Gênesis 9
Bob Utley · Citado em PreceptAustin
Gênesis 9
Utley - "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth" Notice the three Qal IMPERATIVES: "be fruitful", "multiply", "fill the earth". This is a second beginning for the animals (cf. Ge 1:22) and for mankind (cf. Ge 1:28), but notice (1) that sin has caused a change in the command; "subdue and have dominion" may be left out, (2) the UBS Text Project, p. 15, gives "and multiply in it" a "B" rating (some doubt). The NEB makes an emendation to "and reign over it," which would then parallel Gen. 1:28). John
Gênesis 9
Utley - "fear. . .terror" Mankind has a new relationship with the animals, not peace and friendship as in Eden and the eschaton (Isaiah 11), but fear and terror. Warren
Gênesis 9
Utley - "Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you" Mankind was originally a vegetarian (at least in the garden of Eden) but since the fall and since no crops could be produced for a while, meat was made available. Also notice that there was no distinction between clean and unclean animals as far as consumption was concerned (very different from Leviticus 11), but there was a distinction in acceptable sacrificial animals (i.e., clean and unclean, cf. Gen. 7:2ff). Norman Geisler - When Critics Ask - Genesis 9:3—Did God ordain the eating of meat or only plants? PROBLEM: When God created Adam, He commanded him to eat only “every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth … to you it shall be for food” (Gen. 1:29). But meat was not given by God to eat. However, when Noah came out of the Ark, he was told, “Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs” (Gen. 9:3). But this seems to contradict God’s earlier command not to eat meat. SOLUTION: This is a good example of progressive revelation where earlier commands are superseded by later ones. In matters that do not involve the change of any intrinsic moral standard (based on the nature of God), God is free to change the commands to His creatures to serve His overall purposes in the progress of redemption. For example, parents at one time will allow small children to eat with their fingers, only to instruct them a little later to eat their potatoes with a spoon. Then, a few years later, the same parent reprimands her older child, “Don’t eat your potatoes with your spoon; use your fork!” There is no contradiction here at all. It is a simple matter of progressive revelation adapted to the circumstances and all geared to the ultimate goal. God works in a similar way. Genesis 9:4 "Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. the life - Lev 3:17 7:26 Lev 17:10-14 19:26 De 12:16,23 14:21 15:23 1Sa 14:34 Ac 15:20,25,29 1Ti 4:4 Genesis 9 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries Related Passages: Leviticus 17:10-14+ ‘And any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people. 11 ‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement.’ 12 “Therefore I said to the sons of Israel, ‘No person among you may eat blood, nor may any alien who sojourns among you eat blood.’ 13 “So when any man from the sons of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, in hunting catches a beast or a bird which may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. 14 “For as for the life of all flesh, its blood is identified with its life. Therefore I said to the sons of Israel, ‘You are not to eat the blood of any flesh, for the life of all flesh is its blood; whoever eats it shall be cut off.’ Acts 15:20+ (NO EATING BLOOD ONE OF 4 "JEWISH" COMMANDS TO NEW GENTILE BELIEVERS) but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood....29 that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled (IMPLICATION IS NOT PROPERLY DRAINED OF BLOOD) and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell.” EATING BLOOD NOT PERMITTED Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood - In Leviticus 17:11+ we read "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement.’" God says only only blood sacrifices could deal with sin, because they show the pouring out of life that God requires as punishment for sin.
