Shem and Japhethe covered their mother. Lev 18:7 and 8. Ham had seen his mother naked, thus why Noah was outraged when he woke up - thus he was not raped.
Why do people take "nakedness" out of context concerning Ham? If Shem and Japhethe walked "backwards' to COVER thieri father it clearly means 'he was naked?" It has nothing to do with a sexual act between woman or man. The lust of the mind is a dangerous thing! And why would anybody believe anything from the talmud where they clearly hate us?
In the link you provided about the "Curse of Ham" -- first of all... as you've probably noticed... the curse was in reference to K'na'an, one of Ham's sons. Why would Ham's son be cursed for his father's bad actions? I like the opinion that there was no "power" in the words of Noah other than mere perception / intuition due to how he expected Ham's sons would be likely influenced by their father's assumed immoral nature.
But more importantly, regarding the criticism on the Talmud in the link you provided... I agree with the guy that disagreement with an opinion in the Talmud doesn't necessarily imply anti-semitism.... however, the guy's comments do contain some lack of information.
He mentions that the Biblical text doesn't say that Ham had relations with his dad, or whatever else. 1st -- that was just one opinion mentioned in the Talmud. Other opinions are given... but on top of that....
the guy's ignorance of hebrew prevents him from knowing that the word "nakedness" in Hebrew is also at times used as an idiom for intercourse. Upon realizing this, it should then be more understanding as to why one might have the opinion that Ham raped his father while he was drunk. The term "saw" could mean perceived or knew, as is the case elsewhere in the Bible. And we know that "to know" in Hebrew is also sometimes used as an idiom for relations in Hebrew.
But all this aside, the Talmud does not present these opinions as binding beliefs. It does not require that a person side with any one of these opinions.
...and supposing that Ham really did rape his father, or whatever else, ...and supposing that sub-saharan africans are dark as a result of some change connected to this (which I'm not convinced of)... so what? That's nto a reason to hate African peoples. The Torah AND the Talmud give many more records of the bad deeds of JEWISH / ISRAELITE peoples... and those are their own ancestors. It shouldn't be considered a matter of racism. it should be considered [errant?] opinion about the past.
Hey Yosef. Thanks for these comments man. I'm glad you've addressed the issue because you're probably the one person I would wish to offer some thoughts form a rabbinic perspective.
By the way, that was me who made that video! It was qnearly a year ago and if I had made it now, I would done it quite differently - more asking questions rather than making statements about the rabbis. I was in a different place then.
There is a kabbalistic interpretation of genesis that, when read, claims the garden of eden, and adam and eve were never physical beings, and that the "coats of skin" refer to physical bodies that The Holy One gave the humans as they descended into materiality.
Even when the remez [hinted meaning] or the derash [allegorical meaning] is correct, it doesn't nullify the plain meaning of the text, unless the plain meaning itself is metaphorical or idiomatic.
Nakedness means exposed to sin. Stripped from your heavenly glory. Sin makes cowards of men. Innocent blood needed to be shed to cover Adam and Eve's nakedness because of sin.
It's the opposite of being clothed in righteousness. Almost everything can be taken literally as well as spiritually.
actually its because i HAVE studied that i know the word "chagowr" means "loin covering" . And to your other point, do i really need to build a list of times men of God were naked in public and it wasnt sinful ? how many are necessary to prove it isnt a sin? in fact the burden of proof is on you to show me where teh BIble says nudity is a sin. good luck with that
first, the BIble only specifics certain nudity not allowed to be uncovered, and thats besides the fact that it seems to be referring to having sexual relations . So a verse taht forbidsd sexual relations between a man and his fathers wife, isnt a ban on nudity . and even if it were literal nudity it spoke of, it only means you cant see these peoples nudity. Why would the Bible give you a list of nudity not to look at if ALL of it was a sin ? why not just say that ? notice all the sense im making
is there something wrong with being a rude jerk ? yes . but can i say that its a sin to be rude? no . Isaiah walked and preached naked for 3 years .are you saying isaiah sinned ?
