Genesis · Chapter 9

V. 1. And God blessed Noah and his sons-He assured them of his good-will to them, and his gracious intentions concerning them. The first blessing is here renewed,

Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and repeated, Genesis 9:7; for the race of mankind was as it were to begin again. By virtue of this blessing mankind was to be both multiplied and perpetuated upon earth; so that in a little time all the habitable parts of the earth should be more or less inhabited; and tho’ one generation should pass away, yet another generation should come, so that the stream of the human race should be supplied with a constant succession, and run parallel with the current of time, ‘till both be swallowed up in the ocean of eternity.

Verse 1. God blessed Noah] Even the increase of families, which appears to depend on merely natural means, and sometimes fortuitous circumstances, is all of God. It is by his power and wisdom that the human being is formed, and it is by his providence alone that man is supported and preserved.

Verse 1. God blessed Noah and his sons — He assured them of his good-will to them, and his gracious intentions concerning them. The first blessing is here renewed, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and repeated, verse 7; for the race of mankind was, as it were, to begin again. By virtue of this blessing mankind were to be both multiplied and perpetuated upon earth; so that in a little time all the habitable parts of the earth should be more or less inhabited; and though one generation should pass away, yet another generation should come, so that the stream of the human race should be supplied with a constant succession, and run parallel with the current of time, till both should be swallowed up in the ocean of eternity.

THE COVENANT WITH NOAH, 1-17.

1. God blessed Noah — Noah, as the second founder of the race, receives a renewal of the blessing and the promise given to Adam, (Genesis 1:28, 29,) but modified by the altered relations which had been introduced by sin. Had man never fallen, the beasts of the field would willingly and naturally have owned his dominion; but the fallen king must struggle for his sceptre, and can govern only by fear and dread. Verse 2.

V. 2. He grants them power over the inferior creatures. He grants,

1. A title to them; into your hands they are delivered-For your use and benefit.

2. A dominion over them, without which the title would avail little; The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast-This revives a former grant, Genesis 1:28, only with this difference, that man in innocency ruled by love, fallen man rules by fear. And thus far we have still the benefit of it,

1. That those creatures which are any way useful to us are reclaimed, and we use them either for service or food, or both, as they are capable.

2. Those creatures that are any way hurtful to us are restrained; so that tho’ now and then man may be hurt by some of them, yet they do not combine together to rise up in rebellion against man.

Verse 2. The fear of you and the dread, &c.] Prior to the fall, man ruled the inferior animals by love and kindness, for then gentleness and docility were their principal characteristics. After the fall, untractableness, with savage ferocity, prevailed among almost all orders of the brute creation; enmity to man seems particularly to prevail; and had not God in his mercy impressed their minds with the fear and terror of man, so that some submit to his will while others flee from his residence, the human race would long ere this have been totally destroyed by the beasts of the field. Did the horse know his own strength, and the weakness of the miserable wretch who unmercifully rides, drives, whips, goads, and oppresses him, would he not with one stroke of his hoof destroy his tyrant possessor? But while God hides these things from him he impresses his mind with the fear of his owner, so that either by cheerful or sullen submission he is trained up for, and employed in, the most useful and important purposes; and even willingly submits, when tortured for the sport and amusement of his more bruitish oppressor. Tigers, wolves, lions, and hyænas, the determinate foes of man, incapable of being tamed or domesticated, flee, through the principle of terror, from the dwelling of man, and thus he is providentially safe. Hence, by fear and by dread man rules every beast of the earth, every fowl of the air, and every fish of the sea. How wise and gracious is this order of the Divine providence! and with what thankfulness should it be considered by every human being!

THE COVENANT WITH NOAH, 1-17.

1. God blessed Noah — Noah, as the second founder of the race, receives a renewal of the blessing and the promise given to Adam, (Genesis 1:28, 29,) but modified by the altered relations which had been introduced by sin. Had man never fallen, the beasts of the field would willingly and naturally have owned his dominion; but the fallen king must struggle for his sceptre, and can govern only by fear and dread. Verse 2.

V. 3. Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you-Hitherto man had been confined to feed only upon the products of the earth, fruits, herbs and roots, and all sorts of corn and milk; so was the first grant, Genesis 1:29. But the flood having perhaps washed away much of the virtue of the earth, and so rendered its fruits less pleasing, and less nourishing, God now enlarged the grant, and allowed man to eat flesh, which perhaps man himself never thought of ‘till now. The precepts and provisos of this charter are no less kind and gracious, and instances of God’s good-will to man. The Jewish doctors speak so often of the seven precepts of Noah, or of the sons of Noah, which they say were to be observed by all nations, that it may not be amiss to set them down. The first against the worship of idols. The second against blasphemy, and requiring to bless the name of God. The third against murder. The fourth against incest and all uncleanness. The fifth against theft and rapine. The sixth requiring the administration of justice. The seventh against eating flesh with the life. These the Jews required the observation of, from the proselytes of the gate. But the precepts here given, all concern the life of man. Man must not prejudice his own life by eating that food which is unwholsome, and prejudicial to his health.

Verse 3. Every moving thing-shall be meat] There is no positive evidence that animal food was ever used before the flood. Noah had the first grant of this kind, and it has been continued to all his posterity ever since. It is not likely that this grant would have been now made if some extraordinary alteration had not taken place in the vegetable world, so as to render its productions less nutritive than they were before; and probably such a change in the constitution of man as to render a grosser and higher diet necessary. We may therefore safely infer that the earth was less productive after the flood than it was before, and that the human constitution was greatly impaired by the alterations which had taken place through the whole economy of nature. Morbid debility, induced by an often unfriendly state of the atmosphere, with sore and long-continued labour, would necessarily require a higher nutriment than vegetables could supply. That this was the case appears sufficiently clear from the grant of animal food, which, had it not been indispensably necessary, had not been made. That the constitution of man was then much altered appears in the greatly contracted lives of the postdiluvians; yet from the deluge to the day of Abraham the lives of several of the patriarchs amounted to some hundreds of years; but this was the effect of a peculiar providence, that the new world might be the more speedily repeopled.

Verse 3. Every moving thing — Which is wholesome and fit for food, shall be meat for you: That liveth — This may be added to exclude the use of those creatures which died of themselves, or were killed by wild beasts. These, which were afterward expressly forbidden to be eaten, (see Exodus 22:31, Leviticus 22:8,) may here be forbidden implicitly. Hitherto man had been confined to feed only upon the products of the earth, fruits, herbs, and roots, and all sorts of corn and milk; such was the first grant, Genesis 1:29. But the flood having perhaps washed away much of the virtue of the earth, and so rendered its fruits less pleasing, and less nourishing, God now enlarged the grant, and allowed man to eat flesh, which perhaps man himself never thought of till now. The Jewish doctors speak so often of the seven precepts of Noah, which they say were to be observed by all nations, that it may not be amiss to set them down here. The first was against the worship of idols: the second against blasphemy; and requires to bless the name of God: the third against murder: the fourth against incest and all uncleanness: the fifth against theft and rapine: the sixth required the administration of justice: the seventh was against eating flesh with life. The Jews required the observation of these from the proselytes of the gate. But the precepts here given, all concern the life of man. Man must not prejudice his own life by eating that food which is unwholesome and prejudicial to his health.

3. Meat for you — Animal food is here granted to man. It may have been used before, but is now for the first time expressly permitted. Man is permitted freely to eat whatever he desires in the vegetable and animal creation.

V. 4. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat-Blood made atonement for the soul, Leviticus 17:11. The life of the sacrifice was accepted for the life of the sinner. Blood must not be looked upon as a common thing, but must be poured out before the Lord, 2 Samuel 23:16. Mr. Henry indeed has a strange conceit, That this is only a prohibition to eat flesh. This does such apparent violence to the text, that to mention it, is sufficient.

Verse 4. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood] Though animal food was granted, yet the blood was most solemnly forbidden, because it was the life of the beast, and this life was to be offered to God as an atonement for sin. Hence the blood was ever held sacred, because it was the grand instrument of expiation, and because it was typical of that blood by which we enter into the holiest. 1. Before the deluge it was not eaten, because animal food was not in use. 2. After the deluge it was prohibited, as we find above; and, being one of the seven Noahic precepts, it was not eaten previously to the publication of the Mosaic law. 3. At the giving of the law, and at several times during the ministry of Moses, the prohibition was most solemnly, and with awful penalties renewed. Hence we may rest assured that no blood was eaten previously to the Christian era, nor indeed ever since by the Jewish people. 4. That the prohibition has been renewed under the Christian dispensation, can admit of little doubt by any man who dispassionately reads Acts 15:20, 29; 21:25, where even the Gentile converts are charged to abstain from it on the authority, not only of the apostles, but of the Holy Ghost, who gave them there and then especial direction concerning this point; see Acts 15:28; not for fear of stumbling the converted Jews, the gloss of theologians, but because it was one twn epanagkev toutwn, of those necessary points, from the burden (barov) of obedience to which they could not be excused. 5. This command is still scrupulously obeyed by the oriental Christians, and by the whole Greek Church; and why? because the reasons still subsist. No blood was eaten under the law, because it pointed out the blood that was to be shed for the sin of the world; and under the Gospel it should not be eaten, because it should ever be considered as representing the blood which has been shed for the remission of sins. If the eaters of blood in general knew that it affords a very crude, almost indigestible, and unwholesome ailment, they certainly would not on these physical reasons, leaving moral considerations out of the question, be so much attached to the consumption of that from which they could expect no wholesome nutriment, and which, to render it even pleasing to the palate, requires all the skill of the cook. See Leviticus 17:10.

Verse 4. But flesh with the blood thereof shall ye not eat — One meaning of this may be, Ye shall not cut off, tear away, or take any member or part of any creature for your food, while it is yet alive; but ye shall first spill its blood, and thereby put it to death in the way most easy to it. This is the sense which the Jews give the words, and, thus understood, they contain a prohibition of all cruelty toward those animals which are killed for food. And the prohibition, in this point of view, was not unnecessary, the practice here condemned being not unusual in ancient nor even in modern times, in many parts of the East. The principal meaning, however, of the passage, is to prohibit the eating of blood in any way, the eating of which seems to have been forbidden especially for two reasons: 1st, To be a token to mankind in all ages, that they would have had no right to take the life of any animal for food, if God had not given them that right, and who, therefore, to remind them of it, and impress it on their minds in all generations, denied them the use of blood, and required it to be spilled upon the ground: 2d: In honour of the blood of atonement, Leviticus 17:11, 12. The life of the sacrifice was accepted for the life of the sinner, and blood made atonement for the soul, and therefore must not be looked upon as a common thing, but must be poured out before the Lord, 2 Samuel 23:16. And it ought to be observed, that this prohibition of eating blood, given to Noah and all his posterity, and repeated to the Israelites, in a most solemn manner, under the Mosaic dispensation, has never been revoked, but, on the contrary, has been confirmed under the New Testament, Acts 15.; and thereby made of perpetual obligation.

Verse 4. But—the blood ye shall not eat. This prohibition of blood is repeated. Leviticus 17. Deuteronomy 12. And being connected with murder in the following verse, we are taught to abstain from imitating the ferocity of wild beasts, which lick the blood of their prey. Blood is also the life of the sacrifices offered up for sin; and our having been redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, the apostles have forbidden the use of blood to christians. Acts 15:29. A third reason assigned by Moses is, that we must not join in the sacrifice of devils. David says of idolaters, Their drink-offerings of blood will I not offer. The huge idol of Juggernaut in India is said to smile when they offer him a libation of human blood. The South-sea islanders drink the blood of enemies slain in battle. These are strong reasons which justify the precept to abstain from blood.

4. Flesh with the life thereof — Literally, Only flesh in its life, its blood, ye shall not eat — a humane restriction, the necessity of which is seen in the barbarous and gluttonous cruelty of some heathen nations. The animal is not to be used for food until life has become wholly extinct. The restriction forbidding the eating or cooking of an animal while capable of suffering pain is in that benevolent spirit which pervades all the Bible, and has a care for the sparrow that falls. Another reason for this prohibition is, that blood is considered as typical of expiation and atonement. This is assigned in the Mosaic law, (Leviticus 17:10, 11,) “for the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls.” By this legislation the way was prepared for the reception of the great gospel doctrine that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins, and that Christ is the propitiation for our sins.

V. 5. And surely your blood of your lives will I require-Our own lives are not so our own, that we may quit them at our own pleasure; but they are God’s, and we must resign them at his pleasure. If we any way hasten our own deaths, we are accountable to God for it. Yea, At the hand of every beast will I require it-To shew how tender God was of the life of man, he will have the beast put to death that kills a man. This was confirmed by the law of Moses, Exodus 21:28, and it would not be unsafe to observe it still.

And at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the life of a man-I will avenge the blood of the murdered upon the murderer. When God requires the life of a man at the hand of him that took it away unjustly, he cannot render that, and therefore must render his own in lieu of it, which is the only way left of making restitution.

Verse 5. Surely your blood—will I require; at the hand of every beast] This is very obscure, but if taken literally it seems to be an awful warning against cruelty to the brute creation; and from it we may conclude that horse-racers, hare-hunters, bull-baiters, and cock-fighters shall be obliged to give an account to God for every creature they have wantonly destroyed. Instead of hyj chaiyah, “beast,” the Samaritan reads [Sam. Yod Kaph] chai, “living,” any “living creature or person;” this makes a very good sense, and equally forbids cruelty either to men or brutes.

Verse 5. And surely your blood of your lives will I require — The sense is, If I am thus careful of the blood of beasts, be assured I will be much more solicitous for the blood of men, when it shall be shed by unjust and violent hands. Our own lives are not so our own that we may quit them at our own pleasure; but they are God’s, and we must resign them at his pleasure. If we any way hasten our own deaths, we are accountable to God for it. Yea, At the hand of every beast will I require it — To show how tender God was of the life of man, he will have the beast put to death that kills a man. This was confirmed by the law of Moses, Exodus 21:28, and it would not be improper to observe it still. And at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the life of man — I will avenge the blood of the murdered upon the murderer. When God requires the life of a man at the hand of him that took it away unjustly, as he cannot render that, therefore he must render his own in lieu of it, which is the only way he hath of making restitution.

5. And surely — In the original, verses 4 and 5 both commence with the particle, Ëa, except, or but, which introduces two stringent prohibitions supplementary to the liberty granted in verses 2 and 3. 1) The life, or blood of the animal, is never to be used as food. 2) The life of man is to be held sacred, Blood of your lives — Rather Your blood, for your lives, (in requital for them,) will I require, (seek for, demand.) A command sternly guarding the life of man. At the hand of every beast — Beasts should be killed that endanger the life of man, (Exodus 21:28,) for the animal creation exists for man. By this precept the sacredness of human life is impressively declared. At the hand of every man’s brother — The brotherhood of man is the foundation of this precept. The beast is man’s servant — made for him — but man, wherever met, of whatever race or condition, is his brother. How completely this strikes at the root of national pride, at the aristocracy of family or race! Man’s life is to be sacred simply because he is a man, a brother, God’s image. The Noachian precept is the germ of the Pauline declaration uttered in the ears of the proud Athenians, amid the very glories of Greek civilization, God “hath made of one blood all nations of men.” Acts 17:26.

V. 6. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood-Whether upon a sudden provocation, or premeditated, (for rash anger is heart-murder as well as malice prepense, Matthew 5:21,22),

by man shall his blood be shed-That is, by the magistrate, or whoever is appointed to be the avenger of blood. Before the flood, as it should seem by the story of Cain, God took the punishment of murder into his own hands; but now he committed this judgment to men, to masters of families at first, and afterwards to the heads of countries.

For in the image of God made he man-Man is a creature dear to his Creator, and therefore ought to be so to us; God put honour upon him, let us not then put contempt upon him. Such remains of God’s image are still even upon fallen man, that he who unjustly kills a man, defaceth the image of God, and doth dishonour to him.

Verse 6. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood] Hence it appears that whoever kills a man, unless unwittingly, as the Scripture expresses it, shall forfeit his own life.

A man is accused of the crime of murder; of this crime he is guilty or he is not: if he be guilty of murder he should die; if not, let him be punished according to the demerit of his crime; but for no offence but murder should he lose his life. Taking away the life of another is the highest offence that can be committed against the individual, and against society; and the highest punishment that a man can suffer for such a crime is the loss of his own life. As punishment should be ever proportioned to crimes, so the highest punishment due to the highest crime should not be inflicted for a minor offence. The law of God and the eternal dictates of reason say, that if a man kill another, the loss of his own life is at once the highest penalty he can pay, and an equivalent for his offence as far as civil society is concerned. If the death of the murderer be the highest penalty he can pay for the murder he has committed, then the infliction of this punishment for any minor offence is injustice and cruelty; and serves only to confound the claims of justice, the different degrees of moral turpitude and vice, and to render the profligate desperate: hence the adage so frequent among almost every order of delinquents, “It is as good to be hanged for a sheep as a lamb;” which at once marks their desperation, and the injustice of those penal laws which inflict the highest punishment for almost every species of crime. When shall a wise and judicious legislature see the absurdity and injustice of inflicting the punishment of death for stealing a sheep or a horse, forging a twenty shillings’ note, and MURDERING A MAN; when the latter, in its moral turpitude and ruinous consequences, infinitely exceeds the others?* {* On this head the doctor’s pious wish has been realized since this paragraph was written-PUBLISHERS}

Verse 6. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood — Whether upon a sudden provocation, or premeditated, (for rash anger is heart-murder, as well as malice prepense, Matthew 5:21, 22,) by man shall his blood be shed — That is, by the magistrate, or whoever is appointed to be the avenger of blood. Before the flood, as it should seem by the story of Cain, God took the punishment of murder into his own hands; but now he committed this judgment to men, to masters of families at first, and afterward to the heads of countries. For in the image of God made he man — Man is a creature dear to his Creator, and, therefore, ought to be so to us: God put honour upon him, let us not then put contempt upon him. Such remains of God’s image are still even upon fallen man, that he who unjustly kills a man, defaceth the image of God, and doth dishonour to him. And what then shall we say of those who commit wilful and deliberate murder in duels? And what shall we say of the magistracy in any country that does not suppress this diabolical practice?

6. Whoso sheddeth — The command is here repeated and enforced more explicitly. The beast that endangered human life should be slain, (verse 5;) so it shall be man’s duty to take the life of the murderer, for murder is a crime against the divine majesty, which is imaged in man. These words are the divinely granted charter of civil government. The means by which this precept is to be carried out in the details of human government are left to human wisdom and experience, but man is here authorized and commanded to form institutions for the protection and welfare of society, and to defend them, if need be, at the sacrifice of life. Civil government is of God; “The powers that be are ordained of God.” Romans 13:1. So the heathens regarded the magistrate as God’s vicegerent. (Iliad, 1:239.) Luther remarks: “If God here grants to man the power over life and death, much more does he also grant him power over inferior things, such as fortune, family, wife, children, servants, lands. God intends that all these should be placed under the authority of certain men, whose duty is to punish the guilty.” The rulers, as God’s representatives, were designated Elohim among the Hebrews. Psalm 82:1. “He judgeth among the Elohim” — magistrates. From these commands the Jewish synagogue drew what they styled the seven Noachic precepts, which were obligatory upon all proselytes. These are seven prohibitions forbidding, 1) idolatry, 2) blasphemy, 3) murder, 4) incest, 5) theft, 6) eating blood, 7) disobedience to magistrates. Civil government has its authority, not from expediency, not from any primeval social compact, but from the ordinance of God. It is not founded on the shifting sands of popular opinion, but on the eternal rock of the divine justice. Obedience to magistrates is enjoined, not because of its expediency, not because of a social covenant, but because “whosoever resisteth the power, (of the magistrate,) resisteth the ordinance of God.” Romans 13:2. For in the image of God made he man — This is the reason for the stern and stringent command. He who slays a man slays God’s image, and God demands blood for blood. The murderer’s life is forfeited, and it is not only the right, but the duty, of the magistrate, who “bears the sword,” to fulfil the ordinance of God. This was the universal sentiment, or rather instinct, of antiquity, as shown in heathen poetry and law. This, let it be noted, is not a Mosaic precept given to the Hebrew people, but one enjoined upon the race as it goes forth from its cradle upon the renewed earth. Hence in the infancy of society, before judicial processes became regular and methodical, those nearest the scene of a murder felt called upon to avenge it. This is the origin of the institution of Goelism, which, in the patriarchal times, provided for the punishment of the murderer. By the Goel (lawg) is to be understood the nearest relative of the murdered man, whose duty it was to avenge his death, and who is, therefore, called “the avenger,” or rather, the “redeemer, of blood;” that is, one who pays for blood with blood. Goel thus came to mean simply the nearest blood relative. Ruth 4:1, 6, 8, etc. Hence the word is transferred, with great tenderness and power, to the divine Redeemer, the Goel of the race. Christ is our nearest kinsman, our elder brother, who redeems us by giving blood for blood, and who will avenge our spiritual murder upon Satan, that archetypal murderer in the spiritual world. Hebrews 2:14.

THE COVENANT WITH NOAH, 1-17.

1. God blessed Noah — Noah, as the second founder of the race, receives a renewal of the blessing and the promise given to Adam, (Genesis 1:28, 29,) but modified by the altered relations which had been introduced by sin. Had man never fallen, the beasts of the field would willingly and naturally have owned his dominion; but the fallen king must struggle for his sceptre, and can govern only by fear and dread. Verse 2.

8. God spake unto Noah — The Elohistic narrative here describes more fully the covenant with Noah, briefly mentioned before in the Jehovistic narrative. Genesis 8:20-22. The covenant promised (Genesis 6:18) is now consummated. But there is no inconsistency, as Knobel and others have alleged, between the two narratives. They may have been appropriated by the author of Genesis from different ancient documents, but, if so, the compiler saw, as every candid reader must now see, that these verses (8-17) are supplementary, and supply most interesting information not previously given.

V. 9. We have here the general establishment of God’s covenant with this new world, and the extent of that covenant.

Verse 9. Behold, I establish my covenant, &c. — We have here the general establishment of God’s covenant with this new world, and the extent of that covenant.

THE COVENANT WITH NOAH, 1-17.

1. God blessed Noah — Noah, as the second founder of the race, receives a renewal of the blessing and the promise given to Adam, (Genesis 1:28, 29,) but modified by the altered relations which had been introduced by sin. Had man never fallen, the beasts of the field would willingly and naturally have owned his dominion; but the fallen king must struggle for his sceptre, and can govern only by fear and dread. Verse 2.

10. With every living creature — The covenant is made, first, with all creatures which went forth from the ark, and then, with all flesh; “with every living creature… from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth.” In the words which relate the establishment of the covenant with the animal creation, Keil remarks, “The prepositions are accumulated, first, b, embracing the whole, then the partitive, ˆm, restricting the enumeration to those which went out of the ark, and, lastly, l, with regard to extending it again to every individual.”

V. 11. There shall not any more be a flood-God had drowned the world once, and still it is as provoking as ever; yet he will never drown it any more, for he deals not with us according to our sins. This promise of God keeps the sea and clouds in their decreed place, and sets them gates and bars, Hitherto they shall come, Job 38:10,11. If the sea should flow but for a few days, as it doth twice every day for a few hours, what desolations would it make? So would the clouds, if such showers as we have sometimes seen, were continued long. But God by flowing seas, and sweeping rains, shews what he could do in wrath; and yet by preserving the earth from being deluged between both, shews what he can do in mercy, and will do in truth.

Verse 11. There shall not any more be a flood — God had drowned the world once, and still it is as provoking as ever; yet he will never drown it any more, for he deals not with us according to our sins. This promise of God keeps the sea and clouds in their decreed places, and “sets them gates and bars: Hitherto they shall come,” Job 38:10, 11. If the sea should flow but for a few days, as it doth twice every day for a few hours, what desolations would it make! So would the clouds, if such showers as we have sometimes seen, were continued long. But God, by flowing seas and sweeping rains, shows what he could do in wrath; and yet by preserving the earth from being deluged between both, shows what he can do in mercy, and will do in truth.

THE COVENANT WITH NOAH, 1-17.

1. God blessed Noah — Noah, as the second founder of the race, receives a renewal of the blessing and the promise given to Adam, (Genesis 1:28, 29,) but modified by the altered relations which had been introduced by sin. Had man never fallen, the beasts of the field would willingly and naturally have owned his dominion; but the fallen king must struggle for his sceptre, and can govern only by fear and dread. Verse 2.

THE COVENANT WITH NOAH, 1-17.

1. God blessed Noah — Noah, as the second founder of the race, receives a renewal of the blessing and the promise given to Adam, (Genesis 1:28, 29,) but modified by the altered relations which had been introduced by sin. Had man never fallen, the beasts of the field would willingly and naturally have owned his dominion; but the fallen king must struggle for his sceptre, and can govern only by fear and dread. Verse 2.

V. 13. I set my bow in the clouds-The rainbow, ‘tis likely was seen in the clouds before, but was never a seal of the covenant ‘till now. Now, concerning this seal of the covenant, observe, (1.) This seal is affixed with repeated assurances of the truth of that promise, which it was designed to be the ratification of; I do set my bow in the cloud, Genesis 9:13. It shall be seen in the cloud, Genesis 9:14. and it shall be a token of the covenant, Genesis 9:12,13. And I will remember my covenant, that the waters shall no more become a flood, Genesis 9:15. Nay, as if the eternal Mind needed a memorandum, I will look upon it that I may remember the everlasting covenant, Genesis 9:16. (2.) The rainbow appears when the clouds are most disposed to wet; when we have most reason to fear the rain prevailing, God shews this seal of the promise that it shall not prevail. (3.) The rainbow appears when one part of the sky is clear, which imitates mercy remembered in the midst of wrath, and the clouds are hemmed as it were with the rainbow, that it may not overspread the heavens, for the bow is coloured rain, or the edges of a cloud gilded. As God looks upon the bow that he may remember the covenant, so should we, that we also may be ever mindful of the covenant with faith and thankfulness.

Verse 13. I do set my bow in the cloud] On the origin and nature of the rainbow there had been a great variety of conjectures, till Anthony de Dominis, bishop of Spalatro, in a treatise of his published by Bartholus in 1611, partly suggested the true cause of this phenomenon, which was afterwards fully explained and demonstrated by Sir Isaac Newton. To enter into this subject here in detail would be improper; and therefore the less informed reader must have recourse to treatises on Optics for its full explanation. To readers in general it may be sufficient to say that the rainbow is a mere natural effect of a natural cause: 1. It is never seen but in showery weather. 2. Nor then unless the sun shines. 3. It never appears in any part of the heavens but in that opposite to the sun. 4. It never appears greater than a semicircle, but often much less. 5. It is always double, there being what is called the superior and inferior, or primary and secondary rainbow. 6. These bows exhibit the seven prismatic colours, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet. 7. The whole of this phenomenon depends on the rays of the sun falling on spherical drops of water, and being in their passage through them, refracted and reflected. The formation of the primary and secondary rainbow depends on the two following propositions; 1. When the sun shines on the drops of rain as they are falling, the rays that come from those drops to the eye of the spectator, after ONE reflection and TWO refractions, produce the primary rainbow. 2. When the sun shines on the drops of rain as they are falling, the rays that come from those drops to the eye of the spectator after TWO reflections and TWO refractions, produce the secondary rainbow. The illustration of these propositions must be sought in treatises on Optics, assisted by plates. From the well-known cause of this phenomenon It cannot be rationally supposed that there was no rainbow in the heavens before the time mentioned in the text, for as the rainbow is the natural effect of the sun’s rays falling on drops of water, and of their being refracted and reflected by them, it must have appeared at different times from the creation of the sun and the atmosphere. Nor does the text intimate that the bow was now created for a sign to Noah and his posterity; but that what was formerly created, or rather that which was the necessary effect, in certain cases, of the creation of the sun and atmosphere, should now be considered by them as an unfailing token of their continual preservation from the waters of a deluge; therefore the text speaks of what had already been done, and not of what was now done, yttn ytcq kashti nathatti, “My bow I have given, or put in the cloud;” as if he said: As surely as the rainbow is a necessary effect of sunshine in rain, and must continue such as long as the sun and atmosphere endure, so surely shall this earth be preserved from destruction by water; and its preservation shall be as necessary an effect of my promise as the rainbow is of the shining of the sun during a shower of rain.

Verse 13. I set my bow in the clouds — The rainbow, it is likely, was seen in the clouds before, but was never a seal of the covenant till now. Now, observe, 1st, This seal is affixed with repeated assurances of the truth of that promise, which it was designed to be the ratification of; I do set my bow in the cloud, verse 13. It shall be seen in the cloud, verse 14, and it shall be a token of the covenant, verses 12, 13. And I will remember my covenant, that the waters shall no more become a flood, verse 15. Nay, as if the Eternal Mind needed a memorandum, I will look upon it that I may remember the everlasting covenant, verse 16. 2d, The rainbow appears when the clouds are most disposed to wet; when we have most reason to fear the rain prevailing, God shows this seal of the promise that it shall not prevail. 3d, The rainbow appears when one part of the sky is clear, which intimates mercy remembered in the midst of wrath, and the clouds are hemmed, as it were, with the rainbow, that they may not overspread the heavens; for the bow is coloured rain, or the edges of a cloud gilded. As God looks upon the bow that he may remember the covenant, so should we, that we also may be ever mindful of the covenant with faith and thankfulness.

Ver. 13. My bow, the iris, the rainbow. In Mr. Maurice’s history of Indostan, we find a quotation from the mythology of the Chinese, in which they make FOHI, their deity, to proceed from a rainbow. Here is a plain reference to the iris; the symbol of the Noahical covenant. By consequence, the boasted antiquity of Chinese and Egyptian chronology above that of Moses could be but years of moons, as Diodorus Siculus has hinted, and as the American Indians still reckon time.

The rainbow is seen in the drops of the falling shower opposite to the sun. Its colours are seven, red, orange, yellow, green, violet, purple, and blue. In the second bow, or water gall, seen when the clouds are large, the colours are reversed: so in the third and fourth bow, which are rarely seen. The rainbow is beautifully seen also in the ascension of vapours from the glacis of Switzerland; in the vapours which ascend from the sea in times of hurricane; and fainter in the lunar rainbows during showers in the night. So the bow must have existed from the creation of the sun, and God here was pleased to take it for a perpetual witness of his covenant: and as the rainbow is full of light, so the covenant is full of grace. Mons. Cuvier, professor of anatomy in Paris, in one of his early lectures on the natural sciences delivered in 1829, takes particular notice of the coincidence of tradition among all nations respecting the Deluge. “The Hebrew text of Genesis fixes it 2349 years before the birth of Christ; and the Chinese place it 2384, leaving but a variation of 35 years. Confucius represents their first king, Yao, employed in carrying off the waters of the ocean, which had reached the summit of the mountains, and in repairing the damages they had sustained.” These traditions of the Chinese strongly corroborate the truth of the Mosaic account of the deluge.

13. Do set my bow — yttn, I have set. The verb is in the perfect tense, but the perfect is often used with reference to future events in promises and assurances, where the speaker wishes to represent the event as so absolutely certain that it may be regarded as having already taken place. Especially is this the case in prophecies. Comp. Genesis 15:18, and 7:16, the promises to Abraham; Jeremiah 31:33: “I will put my law in their inward parts,” (lit., I have put.) Kimchi remarks of this usage in the prophecies: “The thing is as certain as though already performed, it having been long determined on.” (Comp. Ges., Hebrews Gr., 126, 4.) Some (Knobel, Del., Keil, Bush, Jac.) understand the text as teaching that there had been no rainbow before the flood, perhaps from the lack of the atmospheric conditions which the phenomenon is now observed to follow. Others, following Maimonides and the most celebrated Jewish scholars, as well as Chrysostom, understand that a phenomenon which had existed from the beginning, was now made a sign of this covenant. They accordingly render ˆtn, “appoint, constitute,” as in 1 Kings 2:35. But if the rainbow were familiar to the antediluvians, in what sense could it be a token to Noah and his family that the human race should not again be destroyed by a deluge of water? This is the question that has always perplexed expositors, especially since the natural causes of the rainbow were unfolded by the discoveries of Newton. Of course there is no difficulty to the Christian expositor in assuming, with Bush and Delitzsch, that the peculiar atmospheric conditions which now precede the rainbow did not exist before the deluge, being providentially prevented, from a foresight of the moral uses to which it was hereafter to be applied. Yet assumptions of this character are obviously to be avoided. We are decidedly of the opinion that science has increased rather than diminished the lustre of this promise, and that no unwarrantable assumption or meddlesome softening away of the express statements of the text is required by modern discoveries. After the terrible deluge storm, the sun bursts through the retiring clouds, and the glorious arch appears. It is a sign that the storm is vanquished by the sun, a beautiful trophy woven by the sunbeams and water-drops on the skirts of the retreating tempest. God points it out to Noah as a symbol of peace restored after the fierce elemental war, and science now shows us how completely it is such a symbol, it being the first flashing glance of the victorious sun through the discomfited clouds as they discharge their last shower upon the air. And Jehovah says, “I have set my bow in the cloud;” “set” is the emphatic word. He has bound the bow, wherein is the essence of the promise, to the stormy heavens; that is, the bow, or in other words, by immutable laws, the causes that produce the bow, shall never fail. The sun shall always burst through the clouds. There was a storm which, to the antediluvian world, had no end; to that doomed race no bow appeared; but man hereafter shall always see the bow in the heavens. God has set, established, it there by an immutable decree. Nature is so constituted, its forces so adjusted, that another similar convulsion can never occur. Thus is the bow set in the heavens.

THE COVENANT WITH NOAH, 1-17.

1. God blessed Noah — Noah, as the second founder of the race, receives a renewal of the blessing and the promise given to Adam, (Genesis 1:28, 29,) but modified by the altered relations which had been introduced by sin. Had man never fallen, the beasts of the field would willingly and naturally have owned his dominion; but the fallen king must struggle for his sceptre, and can govern only by fear and dread. Verse 2.

THE COVENANT WITH NOAH, 1-17.

1. God blessed Noah — Noah, as the second founder of the race, receives a renewal of the blessing and the promise given to Adam, (Genesis 1:28, 29,) but modified by the altered relations which had been introduced by sin. Had man never fallen, the beasts of the field would willingly and naturally have owned his dominion; but the fallen king must struggle for his sceptre, and can govern only by fear and dread. Verse 2.

16. And I will look upon it — A tender and beautiful anthropomorphism. God remembers us in every earthly storm. The bow is a symbol of his tender look upon frail, sinning man. The fragment of a vast and glorious circle, formed from the sunshine and storm, it typifies eternal mercy blended with justice, as seen from earth; binding earth to heaven, it typifies God’s perpetual covenant. We hear scattered echoes of this promise from the heathen poetry and mythology. Homer calls the rainbow a sign, (terav.) Iliad, 2:324. The Latin poets make Iris, or the rainbow, the messenger of the gods. Virgil, AEn., 4:694; Ovid, Met., 1,270. The ancient Germans considered the bow as the bridge of the demigods, by which they went to and fro between heaven and earth; and the Indians, according to Kuhn, had a similar tradition. Compare Delitzsch.

Verse 17. This is the token] twa oth, The Divine sign or portent: The bow shall be in the cloud. For the reasons above specified it must be there, when the circumstances already mentioned occur; if therefore it cannot fail because of the reasons before assigned, no more shall my promise; and the bow shall be the proof of its perpetuity.