Gênesis 9
Utley - "you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood" This prohibition on not consuming blood is unique to Isreal. This is the theological foundation for the sacrificial system (cf. Lev. 17:10-16; Deut. 12:16,23; Acts 15:29) and the significance of the death of Christ (Isaiah 53; John 1:29; Mark 10:45; 2 Cor. 5:21). Sin costs a life. Later in Israel's history God would mercifully substitute an animal life (i.e., Leviticus 1-7; 16). NET NOTE - Heb “its life, its blood.” The second word is in apposition to the first, explaining what is meant by “its life.” Since the blood is equated with life, meat that had the blood in it was not to be eaten. You must not eat meat with its life … in it. Because of the carnage produced by the flood, people might conclude that life is cheap and therefore treat it lightly. But God will not permit them to kill or even to eat anything with the lifeblood still in it, serving as a reminder of the sanctity of life. Warren
Gênesis 9
Utley - "By man his blood shall be shed" This is the first statement of "eye for eye" justice. It shows God's ordaining government the right of capital punishment. In the OT, this was accomplished by the "go'el" (kinsman redeemer). For possible NT references see Acts 25:11 and Rom. 13:4. Ge 9:5 is prose while Gen. 9:6 is printed in poetic parallel lines. There is a possible Hebrew word play which may even affect etymology between blood (dam), man (adam) and In Assyrian the term man (adamu) is related to sanctuary (adman). Therefore, there may be a link between blood-worship-mankind (cf. Robert B. Girdlestone, Synonyms of the Old Testament). William Wenstrom - Genesis 9:5-6 records the institution of human government where God delegated authority to mankind as His agents in exacting retribution by capital punishment upon those who take a human life indicating as well that this is not a personal matter but a social obligation. Before the Flood, there was no formal arrangement of human government and thus no formal punishment of crime or of crime prevention, even for the capital crime of murder, as evident in the individual histories of Cain and Lamech. The absence of human government and the total depravity of mankind led to a universal state of violence and anarchy, which resulted in the judgment of the Flood. God established capital punishment and thereby human government in order to prevent the conditions of the antediluvian period from developing again. (Genesis Verse by Verse) Ligon Duncan adds that "capital punishment, even in a post fall world, Moses says, is designed to uphold the sanctity of life and the preciousness of man in the image of God, even though that image is defaced by our fall and decent." Capital punishment reflects this high view of life, not a low view of it. -- Ligon Duncan For - This is an important term of explanation. What is God explaining? He is in essence giving the justification for capital punishment. In the image of God He made man - This shows the priority of humanity! (cf. Ge 1:26,27; 5:1,3). Human life is very precious to God, and God wants man to understand that men are not to resort to violence to attain their ends. God does not take lightly the distorting and despoiling of His image in man. Related Resources: Jesus Christ-Our Blood Avenger Kinsman-Redeemer - The Goel BLOOD AVENGER AND KINSMAN REDEEMER - Bob Utley QUESTION - Why did God mandate capital punishment for murder (Genesis 9:6)? ANSWER - After Noah, his family, and the animals exited the ark, God gave a new command: put to death anyone who murders another person. Genesis 9:6 says, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.” The severest of penalties is to follow murder, and God Himself gives the reason for it. God specified that murder was to be punished by death because of the nature of man. Man is created in God’s own image (Genesis 1:27). As murder destroys an image-bearer, it is a direct affront to God Himself. Humans are unique among God’s creations—none of the animals are created in God’s likeness—and murder is a unique crime. Another, secondary reason for the mandate is quite practical. The immediate context includes another command given to Noah and his three sons: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” (Genesis 9:1). Murder, of course, would work against humanity’s being fruitful and multiplying. The death penalty for murder thus served as a deterrent to anyone who sought to thwart God’s plan to replenish the earth. This was especially important when Noah’s family first departed from the ark, at which point only eight people were alive. Before the Flood, Cain had murdered Abel, and, although Cain was judged by God, he was not put to death (Genesis 4). Lamech, a descendant of Cain, also murdered someone (Genesis 4:23-24). By the time of God’s judgment in Genesis 6, it appears that crime was rampant, including the crime of murder. After the Flood, a new standard was raised as part of the recreated earth: God would no longer tolerate murder. Later, murder was condemned in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20). The punishment for premeditated murder was death (Numbers 35:30-34). In the New Testament, Jesus provided a wider application of the Old Testament command against murder. He taught, “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire” (Matthew 5:21-22). Murder is wrong, and the attitude behind the action is just as wrong. God sees the heart and its intentions (1 Samuel 16:7). Murder is consistently listed as a sin throughout the New Testament (e.g., Revelation 