Bible Study Noah's Nakedness

[Sinthesis]

So your saying Moses was writing to the current generation about their current situation when he wrote the passage in Genesis in regard to Noah? Why then do you reject what Moses said in Leviticus in regard to what Moses said in Genesis in regard to what I've shown, yet you accept what Moses says in Leviticus in regard to what Moses said in Genesis when it supports what your saying?

Just sayin brother... I found this a bit odd.

What I find odd is the way the 'sexual perverse activity' model of Gen 9 is such a feeble and confused attempt to illustrate what would be the same sin that is presented so much more clearly as the 'sexual perverse activity' found in Gen 19 to accuse the Moabites and Ammonites.

I don't reject what Moses said in Leviticus. I don't think it can be applied correctly to Gen 9 when Ham didn't actually 'uncover' anything.

Why wasn't the language of 'Levitical nakedness' not used in Gen 19?

 

[DPMartin]

Good questions Dora. These are the same questions the sages asked. At lunch, I was reading commentary from the Ramban on the matter. For me, it really made sense. I'm not trying to be stingy, but I'm not going to share it here simply because I know it will cause a dispute.

As far as the sex thing, it is recorded as sodomy in Sanhedrien 70a according to the foot note that points me to Rashi.

StoveBolts
I have been told by those who are Jewish and studied to be a rabbi or are rabbis that are coverts that believe in Jesus Christ, that basically Rashi is not valid. And after sitting down and reading his stuff from the beginning of Gen. you can see why, in other words I agree.


It’s not the facts so much as in, this is this in Hebrew, or that is that, its the interpretation comes through as if he can correct the Torah, I mean there are places were he is definitely way off base.

 

[jasoncran]

and i would say the same with schofield, darby, chafer and most modern scholars that teach dispationisalism. and well i think i may some messianic jews who would disagree.

 

[DPMartin]

and i would say the same with schofield, darby, chafer and most modern scholars that teach dispationisalism. and well i think i may some messianic jews who would disagree.

jasoncran

Do you think Rashi interpretations are valid? I realize that Rashi is the go to guy in almost all Jewish study of scripture so I’m not trying to offend.

Also, are you saying that the Lord God doesn’t have a covenant (agreement) with mankind? For example the scripture does state that God made a covenant with Noah and his sons.

Gen:6:18: But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.

 

[jasoncran]

jasoncran

Do you think Rashi interpretations are valid? I realize that Rashi is the go to guy in almost all Jewish study of scripture so I’m not trying to offend.

Also, are you saying that the Lord God doesn’t have a covenant (agreement) with mankind? For example the scripture does state that God made a covenant with Noah and his sons.

Gen:6:18: But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.

yes but if you look at the curse and history whom didnt canaan serve as noah said. its interesting you look at it.

and you speak of the noahide laws which lol we follow!

 

[stovebolts]

What I find odd is the way the 'sexual perverse activity' model of Gen 9 is such a feeble and confused attempt to illustrate what would be the same sin that is presented so much more clearly as the 'sexual perverse activity' found in Gen 19 to accuse the Moabites and Ammonites.

I will give you my view at the end.

I don't reject what Moses said in Leviticus. I don't think it can be applied correctly to Gen 9 when Ham didn't actually 'uncover' anything.

Genesis 9: saw the nakedness of his father
Lev 18: thy father's nakedness.

In Genesis 9, we see that Noah was uncovered in his tent... and further on we see that Noah's other sons "covered" him. but when Noah awoke, why does he say, "and knew what his youngest son had done unto him."

Why wasn't the language of 'Levitical nakedness' not used in Gen 19?

Because it addresses two separate items. Ham's entire seed was cursed because of what he had done to his Father, and no, I don't support same sex marriage and I don't think Noah appreciated it.

More to your point, I believe the key to your question lies in this verse.
Genesis 19:31 And the first-born said unto the younger, Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth:

Keep in mind, a whole city had just been destroyed because of it's wickedness and this is not too long after the flood account which destroyed the world for it's wickedness. It is possible, that as with the Flood they believed they were the only people left on the entire earth, and Dad was getting old.

