Scriptures and Doctrine :: What did Ham realy do?

Transcription

1 What did Ham realy do? - posted by Logic, on: 2009/7/26 17:32 The nakedness of a man is a common Hebrew expression for having sex with his wife Lev. 20:11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Lev. 20:20 And if a man shall lie with his uncle's wife, he hath uncovered his uncle's nakedness: they shall bear their sin ; they shall die childless. 21 And if a man shall take his brother's wife, it is an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his brother's nakedness; they shal l be childless. Canaan was cursed life because he was conceived by perversion; Ham sleeping with his mother. Noah cursed Canaan as a statement of that reality, not as a judgment, but as a warning to others against following in Ham s perverted ways. Noah drank his wine and got drunk, became uncovered in his tent. And Ham, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brothers. But Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father. faces were turned away, and they did not see their fatherâ s nakedness. So Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done to him. Then he said :  Cursed be Canaan  " Gen. 9:18, Re: What did Ham realy do?, on: 2009/7/26 22:04 As logical as that may seem, but aren't you stretching the truth of the matter? It doesn't say that he slept with his Mother. What purpose would the blanket be and for Shem and Jephath to go backwards into the tent to cover up their Dad? Too many missing pieces, not enough information to form an opinion. I'll check with another source and see what that says. Follow up: In Josephus account he says that Ham laughed as to the position he found his father in and he showed his br others which they were not impressed covered their father with a blanket. And as Waltern put it, it does sound like a hollywood script because if you've ever watched the Ten Commandments, my God, I never seen so many untruths crammed into a bible related movie. Re: What did Ham realy do?, on: 2009/7/27 1:40 To: Logic What you have posted sounds like a recent Hollywood movie script, from the pit of hell itself. Homosexuality be tween Ham and his father, Noah? What does God's Word, the Bible say about seeing someone that is "uncovere d" or "naked"? Is it a "wicked thing" to see someone else nude? Leviticus 20: And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she s ee his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath uncovered his sister's nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity. The question is "Why did Noah curse Canaan instead of Ham?" Answer: (Genesis 9:20-29) tells us, "20. And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: 21. And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. 22. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. 23. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it u pon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. 24. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had d one unto him. 25. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. 26. And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. 27. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. 28. And Noa Page 1/18

2 h lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. 29. And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.." Noah was responding to two things: 1) the character of his oldest son, Ham, who thought it was a big joke to see his fath er (the Family Priest) naked (uncovered-  nakednessâ ), and made fun of him to his two other sons; 2) When he awok e, God gave Noah understanding about what had happened, and at the same time God revealed to Noah that Ham s son Canaan would follow in the evil footsteps of his father. Noah was not actually cursing Canaan, he was prophesying about the future of Canaan, a prophecy given to him by God. Why did Noah curse Canaan rather than Ham? Was seeing his father naked serious enough to warrant such a curse? th roughout the Old Testament there are lots of references about seeing another person nude or "uncovered", which God warns against. However, it was also the fact that he had no respect for his father,and it was the pleasure that Ham took f rom his fatherâ s humiliation that was a major part of the offense. It wasnâ t an event that a person should enjoy, as Hab akkuk 2:15-16 states:  15. Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken als o, that thou mayest look on their nakedness! 16. Thou art filled with shame for glory: drink thou also, and let thy foreskin be uncovered: the cup of the Lord' s right hand shall be turned unto thee, and shameful spewing shall be on thy glory.â Of interest to me is the order that Noah lists his sonâ s: Shem, Ham & Japeth. However, Japeth is the oldest, Sh em is the second oldest, and Ham is the youngest: Genesis 10:21 establishes that Japheth is the elder, an adjective which we take to mean" eldest" of the three, no t just the two involved in this verse. "Unto Shem also, the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japhet h the elder, even to him were children born." The Hebrew word for "elder" here is gadol, a word used 511 times i n the Bible, the predominant translation being "great," or some form of it. It is translated 442 times as "great" or forms of it. It is also translated "high," "mighty," and "noble." It is translated "elder" eight times and "eldest" six times. The same word is used in I Samuel 17:13, "And the three eldest sons of Jesse went and followed Saul to the battle: and the names of his, three sons that went to the battle were Eliab the firstborn, and next unto him A binadab, and the third Shammah." Verse 28 also refers to Eliab as the eldest (Heb. gadol) of the sons of Jesse. It appears from the etymology that Japheth was the "great" or "eldest" of Noah's three sons in terms of the orde r of their birth. Now Ham is spoken of in the King James Version as the younger. "And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew w hat his younger son had done unto him" (Gen. 9:24). Bullinger's Companion Bible suggests that Ham was the y ounger to Japheth, not Shem." you have to use the KJV to understand this fact Tracing the etymology of the Hebrew word translated "younger" in Genesis 9:24 (qatan, little), we find it used 48 times, with translationsof "least," "less," "small," "little," and "smallest".it is translated "younger" eleven times and "youngest" twice. David was referred to as the "youngest" son of Jesse, "And Samuel said unto Jesse. Are here all thy children? And he s aid. There remaineth yet the youngest Shem means "name or renown,â indicating the priority that the Semitic or Shemitic people would have in God's plan. Shem's line can be traced in Genesis 11 through Eber and Terah to Abram. The renown of Shem will be realized when the promises to Abram are fulfilled. "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made" (Gal. 3:16). Japheth means "the extender, or enlargement." Of his descendants it is recorded, "By these were the isles of th e Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations" (Gen. 10:5). Pel oubet's Bible Dictionary says of Japheth, "The descendants of Japheth occupied the 'isles of the Gentiles,' i.e., t he coast lands of the Mediterranean Sea in Europe and Asia Minor whence they spread northward over the w hole continent of Europe and a considerable portion of Asia." These being representative of a portion of the Ge Page 2/18

