Africa & the Bible: the myth of a cursed race

[Guest shiloh357]

Ok so why didn,t God punish or kill Moses for marrying a Black Ethiopian woman? God didn't tell Moses he was wrong, He didn't tell Moses to get rid of her and He punished the sister of Moses for speaking out against it. Go figure.

Per Exodus 2 & 3 & 18, Moses' father-in-law Jethro was a priest of Midian, and that would mean of the people of Midian. Midian was a son of Abraham by his later wife Keturah.

For one thing, that does not mean that Jethro was of Midianite lineage. He might have been born elsewhere.

Secondly, we also do not know of what parentage Jethro's wife was. She might have been Cushite as Zipporah is called a "chushite " (black in appearance) in Numbers 12:1.

Whether one holds to Zipporah being black, what we do know is that at some point Moses married a cushite (black) woman.

It is also good to note that Joseph was married to an Egyptian as well and God allowed his sons to head up the tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim in the Land of Israel. Evidently, God didn't have much of a problem with mixed ethnic races.

[Fez]

Ok so why didn,t God punish or kill Moses for marrying a Black Ethiopian woman? God didn't tell Moses he was wrong, He didn't tell Moses to get rid of her and He punished the sister of Moses for speaking out against it. Go figure.

Per Exodus 2 & 3 & 18, Moses' father-in-law Jethro was a priest of Midian, and that would mean of the people of Midian. Midian was a son of Abraham by his later wife Keturah.

For one thing, that does not mean that Jethro was of Midianite lineage. He might have been born elsewhere.

Secondly, we also do not know of what parentage Jethro's wife was. She might have been Cushite as Zipporah is called a "chushite " (black in appearance) in Numbers 12:1.

Whether one holds to Zipporah being black, what we do know is that at some point Moses married a cushite (black) woman.

It is also good to note that Joseph was married to an Egyptian as well and God allowed his sons to head up the tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim in the Land of Israel. Evidently, God didn't have much of a problem with mixed ethnic races.

I have read through the entire post and all the answers and nearly wept with frustration and sadness. Being religious rather than spiritual, and using OT stuff to confuse ourselves is not the way to go. Jesus taught us that he had come to release us from the law, and he also taught us that the way to Him was through love and forgiveness. Now I know I am simplifying the arguement, but that is what the message actually is! A simple message written so that simple people can understand it. By arguing points for which there is no real answer, we complicate this simple message.(satan loves that sort of thing - confusion in the ranks, he loves it!) He told us to love our neighbours, He did not qualify who our neighbours should or should not be, athiests for all we know. Who are we, after all that is said and done, to judge? I leave that to the Lord.

Edited April 7, 2009 by Fez

[Guest shiloh357]

Ok so why didn,t God punish or kill Moses for marrying a Black Ethiopian woman? God didn't tell Moses he was wrong, He didn't tell Moses to get rid of her and He punished the sister of Moses for speaking out against it. Go figure.

Per Exodus 2 & 3 & 18, Moses' father-in-law Jethro was a priest of Midian, and that would mean of the people of Midian. Midian was a son of Abraham by his later wife Keturah.

For one thing, that does not mean that Jethro was of Midianite lineage. He might have been born elsewhere.

Secondly, we also do not know of what parentage Jethro's wife was. She might have been Cushite as Zipporah is called a "chushite " (black in appearance) in Numbers 12:1.

Whether one holds to Zipporah being black, what we do know is that at some point Moses married a cushite (black) woman.

It is also good to note that Joseph was married to an Egyptian as well and God allowed his sons to head up the tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim in the Land of Israel. Evidently, God didn't have much of a problem with mixed ethnic races.

I have read through the entire post and all the answers and nearly wept with frustration and sadness. Being religious rather than spiritual, and using OT stuff to confuse ourselves is not the way to go. Jesus taught us that he had come to release us from the law, and he also taught us that the way to Him was through love and forgiveness. Now I know I am simplifying the arguement, but that is what the message actually is! A simple message written so that simple people can understand it. By arguing points for which there is no real answer, we complicate this simple message.(satan loves that sort of thing - confusion in the ranks, he loves it!) He told us to love our neighbours, He did not qualify who our neighbours should or should not be, athiests for all we know. Who are we, after all that is said and done, to judge? I leave that to the Lord.

So, in essence you said all of that to say that you have nothing really substantive to add to the conversation. If we were arguing about the law, then you might have a point. Otherwise, you basically offered nothing to conversation.

[nebula]

He told us to love our neighbours,

I agree with this.

using OT stuff to confuse ourselves is not the way to go.

But I disagree with that.

Jesus quoted from the Law when He answered Satan's temptations.

When the Apostles spoke of the Scriptures, they were referring to the Law.

In fact, the commands that Jesus gave about love came from the Law!

[Guest HIS girl]

I will be blunt -

Any Christian who believes in race seperation/exclusion is deceived - simple as that.