also, nakedness did mean nakedness. for example, notice how eve made a "loin covering" to cover her nakedness . like i said, im not telling people to walk around naked, but if someone asks me "does the Bible say that being naked or seeing someone naked is a sin?" i cant say yes
no, i just dont believe things the Bible never says. christians have no problem doing that however . ALso, your misuse of the word "modest" is an example. The Bibel says to dress modestly and Christians use this to say "cover up, dont show cleavage", when in fact "modest" has nothing to do with that . it means "a: placing a moderate estimate on one's abilities or worth b: neither bold nor self-assertive : tending toward diffidence". further evidence is that it adds "not with costly attire"
A very interesting place to begin! Interesting indeed. I think you make a very good biblical case. I don't think you are "making laws of God where he didn't", but rather using the word of Deity and looking at the actions of Deity and his people to uncover evidences of principles that affect us all, even if they were not codified like the Israeli Torah covenant. A very good thought-provoking start.
Thanks. It was very accidental though. I wasn'pt at all planning on starting on this issue. But I was watching another video by someone who was talking about the issue of women's bodies. This is an issue that I've had some really interesting convos with people who are not at all religious.
many people in the Bible were naked in public , including sameul, saul , and Isaiah walked around preaching naked for 3 years . This proves that it is not sinful, especially since God is the one that commanded them to do so .also, the lack of scripture that says it is a sin is also evidence .being naked is a sign of destitution and that is why it brings shame .ALso, when men of God would repent they would rip their clothes off, and if it was a sin, it wouldnt make sense to sin to show repentance
The words that are translated as "naked" don't necessarily mean "nude" in every instance. That's why if you notice, I only referred to instances that were clearly referring to exposure certain body parts.
"Naked" can also be used to refer to discarding an outer graments - which I believe is the case in the cases with Shaul and Isaiah.
Also, people didn't "rip their clothes OFFf" when repentant - they ripped (tore) their clothes. hence the saying, "rend your hearts not your garments".
that man was naked when Jesus was taken prisoner. people say that in those times baptisms were done nude. whether thats true or not, that guy was naked for some reason. Also "see the nakedness" can mean to have sexual relations with, as in the list of "thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of our uncles wife" etc. im not saying "hey, lets all walk around naked", but i dont think the Bible ever says its a sin, but the contrary, many verses would seemingly insinuate that it isnt
If true - it would be very interesting that baptisms were done in the nude. But as baptism is a post-biblical innovation anyway, it doesn't have any bearing on the scriptural teaching on nudity. Same is the case with the naked boy in the arrest scene in the NT.
The Bible never says that being naked or seeing someone naked is a sin in itself . IF being naked or seeing someone naked was a sin, then doctors would be sinning too aswell as the people in the Bible that were naked in public and many times as commanded by God . The Bible does however attribute the connotation of "shame" to being naked as it is a sign of destitution, much like poverty, hunger, etc. also, being "shamed" isnt a sin either. We cannot make laws of God where HE didnt,
Shem and Japhethe covered their mother. Lev 18:7 and 8. Ham had seen his mother naked, thus why Noah was outraged when he woke up - thus he was not raped.
rickbgp38 2 years ago
Why do people take "nakedness" out of context concerning Ham? If Shem and Japhethe walked "backwards' to COVER thieri father it clearly means 'he was naked?" It has nothing to do with a sexual act between woman or man. The lust of the mind is a dangerous thing! And why would anybody believe anything from the talmud where they clearly hate us?
v8diva 2 years ago
Good video.
omedyashar 3 years ago
In the link you provided about the "Curse of Ham" -- first of all... as you've probably noticed... the curse was in reference to K'na'an, one of Ham's sons. Why would Ham's son be cursed for his father's bad actions? I like the opinion that there was no "power" in the words of Noah other than mere perception / intuition due to how he expected Ham's sons would be likely influenced by their father's assumed immoral nature.
omedyashar 3 years ago
But more importantly, regarding the criticism on the Talmud in the link you provided... I agree with the guy that disagreement with an opinion in the Talmud doesn't necessarily imply anti-semitism.... however, the guy's comments do contain some lack of information.
