Genesis chapter 9, technically
we've only looked at verses 1 to 7. We spent three weeks on that,
or three sessions on that, looking specifically at the death penalty
and then other lesser forms of punishment, and we saw how that
is consistent with the Noahic Covenant. The Noahic Covenant
is a common grace covenant given by God with all creation. for
the stability of the created order. So tonight we'll look
at verses 8 to 29, briefly verses 8 to 17, the sign of the rainbow
in the Noahic covenant, and then we'll spend most of the time
on the sin of Ham and the curse upon Canaan in verses 18 to 29. But I'll begin reading in Genesis
9 at verse 1. So God blessed Noah and his sons
and said to them, be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.
And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast
of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on
the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into
your hand. Every moving thing that lives
shall be food for you. I have given you all things,
even as the green herbs, but you shall not eat flesh with
its life, that is, its blood. Surely for your lifeblood, I
will demand a reckoning. From the hand of every beast,
I will require it. And from the hand of man, From
the hand of every man's brother, I will require the life of man.
Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed,
for in the image of God he made man. And as for you, be fruitful
and multiply, bring forth abundantly in the earth and multiply in
it. Then God spoke to Noah and to his sons with him, saying,
And as for me, behold, I establish my covenant with you and with
your descendants after you, and with every living creature that
is with you, the birds, the cattle, and every beast of the earth
with you, of all that go out of the ark, every beast of the
earth. Thus I establish my covenant
with you. Never again shall all flesh be
cut off by the waters of the flood. Never again shall there
be a flood to destroy the earth. And God said, this is the sign
of the covenant which I make between me and you and every
living creature that is with you for perpetual generations. I set my rainbow in the cloud,
and it shall be for the sign of the covenant between me and
the earth. It shall be, when I bring a cloud over the earth,
that the rainbow shall be seen in the cloud, and I will remember
My covenant which is between Me and you and every living creature
of all flesh. The waters shall never again
become a flood to destroy all flesh. The rainbow shall be in
the cloud, and I will look on it to remember the everlasting
covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh
that is on the earth. And God said to Noah, This is
the sign of the covenant which I have established between me
and all flesh that is on the earth. Now the sons of Noah who
went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and Ham was
the father of Canaan. These three were the sons of
Noah, and from these the whole earth was populated. And Noah
began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard. Then he drank
of the wine and was drunk, and became uncovered in his tent.
And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father,
and told his two brothers outside. 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. So Noah awoke from
his wine and knew what his younger son had done to him. Then he
said, Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants, he shall be to his
brethren. And he said, Blessed be the Lord,
the God of Shem, and may Canaan be his servant. May God enlarge
Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents of Shem, and may Canaan
be his servant. And Noah lived after the flood
350 years. So all the days of Noah were
950 years, and he died. Amen. Well, as I've said, we
looked at verses 1 to 7 under the protection of life in the
Noahic covenant. Again, spending time specifically
on verse 6 in terms of the death penalty and a biblical theology
thereof. We looked at some common objections
to the death penalty in terms of the biblical. and the non-biblical
sort of objections to it. So tonight we'll look at verses
8 to 29, and as I said, two broad sections here. First, the sign
of the rainbow in the Noahic Covenant in verses 8 to 17, and
then the sin of Ham and the curse upon Canaan in verses 18 to 29.
Now, this is not a happy passage of scripture. I've had the, you
know, the prerogative in the past to deal with certain passages
that are tough. And this latter part is tough,
dealing with what happens with Noah and then with his son Ham. But it's important for us to
kind of get the gist of what's happening. We certainly cannot
comment on every jot and tittle. but hopefully get a sense of
the whole and to see why it is here in Genesis chapter 9. But
in terms of the sign of the rainbow in the Noahic covenant, we see
the content of God's covenant in verses 8 to 11. And again,
the very sort of universalism of this covenant is highlighted
in many ways. Notice, and as for me, verse
9, Behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your descendants
after you, and with every living creature that is with you, the
birds, the cattle, and every beast of the earth with you,
of all that go out of the ark, every beast of the earth." Again,
it's a common grace covenant. It's not a redemptive covenant
because animals like birds and creeping things cannot be redeemed,
but rather the Noahic covenant provides a stable, world order
so that God's special grace covenant, the covenant of grace, can be
preached and sinners saved by our Lord Jesus Christ. And the
specific emphasis in this covenant is found in verse 11. Never again
shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood. Never
again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth. Again,
there are localized floods, regional floods, but never again a worldwide
flood as God covenants here. John Gill emphasizes specifically,
not the covenant of grace in Christ, but of the preservation
of the creatures in common. and a promise that they should
not be destroyed anymore by a flood. So that's the main emphasis in
this Noahic covenant. And then the sign is given in
verses 12 to 16, which sign we're all very familiar with. When
you see that rainbow in the sky, you know that this is the evidence
that God will never again destroy the earth for man's sake. This is how he describes it.
