Noah's Nakedness

[Rose]

What's the big deal of Noah's nakedness and Ham finding him out? Does his nakedness has something to do with Adam and Eve's nakedness? Is there a parallelism between their nakedness? What about Noah cursing Canaan? Does it have to do with God's plan of giving the land of Canaan to His people and the Canaanites must be destroyed/must suffer?

 

[David]

What's the big deal of Noah's nakedness and Ham finding him out? Does his nakedness has something to do with Adam and Eve's nakedness? Is there a parallelism between their nakedness? What about Noah cursing Canaan? Does it have to do with God's plan of giving the land of Canaan to His people and the Canaanites must be destroyed/must suffer?

You are not entering into some strange family sexual episode when you read Genesis 9. When you read Genesis 9, you are entering into a teaching of God that illustrates sin, shame, and honor after the flood in this cursed world we live in.

Noah becoming naked is not a bedroom moment. Scripture simply tells us that Noah became drunk and uncovered himself in his tent (Genesis 9:21). Skin is not the problem. Shame is the problem. Ever since Genesis chapter 3, nakedness has symbolized the exposure of our weakness through sin. Adam and Eve were naked and felt no shame until after sin entered the picture. Once sin was introduced into this world, their nakedness caused them to cover up. Genesis 3:7 tells us they knew they were naked and they covered themselves. In fact, Genesis 3:21 tells us that God covered their nakedness, which was the visible result of their sin.

Covering shame is honoring what God says is right.

There you have it. The parallel. Ham saw his father’s nakedness and took it upon himself to expose it rather than restore it. Instead of handling the matter quietly, Ham exposed his father. Ham publicized his father’s failure. The other two sons did the exact opposite. They went backward, refused to see the shame, and covered their father with honor. One son magnified shame. Two sons minimized shame. One son dishonored his father. Two sons covered and honored their father. Scripture does not leave you to imagine sin; it shows you sin by contrast.

“Noah knew what his younger son had done to him.” Notice what Scripture does and does not say. Scripture does not force a sexual application here. The sin was dishonoring. It was public. The text already told you what happened. Verses 22 and 23 show that Ham exposed his father’s nakedness, while Shem and Japheth covered it. Proverbs 10:12 later explains the principle clearly: hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all sins. Ham did not act in love. His brothers did.

Now comes the curse. Notice Noah did not curse Ham; he cursed Canaan (Genesis 9:25). This is not accidental. Scripture frequently speaks prophetically of descendants. Jacob does this repeatedly later in Genesis 49. This is not racism. It is morality and prophecy.

God is showing what kind of culture would flow from this particular line. Later, yes, this does relate to the land of Canaan, but not because God went on an ethnic cleansing spree. Genesis 15:16 says the iniquity of the Canaanites would become full. Leviticus 18 says the land vomited them out because of their abominations. Judgment came because of sin, not ethnicity.

Sin is still present after the flood. Shame still must be dealt with. God still honors those who do what is right in a broken world. Ham dishonored his father in a moment of sin, and Scripture later shows the kind of culture that flowed from his line. Shem and Japheth covered their father’s disgrace with garments. One son brought mockery to sin. Two sons restored God’s order by covering shame.

The story is not about hidden sexual acts or secret immorality. It is about honor, authority, shame, and the heart. Scripture does not retreat from this principle. Those who honor authority walk within God’s order. Those who delight in exposure walk in the pattern of the fall.

That is what Genesis 9 is preaching, and it does not need imagination to make its point.

 

[Rose]

You are not entering into some strange family sexual episode when you read Genesis 9. When you read Genesis 9, you are entering into a teaching of God that illustrates sin, shame, and honor after the flood in this cursed world we live in.

Noah becoming naked is not a bedroom moment. Scripture simply tells us that Noah became drunk and uncovered himself in his tent (Genesis 9:21). Skin is not the problem. Shame is the problem. Ever since Genesis chapter 3, nakedness has symbolized the exposure of our weakness through sin. Adam and Eve were naked and felt no shame until after sin entered the picture. Once sin was introduced into this world, their nakedness caused them to cover up. Genesis 3:7 tells us they knew they were naked and they covered themselves. In fact, Genesis 3:21 tells us that God covered their nakedness, which was the visible result of their sin.

Covering shame is honoring what God says is right.