Both the Greeks and Latins, as well as the Hebrews, have ever considered the rainbow as a Divine token or portent; and both of these nations have even deified it, and made it a messenger of the gods.

Homer, Il. xi., ver. 27, speaking of the figures on Agamemnon’s breastplate, says there were three dragons, whose colours were irissin eoikotev, av te Kronwn.

En nefei sthrixe, terav meropwn anqrwpwn.

“like to the rainbow which the son of Saturn has placed in the cloud as a SIGN to mankind,” or to men of various languages, for so the meropwn antrwpwn of the poet has been understood. Some have thought that the ancient Greek writers give this epithet to man from some tradition of the confusion and multiplication of tongues at Babel; hence in this place the words may be understood as implying mankind at large, the whole human race; God having given the rainbow for a sign to all the descendants of Noah, by whom the whole earth was peopled after the flood. Thus the celestial bow speaks a universal language, understood by all the sons and daughters of Adam. Virgil, from some disguised traditionary figure of the truth, considers the rainbow as a messenger of the gods. Æn. v., ver. 606: IRIM de caelo misit Saturnia Juno.

“Juno, the daughter of Saturn, sent down the rainbow from heaven;” and again, Æn. ix., ver. 803:—

æriam caelo nam Jupiter IRIM — Demisit.

“For Jupiter sent down the ethereal rainbow from heaven.” It is worthy of remark that both these poets understood the rainbow to be a sign, warning, or portent from heaven.”

As I believe the rainbow to have been intended solely for the purpose mentioned in the text, I forbear to make spiritual uses and illustrations of it. Many have done this, and their observations may be very edifying, but they certainly have no foundation in the text.

THE COVENANT WITH NOAH, 1-17.

1. God blessed Noah — Noah, as the second founder of the race, receives a renewal of the blessing and the promise given to Adam, (Genesis 1:28, 29,) but modified by the altered relations which had been introduced by sin. Had man never fallen, the beasts of the field would willingly and naturally have owned his dominion; but the fallen king must struggle for his sceptre, and can govern only by fear and dread. Verse 2.

PROPHECY OF NOAH, 18-29.

The historical occasion of the remarkable prophecy uttered by Noah in regard to his sons is now given. The sin or error of Noah brings out the character of his sons, and gives rise to predictions which concern the whole family of mankind. This prediction, in style and occasion, is a fair sample of some Scripture prophecies. It has an historic cause, and relates first to immediate events. Compare, in these respects, the remarkable Messianic prophesies in Isaiah 7 and 9. The immediate events, which concern the individuals involved in the transaction, are there regarded as typical of far more momentous events, involving their descendants in distant ages. The material and transitory are regarded as typical of the spiritual and eternal. The deep and wide spread correspondencies between the natural and supernatural, between the near and the distant, are so clear to the prophetic insight that the present and the future, the seen and unseen, seemed blended into a single picture. The prophet ever sees in the earthly, patterns of the heavenly.

18. Sons of Noah — Japheth was the eldest and Ham the youngest. See note on Genesis 5:32. Father of Canaan — This clause is added in this place, and in verse 22, because Noah’s prophetic curse lighted on the Canaanites, with whom the Hebrews were so familiar as a people accursed of God. It is, perhaps, a Mosaic addition to the original document.

PROPHECY OF NOAH, 18-29.

The historical occasion of the remarkable prophecy uttered by Noah in regard to his sons is now given. The sin or error of Noah brings out the character of his sons, and gives rise to predictions which concern the whole family of mankind. This prediction, in style and occasion, is a fair sample of some Scripture prophecies. It has an historic cause, and relates first to immediate events. Compare, in these respects, the remarkable Messianic prophesies in Isaiah 7 and 9. The immediate events, which concern the individuals involved in the transaction, are there regarded as typical of far more momentous events, involving their descendants in distant ages. The material and transitory are regarded as typical of the spiritual and eternal. The deep and wide spread correspondencies between the natural and supernatural, between the near and the distant, are so clear to the prophetic insight that the present and the future, the seen and unseen, seemed blended into a single picture. The prophet ever sees in the earthly, patterns of the heavenly.

18. Sons of Noah — Japheth was the eldest and Ham the youngest. See note on Genesis 5:32. Father of Canaan — This clause is added in this place, and in verse 22, because Noah’s prophetic curse lighted on the Canaanites, with whom the Hebrews were so familiar as a people accursed of God. It is, perhaps, a Mosaic addition to the original document.

V. 20. And Noah began to be an husbandman-Heb. a man of the earth, a man dealing in the earth, that kept ground in his hand and occupied it. Sometime after his departure out of the ark he returned to his old employment, from which he had been diverted by the building of the ark first, and probably after by the building an house for himself and family. And he planted a vineyard-And when he had gathered his vintage, probably he appointed a day of mirth and feasting in his family, and had his sons and their children with him, to rejoice with him in the increase of his house, as well as in the increase of his vineyard; and we may suppose he prefaced his feast with a sacrifice to the honour of God. If that was omitted, ‘twas just with God to leave him to himself, to end with the beasts that did not begin with God: but we charitably hope he did. And perhaps he appointed this feast with design in the close of it to bless his sons, as Isaac, Genesis 27:3,4. That I may eat, and that my soul may bless thee.

Verse 20. Noah began to be a husbandman] hmdah vya ish

haadamah, A man of the ground, a farmer; by his beginning to be a husbandman we are to understand his recommencing his agricultural operations, which undoubtedly he had carried on for six hundred years before, but this had been interrupted by the flood. And the transaction here mentioned might have occurred many years posterior to the deluge, even after Canaan was born and grown up, for the date of it is not fixed in the text.

The word husband first occurs here, and scarcely appears proper, because it is always applied to man in his married state, as wife is to the woman. The etymology of the term will at once show its propriety when applied to the head of a family. Husband, [A.S. husband], is Anglo-Saxon, and simply signifies the bond of the house or family; as by him the family is formed, united, and bound together, which, on his death, is disunited and scattered.

It is on this etymology of the word that we can account for the farmers and petty landholders being called so early as the twelfth century, husbandi, as appears in a statute of David II., king of Scotland: we may therefore safely derive the word from [A.S. hus], a house, and [A.S. bond] from [A.S. binben], to bind or tie; and this etymology appears plainer in the orthography which prevailed in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, in which I have often found the word written house-bond; so it is in a MS. Bible before me, written in the fourteenth century. Junius disputes this etymology, but I think on no just ground.

Verse 20. And Noah began to be a husbandman — (Hebrews a man of the earth,) a man dealing in the earth, that kept ground in his hand and occupied it. Some time after his departure out of the ark he returned to his old employment, from which he had been diverted by the building of the ark first, and probably after by the building a house for himself and family. And he planted a vineyard — And when he had gathered his vintage, probably he appointed a day of mirth and feasting in his family, and had his sons and their children with him, to rejoice with him in the increase of his house, as well as in the increase of his vineyard; and we may suppose he prefaced his feast with a sacrifice to the honour of God. If that were omitted, it was just with God to leave him to himself, to end with the beasts that which did not begin with God: but we charitably hope he did. And perhaps he appointed this feast with design, in the close of it, to bless his sons, as Isaac, Genesis 27:3, 4, “That I may eat, and that my soul may bless thee.”

20. Began to be a husbandman — Or, Noah began to be a man of the soil, and he planted a vineyard. That is, began to cultivate the vine, which probably had grown only spontaneously hitherto, and perhaps its intoxicating properties had not yet been discovered.

V. 21. And he drank of the wine and was drunk-‘Tis highly probable, he did not know the effect of it before.

And he was uncovered in his tent-Made naked to his shame.

Verse 21. He drank of the wine, &c.] It is very probable that this was the first time the wine was cultivated; and it is as probable that the strength or intoxicating power of the expressed juice was never before known. Noah, therefore, might have drunk it at this time without the least blame, as he knew not till this trial the effects it would produce. I once knew a case which I believe to be perfectly parallel. A person who had scarcely ever heard of cider, and whose beverage through his whole life had been only milk or water, coming wet and very much fatigued to a farmer’s house in Somersetshire, begged for a little water or milk. The good woman of the house, seeing him very much exhausted, kindly said, “I will give you a little cider, which will do you more good.” The honest man, understanding no more of cider than merely that it was the simple juice of apples, after some hesitation drank about a half pint of it; the consequence was, that in less than half an hour he was perfectly intoxicated, and could neither speak plain nor walk! This case I myself witnessed. A stranger to the circumstances, seeing this person, would pronounce him drunk; and perhaps at a third hand he might be represented as a drunkard, and thus his character be blasted; while of the crime of drunkenness he was as innocent as an infant.

This I presume to have been precisely the case with Noah; and no person without an absolute breach of every rule of charity and candour, can attach any blame to the character of Noah on this ground, unless from a subsequent account they were well assured that, knowing the power and effects of the liquor, he had repeated the act. Some expositors seem to be glad to fix on a fact like this, which by their distortion becomes a crime; and then, in a strain of sympathetic tenderness, affect to deplore “the failings and imperfections of the best of men;” when, from the interpretation that should be given of the place, neither failing nor imperfection can possibly appear.

Verse 21. And he drank of the wine, and was drunk — It is highly probable he did not know the effect of it before. And he was uncovered in his tent — Made naked to his shame.

21. Was drunken — Here is the first recorded instance of drunkenness, and its revolting consequences. It is probable that in this case it was a sin of ignorance, for Noah’s character as a “perfect” man, who “walked with God,” seems to warrant this assumption.

V. 22. And Ham saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren-To have seen it accidentally and involuntarily would not have been a crime. But he pleased himself with the sight. And he told his two brethren without-In the street, as the word is, in a scornful deriding manner.

Verses 22. - 24. And Ham, the father of Canaan, &c.] There is no occasion to enter into any detail here; the sacred text is circumstantial enough. Ham, and very probably his son Canaan, had treated their father on this occasion with contempt or reprehensible levity. Had Noah not been innocent, as my exposition supposes him, God would not have endued him with the spirit of prophecy on this occasion, and testified such marked disapprobation of their conduct. The conduct of Shem and Japheth was such as became pious and affectionate children, who appear to have been in the habit of treating their father with decency, reverence, and obedient respect. On the one the spirit of prophecy (not the incensed father) pronounces a curse: on the others the same spirit (not parental tenderness) pronounces a blessing. These things had been just as they afterwards occurred had Noah never spoken. God had wise and powerful reasons to induce him to sentence the one to perpetual servitude, and to allot to the others prosperity and dominion. Besides, the curse pronounced on Canaan neither fell immediately upon himself nor on his worthless father, but upon the Canaanites; and from the history we have of this people, in Leviticus 18:6, 7, 24, 29, 30, Leviticus 20:9, 22-24, 26; and Deuteronomy 9:4; 12:31, we may ask, Could the curse of God fall more deservedly on any people than on these? Their profligacy was great, but it was not the effect of the curse; but, being foreseen by the Lord, the curse was the effect of their conduct. But even this curse does not exclude them from the possibility of obtaining salvation; it extends not to the soul and to eternity, but merely to their bodies and to time; though, if they continued to abuse their liberty, resist the Holy Ghost, and refuse to be saved on God’s terms, then the wrath of Divine justice must come upon them to the uttermost. How many, even of these, repented, we cannot tell.

Verse 22. And Ham saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren — To have seen it accidentally and involuntarily would not have been a crime. But he pleased himself with the sight. And he told his brethren without — In the street, as the word is, in a scornful, deriding manner.

22. Saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without — Ham displays immodesty and sensuality, as well as an unfilial glorying in his father’s shame.

V. 23. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father-They not only would not see it themselves, but provided that no one else might see it; herein setting an example of charity, with reference to other men’s sin and shame.

Verses 22. - 24. And Ham, the father of Canaan, &c.] There is no occasion to enter into any detail here; the sacred text is circumstantial enough. Ham, and very probably his son Canaan, had treated their father on this occasion with contempt or reprehensible levity. Had Noah not been innocent, as my exposition supposes him, God would not have endued him with the spirit of prophecy on this occasion, and testified such marked disapprobation of their conduct. The conduct of Shem and Japheth was such as became pious and affectionate children, who appear to have been in the habit of treating their father with decency, reverence, and obedient respect. On the one the spirit of prophecy (not the incensed father) pronounces a curse: on the others the same spirit (not parental tenderness) pronounces a blessing. These things had been just as they afterwards occurred had Noah never spoken. God had wise and powerful reasons to induce him to sentence the one to perpetual servitude, and to allot to the others prosperity and dominion. Besides, the curse pronounced on Canaan neither fell immediately upon himself nor on his worthless father, but upon the Canaanites; and from the history we have of this people, in Leviticus 18:6, 7, 24, 29, 30, Leviticus 20:9, 22-24, 26; and Deuteronomy 9:4; 12:31, we may ask, Could the curse of God fall more deservedly on any people than on these? Their profligacy was great, but it was not the effect of the curse; but, being foreseen by the Lord, the curse was the effect of their conduct. But even this curse does not exclude them from the possibility of obtaining salvation; it extends not to the soul and to eternity, but merely to their bodies and to time; though, if they continued to abuse their liberty, resist the Holy Ghost, and refuse to be saved on God’s terms, then the wrath of Divine justice must come upon them to the uttermost. How many, even of these, repented, we cannot tell.

Verse 23. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, &c. — They not only would not see it themselves, but provided that no one else might see it; herein setting an example of charity with reference to other men’s sin and shame.

23. Took a garment — Hebrews, the garment; that is, the loose mantle with which he would naturally have covered himself on going to sleep. The Mosaic law was specially stringent in enjoining filial reverence, and in prohibiting such moral uncleanness as seems to have given pleasure to Ham. Compare Leviticus 18:7, etc. Sensuality, with its attendant abominations, were the great sins which brought such terrible judgment upon the Canaanites, so that the land “vomited them out.” Comp. Leviticus 18:24-28.

Verses 22. - 24. And Ham, the father of Canaan, &c.] There is no occasion to enter into any detail here; the sacred text is circumstantial enough. Ham, and very probably his son Canaan, had treated their father on this occasion with contempt or reprehensible levity. Had Noah not been innocent, as my exposition supposes him, God would not have endued him with the spirit of prophecy on this occasion, and testified such marked disapprobation of their conduct. The conduct of Shem and Japheth was such as became pious and affectionate children, who appear to have been in the habit of treating their father with decency, reverence, and obedient respect. On the one the spirit of prophecy (not the incensed father) pronounces a curse: on the others the same spirit (not parental tenderness) pronounces a blessing. These things had been just as they afterwards occurred had Noah never spoken. God had wise and powerful reasons to induce him to sentence the one to perpetual servitude, and to allot to the others prosperity and dominion. Besides, the curse pronounced on Canaan neither fell immediately upon himself nor on his worthless father, but upon the Canaanites; and from the history we have of this people, in Leviticus 18:6, 7, 24, 29, 30, Leviticus 20:9, 22-24, 26; and Deuteronomy 9:4; 12:31, we may ask, Could the curse of God fall more deservedly on any people than on these? Their profligacy was great, but it was not the effect of the curse; but, being foreseen by the Lord, the curse was the effect of their conduct. But even this curse does not exclude them from the possibility of obtaining salvation; it extends not to the soul and to eternity, but merely to their bodies and to time; though, if they continued to abuse their liberty, resist the Holy Ghost, and refuse to be saved on God’s terms, then the wrath of Divine justice must come upon them to the uttermost. How many, even of these, repented, we cannot tell.

Verse 24. Noah knew — Either by the information of his sons, or by divine inspiration, what his younger son, (Hebrews his son, ˆcqh, the younger, or little one,) had done unto him. Canaan is thought by many to be chiefly intended. 1st, Because the following curse is appropriated to him; and, 2d, Because the title of younger, little son, does not seem so properly added if Ham be meant, it not being probable that he was the youngest of Noah’s sons; for when they are mentioned together, he is never named last, but always second. Be this as it may, it is very likely he partook of his father’s sin, and probably first saw the situation which his grandfather was in, and told it to his father, who then told it to his brethren.

24. Awoke… and knew — His stupor was not so deep as to prevent his being conscious of Ham’s shameful conduct.

V. 25. A servant of servants-That is, the meanest and most despicable servant shall he be, even to his brethren. Those who by birth were his equals, should by conquest be his lords. This certainly points at the victories obtained by Israel over the Canaanites, by which they were all either put to the sword, or put under tribute. Joshua 9:23 Judges 1:28,30,33,35, which happened not ‘till about eight hundred years after this. God often visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, especially when the children inherit the fathers wicked dispositions, and imitate the father’s wicked practices.

Verse 25. Cursed be Canaan] See on the preceding verses. In the 25th, 26th, and 27th verses, instead of Canaan simply, the Arabic version has Ham the father of Canaan; but this is acknowledged by none of the other versions, and seems to be merely a gloss.

Verse 25. Cursed be Canaan — Canaan may be here put, by a well-known figure termed ellipsis, often used in Scripture, for the father of Canaan, the title given to Ham in verse 22. And although Ham had more sons, he may here be described by his relation to Canaan, because in him the curse was more fixed and dreadful, reaching to the utter extirpation of his seed, while many of the other nations descended from Ham were, in after ages, blessed with the knowledge of the true God and the gospel of his Son. A servant of servants shall he (namely, the father of Canaan, Ham) be to his brethren — That is, in his posterity; whose condition in every age has remarkably coincided with the prediction. “The whole continent of Africa was peopled principally by the descendants of Ham, and for how many ages did the better parts of that country lie under the dominion of the Romans, and then of the Saracens, as they do now under that of the Turks! In what wickedness, ignorance, barbarity, slavery, misery, live most of the inhabitants! And of the poor negroes how many hundreds, nay thousands, have been annually sold and bought, like beasts in the market, and conveyed from one quarter of the world to do the work of beasts in another!” — Newton on the Prophecies. “There never has been a son of Ham who hath shaken a sceptre over the head of Japheth. Shem hath subdued Japheth, and Japheth subdued Shem, but Ham never subdued either.” — Mede. The curse, however, principally respects the posterity of Canaan, the devoted nations whom God destroyed before Israel, and is here recorded for the encouragement of the Israelites, who, it is probable, when Moses wrote these words, were about to march against them and to take possession of their country, about eight hundred years after the words were uttered by Noah. The Phœnicians and Carthaginians are also included in the curse denounced on Canaan; for they were descended from him, and were, at length, subdued with dreadful destruction by the Greeks and Romans, and made tributary to them both.

