Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 14:1

And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying,

The purification of the leper (ch. Lev 14:1-32)

The ceremonies to be observed are of two kinds:

(1) before the leper is brought into the camp,

( a) by the priest ( Lev 14:2-7),

( b) by the leper ( Lev 14:8),

(2) after the leper is readmitted to the camp, but remaining outside his tent seven days,

( c) by the leper on the seventh day ( Lev 14:9),

( d) the sacrificial ritual on the eighth day ( Lev 14:10-20),

( e) modification for the poor leper ( Lev 14:21-32).

The leper was regarded (1) as one dead (see on Lev 13:45 f.), (2) as unclean, (3) as smitten of God: hence the ceremonial indicated (1) restoration to life, (2) removal of uncleanness, (3) readmission to God’s presence.

(1) is thought to represent the older rite, while Lev 14:14-20 are later, giving more detail and laying greater stress on religious motives.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

The leper was excluded not only from the sanctuary but from the camp. The ceremony of restoration which he had to undergo was therefore twofold. The first part, performed outside the camp, entitled him to come within and to mix with his brethren, Lev 14:3-9. The second part, performed in the court of the tabernacle and separated from the first by an interval of seven days, restored him to all the privileges of the covenant with Yahweh, Lev. 14:10-32.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

CHAPTER XIV

Introduction to the sacrifices and ceremonies to be used in

cleansing the leper, 1-3.

Two living birds, cedar-wood, scarlet, and hyssop, to be

brought for him who was to be cleansed, 4.

One of the birds to be killed, 5;

and the living bird, with the cedar-wood, scarlet, and hyssop,

to be dipped in the blood, and to be sprinkled on him who had

been infected with the leprosy, 6, 7;

after which he must wash his clothes, shave his head, eye

brows, beard, c., bathe himself, tarry abroad seven days, 8, 9

on the eighth day he must bring two he-lambs, one ewe lamb,

a tenth deal of flour, and a log of oil, 10;

which the priest was to present as a trespass-offering,

wave-offering, and sin-offering before the Lord, 11-13.

Afterwards he was to sprinkle both the blood and oil on the

person to be cleansed, 14-18.

The atonement made by these offerings, 19, 20.

If the person were poor, one lamb, with the flour and oil, two

turtledoves, or two young pigeons, were only required, 21, 22.

These to be presented, and the blood and oil applied as before,

23-32.

Laws and ordinances relative to houses infected by the

leprosy, 33-48.

An atonement to be made in order to cleanse the house, similar

to that made for the healed leper, 49-53.

A summary of this and the preceding chapter, relative to

leprous persons, garments, and houses, 54-56.

The end for which these different laws were given, 57.

NOTES ON CHAP. XIV

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

And the Lord spake unto Moses,…. In order to deliver the same to Aaron, who, and the priests his successors, were chiefly to be concerned in the execution of the law given:

saying; as follows.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Purification of the leper, after his recovery from his disease. As leprosy, regarded as a decomposition of the vital juices, and as putrefaction in a living body, was an image of death, and like this introduced the same dissolution and destruction of life into the corporeal sphere which sin introduced into the spiritual; and as the leper for this very reason as not only excluded from the fellowship of the sanctuary, but cut off from intercourse with the covenant nation which was called to sanctification: the man, when recovered from leprosy, was first of all to be received into the fellowship of the covenant nation by a significant rite of purification, and then again to be still further inducted into living fellowship with Jehovah in His sanctuary. Hence the purification prescribed was divided into two acts, separated from one another by an interval of seven days.

Lev 14:2-8

The first act (Lev 14:2-8) set forth the restoration of the man, who had been regarded as dead, into the fellowship of the living members of the covenant nation, and was therefore performed by the priest outside the camp.

Lev 14:2-4

On the day of his purification the priest was to examine the leper outside the camp; and if he found the leprosy cured and gone ( , const. praegnans, healed away from, i.e., healed and gone away from), he was to send for (lit., order them to fetch or bring) two living ( , with all the fulness of their vital power) birds (without any precise direction as to the kind, not merely sparrows), and (a piece of) cedar-wood and coccus (probably scarlet wool, or a little piece of scarlet cloth), and hyssop (see at Exo 12:22).

Lev 14:5-7

The priest was to have one of the birds killed into an earthen vessel upon fresh water (water drawn from a fountain or brook, Lev 15:13; Gen 26:19), that is to say, slain in such a manner that its blood should flow into the fresh water which was in a vessel, and should mix with it. He was then to take the (other) live bird, together with the cedar-wood, scarlet, and hyssop, and dip them (these accompaniments) along with the bird into the blood of the one which had been killed over the water. With this the person cured of leprosy was to be sprinkled seven times (see Lev 4:6) and purified; after which the living bird was to be “let loose upon the face of the field,” i.e., to be allowed to fly away into the open country. The two birds were symbols of the person to be cleansed. The one let loose into the open country is regarded by all the commentators as a symbolical representation of the fact, that the former leper was now imbued with new vital energy, and released from the fetters of his disease, and could now return in liberty again into the fellowship of his countrymen. But if this is established, the other must also be a symbol of the leper; and just as in the second the essential point in the symbol was its escape to the open country, in the first the main point must have been its death. Not, however, in this sense, that it was a figurative representation of the previous condition of the leper; but that, although it was no true sacrifice, since there was no sprinkling of blood in connection with it, its bloody death was intended to show that the leper would necessarily have suffered death on account of his uncleanness, which reached to the very foundation of his life, if the mercy of God had not delivered him from this punishment of sin, and restored to him the full power and vigour of life again. The restitution of this full and vigorous life was secured to him symbolically, by his being sprinkled with the blood of the bird which was killed in is stead. But because his liability to death had assumed a bodily form in the uncleanness of leprosy, he was sprinkled not only with blood, but with the flowing water of purification into which the blood had flowed, and was thus purified from his mortal uncleanness. Whereas one of the birds, however, had to lay down its life, and shed its blood for the person to be cleansed, the other was made into a symbol of the person to be cleansed by being bathed in the mixture of blood and water; and its release, to return to its fellows and into its nest, represented his deliverance from the ban of death which rested upon leprosy, and his return to the fellowship of his own nation. This signification of the rite serves to explain not only the appointment of birds for the purpose, since free unfettered movement in all directions could not be more fittingly represented by anything than by birds, which are distinguished from all other animals by their freedom and rapidity of motion, but also the necessity for their being alive and clean, viz., to set forth the renewal of life and purification; also the addition of cedar-wood, scarlet wool, and hyssop, by which the life-giving power of the blood mixed with living (spring) water was to be still further strengthened. The cedar-wood, on account of its antiseptic qualities ( , Theodor. on Eze 17:22), was a symbol of the continuance of life; the coccus colour, a symbol of freshness of life, or fulness of vital energy; and the hyssop ( , herba humilis, medicinalis, purgandis pulmonibus apta: August. on Ps 51), a symbol of purification from the corruption of death. The sprinkling was performed seven times, because it referred to a readmission into the covenant, the stamp of which was seven; and it was made with a mixture of blood and fresh water, the blood signifying life, the water purification.

Lev 14:8

After this symbolical purification from the mortal ban of leprosy, the person cleansed had to purify himself bodily, by washing his clothes, shaving off all his hair – i.e., not merely the hair of his head and beard, but that of his whole body (cf. Lev 14:9), – and bathing in water; and he could then enter into the camp. But he had still to remain outside his tent for seven days, not only because he did not yet feel himself at home in the congregation, or because he was still to retain the consciousness that something else was wanting before he could be fully restored, but, as the Chaldee has explained it by adding the clause, et non accedat ad latus uxoris suae , that he might not defile himself again by conjugal rights, and so interrupt his preparation for readmission into fellowship with Jehovah.

Lev 14:9-12

The second act (Lev 14:9-20) effected his restoration to fellowship with Jehovah, and his admission to the sanctuary. It commenced on the seventh day after the first with a fresh purification; viz., shaving off all the hair from the head, the beard, the eyebrows – in fact, the whole body, – washing the clothes, and bathing the body. On the eighth day there followed a sacrificial expiation; and for this the person to be expiated was to bring two sheep without blemish, a ewe-lamb of a year old, three-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as a meat-offering, and a log (or one-twelfth of a hin, i.e., as much as six hens’ eggs, or 1562 Rhenish cubic inches) of oil; and the priest was to present him, together with these gifts, before Jehovah, i.e., before the altar of burnt-offering. The one lamb was then offered by the priest as a trespass-offering, together with the log of oil; and both of these were waves by him. By the waving, which did not take place on other occasions in connection with sin-offerings and trespass-offerings, the lamb and oil were transferred symbolically to the Lord; and by the fat that these sacrificial gifts represented the offerer, the person to be consecrated to the Lord by means of them was dedicated to His service again, just as the Levites were dedicated to the Lord by the ceremony of waving (Num 8:11, Num 8:15). But a trespass-offering was required as the consecration-offering, because the consecration itself served as a restoration to all the rights of the priestly covenant nation, which had been lost by the mortal ban of leprosy.

(Note: Others, e.g., Riehm and Oehler, regard this trespass-offering also as a kind of mulcta, or satisfaction rendered for the fact, that during the whole period of his sickness, and so long as he was excluded from the congregation, the leper had failed to perform his theocratical duties, and Jehovah had been injured in consequence. But if this was the idea upon which the trespass-offering was founded, the law would necessarily have required that trespass-offerings should be presented on the recovery of persons who had been affected with diseased secretions; for during the continuance of their disease, which often lasted a long time, even as much as 12 years (Luk 8:43), they were precluded from visiting the sanctuary or serving the Lord with sacrifices, because they were unclean, and therefore could not perform their theocratical duties.)

Lev 14:13-14

After the slaying of the lamb in the holy place, as the trespass-offering, like the sin-offering, was most holy and belonged to the priest (see at Lev 7:6), the priest put some of its blood upon the tip of the right ear, the right thumb, and the great toe of the right foot of the person to be consecrated, in order that the organ of hearing, with which he hearkened to the word of the Lord, and those used in acting and walking according to His commandments, might thereby be sanctified through the power of the atoning blood of the sacrifice; just as in the dedication of the priests (Lev 8:24).

Lev 14:15-18

The priest then poured some oil out of the log into the hollow of his left hand, and dipping the finger of his right hand in the oil, sprinkled it seven times before Jehovah, i.e., before the altar of burnt-offering, to consecrate the oil to God, and sanctify it for further use. With the rest of the oil he smeared the same organs of the person to be consecrated which he had already smeared with blood, placing it, in fact, “ upon the blood of the trespass-offering, ” i.e., upon the spots already touched with blood; he then poured the remainder upon the head of the person to be consecrated, and so made atonement for him before Jehovah. The priests were also anointed at their consecration, not only by the pouring of oil upon their head, but by the sprinkling of oil upon their garments (Lev 8:12, Lev 8:30). But in their case the anointing of their head preceded the consecration-offering, and holy anointing oil was used for the purpose. Here, on the contrary, it was ordinary oil, which the person to be consecrated had offered as a sacrificial gift; and this was first of all sanctified, therefore, by being sprinkled and poured upon the organs with which he was to serve the Lord, and then upon the head, which represented his personality. Just as the anointing oil, prepared according to divine directions, shadowed forth the power and gifts of the Spirit, with which God endowed the priests for their peculiar office in His kingdom; so the oil, which the leper about to be consecrated presented as a sacrifice out of his own resources, represented the spirit of life which he had received from God, and now possessed as his own. This property of his spirit was presented to the Lord by the priestly waving and sprinkling of the oil before Jehovah, to be pervaded and revived by His spirit of grace, and when so strengthened, to be not only applied to those organs of the person to be consecrated, with which he fulfilled the duties of his vocation as a member of the priestly nation of God, but also poured upon his head, to be fully appropriated to his person. And just as in the sacrifice the blood was the symbol of the soul, so in the anointing the oil was the symbol of the spirit. If, therefore, the soul was established in gracious fellowship with the Lord by being sprinkled with the atoning blood of sacrifice, the anointing with oil had reference to the spirit, which gives life to soul and body, and which was thereby endowed with the power of the Spirit of God. In this way the man cleansed from leprosy was reconciled to Jehovah, and reinstated in the covenant privileges and covenant grace.

Lev 14:19-20

It was not till all this had been done, that the priest could proceed to make expiation for him with the sin-offering, for which the ewe-lamb was brought, “on account of his uncleanness,” i.e., on account of the sin which still adhered to him as well as to all the other members of the covenant nation, and which had come outwardly to light in the uncleanness of his leprosy; after which he presented his burnt-offering and meat-offering, which embodied the sanctification of all his members to the service of the Lord, and the performance of works well-pleasing to Him. The sin-offering, burnt-offering, and meat-offering were therefore presented according to the general instructions, with this exception, that, as a representation of diligence in good works, a larger quantity of meal and oil was brought than the later law in Num 15:4 prescribed for the burnt-offering.

Lev 14:21-32

In cases of poverty on the part of the person to be consecrated, the burnt-offering and sin-offering were reduced to a pair of turtle-doves or young pigeons, and the meat-offering to a tenth of an ephah of meal and oil; but no diminution was allowed in the trespass-offering as the consecration-offering, since this was the conditio sine qua non of reinstatement in full covenant rights. On account of the importance of all the details of this law, every point is repeated a second time in Lev 14:21-32.

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

The Law Concerning Leprosy.

B. C. 1490.

      1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,   2 This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing: He shall be brought unto the priest:   3 And the priest shall go forth out of the camp; and the priest shall look, and, behold, if the plague of leprosy be healed in the leper;   4 Then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two birds alive and clean, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop:   5 And the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water:   6 As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water:   7 And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open field.   8 And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days.   9 But it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall wash his clothes, also he shall wash his flesh in water, and he shall be clean.

      Here, I. It is supposed that the plague of the leprosy was not an incurable disease. Uzziah’s indeed continued to the day of his death, and Gehazi’s was entailed upon his seed; but Miriam’s lasted only seven days: we may suppose that it often wore off in process of time. Though God contend long, he will not contend for ever.

      II. The judgment of the cure, as well as that of the disease, was referred to the priest. He must go out of the camp to the leper, to see whether his leprosy was healed, v. 3. And we may suppose the priest did not contract any ceremonial uncleanness by coming near the leper, as another person would. It was in mercy to the poor lepers that the priests particularly had orders to attend them, for the priests’ lips should keep knowledge; and those in affliction have need to be instructed both how to bear their afflictions and how to reap benefit by them, have need of the word, in concurrence with the rod, to bring them to repentance; therefore it is well for those that are sick if they have these messengers of the Lord of hosts with them, these interpreters, to show unto them God’s uprightness, Job xxxiii. 23. When the leper was shut out, and could not go to the priests, it was well that the priests might come to him. Is any sick? Let him send for the elders, the ministers, Jam. v. 14. If we apply it to the spiritual leprosy of sin, it intimates that when we withdraw from those who walk disorderly, that they may be ashamed, we must not count them as enemies, but admonish them as brethren, 2 Thess. iii. 15. And also that when God by his grace has brought those to repentance who were shut out of communion for scandal, they ought with tenderness, and joy, and sincere affection, to be received in again. Thus Paul orders concerning the excommunicated Corinthian that when he had given evidences of his repentance they should forgive him, and comfort him, and confirm their love towards him,2Co 2:7; 2Co 2:8. And ministers are entrusted by our Master with the declarative power of loosing as well as binding: both must be done with great caution and deliberation, impartially and without respect of persons, with earnest prayer to God for directions, and a sincere regard to the edification of the body of Christ, due care being always taken that sinners may not be encouraged by an excess of lenity, nor penitents discouraged by an excess of severity. Wisdom and sincerity are profitable to direct in this case.

