And Noah and his family exit the ark and Noah plants a vineyard.
Wait... Noah plants a vineyard?
Doesn't that sound eerily similar to God planting (same word) a garden?
In God's garden, Adam and Eve ate of the fruit and tragedy ensues.
In Noah's garden, he drinks the fruit and tragedy ensues...
Apparently, the parallels continue. And not only is Noah just the "human tragedy" character in this story, but he's also seeming to blur the lines between his role and God's role. He's not just the resident steward of the garden, but he is also the planter/creator. But alas, I'm getting ahead of myself.
Noah drinks of the fruit and becomes drunk. As he sleeps in his stupor, one of his sons, Ham comes in and "looks upon his father's nakedness". He goes out to tell his brothers, who proceed to cover up their father by walking backwards with a blanket held up to their shoulders. Then, Noah wakes up and discovers what his son has done to him. In a rage, he curses Ham's son, Canaan...Wait.. WHAT!?
Why in the world would Noah curse Canaan and not Ham? That makes no sense at all. There continues to be more problems with the Text. And apparently, the author wants us to stop and start digging again.
To help us arrive at an answer, I'm about to explain what the Jewish midrash teaches about this story. But before I do, I need to take a moment to talk about "midrash" — what it is and how it is used. So prepare for a horribly oversimplified explanation of a very complex issue. My attempt to simplify the issue is because any good Bible-believing Christian starts to get really nervous (as they should) when you start reading from extra-biblical texts for aid in biblical interpretation. So first, an explanation for what midrash is:
The midrash is the collected, historical, Jewish conversation that surrounds the Text. The fact of the matter is that the Bible is an ancient eastern book, in an ancient eastern world, written and read by ancient eastern people. You and I are modern (or postmodern) western thinkers. We have been taught for the last two-thousand years to think in terms of definition and propositions. If a westerner wants to make a point, we write an article that has a proposition and the points that support it (deductive) or a bunch of points that arrive at a proposition (inductive). An easterner does not think this way. An eastener will never "tell you what to think"; an eastener wants to lead you to discovery.
So instead of a bunch of old Jews writing commentaries that tell you what to think, the ancients told additional stories that led you on additional treasure hunts and brought you to a place of discovery. An eastener would try to convince you that you learn better and more profound truths that way. The collection of additional stories, reflections, and commentaries is referred to as the midrash — the collected, historical, Jewish conversation that surrounds the Text.
Whether you like the method of midrash or not, this is the world of the Bible. I pursue what I call a contextual hermeneutic, meaning that the way I interpret the Bible is that I want to understand what the writer meant when they wrote it and what the reader heard when they read it. Essentially, I believe the correct interpretation of the inspired words is one read through the original biblical context.
This means that while I do not believe the midrash is inspired or authoritative (very important to hear me say), I do believe that one must use it as a tool to help us arrive at a contextual understanding of the inspired Text.
But enough about the academic details; back to the story (write me an email if you would like to discuss this more).
Why does Noah curse Canaan and not Ham?
The answer revolves around the phrase "saw his father's nakedness", which is a Hebrew idiom (figure of speech) that refers to one of two things. Either Ham sexually molested his father while he was drunk or he castrated Noah.
(I have heard numerous opinions that state that the phrase is an idiom for sleeping with the father's wife. This is based off of a reference to the same phrase used in Deuteronomy to refer to sleeping with the father's wife. It is my historical understanding that the writer of Deuteronomy is using this idiom of molestation to refer to what you do to your father when you sleep with his wife. You molest him — you rob him of his manhood. But at any rate, it is somewhat irrelevant to the point...)
The midrash teaches that Ham castrated his father.
Now here is how the midrash functions. The student is now driven to answer the question: Why would the ancients choose THAT option? Why does it make a difference? Why not molestation?
Do you remember those four rivers that I told you not to forget about? I know you thought I forgot about them. Those four rivers that seemed to have nothing to do with the story of the garden of Eden? Well, didn't we demonstrate earlier that this story is paralleling the story of the garden?
A river and it's tributaries is often an image of the genealogical lineage of a family. Jewish conversation will often refer to the branches of a family line as "tributaries". Isn't it interesting that the story that parallels this story of Noah's garden is a story with rivers and the story of Noah (read the rest of chapter nine and all of chapter ten) is all about his descendants?
There is one problem. There were four rivers.
Noah has three sons.
What was the only repeated command given to Noah upon his departure from the ark?
"Be fruitful and multiply..."
Noah is supposed to have more children.
This is why the midrash teaches that Ham castrated Noah; Ham has robbed his father of his ability to have children.
Why does Noah curse Canaan and not Ham?
Revenge.
It's as if Noah is saying, "You've robbed me of my children. May I rob you of yours!"
I believe, if we listen, we can hear God's continued invitation to Noah: "Noah, stop! I know you are angry, but just trust the story. Don't hurt innocence! Don't seek revenge! It's not as if you MUST have children in order for me to love you. Let me be God — let me deal with justice."
But Noah is blurring the lines between the Creator and the created. Noah curses Canaan and the Hebrew word used for curse — 'arar — is only attributed to God throughout the Scriptures. Noah is the only human being that ever uses 'arar in the Bible.
It's the same story, over and over again. God keeps affirming the goodness of creation, His love for all creation, and His acceptance of people. The characters, however, keep showing us that they are incapable of mastering their desires. They don't seem to be able to tap into their 'God image-ness' and find the rest that God intended in Genesis one.
Adam.
Eve.
Cain.
Noah.
"Trust the story." God might say, "I declared you good and made you in my image. Just rest in my goodness and my declaration that you are enough and what I've given you is enough. Just trust that there is enough. Let me be the Creator. Just rest! Adam and Eve — rest! Cain, why are you angry? Let it go and rest! Noah, I know why you are angry, but just rest! Don't make it worse, make it better."
Maybe it will get better when man creates the brick and starts building towers...
That last line literally made me laugh out loud.
ReplyDelete