This is a great interpretation. I’m just starting to read the Bible which bought me here because I really wanted to know what did Ham do to Noah and y Noah cursed Caanan. I really like your interpretation, it completely makes sense to me.

This is a good interpretation. There is absolutely nothing in there that insinuates rape of the mother. When the Bible talks about rape, it says it out right, like in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

So Noah lashed out a cursed his sons whole bloodline cause he saw him naked, possibly made jokes about the situation that made Noah feel ashamed, an im supposed to believe him to be a just man???

Love this explanation...thank you and God Bless

Noah was hundreds of years old in the story, was his generation also still alive and hundreds of years old, or was Noah’s family specifically long lived? At any rate, being the most righteous in a world that was so bad off that God destroys it is literally damning with faint praise.

Amen. ❤

Hmmm how would you explain the two brothers covering him with this quote you provided ?

@@infinite_s902good point, i think a literal interpretation more likely given that

Dan kind of addresses the Leviticus evidence at 5:30. Furthermore, this quote doesn’t really have direct bearing on what Ham is said to have done. Noah’s nakedness was already “uncovered” when Ham happened upon him and Ham only “saw” the nakedness: “He [Noah] drank some of the wine and became drunk, and he lay uncovered in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brothers outside. Then Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father’s nakedness.” (Genesis 9:21-23, New Revised Standard Version Updated) As Dan notes, emphasis on the “saw” part on Ham’s behalf. Here it is obvious that Ham isn’t the one who uncovered Noah’s nakedness. Hence why Noah cursing Canaan in this instance is much more likely to have been simply because Ham saw his father Noah’s “nakedness” or, in a more allegorical interpretation as Dan explains, Noah’s shame or vulnerability and did nothing to remedy it.

Yup

I'm glad you still find fairy tales eye opening like a child on Christmas Day. Do you put your teeth under a pillow?

My understanding of the “uncovers his feet” phrase is that it is a euphemism for Ruth uncovered his circumcision, therefore reminding Boaz of the Israelite’s promise to protect the alien, orphan, and the widow. It wasn’t intended as a sexual act. I think the Bible says that Boaz was startled awake. I mean… I would be too!! It’d be quite drafty. 💨 But Boaz would have to look down towards his circumcision(the sign of the Israel’s covenant with God) then his gaze would fall upon Ruth(a foreigner and widower).

I've still gotta develop my production skills. I'll have text on the screen before too long, but a great book that goes over how these traditions in Genesis 1-11 developed is David Carr, The Formation of Genesis 1-11.

@@maklelan Premiere Pro has a lot of good tools if you’re using that! Also , there are a ton of tutorials on KZfaq!

Please go and read the original information from the Ethiopian Bible nakedness of shame. He uncovered his shame. He saw that his father actually was naked after being drunk, and he saw him in a unrespectable light, and he looked on him, rather than turning his eye, and walking away, and he shamed him. This is African culture. If you see your parents in a light that you shouldn’t, you should cover your eyes you’re not to look upon them in anyway, to judge them. I suggest all of you pray and ask God for understanding and discernment. You can’t pick a part, the Bible, like a math book. It comes with spirit and in truth so if you want it on the down the Bible, spiritually, pray and ask God for discernment, I read your Bible daily.

@@Ghe608 Christ Jesus clearly said, "Anyone who looks (sees) at a woman with LUSTFUL EYES has already committed Adultery from their HEARTS." (ref. Matt. 5:28-32)... Therefore... Looking at the NAKEDNESS of any Human Body regardless of whether a Man or a Woman is not a SIN... but BEYOND LOOKING/ SEEING with LUSTFUL EYES (Cunning/Deceitful/Wickedness) that makes it EVIL or SIN... Logically speaking, if just looking at the NAKEDNESS of Human Bodies is a SIN, therefore all Physicians, Doctors, Surgeons, Nurses, and Caregivers are guilty of SIN against God... NOPE, does not how it works... Facts and Truth of the Matters, Biblically and Logically speaking... Praise be to God in Christ Jesus... Amen...

@@jvlp2046 you have NO idea what your talking about. … It’s clear you dont even know the Bible- one of the first stories in the Bible about Adam and Eve when they realized they were “naked” and they ran to cover themselves they felt shame in their nakedness, in front of God they felt shame. Nakedness and being uncovered in the Bible also relates to people knowing your deepest secret for you being vulnerable the Bible says when you love someone you are supposed to cover them and it doesn’t meet with clothes or a blanket. It means that you’re not supposed to expose them, and blah blah off your mouth about them you should pray with them and bring their sins to God and you both together. Pray there many instances in the Bible that God talks about nakedness covering and shame and you’re not getting it at all.. Genesis 3:7 says, 7. At that moment their eyes were opened, and they suddenly felt shame at their nakedness. So they sewed fig leaves together to cover themselves.Apr 8, 2021 citychurchbloomington.org › ... I recognize there’s not a lot of discipline not a lot of respect for authority in white homes So maybe it’s a foreign concept , but seeing your drunk father, naked, and not turning away or make an overt, moved to remove your father, shame , but you’re making a very big reach, thinking that there was anything homosexual going on or saying that he saw his mother, naked or slept with his mother. There’s nothing that indicates that so stop lying on the Bible …The Bible is a black book that happened in Africa with Black people, black culture and even your relationship with God, you’re supposed to have humility, and you’re supposed to know your place with God is the same thing with Noah when his son saw him drunk and naked because Noah felt shame and his son didn’t run away and kind of mocked him. Stay too long looking called in his brothers. Noah said because you caused me shame you’re lineage are cursed cursed (and I don’t know why that’s weird to the guy who is doing the Bible study in the video because many places in the Bible discussed the fact that you’re curses are passed down to your children and your children’s children) You. don’t understand culture you don’t understand the Bible. It talks about many of these scenarios but you don’t know your Bible.. the first Bible that was written is not western Bible is written by African people and it’s about respect. We also don’t have to figure out respect you’re not supposed to look at somebody’s nakedness meaning, naked in many ways you guys are making it something that it’s not you don’t even read your Bible the majority of you guys in the world don’t even read your Bible, how do you jump from seeing someone naked to homosexuality and then that he was with his father’s wife Not only do I know this Bible from Genesis to Malachi for Matthew to revelation. I also know the Ethiopian Bible that white people left all of those books out to only serve their purpose to do bad things to people and what I’m telling you is, you’re far off? I don’t know. Where are you see in the Bible that it says he looked at his father with the last fly. Be careful that the light within you is not darkness . Combined, the terms “NAKED” and “nakedness” are used 104 times in Scripture, a high number for fairly uncommon words, indicating their importance. Depending on the context, the terms can figuratively indicate innocence, defenselessness, vulnerability, helplessness, humiliation, shame, guilt, or judgment. The fact that you very quickly choose to make a judgment on morality. In this case is very weird. You don’t know the Bible and to read it in context into ask for discernment you are wrong you’re trying to compare old language to your not so common sense in today’s day and age, you’re not aware of Bible language, you’re not aware of their thinking, I think that you should take some time get into your Bible do some intense Bible studies get a good Bible study planner and read the Bible every day. Ask God for discernment, and then next year do it all over again constantly have the word of God, listening to it in your ear, and God will reveal himself to you what you’re saying right now is not correct

All scripture is inspired of God so there is never any error. (2 Timothy 3:16,17) Jephthah did not offer his daughter as a human burnt offering. That would be an insult to God and a violation of his law to make a literal human sacrifice. (Deuteronomy 18:9-12) The very ones Jephthah was fighting practiced human sacrifice to their god Molech. His daughter served at the sanctuary for the rest of her life. Her female companions visited her from year to year to give commendation, so obviously she wasn’t dead. (Judges 11:40) At the sanctuary she served in gathering wood, drawing water, and performing many other tasks as assistants to the priests and Levites there.

​@@sunnyjohnson992 His vow was explicitly to make a burnt offering of whatever comes out of the house to greet him. The custom was for maidens to lament the daughter of Jephthah, not visit her.

@@sunnyjohnson992 Bibliolatry is ugly, mean, and ignorant. Deuteronomy says for no books to be taken from or added to scripture, YET the new testament was added to the protest of many martyrs. Indeed, "2 Timothy" was not even part of the New Testament collection when it was crafted, let alone part of "actual scripture" being referred in that "personal letter." You have to know how your idols are crafted and used, you have to know how the letter kills the spirit "of interpretation as your heart doth wish" and how 1000 words merely paint a picture.

That seems quite a stretch compared to this explanation of amended text

Ham's whole lineage was not condemned for all eternity! Noah cursed the youngest son of Ham Canaan, why? Noah was hoping for a fourth son, to which Ham and his wife objected, for their inheritance would be divided four ways instead of three. Again, why would Noah curse the fourth son of Ham, namely Canaan? Ham did not uncover Noah's nakedness because he was already naked. According to The Essential Zohar, as translated by Rav P. S. Berg, and we read, "And he drank of the wine, and was drunk, and he was uncovered" (Genesis 9:21). This aroused Ham, the father of Canaan, and he castrated Noah, thereby removing the secret Covenant, which had made Noah a righteous man. He removed the male organ, the means of begetting" (P. 102). 22 "And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brothers outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father’s nakedness. 24 So Noah awoke from his wine and knew what his younger son had done to him. 25 Then he said: “Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants he shall be to his brethren.” 26 And he said: “Blessed be the Lord, The God of Shem, And may Canaan be his servant. 27 May God enlarge Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents of Shem; and may Canaan be his servant” (Genesis 9:22-27). Noah cursed Canaan who was already known, and therefore, Noah's wife was not assaulted, raped, or impregnated by her son, Ham. If Noah was not castrated, and thereby no longer the leading Patriarch, then why did he pass the Patriarchy onto Shem? This is why he said, "Blessed be the LORD God of Shem..." No the key to understanding why Canaan and his descendants were cursed with perpetual slavery, is due to Ham preventing his father, Noah, from being able to begat a fourth son, which is why Noah cursed Ham's fourth son.

