Authored By :
Bill Kochman
Published On :
April 30, 1998
Last Updated :
January 3, 2009
NOTE: This article or series has not been updated recently. As such, it may possibly contain some outdated information, and/or ideas and beliefs which I no longer embrace, or which have changed to some degree.
Master And Mistress, Noah And The Curse Of Canaan, Reuben
And Bilhah, Proper Child Training, Origin Of The Black Race,
Cush, The Ethiopians And Moses' Wife, The Whereabouts Of
Zipporah, Egyptian Bondage And Goshen And Rameses
Throughout these revealing stories in the Book of Genesis,
we repeatedly see mention of the words 'master' and
'mistress'. It doesn't take much for one to imagine that
these stories could have just as easily occurred in colonial
America, or in some part of the English Commonwealth. For
example, consider the following opening to the story
concerning how Abraham sent his slave to the house of Laban
in Padanaram, that is, in Syria, in order to find a wife for
his younger son, Isaac:
"And the servant put his hand under the thigh of Abraham his
master, and sware to him concerning that matter. And the
servant took ten camels of the camels of his master, and
departed; for all the goods of his master were in his hand:
and he arose, and went to Mesopotamia, unto the city of
Nahor. And he made his camels to kneel down without the city
by a well of water at the time of the evening, even the time
that women go out to draw water. And he said, O LORD God of
my master Abraham, I pray thee, send me good speed this day,
and shew kindness unto my master Abraham."
(Genesis 24:9-12)
In the previous verses, the word 'master' is used five
times! This fellow must have been well-trained and had no
doubt whatsoever who his master was! This word 'master' is
derived from the Hebrew word 'adown', or 'adon', which is
pronounced aw-done'. This word simply means a firm strong
lord or master as is shown by the Hebrew lexicon. In other
words, Abraham must have been one firm Jewish slave master:
----- Begin Quote -----
1) firm, strong, lord, master
1a) lord, master
1a1) reference to men
1a1a) superintendent of household, of affairs
1a1b) master
1a1c) king
----- End Of Quote -----
In the case of the word 'mistress', as in the story of Hagar
and Sarai, the Hebrew word used is 'gebereth', pronounced
gheb-eh'-reth, which means lady, queen or mistress of
servants, which we now know simply means slaves. While the
modern cinemagraphic industry has painted the false picture
of the ancient Israelites as being the first victims of
slavery, this is simply not true. Since the very first time
that they are mentioned in the Bible, we are shown that the
Hebrews had absolutely no problem with buying and selling
other human beings, and thus openly practiced slavery just
like everyone else. Being a patriarchal society, as the head
of his clan, a man was the sovereign lord and master; and he
could do whatsoever he pleased. In fact, as shocking as this
may be to some, according to the Mosaic Law, a man could
actually sell his own daughter into slavery!:
"And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she
shall not go out as the menservants do." (Exodus 21:7)
In the previous verse, the word 'maidservant' is derived
from the Hebrew 'amah', pronounced aw-maw', which simply
means a female slave:
----- Begin Quote -----
1) maid-servant, female slave, maid, handmaid, concubine
1a) of humility (fig.)
----- End Of Quote -----
While it is difficult to determine at exactly what point in
history man began to enslave other men, as I have already
shown, by the time of Abraham, this had already become a
common practice. While this is a great leap of speculation
on my part, it is possible that slavery began in Genesis
chapter six when violence filled the Earth following the
demonic attack on humanity by the fallen angelic Sons of
God; after all, slavery is a form of violence:
"The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was
filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and,
behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way
upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh
is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence
through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the
earth." (Genesis 6:11-13)
If the practice of slavery didn't begin in Geneis chapter
six, then the clearest indication is that it began shortly
after the Flood when Noah cursed his grandson Canaan, the
son of Ham. As a part of the curse, we are told that Canaan
and his seed would be the 'servant of servants', or the
slave of slaves, meaning the very lowest slave, to his older
brothers Japheth the Elder and Shem. As in earlier verses,
this word 'servant' is derived from 'ebed' which means
'slave'. Here is the story in its entirety:
"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. And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he
planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was
drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the
father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told
his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a
garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went
backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and
their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's
nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his
younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be
Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan
shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he
shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his
servant." (Genesis 9:18-27)
The proper understanding of the above story is one which has
stirred up considerable debate within Christian circles.
