word cursed, as used in relation to the destinies of the negro race, were used in the imperative and judicial sense – not prophetically. In these passages, Gen., ix, 25, 26, 27, the person who violated the privacy of Noah in his repose, is alluded to as being then, at the very time the deed was done, a cursed character, and, in him, all his race. In the text, as it is translated, the words, cursed be Ham, is an imprecation on the head of Ham and his progeny, all identified, then and there, in his person. But, as it reads in the original, cursed Ham, without the be – which is a supplied word – it makes Ham to have been then, at that very time, a cursed man, and in him, all his race, in relation to slavery, excluding altogether any such notion as the passages being a mere prophesy.
But, says an objector, was it not prophesied that Jesus Christ was to come into the world, and that he should be put to death by wicked hands? We answer, yes; and add, moreover, that it was not only prophesied of, but was judicially determined, that he should come into the world to die for sinners; and had there never been any wicked hands to put him to death, yet must he have died in some other way, or there could have been no atonement. It was a decree of God, an irretrievable judicial act, that Christ should die, because he became the surety of those who were condemned to death and damnation; it did not depend, therefore, on contingencies primarily, but secondarily only. Respecting the curse, or judicial act of God, against the race of Ham, we apprehend that it is to be viewed in the same light as to its fulfillment,