22:15). Man still bears the image of God, and God’s view of murder has remained the same. GotQuestions.org Related Resources: C S Lewis' masterful treatment of this subject in his 7 page paper entitled "The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment." Borrow C S Lewis' book God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics Borrow On Capital Punishment by William H Baker Borrow The early church on killing : a comprehensive sourcebook on war, abortion, and capital punishment Borrow Christian ethics by Norman Geisler (capital punishment on page 193-215) - interesting article from a premier Christian apologist who begins by discussing the opposing view to capital punishment which is "Rehabilitationism." Borrow Christian ethics in plain language by Kerby J Anderson - page 142 "Crime and Capital Punishment" Henry
Gênesis 9
Utley - "Populate the earth abundantly" This is parallel to Gen. 1:22,24,28; 8:17. Chapters 8-9 form a re-initiation of God's expressed will and actions in Genesis 1. This verse has four Qal IMPERATIVES, while Gen. 9:1 has three. Rabbinical Midrash says that because of the context of murder (Gen. 9:5-6) those who refuse to have children also violate this command. Populate (swarm, increase greatly) (08317) sharats means to swarm, to teem, to breed abundantly. This verb serves as a description of a large number of creatures densely populating a location. Most passages use the animals themselves as the subject of the verb, but some verses speak of land or water swarming with creatures. Shārats emphasizes their immense numbers and prolific reproduction. In Exodus 1:1 we see a "swarm" of Israelites and in Ex 8:3 (Ps 105:30) a "swarm" of frogs! This verb is used repeatedly in the context of God's call to Israel to be a holy or set apart people, as exemplified in Lev 11:43-44+ "Do not render yourselves detestable through any of the swarming things that swarm (sharats); and you shall not make yourselves unclean with them so that you become unclean., ‘For (term of explanation) I am the LORD your God. Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am holy. And you shall not make yourselves unclean with any of the swarming things that swarm on the earth." (cf NT parallel - 1 Peter 1:13-16+). Sharats - 14x in 14v - breed abundantly(1), increased greatly(1), populate the abundantly(1), swarm(3), swarmed(2), swarms(5), teem(1). Gen. 1:20; Gen. 1:21; Gen. 7:21; Gen. 8:17; Gen. 9:7; Exod. 1:7; Exod. 8:3; Lev. 11:29; Lev. 11:41; Lev. 11:42; Lev. 11:43; Lev. 11:46; Ps. 105:30; Ezek. 47:9 Genesis 9:8 Then God spoke to Noah and to his sons with him, saying, Genesis 9 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries GOD SPEAKS TO NOAH & SONS Then - Marks progression in the narrative. The previous section Ge 9:1-7 dealt with propagation of life and protection of that life in a post-diluvian world. God had just destroyed a world filled with violence and now desires for man to experience a life not filled with violence! Then marks God's movement to the next word to Noah in this post-diluvian world, and that word would be covenant. God spoke to Noah and to his sons with him, saying - Note that here God speaks again not just to Noah but also to his sons (as in Ge 9:1 = "said to them"). Genesis 9:9 "Now behold, I Myself do establish My covenant with you, and with your descendants after you; Ge 9:11,17 6:18 17:7,8 22:17 Isa 54:9,10 Jer 31:35,36 33:20 Ro 1:3 Genesis 9 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries GOD HIMSELF ESTABLISHES HIS COVENANT Now behold (hinneh), I Myself do establish My covenant (berit/berith/beriyth) with you, and with your descendants after you - Ge 9:8-17 is what is known as the Noahic Covenant. NET = "Look! I now confirm my covenant with you and your descendants after you." Behold (hinneh) introduces this section on covenant to invoke Noah and his sons full attention! Notice the emphasis on I Myself indicating God is the initiator of this covenant and there are no conditions that need to be kept for it to be valid. God is pledging His faithfulness to carry out the obligations He will describe in this section. Note that since Noah (and man in general) does nothing to merit this covenant, it is another reflection of God's amazing grace, in this case an example of "common grace." Note also while the covenant is addressed to Noah, it includes all his descendants and all successive generations (Ge 9:12). Gotquestions excerpt on common grace - The doctrine of common grace pertains to the sovereign grace of God bestowed upon all of mankind regardless of their election. In other words, God has always bestowed His graciousness on all people in all parts of the earth at all times. Notice that the phrases and with your descendants after you and with every living creature (Ge 9:10) indicates this covenant, although often called the Noahic Covenant, is more accurately a covenant with all creation, thus we could accurately designate it as the "Creation Covenant." It is God's promise to preserve the present creation until God's final judgment following the Messianic Kingdom when the present creation will be destroyed by fire not flood (2Pe 3:10+, compare out with the old and in with the new in Rev 20:11+ where "no place was found" for heaven and earth and in with "a new heaven and a new earth" in Rev 21:1+) R Kent
Gênesis 9
Utley - "became drunk" Drunkenness is deplored over and over again in Scripture (cf. Pr. 23:29-35). Yet wine is not the problem, but mankind's misuse of it (cf. Dt. 14:26; Ps. 104:15; Pr 31:6-7). SEE UTLEY'S INTERESTING ARTICLE - BIBLICAL ATTITUDES TOWARD ALCOHOL AND ALCOHOL ABUSE Warren
