Leviticus 13

Leviticus 13:1-8

LAWS CONCERNING LEPROSY 13:114:57 EXAMINATION AND ITS RESULT 13:1-46 a. THE SYMPTOMS OF LEPROSY, WHETHER PROCEEDING DIRECTLY FROM ERUPTIONS IN THE SKIN, OR CAUSED BY A BOIL OR BURN 13:1-8 TEXT 13:1-8

1

And Jehovah spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying,

2

When a man shall have in the skin of his flesh a rising, or a scab, or a bright spot, and it become in the skin of his flesh the plague of leprosy, then he shall be brought unto Aaron the priest, or unto one of his sons the priests:

3

and the priest shall look on the plague in the skin of the flesh: and if the hair in the plague be turned white, and the appearance of the plague be deeper than the skin of his flesh, it is the plague of leprosy; and the priest shall look on him, and pronounce him unclean.

4

And if the bright spot be white in the skin of his flesh, and the appearance thereof be not deeper than the skin, and the hair thereof be not turned white, then the priest shall shut up him that hath the plague seven days:

5

and the priest shall look on him the seventh day: and, behold, if in his eyes the plague be at a stay, and the plague be not spread in the skin, then the priest shall shut him up seven days more:

6

and the priest shall look on him again the seventh day; and, behold, if the plague be dim, and the plague be not spread in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him clean: it is a scab: and he shall wash his clothes, and be clean.

7

But if the scab spread abroad in the skin, after that he hath showed himself to the priest for his cleansing, he shall show himself to the priest again:

8

and the priest shall look; and, behold, if the scab be spread in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is leprosy.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 13:1-8

Why are both Moses and Aaron addressed?

List the three kinds of appearances related to leprosy.

Two symptoms must be present for leprosy to be present. What were they? Cf. Leviticus 13:3.

What condition must prevail in the case of the bright spot?

There are two seven-day quarantine periods. What are they?

The priest has a heavy responsibilitythe suspected person can be released as curedwhat must he do to be pronounced clean?

What seems to be the one deciding factor in identifying leprosy? Cf. Leviticus 13:7-8.

PARAPHRASE 13:1-8

The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, If anyone notices a swelling in his skin, or a scab or boil or pimple with transparent skin, leprosy is to be suspected. He must be brought to Aaron the priest or to one of his sons for the spot to be examined. If the hair in this spot turns white, and if the spot looks to be more than skin-deep, it is leprosy, and the priest must declare him a leper. But if the white spot in the skin does not seem to be deeper than the skin and the hair in the spot has not turned white, the priest shall quarantine him for seven days. At the end of that time, on the seventh day, the priest will examine him again, and if the spot has not changed and has not spread in the skin, then the priest must quarantine him seven days more. Again on the seventh day the priest will examine him, and if the marks of the disease have become fainter and have not spread, then the priest shall pronounce him cured; it was only a scab, and the man need only wash his clothes and everything will be normal again. But if the spot spreads in the skin after he has come to the priest to be examined, he must come back to the priest again, and the priest shall look again, and if the spot has spread, then the priest must pronounce him a leper.

COMMENT 13:1-8 a. FIRST CASE 13:1-8

Leviticus 13:1-2 Since the laws of leprosy chiefly concerned the priests, who had to examine the symptoms and decide if leprosy was present or not, the Lord addressed Aaron as well as Moses. There are three places where leprosy can develop: (1) manLev 13:2-46; (2) clothesLev 13:47-59; (3) housesLev 14:33-57. In the next two Chapter s we will discuss all of these. In the case of man, there are seven different circumstances under which it might develop. The first one in Leviticus 13:2-6 refers to development without any apparent cause. If one of the following three symptoms occur, a visit to the priest was in order: (1) A swelling or a swollen spot; (2) a scab or small tumor; (3) a bright or glossy pimple. The color of the swelling (according to tradition) should be like an eggshell or white wool; the bright spot should be as white as snow or the plaster on the wall.

Harold Fowler has given us some very helpful information on the general subject of leprosy: Leprosy is an infectious condition produced by microbe discovered and described by A. G. Hansen in 1874. Hansen’s disease is contagious, its infection being thought to arise from direct contact with infected skin and mucous membranes, although not very readily communicated by casual contact. Seemingly it is not hereditary. Nerve involvement is attended with anesthesia, tingling and pain of the parts affected. In those forms of leprosy where nodular growths are the most prominent features the small bones of the hands and feet are destroyed and often drop off. Modern medicine has discovered treatments for leprosy of the various types (lepramatous, tuberculoid and non-specific) and control through early diagnosis, isolation and some drugs that show encouraging results, although complete cure is not yet promised. Spontaneous arresting of the disease and temporary cures have occurred. However, treatment is often necessary for years. (See UWRE, 2954; ISBE, 1867) Some affirm, however, that Hansen’s disease is not the biblical leprosy. There are several complications to our problem of identifying precisely the leprosy of the Bible:

The Biblical terminology identifying leprosy describes only the initial symptoms and discuss none of the later manifestations as a fully developed disease or attempt a medical description of its characteristics. The purpose of the Biblical terminology was originally for identifying and isolating the victims of this disease. It is worthy of note that there is no mention of treatment or remedy for the disease.

The Biblical term leprosy in the critical passage (Leviticus 13:1-59) is obviously used in several senses, meaning, generally, skin disease and, precisely, leprosy (the real thing). It would seem that Moses in that passage is describing leprosy and then listing eight other skin diseases which might be confused for leprosy, but which, regarding ceremonial defilement, were clean.

Any remarks derived from the Mosaic legislation would have to be tempered by the actual practice of the Jews in Jesus-’ time, which may well have been quite different from that intended by Moses. For instance, while Moses required lepers to stay out of inhabited centers (Leviticus 13:46), this regulation may have been relaxed in later times so that lepers even entered a segregated portion of the synagogues, although not into the Temple. (Edersheim, Life, I, 493)

The chief emphasis of the Levitical legislation in the first place was the defilement which the disease brought to the sufferer, thus rendering him incapable of entering either the camp of Israel or of participating in the formal worship of Jehovah while in the grip of that disease. And it was by a sin offering that the ceremonial uncleanness was atoned for, upon one’s cleansing from leprosy. (Leviticus 14:13-14; Leviticus 14:18 b - Leviticus 14:22) But the homiletic use of leprosy as a TYPE of sin is not biblical, although the similarities are striking. Were we to judge leprosy from the ancient Jewish standpoint of defilement, there could possibly be no lower state, nor worse defilement than this; however, estimating the disease from Christ’s standpoint, there are certainly worse defilements than mere leprosy. (Study Matthew 15:1-39; Mark 7:1-37) Let it be remarked that though leprosy was atoned for by a sin, that is, a guilt offering, yet Jesus never declared the sins forgiven of a leper in connection with his disease, in the same way in which He apparently did not hold the demon-possessed as particularly guilty or sinful, or as He did in the case of others (Luke 7:47-50; Matthew 9:1-8). Yet, from the silence of the Scripture record, no real argument can be made, inasmuch as the Apostles recorded only what we have. But it must be made absolutely clear that leprosy today carries no spiritual contamination to any man as it did only to Jews under Moses-’ law.

Leviticus 13:3 In this verse we have the principle used in all three of the above cases. Two indications of leprosy: (1) the ordinarily jet-black hair of the Hebrew has turned white in the area being examined; (2) the infection is deeper than the skin, i.e. it indicates by the soreness and a swollen condition that the flesh itself is affected. When these two symptoms are obvious, the priest must pronounce the sufferer unclean. By his pronouncement he actually makes him unclean, for such is the Hebrew meaning of the phrase. Whereas this is not primarily a homiletical commentary and whereas we recognize nowhere does the scripture link leprosy with sin, the comparison is at the same time very striking. Consider: (1) Both have a small beginning; (2) both are painless in early stages; (3) both are slow in growth; (4) both are insidious in progress; (5) both are resistless if not eradicated; (6) both have a hideous end.

Leviticus 13:4-8 These verses discuss the treatment of the bright (or white) spot. Keil says: But if the bright spot was white upon the skin, and its appearance was not deeper than the skin, and the place therefore was not sunken, nor the hair turned white, the priest was to shut up the leper, i.e. preclude him from intercourse with other men, for seven days, and on the seventh day examine him again. If he then found that the mole still stood, i.e. remained unaltered, -in his eyes,-’ or in his view, that is it had not spread any further, he was to shut him up for seven more days. And if, on further examination upon the seventh day (fourteenth), he found that the mole had become paler, had lost its brilliant whiteness, and had not spread, he was to declare him clean, for it was a scurf, i.e. a mere skin eruption, and not true leprosy. The person who had been pronounced clean, however, was to wash his clothes, to change himself from even the appearance of leprosy, and then to be clean. But if the scurf had spread upon the skin, -after his (first) appearance before the priest with reference to his cleansing,-’ i.e. to be examined concerning his purification, and if the priest noticed this on his second appearance, he was to declare him unclean, for in that case it was leprosy.

FACT QUESTIONS 13:1-8

Why did God address Aaron as well as Moses?

Name the three places where leprosy can develop.

There are six different circumstances for the development of leprosy in man. Name the first one.

Three symptoms call for a visit to the priest. What are they?

How does A. G. Hansen and 1874 relate to leprosy?

What are the problems in identifying the particular type of leprosy mentioned in the Bible?

What are the two sure indications of the presence of leprosy?

What is the subject of Lev 13:4-8?

Describe the treatment for the bright spot.

Leviticus 13:9-17

b. SECOND CASE 13:9-17 TEXT 13:9-17

9

When the plague of leprosy is in a man, then he shall be brought unto the priest;

10

and the priest shall look; and, behold, if there be a white rising in the skin, and it have turned the hair white, and there be quick raw flesh in the rising.

11

it is an old leprosy in the skin of his flesh, and the priest shall pronounce him unclean: he shall not shut him up; for he is unclean.

12

And if the leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague from his head even to his feet, as far as appeareth to the priest;

13

then the priest shall look; and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: it is all turned white: he is clean.

14

But whensoever raw flesh appeareth in him, he shall be unclean.

15

And the priest shall look on the raw flesh, and pronounce him unclean: the raw flesh is unclean: it is leprosy.

16

Or if the raw flesh turn again, and be changed unto white, then he shall come unto the priest;

17

and the priest shall look on him; and, behold, if the plague be turned into white, then the priest shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: he is clean.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 13:9-17

Some persons had a case of chronic leprosy. What were its symptoms?

Who was not shut up or quarantined when he was brought to the priest? Why?

A breaking out of leprosy can be good, When? Why?

Any practical lessons in this for us?

PARAPHRASE 13:9-17

When anyone suspected of having leprosy is brought to the priest, the priest is to look to see if there is a white swelling in the skin with white hairs in the spot, and an ulcer developing. If he finds these symptoms, it is an established case of leprosy, and the priest must pronounce him defiled. The man is not to be quarantined for further observation, for he is definitely diseased. But if the priest sees that the leprosy has erupted and spread all over his body from head to foot wherever he looks, then the priest shall pronounce him cured of leprosy, for it has all turned white; he is cured. But if there is raw flesh anywhere, the man shall be declared a leper. It is proved by the raw flesh. But if the raw flesh later changes to white, the leper will return to the priest to be examined again. If the spot indeed turned completely white, then the priest will pronounce him cured.

COMMENT 13:9-17

Leviticus 13:9-17 This is the second case to be considered (the first was in Leviticus 13:4-8). Supposing the leprosy returns after the man is pronounced clean? Such is here to be considered.

Upon discovery of a white eruption the first step is always a visit to the priest. There are two indications to be noticed of a real reappearance of leprosy: (1) a white swelling in the skin; (2) the hair in the skin of the swelling will be turned to white. There must be both a white rising and white hair. An additional indication is the appearance of raw flesh in the swelling, i.e. if the swelling breaks open and exposes the raw flesh. Either this symptom or the white swelling and white hair will indicate the sure return of the disease. Some commentators interpret the phrase quick raw flesh as an insulated spot of sound flesh in the midst of a tubercle. In either case there was no need for quarantine. Leprosy was present and should be at once pronounced.

