Levítico 13

Levítico 13

Guzik - The methodology in this passage erred on the side of safety. If a person could not be pronounced “clean” with certainty, they were then isolated until they could be pronounced clean. i. These judgments were based on sound medical diagnosis and concern. They were made more with the idea of protecting the community from the outbreak of disease than with the idea of the rights of the individual. ii. “The Hebrew priest-physicians appear to have been the first in the ancient world to isolate persons suspected of infectious or contagious diseases.” (Harrison) iii. Illnesses such as smallpox, measles, and scarlet fever might start out with a skin condition considered to be leprosy—and the person would be isolated for the necessary time until the condition cleared up. This quarantine helped prevent the spread of these diseases among the people of Israel. George Bush - Among the various diseases to which the Israelites were subject, none was so odious, so formidable, so incurable as the Leprosy, which forms the subject of the present chapter. Although this disease was not peculiar to the Jews, as it prevailed in Egypt, Syria, and the northern part of upper Asia, yet it was regarded by the chosen people as proceeding immediately from the hand of God, and was always considered as a punishment for sin. Accordingly it was usually denominated by them הנגע hannëga, נגע צרעת nëga tzâraath, the stroke or wound, i. e. by supplying the ellipsis, the stroke or wound of the Lord. The disease, though not unknown in modern times, is yet comparatively rare, especially in European countries, and in our own, is scarcely known at all. Its leading characteristic, as outwardly visible, is a spotted skin. These spots in the outset are commonly small, resembling the pustules made by the prick of a pin, but they gradually increase in size, and often for a number of years, till they become as large as a coffee-bean, covering the whole body, and finally terminating in ulcers, which penetrate inwardly till they have produced a complete caries of the bones, and the whole body becomes little better than a mass of corruption. But spots upon the body resembling these were not always the effect of leprosy; at therefore became important to lay down rules for distinguishing between leprous spots and those which are harmless, and result from other causes. This is the object of the present chapter; and no part of the Levitical code will appear more worthy of its divine author than this, when we consider that it was designed, not wantonly to fix the charge of being a leper upon an innocent person, and thus to impose upon him a load of grievous restraints and inconveniences, but to ascertain in the fairest and most satisfactory manner the real subjects of the scourge, and to separate them from all intercourse with their fellow-men. As this was the prominent aim of the laws on this subject, viz. to secure a fair and impartial decision of the main question, of the fact of the disease, Moses has not mentioned those signs of leprosy which admitted of no doubt, but those only which might be the subject of contention, and left it to the priests to distinguish between the really leprous, and those who had only the appearance of being such. (Leviticus 13 Commentary) Arnold Fruchtenbaum has an interesting note on leprosy in his article entitled "The Three Messianic Miracles".... Some time prior to the coming of Yeshua (Jesus), the ancient rabbis separated miracles into two categories. First were those miracles anyone would be able to perform if they were empowered by the Spirit of God to do so. The second category of miracles were called "messianic miracles," which were miracles only the Messiah would be able to perform. Yeshua did miracles in both categories: general miracles and also messianic miracles. So because of the rabbinic teaching that certain miracles would be reserved only for the Messiah to do, whenever He performed a messianic miracle it created a different type of reaction than when He performed other types of miracles. The first messianic miracle was the healing of a leper....From the time the Mosaic Law was completed, there was no record of any Jew who had been healed of leprosy. While Miriam was healed of leprosy, this was before the completion of the Law. Naaman was healed of leprosy, but he was a Syrian Gentile, not a Jew. From the time the Mosaic Law was completed, there was never a case of any Jew being healed of leprosy. Leprosy was the one disease that was left out of rabbinic cures; there was no cure for leprosy whatsoever. Yet Leviticus 13-14 gave the Levitical Priesthood detailed instructions as to what they were to do in case a leper was healed. On the day that a leper approached the priesthood and said, "I was a leper but now I have been healed," the priesthood was to give an initial offering of two birds. For the next seven days, they were to investigate intensively the situation to determine three things. First, was the person really a leper? Second, if he was a real leper, was he really cured of his leprosy? Third, if he was truly cured of his leprosy, what were the circumstances of the healing? If after seven days of investigation they were firmly convinced that the man had been a leper, had been healed of his leprosy, and the circumstances were proper, then, on the eighth day there would be a lengthy series of offerings. All together, there were four different offerings. First, there was a trespass-offering; second, a sin-offering; third, a burnt-offering; and fourth, a meal-offering. Then came the application of the blood of the trespass-offering upon the healed leper followed by the application of the blood of the sin-offering upon the healed leper. The ceremony would then end with the anointing of oil upon the healed leper. Although the priesthood had all these detailed instructions as to how they were to respond in the case of a healed leper, they never had the opportunity to put these instructions into effect, because from the time the Mosaic Law was given, no Jew was ever healed of leprosy. As a result, it was taught by the rabbis that only the Messiah would be able to heal a Jewish leper.... (The Three Messianic Miracles) Leon Hyatt has an in depth introduction - (Original Article) Introduction A third type of uncleanness was from a type of disease. In people it began with a spot on the skin that spread and eventually became an open sore. The Hebrews were familiar with a malady that affected cloth and leather that had a similar appearance to the human disease. They were also aware of a malady that affected stone houses that had a similar appearance. They called all three conditions by the same name, which was tsaraath. Jehovah chose the three conditions called by that name as another symbol of sin, to remind His people of their responsibility to avoid sin at all times and to work to remove the effects of sin from their lives. Few Biblical subjects have been more clouded with misinterpretation and harmful, superstitious, unscholarly speculation than this one. The misunderstanding originated in the fact that the conditions described in Leviticus 13 are not known today, and translators did not know how to translate the name into other languages. When the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek in the first or second century B.C., the translators rendered the Hebrew name for the disease with the Greek word “lepra.” Whereas the Hebrew name seems to have meant “an humbling malady,” the Greek name means “scaly.” The Greek word lepra, unlike the Hebrew word tsaraath, was general in meaning and did not apply to any certain malady. Centuries later, when Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, he transliterated the Greek name instead of using a Latin word. Later when the Bible began to be translated into English, English translators followed Jerome’s practice and transliterated the Greek word into their versions. Thus, in