I would also mention that what occured in Gen 19 also had it's consequences.
Deuteronomy 23:3 An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of Jehovah; even to the tenth generation shall none belonging to them enter into the assembly of Jehovah for ever:

Odd, Ruth was a Moabite wasn't she? ;)

 

[Fedusenko]

I hate coming into conversations late...

StoveBolts, where does it say that all of Hems descendants were cursed. I only recall Cannan. With that understanding of mine I have seen the reason for Cannan being cursed because Cannan is the result of the sin committed by Ham.

StoveBolts, where does it say that getting drunk is a sin and how does that compare to Jesus giving wine to the bridegroom for the wedding when everyone was already drunk? Would that be Jesus causing others to sin, which imparts that sin on Him, too?

Handy, do you think that eating fruit caused Adam and Eve to become ashamed or could they have been hiding the tools of their sin?

 

[stovebolts]

I hate coming into conversations late...

StoveBolts, where does it say that all of Hems descendants were cursed. I only recall Cannan. With that understanding of mine I have seen the reason for Cannan being cursed because Cannan is the result of the sin committed by Ham.

Hi Fedusenko,
My bad, I didn't articulate that very well did I? Can I have a do over :D How does this sound?

The seed of Ham was cursed through the perpetual line of Cannan.

Now, as far as Cannan being the result of the sin committed by Ham, I had not heard that one and the sages only mention sodomy and castration. Not only that, but it is speculated that Cannan was the oldest child of Ham when this occurred as Ham's other children had not been born yet. This is why Cannan is placed last on the geneological list which would make it appear that he is the youngest. Basically, Cannan had lost his rightful place.

StoveBolts, where does it say that getting drunk is a sin and how does that compare to Jesus giving wine to the bridegroom for the wedding when everyone was already drunk? Would that be Jesus causing others to sin, which imparts that sin on Him, too?

Not sure how this really relates to Noah getting drunk other than to say that even a great man such as Noah could get drunk... I don't really want to go down the path your paving, but if I could ask, what significance is this portion as it pertains to the narrative that you bring it up in such a manner? I'd really like to know what angle your attempting to bring into the equation.

 

[Fedusenko]

I hold you in higher regard concerning certain subjects so I am also more critical of mistakes or fuzzy responses. Please take it as a compliment.

While I am not attempting to argue with any Sage, I am curious how they came to the conclusion of sodomy and castration. I know you and I have gone down this road before, but I perfer to know how I know what I know, if you know what I mean.

As for the road I was going down... I am stating that because the Messiah contributed to the drunkeness of the wedding goers that getting drunk is not a sin for that would disqualify Him as Messiah, thus Moses did not sin by becoming drunk. The sin lies in allowing it take over your life, thus making the state of drunk a god. The sin can also be what you do while intoxicated. Most people don't say God's name in fear of saying It out of reverence. I believe this is the origine of the belief that being intoxicated is a sin, for fear of sinning while your guard is not as high.

I am not at all stating that the Messiah sinned, but prointing out an inconsistancy that seems to be overlooked often. Jesus could not have sinned AND Christianity be true, so we must be misunderstanding something else.

 

[Fedusenko]

Not only that, but it is speculated that Cannan was the oldest child of Ham when this occurred as Ham's other children had not been born yet. This is why Cannan is placed last on the geneological list which would make it appear that he is the youngest. Basically, Cannan had lost his rightful place.

Is there any other place where this has happened, an eldest child looses his birthright and is thus placed as the youngest?

Also, anothe point to ponder, if Ham sleeps with his mother then she has 9 months for gestation. Keep the time periods in context. They have spent quite some time on the boat being abstinint, 150 days actually. They understand they must repopulate the earth. They have been pondering this idea a while now. Human nature is going to say Ham got lucky on his first night off the boat.

20*Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded[j] to plant a vineyard. 21*When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent.

This gives us quite a bit of information. Not only has Noah created a vinyard, but he ferminted the produce to wine. I have never made wine, but my assumption is that it takes time. I also imagine there was a party about it, too, but that is unessential for this perspective. I think this allows for the possibility that no children had been born yet, and being intoxicated, Ham impregnated Noah's wife.

I am not saying it is correct, but a possibility and I wanted to throw it in the mix.

