22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. ces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. 24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his young e 23 And Shem and Japhether son had done unto him. took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father: and their fa c Ex. 20. 12. Gal. 6. 1. 25 And he said, d Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. d Deut. 27. 16. Josh. 9. 23. 1 Kings, 2. 20, 21. 22. And Ham-saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brethren. However sinful it was for Noah thus to expose himself, it was still more so for Ham, on perceiving his situation, to go out and report it with malignant pleasure to his brethren. For that he did to answer to 'his' in our translation. Indeed the use of the collect. sing. is of such incessant occurrence in Hebrew, that it is by no means certain that a ringle tent is here intended. It may be hat he lay on the ground in the open air in the midst of a number of tents, where he happened first to be discov-so, we cannot but infer from the sequel. He was now in all probability about an hundred years old, and the act therefore could not have been one of mere childish levity. It was undoubtedly a known and voluntary instance of gross disrespect, or contemptuous deportment towards his aged parent, and as such justly gave occasion to the malediction that followed. - 'Ham is here called 'the father of Canaan,' which intimates that he who was himself a father, should have been more respectful to hinı who was his father.' Henry. ered by Ham. Thus while in 2 Sam. 7. 6, God says, 'Whereas I have not dwelt in (any) house since the time that [ brought up the children of Israel out of Egypt, even to this day, but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle,' 1. e. have dwelt tentwise; we read in the parallel passage 1 Chron. 17. 5, 'For I have not dwelt in an house since the day that I brought up Israel unto this day; but have gone from tent to tent and from (one) tabernacle (to another).' As to Ham's telling his brethren without, this may mean simply that he told them in the fields or in the vineyards, or any where without the spot where the several tents happened to be pitched. But whatever er were the place, it was the position that constitu-quiries concerning it of his sons, and ted the degradation. 'Noah had no sooner sinned but he discovers his nakedness, and hath not so much rule of himself as to be ashamed. One hour's drunkenness bewrays that which more than six hundred years' sobriety had | modestly concealed. He that gives himself to wine is not his own: what shall we think of this vice, which robs a man of himself and lays a beast in his room?' Bp. Hall. 24. And Noah awoke, &c. Finding himself covered, when he awoke, with a garment which he had no recollection of having spread over him when he laid down, he would naturally make in thus would learn from Shem and Japheth all that had happened. It is unnecessary to suppose any supernatural revelation in the case. - I Knew what his younger son had done unto him. Heb. בנו הקטן his little son. As Ham in the enumeration of Noah's sons is invariably placed between the other two, the presumption is, that he was between them in age; and consequent ly that he is here called 'younger' or little' not in literal truth but in comparative dignity. His conduct on this occasion had so degraded him that Shem and Japheth were both preferred before him, and in this sense we think it is that he is here denominated little' or 'young,' an epithet that would otherwise sound strangely as applied to a person already an hundred years old. Still it is a point on which we cannot speak with confidence. sion is fair, that as nothing is said of Ham personally in the sentence uttered, his conduct, though highly criminal, merely afforded an occasion for the prompting of one of the most signal prophecies contained in the Scriptures. In like manner we suppose the indiscretion of Hezekiah in displaying his treasures to the embassadors of the king of Babylon, Is. 39. 6, was not so truly the cause as the occasion of the severe denunciation and the actual heavy judgment that followed. (2.) As to the connection between the incident here mentioned and the predicted doom of Canaan, it is especially to be borne 25. And he said, Cursed be Canaan, &c. 'The important prophecy here recorded, which is remarkable for the fulness and extensive reach of its meaning, involves several particulars requiring a minute and critical investigation, in mind, that here, as in hundreds of which may perhaps swell our remarks other instances in the Scriptures, indisomewhat beyond their usual dimen-viduals are not so much contemplated sions. The first inquiry that naturally arises respects the procuring cause of such an apparently severe denunciation, and that too a denunciation directed not against Ham, the real offender, but against Canaan his son, who does | person of Canaan, but was to alight not appear from the text to have had any agency in the transaction. On this head we may remark, (1.) That the act of Ham was rather the occasion than the cause of the prediction against Canaan. At the most, his sin was that | diction was ever fulfilled upon the Ca as the nations and peoples descending from them. As the blessings promised were not to be confined to the persons of Shem and Japheth, so the curse denounced was not to be restricted to the was no more. upon his posterity centuries after he But the judgments of God are not inflicted upon men irrespective of their moral character, nor have we any reason to think that this pre of irreverence and unbecoming levity naanites