Genesis 9:22

And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father,.... Which, had it been through surprise, and at an unawares, would not have been thought criminal; but be went into his father's tent,

And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. No JFB commentary on this verse.

The grown age of Ham was a great aggravation of this sin. The father of Canaan: this is here added as a reason of Canaan’ s curse, . The nakedness, i.e. the secret parts, oft so called, as , and elsewhere, and told his two brethren without, who were then without the house or room where their father lay in that posture, whom he invited to that prospect.

Genesis 9:22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.Ver. 22. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw.] The Hebrews say, that Canaan first saw it, and then showed it to Ham his father, who looks upon it with delight, Ut vultures ad male olentia feruntur , saith Basil; as carrion-kites are carried after stinking carcasses. And told his two brethren without.] Sic et impii hodie ex Ecclesiae tragaediis comaedias componunt . How glad are the wicked, if they can but get any hint to lay hold on, whereby to blaspheme, and blaze abroad the saints’ infirmities! "Report say they, and we will report". Yea, rather than want matter against God’ s people, they will suck it out of their own fingers’ ends. But if such a thing as this fall out, that Noah be drunk, though but once in an age, the banks of blasphemy will soon be broken down, and the whole race of religious persons must rue for it; among these Canaanites some also will be found to excuse them in it, as Scaliger doth Ham.

(22, 23) Ham . . . saw . . . and told.—The sin lay not in seeing, which might be unintentional, but in telling, especially if his purpose was to ridicule his father. His brothers, with filial piety, “take a garment,” the loose outer robe or cloak enveloping the whole body, and with reverent delicacy walk backwards, and lay it upon their father’s person.

Verse 22. - 24. And Ham, the father of Canaan, c.] 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 Leviticus 18:6-7, Leviticus 18:24, Leviticus 18:29-30, Leviticus 20:9, Leviticus 20:22-24, Leviticus 20:26; and Deuteronomy 9:4; Deuteronomy 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.

22. Ham, the father of] Words probably inserted by the compiler (R). If so, in the original narrative there stood in this verse simply the name of “Canaan,” “and Canaan saw the nakedness.” Otherwise the curse pronounced upon Canaan, instead of upon Ham, in Genesis 9:25, is unintelligible (see note). According to this view, the old tradition, from which these verses are derived, regarded “Canaan,” and not “Ham,” as the brother of Shem and Japheth.

22. Saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without — Ham displays immodesty and sensuality, as well as an unfilial glorying in his father’s shame.