Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Now, why do many people think Noah was in the right here, or that we should look at it that way. Isn't it because he is supposed to be the man of God, and so we give him the benefit of the doubt? And isn't it because the curse seemed to come true? But the Bible never tells us to take this approach. It simply tells the story. It's up to us to interpret it. Other men of God have failed late in life.
|
To be honest, I have never taken it this way. Whether or not Noah's actions were acceptable or righteous has not been a basis for any kind of position of righteousness in my post-LCM life. If we only had the curse, by itself, we might have basis for accusing Noah rather than Ham or Canaan.
But in terms of the whole story, it does not provide enough of anything to create a "cover your leader" kind of command or even suggestion in the "they can do no wrong" way that Nee/Lee/BBs push it. Lee did not suggest that cursing Ham was bad. He uses it as excuse to do the same about others. That was not a sin in his eyes either. So the title of this thread aptly questions whether there was a sin of Noah. And if there was, did it support deputy authority.
I think that the answer is that there may have been a sin, but it was not the one that Nee, Lee and the BBs think there was. And within a LCM context, that is the only thing that matters.