Verse 12, this is the sign of the covenant which I make between
me and you and every living creature that is with you for perpetual
generations. I set my rainbow in the cloud
and it shall be for the sign of the covenant between me and
the earth." Now, some question why the rainbow, and some see
it as a symbol of God taking the weapon, the bow, and laying
it on its side. It's no longer a weapon against
or targeting man, but rather it's on the side, and it serves
as this confirmation that God will not, in fact, destroy the
earth again. And then notice in verse 16,
we have another anthropopathism. Verse 16 says, the rainbow shall
be in the cloud, and I will look on it to remember the everlasting
covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh
that is on the earth. Remember that an anthropopathism
is an ascription of human emotion to God. Just like anthropomorphism
is the ascription of physical body parts to God. When we say
God's right arm, we do not mean that this spirit has a right
arm. The scripture says that. It's
what's called an improper predication to teach us something true concerning
God. God has power. The scripture
says, the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout all the
earth. Again, God is spirit. He doesn't
have eyes. That's an anthropomorphism, the
ascription of something human to God to describe something
true about God. Well, an anthropopathism is an
ascription of a human emotion. or something like we find here
in verse 16, where it says that God remembered. God doesn't remember
because God never forgets. There's no increase and there's
no diminishment with God. God always knows everything there
is to know, and He doesn't arrive at that knowledge by sort of
discursive reasoning or the use of logic. God always knows what
God always knows, and there's never an increase or, as I said,
a diminishment of that. Verse 16 is anthropopathic, and
it is designed to teach us something concerning God. John Gill says,
not that forgetfulness or remembrance, properly speaking, belong to
God, but this is said after the manner of men. who by this token
may be assured, whenever they see the bow and the cloud, that
God is not unmindful of the covenant He has made with all creatures,
and which is to continue to the end of the world." Again, it's
the ascription of something human to God. It's spoken, as Gil says
here, in the manner of man. The formal sort of declaration
or terminology for that is an improper predication. And that
is given to us so that we know something true concerning God.
But it's not the case that he remembers, it's not the case
that he forgets, it's not the case that he grows in his understanding. And then verse 17 essentially
summarizes everything up to this point. And God said to Noah,
this is the sign of the covenant which I have established between
me and all flesh that is on the earth. So remember, it's a common
grace covenant established by God with the entirety of creation. It is perpetual. It's for all
generations. That's how the argument stands
in terms of capital punishment for the crime of murder based
on Genesis chapter 9 and verse 6. As long as creation is in
play, then the Noahic covenant is there, and those particular
things stipulated by God are mandated and for us now. The common grace covenant provides
for the stability of the created order so that God's special grace
can be preached and by His grace believed on. Now let's look at
this sin of Ham and the curse upon Canaan. Up to this point,
in verses 1 to 17, we essentially have God's word concerning His
covenant with creation. When we get to Noah's words,
specifically in verses 25 to 27, we have something true, not
of the common grace order, but of the redemptive order. And
I will say at the outset that in many respects, verses 25 to
27 function like Genesis 3.15. In fact, you can go back to Genesis
3.15. Remember, this is after the fall
of Adam and Eve, and this is God dealing with the serpent,
God's curse specifically upon the serpent in Genesis 3.14.
So the Lord God said to the serpent, because you have done this, you
are cursed more than all cattle and more than every beast of
the field. On your belly you shall go and you shall eat dust
all the days of your life. And I, God the Lord is saying
this, will put enmity between you and the woman. And between
your seed and her seed, he shall bruise your head and you shall
bruise his heel. It's the first announcement of
the Messiah, the first announcement of the Redeemer, the first announcement
of the Deliverer, even our Lord Jesus Christ. And what we learn
specifically is that the Deliverer would be a man, that the Deliverer
would be a man born of a woman. and that the Deliverer would
deliver or redeem through His own death. He shall bruise your
head, this is Christ's victory, and you shall bruise His heel.
So as Christ is gaining victory and mastery over the devil, Christ,
in His earthly sufferings, dies as a result of this. This is
the first promise of the Messiah and it highlights something true
of all history. There is this antithesis between
the seed of the woman and between the serpent. You see that already
begin to take shape in chapter 4. You've got the difference
between Cain and Abel. Cain is obviously of the seed
of the serpent. Abel is of the seed of the woman. As we trace through the line
of Adam, we see the line, the seed of the woman is found in
Seth. And then as we move through this
flood narrative, we learn according to chapter nine, that the seed
of the woman is the Shemites and the Japhethites, and the
seed of the devil is the Hamites or Canaanites. And we'll say
more about that when we get there. But that's sort of how it functions.
