Cursing and Blessing in the Future of the Sons of Noah (Gen 9.18-29) WestminsterReformedChurch.org Pastor Ostella November 16, 2014 The sons of Noah who went forth from the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. (Ham was the father of Canaan.) 19 These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the people of the whole earth were dispersed. 20 Noah began to be a man of the soil, and he planted a vineyard. 21 He drank of the wine and became drunk and lay uncovered in his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brothers outside. 23 Then Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were turned backward, and they did not see their father's nakedness. 24 When Noah awoke from his wine and knew what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said, "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be to his brothers." 26 He also said, "Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant. 27 May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem, and let Canaan be his servant." 28 After the flood Noah lived 350 years. 29 All the days of Noah were 950 years, and he died. (Genesis 9:18-29 ESV) Introduction We come this morning to a text that is both difficult to understand and delicate to discuss, Genesis 9.18-29. This challenging text begins by tracing the development of people on the earth at the time of Moses back to the three sons of Noah: 18 The sons of Noah who went forth from the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. (Ham was the father of Canaan.) 19 These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the people of the whole earth were dispersed (9.18-19). Notably, in 9.18 before the account of Noah s drunkenness, Moses further identifies Ham as the father of Canaan. In the unfolding of the narrative, this fact that Ham is the father of Canaan occurs again: Noah began to be a man of the soil, and he planted a vineyard. 21 He drank of the wine and became drunk and lay uncovered in his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brothers outside (9.20-22). So, after the Flood, Noah worked the soil, planted a vineyard from which he made wine, then on a particular occasion became drunk, and passed out in his tent, we read, uncovered (9.21). Then, Ham, the father of Canaan saw the nakedness of his father and reported what he saw to Shem and Japheth outside the tent (9.22). Upon hearing about their father s condition, the two brothers take extreme measures to cover Noah s exposed body: they took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were turned backward, and they did not see their father's nakedness (9.23). If this part of the story seems peculiar, then what comes next has to seem even more peculiar: 24 When Noah awoke from his wine and knew what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said, "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be to his brothers." 26 He also said, "Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant. 27 May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem, and let Canaan be his servant" (9.24-27). Knowing how his youngest son, Ham, had conducted himself, he pronounces a curse, and oddly, he pronounces this curse on Canaan, the person introduced earlier (twice for emphasis) as the son fathered by Ham. Finally, in sweeping summary of Noah s life, we are told that he lived 350 years after the Flood and died when his days added up to 950 years (9.28-29). Trying to get to the bottom of things here, our title is Cursing and Blessing in the Future of the Sons of Noah. The outline, reflecting the difficulties, has two points: forks in the road of interpretation and questions to guide us forward. I. Forks in the road of interpretation There are three views of the sin of Ham that we need to have before us as we wrestle with this text: voyeurism, paternal incest, and maternal incest. A. Voyeurism A widespread view is that Ham was a voyeur, that is, a person who obtains sexual gratification by looking at sexual objects, pictures or actions. It has been said that Ham stared at
his father in this way and then shared his delight with his brothers. However, even granting euphemism, there is nothing here that indicates starring. To see is not to stare. 1 2 B. Paternal incest For people who are looking for subtle implications in the text that go beyond the literal words to what what we might call artistic euphemism, the voyeurist interpretation is found wanting. The sin therefore is thought to be on a different track. It is taken to be paternal incest, an act of homosexuality. How is this view supported? 