Why Noah Cursed Canaan ?
- Thread starter Saint
- Start date
To me, the bible is a mythology; that said, here is the possible reason why Noah cursed Canaan.
Noah got pissed off that Ham had seen him naked and he had to punish him in a way that was deemed right for the religion and culture of the times.
Due to reasons of Jewish law and doctrine as regards the sins of the fathers visiting their children, had Noah cursed Ham, he would in effect have been cursing himself, because the logic went that if the child had commited a crime, it was because the father had sinned and had caused the child to be imperfect. Therefore he cursed Canaan (Ham's son), so that Ham was punished by implication.
Noah then went on to bless Ham's 2 brothers, which again, under Jewish law and doctrine meant that he was in effect bestowing great honours upon himself.
I suppose that as a Godl fearing man, fully adhering to the law, Noah absolutely had to dole out punishment; forgiveness not being an option in his ideology. I could suppose that he might even have felt hurt at having to do this to his innocent grandson, but that's just me, because it's not mentioned in the book.
It also doesn't mention why a drunkard should want to bestow honour on himself for drinking himself into a stupor and then lying around his tent stark naked for anyone to find. I don't see any redeeming purpose for the passage to be included in the book, unless it's to show that alcohol abuse leads to stupid and irrational behaviour
In a real life present day situation, I would consider Noah to be an unspeakably rotten, selfish, hypocritical and vindictive bastard, mesmerised by delusions of grandeur, God and personal honour, in other words a seriously fucked up head case!
Noah got pissed off that Ham had seen him naked and he had to punish him in a way that was deemed right for the religion and culture of the times.
Due to reasons of Jewish law and doctrine as regards the sins of the fathers visiting their children, had Noah cursed Ham, he would in effect have been cursing himself, because the logic went that if the child had commited a crime, it was because the father had sinned and had caused the child to be imperfect. Therefore he cursed Canaan (Ham's son), so that Ham was punished by implication.
Noah then went on to bless Ham's 2 brothers, which again, under Jewish law and doctrine meant that he was in effect bestowing great honours upon himself.
I suppose that as a Godl fearing man, fully adhering to the law, Noah absolutely had to dole out punishment; forgiveness not being an option in his ideology. I could suppose that he might even have felt hurt at having to do this to his innocent grandson, but that's just me, because it's not mentioned in the book.
It also doesn't mention why a drunkard should want to bestow honour on himself for drinking himself into a stupor and then lying around his tent stark naked for anyone to find. I don't see any redeeming purpose for the passage to be included in the book, unless it's to show that alcohol abuse leads to stupid and irrational behaviour
In a real life present day situation, I would consider Noah to be an unspeakably rotten, selfish, hypocritical and vindictive bastard, mesmerised by delusions of grandeur, God and personal honour, in other words a seriously fucked up head case!
ConsequentAtheist
Registered Senior Member
This does not correspond to any "Jewish law and doctrine" of which I am aware. I would be interested in your source.
In Exodus 20:5, God declared that he would "visit the iniquities of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generations
"The fathers have eaten sour grapes and the children's teeth are on edge" (Jeremiah 31:29)
http://custance.org/old/noah/curse.html
"The fathers have eaten sour grapes and the children's teeth are on edge" (Jeremiah 31:29)
http://custance.org/old/noah/curse.html
ConsequentAtheist
Registered Senior Member
Thanks for the reference.
Now, would it be possible to get a reference to any Jewish law and doctrine which argues that had Noah cursed Ham, he would in effect have been cursing himself, because the logic went that if the child had commited a crime, it was because the father had sinned and had caused the child to be imperfect? Parenthetically:
- It is a logical fallacy to assert that the visiting of the iniquties of the father upon the son implies that all errors, sins, and/or iniquities of the son serve as evidence of iniquities on the part of the father, nor, I believe, will you be able to supply Talmudic discourse to this effect.
- While quoting Exodus is always in vogue, it seems of dubious worth here since the verse 'visits iniquities' "to the third and the fourth generation ". As such, if your argument had merit (and I believe that it does not), it would be equally applicable to the grandson as to the son.
I found this interpretation by a rabbi (PARASHAT NOAH):
Why does Noah curse his grandson and not his son? Perhaps it is because, of all the children, Cham was the only one who was himself already a father. Cham should have been aware of how difficult it is to be a parent. Of all the children, Cham should have been most sensitive to Noah's plight. Yet he was the least sensitive! And Noah says, if that's the way you behave, if that's the model you provide your children, if you respond to a person in need by acting callously and insensitively, the end result will inevitably be that your own child, Canaan, will be a slave. Just like you, he will be unable to control himself. He'll be a slave to his own passions and needs, just as you are yourself.
