History 101:

 

First of all, let's clarify that when you research the etymology of the term "race" you will see that it originally had nothing to do with skin color or facial features. The term race originally referred to descendants of a common ancestor - or a family.

​

From Wikipedia under Etymology:

 

"The word "race", interpreted to mean an identifiable group of people who share a common descent, was introduced into English in about 1580, from the Old French rasse (1512), from Italian razza. An earlier but etymologically distinct word for a similar concept was the Latin word genus meaning a group sharing qualities related to birth, descent, origin, race, stock, or family; this Latin word is cognate with the Greek words "genos", (γένος) meaning "race or kind", and "gonos", which has meanings related to "birth, offspring, stock "

​

The term "race" took on the modern meaning of strictly skin color by Europeans during the slave trade or Maafa in the 1600's. (Maafa is a Kiswahili word meaning 'great dissaster' referring to the Trans Atlantic slave trade.)

​

But because today's version of history mainly teaches a whitewashed version of all Scripture, we must deal with these man made so called "races" and do some "untwisting" of many foundational inacuracies concerning Scripture. 

​

The following is an except from my book titled "Hebrews? Africans? Or Does It Matter?"

 

One thing is always true – words do paint pictures! And a picture is worth a thousand words!

 

When we read the Bible, we all read it with narration in our minds of information that we already have about the Bible – whether that information is true or not, it is all we have. The information that we have forms what we believe.

 

So when we read about Biblical stories - like Noah and his three sons, because of different movies and pictures that many have seen in previous Bibles, churches, etc, most people think of a white skinned Noah with three sons of three different races – with Noah’s son Ham being black (or African), Shem being Arab (or Middle Eastern), and Japheth being white (or European).

 

Thus there is the strong but very subtle implication that all black people (or Africans) descended from Ham, all Arab (or Middle Eastern looking people) descended from Shem, and all white (or European people) descended from Japheth – three different “races” all birthed from Noah and his wife being a Caucasian or so called White couple? Or we see images in our minds of Noah’s entire family, as well as all of the Israelites as white (or European).

 

Are either of these in line with the correct context of the Bible? Let’s see what the context of the Bible says… more “exegesis”…

 

So let's clarify Noah and his three sons...

 

 

“And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan.

 

These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread.” (Gen 9:18-19)

 

Question:

 

Is the notion that the family of Noah and his three sons of three different races the origin of the different races on earth?

 

Is this where all of the different “races” came from?

 

Most people say yes to both of these questions... because this is what has been implied and taught. But does the Bible agree with this school of thought?

 

Now, some have tried to, as some would say, “put their heads in the sand”, and not deal with this issue by saying “the concept of race is not real, it was created” which is very much true. We’ll dig into the actual origins of what we call a “race” later on in chapter 13 titled “God Is Not Colorblind”.  

 

But many dodge this subject by making the obvious point that “we are all the same race – the human race” which is also true!

 

But the original human race had to have a color!

 

We are all of the human race but today we must make distinctions and clarifications between the facts of the so called “races”… and here is why…

​

The fact is there is – a specific group of people (so called Black people) with beautiful dark skin and the versatile and nice nappy or kinky hair who were all subjected in this land and around the world, because they are a part of this made up concept of “race”. This means that this “unreal category of a race” has in the past, and continues today to affect the “real” lives of everyone in the particular race chosen to be subjected – whether child or adult. Therefore, in our situation, so called Black people have a “real” problem because of an “unreal category” called race. To ignore this problem shows a severe lack of intelligence as a people.

 

Concerning intelligence as a people, the late psychiatrist, Dr. Amos Wilson said, “True intelligence is the ability to solve one’s own problems”

 

And responsible men and women don’t wait on someone else to deal with the problems of their people. I would take it a step further and make it clear that this is a crisis that some of us, as so called Black people in America, have sadly gotten use to.

 

But responsible men and women utilize the resources they have and take responsible steps to deal with their crisis. The so called Black or African “race” has been in a crisis for about five hundred years now… So yes, we are discussing “race” and solutions concerning issues with race – beginning with our race – the so called Black race. This is the intelligent and responsible thing to do. We do what is possible, and God will do the impossible!

 

Why is this conversation about the so called “race” of Noah and his three sons a problem? This conversation maybe a problem to a people with a history of seeing other races as inferior. But what might be a problem for one, sometimes is a need for another. This is one of those cases for black people - specifically in America and abroad whose ancestors were stripped of their identity and culture. We must be honest about the needs of us and our children. I often say “God does not ignore needs, he supplies needs!”

