Curse of Ham/Canaan

[Romiettah]

Hi there :)

I hope I am not repeating questions, but I couldn't find this asked in my search.

I am currently reading in Genesis, and am curious about the Curse of Canaan found in chapter 9. It says that Ham is the one who betrayed Noah, his father, so why did Noah curse Canaan, who is Ham's son?

If anyone can help me with that, I'd be appreciative. I know it's not detrimental to the meaning of life, but it will kill the curiosity *grin*

[Vanhin]

Hi there :)

I hope I am not repeating questions, but I couldn't find this asked in my search.

I am currently reading in Genesis, and am curious about the Curse of Canaan found in chapter 9. It says that Ham is the one who betrayed Noah, his father, so why did Noah curse Canaan, who is Ham's son?

If anyone can help me with that, I'd be appreciative. I know it's not detrimental to the meaning of life, but it will kill the curiosity *grin*

Here is one is one idea as to why Noah cursed Canaan from a Wikipedia article:

The source of the "curse of Ham" interpretation comes from Genesis 9:20-27, which states the story of Noah's family, soon after the flood:

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.

Ham is not directly cursed for his actions; instead the curse falls upon his youngest son Canaan. The curse seems unusually severe for merely observing Noah unclothed. An explanation sometimes offered notes that the phrase "expose father's nakedness" is used several times elsewhere in the Pentateuch as a euphemism for having sexual relations with one's mother, suggesting a different crime.

Leviticus 20:11

If a man has sexual intercourse with his father’s wife, he has exposed his father’s nakedness.

Leviticus 18:7-8

You must not expose your father’s nakedness by having sexual intercourse with your mother. She is your mother; you must not have intercourse with her. 8 You must not have sexual intercourse with your father’s wife; she is your father’s nakedness.

But even so, the punishment seems pretty severe. Ham's wife was Egyptus, who is a descendant of Cain, but it is unclear if the curse had anything to do with that. Here's what the Book of Abraham says about it.

21 Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.

22 From this descent sprang all the Egyptians, and thus the blood of the Canaanites was preserved in the land.

23 The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden;

24 When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land.

25 Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.

26 Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.

27 Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry; (Abr. 1:21-27)

For many years some leaders of the Church believed this to be the reason for the priesthood ban on those of African descent. See this artile from FAIRLDS, Blacks and the priesthood.

Vanhin

[Romiettah]

Vanhin,

Wow, thank you for all that information! I appreciate the time you've taken to help me understand it a little better :)

Tracey

[puf_the_majic_dragon]

Here is one is one idea as to why Noah cursed Canaan from a Wikipedia article:

But even so, the punishment seems pretty severe. Ham's wife was Egyptus, who is a descendant of Cain, but it is unclear if the curse had anything to do with that. Here's what the Book of Abraham says about it.

21 Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.

22 From this descent sprang all the Egyptians, and thus the blood of the Canaanites was preserved in the land.

23 The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden;

24 When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land.

25 Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.

26 Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.

27 Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry; (Abr. 1:21-27)

For many years some leaders of the Church believed this to be the reason for the priesthood ban on those of African descent. See this artile from FAIRLDS, Blacks and the priesthood.

Vanhin

Hey Vanhin... Scripturally I can't find anything that indicates that Egyptus was a descendant of Cain - the Guide to the Scriptures which is available at scriptures.lds.org says this, but its citations don't clearly state that this is the case - it's more of an inference. Apparently it's a doctrinal inference, however... I'd really like to know who wrote the Guide to the Scriptures, that would help my understanding a bit I think.

As regards Ham and Noah, Genesis 9 verse 24 states "And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him." Emphasis added. This seems to clearly state that Ham didn't just see something, but had performed some action relating to seeing his father's nakedness. If there was sexual sin involved, I don't think it's a heavy punishment at all. Throughout the book of Leviticus and throughout the scriptures, sexual sin carries some of the greatest punishments - thieves, robbers, and even murderers could be excommunicated and banished from the country, but adulterers were to be stoned to death!