Leviticus 13:13 gives a curious exception: … if the leprosy has covered all his body, he shall pronounce him clean of the disease; it has all turned white, and he is clean. This is a clear indication of the crisis of this form of leprosythe white scaling will fall off and he will be well. The breaking out of the leprous matter in this complete and rapid way upon the surface of the whole body was the crisis of the disease; the diseased matter turned into a scurf, which died away and fell off. (Keil)

Leprosy was very unpredictable and needed constant and careful surveillance. Any breaking out of proud flesh or raw flesh sores was an indication that what seemed to be a cure was only temporarythe disease has not run its course and the patient must again be counted as unclean. It could be that the leprosy will fluctuate back and forth between an apparent crisis and ulcers of proud flesh several times. Each time is an occasion for an examination and a pronouncement of clean or unclean.

FACT QUESTIONS 13:9-17

How would you describe the circumstances of the second case?

Describe the two sure symptoms of returned leprosy.

What was said of raw flesh?

Leviticus 13:13 gives a curious exception. What was it?

Why do we say leprosy is unpredictable?

Leviticus 13:18-23

c. THE THIRD CASE 13:18-23 TEXT 13:18-23

18

And when the flesh hath in the skin thereof a boil, and it is healed,

19

and in the place of the boil there is a white rising, or a bright spot, reddish-white, then it shall be showed to the priest;

20

and the priest shall look; and, behold, if the appearance thereof be lower than the skin, and the hair thereof be turned white, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is the plague of leprosy, it hath broken out in the boil.

21

But if the priest look on it, and, behold, there be no white hairs therein, and it be not lower than the skin, but be dim; then the priest shall shut him up seven days:

22

and if it spread abroad in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a plague.

23

But if the bright spot stay in its place, and be not spread, it is the scar of the boil; and the priest shall pronounce him clean.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 13:18-23

Why be concerned if a boil or an abscess has been healed?

How does the priest decide there is a serious problem in the circumstance here described?

Some persons were released and pronounced clean. Describe the circumstances.

PARAPHRASE 13:18-23

In the case of a man who has a boil in his skin which heals, but which leaves a white swelling or a bright spot, sort of reddish white, the man must go to the priest for examination. If the priest sees that the trouble seems to be down under the skin, and if the hair at the spot has turned white, then the priest shall declare him defiled, for leprosy has broken out from the boil. But if the priest sees that there are no white hairs in this spot, and the spot does not appear to be deeper than the skin, and if the color is gray, then the priest shall quarantine him for seven days. If during that time the spot spreads, the priest must declare him a leper. But if the bright spot grows no larger and does not spread, it is merely the scar from the boil, and the priest shall declare that all is well.

COMMENT 13:18-23

Leviticus 13:18-23 According to those who administered the law in the time of Christ, the boil and inflammation here meant are such as arise from a stroke by a piece of wood or a stone, from having come in contact with pitch or hot water, thus distinguishing it from the burn by fire mentioned in Leviticus 13:13. (C. D. Ginsburg)

If the priest found the appearance of the diseased spot lower than the surrounding skin, and the hair upon it turned white, he was to pronounce the person unclean. It is a mole of leprosy: it has broken out upon the abscess. But if the hair has not turned white upon the spot, and there was no depression on the skin, and it (the spot) was pale, the priest was to shut him up for seven days. If the mole spread upon the skin during this period, it was leprosy; but if the spot stood in its place, it had not spread, it was the closing of the abscess. (Keil)

FACT QUESTIONS 13:18-23

What was the cause of this boil or inflammation?

What two conditions must prevail before the priest pronounces it leprosy?

What happens during the seven days to determine the decision of the priest?

Leviticus 13:24-28

d. THE FOURTH CASE 13:24-28 TEXT 13:24-28

24

Or when the flesh hath in the skin thereof a burning by fire, and the quick flesh of the burning become a bright spot, reddish-white, or white;

25

then the priest shall look upon it; and, behold, if the hair in the bright spot be turned white, and the appearance thereof be deeper than the skin; it is leprosy, it hath broken out in the burning: and the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is the plague of leprosy.

26

But if the priest look on it, and, behold, there be no white hair in the bright spot, and it be no lower than the skin, but be dim; then the priest shall shut him up seven days:

27

and the priest shall look upon him the seventh day: if it spread abroad in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is the plague of leprosy.

28

And if the bright spot stay in its place, and be not spread in the skin, but be dim; it is the rising of the burning, and the priest shall pronounce him clean: for it is the scar of the burning.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 13:24-28

How does the description here differ from the third case?

Why no mention of medicine or of any type of treatment?

PARAPHRASE 13:24-28

If a man is burned in some way, and the burned place becomes bright reddish-white or white, then the priest must examine the spot. If the hair in the bright spot turns white, and the problem seems to be more than skin-deep, it is leprosy that has broken out from the burn, and the priest must pronounce him a leper. But if the priest sees that there are no white hairs in the bright spot, and the brightness appears to be no deeper than the skin and is fading, the priest shall quarantine him for seven days, and examine him again the seventh day. If the spot spreads in the skin, the priest must pronounce him a leper. But if the bright spot does not move or spread in the skin, and is fading, it is simply a scar from the burn, and the priest shall declare that he does not have leprosy.

COMMENT 13:24-28

Leviticus 13:24-28 There are two considerations to add here that were not already given in the third case: (1) this is a scar from fire and not hot water or pitch; (2) in neither one of these cases do we have a two-week quarantine. Perhaps this is due to the fact that in these cases the cause of the infection is known and in the previous ones it was not.

FACT QUESTIONS 13:24-28

Give the two additional thoughts related to case four.

Leviticus 13:29-37

e. THE FIFTH CASE 13:29-37 TEXT 13:29-37

29

And when a man or woman hath a plague upon the head or upon the beard,

30

then the priest shall look on the plague; and, behold, if the appearance thereof be deeper than the skin, and there be in it yellow thin hair, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a scall, it is leprosy of the head or of the beard.

31

And if the priest look on the plague of the scall, and, behold, the appearance thereof be not deeper than the skin, and there be no black hair in it, then the priest shall shut up him that hath the plague of the scall seven days:

32

and in the seventh day the priest shall look on the plague; and behold, if the scall be not spread, and there be in it no yellow hair, and the appearance of the scall be not deeper than the skin,

33

then he shall be shaven, but the scall shall he not shave; and the priest shall shut up him that hath the scall seven days more:

34

and in the seventh day the priest shall look on the scall; and, behold, if the scall be not spread in the skin, and the appearance thereof be not deeper than the skin; then the priest shall pronounce him clean: and he shall wash his clothes, and be clean.

35

But if the scall spread abroad in the skin after his cleansing,

36

then the priest shall look on him; and, behold, if the scall be spread in the skin, the priest shall not seek for the yellow hair; he is unclean.

37

But if in his eyes the scall be at a stay, and black hair be grown up therein; the scall is healed, he is clean: and the priest shall pronounce him clean.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 13:29-37

What is meant by the word scall in Leviticus 13:30 ff?

What does thin yellow hair have to do with leprosy?

Who do you suppose paid the expenses of the man or woman who was shut away from home and job for a possible 14 days? Discuss.

When and why was a person to be shaved?

The return or reactivating of the sore called for special treatmentwhat was it?

PARAPHRASE 13:29-37

If a man or woman has a sore on the head or chin, the priest must examine him; if the infection seems to be below the skin and yellow hair is found in the sore, the priest must pronounce him a leper. But if the priest’s examination reveals that the spot seems to be only in the skin and that there is black hair in it, then he shall be quarantined for seven days, and examined again on the seventh day. If the spot has not spread and no yellow hair has appeared, and if the infection does not seem to be deeper than the skin, he shall shave off all the hair around the spot (but not on the spot itself) and the priest shall quarantine him for another seven days. He shall be examined again on the seventh day, and if the spot has not spread, and it appears to be no deeper than the skin, the priest shall pronounce him well, and after washing his clothes, he is free. Then the priest must examine him again and, without waiting to see if any yellow hair develops, declare him a leper, But if it appears that the spreading has stopped and black hairs are found in the spot, then he is healed and is not a leper, and the priest shall declare him healed.

