Sep 04, 2016

Genesis 9:18-29

I don’t know if you see the moral dichotomy that exists within our culture as I do, but it was on stark display this week. On one side of the coin we live in a society that frowns on people who make moral judgments. As a matter of fact anytime a Christian points out the blatant immorality and/or dangerous trends within politics, media, or the Hollywood community we’re silenced by an avalanche of accusations of judgmentalism, bigotry, intolerance, etc. And yet… When a public figure does something wrong and it’s generally comical our society has zero problem not only making moral judgments, but destroying that person publicly.

Let me give you an example… According to a recent study an astounding 50% of American adults have sexted and/or presently contain compromising sexual content on their phones. What’s even crazier is that 16% have actually sent sexual content to a complete stranger!

And while I’m sure you have seen news stories defending people’s privacy and right to exchange sexual content without fearing prejudice, you have probably not seen journalistic presentations of the moral dangers of sexting and how it can destroy a person’s life… Unless the man who’s sexting pictures hit the internet has the last name Weiner, goes by the alias Carlos Danger, and in addition to being politically active in N.Y. just so happens to be married to Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s most trusted adviser Huma Abedin.

This week in the wake of yet another picture yielding to an entire new round of sexting allegations, from Twitter - to the major news networks - to talk radio, this week has been filled with literally wall to wall coverage of the most recent moral indiscretion of Anthony Weiner. Not only has the commentary been brutal, but I’ve been struck by the fact I’ve seen zero public concern for the embarrassment this has caused his wife, will later in life cause his young son, the destruction of his marriage, and the sever damage this particular sexual proclivity is inflicting in the life of a man who undoubtedly has a serious problem.

Don’t get me wrong… Because of the high profile nature of the people involved I’m not saying this story wasn’t newsworthy, however what really irritated me was the glee in which the story has been reported by virtual everyone in the amoral media. The truth is that I’ve seen zero compassion in the way the story has been reported and instead have witnessed nothing but a judgmental media finding hilarity in another man’s moral failure.

Now before we become indignant I’m afraid to say the institutional church can be equally savage and in many ways operate in a similar dichotomy. Aside from the more public spectacles that occur when a high profile pastor is exposed for having a moral failure, I have personally seen the local assembly of the church be equally merciless.

How heavy handed the church can be to those who’ve been divorced or are presently living in a failing marriage. How quickly the church castigates those who fall into sexual sin or are struggling with the taboo of same-sex attraction. How fast the church judges the woman who’s had an abortion or the single mom who’s had a child out of wedlock.

How immediate the church is in blaming the parents who’s children have gone wayward or how the church openly ostracize those within her ranks who fail to conform to their version of orthodoxy (don’t drink, vote Democrat, or watch Game of Thrones). The reality is that there tends to be very little difference in how the church handles our own “Carlos Dangers.”

It’s a sad inditement, but Christians are one of the few groups of people who tend to eat their wounded! Today, how many people are no longer in our ranks because the church executed them? How many people are no longer serving in ministry because the church lynched them in the public square and now refuses to give them a second chance? How many refugees sit outside the church today because we’ve built a wall to keep them out?

Could it be that the American church hasn’t faced open persecution from the enemy because we’re doing a good enough job slaughtering our own sheep? That the wolf has no need to pick off the weak because the herd is all to quick to plate up the meal for him?

As sad a reality that it is the truth is that many of you may have stumbled into the doors of our church because you were ushered out the doors of another. Now that’s not to say you were asked or forced to leave, but if you were honest you knew it was time for a change because it was abundantly clear you were no longer welcomed where you were.

Because of your DUI, the fact you’ve been divorce, committed adultery, had a child out of wedlock, smoke cigarettes, challenged the doctrinal norm, or heaven forbid said something moronic on Facebook you knew beyond the chances of getting involved in a ministry role being nil there would always be a stigma you’d never be able to escape. Almost as though every time you went to church you felt like people saw you as Pig-Pen from Charlie Brown… This cloud of controversy following you everywhere you went.

This morning we’re going to examine what I believe to be one of the most fascinating stories in the book of Genesis because it addresses this very topic of how we’re called to handle the person in our tent who’s made a mistake. As far as approaching the text… We’re going to first discuss what actually happened before we then look at two very different reactions.

---

Genesis 9:18-29, “Now the sons of Noah who went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And Ham was the father of Canaan. These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole earth was populated. And Noah began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard. Then he drank of the wine and was drunk, and became uncovered in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. But Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father’s nakedness. So Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done to him. 

Then he said: ‘Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants he shall be to his brethren.’ And he said: ‘Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem, and may Canaan be his servant. May God enlarge Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents of Shem; and may Canaan be his servant.’ Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. So all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died.”

---

Our story begins with an interesting scene… We’re told, “Noah planted a vineyard… drank of the wine and was drunk.” Literally, the word “drunk” means Noah became intoxicated. Please understand (and for obvious reasons as you’ll see in a few minutes I need to be crystal clear on this one point), while there is zero prohibition when it comes to drinking alcohol in Scripture (even Jesus drank wine), there is a clear and undeniable prohibition against drunkenness. Getting sloshed is wrong. Getting hammered is indefensible. As they once said in deep Appalachia, “Gettin’ full of mountain dew” is simply not ok! Side Note: The phrase “Mountain Dew” was originally slang for mountain-brewed moonshine.

There is no doubt that Noah clearly made a mistake. That said… The purpose of this story and the reason it’s included in the Genesis record really has nothing to do with what Noah did and instead has everything to do with what was done to Noah. The purpose of the story was to explain why it was that Canaan was cursed and Shem and Japheth blessed.

Notice what happened after Noah “drank of the wine and was drunk.” We’re told he “became uncovered in his tent.” In the original language a better translation for “became uncovered” would be “to be uncovered.” Though the text doesn’t specifically say how this happened it would appear from Noah’s reaction this “uncovering” was not accidental. 

Consider that when “Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done to him… he cursed” (not Ham), but instead Ham’s son “Canaan.” In order to know what “had been done to him” it’s important we first determine the identity of this “younger son.” In the Hebrew this phrase translated “younger son” is “ben qatan.” While the phrase is often translated in Scripture as “younger” it’s more literal meaning in the original is “small.” 

If you consider Ham was in actuality the middle son of Noah (“Shem, Ham, and Japheth…” Probably a reverse order as Genesis 10:21 says Japheth was Shem’s older brother only to, in the table of nations, lists him first, Ham second, and Shem last) and that Canaan may have been the first of Noah’s grandchildren (he’s the first mentioned), it’s not outside the realm of possibility that upon awaking from his drunken slumber Noah was keenly aware of what Canaan (Ham’s son) had done to him. 

While there is no doubt Ham failed to handle this situation in an appropriate way (which we’ll address in a minute), the implications of Canaan being cursed by Noah instead of Ham implies this young man was the instigator of the initial “uncovering” of his grandfather. And don’t think this was just innocent fun as if he were playing a joke… Judging by Noah’s swift reaction it seems something nefarious and perverse had occurred to him. The key clue to this point is the use of these two words “uncovering” and “nakedness.” Keep in mind, whatever happened in that tent Noah was immediately aware of when he woke.

In describing the wickedness of incestual perversions God would say in Leviticus 18:6-8, “None of you shall approach anyone who is near of kin to him, to uncover his nakedness: I am the LORD. The nakedness of your father or the nakedness of your mother you shall not uncover. She is your mother; you shall not uncover her nakedness. The nakedness of your father's wife you shall not uncover; it is your father's nakedness.”

Once again the point of this passage was to explain that something happened to Noah so sever and wicked that he would immediately curse Canaan and all of his subsequent generations, which was significant to Moses and the children of Israel because all of the people groups currently occupying the land of promise (Canaan) descended from this man.

