Leviticus · Chapter 13

Verse 1. This law is directed to Aaron as well as Moses, because he and his sons were to be judges, to determine, according to certain rules, what was clean and what unclean.

V. 2. In the skin-For there is the first seat of the leprosy, the bright spot shining like the scale of a fish, as it is in the beginning of a leprosy. The priest-The priest was to admit to, or exclude from, the sanctuary, and therefore to examine who were to be excluded.

Verse 2. The plague of leprosy] This dreadful disorder has its name leprosy, from the Greek lepoa, from lepiv, a scale, because in this disease the body was often covered with thin white scales, so as to give it the appearance of snow. Hence it is said of the hand of Moses, Exodus 4:6, that it was leprous as snow; and of Miriam, Numbers 12:10, that she became leprous, as white as snow; and of Gehazi, 2 Kings 5:27, that, being judicially struck with the disease of Naaman, he went out from Elisha’s presence a leper as white as snow. See Clarke’s note on “Exodus 4:6”.

In Hebrew this disease is termed t[rx tsaraath, from [rx tsara, to smite or strike; but the root in Arabic signifies to cast down or prostrate, and in Æthiopic, to cause to cease, because, says Stockius, “it prostrates the strength of man, and obliges him to cease from all work and labour.” There were three signs by which the leprosy was known. 1. A bright spot.

2. A rising (enamelling) of the surface. 3. A scab; the enamelled place producing a variety of layers, or stratum super stratum, of these scales. The account given by Mr. Maundrell of the appearance of several persons whom he saw infected with this disorder in Palestine, will serve to show, in the clearest light, its horrible nature and tendency.

“When I was in the Holy Land,” says he, in his letter to the Rev. Mr. Osborn, Fellow of Exeter College, “I saw several that laboured under Gehazi’s distemper; particularly at Sichem, (now Naplosu,) there were no less than ten that came begging to us at one time. Their manner is to come with small buckets in their hands, to receive the alms of the charitable; their touch being still held infectious, or at least unclean. The distemper, as I saw it on them, was quite different from what I have seen it in England; for it not only defiles the whole surface of the body with a foul scurf, but also deforms the joints of the body, particularly those of the wrists and ankles, making them swell with a gouty scrofulous substance, very loathsome to look on. I thought their legs like those of old battered horses, such as are often seen in drays in England. The whole distemper, indeed, as it there appeared, was so noisome, that it might well pass for the utmost corruption of the human body on this side the grave. And certainly the inspired penman could not have found out a fitter emblem, whereby to express the uncleanness and odiousness of vice.”-Maundrell’s Travels. Letters at the end. The reader will do well to collate this account with that given from Dr. Mead; See Clarke’s note on “Exodus 4:6”.

Verse 2. A rising, a scab, or bright spot — The leprosy appeared in one of these three forms. Now, as these marks might sometimes be upon the skin when there was no leprosy, rules are here given whereby the priests might discern between a plague of leprosy and the resemblance of it; that accordingly they might pronounce a person clean or unclean. Some of the symptoms of the leprosy here described are of a very extraordinary nature, particularly its infecting houses and garments. This has led several of the learned, Le Clerc in particular, to imagine that Moses’s leprosy was one of those diseases which Providence occasionally inflicts upon mankind in certain ages and countries, as a chastisement for peculiar sins, and to bring them to repentance and reformation. Thus much is certain, that what we now call the leprosy is very different from what went by that name in former times.

Verse 2. Aaron—or one of his sons were obliged to inspect every case of leprosy, the priests being best acquainted with the nature and progress of the complaint, and most concerned to keep the congregation pure.

2. The plague of leprosy — The word leprosy is of Greek origin, and literally signifies, the scaly disease. For its general meaning see note on Numbers 5:2. But the disease here treated of is evidently the so-called white leprosy, (Lepra Mosaica,) which is still found among the Arabs under the name of Baras. It is described by Trunsen as follows: “Very frequently, even for years before the actual outbreak of the disease itself, white, yellowish spots are seen lying deep in the skin, particularly on the genitals, face, forehead, or in the joints. They are without feeling, and sometimes cause the hair to assume the same colour as the spots. These spots afterwards pierce through the cellular tissue and reach the muscles and bones. The hair becomes white and woolly, and at length falls off; hard, gelatinous swellings are formed in the cellular tissue; the skin gets hard, rough, and seamy; lymph exudes from it, and forms large scabs, which fall off from time to time; and under these there are often offensive running sores. The nails then swell, curl up, and fall off; entropium (inversion of the eyelashes) is then formed, with bleeding gums; the nose is stopped up, and there is a considerable flow of saliva. The senses become dull, the patient gets weak and thin, wasting diarrhea sets in, and incessant thirst and burning terminate his sufferings.” There are three chief symptoms of this disease. (1.) A rising or swelling. (2.) A scab. (3.) A bright spot — This was of a white colour. These are described under six different circumstances, namely: 1.) Developed without any apparent cause, 2-8. 2.) Reappearing after the supposed cure, 9-17. 3.) Arising from the scar of a boil or a burn, 18-28. 4.) Appearing on the head or chin. 29-37. 5.) In the form called bohak, not unclean, 38-39. 6.) In a bald head, 40-44. Unto Aaron the priest — The treatment was to be ceremonial, not medical. The command that the leper present himself not to the physician but to the priest, shows that the leprosy was in some way intimately associated with sin, for the priest’s office related to guilt. “There was no doctor then; he is a later creation. The Church is the true lazar-house; the Church is the great hospital. We have no instruction to the effect that one leper is to look on another; the distinct direction is that the priest — the holy, pure man — shall look at the leper — handle him, undertake him.”-Joseph Parker.

V. 3. When the hair is turned white-This change of colour was an evidence both of the abundance of excrementious humours, and of the weakness of nature, as we see in old and sick persons. His flesh-For the leprosy consumed both the skin and the flesh.

Verse 3. The priest shall-pronounce him unclean.] wta amcw vetimme otho; literally, shall pollute him, i.e., in the Hebrew idiom, shall declare or pronounce him polluted; and in Leviticus 13:23, it is said, the priest shall pronounce him clean, הכחנ wrhcw vetiharo haccohen, the priest shall cleanse him, i.e., declare him clean. In this phrase we have the proper meaning of Matthew 16:19: Whatsoever ye bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. By which our Lord intimates that the disciples, from having the keys, i.e., the true knowledge of the doctrine, of the kingdom of heaven, should, from particular evidences, be at all times able to distinguish between the clean and the unclean, the sincere and the hypocrite; and pronounce a judgment as infallible as the priest did in the case of the leprosy, from the tokens already specified. And as this binding and loosing, or pronouncing fit or unfit for fellowship with the members of Christ, must in the case of the disciples be always according to the doctrine of the kingdom of heaven, the sentence should be considered as proceeding immediately from thence, and consequently as Divinely ratified. The priest polluted or cleansed, i.e., declared the man clean or unclean, according to signs well known and infallible. The disciples or ministers of Christ bind or loose, declare to be fit or unfit for Church fellowship, according to unequivocal evidences of innocence or guilt. In the former case, the priest declared the person fit or unfit for civil society; in the latter, the ministers of Christ declare the person against whom the suspicion of guilt is laid, fit or unfit for continued association with the Church of God. The office was the same in both, a declaration of the truth, not from any power that they possessed of cleansing or polluting, of binding or of loosing, but by the knowledge they gained from the infallible signs and evidences produced on the respective cases.