 

But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus. (Philippians 4:19)

 

Plus this conversation about the race of Noah and his three sons is true! And only the truth will make you free!

 

So, because of the bad “racist” history of this western culture, we see discussing “racial” history as a bad thing… only because we’re looking through the defiled conscience of this Eurocentric culture. But, to a pure conscience, this conversation about race is not a problem.

 

Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. (Titus 1:15)

 

With a pure mind we must discuss this.. as this understanding of Noah and his three sons’ so called “races” is foundational to any discussion about the “race” of the Biblical Hebrews.

 

** I must remind you – we are discussing race. Not lineage.

 

I had to make that point because race and lineage are not the same as we will talk more about the differences between the two later. Understanding the differences will help you understand this section.

 

When attempting to research the origin of the different races, most articles and books will point you towards Shem, Ham and Japheth as the fathers of the different races. Even non believers of the Bible have this so called secular notion of three different races – Negroid, Caucasoid and Mongoloid. Why three? It’s quite a coincidence that they are also squeezing all races into only three.

 

Although the Bible clearly says that the earth was repopulated by the descendants of Noah’s three sons, do the scholars, theologians, historians, etc take the leap that Noah’s sons themselves were different races? I struggle with this notion of Noah’s three sons being three different races because it implies something unnatural that is not, nor has never been seen before in scripture or history.

 

First of all, I must make it clear that Noah did not have three sons of three different races. Think about that... Research the origin of that myth... you won't find it in the Bible.

 

You will find out that the myth that Noah had three sons of three different races originated out of a need to justify slavery and the slave trade (via the anti-Scriptural Babylonian Talmud - the origin of the fictitious “curse of Ham” myth).

 

And as stated earlier, the whole concept of distinguishing groups of people by “race” as in skin color, hair texture and facial features was created by Europeans alongside and at the same time of the Maafa or Trans Atlantic slave trade. So before this new type of slavery, there were no “racial” distinctions – as we know them today. Before this European slavery, people were mostly categorized by their families/lineages or by their location of residence/citizenship. Of course in post Biblical times there has been references to Africans and Moors/Blackamoors referring to what we would call Africans or Black people today. But this was post – or after the Biblical era. And still, we only see wording referring to Black people… There is no documentation of anyone being referred to as “white” until a playwright in 1613.

 

“The Jacobean playwright Thomas Middleton invented the concept of ‘white people’ on 29 October 1613, the date that his play The Triumphs of Truth was first performed. The phrase was first uttered by the character of an African king who looks out upon an English audience and declares: ‘I see amazement set upon the faces/Of these white people, wond’rings and strange gazes.’ As far as I, and others, have been able to tell, Middleton’s play is the earliest printed example of a European author referring to fellow Europeans as ‘white people’.” https://aeon.co/ideas/how-white-people-were-invented-by-a-playwright-in-1613

 

Now back to our subject on the myth of Noah having three sons of three different races.

 

Let's take a look at a common point of agreement, we'll call it our common denominator. Consider this: 

 

The ONLY son of Noah, in whom ALL preachers, scholars, historians and theologians that I have heard discuss this, they agree on the race of only one son of Noah... Ham. Who was undoubtedly black. Ham is called the father of the African people.

 

There is a conversation about the race of the other two sons: Shem and Japheth. People debate over their races.

 

But there is only agreement on Ham. Why?

 

It is because Ham is the only son of Noah with proof of his so called race! Ham would be our common denominator in this scenario.

 

Let’s take a good look at Ham’s sons:

 

Genesis 10:6 says “And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan.”

 

Ok, starting with some ancient world maps… if you look up some of the first world maps created, you will see that Africa was called "Ham". Other ancient maps, like the one made by the man called the father of history - Herodotus, he called Africa "Libya", who was Phut - Ham's son.

 

We know that Ham had another son - named Cush. The descendants of Cush were Cushites. The Greeks called the Cushites “Ethiopians”. Ethiopian in the Greek literally means burnt or scorched face (or to appear to be scorched) [Strong's G128].

 

On another map (to the left), you can see Africa as “Ethiopia”, and what we call the Atlantic Ocean was originally called the Ethiopic or Southern Ocean

​

​Ham had another son named Mizriam, whom  the Greeks called Egypt. The Mizriamites have left records called medu neter. Medu neter basically means “words of nature”, but you may be more familiar with what the Greeks called them - hieroglyphs.

 

The ancient Mizriamites never called themselves Egyptians, the Greeks called them Egyptians.

 

In the medu neter, or what is called “hieroglyphs” by the Greeks, the ancient Egyptians document that they called themselves Kem (many scholars define Kem as meaning black), and they called their land Kemet (meaning land of black people).