Why Noah cursed Canaan, Ham's son, is a curiosity. Canaan was the fourth son of Ham, and Noah singled him out specifically for the curse. I don't see any other references in scripture to explain this, but I think it's reasonable to assume that Canaan had committed his own sins and may have been party to the act that Ham had committed against Noah. For Noah to single Canaan out as a direct consequence of Ham's actions suggests Canaan was involved in some way.

[Vanhin]

Hey Vanhin... Scripturally I can't find anything that indicates that Egyptus was a descendant of Cain - the Guide to the Scriptures which is available at scriptures.lds.org says this, but its citations don't clearly state that this is the case - it's more of an inference. Apparently it's a doctrinal inference, however... I'd really like to know who wrote the Guide to the Scriptures, that would help my understanding a bit I think.

That's a good point. Which further makes it less clear that the curse and mark of Cain was at play. And on top of that it appears that Ham and Egyptus had a daughter named Egyptus, who actually was the one that discovered the land of Egypt; and it was her son who is Pharoah...

As regards Ham and Noah, Genesis 9 verse 24 states "And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him." Emphasis added. This seems to clearly state that Ham didn't just see something, but had performed some action relating to seeing his father's nakedness. If there was sexual sin involved, I don't think it's a heavy punishment at all. Throughout the book of Leviticus and throughout the scriptures, sexual sin carries some of the greatest punishments - thieves, robbers, and even murderers could be excommunicated and banished from the country, but adulterers were to be stoned to death!

Why Noah cursed Canaan, Ham's son, is a curiosity. Canaan was the fourth son of Ham, and Noah singled him out specifically for the curse. I don't see any other references in scripture to explain this, but I think it's reasonable to assume that Canaan had committed his own sins and may have been party to the act that Ham had committed against Noah. For Noah to single Canaan out as a direct consequence of Ham's actions suggests Canaan was involved in some way.

Well that's the part that made it seem so severe; that Canaan and his posterity would be cursed for something Ham and possibly Canaan did. Based on Abr. 1:24 this was the race that preserved the curse, so it affected more than just Canaan; unless we are actually talking about the curse/mark of Cain. We're clearly missing some info. But honestly, the Lord has done things like that before, so I'm not surprised. It's just that we don't know for sure why.

Some very interesting thoughts Puff. Thanks. :)

Regards,

Vanhin

[puf_the_majic_dragon]

Some very interesting thoughts Puff. Thanks. :)

Regards,

Vanhin

Thanks :) Though they weren't very well organized... I usually try to research and organize my answers better before I respond, but last night was just an off night in general (I'm going to have nightmares about counting CDs...). You're right about one thing, we really don't have enough information to draw any real conclusions. But a safe one to draw, I think, would be that the curse was punishment for some sort of sexual sin and it's a reminder of how little tolerance the Lord has for such things.

Oh... Another random thought... We've been talking about this as if God was the one who cursed Canaan, but it was Noah who voiced the curse. Perhaps in a moment of anger he used the priesthood in a way that might be considered "over doing it" much in the same manner as Moses was commanded to speak to the rock, but struck it instead (he was still able to perform the miracle even though he was directly disobeying a commandment of God.... ). The example of Moses I think demonstrates that priesthood power can be misused by imperfect people. So Noah, in his anger, may have used the sealing power to curse Ham and Canaan in a manner that hindsight might say was a bit extreme.

On another side note, from what I was reading last night, it does seem very evident that the curse placed upon Canaan was two-fold: that him and his posterity would have dark skin, and that him and his posterity would never be permitted to hold the priesthood. According to the Bible Dictionary, Canaan and his posterity are those who settled Africa after the flood. This seems to explain why only those of African descent were not allowed to hold the priesthood while others of "dark complexion" (Native Americans, Asians, Pacific Islanders etc) were allowed to have the priesthood. If I'm right in my conclusions, the priesthood having been witheld from blacks was a direct result of Noah's curse.