3 ntiles, they have access to the promises made to Abraham and his seed by the process of adoption in which th ey surrender their Gentilism and become adopted into the spiritual family of Israel. Ham means "black or swarthy or dark colored." It is opined that the descendants of Ham are the black races, "s ervant of servants to his brethren" (Gen. 9:25) as the curse placed on Ham's descendants by Noah suggests. So me feel that the descendants of Ham include the races of the East (China, India, etc.). W. H. Carter, in Times and Seasons, page 221, concludes, "It is thus clear beyond doubt that the order of birth w as Japheth, Shem and Ham; whilst Shem was two years younger than Japheth, and Ham younger than Shem. T he latter was probably named first in Genesis 5:32 because he was the one through whom God's purpose was t o develop." W. H. Carter proves from Genesis 11:10 that Shem was 100 years old when he "begat Arphaxad two years after t he flood." He then calculates Noah's age as in his 503rd year when Shem was born, determining by deduction t hat Japheth was two years older than Shem from the text in Genesis 5:32, "And Noah was five hundred years ol d : and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth." Sincerely, Walter Logic wrote: The nakedness of a man is a common Hebrew expression for having sex with his wife Lev. 20:11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood sh all be upon them. Lev. 20:20 And if a man shall lie with his uncle's wife, he hath uncovered his uncle's nakedness: they shall bear their sin; they shall die childless. 21 And if a man shall take his brother's wife, it is an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his brother's nakedness; they shall be childless. Canaan was cursed life because he was conceived by perversion; Ham sleeping with his mother. Noah cursed Canaan as a statement of that reality, n ot as a judgment, but as a warning to others against following in Ham s perverted ways. Noah drank his wine and got drunk, became uncovered in his tent. And Ham, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brothers. But Shem a nd Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father. faces were turned away, and they did not see their fatherâ s nakedness. So Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done to him. Then he said :  Cursed be Canaan  " Gen. 9:18, Re: What did Ham realy do? - posted by enid, on: 2009/7/27 9:05 Rev 22v18, 'For I testify to everyone who hears the word of the prophecy of this book, if anyone adds to these things, Go d will add to him the plagues that are written in this book, vs19, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. Whether that means only the book of Revelation, or the entire Bible, I'll leave that up to you. But, don't read into the word of God that which is not there. It does read like some perverse hollywood script, what logic wrote that is. What a mind. But I simply accept what it says in Genesis concerning what Ham did. Besides, how does knowing or not knowing enhance your Christian walk? How does it help? Who cares what happened? Page 3/18