themselves, any farther than towards his aged parent, and this, as their own sins were the procuring though by no means a slight offence, causes of it. Noah therefore uttered can yet be scarcely conceived to pos- the words from an inspired foresight sess such peculiar enormity as to draw of the sins and abominations of the after it so dire a malediction not only abandoned stock of the Canaanites. upon the offender himself, but upon his Now it is clear from the subsequent posterity down to distant generations. history that the peculiar and characterIt is moreover worthy of note, that istic sins of that people, the sins which Noah does not expressly say that be- in an especial manner incurred the dicause Ham had done so and so, there- vine indignation, were closely allied to fore should his offspring be accursed; the sin which immediately prompted not to mention, that if Ham's maledic- Noah's denunciatory prophecy. It was tion is to be referred entirely to his the uncovering of nakedness)גלת ערות want of filial reverence, Shem's bless- or in other words, the prevalence of ing, on the other hand, ought to be as the most flagrant corruption, licentiousdistinctly ascribed to his piety towards ❘ ness, and debauchery of manners. In his parent. But this evidently is not proof of this we have only to turn to the case. We think then the conclu- | the eighteenth chapter of Leviticus, where the black specification of the Canaanites came to the full, Melchizleading crimes of the Canaanites is giv-edek whose name was expressive of en, and we cannot fail to be struck with the coincidence even in the very point of the language of the description; the whole concluding with the solemn injunction, v. 24, 25, 'Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you. And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity | thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.' We may therefore justly regard the conduct of Ham towards his father as so far an image or sample of the future iniquitous conduct of the Canaanites, that it should very naturally be made, under the prompting of nspiration, a suggesting occasion of the curse now pronounced. (3.) This view of the subject, while it makes the his character, 'king of righteousness,' was a worthy priest of the most high God; and Abimelech whose name imports 'parental king' pleaded the integrity of his heart and the righteousness of his nation, Gen 20, 4-9, before God, and his plea was admitted. Yet both these personages appear to have been Canaanites. The import of this prediction will be still further developed as we proceed. - A servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. Chal. 'working servant.' That is, a servant reduced to the lowest degree of bondage and degradation. It is an Hebraic idiom conveying a superlative idea like holy of holies, king of kings, vanity of vanities, song of songs, &c. The terms 'brother,' 'brethren,' were used by the Hebrews for more distant relatives; and this burden of the prediction to centre more | prophecy more especially entered on a especially upon Canaan, does not utterly exclude Ham from all participation in it, inasmuch as no father can fail to be deeply affected with the prospect of a child's calamities. Omniscience perhaps saw that Ham's sin was not sufficiently aggravated to subject him just ly to any severer punishment than the knowledge of the future lot of this portion of his posterity. But at the same time, it is worthy of remark, that although the sentence here recorded was to spend itself mainly upon the descendants of Ham in the line of Ca course of fulfilment about eight hun dred years after its delivery, when the Israelites, the descendants of Shem, subdued the Canaanites and took possession of their country. The prediction was still farther accomplished, when the scattered remnants of those tribes were expelled by David and settled in those parts of Africa which first fell under the dominion of the Romans, the undoubted descendants of Japheth. Canaan therefore was in early ages the slave of Shem, and in later times of Japheth; and in this way is the diffi naan, yet it is an historical fact, that ❘culty arising from the possible suppo the curse of servitude has signally fallen upon other branches of his posterity, of which the fate of the African race is a standing evidence; but how far we are to refer that fact to the effects of Noah's curse, on this occasion, is not clear. (4.) The prediction is not to be considered as necessarily affectimg individuals, or even communities proceeding from Canaan, so long as they continued righteous. In Abraham's days, before the iniquity of the sition that Canaan was to be in bondage to both his brethren at once, effectually removed. He first bowed to the rod of one, and then, some centuries afterwards, to that of the other. 26 Blessed be the Lord God of Shem. These words are to be regarded as far more than a simple expression of Noah's thanks to God for the pious act of Shem; for in this sense Japheth's conduct was entitled to equal commendation, and God could not, on this ground alone 26 And he said, Blessed be 27 God shall enlarge Japheth, the LORD God of Shem; and Ca-5 and he shall dwell in the tents naan shall be his servant. f Ps. 144. 15. Heb. 11. 