Recently I read an article entitled 'Canaan's Curse' which
shed a whole new light on this incident for me personally.
After studying the article, I came to the conclusion that,
concerning the immediate story, some of the ideas proposed
by the author are correct. While some people have assumed
that the sin was committed directly by Ham, a closer reading
of the Scriptures proves otherwise. Notice that from the
beginning of this account to the very end, five obvious
characters are mentioned; Noah, Shem, Ham, Japheth and
Canaan. This shows that Canaan, one of Ham's four sons, was
alive at this time. The fact that none of Noah's many other
grandsons are mentioned, also seems to indicate that the
writer is pointing out Canaan for a very specific reason.
The fact that Noah curses Canaan, and not Ham, seems to be
the final indicator that Canaan is the one guilty of the
crime, and not Ham himself. The reason most people become
confused is because the twenty-second verse states:
"And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his
father, and told his two brethren without." (Genesis 9:22)
At first glance, this verse appears to be saying that Ham
saw his father laying naked in his tent, which was his sin.
If this is the case, then why does Noah curse Ham's son
Canaan instead? The confusion results from the lack of a
proper understanding of the phrase 'saw the nakedness of his
father'. To help clarify what this verse really means, we
need to follow my practice of comparing Scripture with
Scripture, and consider what we are told in the Levitical
Law:
"None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to
him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD. The
nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother,
shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not
uncover her nakedness. The nakedness of thy father's wife
shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness. The
nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or
daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born
abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover. The
nakedness of thy son's daughter, or of thy daughter's
daughter, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for
theirs is thine own nakedness. The nakedness of thy father's
wife's daughter, begotten of thy father, she is thy sister,
thou shalt not uncover her nakedness. Thou shalt not uncover
the nakedness of thy father's sister: she is thy father's
near kinswoman. Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy
mother's sister: for she is thy mother's near kinswoman.
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's
brother, thou shalt not approach to his wife: she is thine
aunt. Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter
in law: she is thy son's wife; thou shalt not uncover her
nakedness. Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy
brother's wife: it is thy brother's nakedness. Thou shalt
not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter,
neither shalt thou take her son's daughter, or her
daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness; for they are
her near kinswomen: it is wickedness. Neither shalt thou
take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to uncover her
nakedness, beside the other in her life time. Also thou
shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as
long as she is put apart for her uncleanness. Moreover thou
shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour's wife, to defile
thyself with her." (Leviticus 18:6-20)
In the above verses we are repeatedly warned of the dangers
of uncovering one's nakedness. Notice that in the eighth
verse we are specifically told 'The nakedness of thy
father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's
nakedness.' The question is, exactly what does this phrase
mean? It isn't until the final verse that the author finally
tells us that to uncover one's nakedness means to lie
carnally with them, or with their mate; in other words, to
have sexual intercourse with them. In the story of Noah,
this is precisely what we see happening. Canaan apparently
took advantage of his grandfather's drunken state in order
to violate Noah's wife. In so doing, Canaan exposed Noah's
nakedness; that is, he shamed and humilitated Noah before
his own family. I believe that this is why we are told that
'Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his
father.' In other words, Ham accidentally walked into the
tent and saw his son Canaan in bed with his father's wife.