Ver. 25. Cursed be Canaan. The blessings were connected with fidelity to the law and covenant of the Lord; and the curses were consequences of disobedience. The patriarchs were the priests and prophets of the Lord, whose right it was to pronounce the benediction. But they could neither bless nor curse but by the Spirit of God. Hence God said to Abraham, “I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee;” and Isaac said to Esau, “I have blessed him, (Jacob) yea, and he shall be blessed;” for he felt that the Spirit accompanied his benedictions. It is just so with regard to those most base and atrocious crimes which merit the execrations of heaven. No such anathemas can be inflicted but in the Lord, for which reason Balaam could neither curse Jacob, nor defy Israel. He was, on the contrary, constrained to bless them.—This curse on Canaan came upon his posterity by the sword of Joshua; and on Ham’s race it seems to have fallen in the sentence on Egypt, to be “the basest of all kingdoms;” on the black population of Africa, whose hordes have been oppressed with tyranny, almost destitute of literature and of arts, and very much exposed to the cruelties of slavery. The curse of Joshua on the rebuilder of Jericho, came on the presumptuous Hiel. Joshua 6:26. 1 Kings 16:34. The curse of Chryses, priest of Apollo, came on the Greeks by a plague in the camp for carrying away his daughter. Iliad 1. Tacitus reports that when the Romans attacked Anglesey, the grand seat of druidism in this country, both the druids and druidesses entered the combat; the latter with dishevelled hair, and torches in their hands, pouring anathemas on the invaders. Rome was indeed cursed on all sides for her cruelties and slaughters, and in the end those curses fell most heavily upon her when her own civil wars preyed on her vitals, and when the christian Goths stormed the imperial city in the year of Christ 435. A good man has nothing to fear from the curses of the wicked. The imprecations of Shimei fell not on David, but on his own head. Hence the superior doctrine of the christian religion: Bless, and curse not.

A servant of servants. The Hebrew idiom differs here from the English, in forming the superlative degree, which requires to be read, “The most servile of servants.” Slavery in all parts of Africa, and slavery out of Africa seems to attend the race of Ham.—Lord shorten those days, and hear the prayers of thy people.

25. And he said — Render the whole prophecy thus:

Cursed be Canaan,

A servant of servants let him be unto his brethren.

And he said:

Blessed be Jehovah, God of Shem;

And let Canaan be a servant unto them.

Let God enlarge Japheth,

And let him dwell in the tents of Shem,

And let Canaan be a servant unto them.

The futures in this passage have an imperative sense, the prediction taking the form of blessing and imprecation. It will be noted, that in reference to both Shem and Japheth the plural pronoun them is used, showing that each patriarch’s name is used in a collective sense, embracing his posterity. The preposition and suffix wml is incorrectly rendered his in our version, although the margin gives the real meaning. Comp. Ges., Gr., § 103, 2, note. There is a play upon words, after the favourite method of the Old Testament writers and speakers, which cannot be well shown in translation. Japheth signifies enlargement, and Noah uses, in the blessing, the verb from which the name is derived. The predictions touched the individuals addressed only as they were interested in their posterity. The sin of Ham and the etymology of the names, furnish starting points for prophecies of world-wide interest. Noah is now, for the first time, made to understand the prophetic significance of the names which, under divine guidance, he had given his children, as Lamech, his father, saw that Noah would be Noah, or Rest, to mankind. The filial piety of Shem and Japheth was the means by which the revealing Spirit lifted the curtain of the future, and showed Noah how the knowledge of Jehovah should make the children of Shem illustrious (µv, name, a great name), how the descendants of Japheth should be spread over vast continents yet unknown, while the sensual impiety of Ham typified the degradation of the children of Canaan, his son, who should be enslaved or exterminated by the Shemites, as the reward of their dreadful iniquities. But this foresight had no causative power, and in no sense necessitated the sin or holiness of those far-off generations; for necessary sin or holiness is an impossibility. Their actions were foreseen, not foreordained. Cursed be Canaan — Not Ham, as might be expected. The prediction begins with the youngest, as his sin was its immediate cause, (compare the order in Genesis 3:14-16,) and as certainly would have been the case had Noah been left to vent a natural ebullition of wrath upon his unnatural son. The curse lights only upon the descendants of Canaan, the youngest son of Ham, and father of the nations who dwelt in Canaan in the time of Abraham, and down to the era of its conquest by Joshua. It is, then, pure assumption to apply the prediction to the African families who descended from the other children of Ham. Shem and Japheth are mentioned by name, but the curse of Ham is expressly limited to Canaan. It is true that in modern times slavery has mostly fallen to the African race, but it is only in extremely modern times; and this slavery is not to be compared in universality or in severity to that which prevailed in ancient times and involved the children of Shem and Japheth as much as those of Ham. Slavery was the normal condition of the masses in the Greek and Roman world. It was a fundamental characteristic of all ancient society. Aristotle, the greatest political philosopher of antiquity, lays it down as an indispensable condition of civilization. (Polit., i, cap. 3, 6.) Greeks enslaved Greeks, and Roman fathers, at the time of Christ, enslaved their own children.

V. 26. The God of Shem-All blessings are included in this. This was the blessing conferred on Abraham and his seed, the God of heaven was not ashamed to be called their God, Hebrews 11:16. Shem is sufficiently recompensed for his respect to his father by this, that the Lord himself puts this honour upon him to be his God; which is a sufficient recompense for all our services and all our sufferings for his name.

Verse 26. Blessed be the Lord God of Shem — Abraham and all his posterity were included in the descendants of Shem, as appears from the next chapter. Our Lord Jesus Christ, therefore, in whom all the nations of the earth are to be blessed, sprang from him. Well, therefore, might Jehovah be called the Lord God of Shem. Most of the worshippers of the true God, before the coming of the Messiah, were of his seed, and afterward the descendants of Shem were the chief instruments of bringing other nations to join in God’s worship, and to partake of the blessings of his salvation. Thus Shem is well recompensed for his respect to his father, and the being thus informed of the blessings that awaited his posterity, must have been a great consolation to him, as it, no doubt, was afterward to the truly pious of his seed.

26. Blessed — The blessing of Shem is an ejaculation of praise, as the patriarch sees that Jehovah, the one only God, will be the God of his children, the Hebrew people. This made them a nation, and gave them an historic position grander than was ever occupied by any other people, making the Hebrew character, ritual, and literature the channels of the sublimest moral and religious truths to the world. Thus has the world learned, or rather remembered, the momentous truths of the unity, spirituality, and holiness of God, and the unity, spirituality, and depravity of man.

V. 27. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem-His seed shall be so numerous and so victorious, that they shall be masters of the tents of Shem, which was fulfilled when the people of the Jews, the most eminent of Shem’s race, were tributaries to the Grecians first, and after to the Romans, both of Japhet’s seed. This also speaks the conversion of the Gentiles, and the bringing of them into the church; and then we should read it, God shall persuade Japheth; (for so the word signifies) and being so persuaded,

he shall dwell in the tents of Shem-That is, Jews and Gentiles shall be united together in the gospel-fold: after many of the Gentiles shall have been proselyted to the Jewish religion, both shall be one in Christ, Ephesians 2:14,15. When Japheth joins with Shem, Canaan falls before them both: when strangers become friends, enemies become servants.

Verse 27. God shall enlarge Japheth — Most of the inhabitants of Europe, termed in the next chapter, the isles of the Gentiles, and those of the northern parts of Asia, were descended from Japheth; and if, as is generally supposed, America was peopled from the north-east of Asia, the original inhabitants of that country also were his offspring. And he shall dwell in the tents of Shem — His seed shall be so numerous, and so victorious, that they shall be masters of the tents of Shem. This was fulfilled when the people of the Jews, the most eminent of Shem’s race, were subjected and made tributaries, first to the Grecians, and afterward to the Romans, both of Japheth’s seed. This also signifies the conversion of the Gentiles, and the bringing of them into the Church of God; and with a reference to this, the words should be rendered, as they properly may, God shall persuade Japheth; and being so persuaded, he shall dwell in the tents of Shem: that is, the Jews and Gentiles shall be united together in the church of God. And after many of the Gentiles shall be proselyted to the Jewish religion, both Jews and Gentiles shall be one in Christ. And Canaan shall be his servant — Servant to Shem, and servant to Japheth; for it is affirmed with respect to both. And a very slight acquaintance with ancient or modern history will be sufficient to convince any serious inquirer of the exact accomplishment of the prediction. For the descendants of Canaan have been under subjection to those of Shem and Japheth through many generations. In this wonderful prophecy, therefore, which includes an outline of the history of all nations and ages, we have a demonstration of the divine inspiration of him who uttered it, as well as of him who recorded it, as Bishop Newton has shown in his most admirable Exposition of the Prophecies: a decisive proof this, of the certainty and importance of these records of eternal truth!