The two seeds continue after the flood into this new world. And there's this clear demarcation
between the virtuous Shemites and Japhethites and the wicked
Canaanites. in chapter 9, verses 25 to 27. So God's word deals with the
Noahic covenant in terms of common grace. Noah's words, and they're
prophetic. Noah's not just making this up.
It's similar to what you find in Jacob, Genesis chapter 49,
and what you find with Moses in Deuteronomy 33. It's their
last words, but it's like a last will and testament, and it's
prophetic in nature. and specifically what Noah says
does outline for us the subsequent history in terms of Israel and
the Canaanites and the Gentiles. So let's look at this section.
Notice the sons of Noah in verses 18 to 19. It says, the sons of
Noah who went out went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Now it's curious that in the
other, there's three times where the sons are mentioned, and Ham
always comes right in the middle, and yet in our narrative he's
called the younger. I don't know why. If you can
figure that out and report back to us next Wednesday, that would
be wonderful. I'm just going to tell you right
now, that's no small task. There's a lot of stuff written
on this section of Scripture. Now, mind you, Wednesdays are
a packed day for me. I have like five or six commentaries
that I consult. There's probably another hundred
commentaries that I don't have, and each of them spends a great
deal of time dealing with such sorts of questions. I simply
throw it out there. But this is one of the three
places where each of the three sons are mentioned in terms of
their relationship to Noah. Now, it will be extended in chapters
10 and 11 when their genealogies are given. We'll find out more
about Shemham and Japheth in chapters 10 and 11. But here
specifically, it's just reminding us of the sons of Noah who went
out. And in verse 18, it says, and Ham was the father of Canaan. I think that's appended there,
or told us there, because it helps us to make sense of the
narrative later. When God curses, or when Noah
curses Canaan, we know that Canaan is the son of Ham. Now you're
going to ask the question, why does he curse Canaan when it
was him that did the wicked deed? Again, that's a great question. And there's probably that much
written on it. And I'm not sure I'm going to
be able to satisfy anybody tonight in terms of why it is the way
it is. But I will offer up a couple
of suggestions. But for now, that's why we're
told that Ham was the father of Canaan, because in verse 25,
Noah's going to say, Cursed be Canaan. And if we didn't know,
and it's told us again in the subsequent narrative that Ham
was the father of Canaan, we'd be scratching our heads and wondering
why this reference to Canaan. But then I think what we ought
to appreciate here specifically is that the three sons are being
isolated or set apart from Noah because the future, specifically
chapters 10 and 11, and subsequent history is dependent upon them.
It's not to say that Noah is no longer important, but as genealogies
function, we go from one to the next and to the next. And this
is the one or where the focus is going to be at least in the
next couple of chapters. and really throughout Israel's
history in terms of the Canaanites and the Israelites and the Gentiles. That's who's represented by these
three signs. Now note with reference to the
sin of Ham in verses 20 to 27. We first have to appreciate,
not appreciate, like, wow, good for him. I mean, get the backdrop. And it's found there for us in
verse 20. Noah began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard. Viticulture
is the science of growing grapes, and viniculture is the science
of making wine. And Noah here has both. And we have to appreciate that
some time elapses, some time passes. It's not the case that
we're introduced to these people and then all of a sudden this
happens. Noah began to be a farmer and he planted a vineyard. Now
I'm not a viticulturist, a culturist, whatever it is, but I don't think
vineyards just pop up overnight. So there's some time. Most likely
Canaan is a man by the time all of this transpires. is the grandson
of Noah. He's probably a man at this particular
time. But when we look at this passage,
he drank of the wine and was drunk. I think verse 21a highlights
for us a biblical theology of alcoholic beverages. The Bible
does not condemn drinking. The Bible condemns drunkenness. Let me just say that again. The
Bible does not condemn drinking. The Bible condemns drunkenness. In fact, drinking wine is looked
at positively in some passages. You can turn to Psalm 104. Psalm
104. This isn't an argument for you
to go out and buy a bottle of wine tonight. I'm simply trying
to show what Scripture says concerning this topic that I think at times
is very much misunderstood. The Bible isn't always condemning
alcoholic beverages. In fact, we find, Psalm 104,
verse 14, he causes the grass to grow for the cattle and vegetation
for the service of man, that he may bring forth food from
the earth and wine that makes glad the heart of man, oil to
make his face shine, and bread which strengthens man's heart.