4 Bye. Re: What can we learn from Ham's error? - posted by roadsign (), on: 2009/7/27 9:16 But, don't read into the word of God that which is not there. Yes, we do need to guard against trying to fit scripture texts into our own epistemological categories (ie: logic). It may be wise to go over the text again and ask different questions. How about these: Why did this story get into scripture? What does this account say about the characters? About human nature? About God s ways? What is the abiding principle? Consider this analysis: One day, Noah drank too much wine and as a result he shamefully exposed himself. "He became drunk and lay uncove red inside his tent." Gen. 9:20 While he was fast asleep, his son, Ham, happened to walk in on him and see him lying th ere naked. Notice Ham's response: "Ham saw his father's nakedness and TOLD his brothers." Gen. 9:22 In other words, Ham ratted on his dad. Apparently, this was a very wicked thing to do. You may be wondering, what coul d have been so wrong with mentioning this to his brothers? What was wrong with having a good laugh over this? Surely this was not nearly as bad as his father's excessive drinking. Ham's thoughtless response was evil because it violated the character of God. God's primary involvement with man is to cover their shame. That's what Christ was all about. Ham's brothers, Shem and Japheth, responded to the situation very differently. Their action demonstrated the character of God. They "took a garment and laid it across their shoulders; then they walked in backwards and covered their father' s nakedness." Gen.9:23 Their gesture was an expression of the heart of God. Because God is holy, he cannot look upon exposed sin without condemning it. Instead he covers it with mercy forshadowed in his provision of coverings for Adam and Eve. God blessed Shem and Japheth, including their descendants but he punished Ham with a curse. It is not natural for us to protect the dignity of another, especially if they don't deserve it, or if they have offended or anno yed us in some way. Like Ham, we are more inclined to expose their shame - and expose them naked before others - perhaps by gossiping about them or "reporting" on them. Naturally, we feel very justified in doing it. But that invites the s ame curse Ham received. However, this thinking never originates from the Spirit. When the Spirit puts God's laws on our mind, we will intuitively ref lect Christ's mission and his nature: to cover the shame of sinners - as Shem and Japheth did. The sins of others are never to be pawns for us to "play with" at the expense of the sinner. It is not for us to rip off people 's self-made "fig leaves" - as pitiful as they may be. That is never redemptive. Our mission is to be redemptive. "He who covers over an offense promotes love, but he who repeats the matter separates close friends." Prov. 17:9 Diane Page 4/18

5 Re: - posted by Logic, on: 2009/7/27 10:02 DeepThinker wrote: As logical as that may seem, but aren't you stretching the truth of the matter? It doesn't say that he slept with his Mother. Yes, it does: the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness Lev. 20:11 & re-read Lev. 20:20-21 & Lev. 18:8 while your at it. Lev 18:8 The nakedness of your father's wife shall you not uncover: it is your father's nakedness. What purpose would the blanket be and for Shem and Jephath to go backwards into the tent to cover up their Dad? That would be my question. Ham says: "Hey brothers, Dad's in his own tent naked". (Gen 9:22) Shem and Japheth sayd: "Oh-oh, we'd better go and cover him up, he shouldn't be naked in his own tent." In the popular interpretatipon of this story, What is wrong with what Ham did then? What is so amazing that Ham thought his father being naked in his own tent something to brag about? Why can't Noah be naked in his own tent? Why did Noah curse Canon and not Ham? Why was Hams "crime" any wors than what Noah did? What do you think of Lev. 20:11, concerning what Ham did? Re: - posted by Logic, on: 2009/7/27 10:08 waltern wrote: What you have posted sounds like a recent Hollywood movie script, from the pit of hell itself. Only if you understand it the way you do, sure, I will agree. Homosexuality between Ham and his father, Noah? That is not what I was getting at. This is why I agree with your first statment. My point was that Ham slep with his mother, as Lev. 20:11 says. the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: Ham slept with his mother. What does God's Word, the Bible say about seeing someone that is "uncovered" or "naked"? I'm not talking about seeing some one naked, but "uncovering his father's nakedness" which is lying with his father's wi fe. Page 5/18

