Mormons teach Ham was cursed with black skin

Elijah the Tishbite

Well-known member
20 Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded to plant a vineyard. 21 When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent. 22 Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father's nakedness and told his two brothers outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their shoulders; then they walked in backward and covered their father's nakedness. Their faces were turned the other way so that they would not see their father's nakedness.
24 When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said,
"Cursed be Canaan!
The lowest of slaves
will he be to his brothers."
26 He also said,
"Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem!
May Canaan be the slave of Shem.
27 May God extend the territory of Japheth;
may Japheth live in the tents of Shem,
and may Canaan be his slave."


It was Canaan that received the curse and it wasn't black skin since his ancestors weren't black


According to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 (verses 15–19), Canaan was the ancestor of the tribes who originally occupied the ancient Land of Canaan: all the territory from Sidon or Hamath in the north to Gaza in the southwest and Lasha in the southeast. This territory, known as the Levant, is roughly the areas of modern-day Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, western Jordan, and western Syria.

Ham
"See CAIN, EGYPTUS, NEGROES, PRE-EXISTENCE, PRIESTHOOD. Through Ham (a name meaning black) "the blood of the Canaanites was preserved" through the flood, he having married Egyptus, a descendant of Cain. (Abra. 1:20-27.) Ham was cursed, apparently for marrying into the forbidden lineage, and the effects of the curse passed to his son, Canaan. (Gen. 9:25.) Ham's descendants include the Negroes, who originally were barred from holding the priesthood but have been able to do." Mormon doctrine Bruce R McConkie
 
What is wrong with Mormonism is that Egypyus was not around durning Noah's life
`Noah did have a covenant with God, it was the rainbow

Abraham had a covenant with God, it was circumcision

Moses had a covenant with God it was the Sabbath

David had a covenant with God it was through him was to come the Messiah
 
Isaiah 44:24 KJV 24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Malachi 2:10

10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?” KJV
 
Several Christians are here to expose the false teachings as a warning to others. And many intelligent people are trapped in Mormonism: lawyers, doctors, professors, etc.
 
20 Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded to plant a vineyard. 21 When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent. 22 Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father's nakedness and told his two brothers outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their shoulders; then they walked in backward and covered their father's nakedness. Their faces were turned the other way so that they would not see their father's nakedness.
24 When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said,
"Cursed be Canaan!
The lowest of slaves
will he be to his brothers."
26 He also said,
"Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem!
May Canaan be the slave of Shem.
27 May God extend the territory of Japheth;
may Japheth live in the tents of Shem,
and may Canaan be his slave."


It was Canaan that received the curse and it wasn't black skin since his ancestors weren't black


According to the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 (verses 15–19), Canaan was the ancestor of the tribes who originally occupied the ancient Land of Canaan: all the territory from Sidon or Hamath in the north to Gaza in the southwest and Lasha in the southeast. This territory, known as the Levant, is roughly the areas of modern-day Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, western Jordan, and western Syria.

Ham
"See CAIN, EGYPTUS, NEGROES, PRE-EXISTENCE, PRIESTHOOD. Through Ham (a name meaning black) "the blood of the Canaanites was preserved" through the flood, he having married Egyptus, a descendant of Cain. (Abra. 1:20-27.) Ham was cursed, apparently for marrying into the forbidden lineage, and the effects of the curse passed to his son, Canaan. (Gen. 9:25.) Ham's descendants include the Negroes, who originally were barred from holding the priesthood but have been able to do." Mormon doctrine Bruce R McConkie
Wow! where did you find that anti mormon source.... he was not black, but he married against his fathers wishes and the curse was passed on through his future line of decent that they would not have the Priesthood...


Abraham 1

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 aorder 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;
 
White Supremacists;

Mormons taught that Ham's wife and descendants were black.