      III. If it was found that the leprosy was healed, the priest must declare it with a particular solemnity. The leper or his friends were to get ready two birds caught for this purpose (any sort of wild birds that were clean), and cedar-wood, and scarlet, and hyssop; for all these were to be used in the ceremony. 1. A preparation was to be made of blood and water, with which the leper must be sprinkled. One of the birds (and the Jews say, if there was any difference, it must be the larger and better of the two) was to be killed over an earthen cup of spring water, so that the blood of the bird might discolour the water. This (as some other types) had its accomplishment in the death of Christ, when out of his pierced side there came water and blood, John xix. 34. Thus Christ comes into the soul for its cure and cleansing, not by water only, but by water and blood, 1 John v. 6. 2. The living bird, with a little scarlet wool, and a bunch of hyssop, must be fastened to a cedar stick, dipped in the water and blood, which must be so sprinkled upon him that was to be cleansed, Lev 14:6; Lev 14:7. The cedar-wood signified the restoring of the leper to his strength and soundness, for that is a sort of wood not apt to putrefy. The scarlet wool signified his recovering a florid colour again, for the leprosy made him white as snow. And the hyssop intimated the removing of the disagreeable scent which commonly attended the leprosy. The cedar the stateliest plant, and hyssop the meanest, are here used together in this service (see 1 Kings iv. 33); for those of the lowest rank in the church may be of use in their place, as well as those that are most eminent, 1 Cor. xii. 2. Some make the slain bird to typify Christ dying for our sins, and the living bird Christ rising again for our justification. The dipping of the living bird in the blood of the slain bird intimated that the merit of Christ’s death was that which made his resurrection effectual for our justification. He took his blood with him into the holy place, and there appeared a lamb as it had been slain. The cedar, scarlet wool, and hyssop, must all be dipped in the blood; for the word and ordinances, and all the operations of the Spirit, receive their efficacy for our cleansing from the blood of Christ. The leper must be sprinkled seven times, to signify a complete purification, in allusion to which David prays, Wash me thoroughly, Ps. li. 2. Naaman was directed to wash seven times, 2 Kings v. 10. 3. The living bird was then to be let loose in the open field, to signify that the leper, being cleansed, was now no longer under restraint and confinement, but might take his liberty to go where he pleased. But this being signified by the flight of a bird towards heaven was an intimation to him henceforward to seek the things that are above, and not to spend this new life to which God had restored him merely in the pursuit of earthly things. This typified that glorious liberty of the children of God to which those are advanced who through grace are sprinkled from an evil conscience. Those whose souls before bowed down to the dust (Ps. xliv. 25), in grief and fear, now fly in the open firmament of heaven, and soar upwards upon the wings of faith and hope, and holy love and joy. 4. The priest must, upon this, pronounce him clean. It was requisite that this should be done with solemnity, that the leper might himself be the more affected with the mercy of God to him in his recovery, and that others might be satisfied to converse with him. Christ is our priest, to whom the Father has committed all judgment, and particularly the judgment of the leprosy. By his definitive sentence impenitent sinners will have their everlasting portion assigned them with the unclean (Job xxxvi. 14), out of the holy city; and all that by his grace are cured and cleansed shall be received into the camp of the saints, into which no unclean thing shall enter. Those are clean indeed whom Christ pronounces so, and they need not regard what men say of them. But, though Christ was the end of this law for righteousness, yet being in the days of his flesh made under the law, which as yet stood unrepealed, he ordered those lepers whom he had cured miraculously to go and show themselves to the priest, and offer for their cleansing according to the law,Mat 8:4; Luk 17:14. The type must be kept up till it was answered by its antitype. 5. When the leper was pronounced clean, he must wash his body and his clothes, and shave off all his hair (v. 8), must still tarry seven days out of the camp, and on the seventh day must do it again, v. 9. The priest having pronounced him clean from the disease, he must make himself as clean as ever he could from all the remains of it, and from all other defilements, and he must take time to do this. Thus those who have the comfort of the remission of their sins, by the sprinkling of the blood of Christ upon their consciences, must with the utmost care and caution cleanse themselves from all filthiness both of flesh and spirit, and thoroughly purge themselves from their old sins; for every one that hath this hope in him will be concerned to purify himself.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

LEVITICUS- CHAPTER FOURTEEN

Verses 1-7:

The law of purification of the leper was precise and detailed. Only the law of purification from contact with a dead body, and the law of the purification of a defiled Nazarite were comparable to it in respect to the minute details involved.

Some purifications were simple: one who touched the carcass of a beast who had died of natural causes had only to wash his clothes, see Le 11:40. It appears that the more important the defilement, the more significant the cleansing.

Leprosy excluded its victim from both the sanctuary, and the congregation of Israel. This involved the relationship both to Israel, and to God. Thus there must be a two-fold restoration, each with its own ceremonies. The method of the first purification is described in verses 1-8, the second in verses 9-32.

Preliminary stages in the first cleansing, to allow the cleansed leper to return to society, were:

1. The priest examined the leper outside the camp, to determine if he were indeed clean.

2. An earthen vessel was filled with fresh water, and was brought along with two birds, to the priest. One of these birds was killed, and his blood was allowed to run in the water.

3. The second bird was dipped in the water, along with hyssop and a piece of cedar wood, bound together with a thread of scarlet wool. The priest then sprinkled the leper with the bloody water which dripped from the living bird’s feathers.

4. The priest formally declared the leper to be clean.

5. The living bird was set free in the open field.

This cleansing process is symbolic:

1. Of Jesus our Priest who went forth outside the camp, both to examine for and to cleanse of sin, Heb 13:12, 13.

2. The fragrance and antiseptic properties of the cedar wood may represent the beauty of the therapy of cleansing. 1Jo 1:7.

3. The hyssop may symbolize the bitterness through which the . Savior went, to effect the sinner’s purification, 2Co 5:21.

4. The scarlet wool may represent the blood of Christ which “cleanseth from all sin,” 1Jo 1:7.

5. The bird which was slain pictures the sacrifice of Christ on behalf of sinners.

6. The running water may symbolize the Holy Spirit, see Joh 7: 39.

7. The bird set free represents the Lord bearing man’s sins from him “as far as the east is from the west,” Ps 103:12.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

Leprosy Cleansed

SUGGESTIVE READINGS

Lev. 14:2.In the day of his cleansing. Remedy and respite came to the pitiable leper. Although his case seemed forlorn and dismalunclean, and an outcastyet the hope was left to him that the plague might be healed, and he be again restored to society and the sanctuary. The darkest lot of human life is illumined by hope; faint may be its ray, yet it breaks the dreariest gloom. Weary indeed were all the days wherein the plague was in him (Lev. 13:46), but after long waiting there might come in due season the day of his cleansing. Yes, the possibilities of better things cheer us in every adverse case; the promises of God alleviate the desolation of all who wait for Him, even as the outlook for the accepted time and the day of salvation cheers the languishing soul in its conscious misery and sin. To every plague-bound soul this solace remainsthe day of his cleansing may perchance come.

Lev. 14:3.The priest shall go forth out of the camp. No restoration from banishment to God, no removal of the bane of uncleanness, except through priestly mediation. Between the soul and salvation comes the priest. And the whole work of reinstating the outcast in his lost privileges begins in this act of the priest going forth to the place of the lepers banishment. The coming forth of Christ Jesus to us, to where we were in our banishment, that was the initial incident in our restoration to God. No one but the priest could come nigh a leper without contracting defilement; no one but the sacred person of our divine Priest could approach us in our sins and both Himself remain holy, harmless, undefiled, and also bring the unclean life back to purity and privilege.

Lev. 14:4.Two birds, cedar wood, scarlet and hyssop. Symbols of ceremonial and sacrificial cleansing. The one bird was killed, the other set at liberty. The one bird dead, symbolising that the leprous life of the victim was now also dead; the other bird free, symbolising that henceforth a new life of liberty was set before the restored leper. Or the evangelical symbolism may suggest to us in the slain bird the death, and in the soaring bird the resurrection of Christtwo aspects of His perfected redemption for the sinner.

The cedar in Scripture is the symbol of loftiness and pride, and leprosy was regarded as Gods rebuke for arrogance and haughtiness. Hyssop symbolised lowliness. Tradition affirms, Pride was the cause of the distemper, which cannot be cured till man becomes humble, and keeps himself as low as hyssop.

Scarlet, a binding of crimson wool, by which the cedar and hyssop were connected; suggestive of sins as scarlet, and equally of the blood of atonement; or it may symbolise the now purified and healthy blood flowing in the cleansed lepers veins.

Lev. 14:7.Sprinkle upon him seven times. Welcome to the leper those sprinklings of the blood; each one being a testimony of his deliverance. And to a sin-burdened life how welcome the blood of sprinkling. There is no impatience while the sign of cleansing is seven times repeated. Naaman might resent the requirement of the seven washings in Jordan; but it was in ignorance of the fact that seven is the sign of perfectness. The life which craves emancipation from uncleanness and banishment, frets not under the repeated application of the purifying blood; it is to him precious blood, and his outcry is Wash me throughly from mine iniquity. They who have experienced the bitterness of sin, weary not under the process of cleansing.

Lev. 14:8-9.He that is to be cleansed. The first process of personal purifying restored the leper to the camp, the place of acknowledged relationship to Jehovah; he entered the society of Israel. Even so does the repentant sinner, who has been recalled from his outcast life, seeks to cleanse himself from evil ways and outward defilements, and then takes his place amid the congregations of Gods people. It is the beginning of his new and better life. He ventures not yet into his tent, nor treads the floors of the sanctuary; for these nearer and more sacred felicities require a fuller sanctifying. He must be clean who would dwell in the camp; doubly cleansed who could enter the family of Gods people in happy tent fellowship; supremely sanctified if he would tread the sanctuary of holy privilege, accepted within the very presence of the Lord.

Lev. 14:10-20.He shall take two lambs, etc. For now, at the end of seven days the soul is to come before the Lord (Lev. 14:11); and who will venture near Him without sacrifice? The priest leads him to the very door of the tabernacle, waves the trespass offering in Gods presence, slays the sin offering and burnt offering in the holy place, then applies the trespass-offering blood, to the person of the suppliant together with the oil of consecration, making atonement for him, that he may be clean. The priestly ministries, and the sacrificial offerings reveal to us the works of Jesus; the applied blood and oil suggest the gracious offices of the Holy Spirit. All the most effective methods of purifying are called into requisition if a leper is to be made acceptable to God. True types of the needs of guilty men. It is not by easy and superficial processes they can be reinstated in grace. The priestly offices and sacrificial merits of Christ, the direct ministries of the Holy Spirit in applying the healing virtues of redemption, are imperative for their acceptance with the Lord. The sinner needs all that Christ and the Spirit can do for him if he is to stand without spot or rebuke before God.

Lev. 14:21-32.If he be poor. Poverty is left without plea of inability by such concessions; and equally is saved from fear of rejection by such evidence that God thinks specially of the poor.

Lev. 14:33-53.Leprosy in a house. A law given in the desert which was applicable to their future lot in the Land of Promise. It is thus a hostage that they would come into the land of Canaan. God sees the end from the beginning. He knows the way we take, and He arranges the goal we shall reach. It is so in our earthly movements; it is certainly so in our spiritual pilgrimage.

God would have our homes pure. No care could be too minute, no toil too heavy, no sacrifice too serious, in order to keep the house clean from plague. The habitations of the righteous should be free from all impurities; the walls bared of all suggestions of wrong thoughts and passions; the house free from every enticement to indulgence and sin. Modern Art is responsible for many a plague spot on the walls of our houses; and Luxury is to-day laying decoys on our tables which allure to habits whose issue is sin. Christian houses should be free from all occasions to such defilement. At all costs, though it mean the parting with ideal pictures and valued sculpture in the adornment of our rooms, or the removing of indulgences from our board, which may encourage in our children impure thoughts or perilous habits, let us show ourselves to be Gods people by keeping our homes clean. For a Christian home is earths best type of the beauteous and blissful heaven.

SECTIONAL HOMILIES

Topic: THE LAW OF CLEANSING (Lev. 14:1-3)

The law of cleansing is clearly and emphatically shown at the outset; mans part in his own purifying is to stand still, and see the salvation of God. All is to be done for him, nothing done by him. The leper must make no advances, could effect no purifying; he must for ever remain unclean and an outcast if help and deliverance are not brought him. And in the redemption, in the recreation of the sinner, all must be of God, all of grace; not of works, lest any man should boast. [Addenda to chap. xiv., Helplessness.]

I. GUILTY MANS ABSOLUTE HELPLESSNESS.

1. His position. The lepers place was outside the camp, in the place of (symbolical) banishment from God. He was consigned to solitude, dreary isolation, beyond the reach of human aid. Doubly outlawed, from God and man; all help divorced from him; far off from the agencies of healing and amelioration; shut out from divine and human regard. In the ranks of sinful men and women to-day, there are thousands equally outlawed from help; living far off from God, apparently untouched by gracious influences of heaven, never hearing of Christ, unarrested and unawakened, living as outcasts. Nor do their fellow men come to their aid; no man careth for their soul; they are shunned as criminals, abandoned as hopeless. Let not this be supposed true only of the lower classes of society; in the highest stations there are those of whom, so far as sacred agencies reaching them, God seems to say, Let them alone! and to whom no delivering help or saving word ever appears to come from those who know the way of salvation.

2. His condition. Beyond human aid, certainly the leper was beyond self-aid. How could he act to secure his own cleansing? He could only communicate defilement to everything and every one he touched. He was a defiled and a defiling leper; could make nothing clean, only unclean. Without any helper, he was absolutely helpless. Are sinners thus? Can we minimise or escape our guilt? If it were possible for us to do works of righteousness, they would not diminish the guilt to our past account or obliterate present sinfulness. All our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; there is none that doeth good and sinneth not. It is mournfully true that the unclean cannot act any single part for the removal of their uncleanness.

Add to this the fact that one leper could not cleanse another, and the sum of his helplessness is complete. Neither in himself nor in his fellow-men, clean or unclean, could deliverance or healing be found.

When shut out from men we are shut up to God. Grace meets us in our extremity. Jesus finds him whom men cast out (Joh. 9:35), and receives sinners whom society rejects (Mat. 9:11-12).

When penitence has wept in vain
Over some foul dark spot,
One only stream, a stream of blood,
Can wash away the blot.

II. GODS ABOUNDING HELPFULNESS.

Since his only resource was in God, He alone devised and accomplished the plan of his cleansing.

1. The outgoing of divine help. The priest shall go forth out of the camp. He was in this the minister of God, acting out Gods purpose. In the priest God approached the leper. Later in time, to guilty men there came the Supreme Priest; man could not, in his sin, come to God, but God came to man in Christ. And still He comes, by mediatorial agencies, to the lone spirit in the misery of sin. The first step in a sinners salvation is taken by God. He does not shrink from leprous scenes. Where sinners are the Saviour comes. In this was manifested the love of God toward us (1Jn. 4:9-10).

2. The process of divine cleansing. Having began a good work, God carries it on to completion (Lev. 14:5; Lev. 14:7). Sacrificial bloodshedding follows (Lev. 14:6), then the blood of sprinkling is applied (Lev. 14:7) in token of redeeming merits communicated; followed by the soaring bird (Lev. 14:7), symbolic of the risen life into which Gods grace calls the soul whose death is both symbolised and substituted in the offering slain.

3. Cleanness proclaimed. The priest shall pronounce him clean, that it may convey glad assurance to the sufferer, that he may fearlessly claim the privileges now his. A wondrous hour to the stricken spirit is that when God pronounces him clean; it brings with it the peace of God which passeth all understanding, it imparts strong confidence and acceptance to the long outcast life. For as truly as the leper heard, and heard with eagerness, the priests voice of acquittal, so to the sinner entering into the Saviours grace comes the witness in himself, the voice of blessed testimony for the Lord, Thy sins are forgiven thee, go in peace.

One only band, a piercd hand,

Can salve the sinners wound.

I am the Lord that healeth thee. [Addenda to chap. xiv., Cleansed.]

Topic: ANXIETY FOR RECOVERY (Lev. 14:1-3)

Medicinal remedies were not prescribed for leprosy; it was treated more as an uncleanness than as a disease, and the sufferer repaired not to the physician, but the priest. From the decision of the priest there was no appeal. In the leper was expected

I. WILLINGNESS TO BE HEALED. There was anxiety in the congregation that the diseased should submit to the required regulations, and become quickly healed. The leper must not, through feelings of shame, hide his complaint, or keep from the necessary scrutiny. He must be willing to submit frequently, if needed, and follow closely the directions given. The first step towards moral recovery is to know, and acknowledge the plague of sin in the heart; to have anxiety to be searched by the candle of the Lord, and have every evil way rooted out. It is good when an anxious inquirer exclaims from solemn conviction: I am altogether as an unclean thing, and my righteousness is as filthy rags.

II. CONFIDENCE IN HIS HEALER. Faith in the priest would lie at the basis of the lepers obedience to the requirements of the Ceremonial Law; abandoning all dependence in any other means. The priest was to confirm the cure God had wrought by directing a process of cleansing, which would exercise and prove the offerers faith. The priest was the representative of Jehovah; the directions he gave were to be regarded as the commands of the Lord; confidence in him, and implicit obedience to his directions, were accepted as compliance with the expressed purposes of God.

To be completely recovered from the leprosy of sin, unshaken confidence must be reposed in Him who alone has power to heal, who alone can give us the inward witness that we have passed from death unto life. Meeting the priest outside the camp, as mediator between God and His people, would give comfort and composure to the suppliant for mercy; so, God coming to meet us in the likeness of man, and unattended by overawing manifestations, awakens confidence in the earnest seeker after salvation. Willingness to be saved, belief in the Saviour, personal appropriation of the blessings of redemption, are the sole and indispensible requisites for deliverance from sin and death.F. W. B.

Topic: REMEDIAL MEASURES (Lev. 14:4-9)

Leprosy, next to death, was regarded as a symbol of the pollution and loathsomeness of sin. The care taken in the purification of the leper may be regarded as peculiarly referring to the fact that sin separates man from all pure and holy beings, or the whole family of God, and as setting forth the restoration of the penitent to the company of all faithful people, by means of the great appointed sacrifice. The ceremony to be observed would impress the mind of the restored, not only with the fact that he had become whole, but that a fresh tide of life had started in his veins; and, as he saw the live bird escape and soar towards heaven, he would probably have suggested to his mind that, henceforth, he was to rise superior to earthly things, and seek those that are above.

I. RESTORATION TO THE DIVINE FAVOUR IS THROUGH DIVINELY APPOINTED SACRIFICES.

The leper may have wondered what connection there was between the sacrifices and the cleansing he desired; yet it was not for him to question but to obey, and accept gratefully the blessing conferred. So, in what we are commanded to do for our cleansing and sanctifying the reason may not be apparent, but, since God has enjoined obligations upon us, exceptions and questionings are excluded. These offerings certainly suggest that only by the sacrifice of the life of a substitute can we be cleansed from defilements, only by compliance with divine directions can we obtain restoration to divine favour.