1) First, when Noah realizes that something was done to him, the idea conveyed seems to be clearly beyond the mere act of seeing or passive viewing: When Noah awoke from his wine and knew what his youngest son had done to him, he Cursed (9.24-25). Further, Noah does not cite what Ham failed to do to him but what he did. Moreover, what was done to Noah is associated with the fact that Noah disrobed himself or uncovered himself 2 in his tent, and this is language that carries sexual overtones, especially when connected with drunkenness. So, it is concluded that there is more here than what meets the eye. 2) Second, some parallels about seeing the nakedness of another are cited. In the Holiness Code of Leviticus, seeing the nakedness of another and uncovering it are euphemisms for sexual intimacy (Lev 20.17: If a man takes his sister, a daughter of his father or a daughter of his mother, and sees her nakedness, and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace, and they shall be cut off in the sight of the children of their people. He has uncovered his sister's nakedness, and he shall bear his iniquity). Taking, seeing, and uncovering all refer to illicit sex, which is a disgrace and it is iniquity. Also, a major theme in Leviticus is incest (Lev 18.6); so, Ham s sin, they conclude must be paternal incest. C. This leads to the third view of Ham s sin: maternal incest Claim: the evidence for paternal incest gives better support for maternal incest. They emphasize the fact that the nakedness of one s father refers to intimacy with his wife in Leviticus and Deuteronomy (Lev 18.7, You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, which is the nakedness of your mother; she is your mother, you shall not uncover her nakedness; Deut 27.20, Cursed be anyone who lies with his father's wife, because he has uncovered his father's nakedness). Moreover, these commentators note that this kind of language is nowhere used of homosexual relations but only of heterosexual relations; so, here it is maternal incest. Then they cite the procreative context and claim that, unlike the other views, this view gives a meaningful explanation of the curse of Canaan. He is cursed because his origin is the result of a vile act on the part of his father (Hahn, 35); hence, the repeated refrain that Ham is the father of Canaan, i.e., by maternal incest. II. Questions to guide us forward How do we get past these forks in the road to make progress beyond them? The answer, I will argue, is found in a very conservative, less dramatic, and less exciting traditional reading that runs counter to all the views claiming voyeurism or incest. Although this conservative view may have less eroticism built into it, it will turn out to have far greater meaning. We will proceed by a series of questions. A. What can we firmly draw from Leviticus 20.17? It is true that Leviticus 20.17 speaks about sexual intimacy, using the language of seeing in parallel with uncovering (If a man takes his sister, a daughter of his father or a daughter of his mother, and sees her nakedness, and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace, and they shall be cut off in the sight of the children of their people. He has uncovered his sister's nakedness, and he shall bear his iniquity). Here, there is a clear association of seeing with uncovering, and uncovering is euphemism that 1 Moreover, opponents of this view take it to be a nonexplanation that fails to elucidate either the gravity of Ham s offense or the reason for the curse of one of his sons, Canaan.It is further noted that a taboo against the accidental seeing of a naked parent is unattested elsewhere in the Bible and is not found in ancient Near Eastern literature, Bergsma & Hahn, Noah s Nakedness, JBL (2005), 27. 2 The verb can be translated this way as a reflexive, not just that he was uncovered but that he [had] uncovered himself.
unquestionably refers to sexual intimacy. However, this is the only passage (I could find) that uses seeing in this way associated with illicit sex. However, it is not necessarily equivalent 3 with having intimate relations; it may simply refer to the visual aspect that goes with the tactile aspect of intimacy. From this text alone, we cannot conclude to physical contact in any way. Furthermore, in the other references in Scripture, seeing nakedness has a range of uses: it refers to spies seeing the weakness and vulnerability of an enemy s land (Gen 42.9, 12); to the Lord s judgment that causes Israel s enemies to uncover and see her nakedness, guilt, shame, and humiliation having been stripped of clothes and jewelry, and cut to pieces by the sword (Ezek 16.37-40); to the covering of the shame and nakedness of the church at Laodicea by white garments (Rev 3.18). Also, with bold strokes, Ezekiel describes the Lord s covenant relationship to Israel to be that of seeing and covering her nakedness, not uncovering it; when He takes her as His bride, He sees her sins, guilt, and shame, but covers her with forgiving love (Ezek 16.8). The idea of shameful guilt-ridden humiliation is what Adam and Eve recognized when their eyes were opened to see their nakedness (Gen 3.7). Finally, no creature is hidden from God s seeing; instead, all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account (Heb 4.13). All these texts indicate that seeing nakedness is generally used to refer to seeing weakness, shame, guilt, humiliation, and even the exposed state of people who are stripped of everything by divine judgment, stripped of clothes, jewels, and life itself. Therefore, it is completely unwarranted to conclude from the core idiom that paternal or maternal incest is what happened in Noah s tent. Before leaving this point, what about Noah s recognition that Ham did something to him? The simple answer is that this language, more often than not, refers to something that does not involve bodily contact. For example, Pharaoh talks to Abraham about what he had done to him by concealing the truth that Sarah was his wife (Gen 12.18). What Abraham did not do involved doing something to the Egyptian King; at the least, he dishonored him without touching him. Similarly, at the least, that is what Ham did to Noah without bodily contact. 