SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Authentic Biblical Christianity.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : General Topics : Why did Noah...

Print Thread (PDF)


Joined: 2004/2/8
Posts: 199
Worthing UK

 Why did Noah...

Does anyone wish to comment,I was reading today the account in Genesis ch 9 v 21 onwards where Noah got drunk and was naked and Ham his son saw and told his brothers and they walked in backwards and covered there father.Now, my question is; why did Noah upon wakeing up curse Ham's son cannan and bless the other 2? :-(

derek Eyre

 2004/12/11 19:52Profile

Joined: 2004/5/25
Posts: 94

 Re: Why did Noah...

My opinion of this would be because Ham went out and told the other two about Noahs embarassing behavior instead of covering his father up like the other two did. kind of gossiping. maybe not real sure


 2004/12/11 23:09Profile

Joined: 2002/12/11
Posts: 36691
"Pilgrim and Sojourner." - 1 Peter 2:11


why did Noah upon wakeing up curse Ham's son cannan and bless the other 2?

20And Noah began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard. 21Then he drank of the wine and was drunk, and became uncovered in his tent. 22And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. 23But 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. - [b]Genesis 9:20-23 NKJV[/b]

I believe there is a verse in leviticus about seeing the nakedness of a father? Obviously it is considered something shameful and sinful in this case.

The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible:

[b]And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his
Which, had it been through surprise, and at an unawares, would not have been thought criminal; but be went into his father's tent, where he ought not to have entered; he looked with pleasure and delight on his father's nakedness: Ham is represented by many writers as a very wicked, immodest, and profligate creature: Berosus F9 makes him a magician, and to be the same with Zoroast or Zoroastres, and speaks of him as the public corrupter of mankind; and says that he taught men to live as before the flood, to lie with mothers, sisters, daughters, males and brutes, and creatures of all sorts; and that he actually did so himself, and therefore was cast out by his father Janus, or Noah, and got the name of "Chem", the infamous and immodest

SI Moderator - Greg Gordon

 2004/12/11 23:29Profile

Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA


Still a question on why the curse was on Ham's son, Canaan.

From Adam Clarkes Commentary

[b]Gen 9:22-24 -
And Ham, the father of Canaan, etc.[/b] - There is no occasion to enter into any detail here; the sacred text is circumstantial enough. Ham, and very probably his son Canaan, had treated their father on this occasion with contempt or reprehensible levity. Had Noah not been innocent, as my exposition supposes him, God would not have endued him with the spirit of prophecy on this occasion, and testified such marked disapprobation of their conduct. The conduct of Shem and Japheth was such as became pious and affectionate children, who appear to have been in the habit of treating their father with decency, reverence, and obedient respect. On the one the spirit of prophecy (not the incensed father) pronounces a curse: on the others the same spirit (not parental tenderness) pronounces a blessing. These things had been just as they afterwards occurred had Noah never spoken. God had wise and powerful reasons to induce him to sentence the one to perpetual servitude, and to allot to the others prosperity and dominion. Besides, the curse pronounced on Canaan neither fell immediately upon himself nor on his worthless father, but upon the Canaanites; and from the history we have of this people, in Lev_18:6, Lev_18:7, Lev_18:24, Lev_18:29, Lev_18:30, Lev_20:9, Lev_20:22-24, Lev_20:26; and Deu_9:4; Deu_12:31, we may ask, Could the curse of God fall more deservedly on any people than on these? Their profligacy was great, but it was not the effect of the curse; but, being foreseen by the Lord, the curse was the effect of their conduct. But even this curse does not exclude them from the possibility of obtaining salvation; it extends not to the soul and to eternity, but merely to their bodies and to time; though, if they continued to abuse their liberty, resist the Holy Ghost, and refuse to be saved on God’s terms, then the wrath of Divine justice must come upon them to the uttermost. How many, even of these, repented, we cannot tell.

Mike Balog

 2004/12/11 23:48Profile

Joined: 2004/2/8
Posts: 199
Worthing UK


thanks guys, :-)

derek Eyre

 2004/12/12 9:24Profile

Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK


Perhaps some SIers are familiar with the fact that both Pro-Slavery 'Christians' and Apartheid partly justified their position by the fact the Africa's peoples were descendents of Ham. Some of the older commentaries available with e-sword lean towards this justification. The British Empire, among others, being quoted in evidence. :-?

[b]And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
(Gen 9:24-27 KJV)[/b]

Ron Bailey

 2004/12/12 12:41Profile

Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy