Bible question about Genesis 9:20-25???

Question

Ok it starts :
20 Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded [a] to plant a vineyard. 21 When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent. 22 Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father's nakedness and told his two brothers outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their shoulders; then they walked in backward and covered their father's nakedness. Their faces were turned the other way so that they would not see their father's nakedness.

Then it just goes right to:
24 When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said,
"Cursed be Canaan!
The lowest of slaves
will he be to his brothers." --------------

What did Ham do? it looks like all he did was went outside and told his brothers "hey, dad's naked and drunk in the tent hahaha" - and what does Ham's son Canaan have to do with it? why does he have to be a slave because of it??

ThePeskyWabbit - I guess it depends on what version of the bible you read - I took this from the New International Version - and it clearly say SLAVE in verses 26 and 27 it clearly say SLAVE two more times ---------------------
and my question is about the logic - and why is Canaan being punished here -- he doesn't even have any speaking parts he is only spoken of - what did he do wrong?

Answer 1

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

He had sex with his mother and had a son named Canaan.

Know also that it was Noah who cursed him not God!

Answer 2

Good question,

Since the record mentions only that “Ham the father of Canaan saw his father’s nakedness and went telling it to his two brothers outside,” the question arises as to why Canaan rather than Ham became the object of the curse. Commenting on Genesis 9:24, which states that when Noah awoke from his wine he “got to know what his youngest son had done to him,” a footnote in Rotherham’s translation says: “Undoubtedly Canaan, and not Ham: Shem and Japheth, for their piety, are blessed; Canaan, for some unnamed baseness, is cursed; Ham, for his neglect, is neglected.” Similarly, a Jewish publication, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, suggests that the brief narrative “refers to some abominable deed in which Canaan seems to have been implicated.” (Edited by J. H. Hertz, London, 1972, p. 34) And, after noting that the Hebrew word translated “son” in verse 24 may mean “grandson,” this source states: “The reference is evidently to Canaan.” The Soncino Chumash also points out that some believe Canaan “indulged a perverted lust upon [Noah],” and that the expression “youngest son” refers to Canaan, who was the youngest son of Ham.—Edited by A. Cohen, London, 1956, p. 47.

These views, of necessity, are conjectural since the Biblical record does not give any details as to Canaan’s implication in the offense against Noah. Yet some implication seems definitely intended by the fact that, just before relating the case of Noah’s drunkenness, Canaan is abruptly introduced into the account (Ge 9:18) and, in describing Ham’s actions, the record refers to him as “Ham the father of Canaan.” (Ge 9:22) That the expression “saw his father’s nakedness” may indicate some abuse or perversion that involved Canaan, is a reasonable conclusion. For in most instances incest or other sexual sins are meant when the Bible speaks of ‘laying bare’ or ‘seeing the nakedness’ of another. (Le 18:6-19; 20:17) So, it is possible that Canaan had committed or attempted to commit some abuse on the unconscious Noah and that Ham, though having knowledge of this, failed either to prevent it or to take disciplinary action against the offender, and compounded the wrong by making known to his brothers Noah’s disgrace.

I hope that makes sense.

Answer 3

I found this information interesting. It was more than likely worse than just "seeing Noah naked"

While Noah was asleep in his tent Ham, and perhaps also his son Canaan, became implicated in some sort of disrespect for Noah. The account reads: “Finally Noah awoke from his wine and got to know what his youngest son had done to him.” Generally Ham is understood to be designated here as Noah’s “youngest son.” However, in the Bible, the expression sometimes refers to a grandson, who, in this case, was Canaan. Whatever the situation, Canaan’s father Ham went telling it to his two brothers instead of himself covering Noah as they did. On learning of the episode, Noah cursed Canaan and blessed Shem’s God Jehovah.—Ge 9:20-27.

The Biblical record does not give any details as to Canaan’s implication in the offense against Noah. Yet some implication seems definitely intended by the fact that, just before relating the case of Noah’s drunkenness, Canaan is abruptly introduced into the account (Ge 9:18) and, in describing Ham’s actions, the record refers to him as “Ham the father of Canaan.” (Ge 9:22)

That the expression “saw his father’s nakedness” may indicate some abuse or perversion that involved Canaan, is a reasonable conclusion. For in most instances incest or other sexual sins are meant when the Bible speaks of ‘laying bare’ or ‘seeing the nakedness’ of another. (Le 18:6-19; 20:17) So, it is possible that Canaan had committed or attempted to commit some abuse on the unconscious Noah and that Ham, though having knowledge of this, failed either to prevent it or to take disciplinary action against the offender, and compounded the wrong by making known to his brothers Noah’s disgrace.