He mentions that the Biblical text doesn't say that Ham had relations with his dad, or whatever else. 1st -- that was just one opinion mentioned in the Talmud. Other opinions are given... but on top of that....
omedyashar 3 years ago
the guy's ignorance of hebrew prevents him from knowing that the word "nakedness" in Hebrew is also at times used as an idiom for intercourse. Upon realizing this, it should then be more understanding as to why one might have the opinion that Ham raped his father while he was drunk. The term "saw" could mean perceived or knew, as is the case elsewhere in the Bible. And we know that "to know" in Hebrew is also sometimes used as an idiom for relations in Hebrew.
omedyashar 3 years ago
But all this aside, the Talmud does not present these opinions as binding beliefs. It does not require that a person side with any one of these opinions.
omedyashar 3 years ago
...and supposing that Ham really did rape his father, or whatever else, ...and supposing that sub-saharan africans are dark as a result of some change connected to this (which I'm not convinced of)... so what? That's nto a reason to hate African peoples. The Torah AND the Talmud give many more records of the bad deeds of JEWISH / ISRAELITE peoples... and those are their own ancestors. It shouldn't be considered a matter of racism. it should be considered [errant?] opinion about the past.
omedyashar 3 years ago
Hey Yosef. Thanks for these comments man. I'm glad you've addressed the issue because you're probably the one person I would wish to offer some thoughts form a rabbinic perspective.
By the way, that was me who made that video! It was qnearly a year ago and if I had made it now, I would done it quite differently - more asking questions rather than making statements about the rabbis. I was in a different place then.
Torahrevival 3 years ago
There is a kabbalistic interpretation of genesis that, when read, claims the garden of eden, and adam and eve were never physical beings, and that the "coats of skin" refer to physical bodies that The Holy One gave the humans as they descended into materiality.
ThornUvDaath777 3 years ago
Even when the remez [hinted meaning] or the derash [allegorical meaning] is correct, it doesn't nullify the plain meaning of the text, unless the plain meaning itself is metaphorical or idiomatic.
omedyashar 3 years ago
I know. Perhaps it is. Perhaps it isn't.
ThornUvDaath777 3 years ago
Nakedness means exposed to sin. Stripped from your heavenly glory. Sin makes cowards of men. Innocent blood needed to be shed to cover Adam and Eve's nakedness because of sin.
It's the opposite of being clothed in righteousness. Almost everything can be taken literally as well as spiritually.
Ramohog 3 years ago
actually its because i HAVE studied that i know the word "chagowr" means "loin covering" . And to your other point, do i really need to build a list of times men of God were naked in public and it wasnt sinful ? how many are necessary to prove it isnt a sin? in fact the burden of proof is on you to show me where teh BIble says nudity is a sin. good luck with that
pianokid100 3 years ago
first, the BIble only specifics certain nudity not allowed to be uncovered, and thats besides the fact that it seems to be referring to having sexual relations . So a verse taht forbidsd sexual relations between a man and his fathers wife, isnt a ban on nudity . and even if it were literal nudity it spoke of, it only means you cant see these peoples nudity. Why would the Bible give you a list of nudity not to look at if ALL of it was a sin ? why not just say that ? notice all the sense im making
pianokid100 3 years ago
is there something wrong with being a rude jerk ? yes . but can i say that its a sin to be rude? no . Isaiah walked and preached naked for 3 years .are you saying isaiah sinned ?