You see, in that particular passage, wine is not looked upon as something
bad or evil or condemned, but rather it's something that makes
glad the heart of man. It's something that's seen as
beneficial for man. So used in moderation, it can
be a good thing, it can be a blessing. Perhaps one of the most obvious
New Testament references is the wedding at Cana. Jesus is asked
specifically to make, or asked about the water, and he changes
wine, and he changes water into wine. It doesn't mean, he doesn't
say, well, you can't have wine at the wedding, you can't, you
know, no. He changed water into wine. And the master of ceremonies
was surprised because most people served the good stuff, and then
when everybody had drunk enough, then they started serving the
cheap stuff. But he's actually shocked at the reality that the
best stuff was saved for the last. So Jesus doesn't condemn
the use of wine. So the Bible as a whole doesn't
say wine is bad. It says that wine is okay if
used properly, but there are certain dangers attached. And
you can turn to the book of Proverbs, just one passage here. I think
we're all sufficiently aware of much of the Bible's teaching
in terms of the condemnation of alcoholic beverages. But I
think Proverbs 23, 29, I think is a wonderful display of the
dangers associated with the use or an immoderate use of alcohol.
Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has contentions?
Who has complaints? Who has wounds without cause?
Who has redness of eyes? Those who linger long at the
wine, those who go in search of mixed wine. Do not look on
the wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup, when
it swirls around smoothly. At the last, it bites like a
serpent and stings like a viper. Your eyes will see strange things
and your heart will utter perverse things. Yes, you will be like
one who lies down in the midst of the sea or like one who lies
at the top of the mast saying, they have struck me, but I was
not hurt. They have beaten me, but I did not feel it. What shall
I awake or when shall I awake that I may seek another drink?
So on the one hand, it's not bad if it's engaged in moderately.
On the other hand, you have to recognize the dangers associated
with not drinking moderately. Ephesians 5.18, do not be drunk
with wine in which is dissipation, but be filled with the Holy Spirit. It's one of those things that's
a blessing given by God, and it's a curse when it's misused
by men. And going back to our text, we
see something else that we need to appreciate in terms of the
backdrop of the sin of Ham. We see that it's Noah's problem. Verse 21, he drank of the wine
and was drunk. It was wrong for Noah to get
drunk. It was wrong for Noah to imbibe
too much. And the commentators give reasons
why perhaps he would have done that, but the text of Scripture
doesn't. It simply tells us the facts.
It simply says that he drank of the wine and he was drunk,
and then in verse 21, and he became uncovered in his tent. That means that he was naked
in his tent. Now, he is in his tent. He's
not wandering around outside of his tent. This isn't a public
display, but nevertheless, he is uncovered in his tent. And
the scriptures also link an immoderate use of alcohol with sexual sin. Remember that it was the daughters
of Lot that plied him with alcohol so that they could have him impregnate
them. Remember that David tried to
ply Uriah the Hittite with alcohol so that Uriah would go and lay
with his wife. And then there's a text specifically
in the prophet Habakkuk. In Habakkuk chapter 2, there's
a woe pronounced on those who would engage in that sort of
conduct. say my prophets there, Nehemiah 2.15, woe to him who
gives drink to his neighbor, pressing him to your bottle,
even to make him drunk, that you may look on his nakedness. So you see the moderate use of
alcohol, it's OK. An immoderate use of alcohol
is condemned. And understand as well the ever-present
temptation with alcohol to sexual immorality. In fact, the Seventh
Commandment in the Westminster Confession of Faith, the larger
catechism, rather, in its dealings with reference to the Seventh
Commandment, forbids drunkenness. You see the wisdom behind that,
because an immoderate use of alcohol oftentimes leads to an
immoderate to an immoral use of sexuality. And so that's what's
happening here. Noah drank, Noah was drunk, and
Noah became uncovered in his tent. And going back to Genesis
9, at verse 22, we see the sin of him. It says in verse 22,
and Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father
and told his two brothers outside. Now, again, this is where it
gets a bit nasty because if you do read the commentaries, typically
they rehearse the history of interpretation with reference
to this particular text. And some suggest that based on
the curse doled out by Noah to Canaan and subsequent history
with reference to the Canaanites and their specific sexual debauchery,
some suggest the sin of Ham wasn't simply looking upon Noah. Some
have suggested, I'm talking about Jewish interpreters at this particular
point, some suggest that he castrated Noah, some suggested that he
sodomized Noah, and others suggest that he committed incest with
Noah's wife. Now to that I would say the text
doesn't indicate anything of that whatsoever and that the
idea is him seeing Noah's nakedness and not only trying to hide it
or cover it but then publicizing it to his brothers was vile and
reprehensible and wretched in and of itself. The fact that
Japheth and Shem do what they do as a remedy indicates that
the great sin was his seeing Noah's nakedness. The text doesn't
tell us and we ought not to assume there was any other sexual sin
involved. The sexual sin involved was that
Ham saw Noah's nakedness. And the text does not indicate
it was a glance and then he shielded his eyes. He looked upon his
father's nakedness. He engaged in something that
was vile and wretched. That in and of itself is vile
and wretched. We would call this voyeurism.
