One thought on “Noah Flood”

  1. Thank you for posting those four takes on the chiasmus detailing the Noachian cycle. Specifically, thanks for those helps to clarifying Ham’s sin. I now am certain that what Ham did is paired with “Noah: the righteous man,” because it is part of the larger chiasmus (although it is conceptual, rather than “words or phrases). It is an exact parallel to what the Serpent did to “uncover” Adam and Eve’s nakedness to themselves (as emphasised by their clothing themselves with fig leaves, God’s clothing them with (blood-bought) pelts, and the linen garments that the saint’s were clothed with in Revelations.) That is, Ham saw that Noah had no righteousness of his own. Ham, in his pride of his own works, as brought out by his naming one of his sons, “slave,” brought that to his brothers’ attention, and they, knowing that their father brought them through the flood because of his trust in God, acted properly. Ham’s “spiritual” seed were then cursed. Romans 9:32: Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works.(NASB) Therefore, Noah was righteous because he trusted God.
    The above is sketchy, but I hope you can see that I approached this first with other tools. Just happy that another tool focused the picture better. (And, yes, I understand the warning about “our own imaginations.”) Thank you even for that reminder!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.