Descendants of Cain Through the Flood
In Joseph Smith's History of the Church, we read that "the negroes" are the "sons of Cain" (vol. 4, p. 501). Apostle Bruce R. McConkie explains the curse put on Cain as follows:

Though he was a rebel and an associate of Lucifer in pre-existence, and though he was a liar from the beginning whose name was Perdition, Cain managed to attain the privilege of mortal birth.... he came out in open rebellion, fought God, worshiped Lucifer, and slew Abel....

As a result of his rebellion, Cain was cursed with a dark skin; he became the father of the Negroes, and those spirits who are not worthy to receive the priesthood are born through his lineage. He became the first mortal to be cursed as a son of perdition. As a result of his mortal birth he is assured of a tangible body of flesh and bones to eternity, a fact which will enable him to rule over Satan (Mormon Doctrine, 1958, p. 102).

In the "Book of Moses," a revelation given to Joseph Smith in December 1830, it is stated that the "children of Canaan" were black: "For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people" (Pearl of Great Price, Book of Moses 7:8).

Brigham Young declared that the flat nose and black skin were part of the mark put upon the descendants of Cain: "Cain slew his brother... and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin ..." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 290).

Mormon leaders taught that it was Ham's descendants who were "cursed as to the priesthood" after the flood. They claimed that Ham married a black woman named Egyptus, and that the curse was continued "through Ham's wife." Bruce R. McConkie said that "Noah's son Ham married Egyptus, a descendant of Cain, thus preserving the Negro lineage through the flood" (Mormon Doctrine, 1958, p. 477).

 
Several Christians are here to expose the false teachings as a warning to others. And many intelligent people are trapped in Mormonism: lawyers, doctors, professors, etc.
These "intelligent" people still have no answer for the disobedience and the fall as being a good thing.
They claimed that Ham married a black woman named Egyptus, and that the curse was continued "through Ham's wife."
Gen 6 puts a strange spin on that.
 
White Supremacists;

Mormons taught that Ham's wife and descendants were black.

Descendants of Cain Through the Flood
In Joseph Smith's History of the Church, we read that "the negroes" are the "sons of Cain" (vol. 4, p. 501). Apostle Bruce R. McConkie explains the curse put on Cain as follows:

Though he was a rebel and an associate of Lucifer in pre-existence, and though he was a liar from the beginning whose name was Perdition, Cain managed to attain the privilege of mortal birth.... he came out in open rebellion, fought God, worshiped Lucifer, and slew Abel....

As a result of his rebellion, Cain was cursed with a dark skin; he became the father of the Negroes, and those spirits who are not worthy to receive the priesthood are born through his lineage. He became the first mortal to be cursed as a son of perdition. As a result of his mortal birth he is assured of a tangible body of flesh and bones to eternity, a fact which will enable him to rule over Satan (Mormon Doctrine, 1958, p. 102).

In the "Book of Moses," a revelation given to Joseph Smith in December 1830, it is stated that the "children of Canaan" were black: "For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people" (Pearl of Great Price, Book of Moses 7:8).

Brigham Young declared that the flat nose and black skin were part of the mark put upon the descendants of Cain: "Cain slew his brother... and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin ..." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 290).

Mormon leaders taught that it was Ham's descendants who were "cursed as to the priesthood" after the flood. They claimed that Ham married a black woman named Egyptus, and that the curse was continued "through Ham's wife." Bruce R. McConkie said that "Noah's son Ham married Egyptus, a descendant of Cain, thus preserving the Negro lineage through the flood" (Mormon Doctrine, 1958, p. 477).

Early members of the Church brought this culturally-conditioned belief in the "curse of Ham" with them into Mormonism​

Prior to 1978, the doctrinal folklore that blacks are the descendants of Cain and Ham and that they carry the “mark of Cain” was a belief among some members of the Church, and is occasionally heard even today. The dubious “folk doctrine” in question is no longer even relevant, since it was used to incorrectly explain and justify a Church policy that was reversed over thirty years ago. Prior to the 1978 revelation, however, the Saints used the “mark of Cain” to explain the policy of denying priesthood ordination to those of African descent—a policy for which no revelatory prophetic explanation was ever actually given.

