you refer to "Bible scholars" what you must agree to is that it is only some Bible scholars. you are the one that is making the assumption, perhaps relying on your favorite "Bible scholars" that it must have involved only noah and ham and therefore it must have been some kind of homosexual activity. could it not have been a simple mocking of his father who was uncovered in his sleep and perhaps having a physical reaction to a sexual dream. some would find that funny.<quoted text>
So, in the story of Noah, we at least agree that something happened, but that something is elided in the modern English Bibles. I wonder what you think that something was?
Bible scholars have studied the language used in the older texts and concluded that the words are consistent with other Biblical references to sexual acts. There's really not much question about this among those who study these things. There is only a popular reluctance to acknowledge.
As for justifying anything: I do not approve of taking advantage of anyone while they are drunk. I do not approve of sex between sons and fathers. What happened between Noah and Ham is wrong on many levels.
As for "abomination," let me give you a few other abominations that were listed in Leviticus: Shrimp and lobster; sowing two crops in the same field; mixed fabrics; disrespecting one's parents; having sex with a woman during her period; masturbation and wet dreams; mules; etc.
When you start taking all the other abominations seriously, I will at least respect your beliefs. But I still won't share them.
In the meantime, you are merely a blowhard.
now the phrase is "the nakedness of his father". the Bible also says this;
"The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness." [leviticus 18:18]
so it is possible that what Ham saw was his mother also. therefore if you want to insist that something sexual happened it would also be necessary to consider that it might have involved his mother. or perhaps both mother and father. so you see you grasp at one straw trying to make it more than it was.
my opinion was that he probably saw his very old father having a physical reaction to a dream. but it could be that he saw both of them. there is no biblical support for your interpretation of the story.