6 Re:, on: 2009/7/27 12:56 To Logic: I can guarantee you that IF Ham had slept with his own mother, Noah's wife, he would have been put to death on the spot. And if the mother willingly participated, she would have shared the same fate. We hear nothing of the sort in this narrative, given by Noah. We know that Ham and his wife and family ended up in Canaan. Let's look at the verses again: 21. And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. 22. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. 23. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. 24. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. Why did Noah curse Canaan rather than Ham? Was seeing his father naked serious enough to warrant such a curse? It is doubtful that merely seeing Noah naked was the main issue; rather, it was Ham s pleasure from his fatherâ s hu miliation. It wasnâ t an event that a person should enjoy, as Habakkuk 2:15-16 states:  Woe to him who gives drink to his neighbors, pouring it from the wineskin till they are drunk, so that he can gaze on their naked bodies.  You will be filled with shame instead of glory. Now it is your turn! Drink and be exposed!â Where did Ham & his sons (Cush, Put and Cannan) settle when they left the Ark? (Genesis 10:6-18) 6 The sons of Ham; Cush, Mizraim, Put, and Cannan. 7 The sons of Cush; Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah, and Sabtec hah. And the sons of Raamah; Sheba and Dedan. 8 Cush became the father of Nimrod; who became a mighty warrior in the land. 9 He was a might hunter before the Lord; therefore it is said, Like Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord. 10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. 11 From that land he wen t to Assyria and built Nineveh. Rehoboth-Ir, Calah, 12 and Resen between Ninevah and Calah, which is a great city. 13 And Mizraim became the father of Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim, 14 Pathrusim, and Casiuhim, from whom cam e the Philistines and Caphtorim. 15 Cannan became the father of his firstborn Sidon, and Heth, 16 the Jebusite, the Amo rite, and the Girgashite. 17 the Hivite, the Arkite, and the Sinite, 18 the Arvadite, the Zemarite, and the Hamathite. (the Giants that occupied Canaan) Afterward the families of the Cananites were dispersed. (Genesis 10:19) 19 And the border of the Cananites was from Sidon as you go toward Gerar, as far as Gaza; then as you go toward Sod om, and Gomorrah, and Admah, and Zeboim, as far as Lasha. 20 They were the sons of Ham, according to their familie s, according to their tongues, in their lands, in their nations. So, we can see that what is called the  curseâ is nothing more than a Prophecy. Out of Canaan's loins would come th e Giants, who were the enemies of God and the enemies of Israel. Where did they settle? Right in the middle, and throu ghout the promised land of God s chosen people. However, we must go back to Ham, Canaan s father. Ham (who was a Son of God) was the one who married a giantess ("a daughter of men", a descendent of Cain). Ham was corrupted by being married to this woman, just like the Israelites were corrupted by the false prophet Balaam, who we find in Revelation 2:14-15, gave informati on to Balaak to corrupt the Jews  14. But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat thin gs sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. 15. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nic olaitans, which thing I hate. (Revelation 2:14-15) Page 6/18

7 What is the mark of Cain? It surely isnâ t a black skin, that does not protect anyone from anything. The mark of Cain was Giantism- that is how anyone could see the  mark of CainÂ, and stay clear of him. The  Sons of God referenced in Genesis are believers, like Noah and Seth. However, some of the Son s of God married t he daughters of Cain, the "daughters of men", who were giants, and no longer worshiped the God who made th em, but their own idols, given to them by Satan. Genesis 6 1. And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2. T hat the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3. And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundre d and twenty years. 4. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of ren own. 5. And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7. And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8. But Noah found grace in th e eyes of the Lord. What does the Bible tell us about the Sons of God? Are they only Angels(Job 1:6)? are they also believers in Je hovah, believers in God? Or are they demonic angels, who rebelled with satan, and somehow came down to ear th to impregnate unsuspecting women? (Romans 9:3-4) For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according t o the flesh: 4. Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the gi ving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; We can see that the Israelites are the sons of God by adoption! (Exodus 4:22-23) 22. And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: 23. An d I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn.'" Again, we can see that the Israelites are God s sons, are God s firstborn. This reference is given by God Him self to Moses words that he is to say to Pharoah ( Deuteronomy 14:1-2)1. Ye are the children of the Lord your God: ye shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness be tween your eyes for the dead. 2. For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God, and the Lord hath chosen thee to b e a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth. Again, we see reference to the fact that believers are considered by God to be a  holy people unto the Lord, a chosen and peculiar people, above all the nations upon the earth. (Isaiah 43:6-7) 6. I will say to the north, give up; and to the south, keep not back: bring my sons from far, and my dau ghters from the ends of the earth; Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him. Jeremiah 31:9 9. They shall come with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them: I will cause them to walk by the rivers of waters in a straight way, wherein they shall not stumble: for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn. Here, God refers to the believing Jews as his Sons (He is the Father of Israel) Hosea 11:1 1.When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt. Here, Israel is called His son by God Himself! Page 7/18

