As this unbiblical story goes, after Noah and his sons exited the ark. In Genesis 9:20-24 Canaan was cursed by Noah because of something that Ham did to Noah. Remember this is something Ham did and not Canaan.
There are many rumors of what Ham did and we may never know for sure. All that is important is that something happened. Therefore because of this, Canaan and all his descendants are forever cursed by having black skin, were sent to live in Africa, and forever to be slaves.
If this doesn't sound totally racist I do not know what is.
Now, is there anyone that can show me in the bible where the Curse of Ham is something different then what I stated?
I didn't think so.
So where did this version of the story come from then?
This version of the story is not mentioned in the bible, nor the Pentateuch (first 5 books of the bible). The only place that this version of the story exists anywhere on the planet, and where it came from origionally is from the Babylonian Talmud. This is the book that those who practice the Antichrist religion of Judaism hold in highest esteem. The Pentateuch, or Torah as they call it, is not the book they base their Antichrist faith on. Anyone that thinks the Jews base their faith on the Pentateuch shows their ignorance as they have not studied Judaism at all!
I am going to show the origin of this myth. Please do not use the cheap old worn out race card that I am Anti-Semitic, I really do not have time to humor such nonsense. If I am misinterpreting the verses then please do tell me if not then simply calling names and slinging mud will not be tolerated.
Tractate Sanhedrin Folio 70A ; 45 This passage claims that Noah was both castrated and sexually abused by Ham.
Tractate Sanhedrin Folio 108B;34
Our Rabbis taught: Three copulated in the ark, and they were all punished--the dog, the raven, and Ham. The dog was doomed to be tied, the raven expectorates [his seed into his mate's mouth]. and Ham was smitten in his skin.
Footnote 34 on the same page explains what "smitten in his skin means."
Footnote #34 in Tractate 108B, at the bottom of the page says "I.e.,from him descended Cush (the negro) who is black-skinned.
Again another passage that talks about blacks is in another Jewish book: Genesis Rabba 37 p.76
The sexes of both man and the lower animals were meant to be separated in the ark during the deluge. This is clear from the way in which they entered the ark: first Noah and his three sons went in, and then their wives separately (Gen. 7. 7). But when they came out of the ark after the flood, God commanded Noah, 'Go out of the ark, thou and thy wife, thy sons and their wives' (Gen. 8. 16), thus putting the sexes together again. Ham among the human beings, and the dog among the lower animals, disregarded this injunction and did not separate from the opposite sex in the ark. The dog received a certain punishment, and Ham became a black man; just as when a man has the audacity to coin the king's currency in the king's own palace his face is blackened as a punishment and his issue is declared counterfeit --Gen. Rabba 37-
The origin of this lie comes from the Babylonian Talmud and as long as both whites and blacks believe this outrage comes from the bible, the blacks will ever see the Israelites as having their best interest in mind, nor that they are ruling under Yah's law.
In case you don't know yes, I believe the white Western European man is modern day Israel!
This is not a white supremacist idea.The Jews call themselves Israel all the time and I have never heard one of them being called a Jewish supremacist.
May Father Yahweh both bless his small Israel remnant!
No comments:
Post a Comment