There are 4 thoughts on “The People of Canaan: A New Reading of Moses 7”.

  1. I am not convinced that Enoch did not preach to the people of Caanan out of fear of the other people around him who despised those people. When he was called by the Lord to preach to the people he was afraid because he was hated by everyone because he was “slow of speech.” whatever that means. But in Moses 6:32 he is given a promise by the Lord “Go forth and do as I have commanded thee, and no man shall pierce thee. Open thy mouth, and it shall be filled, and I will give thee utterance, for all flesh is in my hands, and I will do as seemeth me good.”

    34 Behold my Spirit is upon you, wherefore all thy words will I justify; and the mountains shall flee before you, and the rivers shall turn from their course; and thou shalt abide in me, and I in you; therefore walk with me.

    I do not believe fear of any man or groups of men was the reason he did not preach to the people of Caanan. We are not told why he did not preach there.

    I also am wondering about the “residue of the people” not including the Caananite. It certainly could be read that way, but in verse 43 “residue of the wicked” refers to all of the people that did not go into the ark and were left when the floods came. Is there a distinction between that use of the word “residue” and the “residue of the people” used in verse 20. Residue of the people vs Zion, i.e. those that would be left behind when in verse 21 Zion was taken up. Then “residue of the wicked, i.e. those that would be left behind and perished in the floods, while the people in the ark were saved.


  2. Stokes has actually clarified passages that I did not understand. Thanks so much.
    However, Stokes’ source did not provided him with the strongest 1978 statement on this issue from the late Elder McConkie:

    “There are statements in our literature by the early Brethren which we have interpreted to mean that the Negroes would not receive the priesthood in mortality. I have said the same things, and people write me letters and say, ‘You said such and such, and how is it now that we do such and such?’ And all I can say to that is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet. Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.” .

  3. This is fascinating and helpful. In addition to the sources and insights Adam has provided, BYU Studies published an essential review by Stirling Adams of books by two Jewish scholars on the history of interpretations of Noah’s Curse. As Stirling reports in his opening paragraph, “After Noah awakes from his drunkenness, he curses—not Ham, and not himself—but Ham’s son Canaan by pronouncing: “Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he
    be unto his brethren” (see Genesis 9:20–27). There is no reference to dark skin, to any skin color, or to Africa, and Noah does not say the curse applies to Canaan’s descendants. Yet this story, as it was amplified and changed in extrabiblical interpretations, became the ideological corner­stone used to justify the slavery of black Africans thousands of years afterwards.”
    It is of interest that Pharoh in the Book of Abraham is far from being a servant but is “A righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely ad justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers…” (Abr. 1:26). Nibley explained that the priesthood problem for Pharoh has nothing to do with race by rather in claiming a patriarchal priesthood through a matrilineal line. See Nibley, Abraham in Egypt, CWHN, 528.

    Andrei Orlov, an Enoch scholar, back around 2006 once wrote an informal comment to an LDS student concerning the Enoch account in the Pearl of Great Price the following:
    “I greatly enjoy your chapters on Enoch that you sent me other day. There are many interesting traditions in these pages. [he means the Book of Moses here in our Pearl of Great Price!]

    “For example: 7:22: And the Lord said unto Enoch: Behold mine abode forever. Very important term “forever” which seems allude to Enoch PERMANENT installation as supreme angel Metatron. In 2 Enoch this phrase is also used very often. The Lord installs Enoch forever.

    “7:22 is also very important: it says that “the seed of Cain were black.” It is interesing that in the Animal Apocalypse from 1 Enoch which depicts all human history in the esoteric zoomorphic code the Cainites are depicted as the black bulls, while the Sethites are portrayed as the white animals.

    “7:24 “Enoch was high and lifted up, even in the bosom of the Father, and of the Son of Man” – the language is similar to the Book of the Similitudes (esp. 1 Enoch 71) where Enoch is brought in the presence of the Father and the Son of Man.

    “Man, it is good stuff..

    “I am glad that you send it to me.”

    Thanks to Adam Stokes for his enlightening readings. Let’s hope there is more to come.

    Kevin Christensen
    Canonsburg, PA

Add Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters available

All comments are moderated to ensure respectful discourse. It is assumed that it is possible to disagree agreeably and intelligently and comments that intend to increase overall understanding are particularly encouraged. Individual authors are given the option to disallow commenting or end commenting after a certain period at their discretion.

Close this window

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This