Verse 3. The priest shall look on the plague — In some dubious cases, the priest might find it convenient to take the judgment of physicians, or of persons who understood the theory of diseases better than himself; but, as he was to admit to or exclude from the sanctuary, he alone was to give judgment, and pronounce who were clean or unclean, and, as such, to be admitted or excluded. When the hair is turned white — He begins with the last of the three marks of a leprosy, namely, the bright spot. The reason of the hair’s turning white is thus assigned by Calmet, in his Dissertation on the Leprosy: “The flesh,” says he, “ceasing to receive its proper nourishment from the blood, which gave it its former vivid colour, the hair, which has its root in the corrupted, empoverished glands, becomes likewise ill-nourished, and so grows whitish and slender, like a plant in stony, parched ground.” His flesh — For the leprosy consumed both the skin and the flesh.

3. The priest shall look — The eye is still the chief instrument in the diagnosis of diseases. The microscope has greatly enhanced the accuracy of its reports, especially in cutaneous diseases, each of which has its peculiar manifestations. In practice the inspection took place on clear days from nine o’clock to twelve, and from one to four, because colours were best discerned then. Hair… turned white — The leprosy is so radical in its nature that it whitens the hairs in the leprous spots. “There must be at least two in the body of the white spot.” — Maimonides. Deeper than the skin — Deeper than the general level of the skin. White spots frequently appear from some defect in the pigments which lie immediately beneath the transparent cuticle. The leprosy must be carefully distinguished from this cutaneous whiteness.

V. 4. Seven days-For greater assurance; to teach ministers not to be hasty in their judgments, but diligently to search and examine all things before-hand. The plague is here put for the man that hath the plague.

Verse 4. Seven days — For greater assurance; to teach ministers not to be hasty in their judgments, but diligently to search and examine all things beforehand. The plague is here put in the original for the man that hath the plague.

4. Shut up seven days — The community, and not the suspected leper, was to have the benefit of the doubt. Every safeguard against the ceremonial impurity was to be taken. Precisely the same measures were adopted in the island of Barbadoes when the leprosy broke out there. The patients were at first shut up seven days in order to determine between the leprosy and the crowcrow, an African itch. At Guadaloupe the citizens petitioned the authorities for a universal inspection of suspected persons, and their confinement in quarantine, and, in the case of the lepers, their removal to permanent pest-houses. It was found that the board of health had in this chapter a code of laws framed to their hand and ready for use with only the change of the word “priest” to physician.

5. Seven days more — It would seem that the suspected leper must necessarily be imprisoned two weeks. But if the symptoms had disappeared entirely at the end of the first week, the man was doubtless entitled to a discharge, otherwise there would be no use of any examination till the end of the second week. The priest who made the first examination must make the second also, as another could not tell whether the disease had spread.

V. 6. Dark-Contrary to the white colour of the leprosy. But the word may be rendered, have contracted itself, and thus the opposition seems to be most clear as the spreading of itself. He shall wash his clothes-Though it was no leprosy, to teach us, that no sin is so small as not to need to be washed by the blood of Christ, which was the thing designed by all these washings.

Verse 6. Dark — Contrary to the white colour of the leprosy. But the word may be rendered, have contracted itself, and thus the opposition seems to be most clear to the spreading of itself. He shall wash his clothes — Though it was no leprosy, to teach us, that no sin is so small as not to need to be washed by the blood of Christ, which was the thing designed by all these washings.

Ver. 6. The priest shall pronounce him clean. He could not heal, as did the prophet Elisha; he could only pronounce upon the case, whether clean or unclean. The mighty ado therefore of the popish priests on this head, comes to nothing, for the Hebrew priesthood could not cleanse. They had only the keys of the sanctuary to admit the pure, or repel the impure, from the altar. It is better to go with a leprous heart to Christ, the great physician and healer of the soul.

6. Pronounce him clean — Ceremonially pure, though he may have other loathsome diseases, and be morally vile. The action of the priest, literally translated, is, to make him clean, as in the third verse he is to make the leper unclean. In both cases the action is declarative and not causative or judicial. This suggests the proper meaning of the apostolic binding and loosing in Matthew 16:19, and the remitting and retaining of sins in John 20:23. He shall wash his clothes — “As the very cause that had led to his being suspected showed that there was some impurity in his blood, a slight purification was prescribed, the moral effect of which would naturally be to teach that the very appearance of evil is an adequate ground of humiliation to any one that fears God.” — Bush.

7. If the scab spread — The white spot has now taken the form of a rapidly spreading scab. When the patient observes this he is under obligation to go to the priest to be examined again. According to Maimonides his neglect subjected him to the penalty of leprosy cleaving to him for life, as the leprosy of sin will cleave to the sinner who neglects to come to the great High Priest, Jesus Christ.

Verses 9, 10. When the plague of leprosy (symptoms thereof) is in a man — If the priest plainly see that it has reached not only the skin, and changed the hair, but eaten into the very flesh, so that he can see the whiteness there, as well as in the skin, he shall look upon it as an evident case, and without shutting him up for further trial, shall judge it a leprosy that has long been breeding, and of the worst kind, and accordingly shall remove the person out of the camp, that he may dwell by himself, verse 46.

V. 10. White in the skin-With a preternatural and extraordinary whiteness. Raw flesh-This shewed it was not a superficial leprosy but one of a deeper and more malignant nature, that had eaten into the very flesh, for which cause it is in the next verse called an old or inveterate leprosy.

Verses 9, 10. When the plague of leprosy (symptoms thereof) is in a man — If the priest plainly see that it has reached not only the skin, and changed the hair, but eaten into the very flesh, so that he can see the whiteness there, as well as in the skin, he shall look upon it as an evident case, and without shutting him up for further trial, shall judge it a leprosy that has long been breeding, and of the worst kind, and accordingly shall remove the person out of the camp, that he may dwell by himself, verse 46.

10-12. The rising — This was a decisive indication when it was white and accompanied by white hair and raw flesh in the swelling. There was in that case no doubt that the virus of leprosy had been long in the blood, making it an old leprosy. Shall not shut him up — For the case is no longer doubtful. The man must now be excluded from the camp or city with bare head, covered face, and rent garment, the badges of his dreadful malady. See verse 45, note.

10-12. The rising — This was a decisive indication when it was white and accompanied by white hair and raw flesh in the swelling. There was in that case no doubt that the virus of leprosy had been long in the blood, making it an old leprosy. Shall not shut him up — For the case is no longer doubtful. The man must now be excluded from the camp or city with bare head, covered face, and rent garment, the badges of his dreadful malady. See verse 45, note.

10-12. The rising — This was a decisive indication when it was white and accompanied by white hair and raw flesh in the swelling. There was in that case no doubt that the virus of leprosy had been long in the blood, making it an old leprosy. Shall not shut him up — For the case is no longer doubtful. The man must now be excluded from the camp or city with bare head, covered face, and rent garment, the badges of his dreadful malady. See verse 45, note.

V. 13. All his flesh-When it appeared in some one part it discovered the ill humour which lurked within, and withal the inability of nature to expel it; but when it overspread all, it manifested the strength of nature conquering the distemper, and purging out the ill humours into the outward parts.

Verse 13. If the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean] Why is it that the partial leper was pronounced unclean, and the person totally covered with the disease clean? This was probably owing to a different species or stage of the disease; the partial disease was contagious, the total not contagious. That there are two different species or degrees of the same disease described here, is sufficiently evident. In one, the body was all covered with a white enamelled scurf; in the other, there was a quick raw flesh in the risings. On this account the one might be deemed unclean, i.e., contagious, the other not; for contact with the quick raw flesh would be more likely to communicate the disease than the touch of the hard dry scurf. The ichor proceeding from the former, when brought into contact with the flesh of another, would soon be taken into the constitution by means of the absorbent vessels; but where the whole surface was perfectly dry, the absorbent vessels of another person coming in contact with the diseased man could imbibe nothing, and therefore there was comparatively no danger of infection. Hence that species or stage of the disease that exhibited the quick raw rising was capable of conveying the infection for the reasons already assigned, when the other was not. Dr. Mead thus accounts for the circumstance mentioned in the text. See on Leviticus 13:18. As the leprosy infected bodies, clothes, and even the walls of houses, is it not rational to suppose that it was occasioned by a species of animalcula or vermin burrowing under the skin? Of this opinion there are some learned supporters.