 

** Random note: In researching the origin of the word “chemistry” we find out that it originated from the word Kem. “Chem” (Kem) means black (ie melanin). “istry” means the study of. The word chemistry originally meant “the study of black or melanin”.

 

The English word chemistry derives from the word alchemy.

 

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, al-kīmiyāʾ may be derived from χημία, which is derived from the ancient Egyptian name of Egypt, khem or khm, khame, or khmi, meaning "blackness"

 

Ancient Greeks attributed the intelligence of the Egyptians to their dark skin. In fact, the word melanin derives from the Greek word melanos, meaning black.

 

Researching the etymology of the word "chemistry" will lead you to many websites with statements implying that the origin of this word is "uncertain" or "unknown".

 

But don't stop digging...

 

"Whenever such a statement is made, experience has taught me that the uncertainty most likely indicates it originated in Africa." (Dr. Joseph A. Bailey, II, M.D.)

 

Just something to think on… but back to evidence that Ham was black or what we call African...

 

Herodotus, the Greek historian who lived over 400 years before Christ, also wrote in his work called “The Histories” that he saw the ancient Egyptians face to face and he described the Egyptians as “dark skinned with woolly hair…”

 

Even in Psalm 105:23 and 106:21-22, Egypt (also Africa) is called the Land of Ham. And... Ham's own name, Khawm or Cham in Hebrew, means hot or heat. [Strong’s H2526]

 

There… we have overwhelming evidence of Ham’s race! But we see no evidence at all of Shem being Arab or Middle Eastern, and no evidence at all of Japheth himself being white or what we call European. But as for Ham, there is great unity in the belief that he was indeed black, or what we call an African.

 

So the Biblical scholars agree that, if nothing else, that Ham was black - as in what is called African today...right? Right, now lets move on... 

 

So, if Ham was what we call an African, that should obviously mean Ham's brothers (Shem, and yes.. Japheth too) had to have also been black, African looking men. They were brothers! Born from the same parents. If one brother was "African", the other brothers had to have been "African".

 

Even though we’re discussing scripture, we must think practically unless there are other examples that imply otherwise – and in this case, there are absolutely no other instances in scripture, again, where anyone had children of different races. So yes, if Ham was African by “race”, his brothers would have to be African also.  (hmmmm…)

 

** I have yet to find anything in scripture describing a white or European son of Noah, let alone all three sons being European. I have nothing against Noah’s sons being European - if it was true. And I was just fine when I thought they were European. But, once again, the context of the Bible does not agree with Noah or any of his sons being European. Any statement that anyone in Noah’s family was European is purely speculation… maybe based on Japheth’s name that some have claimed that it means “fair” but that is not true. Even if it was true, fair is not a color. It could describe a color but to imply fair being a color is error.

 

Some still may not be convinced, and that’s just fine. But this makes much more sense than the European, or even the three different races in one family – looking images of Noah’s family that are pushed on us!

 

Remember, context is everything! According to the proper context of Scripture, it makes no sense to insist that Noah’s sons were different races. Have you ever heard of a couple, both of the same race, having children of - not one or two, but THREE different races? As in it is said that Ham was black, Shem was middle eastern, and Japheth was white. That makes no sense at all. Three brothers of three different races, all having the same parents? Nah, I can't see it. That ideology is found nowhere in scripture or history. And God wrote His Word to intelligent people. 

 

Many try to debate this by stating that there have been (fluke) cases in which an African couple gave birth to a Caucasian baby. Well, I can not say that this is absolutely untrue as an African couple can give birth to Caucasian, but a Caucasian couple can never give birth to an African. And I have seen images of an African family with a Caucasian baby amongst other African children... whether the image was factual or not is another conversation.

 

However, here are a couple things to place in perspective in this particular conversation at hand:

 

1. There is no indication that Noah’s family was anything other than an ordinary family… like mines or yours. Nothing in Scripture implies that this was a “super human” family. God uses ordinary people!

2. Those cases were not normal and are very rare.

3. No time in scripture or history has there EVER been children of THREE DIFFERENT RACES born in one family! As in an African family giving birth to a Caucasian baby and an Oriental baby as well as an African baby!

 

The widely accepted scenario of three different races born in one family by parents of the same race is not implied in Scripture, and does not line up with the rest of Scripture and history.

 

** Let me interject here concerning red Native Americans and our so called Black ancestors being the same people because we see images of dark skinned or even black skinned so called Native Americans, but I have a problem with that theory. You see, and as we’ll discuss later, this culture avoids the hair texture conversation – I believe because hair is such a descriptive trait. I have yet to see an image of one ancient red Native American tribe with nappy hair. We do have the red Native Americans in many of our ancestry… but they were not the same people as the African Native Americans. They intermingled amongst each race.