II. WHEN RESTORED TO DIVINE FAVOUR, THE FACT SHOULD HAVE PUBLIC DECLARATION.

The leper was to be cleansed at the door of the tabernacle, before the Lord, and there he was to be pronounced whole when the rites of purification were completed. Thus the whole camp would know that the man who had been unclean and excommunicated was now recovered, and re-admitted into the society of his friends. His ear, hand, and foot having been consecrated by the priest, a pledge was given that henceforth a new life would be lived before Israel. So, when persons are restored from the plague of sin, and cleansed by the influences of the Holy Ghost, public confession is expected and becoming to the honour of God, and for the encouragement of goodness. Christ has enjoined the duty of confessing Him publicly upon all His disciples, and declared that He will be ashamed of those in the last day who are now ashamed of Him.F. W. B.

Topic: PROGRESSIVE CLEANSING (Lev. 14:8-20)

Until a change came upon the lepers state which was both (a) a conscious change to himself, and (b) an evident change to the priest, nothing could be done towards his admission to Gods fold. So long as a sinner remains dead in his sin, without feeling or desire towards salvation, destitute of penitence and faith, the way of his reception to the community of Christs redeemed is barred: he must, in contact with the priest, prove his awakened state.

This initial movement accomplished, there follows the application of the merits of sacrificial blood, and the liberation of the soul for a freed and a resurrection life, as one alive from the dead, alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. These are all the basis incidents of the Christian life, upon which are superadded the fuller cleansings, the advancing experiences, the higher privileges.

I. FULLER CLEANSINGS.

The seven-fold sprinklings (Lev. 14:7) declare the reiterated application and the abounding virtues of the atonement of Christ. But there is yet more to come. Note:

1. Human co-operation with Gods working. The priests acts stand for the divine operations in the sinners cleansing; but the man himself has to co-work together with God; he must shave himself and wash himself. The sinner must put off, concerning the former conversation, the old man which is corrupt according to the deceitful lust (Eph. 4:22; comp. Col. 3:8-10); rid himself of all sinful excresences, and taints, and indulgences, and habits. He must also apply the pure water of the Word, the truths and precepts of religion, enforcing upon himself the sacred teachings and requirements of the gospel. Ye are my friends if ye do whatsoever I command you (Joh. 15:14). Sanctify them through thy truth (Joh. 17:17). Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you (Joh. 15:3).

2. Repeated efforts after perfect cleansing. What was done at first before he could be admitted to the camp, the congregation of Israel (Lev. 14:8), must be repeated seven days after, even more scrupulously and minutely (Lev. 14:9), as a preparation for his entering his own tent (Lev. 14:8) and the tabernacle of the Lord (Lev. 14:11). It is needful that he who has been living in sin reform his life and cleanse his ways before he becomes even an attendant on sacred scenes, entering into the camp and society of Christians; but if he is to come into the more intimate fellowship of the saints (tent nearness, and family intimacy), and into personal communion with the Lord (tabernacle access to God), he must purge himself of every relic of his former life of impurity, get rid of his old self, and seek a more thorough cleanness by most sedulous use of sanctifying gospel aids. The sources of spiritual cleansing are Scripture, prayer, self-mortification, cross-bearing after Jesus, the Holy Spirits energies, the culture of a godly mind and a pure heart. [Addenda to chap. xiv., Sanctification]

II. ADVANCING EXPERIENCES.

That soaring bird was emblematic of the freed and aspiring career now set before him. The whole of the new life came not to him at a bound: he had to go from strength to strength, to move forward by intervals and stages.

1. Time intervals separated his experiences. Though allowed to come into the camp at once he had to put seven days, a slow space of time, between that event and the next,entrance into his tent; and on the eighth day followed his presentation before the Lord in the tabernacle of the congregation. The soul being made nigh, translated from the power of darkness into the kingdom of Gods dear Son, moves onward by time stages; and sometimes the intervals are wide, years coming between the successive incidents of his progress. Human nature is sluggish, cannot move rapidly into new conditions of life; and so also it is slow to apprehend the transformations of grace. They must come by deliberate advances upon the renewed life, or the soul is overwhelmed and confounded; we are changed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord (2Co. 3:18).

2. Attainments follow successively. To the priest, the camp, the tent, the tabernacle. Is there any of us who can count himself to have attained, or already perfect? Much advance has through divine love and help been made; but there are further possibilities. To the mark for the prize of our high calling of God. [Addenda to chap. xiv., Progress.]

III. HIGHER PRIVILEGES.

Blessed the initial incident to the long outcast soul which brought him to the priest, in living contact with one who could declare him clean. Glad the experience of his cleansing which gave him qualification again for the fellowship with Israel.

1. According to fitness so is privilege regulated. The first cleansing only gave him access to the camp (Lev. 14:8); the seven days waiting qualified him to enter his tent (Lev. 14:8); the after purging fitted him for the tabernacle. More grace for those who aspire higher. But the successive advancements in the divine life come according to our preparedness to enter into them.

2. Spiritual favours increase as we go forward. The longer we live in Christ and press forward in the culture of Christian virtues and habits, the more blessed becomes our state; more intimate and assured enjoyments, richer delights and loftier elevations. Piety gives not its most precious fruits at the outset. The luxuries are more entrancing, the triumphs are more splendid, the satisfaction is more complete, the virtues are more Christ-like the longer we abide in grace and seek the things that are above. The most blissful sanctuary life has yet only began to taste how gracious the Lord is. The most ample application of the blood and oilgraces of redemption and consecrationmay be exceeded by the still richer realizations; for He giveth more grace. So may we advance nearer yet, till we appear in Zion before God, and gain the highest sanctity and the loftiest bliss.

Topic: GRACE FOR THE POOR (Lev. 14:21-32)

The law of him in whom is the plague of leprosy, whose hand is not able to get that which pertaineth to his cleansing.

If he be poor: thus opens the gentle message of Heaven to the needy. And cannot get so much. What then? Let him bring the lesser offering, and it shall be accepted for his atonement as readily as the larger offerings (Lev. 14:8) of the rich man who is able to get that which pertaineth to his cleansing.

I. POVERTY IS NO BARRIER TO GODS CLEANSING GRACE.

1. Grace meets the needy one just where he is, and as he is. The atoning blood is brought within reach of the very lowest, the very feeblest. All who need it can have it. He that hath no money, etc. (Isa. 55:1).

2. The lowly need fear no heedless disregard. Man may despise them, put them aside: not so our gracious Saviour. Within those whose lot is hard there may be beauteous souls, rich in faith.

Let us be very tender;

The lowliest soul may be

A temple of priceless treasure

That only God can see.

II. POVERTY HAS NO INFLUENCE ON THE MERITS OF ATONING SACRIFICE.

1. The value of atonement lies, not in the offerers social status and resources, but in the sacrificial blood. It is not what we are, but what Christ is and has done for us, that forms the sure basis of our acceptance. The sacrifice of the cross has the same efficiency to every soul that brings it before God as his offering, whether lowly or wealthy. And in the smaller offering, equally with the richer, there was exhibited the full value of the atoning work, precious blood, a spotless victim, a perfect substitute for mans uncleanness.

2. The acceptance of the poor is guaranteed by this sacrifice. There need be no trepidation in the breast of the lowly, the feeble, the needy, the misgiving; all are welcomed on the ground of an offering such as they are able to get. Nothing beyond. Jesus said of the woman, She hath done what she could.

III. POVERTY AFFORDS NO EXCUSE FOR FAILING TO SEEK GODS MERCY.

1. Without the presentation of sacrificial offering none could be readmitted to divine favour and fellowship. God would not dispense with atonement, however straightened the individuals case. Every one, the poorest, must come with sacrifice. Christ Jesus must be every ones trust and hope. And there is grace in His meritorious cross for each. God will allow none to excuse themselves. Sacrifice or rejection!

2. The terms of admission to the divine life are that we bring our utmost. Such as he be able to get. Not pleading poverty as a reason for doing poorly, offering a meaner presentation than is justifiable. The poor may not cover themselves from Gods requirements by their penury: but must bring such as they are able to get, their very best. None may offer to God that which costs him nothing. God would reject it as a vain oblation. The widows mite was pleasing to Christ as being all her living.

Little faith is but a poor offering to bring to Christ: but if the trembling and anxious soul can only bring that, it is accepted according to what a man hath, and not according to what he hath not.

Our treasury offerings to the sanctuary, our working energies in Christian service, our talents for speaking to others for Christ, or in prayers to God for blessing on sacred work; all stand on this divine principle, such as he be able. Then the sacrifices will be welcomed, and the soul admitted into all the fellowship and felicities of grace. [Addenda to chap. xiv., Poverty.]

Topic: PURITY IN THE HOUSE (Lev. 14:34-53)

It awakes wonder that leprosy could cling to the walls, could fix itself upon the very stones of a house, in some cases defying purgation, necessitating, therefore, the demolition of the structure and the casting out of all its fouled materials into an unclean place. The precautions here so expressly given show the danger, and denote that God abhorred house defilement equally with uncleanness in the human person. It is not alone that sinners shall not dwell in His sight (Psa. 5:4-5), but unclean things were revolting to Himwhatsoever (as well as whosoever) worketh abomination or maketh a lie (Rev. 21:27) is hateful to Him. So God is emphatic in condemnation of any defiling thing in His peoples abodes. Themselves clean, their homes must be pure.

I. HOUSEHOLD CLEANLINESS SHOULD DISTINGUISH THE ABODES OF THE GOOD.

1. Surely a pure mind will express itself in scrupulous cleanliness in its surroundings. Virtue and piety are as sensitive plants, recoiling from every physical uncleanness.

Burns speaks of the devout Cotters return to

His clean hearth-stane, his thrifty wifies smile.

Goldsmith marks the Travellers delight as

His loved partner, boastful of her hoard,
Displays her cleanly platter on the board.

It would prove a pleasing study to note how character may be tested by such minute domestic purities.

2. Certainly the cleanliness of a home reflects its influence upon those who dwell therein. If the occupants purity stamps itself on the house, the condition of the house casts back impressions of the occupant.

Thomson says:

Even from the bodys purity, the mind
Receives a secret sympathetic aid.

And not less so from the purity of home scenes.

3. The motive to such cleanliness will be with the Christian a regard for Gods approval. What care would not Martha feel that every spot and article in her Bethany home should be spotless and bright, knowing that the Lord Jesus might be there any hour as a Guest. Cleanliness is fostered by a spirit of reverence.

A servant with this clause,

Makes drudgery divine;

Who sweeps a room as for Thy laws,

Makes that and th action fine.Geo. Herbert.

4. Such care for simple home satisfactions renders the dwellings delightful to its inmates. It is the sense of the purity and the carefulness which we find at home that leads us to rest so confidingly there. Suspicion and detraction may disturb thought and spoil enjoyment when in scenes which love and piety have not made sweet for us; but all is good and genial at home. No little room so warm and bright (Tennyson) anywhere in the great world, as that where gentle hands have made all so satisfactory for us.

And though, as the French proverb affirms, to every bird its nest is fair, yet it is not easy to believe it fair if the nest be fouled.

The sober comfort, all the peace which springs
From the large aggregate of little things;
On these small cares of daughter, wife, or friend,
The almost sacred joys of home depend.HANNAH MORS.

II. HOME SANCTITIES WILL BE SCRUPULOUSLY MAINTAINED BY THE GODLY.

1. Impurities would force entrance into the homes of Gods people still. Not leprous spots cleaving to the structure, but moral plague spots and intellectual defilements. Nude art, and sensuous pictures, and indecent drawings, by which incautious parents adorn their rooms; books and magazines, containing articles and stories in which there is a taint upon virtue, or a sneer against truth, are recklessly laid upon the table, because it is fashionable to subscribe for such literature. Companionships press into our family enclosure, which it is difficult to refuse; friendships which are desirable for wordly ends are allowed in Christian households, but whereby is fulfilled the warning, evil communications corrupt good manners. Verily in all such cases it seemeth to me there is, as it were, a plague in the house (Lev. 14:25).

2. Devout minds will resolutely cleanse from the family all such defilements. It would not be easy or pleasant work to empty the house (Lev. 14:36), to take away the stones in which the plague is (Lev. 14:40), to have the house scraped within round about (Lev. 14:41); but the work has to be rigorously done in the name of God! Abhor that which is evil! giving no assent or connivance to what may defile. Duty, not agreeableness, is the Christians law. Parents are home-guardians. The husband is the house band. There may be no looseness in the keeping of the home. If any provide not for his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel (1Ti. 5:8).

Home has been designated Heavens fallen sister; and it iswhere pure and hallowedthe nearest similitude to Heaven. To Adam, paradise was home; to the Christian, home should be paradise. Let there be unsullied purity in the house.

Around each pure, domestic shrine,
Bright flowers of Eden bloom and twine,
Our hearths are altars all.KEBLE.

III. HABITATIONS INCURABLY DEFILED ARE DESTINED TO DESTRUCTION.

There is no alternative. If the plague cannot be arrested and removed, the habitation must be demolished; he shall break down the house (Lev. 14:45).

1. Destroyed habitations; let them warn against the faintest beginnings of error and sin, against the connivance of the slightest dereliction from sanctity. Wrong works ruin! Purest homes have become devastated by incautious inattention to small impieties. If a house is to be saved, sin must be out-barred.

2. Sanctified homes. Evil may be purged (Lev. 14:49). Ask holy visitants to come in; not priests now, but the presence of the good, the virtuous, the Christian, and let the atoning blood (Lev. 14:50) have application, and the running water of Gods word, the living stream of sacerd truth, be used. There is remedy for home defects and defilements; and the doom of a family may be averted, the salvation of a house (Luk. 19:9) may be secured, by the admission therein of the Saviour Himself, and the graces of His kingdom, the agencies of religion, and the sanctifying influence of family prayer and Scripture reading; for so the plague shall be expelled, and the house shall be clean (Lev. 14:53). [Addenda to chap. xiv., Home.]

OUTLINES OF VERSES ON CHAPTER 14

Lev. 14:2.Theme: CLEANSING THE LEPER This is the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing: he shall be brought unto the priest.

Consider

I. THE DISEASE.

1. Its peculiar designation Leprosy the plague of boils (Deuteronomy 28), which applies very forcibly to sin.

2. Its distinguishing characteristics. Small in appearance; so in a vicious course of life. It gradually spread, as does sin spread over all the powers and faculties of a man.

3. Its pernicious consequences. The malady was injurious to society, as being infectious and pernicious; to the person himself, excluding him from all society, civil and religious. So sinners corrupt others, while their abominable ways shut them from the communion of the faithful.

II. THE CUBE OF THE DISEASE.

1. No human means could be availing. The leper would gladly have cured himself. No art of man was effectual (2Ki. 5:7). We have no remedy of mans devising for sin (Rom. 7:19; Rom. 7:24).

2. If the leper was cured it was by God alone, without the intervention of human means. Comp. Luk. 17:14; Isa. 51:7. Nothing was prescribed or attempted for the removal of this distemper And none but God can remove sin, etc. Rom. 7:10; Rom. 7:18; Eph. 5:9; 1Pe. 2:2.

3. But the cure was associated with blood and water. And to be cleansed from the leprosy of sin we must have applied the blood and spirit of Christ (1Jn. 1:7; Eze. 36:25).

II. THE CONFIRMATION OF THE CURE BY THE PRIEST.

1. A person was not to be pronounced clean on a sudden. The priest was to use much caution and deliberation. Caution should be exercised by ministers and office bearers in the church towards those who are candidates for fellowship.

2. When it evidently appeared that soundness had been imparted to his disordered body, this was declared with due solemnity. Here we see the pre-eminence of our High Priest; for while the priest merely declared the leper healed He most effectually heals.

Let those infected with the leprosy apply to their souls the divinely appointed remedy; and

Let those who have been cleansed from it carefully discharge the duty enjoined on them (Lev. 14:10, etc.).W. Sleigh.

Lev. 14:3 Theme: DIVINE COMPASSION EXHIBITED.

The lonely leper, desiring an audience with the priest, would go towards the camp, and wait for the opportunity to present his case. The priest, ascertaining that his services were required, would go forth out of the camp, and discharge his duty. This would indicate that the condition of the leper

I. THOUGH HELPLESS WAS NOT HOPELESS. He could not cure himselfno mortal man could cure him, but the priest, as medium of communication from heaven, could be the channel of cleansing. Helpless in the presence of men, he was hopeful in the presence of the Lord. So, sinners, reprobated by their fellows, are renewed and restored by their Maker. The condition of the leper

II. THOUGH REPULSIVE WAS NOT IRRECOVERABLE.

He was shunned by society, and branded as unclean; but the priest came out of the camp and met him, showing that Jehovah had not given him up, was not unwilling to heal him. God, by sending His dear Son into our world, has come forth to meet us, not to speak from a distance, and treat us as reprobates, but He has come close to us, touched us, worn our humanity, that we may be healed. Here, indeed, is divine compassion; meeting us, not in disdain or to destroy, but to sanctify and save.F. W. B.

Lev. 14:4.Theme: A TYPE OF REDEMPTION.

Though the rite prescribed here was to be observed after the leper was cured, yet it may be regarded as typical of the offering made for the removal of sin from the soul of man.

I. THE LEPERS CLEANSING WAS PROCURED BY

(a) Infliction of death. Two live, clean birds brought to priest; one of them killed, its blood sprinkled on leper to be cleansed, seven times. Through sacrifice of life of Christ, through His blood, we have forgiveness of sins.

(b) Victory over death. The living bird after being dipped in the blood of the slain bird was let loose in the open field. Here we get, if not typeyet illustration, of conquest over the grave by Him who bare our sins in His own body on the tree.

II. THE LEPERS CLEANSING WAS COMMUNICATED BY

(a) Personal application. The blood was sprinkled upon the person to be cleansed. So, nothing short of actual contact with virtue of Christs death will cleanse from sin.