 

[stovebolts]

Fedusenko,

Thank you for keeping me on my toes and holding me to a higher standard. I tend to get lazy sometimes, so I appreciate your nudge.

As far as the reference of Sodomy and Castration, it came from a Rashi commentary. Another commentary that I have (Ramban) does not comment on either, but forwards the discussion to Rashi. Rashi' does not expand on the topic, but simply points you to the proper place. Here is the commentary.

Some say that he castrated him, and some say that he sodomized him. — [from Sanh. 70a] \b 23\b0

I have not read nor studied what the Sanhedrin wrote on the matter because those documents are hard to sift through. I want to buy a program that has all of that stuff wrapped into it, but I don't want to spend the hundred bucks..., anyway, I haven't found anything from a Jewish source that says anything about Noah's wife. Actually, I find this all not only interesting, but intriguing as well. Folks can take it or leave it, I'm simply here for the discussion and I appreciate your tone.

Also, thank you for clarifying your position on getting drunk. I think it's a good point.

As far as Canaan being the oldest, yet being put as the youngest genealogically, that is something I read in my Ramban commentary and it was very interesting. Unfortunatly, I loaned my commentaries out to Jasoncrans and I don't recall how he justified it. If Jason is around, maybe he could help us out.

Just as an FYI, the boat was a float about a year. The flood occured on the 17th day of the second month (Gen 7:11 ). The mountains were seen on the 1st day of the 10th month (8:5). On the 27th day of the second month Noah was able to leave the ark. (8:14)

As far as making wine... it takes about 3 days if you help it along with a little yeast. But wine will naturally ferment.

I'm curious why you think there was abstinence on the ark. Creationists have done a study on the ark and it's design and have calculated that the ark would have had lots of room to move about. Not only that, but I think about Jewish culture where everyone sleeps in the same room, yet they somehow manage to 'be fruitful and multiply'.

Anyway, going back to the castration part, Rashi beleives that Canaan was the 4th (youngest) son and I would highly suspect he gets this from the Sanhedrin. He justifies this by saying:

Cursed be Canaan: You have caused me to be incapable of begetting another fourth son (Gen. Rabbah , manuscripts, and early editions read: a fourth son) to serve me. Cursed be your fourth son, that he should minister to the children of these older ones [Shem and Japhet], upon whom the burden of serving me has been placed from now on (Gen. Rabbah 36:7). Now what did Ham see (what reason did he have) that he castrated him? He said to his brothers,“The first man [Adam] had two sons, and one killed the other so as to inherit the world, and our father has three sons, and he still desires a fourth son!†- [from Gen. Rabbah ibid. 5, 22:7]

boy, talk about joining the conversation late! Ramban doesn't buy into that conversation at all, thus Canaan was the oldest son

 

[jasoncran]

i can. when im in that section i will post that as he has whole chapter on noach! right now im inquiring with a orthodox jewish soldier on the vav. she doesnt know much and if i do meet he parents i may ask them as they are big on the things of the temple and also are isreali. isreali jews that do the torah arent usually of the consertive type i hear.

 

[cupid dave]

I've always thought that Noah was pretty harsh on his son Canaan for joking at his father being drunk and passed out naked in his tent. But I recently read something different on this matter and wanted to share it with you all to get your take on it.

Genesis 9:22-25 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. 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. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his youngest son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

I believe that Moses recorded Genesis, and when he did so, he used the language of Exodus. Or maybe a better way to say it, he used the lingo common to the people of that era. I want to look at Noah's nakedness through the words of Moses as we find in Leviticus 18:7.

Leviticus 18:7 The nakedness of thy father, even the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.

Leviticus 18:8 The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.

18:8 is clear that if one uncovers the fathers wifes nakedness, one has uncovered the father's nakedness.

With this understanding, can we go back to "Noah's nakedness" and view it as his wife's nakedness? After all, Leviticus 18:8 states that if one uncovers the fathers wife nakedness, they have uncovered their "fathers nakedness". This is the same language used in Genesis 9:22 in regard to Noah.