8 Romans 8:12, Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. 23. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the rede mption of our body. Here, we see reference to Christian believers awaiting the adoption to be the Sons of God, at the rapture (redem ption of our body) Ephesians 1:4-6 4.According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame b efore him in love: 5. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of hi s will,(we are the Son's of God, believers!) 6. To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. (Galatians 4:4-5) 4. But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5. To r edeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. So, here again we see that throughout the Old and the New Testament believers in the One True God are referre d to as God s sons, adopted to him by their belief in Him and in His plan of salvation These are all the passages in which the word is found. Here the word means the "placing" or "adoption" as sons. In rege neration we receive the nature of sons of God; in adoption we receive the position of sons of God. Regeneration is a cha nge of nature. Adoption is a change of position or relation. What about the fallen angels? Do they have the ability to have physical, sexual relations with women who live u pon the earth? Are they physical beings or spiritual beings? Christ tells us in His word that they do not have the ability to have sexual relations. However, fallen angels have the ability to possess fallen humans, and vicariously influence and be a part of the sexual encounter, and take o ver their lives.  23. The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him, 24. Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. 25. Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother: 26. Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. 27. And last of all the wom an died also. 28. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. 29. Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 30. For i n the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. Sincerely, Walter Logic wrote: waltern wrote: What you have posted sounds like a recent Hollywood movie script, from the pit of hell itself. Only if you understand it the way you do, sure, I will agree. Homosexuality between Ham and his father, Noah? Page 8/18

9 That is not what I was getting at. This is why I agree with your first statment. My point was that Ham slep with his mother, as Lev. 20:11 says. the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: Ham slept with his mother. What does God's Word, the Bible say about seeing someone that is "uncovered" or "naked"? I'm not talking about seeing some one naked, but "uncovering his father's nakedness" which is lying with his father's wife. Re: - posted by PaulWest (), on: 2009/7/27 13:05 and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backw ard, and they saw not their father's nakedness. So, did the sons cover Noah, or their mother? Remember: "...then he drank of the wine, and was drunk, and became uncovered in his tent." (Genesis 9:21 NKJV Italic s mine). You can't have the text go two ways. It's an interesting thought, I admit, with the references from Levitius. I've never hear d it exegeted that way before. But it must be rejected in light of the obvious context and in the conspicuous absence of a ny mention of the mother or the act of incest (where, in other parts of scripture the Holy Spirit renders the act of incest m ost clear, descriptive and unmistakable). Re:, on: 2009/7/27 13:15 Hello, Paul: The only person mentioned is Noah, not his wife. His two sons, Shem and Japeth, in order not to see their father's nakedness, walked backward on each side of him, to cover his nudity with a garment. 21. And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. 22. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. 23. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. Believe me, if Noah's wife was there, we would know. It would be part of Scripture. There is no reason for us to make up scripture, just because we do not understand what the Scripture is referring to. The Bible is the only Book that shows the flaws of believers and non-believers alike. Why is that? It is the Word of God, that God holds above His very Name. Psalms 138:2 2. I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast mag nified thy word above all thy name. Sincerely, Walter Page 9/18