(b) Repeated application. The blood was sprinkled seven times, to denote that the cure was thorough and complete. We need the constant application of the merits of Christs sacrifice to remove the guilt we are constantly contracting from contact with a sinful world, and the uprising of remaining depravity in our hearts.

Thus, coming to the priest, and submitting to the ordinance of cleansing, the leper would be taught

(1) Humility. He would be deeply impressed with his corruption and unworthiness.

(2) Gratitude. That God had devised means whereby so helpless a condition might be met, so miserable a state be changed.

(3) Responsibility. If cleansed thus he would be a new creature; expected to live a new life; under lasting obligation to Him who had given the healing. So, in redemption; those who are saved are taught humility, gratitude, consecration. Ye are not your own, etc.F. W. B.

Lev. 14:8-9.Theme: SANCTIFICATION.

Personal efforts of the leper for himself to follow services performed for him by the priest. He to co-operate with the divine means employed. In directions given, means of sanctification are suggested, such as

I. PURIFICATION OF ASSOCIATIONS. Leper to wash his clothes.

II. MORTIFICATION OF SELF. Shave off all his hair.

III. MEASURES OF REFORM. Wash his flesh in water.

IV. SCRUPULOUS SELF-EXAMINATION. Tarry out of his tent seven days.

V. CONGENIAL SOCIETY. When cleansed, the leper was restored to the worship of the tabernacle, publicly presented at the door before the Lord. He was then allowed to mingle with the sacred and social life of the nation.

Sanctification, a progressive work. We are being saved in this life. Our complete purification hinges on perseverance in use of divinely appointed means. Constant circumspection and introspection essential. Sanctification on earth culminates in presentation before the presence of the Lord in heaven, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing.F. W. B.

Lev. 14:21-22.Theme: NO EXCUSE FOR NEGLECTING MEANS OF CLEANSING.

As in other rites, provision is here made, so that even the poorest were not shut out from ordinance of healing, so that none could make excuse in justification of neglect. There was

I. GRADATION IN THE OFFERINGS. The leper was to offer such as he could get. God does not expect more than we can do. He demands the best we can offer; if we offer our best He accepts it.

II. EQUALITY IN THE OFFERERS. Whatever they brought they all stood upon a moral level before Jehovah. He makes no distinctions, in the bestowment of His mercy, between rich and poor.

III. COMPLETENESS IN THE RECOVERY. The smallness and poverty of the offering did not hinder a full blessing coming on the leper; all alike pronounced clean when conditions complied with. The merits of Christs sacrifice more than make up for any defects and deficiencies in our services. Though we and our works are less than nothing, He is all and in all.F. W. B.

Lev. 14:17; Lev. 14:25; Lev. 14:28-29.Theme: COMPLETENESS OF CLEANSING.

The leper was not only cleansed from defilement, delivered from past disabilities, but introduced to a new life. He is now the servant of Jehovah, and expected to enter into solemn covenant with Him. There was to be henceforth

I. DEVOUT ATTENTION TO DIVINE COMMANDS. The right ear of the cleansed leper touched with blood and oil.

II. ENERGETIC SERVICE. The right hand touched, etc.

III. READY OBEDIENCE. The right foot touched, etc.

IV. INTELLIGENT CONSECRATION. Oil poured upon the head. Thus all our powers should be set apart for the service and glory of Him who has interposed to save us, and who sets us apart as His peculiar people by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost.F. W. B.

Lev. 14:33-34.Theme: LEPROUS HOUSES.

Material things not evil in themselves, yet, since the Fall, they have often become vehicles of contamination, incentives to depravity. Man has disfigured the world and made it like a leprous house, so that the whole creation groans and travails on account of sin, syren songs are sung to beguile the unwary, and wrecking lights are held out from scenes which appear both beautiful and safe. The leprosy of lewdness, licentiousness, cling to many a dwelling in the midst even of civilised Christian society. Thus

I. THE WORLDAS THE HOUSE OF OUR RACEHAS BECOME LEPROUS. Let us beware of its tempting, tainting influences.

II. THE BODYAS THE HOUSE OF THE SOULHAS BECOME LEPROUS. It contains not only seeds of mortality, but of depravity. Corruption clings to all its issues and powers. The world will be purified by the final wrecking fires; the vile body of our mortality is to be changed by our risen Lord, if we live and die to Him.F. W. B

Lev. 14:45-49.Theme: DEPRAVED SURROUNDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED.

Every effort was to be made to effect the complete cleansing of leprous houses; such efforts failing, the houses were to be pulled down and the materials carried to an unclean place without the city. So

I. STRENUOUS EFFORTS SHOULD BE MADE TO PURIFY CORRUPT SURROUNDINGS. In the world; our own homes; in our bodies; in our hearts.

II. COMPLETE DESTRUCTION MUST ENSUE WHERE CORRUPTION IS INCURABLE. At length the house was demolished, to prevent spread of infection, to show hatefulness of corruption. So, in the end, when period of probation is over, all uncured depravity will be removed to an unclean place; the finally impure, even in surroundings, will be destroyed. Purity shall ultimately triumph over corruption, and happiness over misery.F. W. B.

ILLUSTRATIVE ADDENDA TO CHAPTER 14

HELPLESSNESS

A physician, attending a Christian patient, became concerned to gain such spiritual assurance and joy in Christ as the sufferer manifested, and asked how it might be secured. He replied:
Doctor, I have felt that I could do nothing, and so I have put my case in your hands; I am trusting in you.

He saw the simplicity of the way, absolute helplessness, but absolute trust in Christ; and he found peace therein.

Lord, save me from my sin;

Thine is the work alone;

Come to this erring soul of mine
And make that power known.

OFFORD.

CLEANSED

His garb was simple, and his sandals worn;
His stature modelled with a perfect grace;
His countenance the impress of a God.
He looked on Helon earnestly awhile,
As if His heart were moved; and stooping down
He took a little water in His hand
And laved the sufferers brow, and said, Be clean!
And lo! the scales fell from him, and his blood
Coursed with delicious coolness through his veins,
And his dry palms grew moist, and on his lips
The dewy softness of an infants stole.
His leprosy was cleansed; and he fell down Prostrate at Jesus feet, and worshippd Him.

WILLIS: Room for the Leper.

SANCTIFICATION

Justification regards something done for us; sanctification, something done in us. The one is a change in our state, the other in our nature. The one is perfect, the other gradual. The one is derived from obedience to the Saviour, the other from His Spirit The one gives a title to heaven, the other a meetness for it. Suppose you had a son; you forbade him to enter a place of contagion on pain of losing all you could leave him. He goes, and is seized with the infection. He is guilty, for he had transgressed your command; but he is also diseased. Do you not perceive that your forgiving him does not heal him? He wants not only the fathers pardon, but the physicians aid. In vain is he freed from the forfeiture of his estate, if he be left under the force of the disorder.JAY.

Who would be cleansed from every sin
Must to Gods holy altar bring
The whole of lifeits joys, its tears,
Its hopes, its loves, its powers, its years,
The will, and every cherished thing.

ALLIS.

PROGRESS

Flying birds are never taken in the fowlers aware.SECKER.
He never was so good as he should be, who does not strive to be better than he is.WARWICK.
It is so with all climbing: Every upward step makes another needful; and so we must go on until we reach heaven, the summit of the aspiration of time.H. W. BEECHER
All growth that is not growth towards God
Is growing to decay.GEO. MACDONALD.

POVERTY: THE SAINTLY POOR

The shell may be coarse which encloses the pearl. An iron safe may hold treasures of gold. A broken frame may contain the most beautiful picture. Poor believers may be rich Christians.BOWES.
There was no part of creature-holiness that I had so great a sense of the loveliness of as humility, brokenness of heart, and poverty of spirit; and there was nothing that I so earnestly longed for. My heart panted after thisto be before God as in the dust; that I might be as nothing, and that God might be All; that I might become a little child.EDWARDS.

The Emperor heard that the treasures of the Church had been confided to St. Laurence; he was brought before the tribunal and required to confess where those treasures were concealed. He answered that in three days he would show them. On the third day St. Laurence gathered together the sick and the poor, to whom he had dispensed alms, and placing them before the tribune said, Behold! here are the treasures of Christs Church.

Gods riches to my soul be given,
And tis enough for earth and heaven!

HANS SACHS.

That life on earth may be the beat
In which by want the soul is tried;
For He whose word is ever sure,
Hath said that Blessed are the poor.

WELD.

HOME

A mans house should be on the hill-top of cherfulness and serenity; so high that no shadows rest upon it; and where the morning comes so early and the evening tarries so late that the day has twice as many golden hours as those of other scenes Home should be the centre of joy.BEECHER

Oh, happy home! oh, home supremely blest,

Where Thou, Lord Jesus Christ, art entertained

As the most welcome and beloved guest,

With true devotion and with love unfeigned;

Where all hearts beat in unison with Thine,

Where eyes grow brighter as they look on Thee,

Where all are ready at the slightest sign

To do Thy will, and do it heartily.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

REGULATIONS FOR THE PURIFICATION OF A LEPER 14:132
TEXT 14:132

1

And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying,

2

This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing: he shall be brought unto the priest:

3

and the priest shall go forth out of the camp; and the priest shall look; and, behold, if the plague of leprosy be healed in the leper,

4

then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two living clean birds, and cedar-wood, and scarlet, and hyssop:

5

and the priest shall command to kill one of the birds in an earthen vessel over running water.

6

As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar-wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water:

7

and he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let go the living bird into the open field.

8

And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and bathe himself in water; and he shall be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, but shall dwell outside his tent seven days.

9

And it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe his flesh in water, and he shall be clean.

10

And on the eighth day he shall take two he-lambs without blemish, and one ewe-lamb a year old without blemish, and three tenth parts of an ephah of fine flour for a meal-offering, mingled with oil, and one log of oil.

11

And the priest that cleanseth him shall set the man that is to be cleansed, and those things, before Jehovah, at the door of the tent of meeting.

12

And the priest shall take one of the he-lambs, and offer him for a trespass-offering, and the log of oil, and wave them for a wave-offering before Jehovah:

13

and he shall kill the he-lamb in the place where they kill the sin-offering and the burnt-offering, in the place of the sanctuary: for as the sin-offering is the priests, so is the trespass-offering: it is most holy.

14

And the priest shall take of the blood of the trespass-offering, and the priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot.

15

And the priest shall take of the log of oil, and pour it into the palm of his own left hand;

16

and the priest shall dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand, and shall sprinkle of the oil with his finger seven times before Jehovah.

17

And of the rest of the oil that is in his hand shall the priest put upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the blood of the trespass-offering:

18

and the rest of the oil that is in the priests hand he shall put upon the head of him that is to be cleansed: and the priest shall make atonement for him before Jehovah.

19

And the priest shall offer the sin-offering, and make atonement for him that is to be cleansed because of his uncleanness: and afterward he shall kill the burnt-offering;

20

and the priest shall offer the burnt-offering and the meal-offering upon the altar: and the priest shall make atonement for him, and he shall be clean.

21

And if he be poor, and cannot get so much, then he shall take one he-lamb for a trespass-offering to be waved, to make atonement for him, and one tenth part of an ephah of fine flour mingled with oil for a meal-offering, and a log of oil;

22

and two turtle-doves, or two young pigeons, such as he is able to get; and the one shall be a sin-offering, and the other a burnt-offering.

23

And on the eighth day he shall bring them for his cleansing unto the priest, unto the door of the tent of meeting, before Jehovah:

24

and the priest shall take the lamb of the trespass-offering, and the log of oil, and the priest shall wave them for a wave-offering before Jehovah.

25

And he shall kill the lamb of the trespass-offering; and the priest shall take of the blood of the trespass-offering, and put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot.

26

And the priest shall pour of the oil into the palm of his own left hand;

27

and the priest shall sprinkle with his right finger some of the oil that is in his left hand seven times before Jehovah:

28

and the priest shall put of the oil that is in his hand upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the place of the blood of the trespass-offering:

29

and the rest of the oil that is in the priests hand he shall put upon the head of him that is to be cleansed, to make atonement for him before Jehovah.

30

And he shall offer one of the turtle-doves, or of the young pigeons, such as he is able to get,

31

even such as he is able to get, the one for a sin-offering, and the other for a burnt-offering, with the meal-offering: and the priest shall make atonement for him that is to be cleansed before Jehovah.

32

This is the law of him in whom is the plague of leprosy, who is not able to get that which pertaineth to his cleansing.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 14:132

277.

Why not include Aaron as God gave these instructions?

278.

Doesnt the previous chapter provide for the cleanness of the leper? Why all the regulations of this chapter?

279.

At what place does the leper meet the priest?

280.

Please get a clear picture of just what was to be used by the priest in the purification ceremony. Define each item.

281.

Read Heb. 9:19-22 for some present-day meaning to this text.

282.

Is the water running at the time of the ceremony? What is meant by the use of the term running water?

283.

Name three possible clean birds for this service.

284.

How was the bird killed? Where?

285.

Picture just how all four items could be dipped in the blood and water. What size bowl?

286.

What was used to sprinkle the blood on the leper? Where upon the leper was the blood sprinkled? How many times?

287.

What is symbolized by the freeing of the living bird? (Cf. Heb. 9:13-15)

288.

A bath and a shave are in orderbut not an ordinary bath or shavedescribe the purpose.

289.

Why stay outside his tent seven days?

290.

Is there something different in the bath and shave seven days later?

291.

List the items for the sacrifice. How much is a log of oil?

292.

In the trespass and sin offering is the leper saying (or God saying to the leper) he is sinful therefore he is a leper? Discuss.

293.

It would almost seem the leper is being ordained to the priesthood. Why? Discuss the possible significance.

294.

What does leprosy have to do with the hand, the head and the foot?

295.

At what particular juncture does God declare atonement has been made?

296.

What is represented by the blood and oil?

297.

What is the substitution for a poor man?

298.

What is meant by waving the offering before God?

299.

Is the ceremony for the poor man just as elaborate as for the rich man? What does this say?

PARAPHRASE 14:132

And the Lord gave Moses these regulations concerning a person whose leprosy disappears: The priest shall go out of the camp to examine him. If the priest sees that the leprosy is gone, he shall require two living birds of a kind permitted for food, and shall take some cedar wood, a scarlet string, and some hyssop branches, to be used for the purification ceremony of the one who is healed. The priest shall then order one of the birds killed in an earthenware pot held above running water. The other bird, still living, shall be dipped in the blood, along with the cedar wood, the scarlet thread, and the hyssop branch. Then the priest shall sprinkle the blood seven times upon the man cured of his leprosy, and the priest shall pronounce him cured, and shall let the living bird fly into the open field. Then the man who is cured shall wash his clothes, shave off all his hair, and bathe himself, and return to live inside the camp; however, he must stay outside his tent for seven days. The seventh day he shall again shave all the hair from his head, beard, and eyebrows, and wash his clothes and bathe, and shall then be declared fully cured of his leprosy. The next day, the eighth day, he shall take two male lambs without physical defect, one yearling ewe-lamb without physical defect, ten quarts of finely ground flour mixed with olive oil, and a pint of olive oil; then the priest who examines him shall place the man and his offerings before the Lord at the entrance of the Tabernacle. The priest shall take one of the lambs and the pint of olive oil and offer them to the Lord as a guilt offering by the gesture of waving them before the altar. Then he shall kill the lamb at the place where sin offerings and burnt offerings are killed, there at the Tabernacle; this guilt offering shall then be given to the priest for food, as in the case of a sin offering. It is a most holy offering. The priest shall take the blood from this guilt offering and smear some of it upon the tip of the right ear of the man being cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the big toe of his right foot. Then the priest shall take the olive oil and pour it into the palm of his left hand, and dip his right finger into it, and sprinkle it with his finger seven times before the Lord. Some of the oil remaining in his left hand shall then be placed by the priest upon the tip of the mans right ear and the thumb of his right hand and the big toe of his right footjust as he did with the blood of the guilt offering. The remainder of the oil in his hand shall be used to anoint the mans head. Thus the priest shall make atonement for him before the Lord. Then the priest must offer the sin offering and again perform the rite of atonement for the person being cleansed from his leprosy; and afterwards the priest shall kill the burnt offering, and offer it along with the grain offering upon the altar, making atonement for the man, who shall then be pronounced finally cleansed. If he is so poor that he cannot afford two lambs, then he shall bring only one, a male lamb for the guilt offering, to be presented to the Lord in the rite of atonement by waving it before the altar; and only three quarts of fine white flour, mixed with olive oil, for a grain offering, and a pint of olive oil. He shall also bring two turtledoves or two young pigeonswhichever he is able to affordand use one of the pair for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. He shall bring them to the priest at the entrance of the Tabernacle on the eighth day, for his ceremony of cleansing before the Lord. The priest shall take the lamb for the guilt offering, and the pint of oil, and wave them before the altar as a gesture of offering to the Lord. Then he shall kill the lamb for the guilt offering and smear some of its blood upon the tip of the mans right earthe man on whose behalf the ceremony is being performedand upon the thumb of his right hand and on the big toe of his right foot. The priest shall then pour the olive oil into the palm of his own left hand, and with his right finger he is to sprinkle some of it seven times before the Lord, Then he must put some of the olive oil from his hand upon the tip of the mans right ear, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the big toe of his right foot, just as he did with the blood of the guilt offering. The remaining oil in his hand shall be placed upon the head of the man being cleansed, to make atonement for him before the Lord. Then he must offer the two turtledoves or two young pigeons (whichever pair he is able to afford). One of the pair is for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering, to be sacrificed along with the grain offering; and the priest shall make atonement for the man before the Lord. These, then, are the laws concerning those who are cleansed of leprosy but are not able to bring the sacrifices normally required for the ceremony of cleansing.