pianokid100 3 years ago
also, nakedness did mean nakedness. for example, notice how eve made a "loin covering" to cover her nakedness . like i said, im not telling people to walk around naked, but if someone asks me "does the Bible say that being naked or seeing someone naked is a sin?" i cant say yes
pianokid100 3 years ago
no, i just dont believe things the Bible never says. christians have no problem doing that however . ALso, your misuse of the word "modest" is an example. The Bibel says to dress modestly and Christians use this to say "cover up, dont show cleavage", when in fact "modest" has nothing to do with that . it means "a: placing a moderate estimate on one's abilities or worth b: neither bold nor self-assertive : tending toward diffidence". further evidence is that it adds "not with costly attire"
pianokid100 3 years ago
A very interesting place to begin! Interesting indeed. I think you make a very good biblical case. I don't think you are "making laws of God where he didn't", but rather using the word of Deity and looking at the actions of Deity and his people to uncover evidences of principles that affect us all, even if they were not codified like the Israeli Torah covenant. A very good thought-provoking start.
Hesediah 3 years ago
Thanks. It was very accidental though. I wasn'pt at all planning on starting on this issue. But I was watching another video by someone who was talking about the issue of women's bodies. This is an issue that I've had some really interesting convos with people who are not at all religious.
Torahrevival 3 years ago
many people in the Bible were naked in public , including sameul, saul , and Isaiah walked around preaching naked for 3 years . This proves that it is not sinful, especially since God is the one that commanded them to do so .also, the lack of scripture that says it is a sin is also evidence .being naked is a sign of destitution and that is why it brings shame .ALso, when men of God would repent they would rip their clothes off, and if it was a sin, it wouldnt make sense to sin to show repentance
pianokid100 3 years ago
The words that are translated as "naked" don't necessarily mean "nude" in every instance. That's why if you notice, I only referred to instances that were clearly referring to exposure certain body parts.
"Naked" can also be used to refer to discarding an outer graments - which I believe is the case in the cases with Shaul and Isaiah.
Also, people didn't "rip their clothes OFFf" when repentant - they ripped (tore) their clothes. hence the saying, "rend your hearts not your garments".
Torahrevival 3 years ago
that man was naked when Jesus was taken prisoner. people say that in those times baptisms were done nude. whether thats true or not, that guy was naked for some reason. Also "see the nakedness" can mean to have sexual relations with, as in the list of "thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of our uncles wife" etc. im not saying "hey, lets all walk around naked", but i dont think the Bible ever says its a sin, but the contrary, many verses would seemingly insinuate that it isnt
pianokid100 3 years ago
If true - it would be very interesting that baptisms were done in the nude. But as baptism is a post-biblical innovation anyway, it doesn't have any bearing on the scriptural teaching on nudity. Same is the case with the naked boy in the arrest scene in the NT.
Torahrevival 3 years ago
The Bible never says that being naked or seeing someone naked is a sin in itself . IF being naked or seeing someone naked was a sin, then doctors would be sinning too aswell as the people in the Bible that were naked in public and many times as commanded by God . The Bible does however attribute the connotation of "shame" to being naked as it is a sign of destitution, much like poverty, hunger, etc. also, being "shamed" isnt a sin either. We cannot make laws of God where HE didnt,
pianokid100 3 years ago
Ok Torah-the Law of Creator say something different my mistake :D
Exo 18:7-17, but it is not ok for us to wlk naked.
bojann79 3 years ago
those verses dont have anything to do with nakedness. did you post the wrong ref ?
pianokid100 3 years ago
Yes Melech, showing our nakedness in public are sin according to Torah.
Shalom
bojann79 3 years ago
You seem to be on a journey, you have moved away fropm Paul, "Jesus" and it is now apparent the New Testament.
Is the journey leading to HaShem and His 613 commandments or Noahide Commandments or both?
I wish you well and may you find theTRUTH and be FREE.
12CIFOM 3 years ago
Thanks man
Torahrevival 3 years ago