Mark Tabata’s Weekday Devotionals
Friday, September 18
More Bible Studies Available @ http://www.marktabata.com. To Receive Free Bible Studies and updates via email, contact Mark Tabata @ 606-216-1757 (SMS Only) or mailto:markatabata@gmail.com (Email). Follow me on Substack: http://substack.com/@marktabata. Also, please visit my author page: http://amazon.com/author/marktabata
Genesis 9:20-29-And Noah began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard. 21 Then he drank of the wine and was drunk, and became uncovered in his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father’s nakedness. 24 So Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done to him. 25 Then he said: “Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants He shall be to his brethren.” 26 And he said: “Blessed be the LORD, The God of Shem, And may Canaan be his servant. 27 May God enlarge Japheth, And may he dwell in the tents of Shem; And may Canaan be his servant.” 28 And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. 29 So all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died.
One of the dark sagas of human history is found in the story of Noah cursing his grandson, Canaan, and his descendants. As we read through the passage, there are many questions that arise.
Why does Noah curse Canaan for what his father, Ham, had done?
What exactly was so bad about Ham seeing Noah’s nakedness?
What does the Bible mean when it says that Noah, awaking from his drunken state, knew what his younger son had done to him?
What exactly is going on here?
Let’s study.
When we consider carefully the background of this passage, we see a very horrific scene unfolding. There is strong evidence that Noah was sexually assaulted while he was asleep and intoxicated.
These problems are resolved satisfactorily when one understands this story as an instance of incestuous, homosexual rape. Wold and Nissinen, among others, have made a convincing case for this interpretation. 63 First, the story appears to place Ham inside the tent, suggesting an action beyond peeking into the tent. Gen 9: 22 clearly states that, after seeing his father’s nakedness, Ham “told (it) to his two brothers outside.” The Septuagint is even more explict, adding (or translating from a different Hebrew version) that Ham “went out and told . . .” (exelthōn). What was he doing inside the tent? Possibly the tent was understood to be off-limits to the sons, explaining why Shem and Japheth were “outside” and unaware. The fact that v. 23 refers to Shem and Japheth taking “the outer garment” suggests that the garment was Noah’s. 64 How did Noah’s garment happen to be outside the tent? The most likely answer is: Ham brought it out when he went back outside. Why would Ham have brought out Noah’s garment? A possible answer: Ham brought the garment out as proof of what he “had done” to his father. It was the evidence he needed to establish bragging rights. Second, when Noah woke up, “he learned what his youngest son had done to him”—not the expression one would expect to describe an unintended glance or even voyeurism. 65 If wayyitgal is translated “and he was uncovered” rather than “and he uncovered himself,” it “leaves the door open” for asking: who uncovered Noah? The continuation in 9: 22 (which need not be separated from 9: 21 with a period) intimates that Ham committed the unspeakable act. Third, and most important, the language of “uncovering” and “seeing the nakedness of” connects up with similar phrases denoting sexual intercourse. 66 Leviticus uses the phrase “uncover the nakedness of” to denote incest (1aw8: 6-18; 20: 11, 17-21; also in 18: 19, of sexual intercourse with a woman during her menstrual cycle). The same phrase is used elsewhere in the Bible of prostitution and adultery, and of rape and/ or public exposure for adultery. 67 In Lev 20: 17, the expression “sees his/ her nakedness” is used to describe sibling incest; in other instances, the phrase “seeing the nakedness of” may imply an opportunity for rape. 68 Fourth, the claim that the text is concerned with Ham’s homosexual rape of his father is bolstered by the depiction of homosexual rape in a Mesopotamian omen text and the Egyptian myth of Horus and Seth (both cited above); in other words, as attempts at emasculating, disgracing, and demonstrating one’s power over a rival. By raping his father and alerting his brothers to the act, Ham hoped to usurp the authority of his father and elder brothers, establishing his right to succeed his father as patriarch. Fifth, the brothers’ actions in “covering their father’s nakedness” and taking great pains not to look at their father is compatible with an interpretation of “seeing another’s nakedness” as sexual intercourse. The brothers’ actions play on the broader meaning of the phrase. Not only did the brothers not “see their father’s nakedness” in the sense of having intercourse with him, but also they did not even dare to “see their father’s nakedness” in a literal sense. Where Ham’s act was exceedingly evil, their gesture was exceedingly pious and noble. Sixth, understanding Ham’s action as