Gênesis 9
Utley - In a theological sense, this section shows the continuing downward pull of the fall. Noah drunk! Ham intensely enjoying both his father's folly and nakedness! This propensity towards irreverence and abuse of sexuality becomes so evident in Canaan's descendants! The tendencies must have been evident to Noah who curses Canaan, not Ham. As a postscript, this episode has nothing, nothing to do with a biblical depreciation of the black race. Africans surely came from Ham but Canaanites were not black (i.e., wall pictures in Egypt)! (See RACISM) In the ancient world, especially in a patriarchal society, seeing another’s nakedness was a major offense. NET NOTE - Some would translate saw the nakedness of as “had sexual relations with,” arguing that Ham committed a homosexual act with his drunken father for which he was cursed. However, the expression “see nakedness” usually refers to observation of another’s nakedness, not a sexual act (see Ge 42:9, 12 where “nakedness” is used metaphorically to convey the idea of “weakness” or “vulnerability”; Dt 23:14 where “nakedness” refers to excrement; Isa 47:3; Ezek 16:37; Lam 1:8). The following verse (Ge 9:23) clearly indicates that visual observation, not a homosexual act, is in view here. In Lev 20:17 the expression “see nakedness” does appear to be a euphemism for sexual intercourse, but the context there, unlike that of Gen 9:22, clearly indicates that in that passage sexual contact is in view. The expression “see nakedness” does not in itself suggest a sexual connotation. Some relate Ge 9:22 to Lev 18:6–11, 15–19, where the expression “uncover [another’s] nakedness” (the Piel form of גָּלָה, galah)(ED: SEE NOTE ABOVE ON Lev 18:6) refers euphemistically to sexual intercourse. However, Ge 9:22 does not say Ham “uncovered” the nakedness of his father. According to the text, Noah uncovered himself; Ham merely saw his father naked. The point of the text is that Ham had no respect for his father. Rather than covering his father up, he told his brothers. Noah then gave an oracle that Ham’s descendants, who would be characterized by the same moral abandonment, would be cursed. Leviticus 18 describes that greater evil of the Canaanites (see Lev 18:24–28). Saw the nakedness. It is hard for modern people to appreciate why seeing another’s nakedness was such an abomination, because nakedness is so prevalent today. In the ancient world, especially in a patriarchal society, seeing another’s nakedness was a major offense. (See the account in Herodotus, Histories 1.8–13 below, where a general saw the nakedness of his master’s wife, and one of the two had to be put to death.) Besides, Ham was not a little boy wandering into his father’s bedroom; he was over a hundred years old by this time. For fuller discussion see A. P. Ross, “The Curse of Canaan,” BSac 137 (1980): 223–40 (See excerpt below). Herodotus, Histories 1.8–13 This Candaules, then, fell in love with his own wife, so much so that he believed her to be by far the most beautiful woman in the world; and believing this, he praised her beauty beyond measure to Gyges son of Dascylus, who was his favorite among his bodyguard; for it was to Gyges that he entrusted all his most important secrets. [2] After a little while, Candaules, doomed to misfortune, spoke to Gyges thus: “Gyges, I do not think that you believe what I say about the beauty of my wife; men trust their ears less than their eyes: so you must see her naked.” Gyges protested loudly at this. [3] “Master,” he said, “what an unsound suggestion, that I should see my mistress naked! When a woman's clothes come off, she dispenses with her modesty, too. [4] Men have long ago made wise rules from which one ought to learn; one of these is that one should mind one's own business. As for me, I believe that your queen is the most beautiful of all women, and I ask you not to ask of me what is lawless.” 9. Speaking thus, Gyges resisted: for he was afraid that some evil would come of it for him. But this was Candaules' answer: “Courage, Gyges! Do not be afraid of me, that I say this to test you, or of my wife, that you will have any harm from her. I will arrange it so that she shall never know that you have seen her. [2] I will bring you into the chamber where she and I lie and conceal you behind the open door; and after I have entered, my wife too will come to bed. There is a chair standing near the entrance of the room: on this she will lay each article of her clothing as she takes it off, and you will be able to look upon her at your leisure. [3] Then, when she moves from the chair to the bed, turning her back on you, be careful she does not see you going out through the doorway.” 10. As Gyges could not escape, he consented. Candaules, when he judged it to be time for bed, brought Gyges into the chamber; his wife followed presently, and when she had come in and was laying aside her garments, Gyges saw her; [2] when she turned her back upon him to go to bed, he slipped from the room. The woman glimpsed him as he went out, and perceived what her husband had done. But though shamed, she did not cry out or let it be seen that she had perceived anything, for she meant to punish Candaules; [3] since among the Lydians and most of the foreign peoples it is felt as a great shame that even a man be seen naked. 