Noah's sons each represented a nation (Canaan's brothers were Cush (Ethiopia), Mizriam (Egypt), and Put (Phut)), so his curse could be a kind of prophecy. Canaan was begotten in "exile" - while in the ark, and Ham is persistently mentioned as "the father of Canaan", as if it was an important fact. Abraham, father of Israel, was a descendent of Shem. Canaan was later to become the "promised land" of the Israelites, while the Canaanites were in league with the Amalekites - sworn enemies of the Israelites. Both were larger nations, but were subjected to the weaker nation of Israel. Israel was then commanded to keep themselves separate from these neighbouring peoples.
These "histories" are the beginnings of the theology that you are a "child" of the person whose traits and activities you repeat. Genesis and Exodus shows us which "choices"/sons lead to which "descendents". Your choices are acts that beget "children", and these spiritual children will be brothers with your biological children, and just like your actions have an influence on them, they will live with the legacy you left them. Even when you live under a curse, you can still escape its destruction by keeping yourself separate from the actions that brought on the curse. This is the basis of keeping yourself "holy" (i.e. separate) from sin, even while we live under the curse Adam brought on by sin. The key to such a life is self-control and love; you are the only person who has control over what choices you make. If we keep ourselves separate from sin like Israelites should have kept themselves separate from the curse of the Canaanites, God will lead us out of exile in the world into heaven and grant us victory, just like He lead the Israelites out of exile in Egypt into Canaan and made them victorious against all odds.
Why does Noah curse his grandson and not his son? Perhaps it is because, of all the children, Cham was the only one who was himself already a father. Cham should have been aware of how difficult it is to be a parent. Of all the children, Cham should have been most sensitive to Noah's plight. Yet he was the least sensitive! And Noah says, if that's the way you behave, if that's the model you provide your children, if you respond to a person in need by acting callously and insensitively, the end result will inevitably be that your own child, Canaan, will be a slave. Just like you, he will be unable to control himself. He'll be a slave to his own passions and needs, just as you are yourself.
Noah's sons each represented a nation (Canaan's brothers were Cush (Ethiopia), Mizriam (Egypt), and Put (Phut)), so his curse could be a kind of prophecy. Canaan was begotten in "exile" - while in the ark, and Ham is persistently mentioned as "the father of Canaan", as if it was an important fact. Abraham, father of Israel, was a descendent of Shem. Canaan was later to become the "promised land" of the Israelites, while the Canaanites were in league with the Amalekites - sworn enemies of the Israelites. Both were larger nations, but were subjected to the weaker nation of Israel. Israel was then commanded to keep themselves separate from these neighbouring peoples.
These "histories" are the beginnings of the theology that you are a "child" of the person whose traits and activities you repeat. Genesis and Exodus shows us which "choices"/sons lead to which "descendents". Your choices are acts that beget "children", and these spiritual children will be brothers with your biological children, and just like your actions have an influence on them, they will live with the legacy you left them. Even when you live under a curse, you can still escape its destruction by keeping yourself separate from the actions that brought on the curse. This is the basis of keeping yourself "holy" (i.e. separate) from sin, even while we live under the curse Adam brought on by sin. The key to such a life is self-control and love; you are the only person who has control over what choices you make. If we keep ourselves separate from sin like Israelites should have kept themselves separate from the curse of the Canaanites, God will lead us out of exile in the world into heaven and grant us victory, just like He lead the Israelites out of exile in Egypt into Canaan and made them victorious against all odds.
Last edited:
Shem's descendants
Originally posted by Jenyar
----------
Why does Noah curse his grandson and not his son? Noah's sons each represented a nation (Canaan's brothers were Cush (Ethiopia), Mizriam (Egypt), and Put (Phut)), so his curse could be a kind of prophecy. Canaan was begotten in "exile" - while in the ark, and Ham is persistently mentioned as "the father of Canaan", as if it was an important fact. Abraham, father of Israel, was a descendent of Shem.
----------
(Okay, let me get this straight. Canaan is Noah's grandson by Ham. Ham is the son who sees Noah naked, so Canaan and his descendants are consequently cursed. Abraham is a descendant of Canaan. Abraham is the patriarch of Judaism, Islam and Xianity, but they were all fighting amongst themselves. Therefore, all these religions are cursed.)
Originally posted by Jenyar
----------
Why does Noah curse his grandson and not his son? Noah's sons each represented a nation (Canaan's brothers were Cush (Ethiopia), Mizriam (Egypt), and Put (Phut)), so his curse could be a kind of prophecy. Canaan was begotten in "exile" - while in the ark, and Ham is persistently mentioned as "the father of Canaan", as if it was an important fact. Abraham, father of Israel, was a descendent of Shem.
----------
(Okay, let me get this straight. Canaan is Noah's grandson by Ham. Ham is the son who sees Noah naked, so Canaan and his descendants are consequently cursed. Abraham is a descendant of Canaan. Abraham is the patriarch of Judaism, Islam and Xianity, but they were all fighting amongst themselves. Therefore, all these religions are cursed.)