At this point, some might argue that Noah's wife is not even
mentioned in the story. To the English reader, this seems to
be the case; however, to any devout Jew who is familiar with
the Levitical Law, and who is reading in the original
Hebrew, it is clearly understood what is meant by '"And Ham,
the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father.' This
English word 'nakedness' is derived from the Hebrew word
'ervah', pronounced er-vaw', which has the following
meanings according to my Hebrew lexicon:
----- Begin Quote -----
1) nakedness, nudity, shame, pudenda
1a) pudenda (implying shameful exposure)
1b) nakedness of a thing, indecency, improper behaviour
1c) exposed, undefended (fig.)
----- End Of Quote -----
Tragically, as English readers, unless we take the time
to really study the Hebrew roots of some of these words, we
lose a lot of the intended meanings. If Ham had actually
been guilty of this crime, he definitely would not have done
what we read next in the story: '...and told his two
brethren without.' Ham was so disgusted that he went out and
told his two brothers what his son had done. We are then
told that:
"...Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both
their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the
nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward,
and they saw not their father's nakedness." (Genesis 9:23)
The only way they could have done this is if the persons
involved were sleeping. If this was a case of incest, then
perhaps Canaan and his mother had fallen asleep after having
sex; or maybe Canaan had sex with his mother while she was
asleep. We really don't know. Some people have suggested
that this may have been a direct sexual assault on Noah
himself. In other words, perhaps Canaan may have actually
sodomized his father through oral or anal sex while he was
drunk and asleep. I find this difficult to believe as surely
Noah would have awakened immediately, drunk or not. While
these are also disgusting possibilities, several other
verses in Genesis cause me to believe that the sin was
actually committed with Noah's wife. In Genesis chapter
thirty-five we find a quick mention of the fact that Reuben,
the firstborn son of Jacob by Leah, also discovered the
nakedness of his father Jacob by having sex with Bilhah, one
of Jacob's concubines:
"And it came to pass, when Israel dwelt in that land, that
Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father's concubine: and
Israel heard it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve:"
(Genesis 35:22)
While Bilhah was a concubine, that is, a paramour or lover,
she was nevertheless respected as one of Jacob's wives as is
evidenced by the following verse:
"These are the generations of Jacob. Joseph, being seventeen
years old, was feeding the flock with his brethren; and the
lad was with the sons of Bilhah, and with the sons of
Zilpah, his father's wives: and Joseph brought unto his
father their evil report." (Genesis 37:2)
It was because of the fact that Reuben had openly shamed his
father, or discovered his nakedness by having sex with one
of his wives, that years later when Jacob was dying, he
still remembered the incident and held it against Reuben:
"Reuben, thou art my firstborn, my might, and the beginning
of my strength, the excellency of dignity, and the
excellency of power: Unstable as water, thou shalt not
excel; because thou wentest up to thy father's bed; then
defiledst thou it: he went up to my couch."
(Genesis 49:3-4)
Concerning the story of Noah, the main point is that
whatever happened, Canaan was the guilty party and not Ham.
What further adds to the confusion regarding this story is
that in the King James Bible, verse twenty-four reads as
follows:
"And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son
had done unto him." (Genesis 9:24)
On the surface, it appears that this verse is saying that
Noah discovered what Ham, his younger son, had done to him.
As I have already shown, Ham didn't do anything to his
father; at least not directly. There are two ways of looking
at this verse. First of all, parents are accountable for the
actions of their children up to a certain age. If a child
does something wrong, this is normally viewed as a failure
of the parents to properly train that child. Not only that,
but any serious negative or anti-social acts committed by
the children will bring shame and embarrassment to the
family, and especially to the parents. The following verses
support these ideas:
"Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul
spare for his crying." (Proverbs 19:18)
"Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is
old, he will not depart from it." (Proverbs 22:6)
"The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to
himself bringeth his mother to shame." (Proverbs 29:15)
"A foolish son is a grief to his father, and bitterness to
her that bare him." (Proverbs 17:25)
"Whoso keepeth the law is a wise son: but he that is a
companion of riotous men shameth his father."