27. God — Elohim, the generic, not the covenant name, as used with Shem. Shall — Rather, let. Enlarge Japheth — Japheth goes forth to conquer worlds of matter and worlds of thought. The Shemitic nations are spiritual and contemplative, preferring a pastoral or agricultural life; the Japhetic nations are intellectual, enterprising, nomadic. Intellectual activity characterizes them, as spiritual insight characterizes the descendants of Shem. The conquests of Xerxes, Alexander, the Cesars, and Napoleon — the logic and philosophy of the Sanscrit, the Greek, the German, the English — the vast migrations of the Tartars and Goths — the colonies and the commerce of the Greeks, the Romans, and the English, show how deeply prophetic is the name of Japheth. He shall dwell in the tents of Shem — Let him dwell in the tents of Shem. Many commentators, following the Targum of Onkelos, make Elohim the subject here, but most follow the Targum of Jonathan, and consider Japheth the subject. The first interpretation destroys the unity of the prophecy, and is harsh and forced. As Japheth and Shem had united in this work of filial piety, so should their children be united in participating in world-wide blessings. The aggressive, intellectual Japheth shall dwell in the tents of the quiet, spiritual Shem, and share in the wondrous promises which he inherits. Each shall share the strength and glory of the other. The Hebrew religion was poured upon the world through the languages, the logic, and rhetoric of the Greek and Roman. The words of Jesus (who bore the “NAME above every name,” typified by Shem) come to us in a language of Japheth. Paul, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, preached and wrote in Greek, yet was protected in his work as a Roman citizen, and carried the glad tidings over Roman roads and in Roman ships.

Verse 28. Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years — Which period, as the Jews observe, reaches to the fifty-eighth year of Abraham’s age. So that we need be under no difficulty in accounting for the transmission of the original revelation made to Adam, and of other branches of divine truth, from the beginning of the world to the time of Abraham. Noah received these from his parents, who had the account from Adam’s own mouth, and transmitted it to Abraham. And its communication and descent from him to the Jews, and from the Jews to us, is sufficiently known. Within this time also Noah saw the building of the tower of Babel, the horrid wickedness and idolatry of his children, and the bloody wars which even then began to arise between some of them.

28. Noah lived after the flood — The narrative up to this verse may have been composed during the life of Noah, and in all probability the details of the deluge, the covenant, and these wondrous predictions, minute and graphic as they are, were written by Noah or by Shem, not in the present form, for the Hebrew did not then exist, but in a more primitive tongue, from which they were afterward translated by some one of their descendants, probably before the time of Moses.

Verse 29. The days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years] The oldest patriarch on record, except Methuselah and Jared. This, according to the common reckoning, was A. M. 2006, but according to Dr. Hales, 3505.

“HAM,” says Dr. Hales, “signifies burnt or black, and this name was peculiarly significant of the regions allotted to his family. To the Cushites, or children of his eldest son Cush, were allotted the hot southern regions of Asia, along the coasts of the Persian Gulf, Susiana or Chusistan, Arabia, &c.; to the sons of Canaan, Palestine and Syria; to the sons of Misraim, Egypt and Libya, in Africa.

The Hamites in general, like the Canaanites of old, were a seafaring race, and sooner arrived at civilization and the luxuries of life than their simpler pastoral and agricultural brethren of the other two families. The first great empires of Assyria and Egypt were founded by them, and the republics of Sidon, Tyre, and Carthage were early distinguished for their commerce but they sooner also fell to decay; and Egypt, which was one of the first, became the last and basest of the kingdoms, Ezekiel 29:15, and has been successively in subjection to the Shemites and Japhethites, as have also the settlements of the other branches of the Hamites. “SHEM signifies name or renown; and his indeed was great in a temporal and spiritual sense. The finest regions of Upper and Middle Asia allotted to his family, Armenia, Mesopotamia, Assyria, Media, Persia, &c., to the Indus and Ganges, and perhaps to China eastward.

“The chief renown of Shem was of a spiritual nature: he was destined to be the lineal ancestor of the blessed seed of the woman; and to this glorious privilege Noah, to whom it was probably revealed, might have alluded in that devout ejaculation, Blessed be the LORD, the GOD of Shem! The pastoral life of the Shemites is strongly marked in the prophecy by the tents of Shem; and such it remains to the present day, throughout their midland settlements in Asia.

“JAPHETH signifies enlargement; and how wonderfully did Providence enlarge the boundaries of Japheth! His posterity diverged eastward and westward throughout the whole extent of Asia, north of the great range of Taurus, as far as the Eastern Ocean, whence they probably crossed over to America by Behring’s Straits from Kamtschatka, and in the opposite direction throughout Europe to the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean; from whence also they might have crossed over to America by Newfoundland, where traces of early settlements remain in parts now desert. Thus did they gradually enlarge themselves till they literally encompassed the earth, within the precincts of the northern temperate zone, to which their roving hunter’s life contributed not a little. Their progress northwards was checked by the much greater extent of the Black Sea in ancient times, and the increasing rigour of the climates: but their hardy race, and enterprising, warlike genius, made them frequently encroach southwards on the settlements of Shem, whose pastoral and agricultural occupations rendered them more inactive, peaceable. and unwarlike; and so they dwelt in the tents of Shem when the Scythians invaded Media, and subdued western Asia southwards as far as Egypt, in the days of Cyaxares; when the Greeks, and afterwards the Romans, overran and subdued the Assyrians, Medes, and Persians in the east, and the Syrians and Jews in the south; as foretold by the Syrian prophet Balaam, Numbers 24:24:—

Ships shall come from Chittim,

And shall afflict the Assyrians, and afflict the Hebrews; But he (the invader) shall perish himself at last.

“And by Moses: And the Lord shall bring thee (the Jews) into Egypt (or bondage) again with ships, &c., Deuteronomy 28:68. And by Daniel: For the ships of Chittim shall come against him, viz., Antiochus, king of Syria, Daniel 11:30. In these passages Chittim denotes the southern coasts of Europe, bounding the Mediterranean, called the isles of the Gentiles or Nations; see Genesis 10:5. And the isles of Chittim are mentioned Jeremiah 2:10. And in after times the Tartars in the east have repeatedly invaded and subdued the Hindoos and the Chinese; while the warlike and enterprising genius of the greatest of the isles of the Gentiles, GREAT BRITAIN and IRELAND, have spread their colonies, their arms, their language, their arts, and in some measure their religion, from the rising to the setting sun.” See Dr. Hales’s Analysis of Chronology, vol. 1., p. 352, &c.

Though what is left undone should not cause us to lose sight of what is done, yet we have reason to lament that the inhabitants of the British isles, who of all nations under heaven have the purest light of Divine revelation, and the best means of diffusing it, have been much more intent on spreading their conquests and extending their commerce, than in propagating the Gospel of the Son of God. But the nation, by getting the Bible translated into every living language, and sending it to all parts of the habitable globe, and, by its various missionary societies, sending men of God to explain and enforce the doctrines and precepts of this sacred book, is rapidly redeeming its character, and becoming great in goodness and benevolence over the whole earth!

GENESIS

Verse 29. All the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years — Here the clause, and he begat sons and daughters, is omitted, whence we may infer that he had no more than the three sons already mentioned.

PROPHECY OF NOAH, 18-29.

The historical occasion of the remarkable prophecy uttered by Noah in regard to his sons is now given. The sin or error of Noah brings out the character of his sons, and gives rise to predictions which concern the whole family of mankind. This prediction, in style and occasion, is a fair sample of some Scripture prophecies. It has an historic cause, and relates first to immediate events. Compare, in these respects, the remarkable Messianic prophesies in Isaiah 7 and 9. The immediate events, which concern the individuals involved in the transaction, are there regarded as typical of far more momentous events, involving their descendants in distant ages. The material and transitory are regarded as typical of the spiritual and eternal. The deep and wide spread correspondencies between the natural and supernatural, between the near and the distant, are so clear to the prophetic insight that the present and the future, the seen and unseen, seemed blended into a single picture. The prophet ever sees in the earthly, patterns of the heavenly.

18. Sons of Noah — Japheth was the eldest and Ham the youngest. See note on Genesis 5:32. Father of Canaan — This clause is added in this place, and in verse 22, because Noah’s prophetic curse lighted on the Canaanites, with whom the Hebrews were so familiar as a people accursed of God. It is, perhaps, a Mosaic addition to the original document.