English translations the disease came to be called “leprosy.” Modern leprosy is not the same disease that the Hebrews called tsaraath, so English readers began with a misconception of the disease described in this chapter. Then one layer of misinformation was laid upon another until people came to believe that the disease described in this chapter was one of the most terrible that ever existed. They came to have a superstitious fear of the word “leprosy.” That fear has made it exceedingly difficult for Bible readers to arrive at a proper interpretation of this chapter. Only in recent years are people beginning to overcome that fear, allowing us to make a more reasoned interpretation of this chapter. In seeking to unravel the confusion that has existed with regard to this disease, it is important to examine the manner in which the disease is described in Scripture. First, the disease could affect cloth or leather (Lev. 13:47-58) and stones houses (Lev. 14:34-53), as well as people (Lev. 13:2-46). Second, the disease in humans was characterized by six symptoms: (1) a swollen, scabby, or itchy spot or spots on the skin (Lev. 13:2,6- 8,10,19,30,31,35-36,43), (2) loss of color of the skin in the affected spot or spots (Ex. 4:6; Lev. 13:3,10,19,24,42-43; Num. 12:10; 2 Kings 5:27), (3) lightening of the color of the hair in the affected spot or spots (Lev. 13:3,10,20,25,30); (4) a tendency for the spot or spots to spread in the skin (Lev. 13:6-8,22,27,35- 36); (5) penetration of the spot or spots into the flesh below the skin (Lev. 13:20,21,25,30) and (6) in advanced stages, an open, raw sore or sores in the spot or spots (Lev. 13:10-11,14-15). Third, nowhere in the Scripture is the malady called loathsome, foul, repugnant, horrible, stinking, or deadly. Num. 12:11-12 has been wrongly used to support the position that leprosy was a repulsive and deadly disease. Those verses contain the plea of Aaron in behalf of Miriam after she was stricken with the malady for defying Moses. Aaron said, “Alas, my lord, I beseech you, do not lay the sin on us, by which we have done foolishly, and by which we have sinned. Do not let her be like a dead one, of whom the flesh is half consumed when he comes out of his mother’s womb.” Aaron’s description is horrible and frightening, but Aaron was describing the effects of sin on a person’s life, not the symptoms of the disease. Aaron’s description has nothing to do with the symptoms of the disease that is described in this chapter. Fourth, the disease is not described in Scripture as being incurable. In fact, quite to the contrary, Leviticus 14:1-32, which describes cleansing from the disease, is built on the assumption that the disease was curable and that a cure could to be expected (see comments on those verses in MESSAGE 17). The disease described in this chapter, according to these facts, was definitely not the unspeakably abominable affliction that it has so often been described as being. Several successive steps led to the false ideas about the Biblical disease that were prevalent for so many years. The first step was misinterpreting the Scriptures to contend that the disease described in this chapter was proof that the person had sinned a terrible sin. That view is just one form of the idea that affliction is always proof of sin, a position that should have been dispelled for all time by the book of Job. The disease is not described as a result of sin or proof of sin, but as a symbol for sin. Then, Scripture was further misinterpreted to contend that the disease was a special malady visited on people only by a blow from the Lord. The striking of Moses (Ex. 4:6), Miriam (Num. 12:10), Gehazzi (II Kings 5:27), and Uzziah (II King 15:5; II Chr. 26:20-23) with the disease has been used as evidence that the disease was contracted only as a punishment from Jehovah God. However, just because some people were struck with this disease as punishment does not mean that every case of the disease was a visitation of God’s wrath. Actually, Moses’ contracting the disease supports that view. When Moses was not stricken with the disease, God did not put it on him as a punishment but as a sign of His power to persuade Pharaoh to let the Israelites go free (Ex. 4:6-8). The second step in the development of false ideas about the disease described in this chapter came from an effort in relatively modern times to identify the Biblical disease with the disease that today is called by the name “leprosy.” The name “leprosy” did not come from a disease known by that name, but by transliterating a Greek word into English. So after the Greek word was brought over into English, people sought to know what disease it represented. In trying to identify the disease, people began by observing diseases that begin as a spot on the skin and then spread through the body. Since it was already believed that the Biblical disease was an awful visitation from sin, they sought for the most terrible disease known that could by any stretch of the imagination could fit the Biblical description. Some connected the disease with elephantiasis, which certainly is a fearful disease because of the way it distorts the appearance of the afflicted person. It is caused by a type of worm that cuts off the flow of blood and lymph from the extremities of the body. Its effects are first seen as a spot on the skin. As it progresses, the legs, arms, or head become filled with fluid and are distorted all out of shape. Then, the skin often breaks and bleeds. If it affects the legs, they become so puffy that the skin of the legs expands over the feet until the legs of the person look like the legs of an elephant. Thus, the disease was named “elephantiasis.” However, no connection exists between elephantiasis and the disease described in this chapter. At no time is elephantiasis characterized by whiteness or clearness of the skin and lightening of the hair in the affected part. And, nowhere in the Scripture are the severe symptoms of elephantiasis described in connection with the Biblical disease. In the end, the Biblical disease came to be connected with the disease that is called “leprosy” today, but that name came from applying the transliterated Greek term lepra to the disease, not because it already had that name. The disease that is known as leprosy in modern times has two forms: lepromatous (skin) and tuberculoid (nerve). The two forms are caused by slightly different bacilli and have slightly different symptoms in that the tubercular variety results in greater nerve damage. Both forms of the disease begin with reddish or brownish patches on the skin. As the disease progresses, the bacilli spread along the nerves to affect especially the ear lobes, the eyes, the chin, the elbow, the knees, or the mucous membrane of the nose, throat, and hands. Bones become porous and fragile, and the nerves become insensitive. The afflicted person damages the fragile bones because he or she has no feeling in the affected parts of the body. The bones chip away and are absorbed by the body, so that the fingers and toes grow shorter. The modern disease called “leprosy” is a serious disease, but it has no more connection with the disease described in this chapter than elephantiasis has. Modern leprosy is not characterized by loss of color in the skin or by lightening of the hair, and nowhere in Scripture are the severe later stages of modern leprosy mentioned in connection with the Biblical disease. Modern leprosy is simply not the same disease as the disease described in this chapter. The third step in the development of false ideas concerning the disease described in this chapter came as Christian preachers and teachers, desiring to show the awfulness of sin, dramatized and elaborated the symptoms of modern leprosy and used them as symbols and pictures of the results of sin. They sometimes confused and combined the symptoms of modern leprosy with elephantiasis. Then they exaggerated the symptoms beyond reality and