Thread:JoshSelma5667/@comment-1777104-20180421194926

Josh, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but our guidelines attempt, whenever possible, to only provide commentary that can be drawn from the text. In the case of etymology, there would have to be alteranate translation of a word in the Bible itself to justify alternate meanings. Quoting scholars is fine, but that should be in footnotes, accompanied by verses to support the commentary.

If there is debate, as with Ham (khahm), we should follow the text, not speculation of later redaction. The name was given to the child at birth, in all likelihood, and the charactistic dark color of the Cushites probably is a variation that happened at the birth of Ham's son, Cush. That feature is a dominant gene, and at the dispersion after Babel was likely used to send those suited for the climate near the eqautor to a favorable land.

The Canaanites, on the other hand, are lighter, a mid-brown similar to the Semites. I'm sure it made the choice of mates easier after the time of Jacob. Interestingly, the Hebrews were prejudiced of dark skin, as is seen in the displeasure when Moses married a Cushite. 