Verse 13. If the leprosy have covered all the flesh — It may seem strange that a man who is all over leprous should be pronounced clean, and yet one who is but partially leprous should be unclean. To explain this it has been said, that when the disorder appeared only in some one part, or in a few parts, it discovered the ill humour that lurked within, and withal the inability of nature to expel it; but when it overspread all, it manifested the strength of nature, conquering the distemper, and purging out the ill humours into the outward parts. So that this sort of breaking out was rather a relief to the body than a disease; and there was no danger in the eruption. The most solid account, however, of this matter is, that this kind of leprosy was not infectious, and for that reason, he who was affected with it, is here pronounced clean. In confirmation of this we are told, that this white, or universal leprosy, is not attended with an itching, as in the other kinds.

13. All turned white: he is clean — Here is a paradox; the partial leper is unclean, the total leper is clean. The explanation of Patrick is, that this uniform white covering is indicative of some other disease, and not the real leprosy, yet it has so strong a resemblance as to prompt the writer to give it the same name. But the more common theory is, that the crisis of the leprosy is reached when the patient becomes white from head to foot “broken out blooming on the skin,” with an enamelled, hard, dry scurf, incapable of communicating the contagion by contact. Canon Cook argues that the disease treated of in this chapter is the elephantiasis, and not the leprosy, and that when the entire surface turns white it indicates that it is not the elephantiasis, but some other disease, which did not render the man unclean. This solution of the difficulty agrees very nearly with Patrick’s. It is a prevalent opinion that the leprosy is here treated, not on sanitary but wholly on ceremonial grounds, and that the leprosy is arbitrarily pronounced unclean, just as a corpse is unclean a moment after life is extinct, and that the ceremonial pollution, by arbitrary appointment, continues only so long as the disease is spreading.

V. 14. In it-That is in the place where the appearance of leprosy was, when the flesh was partly changed into a whiter colour, and partly kept its natural colour, this variety of colours was an evidence of the leprosy, as one and the same colour continuing, was a sign of soundness.

Verse 14. When raw — (Hebrew, when living) flesh appeareth in him — That is, when some of the flesh appears in its sound and natural state, the rest of the skin being white. This was a token of nature’s being unable to throw out all the leprous humour into the skin, and of its working inwardly. Consequently the person in that state was to be pronounced unclean.

14. Raw flesh — This is the proud flesh, the appearance of which, after the universal spread of the white scurf, indicates that the disease has not yet entirely left the blood. Maimonides says that the size of the “raw flesh” must be that of a lintel, in order to justify the verdict of uncleanness. The person is still unclean.

V. 15. The raw flesh-This is repeated again and again, because raw or living flesh might rather seem a sign of soundness, and the priest might easily be deceived by it, and therefore he was more narrowly to look into it.

Verse 15. The raw flesh — This is repeated again and again, because raw or living flesh might rather seem a sign of soundness, and the priest might easily be deceived by it, and therefore he was more narrowly to look into it.

V. 16. Unto white-As it is usual with sores, when they begin to be healed, the skin which is white, coming upon the flesh.

Verse 16. Unto white — As it is usual with sores, when they begin to be healed, the skin, which is white, coming upon the flesh.

17. The plague — The stroke of the leprosy is viewed as a direct infliction by God. Sometimes it is abbreviated to the plague, just as we say of the paralytic, that he is suffering from a stroke.

Verse 18. In the skin thereof, was a boil] Scheuchzer supposes this and the following verse to speak of phlegmonic, erysipelatous, gangrenous, and phagedenic ulcers, all of which were subjected to the examination of the priest, to see whether they were infectious, or whether the leprosy might not take its origin from them. A person with any sore or disposition to contagion was more likely to catch the infection by contact with the diseased person, than he was whose skin was whole and sound, and his habit good.

18. A boil — In the Hebrew of Deuteronomy 28:27, 35, the same word is found, and is translated in verse 35, “a sore blotch which cannot be healed.” Both Gesenius and Furst think that the ulcers of elephantiasis, or “the joint evil,” is here intended, which leave tender scars susceptible of the leprous eruption.

19. Somewhat reddish — The redness is that of the inflamed circumference of the blotch. The two symptoms of white hairs and manifest depth below the skin indicate leprosy.

V. 21. Dark-Or, and be contracted.

Verses 21-24. Dark — Or, and be contracted. A plague — Or, the plague of leprosy, of which he is speaking. A hot burning — A burning of fire, by the touch of any hot iron, or burning coals, which naturally makes an ulcer or sore in which the following spot is.

V. 22. A plague-Or the plague of leprosy, of which he is speaking.

Verses 21-24. Dark — Or, and be contracted. A plague — Or, the plague of leprosy, of which he is speaking. A hot burning — A burning of fire, by the touch of any hot iron, or burning coals, which naturally makes an ulcer or sore in which the following spot is.

22. A plague — The plague of the leprosy.

Verses 21-24. Dark — Or, and be contracted. A plague — Or, the plague of leprosy, of which he is speaking. A hot burning — A burning of fire, by the touch of any hot iron, or burning coals, which naturally makes an ulcer or sore in which the following spot is.

23. Bright spot… spread not — Diffusiveness is the decisive symptom of this disease. For this reason, probably more than any other, Christian writers have employed leprosy as a type of sin, though without any expressed authority in the Holy Scriptures. But see Matthew 8:2, note.

V. 24. A hot burning-A burning of fire, by the touch of any hot-iron, or burning coals, which naturally makes an ulcer or sore in which the following spot is.

Verses 21-24. Dark — Or, and be contracted. A plague — Or, the plague of leprosy, of which he is speaking. A hot burning — A burning of fire, by the touch of any hot iron, or burning coals, which naturally makes an ulcer or sore in which the following spot is.

24. A hot burning — The Hebrew is, “a burning of fire.” It is supposed to describe persons scarred by burns whose scars have become eruptive. Rules very similar to the above are laid down for determining these cases, except that only one week was to be spent in quarantine, since the scar furnishes an apparent cause for the symptoms.

V. 28. Of the burning-Arising from the burning mentioned, Leviticus 13:24.

Verse 28. Of the burning — Arising from the burning, mentioned verse 24.

Verse 29. A plague upon the head or the beard] This refers to a disease in which, according to the Jews, the hair either on the head or the chin dropped out by the roots.

Verse 29. Upon the head or beard — Pliny tells us, that a kind of disease came into Italy in the middle of the reign of Tiberius Cesar, which commonly began in the chin, and was therefore called mentagra, and was so filthy, that any death was preferable to it. It was a foul tetter, scab, or scurf, not unlike a ring-worm, which, from the chin, often ran over the face, the neck, the breast, and the hands. Was not this similar to this plague of leprosy in the beard and head here spoken of? Bishop Patrick thinks it was. And Maimonides tells us that, in this sort of leprosy, the hair on the head or beard fell off by the roots, and the place of the hair remained bare.