Early members of the Church were, for the most part, converts from Protestant sects. It is understandable that they naturally brought this culturally-conditioned belief in the "curse of Ham" with them into Mormonism. Many modern members of the Church, for instance, are unaware that Joseph Smith ordained at least one African-American man to the priesthood: Elijah Abel.

At some point during Brigham Young's administration, the priesthood ban was initiated. No revelation, if there ever was one, was published, although many throughout the history of the Church have assumed that the reason for the ban must be that blacks were the cursed seed of Cain, and therefore not allowed the priesthood (usually stemming from a misreading of Abraham 1). The correct answer as to why the ban was put into place is: we don't know. For further information on the priesthood ban, see Blacks and the priesthood.

Bruce R. McConkie in 1978, after the revelation granting blacks the priesthood:

It is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet. Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young…or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world. We get our truth and our light line upon line and precept upon precept. We have now had added a new flood of intelligence and light on this particular subject, and it erases all the darkness and all the views and all the thoughts of the past. They don’t matter any more. It doesn’t make a particle of difference what anybody ever said about the Negro matter before the first day of June of this year. It is a new day and a new arrangement, and the Lord has now given the revelation that sheds light out into the world on this subject. [11]
Prior to this statement by Elder Bruce R. McConkie in 1978, the doctrinal folklore that blacks are the descendants of Cain and Ham and that they carry the “mark of Cain” was a belief among some members of the Church, and is occasionally heard even today. The dubious “folk doctrine” in question is no longer even relevant, since it was used to incorrectly explain and justify a Church policy that was reversed over thirty years ago. Prior to the 1978 revelation, however, the Saints used the “mark of Cain” to explain the policy of denying priesthood ordination to those of African descent—a policy for which no revelation or prophetic explanation was ever actually given.

The speculation was that in the premortal existence, certain spirits were set aside to come to Earth through a lineage that was cursed and marked, first by Cain’s murder of his brother and covenant with Satan (Genesis 4:11–15; Moses 5:23–25, Moses 5:36–40), and then again later by Ham’s offense against his father Noah. The reasons why this lineage was set apart weren’t clear, but it was speculated they were somehow less valiant than their premortal brethren during the war in heaven. In this life, then, the holy priesthood was to be withheld from all who had had any trace of that lineage.

As neat and coherent as that scenario might seem, the scriptures typically cited in its support cannot logically be interpreted this way unless one starts with the priesthood ban itself and then works backward, looking for scriptures to support a predetermined belief.

Fairmormon.
 
So who really Gives a rosy rodent's posterior WHAT "Mormons", their idiot thologians, or their con-man "prophet" think or say about anything???
Yep! exactly my thinking when those who wish to bury their head in the sand and ignore light and knowledge from God...
 
So Ham never married an Egyptian
Never said he did....
According to the Bible, Egypt was founded by Mizraim, another son of Ham, and Canaan’s brother (which may be why Abraham 1:21 connects Egypt with the Canaanites). Egyptians, both ancient and modern, were not black Africans, but Northern Africans, culturally related to peoples of the Middle East. Fairmormon.
 
Never said he did....
According to the Bible, Egypt was founded by Mizraim, another son of Ham, and Canaan’s brother (which may be why Abraham 1:21 connects Egypt with the Canaanites). Egyptians, both ancient and modern, were not black Africans, but Northern Africans, culturally related to peoples of the Middle East. Fairmormon.
As I said the Egyptians never existed until after the flood, and we know who came thru the flood. and Canaan went to the land of Canaan which wasn't black :)
 
As I said the Egyptians never existed until after the flood, and we know who came thru the flood. and Canaan went to the land of Canaan which wasn't black :)
Again, so what, we believe the same... do you have a source that says otherwise...?? Please re-read my post above...
 
Back
Top