described them in the most vivid of language. Thus, leprosy came to be thought of as a much more horrible disease than it really is, and all of those horrible ideas were then applied to the Biblical disease. Actually, the concept of the disease in the minds of most Christians bore no resemblance to the disease described in the Scripture. The final step in this ugly process was turning uncleanness from the Biblical disease into a stigma placed on modern leprosy. People with modern leprosy were isolated in colonies and ostracized from society. This quarantining of people with modern leprosy was unnecessary, because leprosy is only slightly contagious. When leper colonies were maintained around the world, people served in them as doctors, nurses, and orderlies for years without ever contracting the disease, simply because they observed simple, easy-to-follow rules of hygiene. However, the person afflicted with the modern disease called “leprosy” became a despised and feared person, totally out of proportion to the real seriousness of the disease. The social ostracism that was placed on the disease was worse than the physical symptoms of the disease. A young man named Sidney Maurice Levyson, became afflicted with modern leprosy in its lepromatic form and was confined in a leprosarium at Carville, Louisiana. He soon realized the injustice of fearing and ostracizing people with leprosy, and he began a campaign to educate the world in an effort to correct the false ideas that had grown up in connection with the disease of leprosy. He conducted his campaign through a newspaper named “The Sixty-six Star,” which he published and distributed from the hospital. Eventually the newspaper gained world-wide reading. He also conducted his campaign through a book he wrote with Lawrence G. Blochman, entitled Alone No Longer. The book was published in 1963 by Funk and Wagnalls Co., Inc., of New York City. Response came more quickly than expected. Two concrete accomplishments resulted. One was the changing of the name of modern leprosy to “Hansen’s Disease,” a name that was taken from the name of the man who pioneered modern research on the disease. Many resisted this change of name on the grounds that a disease should not be named for a man who worked toward its cure. The contention was that such a name seems to indicate that Doctor Hansen had the disease rather than that he worked toward its cure. Nonetheless, the name gained wide acceptance and is commonly used today. The second result of Levyson’s efforts was an effort on the part of some to rename the disease described in Leviticus 13. This effort has not gained wide acceptance, though it still should happen. The effort to bring a foreign word into another language by transliteration is always a dangerous one, because the word so easily changes its meaning and its connotation in the process. Just such a change in meaning occurred with the Biblical disease as described above, and it opened the way for serious misunderstanding of the nature of the disease. However, an effort to coin another new English word meets with the same difficulties. No modern disease is known that fits the symptoms of the disease described in Leviticus 13; therefore, most modern English translations of the Bible continue to use the traditional rendering and transliterate the name from Greek through Latin as “leprosy.” Two exceptions to this practice are the Jerusalem Bible, which translates the name as “a malignant skin disease” and Holman Christian Standard Bible, which translates if as “skin disease.” These renderings are not helpful, because they tend to indicate that the disease of Leviticus 13 can be any skin disease. That implication is certainly false, because the chapter describes specific, identifiable symptoms for the disease. Therefore, this writing will use the transliteration of the Hebrew name for the disease. That practice has its difficulties, but it at least breaks free from the mistaken ideas connected with names used in the past. Therefore, please try to become accustomed to the name “tsaraath.” The disease described in Leviticus 13 was not a dreadful, repulsive disease that doomed a person to sure and painful death. It was rather a malady that was not exceedingly injurious to the person’s health and from which he could have reasonable hope of recovery. Sidney Levyson, who did so much to inform the world of facts about modern leprosy, was not as well informed concerning the Biblical disease. He followed certain interpreters who contended that the Hebrew term applied to a whole family of skin diseases. One careful reading of Leviticus 13 will show that view is not correct. The symptoms of the disease are clearly defined and always consistent. Leviticus 13 also gives instructions concerning how to distinguish this disease from other similar diseases (see comments on Lev. 13:4-6,12-13,28,34,38-39 below). As described in this chapter, the disease was one certain malady that began on the skin and spread outward and inward in the person’s flesh. Its most serious stage was characterized by a raw sore in the stricken spot or spots. However, the Hebrew name for the disease was also used to designate a certain type of growth that attached itself to cloth and leather and another type of growth that attached itself to stone houses. The three maladies could not have been the same disease, because human infections do not spread to cloth and stone, and germs that thrive in living flesh do not live in inanimate matter. The symptoms of the three maladies were similar in appearance. Therefore, the Hebrews considered them to be one malady and called all three conditions by the same name. Much misunderstanding has also been involved in the effort to explain the purpose of the Leviticus regulations concerning this disease. Most often, the regulations have been explained as health laws. It has been said that their purposes was to identify an especially contagious disease and isolate the people who were afflicted with it to prevent the disease from spreading. However, no mention is made in the Bible of isolating people with other diseases that were known to be contagious; and the Bible places no emphasis on any contagious qualities of this disease. Furthermore, in the text no attention at all is given to trying to cure the disease. The concern of the text is with cleansing the person after he or she had been cured. The text does not reveal concern with stopping a spreading health menace but concern with using the disease as a symbol. The proper understanding of the purpose for uncleanness from tsaraath was to use them as teaching symbols. Like the other types of uncleanness, the three conditions called “tsaraath” were chosen by Jehovah, not because of their inherent awfulness, but in order to use them as symbols. They were made to be symbols of sin. Wherever the diseases occurred, they were to be reminders to the Israelites that they were obligated to avoid contact with sin in every way possible. A man afflicted with tsaraath was put to considerable inconvenience, but he was not in as severe a physical condition as has been supposed. It might be questioned as to whether it was fair to put a man or woman to such inconvenience, simply so that he or she could become a symbol useful to Jehovah. The answer depends on how much significance is attached to the surrender of a person’s life to Jehovah to be used in any way He sees fit. Accepting the covenant meant that an Israelite surrendered his or her life to Jehovah in just that fashion. If the person really meant to make that kind of a surrender, he knew that the highest achievement of his life was to do the will of Jehovah, even if it meant giving up his wealth, his friends, or his life. From that point of view, it was an honor for a person to be used by Jehovah to warn others of the dangers of sin. Being used in that manner by Jehovah was as worthy a purpose for a person’s life as any other calling that Jehovah could give him. If Jehovah chose to set him apart from other people as a priest. Leviticus 13:2 "When a man has on the skin of his body a swelling or a scab or a bright spot, and it becomes an infection of leprosy on the skin of his body, then he shall be brought to Aaron the priest or to one of his sons the priests. skin of. Lev 7:8. Isaiah 3:9. rising. or, swelling. Lev 14:10, 19, 43, etc. a scab. Lev 14:56. Dt 28:27. Isaiah 3:17. the plague of leprosy. Lev 14:3, 35. Ex 4:6, 7. Nu 12:10, 12. Dt 24:8. 