Sadly, upon discovering what had happened to Noah, the text informs us that Canaan’s father Ham also acted in a deplorable and shameful way. We read, “And Ham saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside.” This word “saw” implies Ham stood in the tent gawking and staring at his father before telling his brothers. 

Additionally, this word “told” doesn’t mean Ham informed Shem and Japheth, but rather he told them with a measure of delight. In a sense instead of reprimanding his son Canaan and immediately caring for Noah, Ham chose to make fun of his father’s nakedness. This situation and Canaan’s behavior was something he found amusing.

Honestly, I think Noah gets a bad wrap for this story. I’ve heard people describe him in all kinds of condescending ways. I’ve heard people make the case alcohol tarnished his witness and life of obedience - that this was the one lasting stain on his perfect record. I’ve even heard people use this story to rail against the dangers of drinking as well as the pervasiveness of alcoholism in America - which I would agree should be discussed more often within the Christian community, but with a more Biblically sound perspective. 

And yet, I honestly don’t believe the way this story is portrayed is all that fair to Noah. All the passage says is that Noah was a farmer, planted a vineyard, and drank to much… Then the story immediately transitions to how he was subsequently taken advantage of. While it’s true many use this story to emphasize how wrong Noah was by getting drunk in his tent, they overlook the reality that the text (divinely inspired Scripture) doesn’t refer to his behavior as being wicked nor does it classify any of his activities as even being sinful. The truth is that Noah still possessed the moral authority to bless and curse his sons.

It’s true Noah made a mistake (and I can’t emphasize this enough - nothing good results when you find yourself Def-Con 1… We’re all called to be sober-minded), however, it should be pointed out that in Genesis 6 (a couple hundred years before this event) we’re told “Noah was a righteous man, perfect in his generation; and walked with God.” 

What shouldn’t be overlooked (and few pastors mention this) is that even in light of Noah’s lapse in judgment God’s grace in his life remained unshakable… His favor immovable… His pleasure in Noah sure… And Noah’s righteousness secure in the eyes of God! As C.H. Mackintosh writes concerning Noah, “Divine grace had covered all his sins, and clothed his person with a spotless robe of righteousness. Though Noah exposed his nakedness, God did not see it, for He looks not at him in the weakness of his own condition, but in the full power of divine and everlasting righteousness.” WOW!!!

I want you to know this morning that if you’re a believer and you’ve blown it in some way this past week it’s ok! God is not ashamed of you. He's not disappointed in you. The truth is that when He sees you He still sees Jesus’ righteousness covering you! It’s ok! Never forget this amazing reality God’s grace exists because you’re insufficient. When you blow it all you’ve done is demonstrate the unchanging truth that you need more of Jesus!

What made Ham’s actions so egregious was that in the moment he wasn’t seeing his father the way God did! Ham handled this situation poorly because he saw his father’s nakedness rather than looking beyond to see his father’s righteousness. Ham’s focus was on Noah’s shortcomings instead of his right-standing. And as a result he handled this situation contrary to the way God would have wanted him.

Understand… It’s impossible for any of us or the church at large to handle those who’ve made a mistake in our tent if we’re not willing to view that person the way God does. In order to handle such a person in a Godly way we must be willing to look beyond a person’s shame and remember their righteousness before God. 

In contrast to Ham’s approach look at how Shem and Japheth deal with the situation. Not only do they refuse to join in Ham’s ridicule and mockery of their father, but we’re told they “took a garment, laid it on their shoulders, went backward and covered the nakedness of their father… Their faces turned away” so as “not see their father’s nakedness.” 

Shem and Japheth refused to gloat or judge their father’s situation choosing rather to lovingly “cover the nakedness of their father.” This doesn’t mean they were willingly ignorant of what had happened or were turning a blind eye. Instead, what’s being described here are two sons who decided to handle their “down in the dumps dad” with grace. Because Shem and Japheth refused to see their father in any other way than God did notice how they handled the situation… Since Noah was covered by the righteousness of God, they practically returned their father to such a place of covering. 