incestuous, homosexual rape of one’s father explains the severity of the curse on Canaan. According to Lev 18: 24-30; 20: 22-26, the reason God decided to “vomit out” the Canaanites from the land was their participation in such “abominable practices” (coercive or voluntary) as incest (mentioned most often in Leviticus 18, 20) and same-sex intercourse (singled out for special mention as an “abominable practice”). The etiological thrust of Gen 9: 20-27 lies at the forefront: The Canaanites deserve to be dispossessed of the land and made slaves because they are, and always have been, avid practitioners of immoral activity. In the new post-diluvian world, it was their ancestor that committed the most heinous act imaginable—not just rape, but incest; not just incestuous rape, but homosexual intercourse; not just incestuous, homosexual rape, but rape of one’s own father, to whom supreme honor and obedience is owed. It is, in effect, in the Canaanites’ blood to be unremittingly evil. Canaanite proclivity to homosexual rape is hinted at by J in Gen 10: 19 when he mentions the fact that the territory of the Canaanites extended as far south as Sodom and Gomorrah. The etiological character of the story about Ham also explains why the curse fell on Canaan rather than Ham. The story was being transmitted at a time when Canaan alone—not Egypt, Cush, and Put, Ham’s other “sons”—had been dispossessed by Israel. History had shown that the curse on Ham was really a curse only on Canaan. And the punishment eminently fit the crime (lex talionis). Just as Ham committed a heinous act with his “seed” (sperm), so too the curse fell on his “seed” (son, descendants). 69 Thus it is likely that the narrator charged Ham with committing a heinous act of incestuous, homosexual rape of his father. This interpretation of Gen 9: 20-27 is not unique in the history of interpretation. Three Greek translations of 9: 22 (those of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotian) substitute tēn aschēmosynēn (” shamefulness”) for tēn gymnōsin (” nakedness”)—the same Greek term employed by the LXX in the phrase “uncover the nakedness of” throughout Lev 18: 6-19 and 20: 11, 17-21 (referring to incest). It is also applied by Paul to homosexual intercourse in Rom 1: 27. “Perhaps Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotian intended to imply that Ham committed a homosexual act with his father, but this implication is not necessary, as they might have chosen aschēmosynē to render erwat and to mean nothing more than nakedness.” 70 The Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 70a) records a debate between Rab and Samuel (early third century C.E.) about the meaning of “had done to him” in Gen 9: 24: “Rab and Samuel [differ], one maintaining that he castrated him, while the other says that he had homosexual relations with him.” 71”. (Robert A. J. Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics, 76-79 (Kindle Edition): Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press)
So, why does God curse Canaan (Ham’s son) for Ham’s sin? One possibility is that Noah was speaking prophetically about the lineage of Ham through Canaan.
Furthermore, to hold that this word broods like a dark and inescapable fate over the future of a race, is to hold to a very grievous misunderstanding. True, the feelings of a good man have been outraged. Equally true, he gives vent to righteous indignation. But, for the most part, being a man who has the Holy Spirit, he speaks, a word of prophecy. This prophetic word is to serve as a guide forthe human race as well as for a solemn warning for all times to come.…“The evil trait, displayed by Ham in this story, had, no doubt, been discerned by Noah as marking Canaan, the son, more distinctly. Canaan’s whole race will display it more than any of the races of the earth. To foretell that involves no injustice. The son is not punished for the iniquity of the father. His own unfortunate moral depravity, which he himself developes and retains, is foretold. (H.C. Leupold, Exposition of Genesis, Volume 1 & 2, 423-424 (Kindle Edition): E4 Group)
The Bible paints for us a picture of the wickedness of humanity in this account from which we can learn many powerful lessons.
First, even godly men may fall victim to sin. Noah and his family were the chosen family of God through whom He saved humanity. While he was faithful to God, Noah still at times did things that were wrong (just like all of us-1 John 1:8).
Second, this passage shows us that there are often horrible situations which arise from the abuse of alcohol and other drugs. None of that justifies what Ham did to his father, but it does remind us in the wisdom of abstaining from the recreational use intoxicating influences in our lives (Ephesians 5:18: Titus 2:12-14).
Third, the passage teaches us about our need for the Savior. At every stage, sin is terrible and left to itself, becomes worse over time. Eventually, it leads to spiritual death (James 1:13-15). Thank God for Jesus, Who is the perfect Savior.
Lord grant us wisdom to seek Jesus, the only true Remedy, for our sin. Amen.
Leave a Reply