29, 30. Beard — Since the woman has no beard, and since the beard could not have the leprosy, it is evident that the beard is by metonymy put for the chin. Yellow thin hair — This is a new symptom. White hairs on the head or chin of an elderly person are natural, and hence they could not betoken leprosy. But yellow short hair on these parts is the peculiar mark of this scourge. Dr. Davidson, after carefully inspecting nearly a hundred lepers in Madagascar, says: “The hairs upon the part become yellow and stunted, and, after a time, fall off, leaving the hair bulbs empty and enlarged, especially on the face, so as to present one of the most diagnostic signs of the malady.” Dry scall — The word “dry” is not in the original. “Scall” occurs thirteen times in this chapter and once in the next, and nowhere else in the Bible. It signifies a scurf, scab, or mange. The Hebrews call it nethek, and describe it thus: “The plague of head or beard is, when the hair that is on them falleth off by the roots, and the place of the hair remaineth bare.” Since the scall is a different disease from leprosy it would have been better to have transferred the Hebrew nethek into our English version.

V. 30. A yellow, thin hair-The leprosy in the body turned the hair white, in the head or beard it turned it yellow. And if a man’s hair was yellow before, this might easily be distinguished from the rest, either by the thinness or smallness of it, or by its peculiar kind of yellow, for there are divers kinds of the same colour manifestly differing from one another.

Verse 30. A yellow thin hair — The leprosy in the body turned the hair white, in the head or beard it turned it yellow. And if a man’s hair was yellow before, this might easily be distinguished from the rest, either by the thinness or smallness of it, or by its peculiar kind of yellow, for there are divers kinds of the same colour, manifestly differing from one another.

29, 30. Beard — Since the woman has no beard, and since the beard could not have the leprosy, it is evident that the beard is by metonymy put for the chin. Yellow thin hair — This is a new symptom. White hairs on the head or chin of an elderly person are natural, and hence they could not betoken leprosy. But yellow short hair on these parts is the peculiar mark of this scourge. Dr. Davidson, after carefully inspecting nearly a hundred lepers in Madagascar, says: “The hairs upon the part become yellow and stunted, and, after a time, fall off, leaving the hair bulbs empty and enlarged, especially on the face, so as to present one of the most diagnostic signs of the malady.” Dry scall — The word “dry” is not in the original. “Scall” occurs thirteen times in this chapter and once in the next, and nowhere else in the Bible. It signifies a scurf, scab, or mange. The Hebrews call it nethek, and describe it thus: “The plague of head or beard is, when the hair that is on them falleth off by the roots, and the place of the hair remaineth bare.” Since the scall is a different disease from leprosy it would have been better to have transferred the Hebrew nethek into our English version.

V. 31. No black hair-For had that appeared, it had ended the doubt, the black hair being a sign of soundness and strength of nature, as the yellow hair was a sign of unsoundness.

Verses 31, 33. No black hair — For had that appeared, it had ended the doubt, the black hair being a sign of soundness and strength of nature, as this yellow hair was a sign of unsoundness. He shall be shaven — For the more certain discovery of the growth or stay of the plague.

31. No black hair — It is evident that the word “black” must here refer to the “yellow,” the colour betokening the leprosy. The words are different in the Hebrew, but the Seventy, Luther, Keil, Knobel, and Canon Cook render them both yellow. Thus they make verse 31 harmonize with 30, 32, and 36. Since the original words for yellow and black differ in only one letter, there is, probably, a clerical error in the latter.

Verses 31, 33. No black hair — For had that appeared, it had ended the doubt, the black hair being a sign of soundness and strength of nature, as this yellow hair was a sign of unsoundness. He shall be shaven — For the more certain discovery of the growth or stay of the plague.

V. 33. He shall be shaven-For the more certain discovery of the growth or stay of the plague.

Verse 33. The scall shall he not shave] Lest the place should be irritated and inflamed, and assume in consequence other appearances besides those of a leprous infection; in which case the priest might not be able to form an accurate judgment.

Verses 31, 33. No black hair — For had that appeared, it had ended the doubt, the black hair being a sign of soundness and strength of nature, as this yellow hair was a sign of unsoundness. He shall be shaven — For the more certain discovery of the growth or stay of the plague.

33. He shall be shaven — This would afford a better opportunity to determine the question of the spread of the disease. The scall was exempted from being shaven, probably out of mercy to the patient, and as a safeguard against spreading it all over the head and of infecting others by the use of the same razor.

V. 36. He shall not seek-He need not search for the hair, or any other sign, the spreading of it being a sure sign of leprosy.

Verse 36. He shall not seek — He need not search for the hair, or any other sign, the spreading of it being a sure sign of leprosy.

36. Not seek for yellow hair — The rapid spread is a sufficient token of the leprosy, without the other symptom.

V. 39. If the spots be darkish white-Or, contracted, or confined to the place where they are, and white.

Verses 39, 42. If the spots be darkish white — When there was no other symptom but that of whiteness in the skin, the priest was to be cautious not to pronounce it a leprosy, unless the spots were perfectly bright; for if there was any cloudiness in them, it was not a leprosy. And he is informed that a man’s losing his hair by sickness or age, which made him bald, must not be taken for a sign of leprosy. But, (verse 42,) If there were a white reddish sore — It was a sign that such baldness came not from age, nor any accident, but from the leprosy.

39. A freckled spot — Hebrew, bohak. In the R.V., “tetter.” This constitutes a new case, since these peculiar spots do not appear on the parts where the hair grows thick, but only on the neck and face. It is remarkable that the modern Arabs have a kind of leprosy in which some little spots show themselves here and there, called bohak, a word containing the same consonants as the Hebrew term which we are now considering. These spots gradually spread, continuing sometimes only about two months, and then gradually disappearing. They are not contagious nor hereditary, nor specially painful. The treatment of the bohak in verses 38 and 39 seems to be unnaturally sandwiched between the leprosy of the hairy head and that of the bald head. The sacred writers do not always observe that order of statement required by our canons of rhetoric.

Verses 39, 42. If the spots be darkish white — When there was no other symptom but that of whiteness in the skin, the priest was to be cautious not to pronounce it a leprosy, unless the spots were perfectly bright; for if there was any cloudiness in them, it was not a leprosy. And he is informed that a man’s losing his hair by sickness or age, which made him bald, must not be taken for a sign of leprosy. But, (verse 42,) If there were a white reddish sore — It was a sign that such baldness came not from age, nor any accident, but from the leprosy.

40. Bald… yet… clean — Literally, hind bald. Natural baldness was so uncommon among the Israelites that it subjected men to an unpleasant suspicion and public derision. It is perpetually alluded to as a mark of squalor and misery. 2 Kings 2:23; Isaiah 3:24. Herodotus says that “one would see the fewest bald Egyptians of all men.” He attributes this immunity to their construct shaving. It is here carefully distinguished from the methek, or scall, of verses 29-39.

Verses 39, 42. If the spots be darkish white — When there was no other symptom but that of whiteness in the skin, the priest was to be cautious not to pronounce it a leprosy, unless the spots were perfectly bright; for if there was any cloudiness in them, it was not a leprosy. And he is informed that a man’s losing his hair by sickness or age, which made him bald, must not be taken for a sign of leprosy. But, (verse 42,) If there were a white reddish sore — It was a sign that such baldness came not from age, nor any accident, but from the leprosy.

41. Forehead bald — This is in distinction from the hind bald. Verse 40, note.

V. 42. It is a leprosy-It is a sign that such baldness came not from age, or any accident, but from the leprosy.

Verses 39, 42. If the spots be darkish white — When there was no other symptom but that of whiteness in the skin, the priest was to be cautious not to pronounce it a leprosy, unless the spots were perfectly bright; for if there was any cloudiness in them, it was not a leprosy. And he is informed that a man’s losing his hair by sickness or age, which made him bald, must not be taken for a sign of leprosy. But, (verse 42,) If there were a white reddish sore — It was a sign that such baldness came not from age, nor any accident, but from the leprosy.