COMMENT 14:132
THE FIRST STAGE OF REINSTATEMENT 14:19

Lev. 14:1-9 We are to understand this chapter as a sequel to the one just previous. In chapter 13, descriptions are given of those who were declared clean, such persons are not to be restored to their home, family and sanctuary. Such a person asks for an audience with the priest. Since he had been to the priest to obtain his declaration of cleanness, the priest would know of his purpose. How compassionate were the priests in the days of Moses? Were they too busy to hear the plea of one who called from without the gate? It would seem from a careful consideration of all the sacrifices brought for his reinstatement that his leprosy was indeed some form of punishment, i.e. why offer a guilt or trespass offering if there was no guilt? This being true, a comparison of leprosy to sin and its consequences does not seem forced (as do so many other comparisons we have read). This being true, lets produce what we hope will be helpful outlines from the seven types of leprosy. (Please read the whole thirteenth chapter again.)

I.

The bright spot leper (or sinner)

1.

Life becomes prematurely old, i.e. white hair in youth.

2.

Depression sets in.

3.

If he is shut up to God in deep repentance he could be washed and made clean.

II.

The second time leper

1.

His sin is much more painfulraw flesh.

2.

If he is willing to give himself up as unable at all to help himselfsin will completely overcome me is his honest confession. In this is the power and principle of healing. He that loses his life for my sake shall find it.

3.

Even raw flesh can turn again and be clean. And what a joy and testimony it can be!

III.

The old wound, or scar leper, i.e. I forgive but I will not forget. Such an attitude will bring us into bondage.

1.

Deeper than mere surface words and actions.

2.

Consider it for seven days, i.e. a short time and repent lest we must remember it forever outside the Gate.

3.

An old wound can be healed.

IV.

The quick burn leper

1.

Firstfresh sin can turn to leprosy.

2.

If we let it get beneath the skin, it can soon become tragic and old.

3.

God can recreate us in seven days of repentance and prayer, plus obedience.

V.

Leprosy of the head

1.

Acquiring gold is a loss, not a gain.

2.

The loss of hair and beard could be a great gain (intellectual arrogance and sensual vanity).

3.

Such leprosy (form of sin) is very deceptive. It can return if we do not stay shorn.

VI.

Bald leprosy

1.

All can see itdo we care? Will we go to the priest?

2.

He is unclean regardless of what he says.

3.

Bald sin is no worse than hidden sin. It can be forgivenhe can be clean.

VII.

Garment leprosy

1.

People judge us by our attitudes. They cover us like a garment. What if they are leprous?

2.

Diseased attitudes affect all walks of lifelinen, wool, leather.

3.

Its either wash it or burn it!

The three constant attitudes to be taken by all us lepers?

1.

Blessed are they who mourn (keep on mourninga continuing action verb). (Rend your clothes and forget your hair.)

2.

Hide your pridecover your beard (under the robe of His righteousness).

3.

Keep on admitting you have beenare now and always will be unworthy to be called clean (we are saved by grace, or unearned favor!).

There are two stages or steps in the reinstatement of the leper: (1) The use of the birds, cedar, scarlet wool and hyssop by the priestwash and shave. Shave off all hair and bath by the leper. Lev. 14:1-9; (2) the eighth day sacrifices: two he-lambs, one ewe-lamb, meal offerings, log of oil, blood of trespass offering on ear, thumb, toe; oil on same three members as well as sprinkled seven times before the Lord; the rest of the oil in the left hand of the priest on the head of the leperatonement is thus made. Sin offering and burnt offering and the meal offering made for the leper Lev. 14:10-20.

We need to get a very clear look at the four items and their use as given in Lev. 14:1-9 : (1) the two clean birds. The word birds in the Hebrew text is said to mean sparrows. How infinitely kind of God to choose sparrows as a part of mans restoration to His fellowship. Anyone can afford two sparrows. We remember our Saviours reference to these birds (Cf. Mat. 10:29). We do want to understand every word as given by God to Moses in Leviticus, but we want also to find some application of the text to our own lives.

It is helpful to see both the leper and the priest must make an effort in the acceptance of the leper. The leper must be taken from his place of seclusion (Cf. Lev. 13:46) and be brought to some place near the outer court of the tabernacle. The priest must leave the tabernacle and go without the camp to find the leper. We could see some similarity in this action to that of the prodigal son in Luk. 15:11 ff. We are touched by others who tell us of our great High Priest and Saviour. We respond and move toward Him, but He has already seen us afar off and is running to meet us. We are not at all sure the priests of the Old Testament all responded in this way, but we are sure that Jesus left the comfort and security of the camp of heaven to meet us outside the camp on a wooden cross. (Cf. Heb. 13:12-13)

The humble, temporary, trusting nature of the sparrow is very like our Lord. We believe a viable comparison can be made in the action taken with the two birds and the transaction God made on Calvary and at the open tomb. It might be helpful to say that the provision God made in the death of His son potentially provides for the healing of all moral lepers of all time in all the world. All that is now needed is the acceptance of our healing. Hence the fourteenth chapter can be very analogous to us. Notice closely the death of one of the birds: (1) To be put to death in a new earthenware vessel. In the clay bowl was a quantity of living water, i.e. water taken from a spring or river while the water was in motion. The blood of the bird must be shed in such a manner that it will fall into the water in the bowl. Thus blood and water are found in the earthen vessel at the death of the sparrow. The comparisons are almost too beautiful and obvious to be delineated. He came in the likeness of sinful flesh. He lived or tabernacled among us in a clay vessel just like ours. In that body prepared was living water: salvation and the Spirit without measure Joh. 3:34; Joh. 7:38-39. When He was slain for our return to fellowship blood and water were discovered in the earthen vessel (Joh. 19:34-35). It was even after He died that blood and water mingled together. Oh, how poignant is the flight of the living bird let loose in the open field to soar free in the open expanse of Gods sky! How like our Lord who was taken up and a cloud received Him out of their sight. Act. 1:10-11.

The leper must be represented in the three other items: (1) The cedar wood. It is most interesting to notice the difference in the meaning of this term as related to the circumstances in which it was written and the application of it in the time of Christ. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown give the first meaning and Ginsburg supplies the second. The cedar here meant was certainly not the famous tree of Lebanon, and it is generally supposed to have been the juniper, as several varieties of that shrub are found growing abundantly in the clefts and crevices of the Sinaitic mountains. A stick of this shrub was bound to a bunch of hyssop by a scarlet ribbon, and the living bird was to be so attached to it, that when they dipped the branches in the water, the tail of the bird might also be moistened, but hot the head or the wings, that it might not be impeded in its flight when let loose. Now from the traditions of the Second Temple, This had to be a foot and a half long, and a quarter of a foot of the bed in thickness. Though this wood was primarily chosen for its antiseptic properties, which made it peculiarly suitable for the occasion, still, belonging to the loftiest of trees (Psa. 2:13, Psa. 27:24; Amo. 2:9), it also was designated to symbolize the haughtiness of mind which called down the affliction of leprosy.

We readily see the primary meaning of this whole ceremony as it refers to the restoration of the healed leper, but we at the same time see some remarkable comparisons for us: the leper was a dead man restored (resurrected?) and set free as symbolized in the two birds. Perhaps his pride or haughtiness are represented in the cedar, his consequent or subsequent humility by the hyssop (a very ordinary sweet-smelling, low growing bush). (Cf. I Kings Lev. 4:33). The scarlet cord or ribbon of wool that bound the hyssop and bird to the cedar wood represented the blood to the leper by which he was healed and restored. Once again it is easy to take the place of the leper. It was our haughtiness, our selfish independence along with our repentance and deep humility held together with a scarlet cord, that led us to be buried with Him in baptism for the remission of our sins and our restoration of fellowship. Could we find a comparison in the anointing all Christians receive in the person of the Holy Spirit (Cf. 1Jn. 2:21; 1Jn. 2:27) and the sprinkling of the healed leper?

If the reader of these lines can only see an arbitrary parallel by the writer he is under no obligation to find more than this. We can rejoice in the wonders of our salvation whether we can find it in Leviticus or not.

Lev. 14:10-20 Here is the eighth day ceremony. It is very important because in it we have for the leper the completion of his full fellowship into the camp of Israel. The actual preparation for this service began on the seventh day when he shall shave all his hair off his head, his beard, his eyebrows, and his (body); and shall wash his clothes, also bathe his body in water, and be clean (Lev. 14:9). Reading from Lev. 14:10 through Lev. 14:20 in The Amplified Old Testament we find: The eighth day he shall take two he-lambs without blemish, and one ewe-lamb a year old without blemish, and three-tenths of an ephah of fine flour for a cereal offering, mixed with oil, and one log of oil. And the priest who cleanses him shall set the man who is to be cleansed and these things before the Lord, at the door of the tent of meeting; the priest shall take one of the male lambs and offer it for a guilt or trespass offering and the log of oil, and wave them for a wave offering before the Lord; he shall kill the lamb in the place where they kill the sin offering and the burnt offering, in the sacred place (the court of the tabernacle); for as the sin offering is the priests, so is the guilt or trespass offering; it is most holy; and the priest shall take some of the blood of the guilt or trespass offering, and put it on the tip of the right ear of him who is to be cleansed, and on the thumb of his right hand, and on the great toe of his right foot. And the priest shall take some of the log of oil, and pour it into the palm of his own left hand, and the priest shall dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand, and shall sprinkle of the oil with his finger seven times before the Lord, and of the rest of the oil that is in his hand shall the priest put some on the tip of the right ear of him who is to be cleansed, and on the thumb of his right hand, and on the great toe of his right foot, on the blood of the guilt or trespass offering (which he has previously placed in each of these places). And the rest of the oil that is in the priests hand he shall pour upon the head of him (place upon the head) who is to be cleansed, and make atonement for him before the Lord. And the priest shall offer the sin offering, and make atonement for him who is to be cleansed from his uncleanness, and afterward kill the burnt offering (victim). And the priest shall offer the burnt-offering and the cereal offering on the altar; and he shall make atonement for him, and he shall be clean.

We truly appreciate the words of Andrew Bonar upon this section:
To shew that now he is entirely free, the man is to bring all manner of sacrifices; and each is accepted for him. He brings one he-lamb for a trespass-offering, another for a sin-offeringboth without blemish, according to the usual manner. Also, a ewe-lamb, yet tender, of the first year, to be for a burnt-offering. The strength of the two previous victims, and the tenderness of this one, are happily blended; and these three sacrifices sum up all the general offerings of a man of Israel. Then, the three tenth deals of flour are the meat-offering for each sacrifice, one tenth deal for each (compare Lev. 14:21), of the finest flour of the land, and mingled with oil, to shew that it is set apart. Besides, there is a log of oil (a pint) set by itself in a vessel, to be poured on the head of the once leprous man, that he may be publicly received as an acknowledged Israelite, set apart for God. Once the man was set apart from his fellows as polluted; but now every proof of acceptance is heaped upon him. And all is done by the priest, that so it may be authoritatively done. To all this Christ refers in Mat. 8:4, Mar. 1:44, and Luk. 5:14. Go, shew thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing according as Moses commanded (In Mat. 8:4, offer thy gift, the sacrifices of the eighth day may be specially meant. And Jesus delighted in the exhibition of those types that shewed forth His death and resurrection.), for a testimony unto them.

These rites on the eighth day were meant to testify, in the most complete way, that the leprous man was acknowledged to be fully clean. Just as the whole Church, and each member of it, on the day when Christ appears to those who wait for Him, shall be declared to be altogether clean, receiving the result of every gift and offering, and presented as set apart for ever to Jehovah.
The priest slays the he-lamb in the holy place; that is, in the consecrated courts, and on the very spot where the sin-offering is slain. A place is called holy, if holy acts are done there; even as heaven is holy because every act done there is by holy worshippers, and done in a holy manner.

The priests waving the trespass-offering and the log of oil, intimated that this offering for the leper was presented to the Lord. It declared his dedication to the Lord anew (the oil shewed dedication), and seemed to say, first, Against Thee, Thee only have I sinned; and then, Lord, truly I am Thy servant; I am Thy servant, and the son of Thy handmaid.

Some of the blood of this offering is put on the mans right ear; as if to say, Thou art cleansed; go and hear in the camp the joyful sound. Some is put on the thumb of his right hand, as if to say, thou art cleansed; use thy clean hands for Gods work. Some is put upon the great toe of his right foot, as if to say, Thou art cleansed; walk in the Lords ways; go up to His courts, and ever walk before Him in the land of the living.

Some of the oil is then taken from the log (a log contained a pint of our measure). And first it is sprinkled before the veil seven times. Now, as in the case of blood so sprinkled, the meaning was that by this blood-sprinkled way the sinner had boldness to enter the Holiest; so, by this oil thus spread on the same spot, there is a declaration to the effect that the man, the leper now cleansed, offers himself as a consecrated one to serve the Lord who dwells within that veil.

The oil is put on the mans ear, as if to say, Lord, I will hear for Thee,and on his right hand, as if to say, Lord, I will act for Thee,and on his right foot, as if to say, Lord, I will go up and down, to and fro, for Thee. He then pours on his head all that remains (Lev. 14:18), that, as it ran down in copious streams over all his person, he might hear every drop cry, Thou art His that saves thee.

But farther; there is a double type here, as in the case of the two birds. Inasmuch as the oil was to be put upon the blood of the trespass-offering, there was implied the glorious truth that the blood which cleanses also sanctifies. If you are forgiven, you are not your own. If the price is paid for you, you are now the Lords; He bought you. If pardoned by Jesus, then you are inhabited by the Holy Spirit. Jesus cleansed away the guilt that there might be a fair tablet on which the Spirit might re-write His holy law. If freed from guilt and Satan, you are handed over to the Lord, to serve Him in holiness and righteousness.

This being done, and atonement made by the trespass-offering (Lev. 14:19), the priest shall offer the sin-offering, and then the burnt-offering also. Some think this the the gift, meant in Mat. 8:4, The gift that Moses commanded. Thus he is assured of acceptance by every kind of offering; and is sent home rejoicing. He shall be clean.

Lev. 14:21-32 In the cases of poverty on the part of the person to be consecrated, the burnt offering and sin offering were reduced to a pair of turtle-doves or young pigeons, and the meat-offering to a tenth of an ephah of meal and oil; but no diminution was allowed in the trespass offering as the consecration offering, since this was the essential condition of reinstatement in full covenant rights. On a account of the importance of all the details of this law, every point is repeated a second time in Lev. 14:21-32. (Keil)

FACT QUESTIONS 14:132

323.

How do chapters thirteen and fourteen relate?

324.

What leads us to conclude that leprosy was a form of punishment?

325.

Which form of leprosy seems to have the most application to your life? Discuss.

326.

What are the three constant attitudes to be taken by all us lepers? Discuss.

327.

Name the two steps necessary for reinstatement.

328.

Show how the two clean birds compare with our Lord.

329.

In what way are we reminded of the prodigal son?

330.

How was the leper represented in the other three items?

331.

There are two different identifications given for the cedar. What were they?

332.

How does the leper compare to us?

333.

Describe the services of the eighth day and how they related to us.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XIV.

(1) And the Lord spake unto Moses.The regulations for the purification of the leper are delivered to Moses alone, who is to communicate them to Aaron and his sons, whilst the rules by which the distemper is to be discerned were given both to Moses and Aaron. (See Lev. 13:1.) The reason for this is probably that Moses was designed by God as the great law-giver and teacher of the priesthood as well as of the laity.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

THE CEREMONIAL CLEANSING OF THE LEPER, Lev 14:1-32.

Our position that the treatment of the leprosy was founded on ceremonial, rather than sanitary, grounds, is confirmed by the minute ritual required for the cleansing of the leper after he has been healed, together with the total absence of any medicinal prescriptions for his cure. By what natural means this was ever effected we are not informed in the Scriptures. The only cures which are detailed are miraculous, as Miriam, in answer to the prayer of Moses, Num 12:13-15; Naaman, at the command of Elisha, 2Ki 5:14; and the instances of healing by Jesus Christ, Mat 8:3; Luk 17:14. In his sermon to his indignant towns-men on the universality of the divine regards, Jesus gives two very valuable historical items: 1. That in the long and eventful life of Elisha not an Israelite leper was healed; and 2. That “many lepers were in Israel” at that time. Luk 4:27. We infer, therefore, that the perfect healing of the leprosy was a rare exertion of supernatural power, and that the cases provided for in this chapter are either instances of miraculous healing, or, more probably, cases in which the disease had reached the stage of complete whiteness, when the patient has become clean, (Lev 13:13, note,) and may be constructively called healed.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

The Return Of Some Who Were Smitten ( Lev 14:1-32 ).