(Proverbs 28:7)
Taking these verses into consideration, while Ham may not
personally have sinned against his father, perhaps Noah
viewed it as having been done to him by Ham because he had
failed to properly train his son Canaan. While this is one
possible interpretation of the verse, I am not convinced
that it is the correct one. I base this upon what Noah did
in the very next verse after discovering what had been done
while he was asleep and drunk:
"And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall
he be unto his brethren." (Genesis 9:25)
If the guilt was truly upon Ham, why did Noah immediately
curse Ham's son Canaan instead? This again supports the idea
that the sexual sin, whatever it was, was committed by
Canaan, and not by Ham. However, we are still left with one
problem to clear up. Verse twenty-four contains the phrase
'his younger son had done unto him.' This problem is easy to
resolve. In the original Hebrew, the word used is 'ben',
pronounced bane. While this word is normally understood to
mean 'son', the Hebrew lexicon also states that it is also
used for one's grandson, thus showing that Noah was more
than likely referring to Canaan when the writer refers to
'his younger son':
----- Begin Quote -----
1) son, grandson, child, member of a group
1a) son, male child
1b) grandson
1c) children (pl. - male and female)
1d) youth, young men (pl.)
----- End Of Quote -----
As we have already seen, because of his sin, Canaan and his
descendants were cursed to a lowly life of servitude as the
slaves of the descendants of Shem and Japheth. As you will
see shortly, this curse saw at least a partial fulfillment
when the Children of Israel invaded the land of Canaan
hundreds of years later.
This story of Noah and Canaan relates directly to another
hotly-debated issue which has been used by both white
supremacists and Orthodox Jews to stir up hatred against the
negroid races of the world. Even though the Scriptures do
not state it directly, these people earnestly believe that
part of Canaan's curse is that his skin turned black. Based
upon this belief, these racists justify such things as the
Euro-American black African slave trade, the Ku Klux Klan,
the Neo-Nazis, the Skinheads, mob lynchings, etc. Until
recently, I had absolutely no idea as to where this story of
Canaan's skin turning black originated. It may surprise you
to know that according to the book 'Hebrew Myths: The Book
Of Genesis' written by Robert Graves and Raphael Patai, this
story finds its origin in the very book which we discussed
earlier; that is, the Babylonian Talmud! In their book,
Graves and Patai quote the following passages from the
Talmud. If you are of the Black race, I must warn you that
the following is quite offensive!:
----- Begin Quote -----
"Now, I [Noah] cannot beget the fourth son whose children I
would have ordered to serve you and your brothers!
Therefore, it must be Canaan, your first born, whom they
enslave. And since you have disabled me ... doing ugly
things in Blackness of night, Canaan's children shall be
born ugly and Black! Moreover, because you twisted your head
around to see my nakedness, your grandchildren's hair shall
be twisted into kinks, and their eyes red; again because
your lips jested at my misfortune, theirs shall swell; and
because you neglected my nakedness, they shall go naked, and
their male members shall be shamefully elongated! Men of
this race are called Negroes, their forefather Canaan
commanded them to love theft and fornication, to be banded
together in hatred of their masters and never to tell the
truth."
----- End Of Quote -----
As all knowledgeable Christians are aware, there is
absolutely no mention of such things in the Old Testament.
This brings us all to a decision; should we believe the
Christian Old Testament account, or should we believe the
Talmud? Personally, it is my view that we should view the
Talmud with a great deal of caution. In fact, as the Apostle
Paul admonished us to do, I believe that we should regard
this tale from the Talmud as just a Jewish myth or fable:
"For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers,
specially they of the circumcision: Whose mouths must be
stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which
they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake. One of themselves,
even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway
liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. This witness is true.
Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the
faith; Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of
men, that turn from the truth." (Titus 1:10-14)
While many have theorized as to exactly how the different
races came into being, in all honesty, we do not really
know. The only facts we are given in the Bible is that eight
people survived the Flood in Noah's day; Noah, his three
sons, and their three wives. From these eight people the
entire Earth was repopulated:
"And God spake unto Noah, saying, Go forth of the ark, thou,
and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee.