COMMENT 13:29-37

Leviticus 13:29-37 The depression of the affected spot is a sure symptom of concern. This indicates that the flesh is affected and not just the skin. In other areas of the body white hair was an indication of leprosy, but on the head or beard, yellow or golden hair was a cause for concern. The word thin could also be translated short. The normally heavy black hair has been replaced by short yellow hair. There is much traditional material of those who exercised these laws during the time of the second Temple or the one Herod built for the Jews. C. D. Ginsburg says concerning this: By the -thin hair-’ those authorities who came in contact with the disorder understood small or short hair. Hence they laid down the following rule: The condition of the hair constituting one of the signs of leprosy is its becoming short. But if it be long, though it is yellow as gold, it is no sign of uncleanness. Two yellow and short hairs, whether close to one another or far from each other, whether in the center of the affected spot or on the edge thereof, no matter whether the affection on the spot precedes the yellow hair, or the yellow hair precedes the affection on the spot, are symptoms of uncleanness.

The word scall means dryness, it describes the condition after the hair has fallen out and leaves the affected area somewhat bare. Yellow hair by itself could be but a sign of an ordinary ulcer, hence a seven-day quarantine is necessary to allow the leprosy to develop or the ulcer to heal. Shaving the area will make it much easier to examine and will give a clear indication of the color of the hair growing back. The spread of the afflicted area after a 14-day examination is a positive indication of leprosyno yellow hair need be consideredhe is a leper! Probably even after such careful precautions some were pronounced unclean who did not have leprosy and some were freed who did have it, but the mistakes must have been at a minimum.

FACT QUESTIONS 13:29-37

What is indicated by the depression of the flesh around a sore spot?

Indicate where white and yellow hair were dangerous symptoms.

Describe the careful regulations of those who administered this law in the time of our Lord.

Why shave some people?

f. THE SIXTH CASE 13:38, 39 TEXT 13:38, 39

38

And when a man or a woman hath in the skin of the flesh bright spots, even white bright spots;

39

then the priest shall look; and, behold, if the bright spot in the skin of their flesh be of a dull white, it is a tetter, it hath broken out in the skin; he is clean.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 13:38, 39

There is a difference in each of these cases or they would not be mentioned separately. What is the distinction here?

The color of the spots is very important. Which color is dangerous?

PARAPHRASE 13:38, 39

If a man or a woman has white, transparent areas in the skin, but these spots are growing dimmer, this is not leprosy, but an ordinary infection that has broken out in the skin.

COMMENT 13:38, 39

Leviticus 13:38-39 A bothersome but harmless type of ringworm infection is here described. Such a problem lasted from two months to two years but it was not leprosy and would heal with treatment. If anyone had a choice of the seven cases, this would be the one.

FACT QUESTIONS 13:38, 39

This could be a serious case. What decided it?

Why no period of quarantine?

Leviticus 13:40-44

g. THE SEVENTH CASE 13:40-44 TEXT 13:40-44

40

And if a man’s hair be fallen off his head, he is bald; yet he is clean.

41

And if his hair be fallen off from the front part of his head, he is forehead bald; yet he is clean.

42

But if there be in the bald head, or the bald forehead, a reddish-white plague; it is leprosy breaking out in his bald head, or his bald forehead.

43

Then the priest shall look upon him; and, behold, if the rising of the plague be reddish-white in his bald head, or in his bald forehead, as the appearance of leprosy in the skin of the flesh;

44

he is a leprous man, he is unclean: the priest shall surely pronounce him unclean; his plague is in his head.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 13:40-44

Is the lack of hair a punishment from God?

Two types of baldness are here described. What are they?

This would seem to be the simplest type of examination and diagnosis. Why?

PARAPHRASE 13:40-44

If a man’s hair is gone, this does not make him a leper even though he is bald! If the hair is gone from the front part of his head, he simply has a bald forehead, but this is not leprosy. However, if in the baldness there is a reddish white spot, it may be leprosy breaking out. In that case the priest shall examine him, and if there is a reddish white lump that looks like leprosy, then he is a leper, and the priest must pronounce him such.