Lev 14:1

‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’

It is interesting that the law of the smitten in the day of his cleansing should be spoken to Moses alone (contrast Lev 13:1; Lev 14:33; Lev 15:1), for Moses was the deliverer of Israel. Aaron is involved with him in controlling the ritual of the cult, but Moses is the prophet of deliverance. Although in view of the general pattern of these headings in this section it may be that we must not read too much significance in it. However, had God not actually spoken this to Moses, had it been a later invention, it would be passing strange in context that Aaron was not mentioned as well.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Lev 14:1-57 The Restoration of the Cleansed Leper Lev 14:1-57 records the law of the leper in restoring him into the congregation when he is declared clean. Benny Hinn teaches that the articles used in the leper’s cleansing ritual are symbolic of the redemptive work of Christ Jesus on Calvary, where our cleansing took place. He says the bird that is killed represents Christ’s death, while the bird that remains alive represents His resurrection (Lev 14:4-5). The blood of the bird that is killed is mixed with running water, signifying how Jesus’ blood came forth from His pierced side mixed with water (Lev 14:5). The earthen vessel represents the body of Christ, which contains the blood of the bird that is killed (Lev 14:6). The cedar wood represents the cross where Christ suffered on Calvary. The Roman soldiers cast lots at the foot of the Cross for the scarlet robe that Jesus wore, represented in this passage by the scarlet cloth used by the priest (Lev 14:6). The hyssop, used by the priest, was also used by the soldiers to offer Jesus vinegar while on the Cross (Lev 14:6). The sprinkling of the blood seven times represents the seven times that Jesus’ blood was shed during His Passion and Death (Lev 14:7). Hinn lists the seven times Jesus shed His blood: in the Garden of Gethsemane, the crown of thorns, His beard plucked out, His scourging, His hands nailed to the Cross, His feet nailed to the Cross, and His side pierced. The sprinkling of the blood upon the leper signifies the fact that the blood of Jesus cleanses us from sin (Lev 14:7). The leper shaves all of his hair and clothes, which represents a believer, who has been cleansed from his sins (Lev 14:8-9). [25] On the eighth day, which represents a new beginning, the cleansed leper offers a sacrifice, representing our testimony before men (Lev 14:10-13). The priest applied blood to the cleansed leper’s right ear, right thumb, and right big toe, symbolizing that the blood of Jesus covers our thoughts and words, our actions, and our walk with the Lord (Lev 14:14). The oil that is sprinkled before the Lord seven times, then placed on the person’s right ear, right thumb, and right big toe represents the anointing of the Holy Spirit upon our minds, bodies and walk (Lev 14:15-17) The oil that is poured over the head represents the anointing of the Holy Spirit that is provided to every believer (Lev 14:18).

[25] Benny Hinn, This is Your Day (Irving, Texas), on Trinity Broadcasting Network (Santa Ana, California), television program, 19 June 2009.

Note how all of the articles used by the priest in the ceremonial cleansing of the leper are also found at the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ:

The scarlet cloth:

Mat 27:28, “And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe .”

Mat 27:35, “And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.”

The hyssop:

Joh 19:29-30, “Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop , and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

The blood mixed with water:

Joh 19:34-37, “But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water . And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe. For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.”

The wood:

1Pe 2:24, “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree , that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.”

Lev 14:7  And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open field.

Lev 14:7 Comments – Note how the number seven is used in cleansing of Naaman the leper:

2Ki 5:10, “And Elisha sent a messenger unto him, saying, Go and wash in Jordan seven times , and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean.”

2Ki 5:14, “Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.”

Lev 14:40  Then the priest shall command that they take away the stones in which the plague is, and they shall cast them into an unclean place without the city:

Lev 14:40 “into an unclean place without the city” – Comments – In Jerusalem the name of this unclean place outside the city became the Valley of Hinnon. This word has its origin from the Hebrew words ( ), literally meaning “valley of Hinnon,” which is the valley on the south side of Jerusalem. In the New Testament Greek, this word, translated “Gehenna,” is used for the word “hell.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Manner Observed in Purifying a Leper

v. 1. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

v. 2. This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing, when he is found cured of the terrible disease with which he had been suffering: He shall be brought unto the priest;

v. 3. and the priest shall go forth out of the camp; and the priest shall look, and, behold, if the plague of leprosy be healed in the leper, literally, healed away from, that is, healed and gone away from, a careful inspection showing that all symptoms and marks of the disease have disappeared;

v. 4. then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two birds alive and clean, and cedar-wood, and scar let, and hyssop. The purpose was to make the person that had been sick Levitically clean. The living birds signified that the leper’s dead flesh, the body that was all but dead, was restored to life and vigor; the cedar-wood denoted restoration from evil-smelling rotting of the tissues and the endurance of life: the scarlet (wool or thread or a bit of cloth), restoration of the color of health and freshness to the skin; the fragrant hyssop, the restoration from the exceedingly bad odor of the disease and the purity of life which was now to be expected of the patient.

v. 5. And the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel, which could afterward be destroyed, over running water, the vessel having been partly filled with water from a spring or brook.

v. 6. As for the living bird, which yet remained, he shall take it, and the cedar-wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water, so that the mixture of water and blood would cling to the feathers of the bird and to the other objects;

v. 7. and he (the priest) shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, as on similar occasions of peculiar solemnity, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose in to the open field. This signified that the former leper was released from the fetters of his sickness and could once more return to the enjoyment of full social and religious fellowship with the other people of his nation.

v. 8. And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, on his whole body, and wash himself in water that he may be clean; and after that he shall come in to the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days. “This remaining restriction seems designed still further to impress upon the mind the fearful character of the disease from which the leper had recovered; and still more, to postpone the full restoration of the leper to his family until he had first, by the prescribed sacrifices, been restored to fellowship with God. ” (Lange. )

v. 9. But it shall be on the seventh day that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off, for a second thorough cleansing; and he shall wash his clothes, also he shall wash his flesh in water, and he shall be clean, restored to full Levitical purity. He was now in a condition to offer the prescribed sacrifices of the eighth day.

v. 10. And on the eighth day he shall take two he-lambs without blemish, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, and three-tenth deals of fine flour for a meat-offering, one-tenth of an epha (about two and one half quarts) being figured for each sacrificial animal, mingled with oil, and one log (about seven-tenths of a pint) of oil.

v. 11. And the priest that maketh him clean shall present the man that is to be made clean, and those things, all the prescribed sacrifices, before the Lord, at the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation;

v. 12. and the priest shall take one he-lamb, and offer him for a trespass-offering, and the log of oil, and wave them for a wave-offering before the Lord, this ceremony distinguishing the leper’s sacrifice from others of the same kind and serving for the worshiper’s consecration;

v. 13. and he shall slay the lamb in the place where he shall kill the sin-offering and the burnt offering, in the Holy Place, north of the altar of burnt offering: for as the sin-offering is the priest’s, so is the trespass-offering; it is most holy.

v. 14. And the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass-offering, and the priest shall put it upon the tip, or lobe, of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, to consecrate the organs of the hearing of the Word, of doing the will of the Lord, and of walking in the path of His commandments, as in the consecration of the priests.

v. 15. And the priest shall take some of the log of oil, and pour it into the palm of his own left hand;

v. 16. and the priest shall dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand, and shall sprinkle of the oil with his finger seven times before the Lord, before the altar in the court;

v. 17. and of the rest of the oil that is in his hand shall the priest put upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the blood of the trespass-offering which he had just applied in the same manner;

v. 18. and the remnant of the oil that is in the priest’s hand he shall pour upon the head of him that is to be cleansed, to restore him to the privilege of his priestly kingship, from which he had been excluded by his disease; and the priest shall make an atonement for him before the Lord. Thus was the propitiation made and the gulf which had existed between God and man bridged over and covered.

v. 19. And the priest shall offer the sin-offering, and make an atonement for him that is to be cleansed from his uncleanness, for the leprosy was only the outward expression of the inner impurity of sin; and afterward he shall kill the burnt offering, the ewe lamb which had been provided.

v. 20. And the priest shall offer the burnt offering and the meat-offering up on the altar; and the priest shall make an atonement for him, and he shall be clean. All this was but a shadow and figure of the sacrifices of good works in which the believers of the New Testament are diligent.

v. 21. And if he be poor and can not get so much, then he shall take one lamb for a trespass-offering to be waved, instead of the two animals which the more well-to-do were expected to bring, to make an atonement for him, and one tenth deal of fine flour (about two and one half quarts ), mingled with oil for a meat-offering, and a log of oil (about seven-tenths of a pint);

v. 22. and two turtle-doves, or two young pigeons, such as he is able to get, as he can afford, according to his means; and the one shall be as in-offering and the other a burnt offering.

v. 23. And he shall bring them on the eighth day, after the first ceremony of washing or lustration, vv. 4-8, for his cleansing unto the priest, unto the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation, before the Lord.

v. 24. And the priest shall take the lamb of the trespass-offering and the log of oil, and the priest shall wave them for a wave-offering before the Lord, to distinguish the leper’s offering from the ordinary sacrifices of the same kind and to symbolize his renewed consecration to the Lord

v. 25. And he shall kill the lamb of the trespass-offering; and the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass-offering, and put it up on the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and up on the thumb of his right hand, and up on the great toe of his right foot;

v. 26. and the priest shall pour of the oil in to the palm of his own left hand;

v. 27. and the priest shall sprinkle with his right finger some of the oil that is in his left hand seven times before the Lord;

v. 28. and the priest shall put of the oil that is in his hand up on the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and up on the thumb of his right hand, and up on the great toe of his right foot, up on the place of the blood of the trespass-offering;

v. 29. and the rest of the oil that is in the priest’s hand he shall put up on the head of him that is to be cleansed, to make an atonement for him before the Lord, as before, vv. 16-18, and with the same significance.

v. 30. And he shall offer the one of the turtle-doves or of the young pigeons, such as he can get,

v. 31. even such as he is able to get, the one for a sin-offering and the other for a burnt offering, with the meat-offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him that is to be cleansed before the Lord. The necessity of atonement, of propitiation, of bridging the gulf between God and sinful man by means of the sacrifices that prefigured the perfect offering of Christ, is brought out again and again.

v. 32. This is the law of him in whom is the plague of leprosy, whose hand is not able to get that which pertaineth to his cleansing, who is actually not in a position to afford the more expensive sacrifices. While cleansing was absolutely necessary, the Lord did not intend to place insuperable obstacles in the way of the person who wished to be restored to full communion with God and full fellowship with the covenant people.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

THE FORM OF PURIFICATION OF THE LEPER (Lev 14:1-32). This is the most minute of all the forms of purification, those for purification from contact with a dead body (Num 19:1-22) and for the cleansing of a defiled Nazarite (Num 6:1-27) being alone to be compared with it in this respect. Some purifications were accomplished, as we have seen, in a very summary manner: one who touched the carcass of a beast that had died a natural death had only to wash his clothes (Lev 11:40). The greater and more significative the defilement, the more careful and the more significative must be the cleansing. Leprous uncleanness excluded the leper both from the camp and from the sanctuary, from the rights both of citizen. ship and of Church-membership, with which the rights of the family were also associated; consequently there had to be a double form of restoration, each with its special ceremonies. The manner of the first reconciliation is detailed in Lev 14:1-8, of the second in Lev 14:9-32.

Lev 14:2

This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing. The ceremonies in the first stage of cleansing, which restored the outcast to the common life of his fellows, were the following:

1. The priest formally examined the leper outside the camp, and made up his mind that he was clean.

2. An earthen vessel was brought with fresh water, and one of two birds was killed, and its blood was allowed to run into this water.

3. The other bird was taken and dipped in the vessel, with a piece of cedar wood and hyssop, which had first been tied together by a band of scarlet wool; and the leper was sprinkled seven times with the blood and water dripping from the feathers of the living bird.

4. The priest pronounced the man clean.

5. The bird was let fly into the open field.

6. The man washed his clothes, shaved his whole body, and bathed.

7. He returned within the camp, but not yet to his tent.

Lev 14:3

The priest. The agent is stilt the priest, not the physician. The priest shall go forth out of the camp. “May we not (as Hesychius suggests) see a figure here of the compassion of our Great High Priest, who has gone forth out of heaven itself, the camp of angel hosts, and has come down to earth, not only to examine but to heal tile moral leprosy of sin, ‘to seek and to save the lost’ (Luk 19:10), and who carefully examines and scrutinizes all the secrets of all hearts (Heb 4:12)? And he was exempt from all contagion of sin while he lived and moved among sinners (Mat 9:11; Luk 15:1), and was ‘holy, harmless, and undefiled’ (Heb 7:26)” (Wordsworth). And the priest shall look. In later times it was ordered that the examination was not to take place on the sabbath, nor in the early morning, nor in the late afternoon, nor inside a house, nor on a cloudy day, nor in the glare of midday, and that the priest must have good eyesight, and only determine one case at a time; nor was he allowed to pronounce judgment on his own kindred. And, behold, if the plague of leprosy be healed in the leper. The plague of leprosy is healed before the ceremony of purification begins, but the leper is not pronounced clean until he has been sprinkled with the blood and water (Lev 14:7).

Lev 14:4

Cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop. “Cedar wood, and hyssop, and scarlet ‘ are also to be burnt with the red heifer for the ashes for the water of separation (Num 19:6), and they appear to have been commonly employed in purifications (Heb 9:19). The antiseptic properties of cedar made it peculiarly suitable for such occasions. The hyssop “was probably not the plant which we call hyssop, the Hyssopus officinalis. for it is uncertain whether this is to be found in Syria and Arabia, but a species of origanum resembling hyssop, the Arabian zater, either wild marjoram, or a kind of thyme” (Keil on Exo 12:21). The Psalmist’s cry, “Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be chart” (Psa 51:7), shows the common use to which it was put. In the present case, the sweet smell both of the wood (one cubit’s length of which was used) and of the herb would have still further adapted them for symbolizing the redemption of the leper’s flesh from corruption and putrefaction. The scarlet was probably a band of scarlet wool with which the cedar and the hyssop were tiednot to the bird (for we have no account of their being after, wards removed), but (as in the burning of the red heifer) one to the other. The colour of the wool was appropriate, not only because it was about to be dipped in the blood and water, but also because it symbolized the purified and now healthy blood.

Lev 14:5

One of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water. A small quantity of water was placed in an earthenware dish, and one of the birds was killed over the dish in such a way that the blood dripped into the water. The water was needed, as there would not have been sufficient blood in the bird for the seven sprinklings which were to be made. It was to be running, literally, living, water; that is, fresh water taken from a fountain or a running stream, in order that it might be as pure as possible. Symbolically, the cleansing power of water as well as of blood is indicated.

Lev 14:6

As for the living bird, he shall take it. The wings and tail of the bird were extended, and in this position it was dipped into the blood and water in the earthenware dish, and with it, the bunch made up of cedar, hyssop, and scarlet wool.

Lev 14:7

And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times. It is not certain whether the seven sprinklings were made upon the forehead of the person to be cleansed, or on the back of his hand. The feathers of the bird and the bunch of hyssop would be specially instrumental in the seven sprinklings. And shall pronounce him clean. Having assured himself that he was healed (Lev 14:3), the priest now pronounces him to be clean, he looses as well as binds. It had been his office to declare the man a leper, and thereby to shut him out from the people of the Lord (Lev 13:8, Lev 13:15, Lev 13:22, Lev 13:25, Lev 13:36, Lev 13:44, Lev 13:46). Now he pronounces him to be no leper, and therefore, after some further ceremonies, readmits him (Lev 14:8, Lev 14:20, Lev 14:31). And shall let the living bird loose into the open field. The symbolism of the two birds, which has been much misinterpreted, is essentially the same as that of the two goats on the day of atonement, though each ceremony has its distinctive features. The killing of the living bird was not a true sacrifice, as was the offering of the goat to Jehovah, but by its death it represented the state in which the leper had legally been, and to which he would have been physically reduced had not a remedy been found. The deathly and unclean state of the leper having been symbolically transferred from the dead bird to the living bird by the latter’s being sprinkled in the former’s blood, the living bird stands in the position of the scapegoat, on whom the sins of the people were laid. The bird is then let loose into the open field; literally, upon the face of the field; and it flies off, carrying with it the leper’s uncleanness, and assuring him by every forward movement that it makes that the living death has passed from him, just as each step or’ the scapegoat appeared to the Israelites to remove their sins from them. A large number of commentators, on the other hand, consider the released bird to symbolize the health and freedom now given back to the leper, and they dwell on the rapid and uncontrolled movement of birds as being peculiarly suitable for representing this recovered liberty. But this interpretation, to which there are many objections, appears to be altogether incompatible with the fact that the same ceremony is used in the cleansing of the leprous house, whereas the house could certainly not be represented as “recovered to unrestrained liberty” (Lunge). The common patristic view, that the two birds represent the two natures of the one Great Sacrifice offered to redeem man from sin, seems to be out of place here.

Lev 14:8

After the healed leper has washed his clothes, and shaved off all his hair, and washed himself with water, so as to leave no remnant of his former defilement that can be removed, the first stage of his purification is over. He is restored to the camp, but not yet to the sanctuary, nor to his position as head or member of his family. He has still to undergo another week’s purgation, and until that time has elapsed he may not live in his tent.

Lev 14:9-32

The ceremonies in the second stage of cleansing, which restored the late outcast to his home and to his covenant-right, were the following;

1. At the end of seven days he repeated the process of washing, shaving, and bathing.

2. On the eighth day he brought a lamb for a trespass offering, a leg of oil, a meat offering, a sin offering, and a burnt offering.

3. The priest that officiated at the cleansing presented him and his offerings at the door of the tabernacle.

4. He offered the trespass offering and the log of oil for him.

5. He slew the trespass offering and put some of the blood of it on different parts of the man’s body.

6. He poured some of the oil into his left hand, and having sprinkled some of it seven times before the Lord, he placed some of it on those parts of the man’s body on which the blood had been placed, and poured the rest upon his head.

7. He offered the sin offering, the burnt offering, and the meat offering.

Lev 14:9

But it shall be on the seventh day. The pause for seven days, followed by placing the blood on the tip of the right ear, and on the thumb of the right hand, and on the great toe of the right foot, and the subsequent anointing with off, irresistibly call to mind the ceremonies of the consecration of priests (Lev 8:35, Lev 8:23, Lev 8:24, Lev 8:12, Lev 8:30), and no doubt they are intended to do so. The whole nation was in a sense a priestly nation, and the restoration of the lapsed member to his rights was therefore a quasi-consecration.