42. A white, reddish sore — This alone was a sure token of the dreadful disease. Hence no seven days’ quarantine was enjoined; he is utterly unclean. Nevertheless the ancient rabbins inferred from the clause, “It is like leprosy in the skin of the flesh,” that all the criteria specified in the former case are to be applied to this, and that the quarantine of two weeks is to be enforced on the patient.

RULES TO BE OBSERVED BY PRONOUNCED LEPERS, 45, 46.

Moses having minutely discussed the various phases of the leprosy, and the methods of diagnosis, now prescribes a course of conduct for the lepers while in exile from society. Simple separation from the healthy was not a sufficient security against the loathed contamination. Additional prophylactics are required for the protection of persons without the camp or walls of the city.

44. Utterly unclean — “The Bible is everywhere careful not to allow the idea of partial goodness or partial uncleanness. There is a great moral suggestion in all this. Once let a man consider that he is not so bad as some other man, and instantly false standards of purity are set up. The Pharisee adopted this method of self-measurement, and separated himself from the publican by certain degrees of supposed righteousness.” — Joseph Parker.

V. 45. His clothes shall be rent-In the upper and fore parts, which were most visible. This was done partly as a token of sorrow, because though this was not a sin, yet it was an effect of sin, and a sore punishment, whereby he was cut off both from converse with men, and from the enjoyment of God in his ordinances; partly as a warning to others to keep at a due distance from him wheresoever he came. And his head bare-Another sign of mourning. God would have men though not overwhelmed with, yet deeply sensible of his judgments. A covering on his upper lip-Partly as another badge of his sorrow and shame, and partly for the preservation of others from his breath or touch. Unclean, unclean-As begging the pity and prayers of others, and confessing his own infirmity, and cautioning those who came near him, to keep at a distance from him.

Verse 45. His clothes shall be rent, &c.] The leprous person is required to be as one that mourned for the dead, or for some great and public calamity. He was to have his clothes rent in token of extreme sorrow; his head was to be made bare, the ordinary bonnet or turban being omitted; and he was to have a covering upon his upper lip, his jaws being tied up With a linen cloth, after the same manner in which the Jews bind up the dead, which custom is still observed among the Jews in Barbary on funeral occasions: a custom which, from Ezekiel 24:17, we learn had prevailed very anciently among the Jews in Palestine. He was also to cry, Unclean, unclean, in order to prevent any person from coming near him, lest the contagion might be thus communicated and diffused through society; and hence the Targumist render it, Be not ye made unclean! Be not ye made unclean! A caution to others not to come near him.

Verse 45. His clothes shall be rent — Whatever Israelite was found and declared by the priest to be a leper, was to be in the condition of a mourner, and in all respects to behave as such, that he might sensibly declare his afflicted state. 1st, His clothes were to be rent in the upper and fore parts, which were most visible, and this partly as a token of his sorrow, because, though his disorder was not a sin, yet it was an effect of sin, and a sore punishment whereby he was cut off, both from converse with men, and from the enjoyment of God in his ordinances; and partly as a warning to others to keep at a due distance from him wheresoever he came. 2d, His head was to be bare, which was another sign of mourning. God would have men, although not overwhelmed with, yet deeply sensible of his judgments. 3d, He was to cover his upper lip, either, perhaps, with his hand, or with the skirt of his garment, partly as a badge of his sorrow, and shame, (see Ezekiel 24:17-22; Micah 3:7,) and partly for the preservation of others from his breath or touch. According to the Hebrew doctors, by covering the lip was implied, that the leper was not to salute any man all the days of his uncleanness. 4th, He was to cry, unclean, unclean. As begging the pity and prayers of others, and confessing his own infirmity, and cautioning those that came near him to keep at a distance from him. To this Jeremiah alludes, (Lamentations 4:15,) They cried unto them, Depart ye: it is unclean: depart, depart, touch not.

45. His clothes shall be rent — This is the first visible sign which the leper was required to hang out as a warning to all not to approach too near to him. The outer garment was usually rent from the neck to the girdle. While it was a warning to others, it was to the leper the symbol of deep self-abhorrence. His head bare — The uncovered head and unkempt hair were an ancient and expressive token of sorrow. See chap. 10:6, note. Rabbinical law exempts women from this and the preceding requirement. A covering upon his upper lip — “He shall cover the beard.” By this act he expressed his unwillingness to speak, on account of shame and vexation. As the beard was a symbol of dignity, to cover it with the hands indicated self-abasement. Yet he was required to herald his own defilement. Unclean! Unclean! The paraphrase of the Palestine Targum is very expressive, “Keep off, keep off from the unclean!” This humiliating and doleful cry, uttered as a warning to any one seen approaching, was requisite to an unmistakable announcement of his leprosy, since the three visible signs were also ordinary badges of mourning. The ground of this requirement is the fact that the touch of the leper ceremonially defiled every thing. According to the Jewish canons his very entrance into a house renders every thing in it unclean. If he stand under a tree and a clean man passes by he renders him unclean. In the synagogue there must be a separate compartment for him, ten handbreadths high and four cubits square. He must be the first to enter and the last to leave the synagogue. If the pronounced leper overstepped the prescribed boundaries he received forty stripes. We no longer wonder that the Jews abhorred this disease as worse than death, the scourge of Jehovah, (2 Kings 5:7; 2 Chronicles 26:20,) and the most awful imprecation upon their foes. 2 Samuel 3:29; 2 Kings 5:27.

V. 46. He shall dwell alone-Partly for his humiliation; partly to prevent the infection of others; and partly to shew the danger of converse with spiritual lepers, or notorious sinners.

Verse 46. He shall dwell alone — For his humiliation, to prevent the infection of others, and to show the danger of converse with spiritual lepers, or notorious sinners. Without the camp shall his habitation be — See Numbers 5:2. In after times they were shut out of the cities, as now out of the camp, (2 Kings 7:3,) and there they dwelt by themselves, 2 Kings 15:5; and so it was among other nations.

46. Dwell alone — “The camp was afraid of contagion. Save the untouched by expelling the defiled.” The picture of a leper is a forlorn man with bare head, sitting in his booth without the camp, with his pitcher of water and loaf of bread by his side — supplies kindly left daily where he can find them, by his kindred within the camp or city. Where there is a number they were not forbidden to associate, as is seen 2 Kings 7:3; Luke 17:12. Such separated unclean persons may be still seen in the east. Dr. Thomson saw one on a rocky hill living in a booth of green branches. There she passed wearisome days and lonely nights till death released her. “We remonstrated against such barbarity, and the men consented to have her brought into a hired room, where we could provide suitable food and prescribe for her disease. But the women rose in furious clamour and rebellion against the proposal, and it had to be abandoned. I was amazed at the barbarity of the women. They passed her by until she died; then, however, they assembled in troops, and screamed, and tossed their arms, and tore their hair, with boisterous lamentations.”

V. 47. Leprosy in garments and houses is unknown in these times and places, which is not strange, there being some diseases peculiar to some ages and countries. And that such a thing was among the Jews, cannot reasonably be doubted; for, if Moses had been a deceiver, a man of his wisdom, would not have exposed himself to the contempt of his people by giving laws about that which their experience shewed to be but a fiction.

Verse 47. The garment also] The whole account here seems to intimate that the garment was fretted by this contagion; and hence it is likely that it was occasioned by a species of small animals, which we know to be the cause of the itch; these, by breeding in the garments, must necessarily multiply their kind, and fret the garments, i.e., corrode a, portion of the finer parts, after the manner of moths, for their nourishment. See Leviticus 13:52.

Verse 47. Leprosy in garments and houses is unknown in these times and places, which is not strange, there being some diseases peculiar to some ages and countries. And that such a thing was among the Jews, cannot reasonably be doubted; for, if Moses had been a deceiver, a man of his wisdom would not have exposed himself to the contempt of his people, by giving laws about that which their experience showed to be but a fiction.