When one has been presented with Scripture "supporting" Moses' marriage to a black woman and there is still willful rejection of His Word on that, I suggest you go into your room, close the door, and pray fervently for protection from the father of lies, repentance in your stubborness at OPPOSING the Word and a renewal in opening of the eyes to what Scripture says about HIS WORD and loving one another - ALL races...

As a Christian woman of mixed heritage, I find it pathetic that Christians are STILL building dividing walls within the Church - Jesus is looking for those to worship in Spirit AND in TRUTH.

Do not REMAIN in DECEIT.

And if that offends some people, well Jesus offended people with the truth also - but it was for their BENEFIT if they took the truth on board.

[Massorite]

Ok so why didn,t God punish or kill Moses for marrying a Black Ethiopian woman? God didn't tell Moses he was wrong, He didn't tell Moses to get rid of her and He punished the sister of Moses for speaking out against it. Go figure.

Per Exodus 2 & 3 & 18, Moses' father-in-law Jethro was a priest of Midian, and that would mean of the people of Midian. Midian was a son of Abraham by his later wife Keturah.

For one thing, that does not mean that Jethro was of Midianite lineage. He might have been born elsewhere.

Secondly, we also do not know of what parentage Jethro's wife was. She might have been Cushite as Zipporah is called a "chushite " (black in appearance) in Numbers 12:1.

Whether one holds to Zipporah being black, what we do know is that at some point Moses married a cushite (black) woman.

It is also good to note that Joseph was married to an Egyptian as well and God allowed his sons to head up the tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim in the Land of Israel. Evidently, God didn't have much of a problem with mixed ethnic races.

I have read through the entire post and all the answers and nearly wept with frustration and sadness. Being religious rather than spiritual, and using OT stuff to confuse ourselves is not the way to go. Jesus taught us that he had come to release us from the law, and he also taught us that the way to Him was through love and forgiveness. Now I know I am simplifying the argument, but that is what the message actually is! A simple message written so that simple people can understand it. By arguing points for which there is no real answer, we complicate this simple message.(satan loves that sort of thing - confusion in the ranks, he loves it!) He told us to love our neighbors, He did not qualify who our neighbors should or should not be, atheists for all we know. Who are we, after all that is said and done, to judge? I leave that to the Lord.

So, in essence you said all of that to say that you have nothing really substantive to add to the conversation. If we were arguing about the law, then you might have a point. Otherwise, you basically offered nothing to conversation.

I agree and besides. Who said anything about arguing? The best I can tell is that we are all "simply" (as you put it Fez) having a discussion and not an argument at all.

So you are saying that we should ignore the old testament because we are delivered from the law? Right? If you have done any real biblical research you would have known that the Old testament and ALL that is written in it complements the New testament in every way and all of the old testament is still relevant whether we are under the law or not. Did Jesus quote from the old testament during His ministry? Yes He did and many times. Did Jesus tell us that any part of the old testament was now void? No! So what the hay, I guess we should be able to have as many relevant old testament discussions as we want as long as we don't let the law get under our skin once more. Right?

[Massorite]

I will be blunt -

Any Christian who believes in race seperation/exclusion is deceived - simple as that.

When one has been presented with Scripture "supporting" Moses' marriage to a black woman and there is still willful rejection of His Word on that, I suggest you go into your room, close the door, and pray fervently for protection from the father of lies, repentance in your stubborness at OPPOSING the Word and a renewal in opening of the eyes to what Scripture says about HIS WORD and loving one another - ALL races...

As a Christian woman of mixed heritage, I find it pathetic that Christians are STILL building dividing walls within the Church - Jesus is looking for those to worship in Spirit AND in TRUTH.

Do not REMAIN in DECEIT.

And if that offends some people, well Jesus offended people with the truth also - but it was for their BENEFIT if they took the truth on board.

You go girl!

[Celt]

I will be blunt also then.

For Moses' father-in-law to be a Midianite priest, as God's Word says, and in more than one Scripture, he would have had to been a Midianite first, and not Ethiopian. But maybe some think Midianites and Ethiopians then were the same peoples? Well, they were not.

There's a reason why God gave these geneaology links in His Word. One example was with the Levitical priesthood, because He commanded that only Levites and the sons of Aaron were to hold the priest office to Israel. And in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, some of the Levites had mixed their lineages, and Nethinims (given to Temple service) that had returned from Babylon with Judah were considered "polluted" from the priesthood because their genealogy could not be found of Israel:

Ezra 2:58-62

58 All the Nethinims, and the children of Solomon's servants, were three hundred ninety and two.

59 And these were they which went up from Telmelah, Telharsa, Cherub, Addan, and Immer: but they could not shew their father's house, and their seed, whether they were of Israel:

60 The children of Delaiah, the children of Tobiah, the children of Nekoda, six hundred fifty and two.

61 And of the children of the priests: the children of Habaiah, the children of Koz, the children of Barzillai; which took a wife of the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and was called after their name:

62 These sought their register among those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found: therefore were they, as polluted, put from the priesthood.