 

Yes, I’m convinced that many of our African ancestors were already here, but to say the ancient red straight haired Native Americans were “Black” as in African looking lacks basic evidence.

 

The tribes already here who looked African looked like African tribes… because they came to this land from Africa way before Christopher Columbus - as the great Ivan Van Sertima wrote in his classic book “They Came Before Columbus”.

 

So I just wanted to clarify that I do not subscribe to the notion that the ancient red Natives were originally

 

Black and somehow lost the kinky hair along the way but we don’t know where? I know it’s very popular but I don’t even subscribe to any notion of an entire group of people’s hair texture and facial features changing because of weather. This all looks good on paper because we don’t want to consider a supernatural Creator. But I digress…

 

** I must also insert, as some wildly speculate that Noah’s wife could have been a different race than Noah was. Well, there is an actual scriptural account of Noah’s wife in the apocryphal Book of Jubilees – one of the original 15 books removed from the Bible that we read today. The original Bible had 81 books, compared to the 66 books we are mostly familiar with today. But the passage reads:

 

In the twenty-fifth jubilee Noah took to himself a wife, and her name was Emzara, the daughter of Rake’el, the daughter of his father’s brother, in the first year in the fifth week, and in the third year of it she gave birth to Shem, in the fifth year of it she gave birth to Ham, and in the first year in the sixth week she gave birth to Japheth. ~ Book of Jubilees 4:33

 

So, according to scripture, Noah’s wife was his uncle’s granddaughter! The point is Noah and his wife Emzara were not two different races! They were from the same family!

 

Therefore the claim of Noah’s wife (out of the clear blue sky) being a different race than Noah appears to be a desperate leap to make someone’s personal point. The uncomfortable truth is that mainstream western history is hinged upon the lie that the European looking so called Jews controlling the State of Israel today are the blood descendants of the Biblical Hebrews... but the history doesn’t agree!

 

Based on the context of history up to that point in scripture, there is no implication of any so called “race” in the entire Old Testament other than what is called “African” (ie dark skin, hair texture, geographic location).

 

 And I haven't seen anywhere in scripture where any family, like I said, had parents of the same race but is DOCUMENTED to have children of different races.

 

Now, of course I’m not implying what God can not do. He is all powerful! God can create people of any color or race. God can do anything He pleases.

 

What I am unequivocally stating is that it is not written or implied anywhere in Scripture or history that Noah, or any other human being in the Bible had children of different races. We will discuss Jacob and Esau also, as many believe they were different races.

 

When researching history, you must find out what is written and documented... and stay right there.

 

Anything else is opinion.

 

If you don’t stick with what is written and the context of what is written, you enter into error - concerning knowing and understanding correct history.

 

** Even though the Bible is not translated to actually state what race anyone is, the context of the Bible is clear. When you finish reading this book, I believe you will agree that correct context of the Bible shows only one so called “race” in the entire Old Testament!

 

• Albino is NOT a race. According to Merriam Webster, albinism is simply a skin condition. If a Black person has this condition and has children, their children will still be Black. For example, the skin condition will not straighten the nappy or kinky hair, nor change the fullness of the lips and nose. Despite popular belief, changing skin color alone does not change anyone’s race. This also goes for all of the theories out there about leprosy being the origin of another race.

 

Concerning the leprosy theory, I often ask a question:

 

What does a black person with leprosy look like? They look like a black person with leprosy!

 

You can still tell that the so called race of this person with leprosy is Black because the ethnic features (hair, lips, nose, etc) are still there! The children of that person may or may not have the skin condition, but the skin condition does not make them White, or what we call European. Even today, an albino or person with leprosy’s children will be of the same race of the parent.

 

The theory that albinos and people with leprosy are "links" between black and white people just don't hold water.  

 

But everybody in Noah’s family was Black - so called Africans. It's just that simple!

 

Now I know... this blows the whole "Japheth was white" theory out the window. He was not white. Many of his descendants are white today... but Japheth himself was not white. We'll discuss Japheth in detail in my upcoming book titled "Hebrews? Africans? Or Does It Matter?"

 

 But simply put... if Ham, Shem and Japheth were Black, that in itself tells us that their parents Noah and his wife were Black - so called Africans. And also all of their son's children were Black so called Africans too.

 

And the Bible says concerning Noah's sons that, "..of them was the whole earth overspread." (Gen 9:19) 

​

Concerning the Bible, incorrect history will produce incorrect theology