Texas Public School Bible Classes Teach Races Come from Noah’s Sons, B

[Canuckistani]

So does the Bible actually teach that black people are descendents of Ham, or is that an interpretation that's been added since then?

(Honest question.)

-k

You don't recall the passage? "Lo, and I say unto you, the descendants of Ham shall be as burned by the sun, and shall be as slaves to the descendants of Japheth. Yeah, those be the pure ones, the delight of the Lord, and their skin be white as the raiment of angels. They shall be given dominion over the descendants of Ham and Shem. Yeah, even the Lord's chosen people shall be forsaken for Japeth's sons, and a mighty burnt offering shall be made of them to please the Lawd. For I am a jealous Lawd, and a fickle one."

[TimG]

the descendants of Ham shall be as burned by the sun

Burned by the sun? That usually results in pink to red skin - not black.

[kimmy]

So where did the "white people" come from....honest question.

Well, from Japheth, according to Texas Public Schools. I'm just curious to know if these theories of racial origins are actually stated in the Bible or if it's an interpretation that has been added more recently to support racism and slavery.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

Well, from Japheth, according to Texas Public Schools. I'm just curious to know if these theories of racial origins are actually stated in the Bible or if it's an interpretation that has been added more recently to support racism and slavery.

Racism and slavery need no such support.....simple economics provided that. I am pretty sure that Texas public and private schools include the study of anthropology.

[Canuckistani]

Burned by the sun? That usually results in pink to red skin - not black.

Ah, sorry, I was using an unauthorized translation. It should read "as daubed in mud and baked by the sun." The rest is pretty well accurate tho, huh?

[kimmy]

Racism and slavery need no such support.....simple economics provided that. I am pretty sure that Texas public and private schools include the study of anthropology.

Sharkman's response indicated that he thinks it is perfectly normal for a Bible class to be teaching students that black people are the descendents of Noah's cursed son. Once again, I'm curious to know if that view is officially supported in the Bible (in which case Sharkman is correct) or if it's an interpretation of the Noah story that's not specified in the Bible (in which case Sharkman is incorrect.)

-k

[Canuckistani]

Pretty easy to look up:

Nevertheless, many Christian denominations strongly disagree with such interpretations due to the fact that in the original biblical text, Ham himself is not cursed and race or skin color is never mentioned, and therefore, out of context in the story of Genesis 9.

wiki

It seems to have been meant as an excuse to holocaust the Canaanites, as Canaan was a descendant of Ham.

Canaan cursed by Noah

Genesis 9:20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:

21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.

22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.

23 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.

24 ¶ And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

26 And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Ham

[bush_cheney2004]

Sharkman's response indicated that he thinks it is perfectly normal for a Bible class to be teaching students that black people are the descendents of Noah's cursed son. Once again, I'm curious to know if that view is officially supported in the Bible...

Noah's "cursed" son was Canaan, not all of his sons. So right away the "teachings" fall apart.

[Canuckistani]

Noah's son was Ham, Canaan was his son. For some reason Noah cursed Canaan for what Ham did. And all Ham did was see his dad nekkid, 'cause daddy was passed out drunk. Noah should have cursed himself, but you know how drunks are.

Also, other places it says Ham was the second son, not the youngest, so they couldn't even keep that straight. To many editors, not enough reporters who were on scene would be my take.

Edited January 27, 2013 by Canuckistani

[kimmy]

It seems to have been meant as an excuse to holocaust the Canaanites, as Canaan was a descendant of Ham.

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Curse_of_Ham

See, this is exactly what I'm confused about. Nothing in there seems to indicate that the curse involved "blackness", and nothing really indicates black people as a group are descendents of Ham at all. Unless there's more elsewhere?

Also, the whole story is stupid. If Noah was pissed at Ham, why did he curse Caanan? Why just Caanan when Ham had 3 other sons? How does that make any sense? I can only assume that Caanan's reaction when learning of this curse bestowed upon him was "Me? WTF? What did I do?!"

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

Also, the whole story is stupid. If Noah was pissed at Ham, why did he curse Caanan? Why just Caanan when Ham had 3 other sons? How does that make any sense? I can only assume that Caanan's reaction when learning of this curse bestowed upon him was "Me? WTF? What did I do?!"

Still, I am curious why there is not equivalent interest in the biblical ancestors of "white people" in this context. What is the unbalanced agenda ?