10 Re: - posted by PaulWest (), on: 2009/7/27 13:16 The only person mentioned is Noah, not his wife. Yes, I know this. It was meant for a challenge to Logic. I was adding a text to my post when you wrote yours. Sorry for th e confusion. Re:, on: 2009/7/27 15:49 Wow... this is kinda of a wierd conversation. I have read this passage hundreds of times and never once made the connection that Logic has made. In the context of Noah being alone in his tent, and his other 2 sons covering him with a blanket, it is quite clear from the context that this had nothing to do with inappropriate relations between one of the sons and Noah's wife. The only thing exposed by further debate on this is perhaps perverse minds on this forum. I will say, however, that I can see how the connection was made between Lev and Gen... but reading it all context it's pla in to anyone that Noah had simply passed out and he was exposed. We look at this from a Western mind that has been warped by the society we live in where we dont think this is a big dea l. But in that culture, at that time... seeing their father's "nakedness", and then mocking him about it was serious busines s. Keep the text in it's context! Krispy Re:, on: 2009/7/27 16:11 The mark of Cain was Giantism- that is how anyone could see the  mark of CainÂ, and stay clear of him. This is a classic example of "extra biblical" information that is not found in our bible. It's guess work on the part of the per son trying to grasp straws as to what took place. Sounds logical, but not derived from the bible. Interesting theory though. It would be part of Scripture. There is no reason for us to make up scripture, just because we do not understand what the Scripture i s referring to. We can see that the Israelites are the sons of God by adoption! There were no Israelites before the flood. Re: The Mark of Cain, on: 2009/7/27 17:37 To deepthinker: The Giants all descended from Ham and his wife. We know in scripture the following: 1. There were giants on the earth before the flood 2. There were giants on the earth after the flood Genesis 6: And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2. That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. Page 10/18

11 3. And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which w ere of old, men of renown. 5. And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every i magination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7. And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping t hing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8. But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. As far as the term Giants, which the translators in 1881 changed to Nephilim is concerned, we must look at Strongs Con cordance to find the true meaning of the term: Strong's Number: 5303 Transliterated: nphiyl Phonetic: nef-eel' Text: or nphil {nef-eel'}; from 5307; properly, a feller, i.e. a bully or tyrant: --giant. Sounds like a good description of Cain and his descendents to me: Another reference to the term Giants is: Strong's Number: 7497 Transliterated: rapha' Phonetic: raw-faw' Text: or raphah {raw-faw'}; from 7495 in the sense of invigorating; a giant: --giant, Rapha, Rephaim(-s). See also And, finally, the last reference to the word Giants, as found in the Bible: Strong's Number: 1051 Transliterated: Beyth Rapha' Phonetic: bayth raw-faw' Text: from 1004 and 7497; house of (the) giant; Beth-Rapha, an Israelite: -Beth-rapha. Supernatural angelic beings, impregnating women, with the power of Satan within them, no way! The reference is to the line of Cain, and were nothing more than fallen men and women, who no longer worshipped God. In fact, they all hated God, just like fallen men and women do to this very day. We also know that the giants, who lived in Canaan and throughout the promised land were descendents of Canaan (see below, posted in green) I know that many believers who believe that the fallen angels (Nephilim, only found in the newer versions) had sex with women, and created a race of giantsâ always quote the following scripture to support their positions: If we go to Jude 1:6-12 we can see: 6. And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains u nder darkness unto the judgment of the great day. 7. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornicati on, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. 8. Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. 9. Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring agai Page 11/18

12 nst him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. 10. But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those thi ngs they corrupt themselves. 11. Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. 12. These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: cloud s they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked u p by the roots; By reading the above, we might think that the angels that sinned in verse 1 are tied to Sodom and Gomorrah, an d the other cities around them, who turned themselves over to fornication and went after  Strange FleshÂ. However, if we search further, we can see that the Holy Spirit has clarified this mistake for us by referencing the same events, but moved the order of the presentation, so we can see that Sodom and Gomorah had nothing to do with fallen angels. We can see that the Holy Spirit has clarified this mistake for us: Lets go to (2 Peter 4:22) for a different understanding about the Giants of the earth, mistranslated as Nephilim by the ne wer Bible versions: 4. For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; 5. And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood u pon the world of the ungodly; 6. And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ens ample unto those that after should live ungodly; 7. And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: 8. (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with t heir unlawful deeds;) 9. The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: 10. But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presump tuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities. 11. Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord. 12. But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; 1 3. And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; 14. Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: 15. Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, w ho loved the wages of unrighteousness; 16. But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man's voice f orbad the madness of the prophet. 17. These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom t he mist of darkness is reserved for ever. 18. For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through th e lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error. 19. While th ey promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. 20. For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the be ginning. 21. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. 22. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, the dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow th at was washed to her wallowing in the mire. So, this tells us that the spirit of Cain was alive and well from the beginning, not the fallen angels who were cast into hell. What is that Spirit of Cain???: 11. Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after t he error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. 12. These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: cloud s they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked u p by the roots; Page 12/18