There you have it. The parallel. Ham saw his father’s nakedness and took it upon himself to expose it rather than restore it. Instead of handling the matter quietly, Ham exposed his father. Ham publicized his father’s failure. The other two sons did the exact opposite. They went backward, refused to see the shame, and covered their father with honor. One son magnified shame. Two sons minimized shame. One son dishonored his father. Two sons covered and honored their father. Scripture does not leave you to imagine sin; it shows you sin by contrast.

“Noah knew what his younger son had done to him.” Notice what Scripture does and does not say. Scripture does not force a sexual application here. The sin was dishonoring. It was public. The text already told you what happened. Verses 22 and 23 show that Ham exposed his father’s nakedness, while Shem and Japheth covered it. Proverbs 10:12 later explains the principle clearly: hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all sins. Ham did not act in love. His brothers did.

Now comes the curse. Notice Noah did not curse Ham; he cursed Canaan (Genesis 9:25). This is not accidental. Scripture frequently speaks prophetically of descendants. Jacob does this repeatedly later in Genesis 49. This is not racism. It is morality and prophecy.

God is showing what kind of culture would flow from this particular line. Later, yes, this does relate to the land of Canaan, but not because God went on an ethnic cleansing spree. Genesis 15:16 says the iniquity of the Canaanites would become full. Leviticus 18 says the land vomited them out because of their abominations. Judgment came because of sin, not ethnicity.

Sin is still present after the flood. Shame still must be dealt with. God still honors those who do what is right in a broken world. Ham dishonored his father in a moment of sin, and Scripture later shows the kind of culture that flowed from his line. Shem and Japheth covered their father’s disgrace with garments. One son brought mockery to sin. Two sons restored God’s order by covering shame.

The story is not about hidden sexual acts or secret immorality. It is about honor, authority, shame, and the heart. Scripture does not retreat from this principle. Those who honor authority walk within God’s order. Those who delight in exposure walk in the pattern of the fall.

That is what Genesis 9 is preaching, and it does not need imagination to make its point.

Hi David, I've shared your answers to a facebook group called Intense Biblical Discussions and got this reply from Greg Harrison. I haven't read everything yet but decided to share it with you first (mainly because of the time difference) and see what you think of it.

"Thanks for the post. I will show you what you missed in the verses. This is an established Jewish idiom "uncovering the nakedness" means exactly sexual intercourse. Let me show you where this is taken from. Leviticus talks about sexual relations and marriages. You will want to read all of the chapter but here is where it states what we want to know.
Leviticus 18: 7 The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness. 8 The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: IT IS THY FATHER'S NAKEDNESS.
So we see that a son is being commanded that he cannot sleep with his father's wife for it is the nakedness of his father.
Let us go to Genesis 9:22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the NAKEDNESS OF HIS FATHER, and told his two brethren without.
It is clear Ham engaged in sexual activity with Noah's wife, it probably was not his mother, as Noah could have married another later. Could it have been his own mother, also possible. Noah was drunk, maybe the wife also and Ham had sex with Noah's wife.
The question is why?
You also have to read the bible to know what Ham was trying to do. Here is why Ham did this. This was a custom to takeover family leadership, Royal leadership by having seed with the King's wives and concubines. David took over Saul's wives and concubines when he became king. This was done to seal leadership and kingship (later).
2 Samuel 12:8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms.
Here again is another example: 2Samuel 16:21 Ahithophel answered, “Sleep with your father’s concubines whom he left to take care of the palace. Then all Israel will hear that you have made yourself obnoxious to your father, and the hands of everyone with you will be more resolute.
Here David has fled and his son is Absalom is trying to takeover kingship, and he is advised to takeover David's concubines and wives. This was a way of sealing the Royal line/leadership.
Now, why curse Canaan? Simply because Canaan was the product of that incestuous relationship. Noah is declaring that Canaan will not inherit this family leadership at all! The reason why Ham boasted to his brothers is simply because the community has to know that you have taken over your father's wives and concubines and you become the leader.
Shalom."

 

[Denise60]

Hi David, I've shared your answers to a facebook group called Intense Biblical Discussions and got this reply from Greg Harrison. I haven't read everything yet but decided to share it with you first (mainly because of the time difference) and see what you think of it.