[Canuckistani]

See, this is exactly what I'm confused about. Nothing in there seems to indicate that the curse involved "blackness", and nothing really indicates black people as a group are descendents of Ham at all. Unless there's more elsewhere?

Also, the whole story is stupid. If Noah was pissed at Ham, why did he curse Caanan? Why just Caanan when Ham had 3 other sons? How does that make any sense? I can only assume that Caanan's reaction when learning of this curse bestowed upon him was "Me? WTF? What did I do?!"

-k

As the wiki article says, many people agree with you that it makes no sense. And again, politics got involved with the writer just looking for an excuse for the holocausting of the Canaanites. The bible is full of stuff like that, including the New Testament. The book of John is deemed to be so anti-semitic because by the time it was written, Jews were actively helping to out and prosecute Christians along with the Romans. Hence Paul's trip to Damascus, and his conversion thereon.

[Canuckistani]

These are classes taught in public schools - a required part of the curriculum. This stuff should be taught in church. If schools want to teach religion, it should be comparative religion, not proselytizing. Don't see how this passes the separation of church and state:

In 2007 the Texas Legislature passed a law encouraging the state’s public schools to teach about the influence of the Bible in history and literature. Schools can do that either by weaving such instruction into existing social studies and literature courses, or they can create full courses about the Bible. Today the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund released a report, authored by a religious studies professor at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, that examines what students are learning in the 57 school districts and three charter schools that teach Bible courses. Examples from Texas public schools:

• Instructional material in two school districts teach that racial diversity today can be traced back to Noah’s sons, a long-discredited claim that has been a foundational component of some forms of racism.
  
• Religious bias is common, with most courses taught from a Protestant — often a conservative Protestant — perspective. One course, for example, assumes Christians will at some point be “raptured.” Materials include a Venn diagram showing the pros and cons of theories that posit the rapture before the returning Jesus’ 1,000-year reign and those that place it afterward. In many courses, the perspectives of Roman Catholics, Orthodox Christians and Jews are often left out.
  
• Anti-Jewish bias — intentional or not — is not uncommon. Some courses even portray Judaism as a flawed and incomplete religion that has been replaced by Christianity.
  
• Many courses suggest or openly claim that the Bible is literally true. “The Bible is the written word of God,” students are told in one PowerPoint presentation. Some courses go so far as to suggest that the Bible can be used to verify events in history. One district, for example, teaches students that the Bible’s historical claims are largely beyond question by listing biblical events side by side with historical developments from around the globe.
  
• Course materials in numerous classes are designed to evangelize rather than provide an objective study of the Bible’s influence. A book in one district makes its purpose clear in the preface: “May this study be of value to you. May you fully come to believe that ‘Jesus is the Christ, the son of God.’ And may you have ‘life in His name.’”
  

• A number of courses teach students that the Bible proves Earth is just 6,000 years old.
  
• Students are taught that the United States is a Christian nation founded on the Christian biblical principles taught in their classrooms.
  
• Academic rigor is so poor that many courses rely mostly on memorization of Bible verses and factoids from Bible stories rather than teaching students how to analyze what they are studying. One district relies heavily on Bible cartoons from Hanna-Barbera for its high school class. Students in another district spend two days watching what lesson plans describe a “the historic documentary Ancient Aliens,” which presents “a new interpretation of angelic beings described as extraterrestrials.”
  

• 
  

[Sleipnir]

Canaan cursed by Noah

Genesis 9:20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:

21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.

22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.

23 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.

24 ¶ And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

26 And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

From my understanding, Noah drank without clothes on and fell asleep in a tent. One of his son found him naked in a tent and told his two other brothers. The two other brothers took clothes and walk backward in the tent to throw it on Noah's naked body. Noah woke up and was upset that he was covered?

Am I missing something here?

Edited January 27, 2013 by Sleipnir

[Canuckistani]

From my understanding, Noah drank without clothes on and fell asleep in a tent. One of his son found him naked in a tent and told his two other brothers. The two other brothers took clothes and walk backward in the tent to throw it on Noah's naked body. Noah woke up and was upset that he was covered?

Am I missing something here?

Yes. He lauded the sons who covered him, but cursed the son of the son who saw him naked. The bible is full of crap like this - different times, different people. We can't really understand them, nor should be take moral guidance from them.

[Sleipnir]

Yes. He lauded the sons who covered him, but cursed the son of the son who saw him naked.

Wouldn't it be Noah's fault for drinking in the nude and falling asleep (presumably drunk) where people can find him?