3 B.What is the sin of Noah? This may be the most important question in this debate about Ham s sin. Noah, in a drunken stupor exposed himself in a way that contradicts the proper, good, and joyful place of nakedness that is oriented to family. He is not seeking to obey God by this self-disclosure. He is inebriated and his nakedness is casual, thoughtless, out of control, out of context, misguided, and unbefitting his righteous standing with God. His action is not prompted by righteousness but by drunkenness. His sin is loaded with theological significance. It is a physical display that speaks volumes in contradiction to all that Noah stands for as the progenitor of a new image bearing human family. C. What is the sin of Ham? His sin is disrespect and by implication opposition to, and rejection of, God s order for the family. Ham does not show respect as His brothers did by covering the shameful humiliation of Noah. This is in keeping with the context about fruitfulness in the formation of a family of image bearers on the earth. This sin is part for the whole of opposition to the good of nakedness, procreation, parenting, parental authority, and respect for parents that orbit around family. Therefore, seeing and telling (without covering the contradiction of marriage committed by Noah) dishonored him and thus revealed Ham s own light view of the sacred and holy place of nakedness in marriage. Thus, Shem and Japheth did what Ham should have done. Surely, their action is more for Noah than for themselves. 4 By preventing themselves from seeing him in this humiliated state, they cover Noah s sin from their eyes; the manner of their action indicates great 3 Similarly, there is doing something to someone without bodily contact in Gen 27.45; 29.25; Judg 8.1. 4 If they were preventing themselves from a sexual act, why would they go into the tent in the first place? Their extreme caution would be better served by keeping their distance.
respect for the patriarch, respect that is oriented to nakedness, family, procreation, and parental authority. 4 D. Now why then was Canaan cursed? Ham s sin opened a wide door in his life for every kind of sin against family. Hence, the sin of Ham foreshadows and typifies the manifestation of sin that will emerge in his offspring. Looking to the future, therefore, Ham planted the seeds of the contradiction of God s order for marriage that grew to fruition in the lives of his Canaanite descendants. Sin will manifest itself in ways that cut against family holiness; so, the curse has a procreative-family orientation. In the relationship between Canaan and his brother descendants of both Shem and Japheth, the pronouncement is let Canaan be his servant (9.25, a servant of servants shall he be to his brothers; 9.26, let Canaan be his [Shem s] servant; 9.27, let Canaan be his [Japheth s] servant). Thus, at the time when Moses writes this report about Noah, Israel is on the edge of the Promised Land, which is notably, the land of Canaan, named after its inhabitants. This is no coincidence. To understand why Canaan is cursed, we must understand the meaning of the curse as a prophecy of judgment on the Canaanites by the armies of Shemite Israel under the command of Joshua. That is servitude of the lowest depths of subjugation, destruction, and death. In their practices, the Canaanites reveal the manifestation of the sin of Ham left by God to grow and fester among his descendants. Ham s disregard of the principles of family associated with nakedness was a seed that grew into a plant with fruit. The fruit was corrupt, particularly, as the flagrant contradiction of God s design for a wholesome experience of nakedness in marriage as the context for procreation. Leviticus 18, for example, lists the sins of the inhabitants of Canaan. Central among their sins are those that contradict marriage and family. These people were guilty of all forms of incest, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, and the sacrifice of children in the practice of their idolatrous worship. According to Genesis 15, for following in the footsteps of their great, great, grandfather, Ham, the sins of the Canaanites reach a point of maximum ripeness for judgment (Gen 15.13: Then the LORD said to Abram, Know for certain that your offspring will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs and will be servants there, and they will be afflicted for four hundred years [there in Egypt] and 15:16: And they shall come back here in the fourth generation, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete). Amorite