16. strictly be called any more the God of the one than of the other. The declaration therefore carries a higher import. From a view of the whole prophecy it cannot be doubted, we think, that whatever patriarchal prerogatives would otherwise have accrued to Hamasan elder brother they are here in fact transferred to Shem, the younger, and consequently that both the spiritual and temporal blessings which constituted the birthright henceforth devolved upon Shem as the appointed heir. In these were included mainly the promise of the Messiah as a natural descendant, and of the land of Canaan as a destined inheritance. This land, thus taken away from the Canaanites, and they reduced to bondage, was to be conferred upon the posterity of Shem, and that too in order that they might come into a close covenant relation to God; he becoming in a preeminent sense their God, and they his people, to which this earthly possession was to be entirely subordinate; 'for the Lord's portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.' In these words, therefore, is mainly set forth the spirit of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. g Eph. 2. 13, 14. & 3. 6. should receive from Him tokens of favour and blessing which were not vouchsafed to other people. This prediction as the time drew near for its further fulfilment was renewed in a still more clear and definite form to Abraham, Gen. 17. 7, 8, 'I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. We find, moreover, that as the time of the ultimate accomplishment of the promise drew still nearer, the peculiar appropriated title of God, as the God of Shem, viz. Jehovah, begins to be more frequently employed, a fact which affords the genuine clew to the remarkable passages, Ex. 3. 14. and 6.3. And it is especially worthy of note, that this peculiar privilege of Shem, of having God for his God, is more than once alluded to as distinguishing the Israelites from the Canaanites, when the former ual distinction of Shem, viz. that God | went to take possession of their inher should be his God, to which the promise of the earthly Canaan is subjoined. Viewed in this light, the words, 'Blessed be the Lord God of Shem,' import that Jehovah, the true God, should, as the God of Shem, be the object of praise, homage, and blessing; that his worship should be established and perpetuated among them; that his name in opposition to that of idols should be acknowledged as known and reverenced in the line of this father of the chosen race, and that they on the other hand itance, and is mentioned as a special 28 And Noah lived after 29 And all the days of Noah the flood three hundred and fifty were nine hundred and fifty years: years. and he died. shall be holy unto me; for I the Lord | take the word in the sense of increasam holy, and have severed you from ing both the progeny and the territories other people, that ye should be mine.' of Japheth; andthis, as a temporal promThe reason of this mode of address is ise, has been most remarkably fulfilled, to be sought for in the remarkable proph- | for Japheth who had several more sons than either of his brethren, appears to have been the progenitor of more than half the human race. The whole of Europe and a considerable part of Asia were originally peopled, and have ever since been occupied, by Japheth's offspring. But it is supposed by some commentators that the mere promise ecy respecting Shem which we are now considering. - Canaan shall be his servant. Heb. עבד כמו servant to them. So also the Chal., Syr., and Arab. The Sept. and some others render in the sing. 'his servant,' but it is certain that according to prevailing usage the Heb. pronoun למר is plural, and we incline to believe with Gesenius of a vast posterity and extensive terri tory did not exhaust the full measure that it is always so used except when referring to a singular of the collective of Japheth's blessing. This 'opinion kind. By the phrase 'servant to them, therefore, is to be understood either that Canaan was to be servant to Shem | and Japheth successively, or, as we think still more probable, to Shem and Jehovah conjointly; for the intimate covenant relation between Shem and the God of Israel would naturally lead to their being spoken of together. The words of Joshua to the Gibeonites Josh. 9. 23, seem to favour this interpretation, 'Now therefore ye are curs- | ed, and there shall none of you be freed from being bondmen, and hewers of wood and drawers.of water for the house of my God.' Comp. v. 27, with my notes on the passage. By being given, or made Nethinims, to the house of God they were at the same time given to the service of Israel, and vice versa. 27. God shall enlarge Japheth. Rather, according to the Heb. )יפת לרפת yapht leyepheth) 'shall enlarge or make room for Japheth,' very similar to the expression Gen. 26. 22, 'Now the Lord hath made room for us )הרהרב יהוה | לנו(. Thus the Gr., Chal., Syr., Arab. Erp., and Lat. Vulg., all which SO they found not only on the ensuing clause, which indeed supports it, but on the original term (yaphthere employed. This they render persuade instead of enlarge, from the fact of the root פתח being generally used in the sense of persuade, entice, allure, by fair and kind words. Accordingly the phrase יפת ליפתyapht leyepheth, in which there is a paranomasia or play upon the words, they would translate God 'shall persuade Japheth,' or still more literally, 'God shall persuade the persuasible,' i. e. God shall work upon and allure Japheth that he shall be brought to the faith and obedience of the Gospel, and thus made to dwell in the tents of Shem. But to this interpretation it is a serious objection, (1.) That the original פתה, wher ever it signifies to persuade or allure, is always, with perhaps the single exception of Jer. 20. 7, used in a bad sense implying that kind of persuasion which is connected with deception. (2.) That when thus used it is always followed by the simple accusative of the object, instead of the dative with a preposition as here. (3.) That none of the more |