Curse of Ham

Author’s Note: This post talks about some very racist ideas. We here at Spirituality & Religious Studies DO NOT agree with ANY racist rhetoric at all, EVER! If this post triggers you, please move on to 1 of our other posts. Thank you.

In the Book of Genesis, the curse of Ham is described as a curse that was imposed upon Ham’s son, Canaan, by the patriarch Noah. It happens in the context of Noah’s drunkenness & it’s provoked by a “shameful” act that was perpetrated by Noah’s son, Ham, who “saw the nakedness of his father.”

The exact reason for Ham’s transgressions & the reason Noah cursed Canaan when Ham had sinned has been debated for over 2,000 years.

The story’s original purpose may have been to justify the biblical subjection of the Canaanites to the Israelites, or a land claim to a portion of the New Kingdom of Egypt, which ruled Canaan in the late Bronze Age.

In later centuries, the narrative was interpreted by some Jews, Christians, & Muslims as an explanation for black skin. As well as a justification for the enslavement of black people. Many Christians, Muslims, & Jews now disagree with such interpretations. Because in the biblical text, Ham himself isn’t cursed. Race or skin color isn’t even mentioned in the text at all, anywhere.

The idea of this curse has its beginnings in Genesis 9:20-27. The story goes:

Noah began to be a farmer. He planted a vineyard. He drank some of the wine that the vineyard produced & enjoyed the drink a little too much. Noah was naked in his tent. Ham (the dad of Canaan) saw Noah’s nakedness. Ham told his 2 brothers. Shem & Jepheth took a garment & put the garment on both their shoulders & covered Noah’s nakedness, while they walked backwards. They kept their faces turned away from Noah so they didn’t see him naked.

Noah woke up from his drunken stupor. He knew what Ham had done. “Cursed be Canaan. A servant of servants will be to his brothers. Blessed be the Lord God of Shem. Canaan will be his servant. God will enlarge Japheth. He’ll live in the tents of Shem. Canaan will be his servant,” Noah said. (Genesis 9:20-27)

The objection of the story may have been to justify the subject status of the Canaanites (the descendants of Ham) to the Israelites (the descendants of Shem). The narrative of the curse is replete with difficulties. It’s uncertain what the exact nature of Ham’s offense is.

In verse 25 of the Genesis story, Noah refers to Shem & Japheth as the “brethren” of Canaan. However, in verse 18, they’re identified as his uncles.

The Table of Nations introduces Canaan & Mizraim (Egypt) among the sons of Ham. The Table of Nations is a genealogy of the sons of Noah & their dispersion into many lands after the Flood. In the Psalms, Egypt is identified with Ham.

A land claim on Canaan, which fell under the rule of the New Kingdom of Egypt in the late Bronze Age, has been suggested as a motive for the curse on Canaan & the association with Ham via Ancient Egypt’s rule over Canaan.

It’s important to realize that the curse was placed/made by Noah, not by God. The curse of Ham (& his descendants) wasn’t confirmed by God. Because the text would mention that, or at least you’d think it would if God had confirmed it. And if God had actually confirmed the curse, then why was the “promised land” called Canaan?

A pesher (interpretation) of the Book of Genesis found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, explains that since Ham was already blessed by God, it made Noah’s curse null & void (Genesis 9:1).

The Book of Jubilees also tells the tale. Jubilees gives a bit more info that Ham had assigned to Canaan a land west of the Nile. All of Noah’s sons agreed to invoke a curse on anyone who tries to seize land that wasn’t assigned to them. Well, Canaan violates this agreement & instead chooses to squat in the land set forth to Shem & his descendants. So Canaan brought on himself the full force of this second curse.

In the past, some groups have claimed that the curse of Ham was a biblical justification for imposing slavery & racial discrimination.

In the 15th century, Dominican Friar Annius of Viterbo invoked Ham’s curse to explain the differences between Europeans & Africans in his writings. Annius doubled down on the racism. He claimed that due to the curse imposed on black people, they would inevitably remain permanently subjugated by Arabs & other Muslims.

Similarly, the Catholic mystic Anne Catherine Emmerich said in her visions that she discovered that black people are, in fact, descendants of Ham.

In 1835, Joseph Smith (founder of the Mormon faith) published a work called the Book of Abraham. Get ready, it’s going to be a very bumpy & cringy ride. This is your trigger warning.

This “work” states that the Pharaoh was a descendant of Ham & the Canaanites. Pharaoh ruled justly & was blessed with wisdom, but was barred from getting into the priesthood because of the curse on Ham. According to the Book of Abraham, ALL Egyptians descended from the Canaanite lineage.

The Book of Abraham was eventually made into Scripture by the Mormon Church. And it is still in active use today. This passage is the only 1 found in any Mormon scripture that bars a particular “lineage” of people from holding the priesthood.

While there’s nothing in the Book of Abraham that explicitly states that Noah’s curse was the same curse that is mentioned in the Bible, or that the Egyptians were related to other black Africans. Some leaders later used the verses of this text as justification for the church policy with regard to the priesthood ban.

The 2002 edition of the Doctrine & Covenants Student Manual pointed to Abraham 1:21-27 as the reason why highly melaninated friends of the male gender weren’t given the priesthood until 1978. That’s 148 years, y’all. Really? That’s almost 150 years, guys. We can’t. We just can’t. And here’s the kicker: they also said that those who tried to abolish slavery were going against the decrees of God.

Make a one-time donation

Your contribution is appreciated.

Make a monthly donation

Your contribution is appreciated.

Make a yearly donation

Your contribution is appreciated.

‘I have to betray them to save them’: how undercover film-makers exposed a sinister polygamous #cult

#Mormonism #Polygamy #FLDS #Utah #Netflix #TrustMe

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2026/apr/08/trust-me-the-false-prophet-cult-docuseries-mormon

Associated Press: ‘Secret Lives of Mormon Wives’ cast aren’t the only influencers sowing curiosity about the church. “Until quite recently, the prevailing image to outsiders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been male missionaries wearing white shirts and name tags, evoked by the hit Broadway show ‘The Book of Mormon.’ But another unofficial face of the male-led […]

Hype for the Future 133LDS: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

https://novatopflex.wordpress.com/2026/03/13/hype-for-the-future-133lds-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints/

#atheism #christianity #catholicism #mormonism #baptist #Jehovah_witness #islam #judaism #buddhism…

https://friendica.produnis.de/display/6036f0c5-27df55fc-7ad8e6024c774204