LEPROSY IN A GARMENT, 47-59.

Moses proceeds to describe a leprous garment in the very words used to describe the leprosy in a man — plague or stroke of leprosy. This has moved the mirth of some and the wonder of others. For it is evident that the garments of the leper are not intended. 1.) The method of purifying these is described in Leviticus 14:8. 2.) The infection is described as visibly spreading in the garment. This is totally unlike “the garment spotted with the flesh.” 3.) It is subject to priestly inspection and condemnation before it is to be destroyed. 4.) No connexion of the leprous garment with a leprous wearer is hinted at. There must therefore be possible in garments something analogous to the loathsome leprosy in mankind. Here modern science comes to our aid in vindication of the accuracy of the Mosaic account. It is well known that there are some skin-diseases which originate in a genus of small spiders called acarus, embracing the mites and ticks, and other cutaneous disorders proceeding from a fungus. The analogy between the insect which frets the human skin and that which frets the garment is close enough for the proposes of the ceremonial law.

47. Woollen… or linen — Garments composed of the wool of sheep or of flax were, according to Jewish canons, exposed to this ceremonial impurity. Silk, hemp, camel’s hair, and other substances are not liable to the plague. But mixed fabrics in which wool or flax predominates are capable of contracting this impurity.

V. 48. In the warp or woof-A learned man renders it in the outside, or in the inside of it. If the signification of these words be doubtful now, as some of those of the living creatures and precious stones are confessed to be, it is not material to us, this law being abolished; it sufficeth that the Jews understood these things by frequent experience.

Verse 48. In the warp or woof — A learned man renders it, in the outside, or in the inside of it. If the signification of these words be doubtful now, as some of those concerning the living creatures and precious stones are confessed to be, it is not material to us, this law being abolished; it sufficeth that the Jews understood these things by frequent experience.

48. Anything made of skin — Dyed skins and garments are not rendered unclean by leprosy. Warp or woof — The vermin or animalculae may eat the threads of either, leaving the other untouched. Michaelis in his researches upon this subject found an intelligent woollen manufacturer in Germany who testified that when dead wool, or the wool of sheep which have died of disease, is used for either the warp or the woof, vermin are apt to establish themselves in it, particularly when it is worn close to the body and warmed thereby. The cloth woven of such wool not only becomes very soon bare, but first full of little depressions and then holes. The Jews, from want of linen and from poverty, always wore woollen next the skin; hence their flesh was specially exposed to pollution from these infinitesimal insects of the moth genus. It has been suggested that the leprosy in linen is mildew, which spreads in partially coloured spots, till it gradually eats up the garment. In leather a delicate fungus or cryptogam eats holes under certain circumstances.

49. Greenish or reddish — Moths by eating away the nap produce a slight discoloration, but mildew and rust cause spots of these colours.

LEPROSY IN A GARMENT, 47-59.

Moses proceeds to describe a leprous garment in the very words used to describe the leprosy in a man — plague or stroke of leprosy. This has moved the mirth of some and the wonder of others. For it is evident that the garments of the leper are not intended. 1.) The method of purifying these is described in Leviticus 14:8. 2.) The infection is described as visibly spreading in the garment. This is totally unlike “the garment spotted with the flesh.” 3.) It is subject to priestly inspection and condemnation before it is to be destroyed. 4.) No connexion of the leprous garment with a leprous wearer is hinted at. There must therefore be possible in garments something analogous to the loathsome leprosy in mankind. Here modern science comes to our aid in vindication of the accuracy of the Mosaic account. It is well known that there are some skin-diseases which originate in a genus of small spiders called acarus, embracing the mites and ticks, and other cutaneous disorders proceeding from a fungus. The analogy between the insect which frets the human skin and that which frets the garment is close enough for the proposes of the ceremonial law.

47. Woollen… or linen — Garments composed of the wool of sheep or of flax were, according to Jewish canons, exposed to this ceremonial impurity. Silk, hemp, camel’s hair, and other substances are not liable to the plague. But mixed fabrics in which wool or flax predominates are capable of contracting this impurity.

51. A fretting leprosy — Properly an inveterate or exasperated leprosy or corrosion.

Verse 52. He shall therefore burn that garment] There being scarcely any means of radically curing the infection. It is well known that the garments infected by the psora, or itch animal, have been known to communicate the disease even six or seven years after the first infection. This has been also experienced by the sorters of rags at some paper mills.

LEPROSY IN A GARMENT, 47-59.

Moses proceeds to describe a leprous garment in the very words used to describe the leprosy in a man — plague or stroke of leprosy. This has moved the mirth of some and the wonder of others. For it is evident that the garments of the leper are not intended. 1.) The method of purifying these is described in Leviticus 14:8. 2.) The infection is described as visibly spreading in the garment. This is totally unlike “the garment spotted with the flesh.” 3.) It is subject to priestly inspection and condemnation before it is to be destroyed. 4.) No connexion of the leprous garment with a leprous wearer is hinted at. There must therefore be possible in garments something analogous to the loathsome leprosy in mankind. Here modern science comes to our aid in vindication of the accuracy of the Mosaic account. It is well known that there are some skin-diseases which originate in a genus of small spiders called acarus, embracing the mites and ticks, and other cutaneous disorders proceeding from a fungus. The analogy between the insect which frets the human skin and that which frets the garment is close enough for the proposes of the ceremonial law.

47. Woollen… or linen — Garments composed of the wool of sheep or of flax were, according to Jewish canons, exposed to this ceremonial impurity. Silk, hemp, camel’s hair, and other substances are not liable to the plague. But mixed fabrics in which wool or flax predominates are capable of contracting this impurity.

LEPROSY IN A GARMENT, 47-59.

Moses proceeds to describe a leprous garment in the very words used to describe the leprosy in a man — plague or stroke of leprosy. This has moved the mirth of some and the wonder of others. For it is evident that the garments of the leper are not intended. 1.) The method of purifying these is described in Leviticus 14:8. 2.) The infection is described as visibly spreading in the garment. This is totally unlike “the garment spotted with the flesh.” 3.) It is subject to priestly inspection and condemnation before it is to be destroyed. 4.) No connexion of the leprous garment with a leprous wearer is hinted at. There must therefore be possible in garments something analogous to the loathsome leprosy in mankind. Here modern science comes to our aid in vindication of the accuracy of the Mosaic account. It is well known that there are some skin-diseases which originate in a genus of small spiders called acarus, embracing the mites and ticks, and other cutaneous disorders proceeding from a fungus. The analogy between the insect which frets the human skin and that which frets the garment is close enough for the proposes of the ceremonial law.

47. Woollen… or linen — Garments composed of the wool of sheep or of flax were, according to Jewish canons, exposed to this ceremonial impurity. Silk, hemp, camel’s hair, and other substances are not liable to the plague. But mixed fabrics in which wool or flax predominates are capable of contracting this impurity.

Verse 54. He shall shut it up seven days more] To give time for the spreading of the contagion, if it did exist there; that there might be the most unequivocal marks and proofs that the garment was or was not infected.

LEPROSY IN A GARMENT, 47-59.

Moses proceeds to describe a leprous garment in the very words used to describe the leprosy in a man — plague or stroke of leprosy. This has moved the mirth of some and the wonder of others. For it is evident that the garments of the leper are not intended. 1.) The method of purifying these is described in Leviticus 14:8. 2.) The infection is described as visibly spreading in the garment. This is totally unlike “the garment spotted with the flesh.” 3.) It is subject to priestly inspection and condemnation before it is to be destroyed. 4.) No connexion of the leprous garment with a leprous wearer is hinted at. There must therefore be possible in garments something analogous to the loathsome leprosy in mankind. Here modern science comes to our aid in vindication of the accuracy of the Mosaic account. It is well known that there are some skin-diseases which originate in a genus of small spiders called acarus, embracing the mites and ticks, and other cutaneous disorders proceeding from a fungus. The analogy between the insect which frets the human skin and that which frets the garment is close enough for the proposes of the ceremonial law.