11. For the present she made no sign and kept quiet. But as soon as it was day, she prepared those of her household whom she saw were most faithful to her, and called Gyges. He, supposing that she knew nothing of what had been done, answered the summons; for he was used to attending the queen whenever she summoned him. [2] When Gyges came, the lady addressed him thus: “Now, Gyges, you have two ways before you; decide which you will follow. You must either kill Candaules and take me and the throne of Lydia for your own, or be killed yourself now without more ado; that will prevent you from obeying all Candaules' commands in the future and seeing what you should not see. [3] One of you must die: either he, the contriver of this plot, or you, who have outraged all custom by looking on me uncovered.” Gyges stood awhile astonished at this; presently, he begged her not to compel him to such a choice. [4] But when he could not deter her, and saw that dire necessity was truly upon him either to kill his master or himself be killed by others, he chose his own life. Then he asked: “Since you force me against my will to kill my master, I would like to know how we are to lay our hands on him.” [5] She replied, “You shall come at him from the same place where he made you view me naked: attack him in his sleep.” 12. When they had prepared this plot, and night had fallen, Gyges followed the woman into the chamber (for Gyges was not released, nor was there any means of deliverance, but either he or Candaules must die). She gave him a dagger and hid him behind the same door; [2] and presently he stole out and killed Candaules as he slept. Thus he made himself master of the king's wife and sovereignty. He is mentioned in the iambic verses of Archilochus of Parus who lived about the same time. 13. QUESTION - What is the biblical account of Shem, Ham, and Japheth? ANSWER - Shem, Ham, and Japheth were the three sons of Noah who along with their wives were carried in the ark during the great flood. Their descendants went on to re-populate the world (Genesis 10:1). Noah fathered Shem, Ham, and Japheth after he was 500 years old (Genesis 5:32). If Noah had any other children, they are not mentioned in the biblical account. Only Shem, Ham, and Japheth are mentioned. The Israelites came from the line of Shem; in fact, the word Semite comes from the name of Shem. Other descendants of Shem include the Assyrians, Chaldeans, Elamites, Arameans, Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites. Japheth’s line produced the Persians, Romans, Scythians, and Macedonians. Ham’s line produced the Canaanites, the Babylonians, the Phoenicians, the Cushites, and the Egyptians. Each of the races and people-groups that exist today can trace their lineage back to one of these three brothers. There is only one biblical story recorded that concerns Shem, Ham, and Japheth. After the flood waters receded, Noah was “a man of the soil” and grew a vineyard (Genesis 9:20). One day, after drinking too much wine, Noah passed out in his tent and lay there naked and exposed. Ham “saw his father naked and told his two brothers outside” (Genesis 9:22). Some have suggested that Ham—or possibly his son Canaan—performed an inappropriate sexual act on his drunken father, but that is nothing more than speculation. Whatever the extent of Ham’s sin, Shem and Japheth refused to join him in dishonoring their father; instead, they walked into the tent backward without looking at Noah and lay a blanket over him to cover him (Genesis 9:23). When Noah woke up and found out what Ham had done, he cursed Ham’s child, Canaan, saying, “Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers” (Genesis 9:25). Noah then blessed his other two sons and reiterated Canaan’s servitude to both Shem and Japheth (Ge 9:26–27). Noah’s curse on Canaan was not an empty threat. In fact, it could be seen as a prophecy of events to unfold in the lives of the Canaanites. In Genesis 10, the descendants of Canaan are listed. They include the Sidonians, the Hittites, the Jebusites, the Amorites, and the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 10:15–19). Noah’s curse/prophecy came true during the time of Joshua. The Canaanites, descendants of Ham and Canaan, were conquered by the Israelites, descendants of Shem. True to God’s Word, some of the Canaanites became slaves (Joshua 9:27; 17:12–13).It’s important to note that Noah’s three sons were blessed (Genesis 9:1) and, out of Ham’s descendants, only the line of Canaan was cursed (Genesis 9:25). The historical record supports the fact of Noah’s curse on Canaan and is powerful evidence of the accuracy of Scripture.GotQuestions.org QUESTION - What does it mean to uncover nakedness in the Bible? ANSWER - Before the fall of mankind in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve lived without clothing in a perfectly natural state (Genesis 2:25). But after the fall, nakedness became a source of shame (Genesis 3:6–7). In fact, shame at their own nakedness was the first felt consequence of Adam and Eve’s sin. Since then, nakedness has been linked with sexuality, privacy, and vulnerability. When the Bible speaks of “uncovering nakedness,” it is usually referring to some type of sexual sin, perversion, or dishonor. The first reference to uncovering someone’s nakedness is in Genesis 9, which continues the story of Noah after the floodwaters receded. Noah and his sons and their spouses had established a new life as the only human beings left to repopulate the earth. As time went by, Noah planted a vineyard and made wine from the grapes. He then drank the wine, became drunk, and passed out naked in his tent (Genesis 9:20–21). His son Ham entered the tent, saw his father’s nakedness, and went to