28:27. 2 S 3:29. 2Kings 5:1, 27. 2 Ch 26:19-21. Ps 38:5-7. Isaiah 1:5, 6. Mt 10:6-8. 11:4, 5. 1 Co 6:11. he shall. Dt 17:8, 9. 24:8. Mal 2:7. Mt 8:4. Mk 1:44. Lk 5:14. 17:14. the priest. Ps 19:12. Jn 2:25. Heb 4:13. Rev 1:14) Leviticus Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries REGULATIONS REGARDING LEPROSY KEY WORDS IN LEVITICUS 13 Mark - 20x in 14v Clean (cleansing) - 19x in 14v Unclean - 22x in 17v Wash - 7x in 6v Priest - 56x in 40v Leprosy - 18x in 16v Leon Hyatt - When a person was suspected of having tsaraath, he was to be taken to the priests, who were expected to be qualified to determine if the condition really was tsaraath. Either the high priest or an ordinary priest could make the determination. The reason for taking him to a priest instead of to a doctor was not the shortage of doctors in the wilderness, though we know nothing about whether any Israelites at that time were skilled in medicine or not. The Israelites had other surprising skills, like those required for building The Tabernacle (Ex. 35:30-36:3). Other people with special training may have been present as well, out of 600,00 men over 20 years of age who left Egypt (probably at total of about 2,000,000 when women and children are so considered). Neither was he to be taken to the priests because of a lack of respect for doctors, as some have suggested. The reason was that medical questions were not involved. A religious ceremony was involved. It is best, therefore, not to refer to the examination of the priest as a diagnosis. The priest was not expected to diagnose the disease for treatment but to recognize the malady for ceremonial purposes. (Message 16 - Leviticus 13:1-59) David Guzik - Leprosy is like sin in many ways. There are some good reasons why many ancient rabbis considered a leper as someone already dead. Leprosy is like sin in that: • It begins as nothing. • It is painless in its first stages. • It grows slowly. • It often remits for a while and then returns. • It numbs the senses—one cannot feel in the afflicted area. • It causes decay and deformity. • It gives a person a repulsive appearance. “These precautions were taken not merely for sanitary reasons, or to guard against contagion, for it is not certain that leprosy was contagious, but in order that the people might be taught through the parable of leprosy, what a fearful and loathsome thing sin is in the sight of God.” (Taylor) iv. “Leprosy was indeed nothing short of a living death, a poisoning of the springs, a corrupting of all the humours of life; a dissolution little by little of the whole body, so that one limb after another actually decayed and fell away.” (Trench) Criswell - The biblical term "leprosy" (sara`at, Heb.) denoted any scaly condition of human skin or even of inanimate objects. It might have included, but was not identical to, modern leprosy or Hansen's disease. It might also have included ringworm, scabies, forms of dermatitis, mildew, fungus, etc. This extended section on leprosy is important because in the Scriptures leprosy frequently symbolizes sin (cf. Ps. 38:3-8; Isa. 1:6). The repulsive features of sin are vividly illustrated in leprosy: (1) Leprosy portrays the internal nature of sin (cf. James 1:14). (2) Leprosy is a loathsome disease, showing the exceeding despicableness of sin (cf. Rom. 7:13). (3) Leprosy isolates someone both from society and from the services of the sanctuary, just as sin separates a man from the presence of God (cf. Isa. 59:2; Rev. 21:27). (4) Leprosy, like sin, is an illness that grows progressively worse (cf. James 1:15). (5) Leprosy is considered to be a contagious disease (cf. Lev 13:45-46, note); sin is also contagious in that when the clean and the unclean come together, the unclean invariably contaminates the clean. Andrew Bonar (Spurgeon called his notes on Leviticus "Very precious.") Here are three indications of leprosy begun:—1. “A rising,” or boil. 2. “A scab,” or small tumor. 3. “A bright spot.” There is inquiry to be made into the slightest indications of the disease; if not prominent, as a boil or tumor, yet as a “bright spot” it may be there. Observe the first appearances of evil in your soul. Detect the leprosy by what you see in your heart’s desire, if not in your words, or in acts. It is said, that “the bright spot” which indicates a leprosy begun, is often so small that it is like pustules made by the pricking of a pin; and so may be your first slight, passing wish, or half-curious look upon forbidden fruit. It is known that one infected with this disease may live long; one born with it may live fifty years: one who got it by contagion, twenty years (Jahn’s Archæologie); and then in the end die suddenly, and leave the same awful disease to his children. It was thus with Adam; in him it began with no more than a small “bright spot”—yon fruit so fair, pleasant, to be desired. It then wrought in him all the 930 years of his lifetime—and he left it to us. A special sin often resembles the beginning of leprosy; as for example, Noah’s drinking too freely of the wine that was the produce of the first grapes that grew on the new earth.(Leviticus 13 The Leprosy - Indwelling Sin - Its Horrid Features) George Bush - Heb. דהיה לנגע צרעת vehâyâh lenega tzârâath, and it become to a stroke of leprosy. That is, so as to assume the appearance and excite the suspicion of leprosy. The term ‘leprosy,’ is derived from the Gr. λεπρα, lepra, from λεπις, a scale, because in this disease the body was often covered with thin white scales, so as to give it the appearance of snow. Thus it is said of the hand of Moses, Ex. 4:6, that it was ‘leprous as snow;’ and of Miriam, Num. 12:10, that ‘she became leprous, white as snow;’ so also of Gehazi, 2 Kings, 5:27, that ‘he went from his (Elisha’s) presence, a leper as white as snow.’ This peculiarity of the disease is thus accounted for in the ‘Medica Sacra’ of Mead. ‘The seeds of leprous contagion are mixed with an acrid and salt humor, derived from the blood, which, as it naturally ought partly to have turned into nutriment, and partly to have perspired through the skin, it now lodges and corrodes the little scales of the cuticle, and these becoming dry and white, sometimes even as white as snow, are separated from the skin, and fall off like bran.’ The Heb. term is צרעת tzâraah, from a root signifying to strike, or smite as with some venomous or infectious matter. Hence, the true import of the original is a fretting soreness, or a piercing infectious scabbiness, denominated also in the scriptures, ‘the plague’ i. e. the ‘stroke,’ or the ‘wound’ of leprosy, as the Jews regarded it as a disease sent directly from God as a punishment of sin, Moses having prescribed no natural remedy for the cure of it. In the Chal. it is termed סגירות segiruth, shutting up, because it caused men to be secluded from society. This dreadful disease which prevails in Egypt and Syria, generally manifests itself at first, in the manner described in the text. Its commencement is scarcely perceptible; there appearing only a few reddish spots on the skin which are not attended with pain or any other symptom, but which cannot be removed. It increases imperceptibly, and continues for some years to be more and more manifest. The spots become larger, spreading over the skin, till at length they cover the whole body with a leprous scurf. The disease affects at the same time the marrow and the bones; so much so, that the farthest joints in the system gradually lose their powers, and the members fall together in such a manner, as to give the body a mutilated and dreadful appearance. In its final stages, the whole mass of the patient’s flesh and blood seems to turn to corruption, and he may be said almost literally to fall to pieces. This disease, though very infrequent in Europe, indeed, almost extinct, made its appearance about the year 1730 in the western continent, and spread its ravages in the sugar islands of the West Indies, particularly Guadaloupe. M. Peysonnel, who was sent to that island in order to acquaint himself with the nature of the disease, observes, after giving the symptoms as above mentioned, that ‘as the disease advances, the upper part of the nose swells, the nostrils become enlarged, and the nose itself soft. Tumors appear on the jaws; the eyebrows swell; the ears become thick; the points of the fingers, as also the feet and toes, swell; the nails become scaly; the joints of the hands and feet separate and drop off. On the palms of the hands, and on the soles of the feet, appear deep dry ulcers, which increase rapidly and then disappear again. In short, in the last stage of the disease the patient becomes a hideous spectacle, and falls in pieces. These symptoms supervene by very slow and successive steps, requiring often many years before they all occur. The patient suffers no violent pain, but feels a sort of numbness in his hands and feet. During the whole period of the disorder, those afflicted with it experience no obstruction in what are called the Naturalia. They eat and drink as usual; and even when their fingers and toes mortify, the loss of the mortified parts is the only consequence that ensues; for the wound heals of itself without any medical treatment or application. When, however, the unfortunate wretches come to the last period of the disease, they are hideously disfigured, and objects of the greatest compassion.’ (Leviticus 13 Commentary) The word leprosy includes modern leprosy (Hansen's disease), but clearly referred to many other kinds of skin conditions. The symptoms described in Lev 13:2, 6, 10, 18, 30, 39 are not sufficient to diagnose precisely the various skin conditions referred to. Isolation and observation were required in all suspected cases. Though the leper is always described in Scripture as ceremonially unclean rather than sinful, the fact that leprosy was a "stroke" from God, something loathsome to which stigma and taboo were attached, strongly suggests that it may have served as an illustration of sin (cf. Isa. 1:6; Ps. 51:7). Chronic (03462)(yashen) means to sleep and here conveys the idea of that which remains a long time. See Medical Article - Biblical Leprosy- A Suggested Interpretation (In depth - 25 page article) Arnold Fruchtenbaum expounds on the significance of leprosy in the Jewish community - This is the account of the healing of a Jewish leper. How do we know he was Jewish? Because Jesus ordered him to go the the priests and observe the offerings that Moses commanded. Jesus had performed a number of miracles up until this time, but this is the FIRST instance of a Jew being healed of leprosy. We need to realize that this sign was very special and unique. From the time of the giving of the Mosaic Covenant there is no record of any Jew being healed of leprosy. The case of Miriam was before the completion of the giving of the Law. In the case of Naaman, he was Syrian, not Jewish. Leviticus 13-14 are devoted to dealing with leprosy, more than 100 verses. The priesthood was given detailed and specific instructions regarding leprosy. Only the priest had the authority to declare someone a leper. Once someone was declared a leper he would tear his garment. He would have to move out of his or her community and into a quarantined area for lepers. While this sounds cruel, notice how the Law protected society from the spread of disease before anyone understood the nature of microbes and germs. He would be excluded from Jewish society, and reviled. He would have to wear a face covering below the eyes. He would never be able to enter the Tabernacle or Temple compound. He had to announce himself “unclean, unclean,” when encountering someone on the road. Anyone touching him would also become unclean. A person with leprosy was viewed as having been judged by God. (Life of Messiah) Leprosy (06883)(tsaraath) is a "feminine noun referring to a skin disease, leprosy. It refers to a skin disease on humans (Lev. 13:2, 3, 8; 2KI. 5:3) but also to similarly appearing mold, mildew, or fungus in garments, walls of houses, etc. (Lev. 13:47, 49, 51, 52, 59). Most translations still render this as leprosy, but many scholars hold that it refers to leucodermia, etc. (The Complete Word Study Dictionary: Old Testament) Elmer Martens in TWOT on tsaraath - While usually rendered leper or leprous, the term “leper” is not correct medically, since tsaraath refers to a wider range of skin diseases (cf. “malignant skin disease,” NEB). For convenience, however, the term “leper” can be retained. A person with leprosy. apart from the telltale malignant raw flesh and white hair, was to be otherwise identified by torn clothes, announcement of “unclean” when in the streets and was to live isolated from the community. Four persons are named in the OT as becoming leprous. Not counting Moses (Ex 4:6; cf. also 2Kgs 7:3), there were Miriam (Nu 12:10), Uzziah (2Ki 15:5), Gehazi (2Ki 5:27) and Naaman, the Syrian (2Ki 5:1). God may inflict the disease of tsaraath as punishment for sins such as jealousy (cf. Miriam), anger, and lack of full compliance with God’s commands (cf. Uzziah), and covetousness (cf. Gehazi). One must not conclude, however, that all sickness is a result of an individual’s sin (cf. Job; Lk 13:1–5; Jn 9:1–7). Tsaraath was not necessarily incurable (cf. 2Ki 5:7). Leprosy by contrast, was likely incurable (Lev 13). In any event, healing of tsaraath could serve as a sign of divine power (Ex 4:6; 2Ki 5:8). The isolation of a leprous person was doubtless a sanitary measure in order to avoid further contagion. That a priest in Israel’s theocracy was to diagnose the illness does not mean that today’s clergy should become health officers. But the principle of God’s concern for the health of bodies is not only self-evident but remains an enduring principle (cf. Jesus, Mt 8:2–3). Diseases with eruptions affecting the skin are sometimes mild, sometimes, as in smallpox, scarlet fever, etc., both dangerous and highly contagious. The only effective control in antiquity would have been isolation. Only the Hebrew laws had this very valuable provision. Tsaraath is found primarily (twenty times) in the two chapters that govern the diagnoses and the cleaning measures for one who had become unclean (tāmē, Lev 13, 14). In the nature of a contagion, tsaraath refers not only to eruptions on the skin but to mildew or mold in clothing (Lev 13) or in houses (Lev 14:34–53); therefore obviously the word is not specific for leprosy. The determination by the priest of an individual as unclean meant separation from the community, and ceremonial unfitness to enter the temple (cf. 2Chr 26:21). The cleansing measures to be performed upon recovery involved a ritual with two birds, which ritual according to KD was necessary for restoration to the community (Lev 14:2–9). An additional set of offerings followed, notably the guilt offering, perhaps because disease is ultimately to be linked with sin (Lev 14:10–20). There is no Scriptural warrant for regarding leprosy as a type of sin, though the analogy can be helpful for illustrative purposes. (Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament) Holman Bible Dictionary - A generic term applied to a variety of skin disorders from psoriasis to true leprosy. Its symptoms ranged from white patches on the skin to running sores to the loss of digits on the fingers and toes. For the Hebrews it was a dreaded malady which rendered its victims ceremonially unclean—that is, unfit