What does it mean that Japheth would dwell in the tents of Shem?

Explanation:

Genesis 9:26–27 anticipates the inclusion of the Gentiles in the covenant of grace. We can deduce this in two steps: first, by paying close attention to the blessing for Shem; second, by identifying when the descendants of Japheth would be incorporated into the tents of Shem.

First, Noah says the term blessed to the Lord, and only indirectly to Shem, because he recognizes that whatever blessing comes to Shem is the work of the Lord. Thus, Noah identifies Shem by his relationship to God, the God of Shem (Genesis 9:26). By this, Noah is basically identifying the chosen line of promise as Shem’s offspring. This is borne out later, in the genealogy of Genesis 9:26, which ends with Abram,¹ the father of Israel (John 8:39). God will work through the people of Israel by increasing them, rescuing them from Egypt, giving them the law, establishing them in Canaan, and bringing forth Jesus through their line. This is the outworking of Noah’s blessing upon Shem.

Second, when do the descendants of Japheth dwell in the tents of Shem, whose descendants form the nation of Israel? We find Japheth’s descendants listed in Genesis 10:2–5, among whom is Javan (יָוָן, Genesis 10:2, Genesis 10:5). That name corresponds to a Greek word (Ἰάων) from whom the Ionians (Ἰάονες) are derived, and the Ionians are the parent tribe of the Greeks (that is, the Gentiles).² We do not find these descendants of Japheth interacting much with the Israelites in subsequent Scripture. The one exception is what we read in Joel 3:6, which has a reference to the Greeks (הַיְּוָנִים, plural of יָוָן).

Of course, when we interpret Genesis 9:26 in light of the whole of Scripture, we see that eventually the Gentiles reside under the shelter of the God of Shem.³ We also know that many Greek speakers were incorporated into the church early on, and the apostle Paul often refers to the Greek speakers (Genesis 9:26). Thus, that Japheth’s descendants, including the Greeks, dwell in the tents of Shem likely refers to the Gentiles’ being incorporated into the people of God through the ministry of Jesus Christ.

Counterargument:

While this is an admirable view, it is difficult to square in light of the fact that Noah does not necessarily know that the Gentiles would eventually be incorporated into tents of Shem through the ministry of Christ. We know from the apostle Paul that the mystery of the incorporation of the Gentiles into the church was only revealed after the ministry of Christ. Paul explicitly states that this mystery of the incorporation of the Gentiles was hidden to earlier generations but made known to the holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit in his own day (Ephesians 3:5–6). Thus, Noah cannot have known that the descendants of Japheth, if these are the Gentiles, would be incorporated into the tents of Shem.

Response to counterargument:

The original speaker did not always know all the ways a statement of his would have future significance. So here, Noah does not necessarily know all the ways that his blessing upon Shem and Japheth would be fulfilled, nor does he have to know; their fulfillment will be determined by the providential hand of God.

Now that the blessing has been announced and the history of Israel recorded in Scripture, do we have enough information to identify how Noah’s blessing was fulfilled? And if so, what procedure should we follow for doing this? We should investigate what Scripture says about Japheth’s descendants dwelling in the tents of Shem. Shem’s descendants are the Israelites, and when these descendants drove Canaan from the land, various nations partnered with them to do so. Perhaps Japheth represents one of these partner nations. The problem here is that the nations that are recorded as partnering with Israel are from the line of Ham.⁴

If we look at the broad story of Scripture, we learn that a people is incorporated into the tents of Shem, namely, the Gentiles. And this incorporation is no small detail. That the Gentiles (including the Greeks) are grafted into the house of Israel through faith in Jesus Christ is a major Pauline theme. Thus, we have a beautiful correlation between Genesis 9:26–27 and the canon as a whole. The Canaanites, who represent godless evildoers, are cursed. Shem, the head of Abraham, and Israel are blessed. And those who were once outside the tents of Shem, that is, the Gentiles who are represented by Japheth, are grafted in through the ministry of Christ.

Explanation:

In Genesis 10:2–5 the narrator names the descendants of Japheth. Among their names are Tarshish, Tubal, Javan, and the coastland peoples. The prophet Isaiah prophecies of a time when God will send a sign among the nations, including Tarshish, Tubal, Javan, and the coastlands far away, in order to reveal his glory to those nations (Is 66:19). In turn, those nations will bring their offerings to the Lord, just as the Israelites brought their offerings (Isaiah 66:20).

Isaiah was prophesying about the inclusion of the Gentiles into the people of God. And what nations represent the Gentiles in this prophecy? The descendants of Japheth, including Tarshish, Tubal, Javan, and the coastland peoples.⁵

Counterargument:

This argument is all well and good except that Isaiah prophecies that descendants of Canaan will also bring offerings to God. In Isaiah 19:21 we read that the Lord will make himself known to the Egyptians, and the Egyptians will know the Lord and worship him with sacrifice and offerings. Of course, the Egyptians are descendants of Canaan, who was cursed (Genesis 10:6). This means we should be wary of the notion that the curses on Canaan, and the blessings on Shem and Japheth, correlate in a one-to-one fashion with later nations. In fact, the blessing on Japheth could simply be a historical account that reflects the ancient Near Eastern custom of the older child receiving a greater inheritance.