...And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his
sons' wives with him:...And God blessed Noah and his sons,
and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish
the earth." (Genesis 8:15-16, 18, 9:1)
"By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as
yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his
house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir
of the righteousness which is by faith." (Hebrews 11:7)
"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the
longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the
ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were
saved by water." (1 Peter 3:20)
Some people have suggested that Adam and Eve contained
the gene pool for all of the different races of the world;
and that when Shem, Ham and Japheth were born, they each
represented a different race. Between them and their wives,
who were of unknown origin, it is supposed that different
genetic groups developed. As I point out in other articles,
the migration of the descendants of Noah and his sons is
described in the tenth and eleventh chapters of the Book of
Genesis. In my quest to try to find some answers to some of
these questions, I did make a few interesting discoveries
which I would now like to share with you. One of the very
first things I discovered is the following verse taken from
the Book of Jeremiah:
"Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his
spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do
evil." (Jeremiah 13:23)
Being as this verse was written by a Jew to his fellow Jews,
the first thought which occurred to me is that the reason
Jeremiah used the example of the Ethiopian is because he was
obviously of a different color than the Jews, and thus would
serve to emphasize the point which the Lord was trying to
make regarding the Jews' inability to change their evil
ways. In my Hebrew lexicon, I discovered that the word
'Ethiopian' is actually derived from the Hebrew word
'Kuwshiy', pronounced koo-shee':
----- Begin Quote -----
AV - Ethiopian 15, Cushi 8; 23
Cushi or Ethiopian = see Cushan "their blackness"
1) one of the descendants of Cush the grandson of Noah
through Ham and a member of that nation or people
2) one of Joab's couriers
3) (TWOT) Ethiopian
----- End Of Quote -----
The Hebrew word 'Kuwshiy' is in turn derived from the root
'Kuwsh', pronounced koosh. Kuwsh, or Cush as he is known in
the English language, was one of the four sons of Ham. For
many years I was led to believe that the name Ham meant
'black'; however, according to my Hebrew lexicon, Ham
actually means 'hot', while Cush means 'black':
----- Begin Quote -----
AV - Ethiopia 19, Cush 8, Ethiopians 3; 30
Cush = "black" n pr m
1) a Benjamite mentioned only in the title of Ps 7
2) the son of Ham and grandson of Noah and the progenitor of
the southernmost peoples located in Africa
3) the peoples descended from Cush n pr loc
4) the land occupied by the descendants of Cush located
around the southern parts of the Nile (Ethiopia)
----- End Of Quote -----
If Cush's skin pigmentation was truly black as seems to be
the case, this creates a number of interesting situations.
For example, it would negate the possibility of Canaan being
turned black as a part of his curse as per the Talmud. The
only way to get around this would be to say that all of
Ham's sons were cursed with black pigmentation as a result
of Canaan sinning against his father Noah. Personally, I
cannot accept this as the Bible does not say this by any
means. The second thought is that if Cush was Black, then
following the laws of genetic reproduction, either Ham his
father, or else his unknown mother, must have also been
Black. If either or both of them were Black, how did this
come about? Is it possible that Noah or his wife was Black?
From what I have read in the Book of Enoch, if it is to be
believed, Noah had a rather miraculous birth and was very
fair-skinned with light hair and light eyes. Again, we are
genetically left at a dead end as the Bible simply does not
say.
The second discovery I made is that at least as far back as
the time of Moses, it appears that the Hebrews did not like
the Ethiopians, or the Cushites as they were also known.