to worship God (Leviticus 13:3). Anyone who came in contact with a leper was also considered unclean. Therefore, lepers were isolated from the rest of the community so that the members of the community could maintain their status as worshipers. Other physical disorders or the flow of certain bodily fluids also rendered one unclean (see Leviticus 12:1-14:32; Leviticus 15:1-33 ). Even houses and garments could have “leprosy” and, thus, be unclean (Leviticus 14:33-57 ). Jesus did not consider this distinction between clean and unclean valid. A person's outward condition did not make one unclean; rather that which proceeds from the heart determines one's standing before God (Mark 7:1-23; compare Acts 10:9-16). Therefore, Jesus did not hesitate about touching lepers (Mark 1:40-45) and even commanded His disciples to cleanse lepers (Matthew 10:8 ). Jesus even made a leper the hero of one of His parables (Luke 16:19-31 ). A person with leprosy, apart from the telltale malignant raw flesh and white hair, was to be otherwise identified by tom clothes, announcement of "unclean" when in the streets and was to live isolated from the community. Tsaraath - 33v in the OT translated leprosy(30), leprous(4), mark(1). Leviticus 13:2 "When a man has on the skin of his body a swelling or a scab or a bright spot, and it becomes an infection of leprosy on the skin of his body, then he shall be brought to Aaron the priest or to one of his sons the priests. 3 "The priest shall look at the mark on the skin of the body, and if the hair in the infection has turned white and the infection appears to be deeper than the skin of his body, it is an infection of leprosy; when the priest has looked at him, he shall pronounce him unclean. 8 "The priest shall look, and if the scab has spread on the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean; it is leprosy. 9 ¶ "When the infection of leprosy is on a man, then he shall be brought to the priest. 11 it is a chronic leprosy on the skin of his body, and the priest shall pronounce him unclean; he shall not isolate him, for he is unclean. 12 "If the leprosy breaks out farther on the skin, and the leprosy covers all the skin of him who has the infection from his head even to his feet, as far as the priest can see, 13 then the priest shall look, and behold, if the leprosy has covered all his body, he shall pronounce clean him who has the infection; it has all turned white and he is clean. 15 "The priest shall look at the raw flesh, and he shall pronounce him unclean; the raw flesh is unclean, it is leprosy. 20 and the priest shall look, and behold, if it appears to be lower than the skin, and the hair on it has turned white, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean; it is the infection of leprosy, it has broken out in the boil. 25 then the priest shall look at it. And if the hair in the bright spot has turned white and it appears to be deeper than the skin, it is leprosy; it has broken out in the burn. Therefore, the priest shall pronounce him unclean; it is an infection of leprosy. 27 and the priest shall look at him on the seventh day. If it spreads farther in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean; it is an infection of leprosy. 30 then the priest shall look at the infection, and if it appears to be deeper than the skin and there is thin yellowish hair in it, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean; it is a scale, it is leprosy of the head or of the beard. 42 "But if on the bald head or the bald forehead, there occurs a reddish-white infection, it is leprosy breaking out on his bald head or on his bald forehead. 43 "Then the priest shall look at him; and if the swelling of the infection is reddish-white on his bald head or on his bald forehead, like the appearance of leprosy in the skin of the body, 47 ¶ "When a garment has a mark of leprosy in it, whether it is a wool garment or a linen garment, 49 if the mark is greenish or reddish in the garment or in the leather, or in the warp or in the woof, or in any article of leather, it is a leprous mark and shall be shown to the priest. 51 "He shall then look at the mark on the seventh day; if the mark has spread in the garment, whether in the warp or in the woof, or in the leather, whatever the purpose for which the leather is used, the mark is a leprous malignancy, it is unclean. 52 "So he shall burn the garment, whether the warp or the woof, in wool or in linen, or any article of leather in which the mark occurs, for it is a leprous malignancy; it shall be burned in the fire. 59 ¶ This is the law for the mark of leprosy in a garment of wool or linen, whether in the warp or in the woof, or in any article of leather, for pronouncing it clean or unclean. Leviticus 14:3 and the priest shall go out to the outside of the camp. Thus the priest shall look, and if the infection of leprosy has been healed in the leper, 7 "He shall then sprinkle seven times the one who is to be cleansed from the leprosy and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the live bird go free over the open field. 32 "This is the law for him in whom there is an infection of leprosy, whose means are limited for his cleansing." 34 "When you enter the land of Canaan, which I give you for a possession, and I put a mark of leprosy on a house in the land of your possession, 44 then the priest shall come in and make an inspection. If he sees that the mark has indeed spread in the house, it is a malignant mark in the house; it is unclean. 54 ¶ This is the law for any mark of leprosy-- even for a scale, 55 and for the leprous garment or house, 57 to teach when they are unclean and when they are clean. This is the law of leprosy. Deuteronomy 24:8 ¶ "Be careful against an infection of leprosy, that you diligently observe and do according to all that the Levitical priests teach you; as I have commanded them, so you shall be careful to do. 2 Kings 5:3 She said to her mistress, "I wish that my master were with the prophet who is in Samaria! Then he would cure him of his leprosy." 6 He brought the letter to the king of Israel, saying, "And now as this letter comes to you, behold, I have sent Naaman my servant to you, that you may cure him of his leprosy." 7 When the king of Israel read the letter, he tore his clothes and said, "Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man is sending word to me to cure a man of his leprosy? But consider now, and see how he is seeking a quarrel against me." 27 "Therefore, the leprosy of Naaman shall cling to you and to your descendants forever." So he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow. 2 Chronicles 26:19 But Uzziah, with a censer in his hand for burning incense, was enraged; and while he was enraged with the priests, the leprosy broke out on his forehead before the priests in the house of the LORD, beside the altar of incense. Resources on Leprosy Leprosy - Bridgeway Bible Dictionary Leprosy - Torrey's Topical Textbook Leprosy - Easton's Bible Dictionary Leprosy - Fausset's Bible Dictionary Leprosy - Holman Bible Dictionary Leprosy - Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible Leprosy - Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament Leprosy - Morrish Bible Dictionary Leper, Leprosy - Smith's Bible Dictionary Leprosy - 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica Leper; Leprosy - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia Leprosy - Kitto's Popular Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature Leprosy - Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature Leprosy - The 1901 Jewish Encyclopedia The following are links to "modern" leprosy WHO - Leprosy Leprosy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Leprosy- Medline Plus Medical Encyclopedia Hansen's Disease (Leprosy) - CDC Today in the Word (Moody Bible) - Leviticus 13:1-59 If an [unclean] person does not purify himself, he must be cut off from the community, because he has defiled the sanctuary of