The Sin of Ham.

The following Scripture has often wrongly been used as a justification for slavery. I’d like to mine this story for some other thoughts:

“And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father’s nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.”
(Gen 9:20-25)

The first question I would ask is WHO SINNED? Yes, Noah was drunk and naked but that is not why this particular verse is given here. Of the 4 men two acted respectfully and honorably, Shem and Japheth acted graciously and covered the nakedness of their father and received a blessing for it, Ham exposed his fathers nakedness and received a curse.

When I’m with a group of men or a man I respect do I expose his flaws or do I respectfully act graciously towards him and seek the counsel of the Holy Spirit for guidance in how I can maintain a respectful attitude towards the man? Do I presume to be holier or more righteous than this man simply because I have exposed a flaw? Do I take the first available opportunity to disrespect him? Think of a beloved uncle or grandfather….imagine openly criticizing them for a failing.

Consider this:

Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
(Eph 5:33)

My husband leaves the toilet seat up.

My husband leaves the cap of the toothpaste.

My husband *insert pet peeve here*.

Now mind you, the husband in his role as Christ is admonitioned to love and honor his wife so he should care about her pet peeves, I’m just wondering if she was covering her husband how he would ever know? Maybe by asking his wife if there was a way to make her more comfortable (since she is doing such a good job of not letting him know what may aggravate her).

Now consider this.

I think my husband lusts after other women.

He’s tempted by pornography. What should I do?

He loses his temper and is rude to me.

He doesn’t give me access to our checking account.

Now we’re talking about some potentially serious problems right? What is the solution? Should the women just go straight up feminist, “equal” partnership and insist on being the judge of her husband? Does she take on the role of Ham? Does she decide to take matters into her own hands or does she “cover” her husband out of respect?

I know the feminist answer.

Advertisements

17 thoughts on “The Sin of Ham.

  1. I also wanted to focus on what men need to do in the way of patriarchy, certainly they should do things to cultivate respect, but one of the ways of doing this is to not receive criticism or exposure from unqualified sources. To respond to those sources as if they are legitimate disqualifies us. Our greater sin is often not the sin for which we are criticized but for letting people we should be leading disqualify us from leadership.

  2. The Holy Spirit qualifies me. My wife qualified me as husband when she married me. Most days I don’t feel qualified but I can’t coddle weakness in myself and make myself that out. Feminist culture doesn’t qualify me (and never will) whether it is in the Church, the “church” or in the world. All they will try to do is play as the accuser of the Brethren, the feminist will only ever try to disqualify Godly men?

    Which side are you on?

  3. Wow now that is a really good answer, i can hang my hat on! I couldn’t even begin to say it any better!

  4. Good, then we are getting somewhere. Someone tell mothership she has docked in the wrong place. We have heard all that before, usually the shaming language comes from women…hence MOTHERship?

  5. Pingback: Linkage Is Good For You: Marriage Week | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

  6. You’re saying only the man is allowed to have the feminist reaction – wanting to be equal is out of a place for a woman in a marriage, she should keep her pet peeves in place.

    You don’t like whiny wives. They don’t like inconsiderate husbands. Those are the oldest two stereotypes in the book. “Maybe life would be better, like in the Bible, if our wives whined less” is old hat. It may feel new and exciting because FEMINISM, but nah man.

    You say it with a sneer, but yes, I imagine you’re right about how feminists would respond to “shut up, wives.”The same way men respond to “shut up, husbands.”

    And besides, the husband in the role of Christ should accept the mantle of the martyr, weather the pain of the world, and bear it all without complaint, not reluctantly have to take his partner’s feelings into account.

    If you think that “covering” for her husband is respect – that is, keeping grievances private, even behind closed doors – then you are greatly misunderstanding what the unity of marriage is. An ideal relationship isn’t one where people don’t bring things up out of fear of hurting feelings, it’s one where anything can be discussed.

    But seriously, “relationships would be better if women were meeker” is weaksauce.

  7. I had to delete comments and ban posters. I never dreamed that would happen. This blog has a purpose believe it or not, and that whole diatribe was not it.
    Anyone can discuss anything that is germane to feminism, The Bible, sin, any sin…sure….but the entire frame of that whole thing was completely wrong and won’t show up here.

  8. You’re too focused on humans I think. Do we care more about what the Bible says or what feminists think? The husband is to love and lead the wife sacrificially even if she is a complete shrew, all the more so. Just like the wife is instructed to win even an unbelieving husband:

    “Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. ”
    (1Pe 3:1-4)

    Those verses are so far under the bus that most feminists have forgotten about them entirely. A wife’s meekness is NOT weak sauce, contradicting the clear word of Scripture IS though.

  9. yesbutdoubtful is missing the point. “Covering” doesn’t mean that I, as my husband’s help meet and sister in Christ, don’t ever confront him if the situation is grave enough to warrant it. It means that I don’t “uncover his nakedness” to others. I pray without ceasing for him. I address him reverently and lovingly with my concerns, and then I shut up.

    Wives are terrible at this, by the way. They call other women and claim they just
    want some prayer and support for their husband when what they really want is
    to gossip and complain about their husband. They deliberately “uncover him”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s