"Thanks for the post. I will show you what you missed in the verses. This is an established Jewish idiom "uncovering the nakedness" means exactly sexual intercourse. Let me show you where this is taken from. Leviticus talks about sexual relations and marriages. You will want to read all of the chapter but here is where it states what we want to know.
Leviticus 18: 7 The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness. 8 The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: IT IS THY FATHER'S NAKEDNESS.
So we see that a son is being commanded that he cannot sleep with his father's wife for it is the nakedness of his father.
Let us go to Genesis 9:22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the NAKEDNESS OF HIS FATHER, and told his two brethren without.
It is clear Ham engaged in sexual activity with Noah's wife, it probably was not his mother, as Noah could have married another later. Could it have been his own mother, also possible. Noah was drunk, maybe the wife also and Ham had sex with Noah's wife.
The question is why?
You also have to read the bible to know what Ham was trying to do. Here is why Ham did this. This was a custom to takeover family leadership, Royal leadership by having seed with the King's wives and concubines. David took over Saul's wives and concubines when he became king. This was done to seal leadership and kingship (later).
2 Samuel 12:8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms.
Here again is another example: 2Samuel 16:21 Ahithophel answered, “Sleep with your father’s concubines whom he left to take care of the palace. Then all Israel will hear that you have made yourself obnoxious to your father, and the hands of everyone with you will be more resolute.
Here David has fled and his son is Absalom is trying to takeover kingship, and he is advised to takeover David's concubines and wives. This was a way of sealing the Royal line/leadership.
Now, why curse Canaan? Simply because Canaan was the product of that incestuous relationship. Noah is declaring that Canaan will not inherit this family leadership at all! The reason why Ham boasted to his brothers is simply because the community has to know that you have taken over your father's wives and concubines and you become the leader.
Shalom."

thanks

 

[David]

Hi David, I've shared your answers to a facebook group called Intense Biblical Discussions and got this reply from Greg Harrison. I haven't read everything yet but decided to share it with you first (mainly because of the time difference) and see what you think of it.

What Greg wrote is not biblically correct. It is not biblical because it requires adding details the passage never gives and ignoring details the passage does give. Greg’s idea sounds impressive because it piles up cross references, but it collapses the moment you let Genesis speak for itself.

The text does not whisper about a hidden act. It tells you plainly what happened.

“And Ham… saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without” ~Genesis 9:22

“They… covered the nakedness of their father… and saw not their father’s nakedness” ~Genesis 9:23

The sin is put in black ink. Seeing and exposing versus refusing to look and covering. The correction matches the crime. A blanket fixes exposure. A blanket does not fix incest. If the offense were sexual intercourse, the response would address adultery, uncleanness, or conception. Scripture instead addresses shame and honor.

Then comes the fatal blow to the theory. Canaan already exists before the event.

“The sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan” ~Genesis 10:6

So he cannot be the product of the act being imagined. The passage never mentions a woman, never mentions Noah’s wife, never mentions a bed, never mentions intercourse, never mentions pregnancy. To get that story, you have to add sentences God never wrote.

Appealing to Leviticus does not rescue it. Moses recorded Genesis first. Law explains conduct, but it does not rewrite history. Genesis uses the language of sight and exposure. Leviticus uses legal language for sexual relations. They are not the same wording and Scripture never merges them here.

What actually happened is far more searching to the heart. One son found sin and advertised it. Two sons found sin and covered it. One delighted in shame. Two preserved honor. That is why the lesson echoes later: “love covereth all sins” ~Proverbs 10:12.

The fog clears when you stop speculating and read what God said. Ham’s sin was not hidden immorality. It was open dishonor. And that sin still lives every time someone runs to broadcast another man’s fall instead of covering it in righteousness. The passage is not about curiosity. It is about the heart.

 

[bobinfaith]

Hi David, I've shared your answers to a facebook group called Intense Biblical Discussions and got this reply from Greg Harrison. I haven't read everything yet but decided to share it with you first (mainly because of the time difference) and see what you think of it.

"Thanks for the post. I will show you what you missed in the verses. This is an established Jewish idiom "uncovering the nakedness" means exactly sexual intercourse. Let me show you where this is taken from. Leviticus talks about sexual relations and marriages. You will want to read all of the chapter but here is where it states what we want to know.
Leviticus 18: 7 The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness. 8 The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: IT IS THY FATHER'S NAKEDNESS.
So we see that a son is being commanded that he cannot sleep with his father's wife for it is the nakedness of his father.
Let us go to Genesis 9:22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the NAKEDNESS OF HIS FATHER, and told his two brethren without.
It is clear Ham engaged in sexual activity with Noah's wife, it probably was not his mother, as Noah could have married another later. Could it have been his own mother, also possible. Noah was drunk, maybe the wife also and Ham had sex with Noah's wife.
The question is why?
You also have to read the bible to know what Ham was trying to do. Here is why Ham did this. This was a custom to takeover family leadership, Royal leadership by having seed with the King's wives and concubines. David took over Saul's wives and concubines when he became king. This was done to seal leadership and kingship (later).
2 Samuel 12:8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms.
Here again is another example: 2Samuel 16:21 Ahithophel answered, “Sleep with your father’s concubines whom he left to take care of the palace. Then all Israel will hear that you have made yourself obnoxious to your father, and the hands of everyone with you will be more resolute.
Here David has fled and his son is Absalom is trying to takeover kingship, and he is advised to takeover David's concubines and wives. This was a way of sealing the Royal line/leadership.
Now, why curse Canaan? Simply because Canaan was the product of that incestuous relationship. Noah is declaring that Canaan will not inherit this family leadership at all! The reason why Ham boasted to his brothers is simply because the community has to know that you have taken over your father's wives and concubines and you become the leader.
Shalom."