the Lord. - Numbers 19:20 TODAY IN THE WORD - If you think issues of uncleanness are limited to the ancient world, consider this cover story headline last year from an issue of U.S. News & World Report: “The Future of Water: Costly • Dirty • Scarce.” The article began with an account of dirty water in Atlanta, where in some neighborhoods it had been flowing brown from the tap. From time to time, “boil water” advisories had been issued to let residents know the water was not safe to drink. The situation may grow worse as 700,000 miles of aging pipes and mains throughout America decay and reach the end of their life spans. One federal official called clean water “the biggest environmental issue that we face in the 21st century.” Such health concerns help bring the world of Leviticus closer to home. For example, our readings for today and tomorrow deal with the problems of infectious skin diseases and mildew. Some Bibles translate infectious skin disease as leprosy, or Hansen’s disease, as it is called today. But the Hebrew word used here is a general term, and the symptoms don’t seem to fit leprosy. The word for mildew is similarly a general term, and can also refer to mold or fungus. These two health or hygiene issues may be paired here because they were seen as parallel problems–one affecting living things, one affecting inanimate objects. The Law prescribed several practical responses to these problems, including careful diagnosis, various forms of quarantine, and thorough washing. Why were the priests responsible for this? Perhaps because diseases and such, while not sin, were still consequences of the Fall and thus results of sin. Additionally, the priests were the community’s guardians of purity, no matter what kind of purity was involved. TODAY ALONG THE WAY - Today, we are going to leave this application portion of the devotional open for the Holy Spirit to direct you. We recommend that you pray for a specific application for yourself based on the principle of purity, modernized for today, and personalized for you. To begin, you might review “Today Along the Way” for the past two days, both of which dealt with the question of purity. Leviticus 13:3 "The priest shall look at the mark on the skin of the body, and if the hair in the infection has turned white and the infection appears to be deeper than the skin of his body, it is an infection of leprosy ; when the priest has looked at him, he shall pronounce him unclean. shall look. Lev 13:2. Lev 10:10. Ezek 44:23. Hag 2:11. Mal 2:7. Ac 20:28. Ro 3:19, 20. 7:7. Heb 13:7. Rev 2:23. turned. Lev 13:4, 10. Nu 6:5. Ezek 16:30. Ho 7:9. white. Ex 4:6. Nu 12:10, 12. 2Kings 5:27. 2 Ch 26:20. deeper. Ge 13:3. Je 17:9. Mt 15:19, 20. 2 Ti 2:16, 17. 3:13. pronounce. Ge 2:17. 2Kings 5:27. 2 Ch 26:20. Mt 16:19. 18:17, 18. Jn 20:23. Ro 3:19, 20. 1 Co 5:4-6. 6:11. 2 Th 3:14, 15. 1 Ti 1:20 Leviticus Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries God may inflict the disease of sara'at as punishment for sins such as jealousy (cf. Miriam), anger, and lack of full compliance with God's commands (cf. Uzziah), and covetousness (cf. Gehazi). One must not conclude, however, that all sickness is a result of an individual's sin (cf. Job; Lk 13:1-5; Jn 9:1-7). Leon Hyatt - The priest was to look for two symptoms in determining if the spot was tsaraath. The first was that the hair growing out of the spot had turned white or lighter in color. The second was that the spot extended beneath the skin and the priest could see that the flesh below the skin was affected. This second symptom shows that tsaraath was more than a skin disease. When it penetrated below the skin, it was tsaraath. Thus, the translation “skin disease” for the name of this disease is deceiving. If the two signs listed were present, the disease was tsaraath. The man was to be declared unclean. A declaration that he was unclean meant that he was to be a symbol of moral evil. It had nothing to do with his moral character or the treatment of his disease. He had been chosen as teaching symbol. (Message 16 - Leviticus 13:1-59) Pronounce unclean (verb) (02930)(tame) means to become unclean, make unclean and this context to pronounce unclean. To become ceremonially unclean. To defile oneself (Hos 5:3, 6:10, Ezek 20:30). A wife defiles herself by adultery (Nu 5:13, Jer 2:23 = speaks of Israel as God's wife who had defiled herself by her spiritual adultery with idols!, Ezek 23:13 = refers to Judah and in context to the 10 Northern tribes - both had defiled themselves). To defile (violate) a girl (Ge 34:5), a woman (Ezek 18:6) The Septuagint (Lxx) translates tame with the verb miaino, means literally to dye with another color. As used in the NT figuratively miaino describes a mind and conscience that is morally contaminated, corrupted, tainted, tinged and polluted (Titus 1:15-note = "defiled and unbelieving"). In a ceremonial or cultic sense it means to defile or make unclean or to be unacceptable. To defile something is to sully (damage the purity or integrity of), mar (impair the appearance of; disfigure) or spoil it. Jude uses miaino in a physical and a moral sense of the one's flesh defiled by licentiousness and so to corrupt morally. (Jude 1:8-note) We see a parallel instruction by Paul to the Corinthians saints (immersed in a licentious, pagan, idol worshipping culture)… Do not be bound (present imperative with negative - stop doing this or do not let it begin) together with unbelievers; for (term of explanation) what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?15 Or what harmony (symphonesis - concord, gives us English "symphony") has Christ with Belial (Name for Satan), or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?16 Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols (Temples for idol worship were common in the ancient world)? For (term of explanation) we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, “I WILL DWELL IN THEM AND WALK AMONG THEM; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE. 17 “Therefore, COME OUT FROM (aorist imperative - "Just do it!" "Don't delay!" "Don't procrastinate!" But do it as you renounce self-reliance and rely on the Holy Spirit!) THEIR MIDST AND BE SEPARATE (aorist imperative - all these commands are contingent upon reliance on the enablement of the Spirit),” says the Lord. “AND DO NOT TOUCH (present imperative with a negative) WHAT IS UNCLEAN (akathartos - word study = adjective used in Septuagint of Leviticus 11 to translate "unclean"); And I will welcome you. 18 “And I will be a father to you, and you shall be sons and daughters to Me,” Says the Lord Almighty. (2 Co 6:14–18) Based on the incredible promises Paul has just recorded he exhorts them… THEREFORE, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. (2Cor 7:1-note) Andrew Bonar (Spurgeon called his notes on Leviticus "Very precious.") GENERAL RULES AS TO ALL THE THREE SYMPTOMS - Leprosy begins far within—in the bones and marrow; and it is sometimes three or four years ere it come out to sight (Jahn’s Archæol.) This typical view of sin we see realized in the case of the tender infant, who lies so innocent-like on the mothers breast. Or, if we take the case of special sins, we see it in David, who seemed of all men the least likely to be guilty of adultery and murder on the day when he sang Psalm 36 or Psalm 32. Or in Hazael, when he honestly exclaimed, “Is thy servant a dog, that he should do this great thing?” (2 Kings 8:13.) If the “hair was turned white,” and the plague evidently “deeper than the skin,” then two things were evident, viz., that corruption was begun in the blood, and that it was not superficial. There was a tendency to decay, and a tendency in this decay to advance inwards. Were it a mere external deformity, there might be little alarm felt; but not so when there are tokens that decay is begun near the seat of life. By this the Lord taught Israel that mere acts of sin would not be so alarming, were it not that they