I think it could go either way, and found this very interesting. But it still always kind of bothered me that Canaan would be treated so harsh for making fun of his Father, and even perhaps his own Mother for getting drunk and passing out naked in their tent. But is that what really happened? I understand the culture, and I've even taught that the priests were to use stairs to go up the altar because God didn't want their nakedness exposed (Exodus 20:26) But "their" nakedness is not the same language used in Genesis 9:22 or Leviticus 18:7-8.

What I find very interesting about Leviticus 18:7-8 is this though. The Jews understood these verses regarding "uncovering" the Fathers Nakedness carried a sexual overtone. In other words, it wasn't just seeing your mother or father naked, it was engaging in sexual activity with them.

With this type of an interpretation, it makes more sense to me now why Canaan was cursed so harshly.

The question remains though, did Canaan have sexual favors with Noah, or with his own Mother? I don't have any idea but lean more toward Noah.

Something to think about anyway. I'd appreciate any thoughts on the matter.

The verse can be seen as implying a difference between Noah types of men and these three "sons."

The whole story could be understood in accord with a scientific interpretation.
We could posit a comparison between the 22 names in the genealogy from the Adam species through Noah and sons and modern science which lists 22 now extinct species of human in our appearance 40 thousand years ago.

In this view, Noah was not as smart as we modern men are.
Noah was uncovered, embarrassingly, as rather dimwitted.

The implication of the word, uncivered, does suggest this type of meaning:

 

[Adam]

The verse can be seen as implying a difference between Noah types of men and these three "sons."

The whole story could be understood in accord with a scientific interpretation.
We could posit a comparison between the 22 names in the genealogy from the Adam species through Noah and sons and modern science which lists 22 now extinct species of human in our appearance 40 thousand years ago.

In this view, Noah was not as smart as we modern men are.
Noah was uncovered, embarrassingly, as rather dimwitted.

The implication of the word, uncivered, does suggest this type of meaning:

I'm sorry, but what you seem to be suggesting is that these species have a lineal ancestry, which is not the case.

Also, there are something like 30 extinct species discovered and "modern science" does not deliniate extinct hominoid species at 22.

No offense, but I percieve that anyone who would compare extinct species to the earliest geneology given in Genesis doesn't have a clear comprehension of either.

 

[John O]

Jeff,

I understand where you're coming from... I disagree mainly due to the fact if Ham was sexual with either his mother or father, is it likely he'd tell his brothers about it?

You've drawn from Exodus to capture possible meanings of nakedness...

We can also look back to the Garden, when Adam and Eve sinned and saw that they were naked and were ashamed...

Noah, is a type of Adam... in the sense that he was the man of righteousness left after God cleansed the world of sin... But, Noah got drunk and exposed his nakedness. Mainly, bringing sin right back into the world again.

Ham coudda, shoudda, woudda covered his father's nakedness and turned to God... but he didn't. He expounded the sin by gazing upon Noah's shame, then dragging his brother's into it.

Just as the sin in the Garden prompted a curse, so this sin does as well.

Which still leaves me wondering, why Canaan?

The reason the curse went to Caanan is because under Jewish (Biblical) custom Justice is the firstborn's and Mercy the second. Ham was the second born of Noah so the curse could not go to Him but it went to his firstborn son Caanan.

The firstborn Adam sinned and received Justice, The second Adam (Jesus) paid the price for the sin of Adam and received mercy. (thankfully so do we)

John O

 

[Sinthesis]

The reason the curse went to Caanan is because under Jewish (Biblical) custom Justice is the firstborn's and Mercy the second. Ham was the second born of Noah so the curse could not go to Him but it went to his firstborn son Caanan.

The firstborn Adam sinned and received Justice, The second Adam (Jesus) paid the price for the sin of Adam and received mercy. (thankfully so do we)

John O

Ham's firstborn was not Canaan.

Gen 10:6 - And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan.

1Ch 1:8 - The sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, Put, and Canaan.​

 

[stovebolts]

Ham's firstborn was not Canaan.

Gen 10:6 - And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan.

1Ch 1:8 - The sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, Put, and Canaan.​

Honestly, you could, as it has in Jewish circles debate if Canaan was the first or last son. It is possible that Canaan was the first born, but because he was cursed, he lost his first born status which is denoted in the genealogical outline you've quoted above.

That ought to be worth about three cents