom were the ancestors of many African-Americans. So there is als a problem with the direct CANAANITE-AFRICAN connection, though generally, and interestingly, the HAMITIC-BLACK connection is effectively made.
But if we are to consider the curse upon the children of Ham as being degenerate and inferior, as the Judeo-Christian cultures do, then you must include all the children of Ham and that includes the Babylonians, the Egyptians, and the Phoenecians, peoples who were definitely culturally advanced in ancient times, even influencing Greek and Aryan cultures, which didn't developed great civilizations until much later.
Well, there you have it. My counter-curse 2 cents.
As a final note. God made all men to be magnificent, that includes the extremely beautiful and smart white race. If a person's god-given magnificence isn't observed from a distance, however, then that doesn't mean they don't have that magnificence. It just means we need to get acquainted with them to find what beauty God has put into every human and every culture.
Viola!
I wasn't going to do this because the "race" issue is too touchy and too complex for most discussions. But this was just to give some counter-issue thoughts about the "curse" on Caanan and how a false teaching has caused the oppression of blacks by whites who feel perhaps since they were cursed that this is what the blacks deserve in some way and that they were thus born to serve the white race, who should always be "kings" over the other races.
The "new order" will be a bit different, however.
The 144,000 will be made up of all peoples and tongues and nations, all working in love and harmony with one another. Which we know is possible because, in general, let's admit it, the witnesses have shown they can have racial harmony among its members and they are known and proud of that racial harmony.
As a black, I've always felt warm and welcomed in the witness environment and my own racial philosophy, based upon the witnesses, has made me and my brothers basically "color-blind" which I think is also a positive influence of the witnesses.
Nuff said...
Cheers,
Bibleman