How interesting that in 1 Peter 4:8 the beloved Apostle would write, “And above all things have fervent love for one another” only to them quote from Proverbs 10:12 “for love will cover a multitude of sins.” Friend, this is what grace does - it covers the sins of others! Keep in mind this idea of “covering” is in direct contrast to exposing or laying bear. We might say the opposite of “covering” would be to “hang someone out to dry” or like Ham to place a person’s shame and shortcomings on display for all to see. I hope you know how you handle another person’s shame reveals a lot about your own heart!

May I ask… How do you handle knowledge of another person’s sin? Do you tell others and gossip about it? Do you inwardly gloat and delight in their failure? Does another’s shortcomings stir within you a greater sense of moral superiority? Do you stand in judgment or by grace do you seek to cover them? Do you seek to restore them to their right position? In Galatians 6:1-3 Paul would exhort the “brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness, considering yourself lest you also be tempted. Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone thinks himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself.”

Here’s why it’s so important we seek to cover one another even when that person doesn’t deserve it… Jesus covered our sins when we didn’t deserve it! This entire idea of covering sin is fundamental to the heart and greater mission of Christ! Romans 4:5-8, “But to him who believes on Jesus who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works: (Paul quotes from Psalms 32) ‘Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.’” (Note: “Impute” means “to take into account.”)

To this point I have found (and maybe you can relate to this) that it’s so hard to walk in the newness of life Jesus died to provide when there are people around constantly reminding you of your old life… People who are so quick to remind you of your former shortcomings and mistakes… So quick to hold your past over your future. Sad to say this is often the very reason people who stumble are so quick to leave a church. They need a fresh start.

Personally, I find this tragic and I know I represent the Elders when I say it’s our prayer Calvary316 is never such a place! I pray we’re always a community of believers that doesn’t judge one another - especially when we blow it, but instead uses such instances to encourage each other to walk and enjoy the newness of life we’ve all found in Christ Jesus! 

I pray we are known as a church more interested in the person you’re becoming and not the one you once were - a church who isn’t judgmental but instead views everyone through the eyes of God… You are not naked… You are forgiven, redeemed by Christ’s sacrifice, set free by the blood, made new through His Spirit! I pray we are a church who, even when you stumble and fall, are quick to lovingly cover and deeply care. Consider that because of Ham’s attitude his successive generations would be cursed while Sham and Japheth would receive a blessing because they represented the heart of God!

I can hear some thinking, “Zach are you saying we should turn a blind eye to sin? Seriously, shouldn’t sin be exposed and in many instances confronted?” Yes. It is true sin should be exposed, however the greater issue is how we should handle the individual once it is.

To this point I want to close by turing to John 8:3-11. We read, “Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, they said to Him, ‘Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?’ This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear. So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, ‘He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.’ And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had raised Himself up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her, ‘Woman, where are those accusers of yours? Has no one condemned you?’ She said, ‘No one, Lord.’ And Jesus said to her, ‘Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.’”

Understand, our text makes no excuses that this women was indeed caught in adultery. Whether she had been set up or acted willingly she had committed a serious sin… A sin the religious establishment was ready to stone her for. And yet, notice how incredibly different Jesus handles this adulterous women… He covered her and showed grace! I can only imagine how radically different Jesus would be addressing the Anthony Weiner situation.

So often those who make such a to do about another person’s sin do so claiming that letting a person off the hook fails to hammer home the severity of the sin. The logic follows that a healthy measure of shame serves as a deterrent. And yet, if these religious men had stoned this women would she have been able to “go and sin no more?” Hardly! She’d be dead!

You see what enabled her to move forward in victory was not greater condemnation, but the fact Jesus covered her and showed amazing grace! In like manner both Shem and Japheth were blessed because they understood, unlike Ham, that for Noah to move forward from his indiscretion he needed to be reminded he was righteously covered. 

Because these men were willing to see their father as God saw him they were therefore able to treat him as God desired. May the same be said of the way the people who make up C316 handles the fallen, the weak, the screw up with our tent. May we see people as Jesus sees them so we can treat them as Jesus would!