Whether or not it was because they were darker-skinned than
the Hebrews is not made clear. If we accept the Rabbinical
writings of the Talmud, then it was definitely a case of
racial prejudice. This dislike towards the Ethiopians is
exemplified by the incident in the Book of Numbers chapter
twelve where the Lord smites Miriam with leprosy after she
and Aaron take up cause with Moses:
"And Miriam and Aaron spake against Moses because of the
Ethiopian woman whom he had married: for he had married an
Ethiopian woman." (Numbers 12:1)
It is also possible that Miriam and Aaron simply did not
like this one particular woman. Again, by itself, this verse
simply does not provide us with enough information to make a
valid determination. This story concerning Moses' wife has
been no small source of debate for Bible students. Some
suggest that this woman was a second wife that Moses took in
addition to, or else after the death of his first wife
Zipporah. As you may recall, Zipporah was the daughter of
Jethro, also known as Reuel, who was the high priest of
Midian. Midian was a son of Abraham by his second wife
Keturah after Sarah had died:
"Then again Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah.
And she bare him Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian,
and Ishbak, and Shuah." (Genesis 25:1-2)
The Hebrew lexicon provides this additional information
concerning Midyan, pronounced mid-yawn', and the land which
was named after him:
----- Begin Quote -----
Midian or Midianite = "strife" n pr m
1) son of Abraham by Keturah and progenitor of the tribe of
Midianites or Arabians
2) the tribe descended from Midian n pr loc
3) the territory of the tribe descended from Midian; located
principally in the desert north of the Arabian peninsula;
land to which Moses went when he fled from Pharaoh
----- End Of Quote -----
Another school of thought believes that the Ethiopian woman
whom Moses married was in fact Zipporah, which would make
her of the Black race. If you read the Scriptures closely,
you will discover that Aaron, Miriam and the rest of the
liberated children of Israel may not have actually met
Zipporah until they reached Mount Sinai. While popular
movies depict Zipporah and her two sons in Egypt with Moses,
this may be yet another of the many blatant inaccuracies in
modern-day Biblical movies. In Exodus chapter four, we
discover that when Moses returned to Egypt, he began the
journey with his wife and children:
"And Moses went and returned to Jethro his father in law,
and said unto him, Let me go, I pray thee, and return unto
my brethren which are in Egypt, and see whether they be yet
alive. And Jethro said to Moses, Go in peace. And the LORD
said unto Moses in Midian, Go, return into Egypt: for all
the men are dead which sought thy life. And Moses took his
wife and his sons, and set them upon an ass, and he returned
to the land of Egypt: and Moses took the rod of God in his
hand. And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to
return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before
Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden
his heart, that he shall not let the people go."
(Exodus 4:18-21)
So far, it appears that Moses and his family are on their
way to Egypt; however, they are not quite there yet. This
seems to be indicated by the fact that in the final verse
the Lord says to Moses 'When thou goest to return into
Egypt...' indicating a journey which is still in progress.
Only a few verses later, we also see that they are still 'by
the way' when an incident occurs bewtween Moses and Zipporah
which I personally have never fully understood:
"And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD
met him, and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah took a sharp
stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at
his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me.
So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art,
because of the circumcision." (Exodus 4:24-26)
Following this incident, we do not hear of Zipporah and her
sons again until after Moses has led the Children of Israel
out of Egypt and to Mount Sinai. We are told that it is at
this time that a family reunion occurs:
"When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses' father in law,
heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his
people, and that the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt;
Then Jethro, Moses' father in law, took Zipporah, Moses'
wife, after he had sent her back, And her two sons; of which
the name of the one was Gershom; for he said, I have been an
alien in a strange land: And the name of the other was
Eliezer; for the God of my father, said he, was mine help,
and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh: And Jethro,
Moses' father in law, came with his sons and his wife unto
Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of
God: And he said unto Moses, I thy father in law Jethro am
come unto thee, and thy wife, and her two sons with her."