What Greg wrote is not biblically correct. It is not biblical because it requires adding details the passage never gives and ignoring details the passage does give. Greg’s idea sounds impressive because it piles up cross references, but it collapses the moment you let Genesis speak for itself. The text does not whisper about a hidden act. It tells you plainly what happened.

So he cannot be the product of the act being imagined. The passage never mentions a woman, never mentions Noah’s wife, never mentions a bed, never mentions intercourse, never mentions pregnancy. To get that story, you have to add sentences God never wrote.

Appealing to Leviticus does not rescue it. Moses recorded Genesis first. Law explains conduct, but it does not rewrite history. Genesis uses the language of sight and exposure. Leviticus uses legal language for sexual relations. They are not the same wording and Scripture never merges them here.

The fog clears when you stop speculating and read what God said. Ham’s sin was not hidden immorality. It was open dishonor. And that sin still lives every time someone runs to broadcast another man’s fall instead of covering it in righteousness. The passage is not about curiosity. It is about the heart.

Good morning, David and Rose;

I'm with David. He posted more of what I was going to share. There are too many erroneous statements from Greg Harrison and will keep him in my prayers. I understand his efforts because of my experiences of sharing the context of the Bible with others.

I got called out and was in error, not just once but often. The Lord filled me with a listening ear for correction, going back and re-read the passages. In the long run (years) this discipline benefited me in my personal growth as a disciple.

Still, Rose, thank you for asking a great question for discussion and learning.

God bless everyone.

Bob

 

[Yesua888]

You are not entering into some strange family sexual episode when you read Genesis 9. When you read Genesis 9, you are entering into a teaching of God that illustrates sin, shame, and honor after the flood in this cursed world we live in.

Noah becoming naked is not a bedroom moment. Scripture simply tells us that Noah became drunk and uncovered himself in his tent (Genesis 9:21). Skin is not the problem. Shame is the problem. Ever since Genesis chapter 3, nakedness has symbolized the exposure of our weakness through sin. Adam and Eve were naked and felt no shame until after sin entered the picture. Once sin was introduced into this world, their nakedness caused them to cover up. Genesis 3:7 tells us they knew they were naked and they covered themselves. In fact, Genesis 3:21 tells us that God covered their nakedness, which was the visible result of their sin.

Covering shame is honoring what God says is right.

There you have it. The parallel. Ham saw his father’s nakedness and took it upon himself to expose it rather than restore it. Instead of handling the matter quietly, Ham exposed his father. Ham publicized his father’s failure. The other two sons did the exact opposite. They went backward, refused to see the shame, and covered their father with honor. One son magnified shame. Two sons minimized shame. One son dishonored his father. Two sons covered and honored their father. Scripture does not leave you to imagine sin; it shows you sin by contrast.

“Noah knew what his younger son had done to him.” Notice what Scripture does and does not say. Scripture does not force a sexual application here. The sin was dishonoring. It was public. The text already told you what happened. Verses 22 and 23 show that Ham exposed his father’s nakedness, while Shem and Japheth covered it. Proverbs 10:12 later explains the principle clearly: hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all sins. Ham did not act in love. His brothers did.

Now comes the curse. Notice Noah did not curse Ham; he cursed Canaan (Genesis 9:25). This is not accidental. Scripture frequently speaks prophetically of descendants. Jacob does this repeatedly later in Genesis 49. This is not racism. It is morality and prophecy.

God is showing what kind of culture would flow from this particular line. Later, yes, this does relate to the land of Canaan, but not because God went on an ethnic cleansing spree. Genesis 15:16 says the iniquity of the Canaanites would become full. Leviticus 18 says the land vomited them out because of their abominations. Judgment came because of sin, not ethnicity.

