Asked in The Bible
How did noah younger son of the bible mistreat him?
May 16, 2012 2:27PM
In Genesis ch 9, it is recorded that Noah got spectacularly drunk and ended up lying naked in his tent. Ham saw this and told his brothers; they went to the trouble of getting a sheet, walking backwards into the tent and covering their father.
Upon learning of this, Noah cursed Ham to be the servant of his two brothers.
The biblical evidence leads to the understanding that either Ham or his son, Canaan, sodomized Noah while he lay unconscious and drunk.
The wording in the KJV says: "...Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father..." (Gen.9:22).
In verse 24; Noah awakes from his drunken stupor: "...and knew what his younger son HAD DONE unto him."
It's evident that "seeing something" isn't "doing" anything to anyone.
To assess this further... a close wording of "seeing the nakedness" of one's relatives is found in the "Levitical laws" [Lev.18]. While most people assume that these laws didn't come into existence until Moses wrote them down centuries later... this passage in Genesis 9 proves otherwise.
Just as Noah knew what "clean" and "unclean" animals were, that he took on the ark with him [Gen.7]... we can read of what animals these were by what Moses wrote down centuries later for our edification, today, in these last days [Acts 7:38].
In Leviticus 18, we read: "None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to UNCOVER their nakedness: I AM the Lord..." (Lev.18:6).
While this seems to be NOT such a great sin to our somewhat calloused psyches in these end times... this is how the NIV translates this passage:
"No one is to approach any close relative TO HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS. I AM the LORD."
The biblical evidence, then, points to either Ham... or his son, Canaan, sodomizing, respectively, either his father... or his grandfather.
The fact that Noah cursed "Canaan" rather than Ham could either mean that Noah was cursing Ham's children for what he, Ham himself, had done... or Canaan, the son of Ham, for his own sin.
Either way... it's evident that what would later become known as a "Levitical law"... was known to Noah and his sons from across the flood. And it becomes clear that "seeing the nakedness of his father" wasn't what was "done" to Noah... but "sexual relations" had been committed, more than likely by Ham's son, Canaan.
The NIV doesn't translate Genesis 9:22 as "having sexual relations" as it does in Leviticus 18. It says that Ham "SAW his father's nakedness"... not that he "uncovered" his father's nakedness [as Lev.18 words it], or did any actual "uncovering."
This lends to the probability that Ham's son, Canaan was the culprit... and Ham was devastated and utterly shamed by it when he discovered [SAW] it, later. And in that shame, informed his brothers of the vile thing that happened.
This would explain why Noah cursed "Canaan," specifically... and not Ham.
In any event... it's evident that the "mistreatment" of Noah by his younger son... probably Canaan... was "illicit sexual relations."