....who even drinks in the nude? Beside Noah of course...

[kimmy]

Still, I am curious why there is not equivalent interest in the biblical ancestors of "white people" in this context. What is the unbalanced agenda ?

Perhaps the idea that black people are descendents of Ham is a touchy subject because the "curse of Ham" theory has been used as a justification for slavery. The idea that black skin was inflicted on Ham's descendants as a punishment is in itself incredibly offensive; the idea that the Bible itself endorses the enslavement of black skinned people as a result of this ancient curse is doubly so.

If people had concluded that white people were the descendents of the bad son and were doomed to eternal servitude as a result, I think white people would be quite up in arms as well.

-k

[Canuckistani]

Wouldn't it be Noah's fault for drinking in the nude and falling asleep (presumably drunk) where people can find him?

....who even drinks in the nude? Beside Noah of course...

Me.

But as I said, we shouldn't apply our standards to those old timey folks. Trying to make sense of the bible will just mess with your head.

[WIP]

Yes. He lauded the sons who covered him, but cursed the son of the son who saw him naked. The bible is full of crap like this - different times, different people. We can't really understand them, nor should be take moral guidance from them.

I don't want to think about it, but according to some Biblical and Talmudic scholars, there is more to the story than what was put down on paper. It is likely that some sort of twisted, sexual misconduct occurred that could not be mentioned specifically, but would have been understood by those who lived during the time the book was written.

[WWWTT]

Well, from Japheth, according to Texas Public Schools. I'm just curious to know if these theories of racial origins are actually stated in the Bible or if it's an interpretation that has been added more recently to support racism and slavery.

-k

In my opinion you are right.

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

Racism and slavery need no such support.....simple economics provided that. I am pretty sure that Texas public and private schools include the study of anthropology.

LOL!

Like "simple economics" was not racialy motivated.

I think you actually believe yourself.

WWWTT

[g_bambino]

They didn't even attempt to explain how those floating "thingies" suddenly appear in the water...suddenly, they were just there!

The conclusion, "Whatever caused it," regarding how life started on earth is not a well-founded assumption.

Shifting the goalposts doesn't actually win you an argument. We weren't talking about some people in some documentary you have a memory of seeing once, nor were we talking specifically about theories on the origins of life. You made a broad comment about what's taught in "secular classrooms" and I rebutted in the same broad manner.

If you want to focus on the origin of life and the teaching thereof, can you highlight what exactly any secular, elementary or high school curricula specifically says on the matter?

By that, I guess you don't know what being "brave" really means.

Please explain.

[g_bambino]

We're talking about the beginning, Sleipnir.

Actually, we weren't until you brought it up. The thread started with a post regarding what was being taught in some Texas classrooms about human races. (Even in the Bible, that subject (depending on your personal interpretation of the Bible) doesn't arise until sometime after the beginning.)

[bush_cheney2004]

Like "simple economics" was not racialy motivated.

I think you actually believe yourself.

The institutions of slavery and indentured servitude were motivated by economics, not racism.

[betsy]

So does the Bible actually teach that black people are descendents of Ham, or is that an interpretation that's been added since then?

(Honest question.) -k

Ham's descendants

Main article: Hamitic

• Cush, son of Ham. The Empire of Kush to the south of Egypt is known from at least 1970 BC, but this name has also been associated by some with the Kassites who inhabited the Zagros area of Mesopotamia, the Sumerian city of Kish.^{[citation needed]}
  
  • Seba, son of Cush. Has been connected with both Yemen and Ethiopia, with much confusion with Sheba below. (The Shibboleth-like division amongst the Sabaeans into Sheba and Seba is acknowledged elsewhere, for example in Psalm 72, leading scholars to suspect that this is not a mistaken duplication of the same name, but a genuine historical division. The significance of this division is not yet completely understood, though it may simply reflect which side of the sea each was on.)^{[citation needed]}
    
  • Havilah, son of Cush. Usually considered to be a part of the Arabian peninsula near the Red Sea.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • Sabtah, son of Cush. Sometimes connected with Hadhramis (their ancient capital being Saubatha) in eastern Yemen.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • Raamah, son of Cush. Has been connected with Rhammanitae mentioned by Strabo in the southwest Arabian peninsula, and with an Arabian city of Regmah at the head of Persian Gulf.^{[citation needed]}
    
    • Sheba, son of Raamah. Has been connected with Sabaeans and peoples on either side of the narrowest part of the Red Sea, in both Yemen/South Arabia, and Eritrea/Ethiopia/Somalia.^{[citation needed]}
      