Again, probably not very organized, I'm probably mostly just rambling, but it was a long night at work... Hopefully there's something useful in there. If not, I'll try again after I get some sleep :)

[lilered]

I think the observation that is made concerning the Lord having little tolerance for sexual sin is dead on. I have often thought that the main reasons for this is that sexual sin/adultry interferes with the family as the center to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.as well and/or the creation of life.

[Ron Beron]

Hey Vanhin... Scripturally I can't find anything that indicates that Egyptus was a descendant of Cain - the Guide to the Scriptures which is available at scriptures.lds.org says this, but its citations don't clearly state that this is the case - it's more of an inference. Apparently it's a doctrinal inference, however... I'd really like to know who wrote the Guide to the Scriptures, that would help my understanding a bit I think.

More specifically, it is believed that Cain founded the tribal group of Kenites which were known for their metal workings. In Genesis 4:22 there is a reference to this.

22 And Zillah, she also bare Tubal-cain, an ainstructer of every bartificer in cbrass and iron: and the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.

There is zero connection with him and the rise of Egyptian civilization. There is some evidence that the Sumerians influenced the Egyptian in religion and culture.

Secondly, any mark placed on Cain was not done to condemn or curse him, but to protect him. The curse would be on those who sought to take his life.

[KosherXMorg]

Here is one is one idea as to why Noah cursed Canaan from a Wikipedia article:

But even so, the punishment seems pretty severe. Ham's wife was Egyptus, who is a descendant of Cain, but it is unclear if the curse had anything to do with that. Here's what the Book of Abraham says about it.

21 Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.

22 From this descent sprang all the Egyptians, and thus the blood of the Canaanites was preserved in the land.

23 The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden;

24 When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land.

25 Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.

26 Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.

27 Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry; (Abr. 1:21-27)

For many years some leaders of the Church believed this to be the reason for the priesthood ban on those of African descent. See this artile from FAIRLDS, Blacks and the priesthood.

Vanhin

What this verse shows me is a conclusion a reached previously from other scriptures... it wasn't all of Ham's lineage that was cursed just those that came through Canaan. Pharaoh tried to claim the priesthood through Ham, indicating Ham had it, but was denied because he came through Canaan. Brigham et al were wrong in excluding African blacks from the priesthood, it was the Canaanites (who would later mix with the Arabs and Persians) who had the blood of Canaan in their bodies. If anyone falls under the curse it would be those that reside in the lands surrounding Israel... the Islamic nations.

[Hemidakota]

Here is one is one idea as to why Noah cursed Canaan from a Wikipedia article:

But even so, the punishment seems pretty severe. Ham's wife was Egyptus, who is a descendant of Cain, but it is unclear if the curse had anything to do with that. Here's what the Book of Abraham says about it.

21 Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.

22 From this descent sprang all the Egyptians, and thus the blood of the Canaanites was preserved in the land.

23 The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden;

24 When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land.

25 Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.

26 Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.

27 Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry; (Abr. 1:21-27)

For many years some leaders of the Church believed this to be the reason for the priesthood ban on those of African descent. See this artile from FAIRLDS, Blacks and the priesthood.

Vanhin

Interesting statement: "4 When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land. "

How could the daughter of Ham discover a land being under water?

[SMG]

Perhaps this is out of left field... but this made me think of how the Nile river delta floods. May it referred to the annual floods that were essential to raising food crops along its banks?

[WillowTheWhisp]

That's what I've always thought it meant SMG.

[Hemidakota]

I was thinking, it was something that was tall enough to stand out of the water to physically see it was not part of the sea. Historically, there is not enough data to figure out, what it was and how long did it take for Ham children to migrate from the lower part of Turkey to that area. There are some who believe it was the Sphinx.