47. Woollen… or linen — Garments composed of the wool of sheep or of flax were, according to Jewish canons, exposed to this ceremonial impurity. Silk, hemp, camel’s hair, and other substances are not liable to the plague. But mixed fabrics in which wool or flax predominates are capable of contracting this impurity.

V. 55. If it have not changed its colour-If washing doth not take away that vicious colour, and restore it to its own native colour.

Verse 55. If it have not changed its colour — If washing doth not take away that vicious colour, and restore it to its own native colour.

55. It is unclean — Here we observe that the spreading of the spot is not a required indication of uncleanness, but simply the continuance of the stain after washing and drying. Indelible rust or mildew would therefore render a garment unclean. Fret inward — Literally, it is a hollow in its back-baldness or in its front-baldness — a depression of the front or back side of the cloth, caused by eating off the nap. This scrupulous care of garments was a part of that process by which the idea of spiritual purity was to be developed through physical purity. First, the natural, afterward the spiritual. 1 Corinthians 15:46.

CONCLUDING NOTES.

(1.) There is much disagreement among biblical scholars respecting the nature of the leprosy and the grounds of its treatment in the law of Moses. Some strongly insist that the term leprosy is a misnomer introduced by the Greek translators, and that the real disease is the elephantiasis, because the skin resembles the elephant’s in colour, roughness, and insensibility, or because the foot, after the loss of the toes and enlargement of the ankle, resembles the foot of that animal. But it is essentially different from the leprosy, as will be seen by a study of recent medical reports from fifty places on the shores of the Mediterranean, in India, China, Africa, and the West Indies, in answer to a series of questions relating to this subject. The answers returned give a good description of the ulcers which afflicted Job, but they are not by any means so accurate a description of the Mosaic leprosy as we could desire. Hence we have not adopted the theory which identifies the elephantiasis with the leprosy described in this chapter.

(2.) Was the Levitical leprosy contagious, and was this the ground of the cautious treatment enjoined by Moses? Modern biblical scholars are inclined to answer in the negative, though not unanimously. “There are in England, now, hospitals built for lepers, so ancient that their origin is unknown, such as the St. Bartholomew Hospital at Gloucester, and others. It is known that there were at least nine thousand hospitals in Europe for leprosy alone. Louis VII. of France left legacies to over two thousand hospitals for lepers in his country. Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, held a synod at Westminster, in the year 1200, to carry out the decree of the Council of Lateran, (1172,) to build a number of churches solely for leprous people, for they had long been expelled from all parish churches. They were to have priests, officers, and graveyards exclusively for themselves. They were released at the same time from all claims for tithes for their land or cattle. So careful and determined were our ancestors to remove from sight and smell every leper, that a law was early in existence to enforce their removal out of towns and villages ‘to a solitary place.’ At the city of Bath, a bath, with physicians and attendants, was endowed — exclusively for lepers — and the endowments are still paid.” — Joseph Parker.

The following facts would justify the conclusion of biblical scholars: 1.) No precautions are prescribed to the priests who are brought into constant and close contact with this disease. 2.) The priests did not become leprous more than the laity. 3.) The wholly leprous person was pronounced clean. 4.) The leprous garment is not treated as contagious, since washing would develop the infection. 5.) According to Jewish law a minor, a heathen, a proselyte, a leprous garment, and a leprous house of a non-Israelite, do not render unclean, nor does a bridegroom seized with leprosy defile any one during the first seven days of his marriage. 6.) Naaman, a leper, commanded the armies of Syria; Gehazi conversed with the king of Israel; and the leper in later times was not shut out from the synagogue nor from the Christian churches. We conclude, therefore, that the treatment of the leprosy prescribed by Moses was not sanitary, but ceremonial, like the separation and uncleanness of menstruous women, and other defilements under the Mosaic law as touching the dead, and having an issue, (Numbers 5:2,) the treatment of which had a far deeper reason than sanitary caution.

(3.) This view suggests the important question, Of what is the leprosy the type? It is not surprising that the Holy Scriptures, especially the New Testament, affords no direct answer, for there are some types, like some parables, whose spiritual import is so obvious that they need no further explanation. All minds instantly appreciate the intended moral lesson. It is enough for us to know that the principle is laid down in the Epistle to the Hebrews that the whole of the Jewish dispensation was typical — a shadow of good things to come in the Gospel. Hence we are not to expect that every type in the Levitical ritual will be explained in detail, and that its antitype be indicated in express terms by the spirit of inspiration. The leprosy, the only disease which rendered a person unclean, is an impressive type of the great moral malady, sin. This plague corrupts and destroys the soul, excludes from the society of the holy, and banishes the incurable to the eternal pest-house of hell. For this the only cleansing is the blood of Jesus Christ, as typically set forth in the cleansing of the leper in the next chapter. Says Hengstenberg, “Every leper was a living sermon, a loud admonition to keep unspotted from the world. The exclusion of lepers from the camp, from the holy city, conveyed figuratively the same lesson as is done in the New Testament passages. See notes on Matthew 6:24; Colossians 3:5; Revelation 21:27; Ephesians 5:5. It is only when we take this view of the leprosy that we account for the fact that just this disease so frequently occurs as the theocratic punishment of sin. The image of sin is best suited for reflecting it; he who is a sinner before God is represented as a sinner in the eyes of man also by the circumstance that he must exhibit before men the image of sin. God took care that the image and the thing itself were perfectly coincident, although, no doubt, there were exceptions.”

Leprosy is a living death, poisoning all the springs and corrupting all the humours of life, dissolving little by little the whole body, so that limb actually falls away from limb through decay. Hence the leper is the type of one dead in sin; the emblems of his misery are the same as those of mourning for the dead; and the means of cleansing him are the same as those prescribed for one who has touched a corpse, and which were never used except on these two occasions. The penitent cry of David, after his deadly sins, “Purge me with hyssop,” (Psalm 51:7,) indicates a sense of utter spiritual defilement, faintly symbolized by the loathsome leprosy which was ceremonially cleansed with hyssop.

As the new-born children of leprous parents are often as pretty and as healthy in appearance as any others before the workings of the disease become visible in some of the signs described in this chapter, so the leprosy is a striking type of original or inborn depravity. If the sin principle in the sweetest babe is left unchecked by power divine he may unfold into a Nero, a Cesar Borgia, or a Robespierre.

LEPROSY IN A GARMENT, 47-59.

Moses proceeds to describe a leprous garment in the very words used to describe the leprosy in a man — plague or stroke of leprosy. This has moved the mirth of some and the wonder of others. For it is evident that the garments of the leper are not intended. 1.) The method of purifying these is described in Leviticus 14:8. 2.) The infection is described as visibly spreading in the garment. This is totally unlike “the garment spotted with the flesh.” 3.) It is subject to priestly inspection and condemnation before it is to be destroyed. 4.) No connexion of the leprous garment with a leprous wearer is hinted at. There must therefore be possible in garments something analogous to the loathsome leprosy in mankind. Here modern science comes to our aid in vindication of the accuracy of the Mosaic account. It is well known that there are some skin-diseases which originate in a genus of small spiders called acarus, embracing the mites and ticks, and other cutaneous disorders proceeding from a fungus. The analogy between the insect which frets the human skin and that which frets the garment is close enough for the proposes of the ceremonial law.