@April Vera this is just my opinion .I don't think the Bible condemns drinking alcohol . Especially wine which was more common . I do however believe it does condemn getting drunk . So if someone can have a couple of drinks and leave it at that without drinking more and becoming intoxicated that is fine .

The Bible doesn't condemn drinking at all. Modern era Protestants dreamed that up. The only restriction is that clergy should not be alcoholics.

You have read into it too much. Worried about the planting of grapes. How long do grapes take to grow? Figure that out. It's pretty simple. Scripture interpretates scripture. Leviticus 18 verifies hams sin.

Nah I don’t except that, this is Noah we’re talking about for him to curse someone of his lineage for something they were not involved in just seems wrong does it not?

Etiologies are usually non-historical, since etiologies don’t generally pop up until knowledge of origins is lost.

@@maklelan thank you so much. I have learned a ton in just the last few months. Please keep doing what you’re doing, it’s so incredibly helpful!

I’m currently reading the History Of God and I’m loving it, what are the odds

I haven't read her. I Look at this story from a lawyers perspective when I am asked "what sin did Ham commit". I read the story and in this story Ham had committed no sin. I scoured the Bible for a character witness against Ham and found no instance where have had ever committed a sin in the entire book, before, during or after this story. Based on the evidence given Ham can only have committed as sin based on speculation assumed resulting from the response of Noah, while also omitting Noah's own sins, as if his actions were assumed to be righteous. When one examines the story for sins it is apparent that Noah had committed a number of now what we consider to be sins. He was drunk, he was indecently exposed while being drunk, he cursed a man, he punished the innocent. It would be no stretch for one in today's world to imagine a scenario where a very influential, well respected, authoritative character being found in a compromising position, after such a condition being reported by a subordinate, would be angered and feel betrayed to the point of punishing the one responsible and even by punishing the ones innocent child while simultaneously rewarding those who refuse to look upon (acknowledge) his sins and even cover them up. This mirrors exactly what we see today. The majority refuse to look upon or report the sins of authoritative figures and even cover them up when they are found, these people are rewarded for their covering up of sin, and the minority who point out the sins of those in authority are unrighteous punished for it. This story is a model of the power structure that exists to this day. Drunkards expose their own nakedness, they bare their own truth. Those who would acknowledge these truths are punished.

@@bettinanstevens9259 that was awesome. Well said.

Canaan had already been born by the time they anchored at mt. Ararat Gen: 9 :26 in the older days grandsons were counted as sons , most likely Canaan could have been the illicit child of a wicked act.

​@@bettinanstevens9259the point of the story is that the first born son gets the inheritance, often one sibling can jump ahead in the line through several methods - one of those being making a new son with the Father's wife.

The gift of etiology keeps on giving. :(

(1) I agree, it has resonances with different societies' approaches to honor/shame and hospitality. (2) Yes, the Israelites were Canaanites. By the time these traditions are created, Israel/Judah had thoroughly othered the societies around them and is creating fictive kinship and ancestries to firm up the lines of distinction from the groups around them.

Canaan was guilty of some abuse or perversion against his grandfather Noah. Canaan’s father Ham witnessed this, but didn’t interfere. Rather he spread the story. Noah’s other sons Shem and Japheth, acted to cover their father. They were blessed, but Canaan was cursed and Ham suffered as a result of the shame brought upon his offspring.

Hello. Please keep in mind that those blessings and curses came from Noah and not God. (James 3:10) And Ham didn't suffer, the land of Ham went on to become a great nation because of God's blessing upon Ham (Genesis 9:1) and Hams Decendants Genesis 9:8-9)

The curse becomes the Israelites defeating the Canaanites in Deuteronomy. There is also a theory I’ve heard that the Canaanite women were taken by the Nephilim and that’s why they are described as Giants.

Look up A Textual Study of Noah’s Flood by Project Tabs I would post a link but KZfaq will delete it.

He says in the video it's NRSV

This is exactly what he’s saying-that’s what an etiology is.

@@owenfw it’s been a long week. I’m exhausted.

It seems particularly heinous of Noah to curse his grandson into slavery for his own shame.

Not until the 17th or 18th century, when slavers wanted to imagine up some religious justification. Canaanites weren't black, they looked the same as the Israelites. As far as archeology can tell us, for the most part they basically were the same people as the Israelites. Although black Africans were/are considered the descendants of Ham (Cush is roughly equivalent to Ethiopia), the curse never applied to them, only to Canaan. Moses even married a Cushite woman.

@@fluffysheap no Canaan is black Canaan is ham son

@@mrnice2665 Where do you get that from?