Gen 9 - All about Canaan

Have you ever noticed in scripture, how, when you really study the text, the story isn't about the person you originally thought? The book of Ruth really isn't about Ruth, its about Naomi. Esther is about Mordeci. The story of Shadrack, Meshack and Abendigo is actually about a showdown between the super power of the day (Nebedchadnezzar) and God. The last half of Genesis 9 is no different. The first thing that should jump out at you is in verse 18, "The sons of Noah who went forth from the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth (Ham was the father of Canaan). 19 These three were the sons of Noah. . . " When studying scripture, look for things that are out of place. Why is that there?! Genesis 11:28-30 is the end of the geneology introducing Abram, it mentions his wife, Saria and verse 30 gives the seemingly out of place information that Sarai, is barren - she can't have kids. Know why? Because Sarai's barrenness is the crux of the whole story - Genesis 9 is no different. "Ham was the father of Canaan" is mentioned because this Biblical account is really about Canaan, not Ham.

The text moves on, and most of you are familiar with the account. Noah gets drunk and is lying nacked in his text. Ham sees him, and tells his brothers, who in turn, respectfully cover their father up. Alot of mental pursute often goes to the question, What is the deal with Ham seeing Noah neaked? What does that phrase even mean? (For those of you who are curious as to what the Hebrew says - it says the same thing as the English, Ham "saw" that's all the info we get.) But we the modern audience (MA) get the general idea - what Ham did = bad, what Japheth and Shem did = good. Interestingly enough, Noah doesn't curse Ham. He curses Canaan and states that he will be a servant of servants to his brothers. Talk about a random ending to an already bazaar story.

I ponder, why is this included in scripture to begin with? Why is Canaan cursed and not Ham? What was Ham doing anyway? Then I take a step back and it all becomes clearer. This passage was not written TO me, I cannot understand the purpose of this divinely inspired - yet complex piece of Old Testament History when I am sitting in my modern-day frame of reference, I get caught up in all the wrong questions.

See, this account was written to the nation of Israel in the wilderness. God was bringing them to their promised land, but there's a problem. The Canaanites. These people are big, powerful, and scary. Or so they seem. Upon further reflection, I realized that this story is the catalist for a huge paradigm shift. The issue of entering the land cannot rest on the ferocity of the Canaanites - they are a cursed people from the beginning of the re-population of the earth - they are going to be the servants of their brothers (the decedents of Shem and Japheth). Israel is descended from Shem, therefore the rightful "rulers" of the Canaanite people - per Genesis 9 which occurred (on the original participants level - OP) thousands of years before the conquest of Canaan.

To recap - the account of Ham and Noah is Gen 9 is confusing and seems pointless until you look at it through the eyes of the OA - realizing that this is not merely the account of Ham's sin, it is designed as the framework underpinnings for Israel's mindset concerning the conquest of the their land.