COMMENT 13:40-44

Leviticus 13:40-44 Read 2 Kings 2:23; Isaiah 3:17; Jeremiah 48:37 and discuss the whole subject of baldness as a sign of punishment. The case before us is one of simple falling out of the hair, either from the crown of the head backwards or from the crown of the head forwards, and in either case the fact of baldness is no sign of uncleanness.

Some commentators feel the usual seven-day examination is inferred in this case and should so be read into the text. However the only clear symptom is a reddish-white eruption on either the fore or back portion of the head. The priest was evidently able to make a diagnosis from this simple but careful examination.

FACT QUESTIONS 13:40-44

What conclusions can be drawn from a study of baldness?

Are we to understand this form of leprosy would affect the brain? Discuss.

THE TREATMENT OF LEPERS 13:45, 46 TEXT 13:45, 46

45

And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and the hair of his head shall go loose, and he shall cover his upper lip, and shall cry, Unclean, unclean.

46

All the days wherein the plague is in him he shall be unclean; he is unclean: he shall dwell alone; without the camp shall his dwelling be.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 13:45, 46

Are we to understand there are moral implications in all leprosy, i.e. that all lepers have leprosy because of their sin? Discuss.

What was the meaning of tearing one’s clothes and not combing his hair?

Unclean in what regard?

Why live alone? With other lepers? Was this observed in the days of our Lord?

PARAPHRASE 13:45, 46

Anyone who is discovered to have leprosy must tear his clothes and let his hair grow in wild disarray, and cover his upper lip and call out as he goes, I am a leper, I am a leper. As long as the disease lasts, he is defiled and must live outside the camp.

COMMENT 13:45, 46

Leviticus 13:45-46 Of the several comments on these verses we feel Keil has done such an admirable job of condensing into a paragraph all pertinent information: With regard to the treatment of lepers, the lawgiver prescribed that they should wear mourning costume, rend their clothes, leave their hair in disorder (Cf. Leviticus 10:6), keep the beard covered (Cf. Ezekiel 24:17; Ezekiel 24:22) and cry -unclean, unclean,-’ that everyone might avoid them for fear of being defiled (Lamentations 4:15); and as long as the disease lasted they were to dwell apart outside the camp (Numbers 5:2; Numbers 12:10; Cf. 2 Kings 15:5; 2 Kings 7:3), a rule which implies that the leper rendered others unclean by contact.

In the case of priests, which is the subject considered in Leviticus, we would almost conclude that leprosy was a form of punishmentalthough the inferences are not conclusive.

FACT QUESTIONS 13:45, 46

Was the mourning for sin or suffering?

Tearing clothes was a sign of grief and repentance. Which is involved here?

Why not groom the hair? Why cover the beard?

To cry, unclean, unclean was an admission of need. What was it?

Leprosy is called a living death. Why?

Leviticus 13:47-59

LEPROSY IN LINEN, WOOLEN, AND LEATHER FABRICS AND CLOTHES 13:47-59 TEXT 13:47-59

47

The garment also that the plague of leprosy is in, whether it be a woolen garment, or a linen garment;

48

whether it be in warp, or woof; or linen, or of woollen; whether in a skin, or in anything made of skin;

49

if the plague be greenish or reddish in the garment, or in the skin, or in the warp, or in the woof, or in anything of skin; it is the plague of leprosy, and shall be showed unto the priest.

50

And the priest shall look upon the plague, and shut up that which hath the plague seven days:

51

and he shall look on the plague on the seventh day: if the plague be spread in the garment, either in the warp, or in the woof, or in the skin, whatever service skin is used for; the plague is a fretting leprosy; it is unclean.

52

And he shall burn the garment, whether the warp or the woof, in woollen or in linen, or anything of skin, wherein the plague is: for it is a fretting leprosy; it shall be burnt in the fire.

53

And if the priest shall look and, behold, the plague be not spread in the garment, either in the warp, or in the woof, or in anything of skin;

54

then the priest shall command that they wash the thing wherein the plague is, and he shall shut it up seven days more:

55

and the priest shall look, after that the plague is washed; and behold, if the plague have not changed its color, and the plague be not spread, it is unclean; thou shalt burn it in the fire: it is a fret, whether the bareness be within or without.