Lev 14:10

On the eighth day he shall take two he lambs without blemish, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, and three tenth deals of fine flour. Every sacrifice is to be provided and offered by the restored leper, except the peace offering. It is certainly singular that the peace offering should be omitted, and that the trespass offering should be required. The former fact may be accounted for by the supposition that though the peace offering was not required, the late leper was, after his other sacrifices, put in a position where he might offer it when he would of his own free will. But the requirement of the trespass offering is more difficult to explain. What wrong had the leper done? and what satisfaction had he to make? The usual answer to this question is that he had wronged Jehovah in that, however involuntarily, he had failed to bring him the offerings and service which he would have brought had he not been excluded from the camp. But this is a very forced explanation, and it is incompatible with other parts of the Law. For the leper was not the only unclean person who, owing to his uncleanness, was prevented from offering his gifts and worship at the tabernacle or temple. The woman who had an issue of blood for twelve years (Luk 8:43) during that time would have been excluded from the sanctuary. But no trespass offering is required of those that have been unclean through issues. We must therefore, look for some other explanation of the requirement in the case of the cleansed leper. And a simpler one is at hand. Leprosy was the type of sinor all sin whatsoever. When, therefore, the expiatory sacrifices were demanded, both kindsthe trespass offering and the sin offeringhad to be offered, because expiation had to be made for the uncleanness which represented all unrighteousnesstrespasses as well as sins. It might be that the man had not committed a trespass; he might also not hive committed sin; but he had been stricken with the foul disease which symbolized both one and the other, and therefore he had to offer on his cleansing the sacrifice appropriate to each. There is a difference in the ritual of the trespass offering in the present ease, intended perhaps to distinguish it from those trespass offerings which were made when a man had in his mind a certain wrong or injury which he had committed, and for which he wished to make compensation. On this occasion

(1) the animal presented was not required to be of a particular value, as in the ordinary trespass offerings;

(2) it was waved, whereas the ordinary trespass offerings were not waved;

(3) it was waved by the priest, whereas other wave offerings were waved not by the priest, but by the offerer, whose bands were guided by the priests. Nor

(4) did the offering of oil accompany the presentation of other trespass offerings. For whatever reason it be, the most characteristic feature of the sacrificial cleansing of the leper is the trespass offering, and the way that it was dealt with.

Lev 14:12

The log of oil, amounting to something more than half a pint, is waved by the priest, together with the lamb for the trespass offering, as a wave offering before the Lord, in order that a special consecration may be given them. They thus become qualified for the purposes for which they are presently used.

Lev 14:14

And the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and the priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed. The Mishna describes the ceremony as follows:”The leper stands before the trespass offering, lays his hand upon it and kills it. Two priests catch up the blood one in a vessel, the other in his band. He who catches it up in the vessel goes and throws it on the side of the altar, and he who catches it in his hand goes and stands before the leper. And the leper who had previously bathed in the court of the lepers, goes and stands in the gate of Nicanor. Rabbi Jehudah says he needs not bathe. He thrusts in his head, and the priest puts of the blood upon the tip of his ear; he thrusts in his hand, and he puts it upon the thumb of his hand; he thrusts in his foot, and he puts it upon the great toe of his foot” (‘Negaim,’ 14.7, quoted by Edersheim, ‘Temple Service,’ Lev 18:1-30.). No doubt, the ear, the thumb, and the great toe are selected for the purpose of showing, as in the case of the consecration of the priest, that the senses and the active powers of the restored Israelite must be dedicated hence, forth to God.

Lev 14:15-18

And the priest shall take some of the log of oil, and pour it into the palm of his own left hand. This ceremony is altogether peculiar to this purification. The joint use of blood and oil is not singular (see Le Lev 8:30), but elsewhere there is no sprinkling of the oil seven times before the Lord, and in the consecration of priests there was no anointing of the different members with oil as well as with blood. The Mishua (as before cited) continues the description of the ceremony as follows:”The priest now takes from the log of oil and pours it into the palm of his colleague, though if he poured it into his own it were valid. He dips his finger and sprinkles seven times towards the holy of holies, dipping each time he sprinkles. He goes before the leper, and on the spot where he had put the blood he puts the oil, as it is written, ‘Upon the blood of the trespass offering.’ And the remnant of the oil that is in the priest’s hand, he pours on the head of him that is cleansed, for an atonement; if he so puts it, he is atoned for, but if not, he is not atoned for. So Rabbi Akiba. Rabbi Jochanan, the son of Nuri, saith, This is only the remnant of the ordinance, whether it be done or not, the atonement is made; but they impute it to him (the priest), as if he had not made atonement.” The double sprinkling with blood and oil betokened dedication as in the case of the priests, the blood specially denoting reconciliation, and the oil the strengthening power of God by which the new life was to be led.

Lev 14:19, Lev 14:20

The priest shall offer the sin offering. The sin offering is due, according to the regulation given in Lev 5:3, in consequence of the man having been in a state of uncleanness. It is followed by the burnt offering and the meat offering, and then the man is restored to his state of legal cleanness, and of communion with God as well as with his fellows

Lev 14:21-32

And if he be poor, and cannot get so much. The concession to poverty consists in the substitution of two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, for the two lambs required for the sin offering and the burnt offering, and one tenth-deal of flour for three tenth-deals of flour in the meat offering. But no difference is made as to the lamb required for the trespass offering, or the log of oil. These must be provided by the poor as well as by the rich, and the ceremonies used at their offering must be the same for poor and rich, as they are essential to the rite,

HOMILETICS

Lev 14:1-32

The cleansing of the leper represents the absolution of the sinner,

as his exclusion from the camp represented spiritual excommunication.

I. THE LAW OF CHRISTIAN EXCOMMUNICATION AND ABSOLUTION, “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mat 16:19). “Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mat 18:18). “Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained” (Joh 20:23).

II. THE USE OF KEYS.

1. To admit.

2. To shut out.

3. To readmit.

1. The spiritual keys are used by God’s ministers for the purpose of admission, whenever they introduce into Christ’s kingdom, the Church, a new member by the use of the initiatory rite of baptism, which they are commissioned to employ for that end.

2. They are used for the purpose of exclusion, whenever the Church, or any duly constituted section of the Church, following the example of the Corinthian Church, as instructed and guided by St. Paul, shuts out from its fold one who has been guilty of gross immorality (1Co 5:1-13) or of depraving the faith (1Ti 1:20), and continues obstinate in his sin.

3. They are used for the purpose of readmission, when the Church has become satisfied that the sinner whom she had excluded from her fold has ceased to be a sinner, and thereupon, like the Corinthian Church, once more under the direction of St. Paul, “forgives him and comforts him, lest such an one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow,” and confirms its love towards him (2Co 2:7, 2Co 2:8).

III. THE FORMS FOR ADMISSION, EXCLUSION, AND READMISSION IN THE OLD AND NEW DISPENSATIONS. The form of admission into covenant with himself is, as we should expect, fixed by Divine authority in both dispensations. In the old dispensation it was circumcision. “Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant” (Gen 17:10-13). In the New Testament it is baptism in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. “Go ye therefore, and teach (make disciples of) all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Mat 28:19). “Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Gal 3:26, Gal 3:27). These forms are unchangeable by any human authority.

The form of exclusion from the covenant people was not so definitely fixed under the old as the new dispensation. In the former it is ordained that for various transgressions a soul shall be cut off. “The uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant’ (Gen 17:14). “If a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, both of them shall be cut off from among their people” (Lev 20:18). But it is only in the case of leprosy that the method of exclusion is given in detail. There we have seen that it is to consist of a careful examination on the part of God’s priest, and a pronunciation by him of the undoubted existence of the uncleanness in the person suspected, after which the latter is to exhibit all the signs of one mourning for himself as dead, to dwell alone, and” without the camp shall his habitation be” (Lev 13:45, Lev 13:46). So in the New Testament the power of “binding” as well as of “loosing,” and of “retaining” bound as well as of “forgiving,” is granted, and the obligation of exerting this power is involved in its grant; but no especial form by which it is to be done is given. It is only in the case of the incestuous Corinthian that we have an example of the way in which St. Paul judges that it shall be done. From thence it appears that the decision is to be passed by the chief Church officer, in the name of Jesus Christ, and promulgated by the assembled Church, the result being that the offender is translated from the kingdom of Christ to the outer world, the kingdom of Satan, “for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1Co 5:3-5).

Nor is there any form definitely appointed either in the old or in the new dispensation for the readmission of those that had been cast out. No doubt in the old dispensation, it was always effected by the means of sacrifice, but we have a definite statement of the form adopted only in the case of reconciliation after leprosy. This form we have seen to be very elaborate and significative. Similarly in the new dispensation, we find no form authoritatively given for the restoration of the penitent; only we have, as before, the instance of the incestuous Corinthian, from which we learn that after sufficient punishment such a one is to be forgiven and taken back to the love of the brethren; and we have the general principle laid down elsewhere, “If a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted” (Gal 6:1).

The fact of a divinely authorized form being given for admission into covenant with God, but none for exclusion from it by excommunication or readmission to it by absolution, is significant. The first is under the new dispensation a sacrament ordained of Christ; the others are ecclesiastical rites, valuable for the well-being of the Church, but not appointed by its Founder as a necessary condition of its existence.

IV. THE OFFICE OF THE PRIEST IS CLEANSING,

1. He did not cure the leprosy.

“If the plague of leprosy be healed in the leper” (Lev 14:3), then the priest shall begin the cleansing ceremonies. The healing of the disease was the work of God.

2. The action of the priest is necessary for the cleansing. If the healing is the work of God, the cleansing is the work of the priest. It is a complex ceremonial act, the result of which is not to deliver from the leprosy, but to serve as an assurance to the man himself and to the whole community that he is delivered from it, and therefore fit to be reinstated, and by that act reinstated, in the position of full communion which he had lost. So with absolution; it is God alone that forgives and heals sin. But after this has been accomplished, still it is necessary that a solemn ecclesiastical ceremony should reinstate in the communion of the faithful one who has been formally severed from it. And where the formal act of severance has not taken place, but a man’s distressed conscience tells him that he has separated himself from God, and can hardly allow him to believe in his forgiveness, the solemn declaration of that forgiveness by God’s minister serves as an assurance to the trembling soul, and restores to him the sense of peace which was lost.

HOMILIES BY R.M. EDGAR

Lev 14:1-57

The cleansing of sin as illustrated in the cleansing of the leper.

cf. 2Ki 5:1-27; Mat 8:1-4; Luk 5:12-15. We have seen the possibility of a cure of leprosy in the directions for its diagnosis given to the priests. The cured leper had also to be cleansed before admitted to the society of the faithful. In this chapter we have the cleansing of the leper detailed. In this we are to discern the cleansing of sin.

Naaman’s case is instructive upon this point. He was cured by Divine power. But be was not ceremonially cleansed or received into the fellowship of the Church of God. In his case the two elements of cure and cleansing were separated. But when our Lord directed the cured leper to go and offer for his cleansing, the gift that Moses commanded for a testimony unto them, the elements were united. In the case of the cure of the leprosy of sin and its concomitant, the cleansing, the Great Physician who cures and the Priest who cleanses are one. It is our Divine Saviour who accomplishes both.

I. WE MUST NOT CONFOUND THE CURE WITH THE CLEANSING OF SIN. The cure of sin is the sanctification of the inward nature, the imparting of the principle of righteousness, the regeneration of the once unholy nature. This is quite distinct from the cleansing which proceeds from the blood of Jesus Christ. In the latter case there is a justification through faith in his blood, so that we are accepted as well as pardoned on the ground of his merits. The one is a work of God in us, the other is a work of God on us. We are not accepted because we are regenerated; we are accepted “in the Beloved.” The leper was not accepted on the ground of his cure, but on the ground of his sacrifice. The ritual of the leper is, therefore, admirably adapted to keep the two ideas distinct of justification and sanctification.

II. THE RESTORATION OF THE LEPER EMBRACED TWO STAGES, WHICH HAVE THEIR COUNTERPART IN THE EXPERIENCE OF THE SINNER. These stages are first, the restoration of the leper to the society of the living, and, secondly, his restoration to the society of the saints.

1. Restoration to the society of the living. The priest was directed to go to the leper outside the camp, and if he was satisfied about his cure, then he was to receive on the leper’s behalf “two live birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop,” One of these is to be killed in an earthen vessel over running water, and its blood mingled with the water in the vessel. Of the cedar wood, scarlet wool, and hyssop the priest is to make a brush, in which he is temporarily to tie the remaining live bird, and having dipped them in the blood and water, he is to sprinkle therewith the leper seven times, pronouncing him clean, and then let the live bird free, The leper is then to wash his clothes, shave off all his hair, wash himself carefully, and come into the camp, waiting, however, a week before taking up his permanent abode in his own tent.

Now, it seems clear that in this first stage of the leper’s restoration the live bird, baptized with water and blood, and then let loose to join its mates in the open fields, was a symbol of the healed leper, now to be restored to the fellowship of men. It has been, indeed, said that the live bird here is parallel to the live goat on the Day of Atonement, and should rather be supposed to carry the leper’s sin away. But, inasmuch as the live bird here receives a similar baptism to the leper himself, the first interpretation is preferable. Living water and blood, therefore, are the elements of the leper’s purificationsymbols of the Spirit and the blood of Jesus Christ. The brush of hyssop was the means by which these were applied to the leper, and might fittingly represent the Word of God, immortal like the cedar, humiliating like the hyssop, and invigorating like the “coccus-wool,” by which the atonement and Spirit of Christ are applied to the sinful soul. It is thus by the blood of Jesus and the Spirit of Jesus that the soul, dead through the leprosy of sin, is restored to the society of the living. “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph 2:1).

2. Restoration to the society of the saints. After seven days’ sojourn in the camp, but not in his own tent, the leper was allowed to approach the tabernacle with two he-lambs without blemish, one ewe-lamb without blemish of the first year, and three tenth-deals of fine flour for a moat offering, mingled with oil, and one log of oil. These were to be used as a trespass offering, a sin offering, and a burnt offering. These suggest respectively a sense of unprofitableness or shortcoming, atonement, and personal consecration. The blood of the trespass offering is to be applied to the right ear, thumb of right hand, and great toe of the right foot, and the oil of consecration to be added thereto. This corresponds exactly to the consecration of the priests (Luk 8:1-56). It suggests that it is out ode a sense of past unprofitableness that future consecration comes (cf. Luk 17:5-10). It is when we realize how we have wronged our Lord that we are prepared to live, not unto ourselves, but unto him who died for us, as our atoning Sacrifice, and rose again (2Co 5:14, 2Co 5:15). In case of the poverty of the leper, he is instructed to bring one lamb for the trespass offering, with turtle-doves or young pigeons, in place of two additional lambs, for the sin offering and burnt offering, and a smaller meat offering, But the emphasis being laid on the trespass offering is surely to show that a sinner, when quickened by the Lord, is to sincerely lament the profitless, isolated life he lived, and to resolve to dedicate himself with full purpose of heart to the service of the Saviour whose blood has taken away his sin. The saints are those who begin in a sense of trespass a life of grateful devotion.

III. MAN‘S HOME IS TO BE CLEANSED AND RESTORED IN THE SAME SPIRIT AS HIMSELF. The priest is directed to investigate a plagued house, and if by the use of prompt measures the plague is stayed and extirpated, then the first part of the ritual is to be carried out. One live bird is to be killed over the running water, and the house sprinkled with the blood and water as before, and then the other live bird liberated. Thus was the restoration of the house to the society of its mates, so to speak, symbolized. We have already taken this to indicate the careful purification of our environment, and there is no more important duty attaching to the religious man. Atonement is due, not only for the sin as it affects the person, but for sin in its ravages in the world. This blighted world of ours has need of atoning blood, and purification even by fire, before it can be restored to the favour of God. Christ has consecrated it through his blood, and his providence and Spirit will yet make the requisite arrangement for its complete purification and restoration to the holy.R.M.E.

HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON

Lev 14:1-20

Restoration suggestions.

The ceremonies here enjoined in the event of leprosy being healed suggest four things.

I. AN INTERESTING PASSAGE IN THE LIFE OF OUR LORD. Our Saviour’s experiences may be divided into:

(1) his sufferings and death;

(2) his life (and example);

(3) his works.

Of these the last may be the least important, but they will never be unimportant. They will always remain one strong, convincing proof of his Godhead. And of these works the healing of leprosyincurable by human artwas one of the most decisive. In this work of mercy, more vividly than in any other, we see him before us as the Divine Healer of the sin-smitten heart of man. Great interest belongs, therefore, to the incident related in Luk 5:12-15. And in the instruction given in Luk 5:14 we see our Divine Lord:

(1) mindful of the Law of Moses, which he ever honoured (Mat 3:15; Mat 5:17);

(2) while desirous of avoiding a noisy and hurtful notoriety, taking, due to establish the reality of his work.

II. THE CONSIDERATION WE OWE TO OUR FELLOW–MEN. In virtue of the Divine precept the leper might not enter human society. But this was not the only ground of exclusion; by reason of the character of his malady he was wholly unfit to enter. Once exiled, therefore, he might not return until every guarantee had been given that he was “whole,” until numerous and prolonged ceremonies of cleansing had removed all stigma from him, and made him likely to receive a cordial welcome back. Hence the elaborate ceremonial of the text:

(1) priestly examination (Luk 5:2, Luk 5:3);

(2) the ceremony of the two birds (Luk 5:4-7);

(3) personal ablution (Luk 5:8);

(4) further exclusion for a week (Luk 5:8);

(5) additional ablution, etc. (Luk 5:9);

(6) offerings at the altar, attended with peculiar rites with the blood and oil (Luk 5:10-20).