And I think Waltke has a good explanation of the voyeurism
engaged in by him. He says, his voyeurism, however,
is of the worst sort. Voyeurism in general violates
another's dignity and robs that one of his or her instinctive
desire for privacy and for propriety. It is a form of domination. Ham's,
however, is perverse, for his is homosexual voyeurism. Worse
yet, he dishonors his father, whom he should have revered in
any case, and then increases the dishonor by proclaiming it
to others. In other words, he doesn't have
to have had incestuous relations, he didn't have to castrate him,
and he didn't have to sodomize him. What he did was reprehensible
and wicked. For him to look upon his father's
nakedness and then go and tell his brothers, again, not in the
sense that they would go and do what they were going to do,
he was exploiting the sin or exploiting the nakedness of his
father Noah. That is a great breach of God's
law as well, not showing honor for parents, not revering one's
father. Ham didn't do this, and as a
result, Ham reaps the curse of God from Noah in this particular
instance. So Ham, verse 22, the father
of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two
brothers outside. Now note the virtue of Shem and
Japheth. 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. One author points
out that when the scripture at times, or when scripture details
or describes a particular sin, it doesn't get into all of the
lurid details. It just gives us this brief snapshot
concerning what Ham does. Ham looks on Noah's nakedness. But here in the description of
the virtuous act, it's almost like you can imagine it. It's
almost like you can picture it in your eyes because they had
to take a lot of steps to not see their father's nakedness. I mean, it's quite an extent
to which they went. Notice, Shem and Japheth took
a garment, they laid it on both their shoulders, they went backward,
covered the nakedness of their father, their faces were turned
away, and they did not see their father's nakedness. That description
in and of itself highlights, I think, in contrast with what
Ham does. Ham sinned. We don't have to
get into the Jewish exegetical tradition to suggest he did those
other things. What Ham did was vile. What Ham
did was wretched, looking upon his father's nakedness, exploiting
his father's nakedness to Shem and to Japheth, and dishonoring
his father in the midst of it. whereas Shem and Japheth take
pains to make sure that they cover up their father's nakedness
without ever having laid eyes upon him. Meredith Klein makes
the observation, and I think it's good for us to to slow it
down here and make this observation. Again, not a fun passage of scripture. These are, you know, there's
no hymns that you can pick that sort of go along with messages
like these. There's been times when I've
preached and, you know, I'm preaching on the death penalty. There's
no section in the hymn book for, you know, when you preach on
the death penalty. I remember teaching on Wednesday night,
and I actually preached that section one Sunday night, I think
it was, on Deuteronomy 13. Deuteronomy 13 is a tough passage. The solicitation to apostasy,
you're to execute a prophet who tries to do that, and you're
to execute family members who try to get you to do that, even
the wife of your bosom. Again, there's no hymns that
sort of prepare one to enter in to the experience of having
to hear about executing their wives if their wives should solicit
them to commit apostasy. In other words, the Bible, as
a truth-telling book, oftentimes tells us truths that we might
rather not hear. It doesn't give us the sanitized
version. It gives us the nuts and bolts
and the gritty details about life in this world. And you see
it pre-fall, and unfortunately, you see it post-fall. The floodwaters
were never able to change the hearts of men. The law is imposed
to hopefully restrain the hearts of men, but the promise of Messiah
is still good as the means by which the hearts of men will
ultimately be changed. And here specifically, as I mentioned,
Klein, there's parallels between Adam and Noah in the garden and
here in this new era, this new scene in life. Remember, Noah
gets out of the ark. What's he told? He's told to
be fruitful and multiply. He's given this mandate that
was given likewise to Adam. But also, there was nakedness
in the garden. There was clothing in the garden. And here you've got nakedness
post-flood and clothing in this post-flood situation. Klein says
the exposure of nakedness recalls Satan's work in Genesis 3. Remember they ate and they were
naked and they were ashamed and they hid themselves. And then
he goes on to say, the covering of nakedness, here by Shem and
Japheth, recalls the divine clothing of fallen man in Genesis 3.21,
and so bespeaks a spirit devoted to the imitation of God. So before
the flood, after the flood, you see these two parallel lines
running alongside each other in history. We know ultimately
the seed of the woman is going to crush the head of the serpent
and bring that victorious redemption to bear upon all God's people. But you ought to appreciate sort
of those things that are going on here in terms of Noah as an