tell his brothers (Genesis 9:22). Scholars debate what may have transpired in this scene. The sin may have been more than merely mocking his father’s naked body. Ham (or his son Canaan) may have engaged in some kind of sexual activity or dishonor of Noah’s private parts. Whatever he did by uncovering his father’s nakedness was wicked enough to invite Noah’s wrath when he sobered up. Noah then pronounced a strong curse on Canaan (Genesis 9:24). The phrase uncover nakedness almost always refers to sexual sin. In most newer versions of the Bible, the phrase uncover nakedness is usually reworded as “have sexual relations with” (e.g., Leviticus 18:6, 17, 19). Other passages, such as Deuteronomy 22:30, forbade a man to sleep with his stepmother because doing so would “uncover his father’s nakedness” (ESV). By entering into intimacy with the same woman who had slept with his father, a man disgraced his father (Deuteronomy 27:20; Leviticus 18:8; Ezekiel 22:10). This was one reason the sin of Absalom, David’s son, was so great (2 Samuel 16:22). As the ultimate act of disrespect, Absalom let it be known publicly that he was having sex with his father’s concubines. He not only violated his father’s bedroom, he violated God’s written law: “Cursed is anyone who sleeps with his father’s wife, for he dishonors his father’s bed” (Deuteronomy 27:20). As our world’s morals continue to spiral downward, uncovering nakedness in one way or another has become a favorite pastime. Culture has glorified nakedness and worked to numb our natural modesty by parading nakedness before our eyes. Even children’s clothing is sexualized, and media outlets praise nakedness as “bold,” “brave,” and “liberating.” We watch actors uncovering each other’s nakedness publicly on the big screen. The pornography industry has made a fortune by uncovering nakedness in every possible way, mocking biblical moral standards as archaic and restrictive. We’ve lost the concept of honor for one’s sexuality, treating the sex drive as just another need to be met the way we treat hunger and thirst. Uncovering nakedness is no longer a source of shame in a culture that has been trained to expect and applaud it. Ironically, in a world that celebrates the uncovering of nakedness, sexual dysfunctions, abuses, and even infertility are skyrocketing. God created the human body, and sexuality is His idea; He therefore knows best how we function. 1 Corinthians 6:13 says, “You say, ‘Food for the stomach and the stomach for food, and God will destroy them both.’ The body, however, is not meant for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.” God intended the uncovering of nakedness to be done only within His prescribed boundaries of marriage (1 Corinthians 7:2–5). Christians can help reclaim the sanctity of marital relations and modesty by refusing to deaden our consciences through sexually graphic TV programs, movies, and magazines. We can guard our eyes against pornographic images by installing filters on our internet devices. And we can honor our bodies by refusing to uncover our own nakedness in the way we dress, talk, or behave (1 Corinthians 6:18). Nakedness is no longer innocent as it was in the Garden of Eden, and wise people do not uncover it in dishonoring ways. GotQuestions.org Genesis 9:23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it upon both their shoulders and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were turned away, so that they did not see their father's nakedness. Ex 20:12 Lev 19:32 Ro 13:7 Ga 6:1 1Ti 5:1,17,19 1Pe 2:17 4:8 Genesis 9 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries SHEM AND JAPHETH IMPEDE THEIR VIEW OF NOAH But - This is a strong term of contrast marking an "about face" (pun intended) or change of direction from the direction taken by Ham. Wenham - Cassuto (BORROW Genesis Commentary) points out: “If the covering was an adequate remedy, it follows that the misdemeanor was confined to seeing.” The elaborate efforts Shem and Japhet made to avoid looking at their father demonstrate that this was all Ham did in the tent. (BORROW Genesis - page 200) Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it upon both their shoulders and walked backward and covered (kasah; Lxx - sugkalupto = cover up completely, keep from being known by concealing) the nakedness of their father; and their faces were turned away, so that (term of purpose) they did not see their father's nakedness - Notice the emphasis on the fact that Shem and Japheth went to great lengths to not see Noah's nakedness. Here we see they display actions that indicate they understood there was a moral or ethical code which said one should never look at another's nakedness (their wives of course were excluded!). In the following centuries, the ethical code of the ancient world considered the act of seeing another person's uncovered state as an abominable deed. (Read the record by the historian Herodotus to give you as sense of the gravity of what Ham did by looking at Noah's nude body.). The action of Shem and Japheth brings to mind the words of Peter "Above all, keep fervent in your love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins." (1Pe 4:8+). These two sons demonstrated their love for their father! Warren
Gênesis 9