is part for the whole of Canaanite; the iniquity of the Canaanites will have grown to completion by the time of the Exodus from Egypt. Thus, the Lord says in Leviticus 18.3: You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, where you lived, and you shall not do as they do in the land of Canaan, to which I am bringing you. You shall not walk in their statutes; you shall not walk in their ways of incest, adultery, fornication, bestiality, homosexuality and child sacrifice (Lev 18). It is because they commit all these marriage contradicting abominations that they are being vomited out of the land (18.25, 27). Thus, their subordination to Shem is subjugation and destruction at God s appointed time in His dealing with the offspring of Eve in contrast to the offspring of the serpent. E. What is the blessing on the sons of Noah? He also said, "Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant. 27 May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem, and let Canaan be his servant." 28 After the flood Noah lived 350 years. 29 All the days of Noah were 950 years, and he died (Genesis 9:26-29). We have to read this text with an eye on the history of redemption. Shem is blessed because His God is the covenant Lord who is worthy of all praise and from whom all blessings flow. Moreover, the Lord chooses to enlarge Japheth and to give his descendants the blessing of redemption by letting them dwell in the tents of Shem. Dwelling in the tents of another means to participate in the prosperity and blessings of another by conquest (1 Chron 5.10), so, by conquest the sons of Japheth (the Gentile world including the Romans) will have a share in the blessings of the God of Shem. A simple way to take this is to view it in terms of Romans 11 and the
marvelous reality that Shemite-Israel comes under judgment by the Gentiles so that her fall brings blessings to the Gentiles. Concluding applications on family, providence, gospel, and doxology 1) Family When you stop and think about this account, many subjects must strike you as important and valuable. Surely, a lesson to learn from the cursing and blessing of Noah, his sons, and their sons s sons is that God works through family. Marital intimacy, the pleasure of seeing nakedness, procreation, and parental authority are His gifts. They are entrusted to us as a stewardship; these gifts are to be greatly esteemed. Nakedness in marriage is a wonderful blessing; its perversion brings serious cursing. Marriage in all its dimensions is a means that God uses even when it is contradicted in thought and practice, as was the case for Ham and the Canaanites. He insures the existence of family on earth through pleasurable means in His common grace. This is the context of His working by efficacious grace in saving the church through the promised offspring of Eve. 2) Providence The look into the future by Noah is prophetic; God revealed these things to him. God not only knows the future, He also controls it. It is His will that is coming to pass as He decides to restrain, permit, and govern the sins of the fathers and their children to the third and fourth generations. So, WCF (5.4): God s wisdom and goodness manifest themselves in His providence that includes not only the first fall but all other sins, and it is not by a bare permission, but such as has joined with it a most wise and powerful bounding, and otherwise ordering, and governing of them to His own holy ends. As to sin, it proceeds from the creature, and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither is, nor can be, the author or approver of sin. 3) Gospel Interestingly, even surprisingly, there is gospel here in the curse of the Canaanites. It is found in the deliverance of a Canaanite from judgment. Her name is Rahab. King David descends from Rahab and Jesus is a kinsman of David according to the flesh. Thus, when He died on the cross, He endured the curse Noah pronounced on Canaan because Jesus has Canaanite blood flowing in His veins. He became the servant of servants to His brothers. In utter humiliation, He endured the curse by coming under the sword of God s wrath against our sin. So, trust Him, commit yourself to Him and you will find rest for your soul. 4) Doxology When we review God s working among the Canaanites we again see the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways (Rom 11.33). Yes, Noah, blessed be the God of Shem; notably, not blessed be Shem. Shem will be blessed because the covenant Lord chooses to show mercy upon him. Noah therefore praises God. This account reminds us again that the gospel is historically rooted, real, and sometimes raw. It is raw and messy because of the mess we are in, but God has a purpose that He is pleased to work out in life s unfolding day by day way. These stages are of His choosing and by grace. He is the providential Lord of human history. So, there is a saved family by grace, and therefore, we who are members of His church must overflow with doxology: the Lord our God is great and greatly to be praised To the glory of the triune God, now and forever, amen. 5