Noah and Ham Genesis 9:18-28

Your friend's view is not uncommon; however, the text does not say that Ham raped his father. That would be an inference. What it does say is that Ham "saw the nakedness of his father" (v. 22), which is contrasted to the brothers who "did not see their father's nakedness" (v. 23). Yes, Ham did something to his dad (v. 24), but the Hebrew word for "did" or "had done" here is very general, much like our English word "did." It doesn't imply anything sexual. It leaves the specifics unaddressed. We have to look elsewhere in the context for any clues. I also looked at the Hebrew in v. 21. The word "uncovered" is what's called a hithpael stem. It's a very complicated stem in Hebrew with various possible translations, but the simplest translation value is that of a reflexive action, meaning something that one does to himself or specifically here something that Noah did to himself. It would be very fair to translate v. 21, "And he drank from the wine and became drunk and uncovered himself in the midst of his tent." This translation suggests that Noah, not Ham, uncovered himself. In other words, Noah got drunk and unintentionally exposed himself while drunk. Ham saw it and did or perhaps failed to do something as suggested by the fact that the brothers "covered the nakedness of their father" (v. 23). It is an inference to argue that Ham raped his father and one that does not seem to be warranted by the text.