(Exodus 18:1-6)
Notice that we are specifically told that Moses sent back
his wife and children. I tend to think that this may have
occurred at the time of the altercation on the road to
Egypt. If this is the case, then I suspect that this may
have been of the Lord's design because He knew that He was
sending Moses on a very dangerous journey to confront the
powers of Egypt. It definitely would not have been a place
for his wife and children to be. However, I admit that this
is only speculation on my part. Those who believe that
Zipporah was the Ethiopian woman further suggest that Midian
was actually Cush, the son of Ham, who according to the
Biblical timeline, may indeed still have been alive at this
time. Personally, I tend to doubt this story. Whatever the
case may be, one thing which is for certain is that neither
Aaron nor Miriam were happy about their brother Moses
marrying this Black woman, whether it was Zipporah or a
second wife. As we have already seen, this hatred for Blacks
has been instilled in Jews to this very day through the
Rabbinical writings of the Talmud.
Returning to the topic of slavery, regardless of when it
actually began, when the Lord informed Abraham that He would
give his seed the land of Canaan for a possession, this must
have further instilled in Abraham a sense of superiority
over the other tribes and nations of the Earth. From that
time until now some four thousand years later, the Jews have
continued to nurture this attitude. While the Christian
Bible does not contain the blatant racist language found in
the Talmud or in the 'Protocols', it does contain many
verses which point to an attitude of Jewish superiority. In
other articles I have touched upon the possible reasons why
the Lord allowed the Hebrews to be enslaved in Egypt. One
idea I have put forth is that the Lord used Egypt as a safe
haven for the Israelites where they could grow and prosper
before taking upon themselves the tremendous task of ousting
the Canaanites from the Promised Land. Once they had reached
a sufficient size, the Lord put on the pressure through
slavery so that the Hebrews would long for deliverance and
eventually be driven out of Egypt. The time in Egypt was
definitely a part of the Lord's plan as He revealed it to
Abraham several hundred years before it actually occurred:
"And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed
shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall
serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge:
and afterward shall they come out with great substance. And
thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried
in a good old age. But in the fourth generation they shall
come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not
yet full." (Genesis 15:13-16)
Some Bible teachers have suggested that when the Scriptures
tell us that Jacob entered Egypt with seventy souls, that
this number only included their immediate family; that is,
Jacob and his wives and children, and his sons' wives and
their children. The idea is that it does not include the
many slaves they possessed. If we do a little bit of math,
this idea appears to have merit. In fact, the Books of
Genesis and Exodus confirm that this number only included
Jacob's flesh heirs, those 'which came out of his loins',
and not the many slaves which were a part of his 'cattle'
business:
"All the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt, which came
out of his loins, besides Jacob's sons' wives, all the souls
were threescore and six; And the sons of Joseph, which were
born him in Egypt, were two souls: all the souls of the
house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were threescore and
ten." (Genesis 46:26-27)
"Now these are the names of the children of Israel, which
came into Egypt; every man and his household came with
Jacob. Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah, Issachar, Zebulun,
and Benjamin, Dan, and Naphtali, Gad, and Asher. And all the
souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy
souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already." (Exodus 1:1-5)
It doesn't seem likely that Jacob just suddenly forsook the
many menservants and maidservants which he possessed. They
must have gone down into Egypt with them where they
continued their 'cattle' business in the land of Goshen.
This was a region in northern Egypt near the east bank of
the lower Nile River. Easton's Bible Dictionary provides
this additional information concerning Goshen:
----- Begin Quote -----
"A district in Egypt where Jacob and his family settled, and
in which they remained till the Exodus. It is called 'the
land of Goshen', and also simply 'Goshen', and 'the land of
Rameses', for the towns Pithom and Rameses lay within its
borders; also Zoan or Tanis. It lay on the east of the Nile,
and apparently not far from the royal residence. It was 'the
best of the land', but is now a desert. It is first
mentioned in Joseph's message to his father. It has been
identified with the modern Wady Tumilat, lying between the
eastern part of the Delta and the west border of Palestine.
It was a pastoral district, where some of the king's cattle
were kept. The inhabitants were not exclusively
Israelites."
----- End Of Quote -----
Concerning the name of 'Rameses', which is derived from
'ra', meaning 'sun', Easton's Bible Dictionary also provides
the following interesting information:
----- Begin Quote -----
"The Land of Rameses was probably 'the land of Goshen'.
