tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26129073.post5748498577645650233..comments2023-12-06T19:46:26.522-05:00Comments on The Greenbelt: Heritage ...... of HateThe Ridger, FCDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01538111197270563075noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26129073.post-63221727080953239642015-08-01T06:26:20.721-04:002015-08-01T06:26:20.721-04:00Few readers will have a clue what "the curse ...Few readers will have a clue what "the curse against Canaan" has to do with modern racism, but I have a book of Christian apologetics published as recently as 1977 that mentions it, in a chapter entitled, "Why are there so many Christians who are racially prejudiced?"<br /><br />The relevant passage is:<br /><br />"<i>We know, of course, that segregationists and even racialists sometimes use quotations from the Bible to 'prove' their case. But this, in itself, proves nothing, for even the Devil himself can quote Scripture if it suits him. The question we must ask ourselves is: 'What do the verses quoted really mean?' Let us, for example, look at the often quoted passage which the reader may find in Genesis 9.20-9. Do the words 'Cursed be Canaan...' mean the black races are cursed? Well, firstly we note that it is Noah, not God, who pronounces the curse — and there is no proof that he was not still drunk at the time! The Bible no more condones his words than his drunkenness; there is, moreover, little or no Biblical evidence that his words proved true. Secondly, if 'Japheth' is really supposed to represent modern white races, they should (according to Noah) be living in the tents of 'Shem' (i.e. the Semites). Unless he is doing so it is hard to see how any white person could apply Noah's curse to present day negroes. Lastly, there seems to be no evidence that 'Canaan' does, in fact, represent the negro races. In view of this, how can we take seriously the use of this passage to support segregation or prejudice in the face of the whole New Testament teaching on love and the oneness of the church?</i>"<br /><br />Within that paragraph there are four footnotes, which I've omitted.<br /><br />The following paragraph discusses evidence of Africans with high status in the early church, and the paragraph after that chastises people who are uncomfortable with mixed marriages.Adrian Morganhttp://outerhoard.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com