Bible Discussion Thread

I know the bible often discusses the most despicable and unsavory parts of man's sinful nature. The account in Genesis where Ham "saw the nakedness" of his father seems to be one such scripture.

Growing up hearing and studying Genesis 9:22, I was taught Ham was cursed because he literally "saw the nakedness" of his father Noah. (This seems to be the most polite way of explaining what actually happened.)

Here is the full account of this incident:

Genesis. 9:22

And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brethren without.

23. 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.

24. And Noah awoke from his wine and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

25. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

I have recently come across an interpretation of this incident that is rather disturbing.

In Lev. 18: 12: Thou shalt not "uncover the nakedness" of thy father's sister: she is thy father's near kinswoman. God is forbidding copulation with close relatives.

In Genesis 9:22 The language is very similar and seems to indicate that Ham copulated with his father Noah and possibly with his mother because a son of Ham was also cursed.

I know this incident is a little unsavory. However, it is in the word of God, and I would like to know the truth about this incident. Especially, in light of the current worldly corruption that is permeating every part of our current world.

Well canaan, the son of ham was cursed with a darker hue, and that's been toking out by are trusty bible Scholars, so they don't have to talk about slavery. But, ham's son was cursed because Noah couldn't curse ham, because GOD Blessed Noah and his 3 Son's before they step out of the ark, so canaan was ham's first born, and therefore he had to be the one that Noah cursed. I pray this answer the question you had. GOD Bless.

Hello John. I don't believe that Leviticus 18:12 can be applied to the Noah/Ham matter as that verse is specifically referring to unnatural familial relationships whereas Ham showed disrespect & disregard to his Father by what he did, in spite of Noah's pitiful condition.

English Sacha's graphical retelling of this portion may be closer to the truth than we know, which I had not earlier considered.

Thank you for your reply Chris.

Hi John , you are correct , the Bible doesn't mess about when discussing human sinfullness . This is why I don't believe that Ham had sex with either of his parents . I think that if he did it would say exactly that . This is just my opinion , I think that Ham found his father 'uncovered ' and had a laugh at his expense , something along the lines of ' look at this silly old drunk ' perhaps ? He said as much to his two brothers and invited them to mock their dad with him . They were a bit more respectfull , Noah awoke with a hangover and in a bit of a bad mood and realised the kind of thing that had happened because of the blanket covering his nakedness . After he had made his enquiries and learnt of Hams disrespect of him , Noah had a few choice words . This is all in my imagination of course . We can always speculate and try to read between the lines as long as we recognise that thats what we have done . May God bless us all with ears to hear and eyes to see .

Thank you "English Sacha". I have always agreed with your interpretation of these events. When I hear a new interpretation of bible facts it seems prudent to apply "Occam's Razor".