After the Hebrews had built Rameses, one of the 'treasure
cities,' it came to be known as the 'land' in which that
city was built. The city bearing this name was probably
identical with Zoan, which Rameses II. ('son of the sun')
rebuilt. It became his special residence, and ranked next in
importance and magnificance to Thebes. Huge masses of
bricks, made of Nile mud, sun-dried, some of them mixed with
stubble, possibly moulded by Jewish hands, still mark the
site of Rameses. This was the general rendezvous of the
Israelites before they began their march out of Egypt.
Called also Raamses."
----- End Of Quote -----
While the Pharaoh gave the Hebrews the best of the land, it
should also be noted that due to the self-righteous attitude
of the Egyptians, the Hebrew shepherds were viewed as being
filthy. This negative attitude is something you do not find
in some popular Bible-related movies:
"That ye shall say, Thy servants' trade hath been about
cattle from our youth even until now, both we, and also our
fathers: that ye may dwell in the land of Goshen; for every
shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians."
(Genesis 46:34)
"And they set on for him by himself, and for them by
themselves, and for the Egyptians, which did eat with him,
by themselves: because the Egyptians might not eat bread
with the Hebrews; for that is an abomination unto the
Egyptians." (Genesis 43:32)
As we already know, while the Hebrews entered Egypt as slave
masters, within a few generations they became slaves
themselves under the harsh whip of the Egyptians. Once the
Israelites were freed from Egyptian bondage by the hand of
Moses several hundred years later, the Lord made it
perfectly clear to them that upon entering the land of
Canaan, they were to drive out the heathen nations, and to
destroy the images of their false gods. Neither were they to
intermarry with them:
"Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When
ye are passed over Jordan into the land of Canaan; Then ye
shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before
you, and destroy all their pictures, and destroy all their
molten images, and quite pluck down all their high places:
And ye shall dispossess the inhabitants of the land, and
dwell therein: for I have given you the land to possess it.
And ye shall divide the land by lot for an inheritance among
your families: and to the more ye shall give the more
inheritance, and to the fewer ye shall give the less
inheritance: every man's inheritance shall be in the place
where his lot falleth; according to the tribes of your
fathers ye shall inherit. But if ye will not drive out the
inhabitants of the land from before you; then it shall come
to pass, that those which ye let remain of them shall be
pricks in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and shall vex
you in the land wherein ye dwell. Moreover it shall come to
pass, that I shall do unto you, as I thought to do unto
them." (Numbers 33:51-56)
While the Lord told the Israelites to drive out the heathen
nations, at the same time, in the Mosaic Law He also made
provisions for the Hebrews to buy slaves from amongst them
as in the following verses:
"Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have,
shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them
shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children
of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye
buy, and of their families that are with you, which they
begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And
ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after
you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your
bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of
Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour."
(Leviticus 25:44-46)
Thus we see that, despite the hard bondage which the ancient
Israelites were forced to endure at the hands of their cruel
Egyptian taskmasters, for many years to come, the practice
of enslaving other human beings would still be an integral
part of Jewish history and culture. The question that we
must ask ourselves is, has it truly ended; or has it simply
been disguised in another form which is so subtle that few
are able to detect it? In the fourth part of this series, we
will be discussing King Solomon and Phoenician King Hiram,
Jewish bribery, extortion and conspiracy, the real plan
behind the Democratic vote, the Apostle Paul, a Pharisee of
Pharisees, the dangers of materialism, our Eternal Kingdom
and the Jewish temporal kingdom, the contrast between the
teachings of Jesus and the Jewish Rabbis, the difference
between cattle and sheep, the qualities of true shepherds of
the Lord, and Divine Predestination. As you can see, there
is still a lot more to come. I hope you are finding this
series fascinating and eye-opening. Please join me in part
four, won't you?
⇒ Go To The Next Part . . .