Utley - "So he said" Remember the Hebrew concept of the power of the spoken word, Genesis 1 (cf. Isa. 55:9-11), as well as the importance of the parental blessing, Genesis 49. Notice that this is not a curse by God but by an alcohol abusing Noah! It is obvious from Israel's later history that Canaanites are viewed as evil idolatrous people that must be totally destroyed (cf. Gen. 15:12-21). It is in their lands that the giants still live. It is their fertility worship that is forbidden in the book of Leviticus. NET NOTE - Heb “a servant of servants” (עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים, ’eved ’avadim), an example of the superlative genitive. It means Canaan will become the most abject of slaves. The Defender's Study Bible (BORROW) - Noah's curse was spoken concerning Canaan instead of Ham for possibly one or more of the following (SPECULATIVE) reasons: (1) As Ham was his youngest son, so Canaan was Ham's youngest son, and Noah wished to emphasize that the prophecy extended through Ham to all his seed, even his youngest; (2) Noah could gladly bless his two faithful sons, but could not bear to pronounce the prophetic curse directly on his other son, whom he also loved dearly; (3) He knew his grandsons well enough to recognize in the sons of Ham the same rebellious attitudes that were in Ham, and he knew that they would actually experience the resultant effects of his sin even more than would Ham himself. The phrase "servant of servants" is never used elsewhere in Scripture. If it means "slave of slaves," then the prophecy has failed, for neither the Hamitic nations in general nor the Canaanitic nations in particular have ever been such. The Hamites have included such great empires as Sumeria, Phoenicia, Egypt, Ethiopia, etc., and quite possibly the great Asian nations (China, Japan, etc.) as well. The word "servant," however, is more often used in the sense of "steward," so the prophecy more likely speaks of Ham's descendants as superlative stewards. That is, all men were stewards of God's created world, in the sense of exercising dominion over its resources; and Ham, with his physical and materialistic bent, would be especially effective in subduing the world and developing its resources. Since the ground had been cursed, however, this meant Ham's lot would be uniquely associated with the physical world, thus itself becoming a curse. Noah's statement, it should be remembered, was a prophecy and not an imprecation, given under divine inspiration and on the basis of Noah's own insight into the developing characters of his sons and grandsons and, therefore, of their descendants. As a prophecy, this interpretation is fitting, since the Hamitic nations have, indeed, been the great explorers, cultivators, builders, navigators, tradesmen, inventors and warriors of mankind. To his brothers - It is obvious that his prophecy applies not only to Canaan but also to all of Ham's descendants, for the following reasons: (1) its scope is obviously intended to be symmetrical, worldwide and age-long, with all the progeny of the three sons of Noah included; (2) if taken as applicable only to Canaan specifically, then it must also apply specifically only to Canaan's brethren, who were Cush, Mizraim and Phut. Their descendants included the nations of Ethiopia, Egypt and Libya. Not only would such a judgment be unfair (it was Ham who sinned, not Canaan), but it was never fulfilled, since the Canaanites were never servants of the Libyans or Ethiopians, and only briefly of the Egyptians; (3) as a matter of fact, the descendants of Canaan, who included the Phoenicians and Hittites, were prominent nations through most of their history, not slave nations. In his Genesis commentary Henry
Gênesis 9
Utley has an interesting note - Shem means "name" and may be a play on God's special name, YHWH. The line of Shem is the Messianic line. This is in opposition of Genesis 11:4+ ("let us make for ourselves a name")! And let Canaan be (jussive ~ a command) his servant - Note that Noah does not say Ham is to be Shem's servant but speaks it of Ham's son. This prophecy was literally fulfilled when Joshua and the Israelite armies conquered Canaan and its tribes, making that area the home of the Jews. The Defender's Study Bible (BORROW) - Noah associated Shem especially with the worship of Jehovah, recognizing the dominantly spiritual motivations of Shem and thus implying that God's promised Deliverer (THE MESSIAH) would ultimately come from Shem. The Semitic nations have included the Hebrews, Arabs (ED: VIA ABRAHAM'S SON ISHMAEL), Assyrians, Persians, Syrians and other strongly religious-minded peoples. QUESTION - Why was a father’s blessing so highly valued in the Old Testament? ANSWER - The book of Genesis emphasizes the blessing of a father to his sons. The patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob all gave formal blessings to their children—and, in Jacob’s case, to some grandchildren. Receiving a blessing from one’s father was a high honor, and losing a blessing was tantamount to a curse. An Old Testament blessing of a father to his sons included words of encouragement, details regarding each son’s inheritance, and prophetic words concerning the future. For example, Isaac’s blessing on Jacob (which was meant for Esau) gave him the earth’s bounty and authority over his brother (Genesis 27:28-29). It also promised that those who blessed Jacob would be blessed, and those who cursed him would receive a curse—words that echo God’s promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:3. When Esau discovered that Jacob had deceived his father and had received the blessing meant for Esau, he was distraught and asked, “Have you not reserved a blessing for me?” (Genesis 27:36). Isaac’s words to Esau reinforced Jacob’s superiority but also prophesied that Esau would one day rebel against Jacob’s rule (Ge 