Answer 4

Ham "apparently" either MOLESTED Noah or made a MOCKERY of him while asleep. Both a no-no in a house that was geared toward Godly devotion and also you must realize the ONLY reason they "boys" were saved was because of Noah's Sake. They were 99, and 100 years old. Two being born within a year of each other, and the third within a year of the 2nd one. So, it was only by "God's" grace that the Flood came in the 100th birthday of their lives and they were still "considered" IN THEIR FATHER'S CARE, being so young. (I know, not young to us, but things change. Noah WAS 500 when he had his FIRST child!).

So, Ham got him and his family cursed on account of his actions. His family was not made SLAVES because of what he DID, but because of HOW HE RAISED THEM. God, thru Noah, was denoting the fact that Ham was a Bad Parent and because of this, his descendents would be Slaves to the other nations. Canaan, also was to be "polluted by the blood of the Rephaim" that survived the flood, thus creating the line of Giants such as Goliath of Gath, and King Ogg of Bashan (both in the Bible). This is WHY upon entering the Holy Land after their 40 years of wandering, the Israelites were told to DESTROY ALL MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN AND ANIMALS. Because of these monsterous inbreedings that had been going ON BEFORE THE FLOOD, and AFTER. However, the Israelites did not listen to God and as a result, TO THIS DAY, THEY ARE FIGHTING WITH THE DESCENDANTS OF THOSE PEOPLE. When if they had followed God's instructions, there would be no one to fight today!

So, Ham was just "not a good person, and raised disobedient children and they all paid the price."

Answer 5

Ham had brought dishoner to Noah because Ham had brought a son into this world (Canaan)who brought disgrace to Noah. Therefore Ham was disgraced due to what His son did. The Disgrace and curse was not on the Hamites though. It was placed upon the Canaanites.

Answer 6

relatively it grow to be Ham's son that observed his father's nakedness. very in all likelihood Canaan grow to be to blame of a few abuse or perversion against the guy of his grandfather Noah, and Ham witnessed this without interfering. rather, Noah’s son Ham seems to have unfold the story, while Shem and Japheth acted to conceal their father. consequently, they have been blessed, the in all likelihood wrongdoer Canaan grow to be cursed, and the bystander and talebearer Ham suffered by using the shame delivered upon his offspring. even with the fact that the Scriptures do no longer grant all the information, the substantial component is that Jehovah brought about Noah to utter the prophecy and God delivered approximately its fulfillment whilst the Canaanites who weren't destroyed via the Israelites have been placed under servitude to those descendants of Shem.—Joshua 9:23; a million Kings 9:21

Answer 7

Grace unto you and peace,
from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

It's "allegory"(Gal 4) and "mystery"(Col 2) to solve by seek and find grace, to help, in time (Heb 4).

The wine Noah got drunk on is law, which made him both naked and ashamed (rather than naked and unashamed). For in the ark story it notes clever Noah did both grace and law: both "all God commanded" and "all the LORD commanded", which are as contrary as 2 and 7, as contrary as keeping seed(Christ) alive and sacrificing(slaughtering) Christ, etc. And where did doing both grace and law get clever Noah? He died (Gen 9:29). He's also listed in the hall of shame of Heb 11: "these all died" and "received not the promise".

Obviously Noah was into both grace and law, since he both blessed and cursed; and what he blessed was the LORD God (LAWED Grace) of Shem. Consider "bless and curse not" in Rom 12:14 allegorically meaneth grace and law not; just as "grace is sufficient" in 2Cor 12:9 meaneth no law req'd.

The "grace" of our Lord Jesus Christ with you all. Amen.

Answer 8

I have no idea what your question is. Ham? Ham and his brother? What did Ham's son, Canaan, do with what?

Slave? There is nowhere in that scripture that says "slave." It says "servant," but not slave. We are all servants of God.

Answer 9

The text that you quote claims that Noah's youngest son had "done to him" something. To do something is different than to see something. I won't take it any further.

Answer 10

Noah was ashamed of him self so he took it out on his son. That's what it sounds like to me.