indicated evil in purpose and feeling—a sinful nature—deep-seated depravity within. The priest was to examine and pronounce him unclean. Our Priest, Jesus, has eyes of fire to discern sin in his people. He detects its first risings. We ought to be of the same mind with our Priest, as anxious as He to detect sin. For it is not as Judge, but as Priest that he lays it bare to our view. These eyes of flame belong to our Priest (see Rev. 1:14) when he visits his golden candlesticks. And so we may willingly submit to have our filthiness brought to light, when One standeth by who is ready that very moment to cleanse it away. Oh! there is sweet comfort in the words, “The priest shall pronounce him unclean!” To be completely convicted of sin casts us completely into the hands of that High Priest, who does not drive us from the sanctuary, but fits us for its holy services. The deep convictions which his Holy Spirit works are meant to direct the eye of the unclean to the cleansing Priest. Our High Priest sends the Spirit to the sinner, and the Spirit sends the sinner to the High Priest. “So,” says one, “when the Prodigal had spent all, and was famishing with hunger, the blessing came.” (Leviticus 13 The Leprosy - Indwelling Sin - Its Horrid Features) George Bush - Pronounce him unclean. Heb. תמא אתו timmë otho, shall make him unclean, or shall pollute him; a phraseology of not unfrequent occurrence, by which one is said to do that which he merely, in a ministerial capacity, pronounces, predicts, or declares to be done. Thus Ezek. 43:3, is said to ‘destroy the city,’ when he simply pronounced or prophecied its destruction. In like manner the apostles, as ministers of Christ, are said to have been empowered to bind and to loose, to remit men’s sins, and to retain them, when all that is intended is, that they were simply to declare them to be so bound or loosed, remitted or retained, according to the tenor of God’s word. It is to be observed, that there are three signs of a leprosy stated in the first verse; (1) a tumor or swelling; (2) a scab; (3) a bright spot. Of these indications, the sacred writer begins with the last, viz. the bright spot, in which, if the hair were turned white, and it was not a superficial whiteness merely, but the spot seemed to have eaten deeper, even into the very flesh, then it was beyond doubt that it was a true leprosy. But if upon inspection there merely appeared a white spot in the skin, which had not affected the color of the hair, then it could not be positively determined that the disease was leprosy. But it had some of the symptoms of leprosy, and might prove to be such; at any rate appearances were so far against the person that it was proper he should be separated from others long enough to afford time for an accurate judgment of the nature of the affection. The priest therefore was to shut him up for seven days, during which time it would be apt to develope its true character. Shall shut up him that hath the plague. The words ‘him that hath,’ it will be noticed, are not found is the text, of which the true rendering is, ‘Shall shut up the plague.’ Gr. αφοριει την ἀφην, shall separate the plague. This is a usage of the sacred writers, by which the abstract is put for the concrete, often met with, as ‘captivity’ for ‘captives,’ Ps. 68:19; ‘the hoary head’ for ‘hoary headed person,’ Lev. 19:32; ‘rebellion,’ for ‘the rebellious,’ Ezek. 44:6; ‘a charge’ for ‘those having charge,’ Ezek. 44:11; ‘pride’ for ‘proud man’ Jer. 50:31; ‘circumcision for ‘those circumcised,’ Rom. 2:26. (Leviticus 13 Commentary) Leviticus 13:4 "But if the bright spot is white on the skin of his body, and it does not appear to be deeper than the skin, and the hair on it has not turned white , then the priest shall isolate him who has the infection for seven days. shut up. Lev 24:12. Nu 12:15. Dt 13:14. Ezek 44:10. 1 Co 4:5. 2 Th 3:14, 15. 1 Ti 5:24. Jude 1:22. plague. Ge 34:29 Leviticus Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries Leon Hyatt - If the spot had turned white, that is, had lost its pigment and become light in color but the other two signs of tsaraath were not present, then the person was to be “shut up” for seven days to give the condition time to develop so that a sure determination could be made at the end of that time. Some have assumed that “shut up” means that the person was to be kept outside the camp during this period. The expression likely means that he was to be kept from his normal duties or in a room to himself. This conclusion is confirmed in verses 9- 11 below, where it is stated that a person with an advanced stage of tsaraath was not to be “shut up” whereas he definitely was to be put out of the camp (see comments on Lev. 13:9-11 and on Lev. 13:45- 46 below). Contagion was not in their minds. The person was simply kept for observation until a clear determination could be made as to whether he had tsaraath or not. (Message 16 - Leviticus 13:1-59) Andrew Bonar (on Lev 13:4-8) (Spurgeon called his notes on Leviticus "Very precious.") THE BRIGHT SPOT - If no proof appeared of deep-seated corruption (which is meant by its being “in the skin” and “no whiteness in the hair”) it was not a leprosy; but until it be ascertained that there is none such, the man must be kept apart from others seven days. “Abstain from all appearance of evil.” The six days of his confinement might be expected to be a season wherein the disease would take a turn; God had appointed that period of probation. God taught Israel that he is not in haste to condemn. “He is slow to anger.” Time is afforded for full proof. He allows the sinner a long day, during which the man’s leprosy is plainly manifested. He allows the fallen world its six days—its 6000 years—during which time no judgment is pronounced on it. He waits for the seventh day, when the priest, who has examined already into the case, shall come and see the “shut up” leper, and declare his doom. “God hath concluded them all in unbelief,” said Paul, in Rom. 11:32. The original is, “hath shut them up together” (συνεκλεισε), and seems to be borrowed from this case of the leper. And so in Gal. 3:22, “The Scripture hath concluded”—shut up together—“all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” The whole world is allowed time to prove itself sinful—utterly sinful; and then the priest comes and deals with them, either for their cleansing, or for their eternal exclusion from the camp! If in the leprous-looking spot, there was no spreading of the disease (ver. 5),—this was so far well. Corruption is stayed, or else never was begun. Such a man is to have the trial of six days, and on the seventh to be examined. And if, on the seventh day, there is proof that there is no spreading (ver. 6) of the plague, and that the hair is darker than it was, the man is set free. Now, here we have the case of souls pardoned—God’s company of pardoned ones, whom he treats for 6000 years in the way of probation. They show that the disease has been stayed—pardon has brought in a new principle of holiness. They are not to be excluded from the camp on the seventh day. The staying of the leprosy in the soul—the ceasing from sin—proves that there has been forgiveness of sin. If the lower waters of Jordan are ever getting shallower, then the upper waters mast have been out off. But if, after an apparent healing, the scab spread (ver. 7), then the man is a leper after all. Is this not typical of him who, after appearing to be one of the justified, returns to his old sins? True, believers have a scab remaining—they have remnants of corruptions; but if this scab—these remnants of corruptions—spread over the soul, is not the man an unforgiven man? This is not opposed to the doctrine of perseverance to the end, any more than are Christ’s words, “If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered.” (John 15:6.) It is speaking to us according to external appearance.(Leviticus 13 The Leprosy - Indwelling Sin - Its Horrid Features)