Explanation:

When we interpret a text, one of our aims is to understand what the author meant. Unfortunately, when it comes to what it means that Japheth would dwell in the tents of Shem we simply do not have enough information to make a decision.¹⁰ It could be a prophecy that anticipates the future incorporation of the Gentiles into the people of God.¹¹ Or it could refer to a future political alliance between Israel and another nation against Canaan.¹² Or it could simply mean that because Shem was the oldest, he received the largest blessing, and Japheth would do well to dwell under Shem’s protection. In any case, the original author did not give us enough information to decide between these, so we must remain agnostic.

Counterargument:

The author blesses Shem and Japheth. When he does, the blessings are notably different. Shem is generally blessed, while Noah asks that Japheth be enlarged and that he live in the tents of Shem. We do not normally think of living under another’s tent as a blessing, so there must be a reason for Noah’s remark. To put it another way, one must concede that both Shem and Japheth received a blessing from Noah. Canaan was cursed, Shem and Japheth were blessed. If there is no marked difference between being blessed in general (as in the case of Shem) and blessed by way of a promise that one will dwell in the tents of another (as in the case of Japheth), then why should Noah have stated the latter? In fact, there must be something to the fact that Japheth would dwell in the tents of Shem; otherwise, Noah would have simply blessed both sons the same.

Response to counterargument:

The argument here is not that Noah had no reason for stating the blessing on Japheth. In fact, when Noah blessed Japheth by asking that Japheth be enlarged and dwell in the tents of Shem, he certainly had a specific blessing in mind. That the narrator records this detail shows that the narrator, too, thought it important enough to include. Still, our purpose is to identify the author’s intention from the context, and in this case, there is simply not enough information. That the author has intention is not the point; rather, the point is that in this case, we cannot recover his intention.

Explanation:

We find the blessings of Shem and Japheth in the narrative section of Genesis 9:20–28, which is really about Abraham's placing a curse on Canaan.¹³ The point of the narrative is to explain that one’s attitude in one’s community is important. Generation follows generation and those who respect the former generation will prosper while those who disrespect their fathers will be cursed.¹⁴ So the primary focus is on cursing Canaan for the sins of his father. Still, the narrator has introduced Shem and Japheth into the account, so he includes their blessings in the same narrative. Likely those blessings were originally separate from the curse of Canaan, and the author has incorporated them all into the same narrative. Thus, we cannot deduce the meaning of the blessing of Japheth in the context of this story because the account originated outside this story.¹⁵

Counterargument:

There are two problems with this view. First, there is no argument for the claim that the blessings of Shem and Japheth originated outside the account of the curse on Canaan. It is one thing to state that certain aspects of a passage were taken from other traditions and another to give arguments to support such a claim. In this case, no argument is given. On the contrary, it only makes sense that at the same time that Noah curses Canaan for Ham’s disrespectful behaviour, he would bless Shem and Japheth for their worthy behaviour. Thus, from a literary perspective, the blessings of Shem and Japheth find a natural home in Genesis 9:20–28.

Second, it is an interpretative mistake not to interpret a passage as it stands in the canon. In other words, the material we have in Scripture has been arranged by an author inspired by the Holy. This means that we should not break Scripture into pieces but should interpret each passage in the context of the canon. There is a reason why the narrator, inspired by the Holy Spirit, included the curse of Canaan and the blessings of Shem and Japheth together. Our job as exegetes is not to pull the text apart but to identify its meaning as presented to us.

Possible weaknesses:

The problem with this view is that it overlooks the primeval genre of Genesis 9:20–28. The opening chapters of Genesis explain broad aspects of reality including creation, sin, death, culture, language, and so on. We call this type of ancient Near Eastern literature primeval. Since the blessings and curses fall within the primeval genre, we have good reason to think that these events are recorded with a broad purpose in mind. This is most clear in terms of the curse of Canaan, as we know that Canaan will represent ungodly behaviour throughout the Old Testament. We also know that Shem is blessed in the sense that Israel will come from his line. Thus, we should assume the author has a meaning in mind when he notes that Japheth would live in the tents of Shem.

Explanation:

We know that Shem represents Israel and that Japheth would dwell in the tents of Shem. We also know that Canaan would be a slave to both Shem and Japheth. This means we can look to the history of Israel to see if they partnered with any nations connected to Japheth’s line, as they drove Canaan from the land. One such ally was the Philistines.¹⁸ Added to this, we know that the Philistines were sometimes referred to as sea people.¹⁹ When we look at the genealogy of Japheth, we learn that his descendants were sea people (Genesis 10:5). Thus, we can conclude that the blessing that Japheth would dwell in the tents of Shem is a prophecy about the future relationship between Israel and the Philistines.²⁰

Counterargument:

There are two problems with this view. First, no evidence is offered for when the Israelites and the Philistines became serious partners in the effort to drive Canaan from the land. On the other hand, we know that Israel was an enemy of the Philistines (1 Samuel 4:1–11). Second, and more to the point, the Philistines are listed as descendants of Ham (Genesis 10:14).²¹ If the Philistines are descendants of Ham, then they are not descendants of Japheth.