47. Woollen… or linen — Garments composed of the wool of sheep or of flax were, according to Jewish canons, exposed to this ceremonial impurity. Silk, hemp, camel’s hair, and other substances are not liable to the plague. But mixed fabrics in which wool or flax predominates are capable of contracting this impurity.

LEPROSY IN A GARMENT, 47-59.

Moses proceeds to describe a leprous garment in the very words used to describe the leprosy in a man — plague or stroke of leprosy. This has moved the mirth of some and the wonder of others. For it is evident that the garments of the leper are not intended. 1.) The method of purifying these is described in Leviticus 14:8. 2.) The infection is described as visibly spreading in the garment. This is totally unlike “the garment spotted with the flesh.” 3.) It is subject to priestly inspection and condemnation before it is to be destroyed. 4.) No connexion of the leprous garment with a leprous wearer is hinted at. There must therefore be possible in garments something analogous to the loathsome leprosy in mankind. Here modern science comes to our aid in vindication of the accuracy of the Mosaic account. It is well known that there are some skin-diseases which originate in a genus of small spiders called acarus, embracing the mites and ticks, and other cutaneous disorders proceeding from a fungus. The analogy between the insect which frets the human skin and that which frets the garment is close enough for the proposes of the ceremonial law.

47. Woollen… or linen — Garments composed of the wool of sheep or of flax were, according to Jewish canons, exposed to this ceremonial impurity. Silk, hemp, camel’s hair, and other substances are not liable to the plague. But mixed fabrics in which wool or flax predominates are capable of contracting this impurity.

Verse 58. It shall be washed the second time] According to the Jews the first washing was to put away the plague, the second to cleanse it. BOTH among Jews and Gentiles the leprosy has been considered as a most expressive emblem of sin, the properties and circumstances of the one pointing out those of the other. The similitude or parallel has been usually run in the following manner:—

1. The leprosy began with a spot, a simple hidden infection being the cause.

2. This spot was very conspicuous, and argued the source whence it proceeded.

3. It was of a diffusive nature, soon spreading over the whole body.

4. It communicated its infectious nature, not only to the whole of the person’s body, but also to his clothes and habitation.

5. It rendered the infected person loathsome, unfit for and dangerous to society because of its infectious nature.

6. The person infected was obliged to be separated from society, both religious and civil; to dwell by himself without the camp or city, and hold commerce with none.

7. He was obliged to proclaim his own uncleanness, publicly acknowledge his defilement, and, sensible of his plague, continue humbled and abased before God and man.

How expressive all these are of the nature of sin and the state of a sinner, a spiritual mind will at once perceive.

1. The original infection or corruption of nature is the grand hidden cause, source, and spring of all transgression.

2. Iniquity is a seed that has its growth, gradual increase, and perfection. As the various powers of the mind are developed, so it diffuses itself, infecting every passion and appetite through their whole extent and operation.

3. As it spreads in the mind, so it diffuses itself through the life; every action partaking of its influence, till the whole conduct becomes a tissue of transgression, because every imagination of the thoughts of a sinner’s heart is only evil continually, Gen. vi. This is the natural state of man.

4. As a sinner is infected, so is he infectious; by his precept and example he spreads the infernal contagion wherever he goes; joining with the multitude to do evil, strengthening and being strengthened in the ways of sin and death, and becoming especially a snare and a curse to his own household.

5. That a sinner is abominable in the sight of God and of all good men, that he is unfit for the society of the righteous, and that he cannot, as such, be admitted into the kingdom of God, needs no proof.

6. It is owing to the universality of the evil that sinners are not expelled from society as the most dangerous of all monsters, and obliged to live without having any commerce with their fellow creatures. Ten lepers could associate together, because partaking of the same infection: and civil society is generally maintained, because composed of a leprous community.

7. He that wishes to be saved from his sins must humble himself before God and man, sensible of his own sore and the plague of his heart; confess his transgressions; look to God for a cure, from whom alone it can be received; and bring that Sacrifice by which alone the guilt can be taken away, and his soul be purified from all unrighteousness. See the conclusion of the following chapter. LEVITICUS

LEPROSY IN A GARMENT, 47-59.

Moses proceeds to describe a leprous garment in the very words used to describe the leprosy in a man — plague or stroke of leprosy. This has moved the mirth of some and the wonder of others. For it is evident that the garments of the leper are not intended. 1.) The method of purifying these is described in Leviticus 14:8. 2.) The infection is described as visibly spreading in the garment. This is totally unlike “the garment spotted with the flesh.” 3.) It is subject to priestly inspection and condemnation before it is to be destroyed. 4.) No connexion of the leprous garment with a leprous wearer is hinted at. There must therefore be possible in garments something analogous to the loathsome leprosy in mankind. Here modern science comes to our aid in vindication of the accuracy of the Mosaic account. It is well known that there are some skin-diseases which originate in a genus of small spiders called acarus, embracing the mites and ticks, and other cutaneous disorders proceeding from a fungus. The analogy between the insect which frets the human skin and that which frets the garment is close enough for the proposes of the ceremonial law.

47. Woollen… or linen — Garments composed of the wool of sheep or of flax were, according to Jewish canons, exposed to this ceremonial impurity. Silk, hemp, camel’s hair, and other substances are not liable to the plague. But mixed fabrics in which wool or flax predominates are capable of contracting this impurity.

Verse 59. This is the law of the plague of leprosy in a garment — The learned confess that this leprosy in a garment was a sign and a miracle in Israel; an extraordinary punishment inflicted by the divine power, as a token of great displeasure against a person or family. The garment suspected to be tainted was not to be burned immediately; for in no case must sentence be given merely upon a surmise; but it must be shown to the priest. If, upon search, it was found that there was a leprous spot, (the Jews say, no bigger than a bean,) it was to be burned, or at least that part of it in which the spot was. If the cause of the suspicion were gone, yet it must be washed, and then it might be used, verse 58. This was intended to intimate the great malignity which there is in sin. It not only defiles the sinner’s conscience, but it brings a stain on all his employments and enjoyments, all he has, and all he doeth. To them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure, Titus 1:14. And we are hereby taught to hate even the garments spotted with the flesh, Jude 1:23. Those that make their clothes servants to their pride and lust, may see them thereby tainted with a leprosy, and doomed to the fire, Isaiah 3:18, 24; but the ornament of the hidden man of the heart is incorruptible, 1 Peter 3:4. The robes of righteousness never fret nor are moth eaten.

LEPROSY IN A GARMENT, 47-59.

Moses proceeds to describe a leprous garment in the very words used to describe the leprosy in a man — plague or stroke of leprosy. This has moved the mirth of some and the wonder of others. For it is evident that the garments of the leper are not intended. 1.) The method of purifying these is described in Leviticus 14:8. 2.) The infection is described as visibly spreading in the garment. This is totally unlike “the garment spotted with the flesh.” 3.) It is subject to priestly inspection and condemnation before it is to be destroyed. 4.) No connexion of the leprous garment with a leprous wearer is hinted at. There must therefore be possible in garments something analogous to the loathsome leprosy in mankind. Here modern science comes to our aid in vindication of the accuracy of the Mosaic account. It is well known that there are some skin-diseases which originate in a genus of small spiders called acarus, embracing the mites and ticks, and other cutaneous disorders proceeding from a fungus. The analogy between the insect which frets the human skin and that which frets the garment is close enough for the proposes of the ceremonial law.

47. Woollen… or linen — Garments composed of the wool of sheep or of flax were, according to Jewish canons, exposed to this ceremonial impurity. Silk, hemp, camel’s hair, and other substances are not liable to the plague. But mixed fabrics in which wool or flax predominates are capable of contracting this impurity.