Sin is still present after the flood. Shame still must be dealt with. God still honors those who do what is right in a broken world. Ham dishonored his father in a moment of sin, and Scripture later shows the kind of culture that flowed from his line. Shem and Japheth covered their father’s disgrace with garments. One son brought mockery to sin. Two sons restored God’s order by covering shame.

The story is not about hidden sexual acts or secret immorality. It is about honor, authority, shame, and the heart. Scripture does not retreat from this principle. Those who honor authority walk within God’s order. Those who delight in exposure walk in the pattern of the fall.

That is what Genesis 9 is preaching, and it does not need imagination to make its point.

Hi David,

I needed to know a bit more about Noah's curse on Caanan (Gen 9:25):

Why did Noah curse Canaan instead of Ham? | GotQuestions.org

Why did Noah curse Canaan instead of Ham? If Ham was the one who sinned against Noah, why did Noah curse Canaan?

www.gotquestions.org

• Ham had been blessed by God (Genesis 9:1), and Noah refused to curse someone whom the Lord had blessed. In the same way, the prophet Balaam could not curse the Israelites. God had told Balaam, “You must not put a curse on those people, because they are blessed” (Numbers 22:12; cf. Numbers 23:20). So, Noah pronounces a curse on some of Ham’s descendants. Ham’s sin against his father brought a punishment through his son. Not all of Ham’s descendants were cursed; only those through Canaan. It’s possible that Canaan was chosen to bear the imprecation because he was already showing evidence that he shared his father’s character.

• The “curse” on Canaan is more of a prophecy. Noah learned of Ham’s sin and gave him the bad news that one line of his posterity would suffer. As a prophet of God, Noah foresaw that the Canaanites, in their wickedness, would deserve their fate (see Leviticus 18 for a list of future Canaanite sins). Ham’s punishment was to lack a fatherly blessing and to know that he was the ancestor of a doomed people group.

In Genesis 10, the descendants of Canaan are listed. They include the Sidonians, the Hittites, the Jebusites, the Amorites, and the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 10:15–19). Noah’s curse/prophecy came true during the time of Joshua. The Canaanites, descendants of Ham, were conquered by the Israelites, descendants of Shem. True to God’s Word, some of the Canaanites became slaves (Joshua 9:27; 17:12–13).

Really interesting, thank you : )

 

[Yesua888]

A

I got called out and was in error, not just once but often. The Lord filled me with a listening ear for correction, going back and re-read the passages. In the long run (years) this discipline benefited me in my personal growth as a disciple.

Still, Rose, thank you for asking a great question for discussion and learning.

God bless everyone.

Bob

Bob, thank you for sharing that ... it is exactly what I have gone through, and now I have new spiritual ears, which I have prayed for and now see that I have received them : ) : ) : )
Rose, yes, thank you for helping us see more Truth, through questioning, researching, and sharing your findings : )
This Group is ramping up xxx

 

[Rose]

A

Bob, thank you for sharing that ... it is exactly what I have gone through, and now I have new spiritual ears, which I have prayed for and now see that I have received them : ) : ) : )
Rose, yes, thank you for helping us see more Truth, through questioning, researching, and sharing your findings : )
This Group is ramping up xxx

A

Bob, thank you for sharing that ... it is exactly what I have gone through, and now I have new spiritual ears, which I have prayed for and now see that I have received them : ) : ) : )
Rose, yes, thank you for helping us see more Truth, through questioning, researching, and sharing your findings : )
This Group is ramping up xxx

I should be the one thanking all of you for helping me with my Bible study.

 

[Rose]

Lessons from Noah's Drunkenness​

By God’s grace we need to start well but by God’s grace we also need to finish well.

The devil is all too aware of the kind of damage that can be done to the testimony of Christ if he can trip up an older saint (Noah) with a lifetime of godly testimony behind him.

John Butler: "No achievement in the past guarantees victory in the future. That as long as we are on the earth we need to be on our guard against temptation. The battle is not over until we are home with the Lord, and we should never let down our guard until we have reached the golden shores of eternity.” (Source - Simeon Western's study notes on Gen. 9:18-21a - Noah's Final Chapter - ( sermon aduio dot com)

 

[bobinfaith]

Lessons from Noah's Drunkenness
"By God’s grace we need to start well but by God’s grace we also need to finish well."

Good morning, Rose;

I love what you posted. I have to confess the times I started well "but didn't even bother to finish" regarding my Christian and life walk.

I guess that's where "we're a work in progress comes in"

God bless you, Rose, and your entire family.

Bob