27:39-40). When Jacob blessed his twelve sons, he also made predictions regarding their future (Genesis 49). The Bible records the direct fulfillment of many of these predictions, revealing the supernatural ability given to Jacob as the father of the twelve tribes. In one of his blessings, Jacob said, “Judah, your brothers shall praise you; your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies; your father’s sons shall bow down before you” (Genesis 49:8). The blessing also included a prediction that kings would come from Judah and that one King would eventually receive “the obedience of the nations” (Ge 49:10). Judah’s descendants later became the tribe from which King David came and in whose land Jerusalem was located. Jesus Christ would also come from the tribe of Judah (Matthew 1:3). Another example of a supernatural prediction in Jacob’s blessing is found in his words to Issachar: “He saw that a resting place was good, and that the land was pleasant” (Genesis 49:15). Issachar’s family would later inherit lower Galilee, including the Valley of Jezreel, which included rich, productive farmland. Jacob’s youngest son also received a prophecy that was later fulfilled: “Benjamin is a ravenous wolf, in the morning devouring the prey and at evening dividing the spoil” (Genesis 49:27). The tribe of Benjamin would produce many military leaders in Israel, including Ehud, King Saul, and Saul’s son Jonathan, revealing a strong, warlike personality (Judges 5:14; 20:16; 1 Chronicles 8:40; 2 Chronicles 14:8; 17:17). A patriarch’s final blessing was important in biblical times as a practical matter of inheritance rights. In addition, some final blessings included prophetic statements that reveal God’s supernatural power at work through the men of His choosing. GotQuestions.org Related Resources: What is the difference between a blessing and a birthright (Genesis 25)? | GotQuestions.org Why is the birthright so emphasized in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org Genesis 9:27 "May God enlarge Japheth, And let him dwell in the tents of Shem; And let Canaan be his servant." dwell - Isa 11:10 Ho 2:14 Mal 1:11 Ac 17:14 Ro 11:12 15:12 Eph 2:13,14,19 Eph 3:6,13 Heb 11:9,10 Genesis 9 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries PRAYER FOR JAPHETH May God enlarge Japheth - This is in the form of a prayer by Noah for his son Japheth. Actions have consequences and Japheth (along with Shem) had sought to honor his father. The consequence is that he would be rewarded. Japheth's name means expansion, enlargement or wide spreading and how wonderfully have his boundaries been enlarged; for not only Europe, but Asia Minor, part of Armenia, Iberia, the whole of the vast regions of Asia north of Taurus, and probably America, fell to the share of his posterity. NET NOTE - Heb “may God enlarge Japheth.” The words “territory and numbers” are supplied in the translation for clarity. There is a wordplay (paronomasia = PUN) on the name Japheth. The verb יַפְתְּ (yaft, “may he enlarge”) sounds like the name יֶפֶת (yefet, “Japheth”). The name itself suggested the idea. The blessing for Japheth extends beyond the son to the descendants. Their numbers and their territories will be enlarged, so much so that they will share in Shem’s territories. Again, in this oracle, Noah is looking beyond his immediate family to future generations. For a helpful study of this passage and the next chapter, see T. O. Figart, A Biblical Perspective on the Race Problem (BORROW), 55–58. Parunak: As we shall see in more detail in chapter 10, Ham’s descendants moved south to populate Africa. From them come the Egyptians and the tribes Israel found in Palestine. Japheth’s descendants moved north to populate Europe and Asia. We are all mainly Japhethites.Shem’s descendants (the “shemitic” or “semitic” people) remained near the center, in Mesopotamia and the Arabian peninsula. From them God chose Abraham and his descendants. (Notes on Gen 8-9) Derek Kidner points out that "The word enlarge (make space for) is the parent verb of the name Japheth (cf. comment on Shem, Ge 9:26); the oracle evidently confirms the prayer made at his birth. The fulfilment of the words let him dwell in (or among) the tents of Shem (RV, RSV) is sought almost in vain in the Old Testament, but leaps to the eye in the New Testament in the ingathering of the Gentiles (Eph. 3:6), predominantly from the west. The fact that this reading of the oracle makes it a prediction of great events, instead of a pious retrojection of twelfth-century politics, will disturb only the resolutely sceptical.." (BORROW Genesis: an introduction and commentary - Page 104) GotQuestions.org adds that "The descendants of Japheth included various maritime peoples (Ge 10:5+) as well as the Persians, Greeks, Romans, Scythians, and Macedonians. Japheth’s descendants spread out over much of Asia and Europe and, through colonization, North America, thus fulfilling Noah’s prediction of “expansion” for Japheth." And let him dwell (jussive ~ functions like a command) in the tents of Shem - NET has "May he live...." These words may mean either that God or that Japheth shall dwell in the tents of Shem (see NET NOTE below). In either sense the prophecy has been literally fulfilled. Bob Utley - "let him dwell in the tents of Shem" Some see this (1) in a political sense like the domination of Roman or European culture (2) in a spiritual sense of the inclusion of the Gentiles with the blessings of the Jews, which was also part of the Abrahamic covenant (cf. Gen. 12:3; Eph. 2:11-3:13) R Kent