Christians - What if people misinterpreted the Mark of Cain and Curse of Ham?

Question

People used these tales from the bible to justify the slave trade. They claimed the mark was dark skin and that Ham's descendants that were cursed to be slaves were the ancestors of Africans.

However, despite how whitewashed the bible has become under European influence we know that the peoples of the Middle East and Africa where these tales are set are already quite darkly complected.

So if the Mark of Cain was indeed meant to be a visible sign of skin colour wouldn't it make more sense if the Caucasians were marked by their light skin? Perhaps Europeans are the ones who were cursed.

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

This will never get past the guys packing heat

BJ · Answer

God’s sentencing of Cain to banishment from the ground evidently meant his eviction from the neighborhood of the garden of Eden, and the curse already upon the earth would be increased in Cain’s case, the earth not responding to his cultivation of it.

Cain expressed regret over the severity of his punishment and showed anxiety as to the possibility of Abel’s murder being avenged upon him, but still no sincere repentance.

God “set up a sign for Cain” to prevent his being killed, but the record does not say that this sign or mark was placed on Cain’s person in any way.

The “sign” likely consisted of God’s solemn decree itself, known and observed by others.

Tommiecat · Answer

The mark of Cain theory fails. Unless one of Noah's daughter in laws had the mark it would have stopped at the flood. The only thing left is the curse of Cannaan.

sanden · Answer

The Mark Of Ham

Jarrod N · Answer

I've never met a Christian who believes anything you just claimed.

Anonymous · Answer

The Canaanites were cursed not black people.

Khakidoodle · Answer

nobody is cursed, we are all children of God, whether we accept it or not.

Trending News

Christians - What if people misinterpreted the Mark of Cain and Curse of Ham?

7 Answers