(KJV)

If Nethinim priests who were foreign born, were put from the priesthood EVEN THOUGH IT SHOWS THEY LIVED AMONG ISRAEL AS ISRAELITE PRIESTS, then why were they considered "as polluted", if it was ONLY about religion? It was because of God's Commandments for Israel to remain separate, and for the priesthood especially!

So don't try and tell me that one's genealogy was not important to God per the Old Covenant times, especially within the Levitical priesthood. God even separated the tribe of Levi only, to carry the ark of the Covenant. Anyone else would suffer for carrying it.

Judg 1:16

16 And the children of the Kenite, Moses' father in law, went up out of the city of palm trees with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah, which lieth in the south of Arad; and they went and dwelt among the people.

(KJV)

In that verse, it's alluding to Jethro being of the Kenites, which was a nation of the land of Canaan, a people which God told Israel not to marry into. So what was Jethro, a Kenite, a Midianite, or an Ethiopian?

Maybe some of you might want to try and go pay some prophet of Baalam to try and put a curse on me for saying all this. You can try, but God will reverse it back to you, because I'm staying in His Word on this matter of genealogy, because God is Who ordained the separation of peoples per the Old Covenant times.

Here's a question within New Covenant timing:

In Revelation 7 is mentioned 144,000, twelve thousand from each of the twelve tribes of Israel, being SEALED WITH GOD'S SEALING FOR THE ENDTIMES AGAINST DECEPTION. Does that mean 144,000 of ALL nations, or just Israelites? If the matter of geneaology is no longer important to God, then why does that still show a separation, even in the New Testament?

[Celt]

I shouldn't have to defend God's Promises to His chosen Israel, but it's obvious today's doctrines of men taught in many Churches today means someone has to.

Rev 7:1-4

1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.

2 And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea,

3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.

(KJV)

Rev.9 tells us what that sealing is about. It is God's sealing for the endtime, in the foreheads of His servants, the spiritual opposite of the 'mark of the beast'. Each tribe of Israel is specifically named. Both the "house of Judah" (Judah, Benjamin, Levi) and the "house of Israel" (ten tribes) are included. The only two names not mentioned are Dan and Ephraim (which are put back in, in final per Ezekiel 48). And per Bible history, the Jews are only represented by the three tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi (see 1 Kings 11 forward). The rest of the tribes exist somewhere else in the world, scattered among the nations.

Also, per 1 Kings 11:28-36, God said He would always leave one tribe in Jerusalem, for the sake of His servant David, and for Jerusalem's sake. That tribe was Judah. And a remnant of Judah has remained there, even to today, and will forever. One does not have to be an orthodox Jew to realize that, nor many other of God's Promises that were specific to Israelites only.

AND AFTER THAT, THEN GENTILES ARE MENTIONED:

Rev 7:9-10

9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

10 And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God Which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.

(KJV)

Some may want to lie to theirself and deny that distinction exists between Israelites and Gentiles even in the New Testament Book of Revelation, the Revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. But they'd just be lying to theirself about that distinction of genealogy there.

Rom 3:1-2

1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

(KJV)

Rom 3:9-12

9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

(KJV)

Even the apostle Paul showed an ordained mission God has for Israelites. That's per God's choosing; it has nothing to do with the kind of sinner they are, for it's well proven we are all sinners. The importance is that God gave them a specific 'calling' that no man can change. And that calling for the literal seed of Israel is still... in effect for today, even as shown with the Revelation 7 distinction. And just because The Gospel has gone to us Gentiles, and we received It, still does not make us better than them, because they still..., even today, have that calling God gave them, and many of the promises, even though many of Israel have still refused Christ today.

Gen 49:10

10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto Him shall the gathering of the people be.

(KJV)

Here's a prophecy Jacob gave for his son Judah, meant for "in the last days" (Gen.49:1). That means even for today. What does that show? It reveals part of what the apostle Paul was saying about the importance of God's calling for Israel. So how would Israel mixing up its genealogy go against that? And if one doesn't think it would interfere, then that shows who the truly decieved are. Even though, I doubt one who is deceived knows what that verse means. So to make sure, I'll outline its meaning.

God has a birthright blessing He gave to His chosen Israel. It began with Abraham, and then went to Isaac, then to Jacob, then to Joseph, and then to Ephraim and Manasseh (1 Chronicles 5). And it is a promise involving the 'literal' seed of Israel. Per the 1 Chronicles 5 Scripture, it is in two parts. One part is about the royal sceptre of rule and caretaker of God's law; the other is about the blessings of wealth, blessings of resources, and blessings of the womb (meaning great number of seed, 'literal' seed), as outlined in the promises God gave to Israel (Jacob) in Genesis 27. Of the tribe of Judah was to come the "chief ruler" per 1 Chron.5. That means the royal sceptre, AND caretaker of God's law. That specific Gen.49:10 verse says neither the royal sceptre, nor the position of lawgiver, is to part from Judah's responsibility, ALL THE WAY UP TO SHILOH'S COMING, AND THE GATHERING OF THE PEOPLE TO HIM. The name "Shiloh" in that verse is put as a symbolic name for our Lord Jesus Christ.

[HouseofGrace]

Are all races created equal in God