    • Dedan, son of Raamah. Apparently a region of the Tabuk Province of Saudi Arabia.^{[citation needed]}
      

    [*]Sabtechah, son of Cush. Possibly Sabaiticum Ostium, Sabaeans living around a specific harbour in Eritrea.^{[citation needed]}

    [*]Nimrod, son of Cush, also identified as a mighty hunter before God, and the founder of ancient Babel, Akkad, Sumer, and possibly cities in Assyria. The Hebrew wording of Genesis 10:11 has led to some ambiguity as to whether Asshur here is the son of Shem or a city built by Nimrod; either interpretation can be found in various modern versions.^{[citation needed]}

  [*]Mizraim, son of Ham. Mizraim is a name for Upper and Lower Egypt and literally translates as Ta-Wy in Ancient Egyptian ("The Two Lands"). The -aim in Mizraim represents dual number. Arabic-speaking modern Egyptians refer to their country as Miṣr.

  • Ludim, offspring of Mizraim. Sometimes considered a scribal error for Lubim, a reference to the Lebou of Eastern Libya.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • Anamim, offspring of Mizraim. There is a reference in an Assyrian inscription from Sargon II's time to Anami, a tribe located in Cyrene, Libya.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • Lehabim, offspring of Mizraim. Identification uncertain, possibly Libya.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • Naphtuhim, offspring of Mizraim. Has been connected with Na-Ptah, the Egyptian form of Memphis.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • Pathrusim, offspring of Mizraim. Possibly connected with Egyptian word Pa-To-Ris meaning southerners.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • Casluhim ("out of whom came Philistim").(Genesis 10:14, 1Chronicles 1:12)
    
  • Caphtorim, offspring of Mizraim, associated with Caphtor in northeast Egypt near Philistia.(Genesis 10:14, 1Chronicles 1:12)
    

  [*]Phut, son of Ham. Ancient authorities are fairly universal in identifying Phut with the Libyans (Lebu and Pitu), the earliest neighbors of Egypt to the west. (Although more recent theories have tried to connect Phut with Phoenicia, or the currently unidentified Land of Punt.)^{[citation needed]}

  [*]Canaan, son of Ham. This is known to be the name of a nation and people who settled the Eastern shore of the Mediterranean in what is now called Israel and Lebanon and Syria.

  • Sidon, firstborn son of Canaan, and name one of the oldest city-states on the Phoenician coast.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • Heth, son of Canaan, considered ancestor of "Hittites", a people of Canaan, possibly connected with Hatti, a powerful entity in Anatolia.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • "the Jebusite", offspring of Canaan, a tribe that lived around Jerusalem, that was formerly known as Jebus according to the Books of Chronicles.(1Chronicles 11:4)
    
  • "the Amorite", offspring of Canaan, a people living between the Jordan and Euphrates rivers by at least 2000 BC, known as Amurru to the Akkadians and Egyptians.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • "the Girgasites", offspring of Canaan
    
  • "the Hivite", offspring of Canaan
    
  • "the Arkite", offspring of Canaan, probably city-state of Arqa in Phoenicia.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • "the Sinite", offspring of Canaan, possibly connected with the Wilderness of Sin, or the Sinn river in Syria.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • "the Arvadite", offspring of Canaan, refers to the Phoenician city-state of Arwad, now; inhabited island in Syria.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • "the Zemarite", offspring of Canaan, refers to the Phoenician city-state of Zemar.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • "the Hamathite", offspring of Canaan, refers to Syrian city of Hamath.^{[citation needed]}
    
  • 
    

Africans were thus anciently understood to be the sons of Ham, particularly his descendant Cush, as Cushites are referred to throughout scripture as being the inhabitants of East Africa, and they and the Yoruba still trace their ancestry through Ham today. Beginning in the 9th century with the Jewish grammarian Judah ibn Quraysh, a relationship between the Semitic and Cushitic languages was seen; modern linguists group these two families, along with the Egyptian, Berber, Chadic, and Omotic language groups into the larger Afro-Asiatic language family. In addition, languages in the southern half of Africa are now seen as belonging to several distinct families independent of the Afro-Asiatic group. Some now discarded Hamitic theories have become viewed as racist; in particular a theory proposed in the 19th century by Speke, that the Tutsi were supposedly Hamitic and thus inherently superior.^[

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Sons_of_Noah

Edited January 28, 2013 by betsy