Adam-like figure. Now notice the prophetic pronouncement
of verses 24 to 27. So Noah awoke from his wine and
knew what his younger son had done to him. Now he knew either
by divine illumination or he knew because Shem and Japheth
told him. Either way, he finds out what's
happened, and now he speaks. And again, his speech here is
the last will and testament, and it's not just his musings
upon an otherwise terrible situation, but in light of Genesis 49, the
last words of Jacob, Deuteronomy 33, the last words of Moses,
what we find here is prophetic pronouncement. And what we find
here does accurately reflect for us the contours of redemptive
history post this declaration. You have three people groups
indicated in this particular section. Note first in verse
25, then he said, Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants, or a slave
of slaves, he shall be to his brethren. In each of the three
pronouncements, Canaan gets this. Notice verse 26, and may Canaan
be his servant. Verse 27, and may Canaan be his
servant. Now, the question as to why Canaan
and not Ham. Well, remember, there's already
been a curse pronounced upon the devil in Genesis 3.14, and
then a curse pronounced upon Cain in Genesis 4.11. Now this
curse comes upon Canaan instead of Ham. Now, again, I don't know
that I have the answer, but here's a few things to consider. the
Lord has already blessed him according to chapter 9 and verse
1. If you look at chapter 9 verse
1, so God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, be fruitful
and multiply and fill the earth. In other words, God's blessed
him, so it cannot be the case that Noah now comes and curses
him. As well, the curses and blessings
have descendants in view. In other words, we're not dealing
specifically with Ham, Shem, and Japheth. We're dealing with
the history of Israel subsequent to this particular pronouncement. Now, Shem and Japheth are mentioned
because it's consistent. They're being blessed. God's
already blessed them according to Genesis 9.1. And then as well,
verse 25 does provide for us the theological rationale for
the problem of the Canaanites. In other words, it's not the
case, say for instance, in the book of Leviticus, Leviticus
18, God just has an axe to grind against these people called Canaanites.
No, there's a reason why and it goes back to this incident
with Ham and with Noah. Cursed be Canaan, a servant of
servants, he shall be to his brother. Matthew Poole says Canaan
is particularly mentioned by the spirit of prophecy in regard
of the future extirpation of that people. In other words,
when you see God's war with the Canaanites in the other books
of the law, realize that the theological rationale or justification
is all the way back here in Genesis chapter 9. Just like Genesis
3.15 is programmatic for history, so is Genesis 9.25-27. Waltke says, in addition to the
Canaanites, Ham's descendants include some of Israel's most
bitter enemies, Egypt, Philistia, Assyria, Babylon. You can see
that in chapter 10, verses 6 to 13. In other words, when you
look at chapters 10 and 11, it fills out for us who this Ham,
Shem, and Japheth are. It shows us what nations descend
from these particular individuals. So this is the theological rationale
or ground upon which everything else is based. So the curse upon
Canaan is repeated three times. A slave of slaves he shall be
to his brethren. Now notice in verse 26 you have
Shem. Blessed be the Lord, the God
of Shem, and may Canaan be his servant. Now that's a praise
to God. It doesn't really say, blessed
be Shem, it says, blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem. It's
a blessing of the Lord God Most High, and the means by which,
or the reason for which, is that He's the God of Shem. So it is
a way of speaking well of Shem. Now the Shemites is Israel. The Shemites are Israel. You
heard that word today. Anti-Semitic means to be anti-Jewish,
or to be Semitic means to be Jewish. Well, it comes from this
fellow called Shem, and you can see that in chapter 10, verses
21 to 31, and then chapter 11, 10 to 26. Terah is a descendant
from Shem, and he is the father of Abraham. And then Abraham
has Isaac and Jacob, and this is Israel. So Shem is the Israelites. And then notice this fellow called
Japheth in verse 27. May God enlarge Japheth, and
may he dwell in the tents of Shem, and may Canaan be his servant. Drop down to verse 2 of chapter
10. The sons of Japheth were Gomer,
Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshach, and Tiras. The sons of Gomer
were Ashkenaz, Rithba, Togarmah. The sons of Javan were Elishah,
Tarshish, Kidim, and Dodanim. From these, the coastland peoples
of the Gentiles were separated into their lands. everyone according
to his language, according to their families, into their nation. So you've got the cursed Canaanites,
reprobate Canaanites, you've got Shemites or Israelites, and
you've got Japhethites who are the Gentiles. Now the good commentators
show us where this was fleshed out in the history of Israel.
Simply don't have time to do that. But in terms of the larger
covenantal swath, we see that theme throughout scripture. To
the Jew first and also to the Greeks or also to the Gentiles.