56

And if the priest look, and, behold, the plague be dim after the washing thereof, then he shall rend it out of the garment, or out of the skin, or out of the warp, or out of the woof:

57

and if it appear still in the garment, either in the warp, or in the woof, or in anything of skin, it is breaking out: thou shalt burn that wherein the plague is with fire.

58

And the garment, either the warp, or the woof, or whatsoever thing of skin it be, which thou shalt wash, if the plague be departed from them, then it shall be washed the second time, and shall be clean.

59

This is the law of the plague of leprosy in a garment of woollen or linen, either in the warp, or the woof, or anything of skin, to pronounce it clean, or to pronounce it unclean.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 13:47-59

What is meant by leprous disease in a garment?

How could decay touch the warp of a garment without also touching the woof?

What was the danger in having leprosy in garments?

When was a garment to be burned?

If the disease has not spread what is to be done with the garment?

The change of color is very important. Why?

When would it be proper to tear out the area affected?

If it appears somewhere in the garment after the area has been torn outthen what?

Isn-’t all of this effort one to get rid of mildew? Discuss.

PARAPHRASE 13:47-59

If leprosy is suspected in a woolen or linen garment or fabric, or in a piece of leather or leather-work, and there is a greenish or a reddish spot in it, it is probably leprosy, and must be taken to the priest to be examined. The priest will put it away for seven days and look at it again on the seventh day. If the spot has spread, it is a contagious leprosy, and he must burn the clothing, fabric, linen or woolen covering, or leather article, for it is contagious and must be destroyed by fire. But if when he examines it again on the seventh day the spot has not spread, the priest shall order the suspected article to be washed, then isolated for seven more days. If after that time the spot has not changed its color, even though it has not spread, it is leprosy and shall be burned, for the article is infected through and through. But if the priest sees that the spot has faded after the washing, then he shall cut it out from the garment or leather goods or whatever it is in. However, if it then reappears, it is leprosy and he must burn it. But if after washing it there is no further trouble, it can be put back into service after another washing. These are the regulations concerning leprosy in a garment or anything made of skin or leather, indicating whether to pronounce it leprous or not.

COMMENT 13:47-59

Leviticus 13:47-59 An effort is made by some authorities to prove that the leprous condition of the garments and fabrics was caused by the same germ that infected man. If such were the case, i.e. the decay of clothes was exactly the same, i.e. identical to the infectious decay of human flesh it would indeed be a miracle. We are not denying this possibility, but it does seem just as reasonable to conclude that the effects of a damp climate are here being described and mildew is the problem.

Wool, linen and leather was the only substance used by the Israelites for clothes. (Cf. Deuteronomy 22:11; Hosea 2:7; Hosea 2:11; Proverbs 31:1-31; Proverbs 13:1-25) Reference to the warp, or woof (Leviticus 13:48-49) has posed a problem as to just how decay could touch one set of threads without the other. The thought that mildew could infect the heap of yarn used for either warp or woof before it was used for weaving seems to answer the question.

The green or red color is again introduced as a sign of the possible presence of leprosy. The seven days of quarantine is also used. If the decay has not spread after seven days a washing could provide all the cleansing needed; however another seven days are necessary before a decision can be given. If the color had not changed after the first washing, the garment must be burned. After the second seven days if the rotting has not spread or changed color, the portion affected can be torn out of the garment. The diseased portion must be burnedthe remaining portion is to be washed and considered clean. It is difficult to avoid the impression that God is at work in the clothesthe housesand in every other part of the daily life of the Israelite. God could and did use these very ordinary items to teach many lessons to those who wanted to learn. The largest and most constant lesson was of His interest and control of the mundane matters of every day. A corollary lesson was: every man’s need to obey Godthe habit of doing what He commands develops the essential character quality for maturing in His way of life. How very much this lesson is needed today as it was in the day when God spoke to Moses and Aaron!

FACT QUESTIONS 13:47-59

In what way do some define leprosy of the house? How do others consider it?

Name the three substances used by the Israelites for clothes. Show how leprosy could touch the woof and not the warp.

Define the use of the two sets of seven days.

What are two good lessons to learn from this section?