13 Dr. Floyd Nolen Jones has a great teaching on this. You can download it online at: ( Dr. Floyd Nolen Jones Where did Ham & his sons (Cush, Put and Cannan) settle when they left the Ark? (Genesis 10:6-18) 6 The sons of Ham; Cush, Mizraim, Put, and Cannan. 7 The sons of Cush; Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah, and S abtechah. And the sons of Raamah; Sheba and Dedan. 8 Cush became the father of Nimrod; who became a mig hty warrior in the land. 9 He was a might hunter before the Lord; therefore it is said, Like Nimrod the mighty hun ter before the Lord. 10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh, in the land of S hinar. 11 From that land he went to Assyria and built Nineveh. Rehoboth-Ir, Calah, 12 and Resen between Ninev ah and Calah, which is a great city. 13 And Mizraim became the father of Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim, 14 Pathrusim, and Casiuhim, from whom came the Philistines and Caphtorim. 15 Cannan became the father of h is firstborn Sidon, and Heth, 16 the Jebusite, the Amorite, and the Girgashite. 17 the Hivite, the Arkite, and the Sinite, 18 the Arvadite, the Zemarite, and the Hamathite. (the Giants that occupied Canaan & the lands promised to Israel) Afterward the families of the Cananites were dispersed. (Genesis 10:19) 19 And the border of the Cananites was from Sidon as you go toward Gerar, as far as Gaza; then as you go tow ard Sodom, and Gomorrah, and Admah, and Zeboim, as far as Lasha. 20 They were the sons of Ham, according to their families, according to their tongues, in their lands, in their nations. So, we can see that what is called the  curseâ is nothing more than a Prophecy. Out of Canaan's loins would come the Giants, who were the enemies of God and the enemies of Israel. Where did they settle? Right in the mi ddle, and throughout the promised land of God s chosen people. However, we must go back to Ham, Canaan s father. Ham (who was a Son of God) was the one who married a giantess ("a daughter of men", a descendent of Cain). Ham was corrupted by being married to this woman, just like the Israelites were corrupted by the false prophet Balaam, who we find in Revelation 2:14-15, gave informati on to Balaak to corrupt the Jews  14. But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat thin gs sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. 15. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nico laitans, which thing I hate. (Revelation 2:14-15) What is the mark of Cain? It surely isnâ t a black skin, that does not protect anyone from anything. The mark of Cain was Giantism- that is how anyone could see the  mark of CainÂ, and stay clear of him. The  Sons of God referenced in Genesis are believers, like Noah and Seth. However, some of the Son s of God married th e daughters of Cain, the "daughters of men", who were giants, and no longer worshiped the God who made the m, but their own idols, given to them by Satan. God bless, Walter DeepThinker wrote: The mark of Cain was Giantism- that is how anyone could see the  mark of CainÂ, and stay clear of him. This is a classic example of "extra biblical" information that is not found in our bible. It's guess work on the part of the person trying to grasp straws as t o what took place. Sounds logical, but not derived from the bible. Interesting theory though. It would be part of Scripture. There is no reason for us to make up scripture, just because we do not understand what the Scripture i s referring to. Page 13/18