The Gentiles are blessed by virtue of the God of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob. And this is the emphasis in verse
27. May God enlarge Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents
of Shem, and may Canaan be his servant. So Canaan loses every
step of the way. Canaan is always a slave of slaves
to the Shemites and to the Japhethites. The Shemites, however, the covenant
people of God in the Old Covenant, give way to this Gentile church. That doesn't mean there's no
Jews in the church, but in this new covenant phase of the church
of Jesus Christ, the gospel goes to all the nations, the gospel
goes to all the peoples, and what we find is that Japheth
dwells in the tents of Shem. I think one of the best sorts
of commentary on this particular passage is found in the book
of Acts. You can turn to Acts 15. Again, the commentators can fill
out the contours in terms of history and the various people
groups represented in the various movements of these men or their
posterity. But in terms of covenant, salvation,
redemption, Acts 15 has to do with the inclusion of Gentiles
into the people of God. I mean, bottom line, Jerusalem
Council, that's what's happening. Some Jews said it's good for
them that they've trusted Jesus, but they also need to be circumcised. In other words, they need to
become Jews as well as Christians. And that's why the Jerusalem
Council convenes in Acts 15. In fact, look there at verse
one. Certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren,
unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot
be saved. Now, these aren't, this isn't,
you know, irrespective of faith in Jesus. These were Judaizers. These were persons that plagued
the churches of Galatia. These were the persons that Paul
was writing against in the book of Galatians, who he speaks of
in Philippians chapter three. These are persons that say belief
in the gospel of Jesus is good, but you also have to add circumcision
in order to complete oneself to be commended to God. So you
see, that's the issue. Gentiles are starting to come
in amongst the people of God in Acts 15. And so now the apostles
convene and they start to provide the rationale and explanation.
How do we deal with this influx of Gentiles coming in among the
people of God? I mean, that was a real live
issue. That's why when you get to the end of Acts 15 and they
give specific prohibitions to the Gentiles, This isn't some
new law code or it isn't something specifically for Gentiles only. It's to provide in this time
of transition so that the Gentiles don't needlessly offend the Jews
and so that the Jews don't bind upon the Gentiles things that
God never had. And so that's the thrust here
in Acts 15. But when we look specifically
at James. James starts to speak concerning
this whole thing. Notice the testimony of James
in Acts 15, 13. And after they had become silent,
James answered. Remember James? This is the half-brother
of Jesus. He's the leader of the church
in Jerusalem. sort of the presiding elder or
pastor over this whole affair. Already up to this point, Peter
has testified, Paul and Barnabas have addressed the council, and
now James in verse 13. James answered saying, Men and
brethren, listen to me. Simon has declared out God at
the first, visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people
for his name. And with this, the words of the
prophets agree just as it is written. After this, I will return
and will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down.
I will rebuild its ruins and I will set it up, so that the
rest of mankind may seek the Lord. Even all the Gentiles who
are called by my name, says the Lord who does all these things."
Now that's a quote from the prophet Amos, Amos chapter 9, verses
11 and 12. Essentially, what it is, is this
statement concerning Japheth dwelling in the tents of Shem. In other words, it's Gentile
inclusion in the covenant promises of God all the way back in Genesis
chapter 9. on the heels of this gross sin
and violation from Ham. Ham receives a curse, specifically
his son Canaan is cursed, and then God blesses, through Noah,
Shem and Japheth. And then we have the statement
concerning Noah's death, which finishes off the genealogy of
chapter 5 at verse 32. So that's the section. It's again a bit difficult in
terms of the particular sin of Ham and what he did. But you
see how God, in the midst of this, demonstrates his plan for
the peoples. and his plan for the inclusion
of Gentiles in the covenant promises of God. And I would suggest,
by way of some concluding thoughts, first, the theological significance,
the restatement of Genesis 3.15. The two seeds are still present,
seed of the woman, seed of the serpent. As well, you see in
this section the rationale behind the perversity of Canaanite culture. In fact, in Leviticus 18.3, both
Canaanites and Egyptians are highlighted as being vile in
terms of sexual perversity. And this goes back to what Ham
does here. It's not the case that because
one, automatically everybody. But it's symptomatic of Canaanite
culture to engage in that matter of wickedness. And then it's
the rationale behind the subjugation of the Canaanites. In other words,
when we get to Deuteronomy chapter 7, and God says, go in and utterly
dispossess the land of the Canaanites, there's a reason for it, and
it's here in Genesis chapter 9. I'm just trying to encourage
you that the Bible is a connected whole and that what we find in
one spot oftentimes foreshadows or provides rationale for what
we find later on. And then it's programmatic in
terms of the flow of redemptive history. the curse of Canaan,
and then the blessing of God upon Shem, the blessing of God
upon Japheth. The people that are Japhethites
or Gentiles find blessed dwelling in the tents of Shem. And then
in terms of the practical significance, the sin of Noah. We ought to
learn in this passage that even good and godly men have remaining
sin. You can never get in the head
that you're going to be perfect. I know that Wesley taught perfectionism,
and I know that certain sectarians have taught perfectionism, but
that's not from a sober reflection upon Scripture, because Scripture
does not teach perfectionism. Notwithstanding the reference
to Noah, notice in Genesis chapter 6 at verse 9. This is the genealogy
of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect
in his generations. Noah walked with God. Remember
there, we defined perfect. Not in terms of sinless perfectionism,
but rather he was a whole man. He was a complete man. He was
indeed a godly man in his generations. But even a godly man does sinful
things. And I thought John Gill's comment
here was most balanced and helpful. He says, he was overtaken with
it, wine, and which is recorded, not to disgrace him. In other
words, we don't write off Noah. If you haven't had sons yet and
you're gonna have a son, don't discount the name Noah. Noah
is a godly man. We shouldn't throw him under
the bus because of this particular event. He says, he was overtaken
with wine and which is recorded not to disgrace him, but to caution
men against the evil of intemperance, as well as to encourage repenting
sinners to expect pardon. So we just don't comment that
way today, do we? We would just focus on, oh no,
you can't get drunk. And I'm certainly focusing on
that. Don't go get drunk. But brethren, if we sin, we have
an advocate with the Father, even Jesus Christ the righteous.