[WillowTheWhisp]

If the land was first discovered by Egyptus when it was under water how could she have seen the Sphynx sticking up out of the water? The Sphynx was made by men and made when the land had been lived in by people, long after it was first discovered.

The Nile floods naturally each year and leaves very fertile sediment behind which makes the area along the banks incredibly fertile. So she discovered it during the flood season and they settled there and cultivated the fertile land. That's how it has always seemed to me.

[Hemidakota]

That was my thoughts also. The claims are based on the actual water erosions marks left on the body.

[WillowTheWhisp]

I have seen an investigation about that - a suggestion that the area was once prone to heavier rainfall than now.

A couple of years ago we were up in the Atlas mountains and found fossils of sea creatures. Just to add an extra bit of spice to the discussion.

[Hemidakota]

We have Whale and Shark tooths in the Bakersfield area. Making me to believe, the central valley of California was part of the Ocean.

[VisionOfLehi]

I had a lesson on the whole Ham/Canaan thing, but I'll be darned if I was paying attention

Nevertheless, this is what the Institute Manual teaches:

(4-20) Genesis 9:20–27. Why Did Noah Curse Canaan

in This Event When He Was Not Even Present?

The account of Noah’s “nakedness” and the role

his sons played in the event is a puzzling one,

especially the part in which Noah awakens and

pronounces a curse upon Canaan, the son of Ham

(see Genesis 10:6), who does not even seem to be

present at the time.

Most members of the Church are aware that a

priesthood garment, symbolic of the covenants made

in the temple, is worn by those who have participated

in the endowment ceremony in the temple. This

garment is a representation of the coat of skins

made by the Lord for Adam and Eve after the Fall

(see Genesis 3:21; Moses 4:27). The idea of a garment

made of skins that signified that one had power in

the priesthood is found in several ancient writings.

Hugh Nibley discussed some of these ancient

writings and their implications for the passage

in Genesis:

“Nimrod claimed his kingship on the ground

of victory over his enemies [see Genesis 10:8–10;

Reading 4-21]; his priesthood, however, he claimed

by virtue of possessing ‘the garment of Adam.’ The

Talmud assures us that it was by virtue of owning

this garment that Nimrod was able to claim power

to rule over the whole earth, and that he sat in his

tower while men came and worshiped him. The

Apocryphal writers, Jewish and Christian, have a

good deal to say about this garment. To quote one

of them: ‘the garments of skin which God made for

Adam and his wife when they went out of the garden

and were given after the death of Adam . . . to Enoch’;

hence they passed to Methuselah, and then to Noah,

from whom Ham stole them as the people were

leaving the ark. Ham’s grandson Nimrod obtained

them from his father Cush. As for the legitimate

inheritance of this clothing, a very old fragment

recently discovered says that Michael ‘disrobed

Enoch of his earthly garments, and put on him his

angelic clothing,’ taking him into the presence of

God. . . .

“Incidentally the story of the stolen garment as

told by the rabbis, including the great Eleazer, calls

for an entirely different rendering of the strange story

in Genesis [9] from the version in our King James

Bible. They seemed to think that the ’erwath of

Genesis [9:22] did not mean ‘nakedness’ at all, but

should be given its primary root meaning of ‘skin

covering.’ Read thus, we are to understand that Ham

took the garment of his father while he was sleeping

and showed it to his brethren, Shem and Japheth,

who took a pattern or copy of it (salmah) or else a

woven garment like it (simlah) which they put upon

their own shoulders, returning the skin garment to

their father. Upon awaking, Noah recognized the

priesthood of two sons but cursed the son who tried

to rob him of his garment.” (Lehi in the Desert and the

World of Jaredites, pp. 160–62.)

Therefore, although Ham himself had the right to

the priesthood, Canaan, his son, did not. Ham had

married Egyptus, a descendant of Cain (Abraham

1:21–24), and so his sons were denied the priesthood.

[Guest TraceyBout]

Online timer for website Online Timer