14 We can see that the Israelites are the sons of God by adoption! There were no Israelites before the flood. So Re:, on: 2009/7/27 19:49 Logic said: Yes, it does: the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness Lev. 20:11 No, you misunderstand what I meant. I meant aren't you "adding" information to the story that is not there? I understand completely what Lev 20:11 is saying and your saying that that expression is as if he had sex with his Mother. Why didn't Moses put that in there that Ham had sex with his Mother, why leave it out? What is so amazing that Ham thought his father being naked in his own tent something to brag about? Actually I have seen this happen. This is not uncommon. Why did Noah curse Canaan and not Ham? The man was drunk and spoke out of rage. There was no law in those days and every man did that which he thought wa s right in his own eyes. Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a rage. In the whole scheme of things, an enemy was created for the people of God to having to have to go in and possess the l and the Canaanites inhabited. All this types and shadows were all ordained of God to bring about Jesus Christ. While N oah cursed Ham, we can look back at it all and see the hand of God in it because of how the nations were shaped. Even Jacob and Esau, there has to be one blessed and the other cursed. One loved the other hated. There has to be a distin ction between what is good and what is bad. Choose you this day who will you serve. There is that question constantly i n the world. There is always that one or the other, the chosen and the rejected. This is an interesting subject and there is nothing wrong in bringing to the table these things that most preachers don't e ven want to talk about. There are answers to the why's and perhaps you've tapped into some of them. Re:, on: 2009/7/27 20:44 If your theory is correct, then Noah's wife would have been a daughter of the Giants because Noah is a direct descende d of Seth who's father is Adam in order for Ham to be a giant...according to your theory. Since I hold the title of "another gospel", I am convinced that the sons of God were fallen angels who manifested themse lves as men because the bible does say that they have Genesis 18:1,2. And in Job 1:6 when the sons of God appeared before God, were they men too? or were they angels? Re:, on: 2009/7/27 21:30 Logic, With as much as you have historically hounded those here on this forum NOT to pervert scripture, you are taking a big le ap yourself with this interpretation. You have held many accountable here in the demand of lucid and logical correlation s from what is claimed in interpretaion to what is actually said in scripture. Although you are not averse to interpretation yourself, it seems that you hold others to a standard that demands the necessary 'back up' to their claim in unequivocal scriptural references that leaves no loose ends. So by your own standard you should take some caution in making these kinds of nuanced scriptural correlations lest you be challenged in the same way you challenge others. As some have said here, what you correlated via scripture concer ning Noah and Ham, is indeed, 'interesting'. But it is far from a slam dunk that cannot be refuted by the obvious and sim ple absence of the necessary details concerning the actual event which you described. Page 14/18

15 We all speculate certain events and correlations in scripture, and this pondering is not unusual or atypical of many of us. But in our attempts to discern such, we shouldn't say (or even imply) these interpretations as absolutes or unequivocal f acts. This allows no room for iron to sharpen iron as it lends more towards arguing points of view rather than mutually h ashing out scriptural events that, may or may not, lead to a fruitful context that could shed even more light on the origina l references. Re: - posted by letsgetbusy (), on: 2009/7/27 21:41 I have to agree with those who think that Ham's sin was the spirit in which he viewed his father's nude body. It is an inter esting thought to think of Noah's wife, but I think it is stretching the plain text. I would never have come up with that unles s someone had told me that. I once heard a preacher drop a cuss word, and rather than build a case against him, I decided I would still respect his off ice. He was off in many areas, but right in others. After I made up my mind to still respect him, my mind immediately turn ed to the covering of Noah by his other two sons. I believe the Holy Spirit revealed this to me in this situation. In other words, this concept was not taught by a person, but by the Spirit. Every individual deserves respect. We are to l ook down on no one. Even Michael did not bring a "railing accusation" against Satan, but only said "The Lord rebuke the e." What we do with an enemy or with someone caught in sin tells much about who we are. Also, "Sons of God" is used to describe angels every other time in the Old Testament. I think it would be very unlikely th at this one occasion would describe men. I believe, like others, that the "sons of God" from Genesis were fallen angels. Apparently, many of the giants of the faith did not think so; but so be it. Re:, on: 2009/7/27 21:56 Hello, Letsgetbusy: A very good post, however I would like to challenge your statement: Also, "Sons of God" is used to describe angels every other time in the Old Testament. I think it would be very unlikely that this one occasion would describe men. I believe, like others, that the "sons of God" from Genesis were fallen angels. Apparently, many of th e giants of the faith did not think so; but so be it. What does the Bible tell us about the Sons of God? Are they only Angels(Job 1:6)? Or,are they also believers in Jehovah, believers in God? Or are they demonic angels, who rebelled with satan, and somehow came down to e arth to impregnate unsuspecting women? (Exodus 4:22-23) 22. And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: 23. An d I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn.'" Again, we can see that the Israelites are God s sons, are God s firstborn. This reference is given by God Him self to Moses words that he is to say to Pharoah Deuteronomy 14:1-2)1. Ye are the children of the Lord your God: ye shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness be tween your eyes for the dead. 2. For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God, and the Lord hath chosen thee to b e a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth. Again, we see reference to the fact that believers are considered by God to be a "Ye are the children of the Lord your God" and also a  holy people unto the Lord, a chosen and peculiar people, above all the nations upon th Page 15/18