This is an illustration or demonstration of that 1 John 2, 1 and 2 text.
We have an advocate with the Father, even Jesus Christ the
righteous. Could you imagine encouraging
a repentant sinner with this passage? John Gill would. John
Gill would say, look at Noah. Noah found favor in the eyes
of the Lord. He sinned and he still found favor in the eyes
of the Lord. But Gill goes on to say, and this shows that the
best of men are not exempted from sin, nor secure from falling.
Remember, David wasn't a 15-year-old when he fell into sin. And remember,
the text is very specific in 1 Kings 11. When did Solomon
have his problems? When he was old. See, old doesn't
necessarily translate into holy. We might like to think that,
that the older we get, the holier we get, but I'm not so sure that
the Word of God could be made to say that. David was no young
man, and certainly Solomon was not either. Now he goes on to
say, and that though Noah was a perfect man, yet not as to
be without sin. And that whereas he was a righteous
man, this is gold. He was not so by the righteousness
of works, but by the righteousness of faith. It's because of his
Savior. It's because of his Jesus. It's
because of the blood that this man enters into heaven. And then
in terms of the sin of Ham. He viewed the nakedness of his
father, he publicized the nakedness of his father, and he dishonored
his father. And that is absolutely reprehensible. We don't need Jewish exegesis
to try and fill in the blanks as to what other stuff he did. What scripture reveals for us
is enough. What he did was bad. Now, you
should know and you've probably heard of the sin of Ham or the
curse of Ham. Older Mormon theology taught
that the curse upon Cain was that God made him black. And
the curse upon Ham was that black men would always be slaves. That's
not what's taught in this particular section of scripture. It's not
the ethnicity, because if it were the ethnicity, Rahab the
harlot, this Canaanite prostitute, her family would have never been
justified freely by God's grace. And when Israel sins the sins
of Canaan, what happens to Israel? She is vomited out of the land,
just like the Canaanites had been vomited out of the land.
This is not teaching anyone to be racist against black-skinned
people and pinning it on the curse of Cain, and that the mark
upon Cain was somehow that he was black, and that when we get
to Ham, He was a black man, and that black men are always destined
to servitude or to slavery. That is not the case. Waltke again says, as the first
scene clarifies, the difference between the future prospect of
the ancestral brothers pertains to their morality, not to their
ethnicity as such. The family of the Canaanite prostitute
Rahab will become a part of the covenant people, and the family
of the Judean Achan will be cut off. When Israel behaves like
the Canaanites, the land also vomits them out." 2 Kings 17. So just be aware of that. I said
older Mormon theology. They didn't want the black folks,
black men to achieve priesthood. I'm not sure how it is in modern
Mormon theology. if blacks can achieve priesthood.
But certainly, they hung their hat on that particular peg. But
it's not just been Mormons. There's been others that have
seen that curse upon Cain and that curse upon him to be concentrated
upon black-skinned people. And that's not what this text
is presenting to us. Well, let's close in a word of
prayer. Our Father, we thank you for your word. We thank you
even for the difficult parts. And even in the difficult parts,
we see your good purpose, your good grace, your plan for Shemites
and Japhethites, and how we thank you for the contours of that.
fleshed out in the rest of scripture to the Jew first and also to
the Greek because in that gospel the righteousness of God is revealed
from faith to faith. How we thank you for including
us in these promises. How we thank you for giving us
so great a salvation. We ask that you would go with
us now and watch over us in the remainder of this week. We pray
that you'd bring us together on the Sabbath day that we may
praise and worship and glorify your most holy name. And we ask
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