When by any folly or guilt of ours we have incurred the distrust or dislike of our brethren, it is due to them that we should give them every possible guarantee of our “cleanness,” our integrity of heart and life, before they abandon their suspicion and give us again their cordial confidence. Society has a right to require that the man whom it has necessarily shunned is pure of his moral and spiritual malady. We may be unable to gain any certificate of character, but we may, to regain confidence and readmission to human fellowship,

(1) show ourselves as humble, earnest worshippers in the house of the Lord;

(2) seek the open confidence of the acknowledged servants of Christ;

(3) give the pledge of a scrupulously virtuous life, that we are really “washed and sanctified by the Spirit of our God’ (1Co 6:11).

III. THE OBLIGATIONS OF OFFICE. Those who hold high office have sometimes uninviting duties to discharge. The priests of Israel held honourable rank in the nation; doubtless they received a large share of public deference, and were regarded as those who occupied an enviable position. But their duties embraced some offices from which the humblest in the land might shrink. They had to make a most careful examination of the man who believed himself healed of leprosy. Probably, in their eagerness to return to the camp, these afflicted ones often sought readmission when the disease was still upon them. But the priest must examine all who came, clean or unclean. Those who now hold honourable positions in society (the minister, the medical man, etc.) must hold themselves ready, not only to do those duties which are inviting and congenial, but those also which are unpleasant and even painful, whether to the flesh or to the spirit.

IV. THE OUTLOOK OF HUMAN MISERY. What was the prospect of the exiled leper? Human art had given him up as incurable, and human fellowship had cast him out as unworthy. What could he hope for? There were only two possible remediesa Divine cure or the grave; the one blessed enough but sadly improbable, the other sad enough but a welcome certainty. If for a while we look at leprosy as the picture, not of human sin, but of human misery, we may be reminded that, for a Christian man, there are two remedies:

(1) deliverance in time from affliction (Psa 30:11);

(2) comfort in affliction during life, and then “the glory which shall be revealed” (Rom 8:18). Though the night of weeping be lifelong, “yet joy cometh in the morning” of the everlasting day.C.

Lev 14:4-9

Admission (or readmission).

When leprosy had departed from the flesh, he who had been, but no longer remained, a leper was, in the sight of Jehovah and of his people, still ceremonially unclean. He was in a bodily condition which made him readmissible to Divine and human fellowship, but he must first “be cleansed” (Lev 14:4) before he would be readmitted. The ceremonies here prescribed give a picture of our readmission to the favour of God and the fellowship of his people.

I. SACRIFICE OF ANOTHER‘S LIFE. As a “clean bird” (Lev 14:4) was taken and its blood was shed (Lev 14:5), as the life-blood of the pure and innocent creature was poured out that the leper might be clean and pure in the sight of God, so is the life-blood of the spotless Lamb shed for us. There must be for our acceptance and admission, or readmission after backsliding, a “sacrifice for sin.”

II. PERSONAL APPLICATION OF THAT SACRIFICE. “He shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed seven times” (Lev 14:7). “The living bird” was to be “dipped in the blood of the bird that was killed.” Here is the truth that if the “blood of Christ” is to be effectual for our salvation, it must be applied to our individual conscience. We who seek to be cleansed from all iniquity and condemnation, must ourselves personally apply for mercy through the shed blood of the Redeemer. By an act of living faith we must bathe in the “fountain opened for sin and for uncleanness.”

III. PERSONAL PUTTING AWAY OF DEFILEMENT, The leper was to “wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean.” And again, after a week’s interval, was to shave and to wash, removing all his hair, even to the eyebrows (Lev 14:9); everything about him that could in any possible way be defiled by the plague was to be carefully removed. So, if we are to be admitted (or readmitted) to God’s favour and man’s communion, we must deliberately put away from ourselves, from heart and life, every evil way, everything which is, or may be, tainted with iniquity (2Ti 2:19).

IV. DIVINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF OUR INTEGRITY. Everything here pointed to the fact that the Divine Ruler of Israel was prepared to acknowledge the cleanness of the leper. The water was to be “running water” (Lev 14:5)pure, as opposed to that which was stagnant and foul; “cedar wood” was to be used (Lev 14:6), type of that which is fragrant and healthful; the “scarlet” wool (Lev 14:6) hinted the red and healthy blood, which had been impure but was so no longer; “hyssop” (Lev 14:6) was suggestive of fragrance; but that which, above all, was indicative of God’s acknowledgment of the wholeness of the leper was the action respecting the living bird: that was released, let “loose into the open field” (Lev 14:7). This either signified that the uncleanness of the leper was borne away on the wings of the bird, where it should never be found again (a similar institution to the scapegoat, Le Lev 16:22, Lev 16:23), or that the leper was thenceforth free to go whithersoever he pleased. Either way, it expressed symbolically the truth that there was reinstatement for the man who had been healed in the privileges he had forfeited. We have in the Scriptures every possible assurance that “repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ,” are followed by fullness of Divine favour. The returned prodigal has the kiss of reconciliation, the ring and robe of honour, and the feast of joy. “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God and rejoice in hope of the glory of God” (Rom 5:1, Rom 5:2). The soul that is healed of its sore disease is pronounced clean in the sight of God, and is free of its Father’s house, to enter its many rooms and partake of its many joys.C.

Lev 14:10-20

Final rites of readmission.

By the series of final rites of restoration recorded in these verses, the leper once more took his place as one of a holy nation admitted to the presence of God: he was “presented before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle,” etc. (Lev 14:10). His formal acceptance at the house of the Lord, and entrance again on the privileges of the peculiar people, reminds us that our entrance, whether in the first instance or after backsliding and return, upon the fullness of sacred privilege must be

I. ATTENDED WITH HUMILITY. The leper was to bring his sin offering, which must be slain in the holy place (Lev 14:13, Lev 14:19). Over the head of the animal he was to confess his sin, and then, with his guilt thus transferred, the blood of the sin offering atoned for past wrong. All approaches to God by the human spirit should be accompanied with a sense of unworthiness. “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Mat 5:3).

II. IS THE SPIRIT OF CONSECRATION. The leper was to bring his burnt offering as well as his sin offering (Lev 14:13, Lev 14:19, Lev 14:20). By this he symbolically presented himself wholly unto the Lord, laid himself on the altar of sacred service. When we turn, or return unto God it must be in the sprat’ ‘ of full, unreserved dedication. We are to present our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, our reasonable (i.e. rational, spiritual) service” (Rom 12:1).

III. IN THE SPIRIT OF THANKFUL JOY. The leper was to bring “three tenth deals of line flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil” (Lev 14:10, Lev 14:20). This was a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, rendered under a sense of deep indebtedness for Divine bounty. It was certainly suitable enough in the case of the leper, whose malady had been removed by the healing hand of God. Nor is the consciousness of our deep indebtedness, the presentation of our utmost thanks, one whit less becoming, less demanded and required of God, when we come to his house, or to the table of the Lord, after months or years, or a life of absence, negligence, estrangement, it should be with hearts overflowing with holy gratitude and. sacred joy that we present ourselves before him.

IV. WITH A SENSE OF GOD‘S FULL ACCEPTANCE OF OUR WHOLE HEART AND LIFE. There was one very significant ceremony through which the leper who was being cleansed had to pass: the priest was to put some of the blood of the trespass offering upon the tip of the right ear, and the thumb of the right hand, and the great toe of the right foot (Lev 14:14). Afterwards the priest did the same thing with the oil, pouring the remnant of the oil upon the leper’s head (Lev 14:17, Lev 14:18). The application of the blood of atonement to these bodily extremities indicated God’s acceptance of the leper throughout the entire man; every part of him was now holy unto the Lord; even every part of that bodily frame which had been the very picture and type of all uncleanness. The application of the oil denoted that the leper was thenceforth to regard himself as God’s accepted servant in every sphere of human action; he was to be:

1. A reverent waiter and watcher before God, eagerly learning his will.

2. An active, industrious minister, doing his work in every way open to him.

3. A conscientious exemplar, walking in the ways of the Lord blameless. We, too, returning unto God, pleading the blood of the Lamb, offering ourselves unto him, reverently rejoicing in his mercy, are to understand and realize that

(1) God accepts us unreservedly as his own, and

(2) expects us to be eager to serve him in every open waylearning, labouring, living to his praise.C.

Lev 14:21-32

Divine considerateness.

If there had been one parenthetical verso introduced or added intimating that Divine allowance would be made for the poor, we should have thought that sufficient for the purpose. But we have more than that here. We have legislation for the poor fully stated, and the whole body of injunctions restated for their especial benefit (Lev 14:21-32). This brings out into hold relief God’s mindfulness of the peculiar necessities of menhis Divine considerateness. We see illustrations of this in

I. SACRIFICES BROUGHT TO HIS ALTAR. Notably this kindly provision for the poor in the case of the healed leper; but not this alone (see Le Lev 5:7; Lev 12:8).

II. GIFTS BROUGHT TO HIS TREASURY. The widow with her two mites cast in more, weighed in the balances of heaven, than did the rich with their abundance (Mar 7:1-37 :41-44; see 2Co 8:12).

III. OUR POWERS IN CHRIST‘S SERVICE. To him who having received two talents gained two others beside them, was accorded by the Lord, when he returned and reckoned with his servants, approval quite as cordial as that rendered to him who having received five talents gained five talents more (Mat 25:19-23). Equally cordial would have been the welcome to him who had been entrusted with only one, if he had gained one talent beside that.

IV. OUR STRUGGLE WITH TEMPTATION. When the agonizing Master returned and found those he left to watch and pray “asleep, for their eyes were heavy,” he gently rebuked them; but he considerately extenuated their fault by saying, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak “(Mat 26:40, Mat 26:41). “He knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust.”

V. OUR ENDURANCE OF EVIL. God sends us privation, sickness, disappointment, perplexity, loss, bereavement, exceeding great sorrows, burdens grievous to be borne; he calls upon us to “endure as seeing him who is invisible,” to be “in subjection to the Father of spirits.” He expects that we shall not repine and rebel, but submit and serve. Yet he who knows all men, and who knows “what is in man” (Joh 2:25), who created us and made us what we are, understands and weighs our peculiar personal difficulties, temperaments, dispositions; he knows how much we strive to yield and acquiesce, and “judges righteous judgment.” He is just, yet merciful, we say. We may also say, He is just, and therefore merciful. He has the requisite justice of Divine considerateness.

Let us

1. Take heart to serve so gracious and considerate a Lord.

2. Feel impelled to serve him all the more faithfully and devotedly because he is so worthy and righteous a Master.

3. Try to copy his grace and his righteousness in our dealings with our fellows (Luk 6:36).C.

HOMILIES BY S.R. ALDRIDGE

Lev 14:1-20

Thorough purification.

Spiritual disease is often neglected by persons who are extremely anxious respecting some disease of the physical frame. For the former they seek no remedy, and display no concern as to its ultimate issue, whereas the latter is viewed with unceasing distress. Would that every spiritual leper entertained just conceptions regarding his state! The ceremonies of this chapter are pregnant with interest for us today. Two stages in the leper’s cleansing are set before us.

I. THE RETURN TO THE CAMP.

1. The supposition that the leper might recover from his leprosy and be clean shows man’s superiority to inanimate nature. When endeavours are being made to confound matter and mind, and to reduce man to a level with the earth on which he lives, it is not unworthy of notice that the legislator here marks a vital distinction between a man and a dwelling. The latter, if on investigation pronounced utterly unclean, was destroyed (Lev 14:45), and so with garments (Lev 13:52), but the leprous man ever contained possibilities of recovery. Let us hold fast to the truth here imaged, and delight in the thought that no sinner is beyond hope of amendment.

2. As the priest journeyed outside the camp to the leper (Lev 14:3), we are reminded of him who “suffered without the camp,” who in his condescending love left his Father’s throne to dwell with the outcasts of earth, and who in his abode with men selected not the richest and purest, but the poor and the sinful, as the recipients of his intimacy and favour.

3. The death of the one bird showed forth the condition from which, by God’s grace, the leper had been rescued; the flight of the other bird, previously dipped in the blood, symbolized the enjoyment of life granted through the death of the appointed victim. How aptly does this apply to our deliverance through Jesus Christ, so that “we have passed from death unto life”! Delight in our present position should be combined with thankful remembrance of the means by which it has been secured to us.

4. The concomitants indicated the completeness of the new life received. There is no reason to reject the general interpretation that the cedar wood was an emblem of uncorruptness, the scarlet wool or braid of freshness and fullness of life, and the hyssop with its detergent properties of cleanness. These were employed in the preparation of the “water for separation” (Num 19:1-22). Jesus Christ came that we might “have life, and have it more abundantly.” He brought “life and incorruption to light through the gospel.” He quickens those “dead through trespasses and sins.” Life that invigorates the entire spirit is his “free gift.”

5. What trouble was necessary, and would be willingly incurred, in order to regain temporal advantages! Unless cleansed by ablution of himself and clothes, and the removal of hair from the head, no entrance into the assembly of his brethren was permissible. Yet how readily would all be performed, just as today no efforts are deemed too great to allow of participation in valued social or political movements! But for the cleansing from sin any commandment is accounted vexatious! Few care to sacrifice time or labour to become citizens of the heavenly commonwealth.

II. THE RETURN TO THE TENT.

1. The provision for restoring the leper proves that God has no desire to exclude men unnecessarily from religious privileges. The seven days’ interval served to guard against a possible error on the part of the priest, and impressed the leper with a deeper conviction of the holiness of God. It is only sin that bars men from the light of God’s presence, and only obstinate persistence in sin that need cause despair of forgiveness. “Ye will not come unto me that ye might have life” was our Lord’s indictment of men’s impenitent folly.

2. See, once more, the function of the priest to appear between man and God. “The priest that maketh him clean shall present the man before the Lord,” and “the priest shall make an atonement for him before the Lord.” We have our Advocate with the Father, in whose name, and sheltered by whose intercession, we may approach boldly the throne of grace. Hereafter he shall present us holy and without blemish, and unreprovable before him (Col 1:22; Jud Col 1:24). Having Christ to introduce us, who can be afraid?

3. The cleansing not complete without an atonement. All marks of disease may have disappeared, or at least the fear of infection may have vanished, and yet to enter upon the fresh period of existence is not sufficient unless the past transgressions be remembered and atoned for. To forsake sin is well, but, in addition, the sin of the past must be confessed and pardoned. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ enables the sinner to start upon his pilgrimage with shoulders eased from the burden of guilt. A gulf separates him from the land of iniquity and stumbling; he is free to commence again under happier auspices. The old score is wiped out; a clean tablet marks the returned prodigal’s position.

4. The purification must be coextensive with the disease. Leprosy affected the whole man; hence the tips of the ear, the hand, and the foot must be touched with the atoning blood, that all parts may be redeemed from corruption. All spheres of activity must be brought under the power of the cross of Christ.

5. The cleansing becomes a consecration of the entire man. The resemblance of this rite to that enjoined at the setting apart of the priests to their holy office cannot fail to be observed. The leper offered a trespass offering to compensate for breaches of the commandment committed by reason of his absence through sin from the sanctuary, a sin offering because of transgressions inadvertently committed, a burnt offering as an act of individual worship in which there was self-surrender to the Lord, and a meat offering, the natural accompaniment testifying grateful homage. And, besides blood, oil also was sprinkled upon the leper, and poured upon his head, and sprinkled seven times (the covenant number)before the Lord, so that we have here a recognition of the truth that Israel was intended to be a “kingdom of priests.” Typical of the sanctification required in the people of God, reaching to every part of their character, until all is brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ. “As ye presented your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now present your members servants to righteousness unto sanctification.”

6. The consecrated man is fit for the discharge of ordinary duties and the enjoyment of lawful pleasures. After the sacrifices, the man could once more enter his tent and mingle with his family, and pursue his wonted avocation. Jehovah proved himself in these regulations the God of the families of Israel. He protected their relationships and imparted to them his blessing. It is a mistaken idea to place affection for our kindred before love to God. Regard for God is the surest guarantee for the performance of human obligations. Well for the land if this were oftener remembered in the establishment of households and in the contracting of domestic ties!

CONCLUSION. Only when “clean” could the leper send for the priest. We go to Jesus Christ with all our guilt; he looks upon us and pronounces us clean, he touches us, and lo! we are healed; for there is sanatory power in his look and touch. What the Saviour exemplified when on earth, he is constantly effecting now from heaven.S.R.A.

HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD

Lev 14:1-9

The cleansing of the leper-ceremonies outside the camp.

As leprosy is evidently a remarkable emblem of sin, so must the cleansing of the leper represent the purification of the sinner, and the laws of the cleansing, the provisions of the gospel. The text brings under our notice

I. THE CONDITIONS REQUIRED. These were:

1. That the leprosy be healed.

(1) Healing and cleansing are distinct things. The priest did not heal. Before proceeding to cleanse he had to see that the leprosy was healed (Lev 14:3). Our Lord healed lepers, and then sent them to the priest to be cleansed.

(2) The gospel of this is that repentance is not salvation. The body may be healed, outward reformation may be considerable, while the heart is morally putrescent (see Mat 23:25-28). The leper, though healed, unless also cleansed, must not enter the holy place or eat of the holy things. A genuine change of heart will manifest itself in a pure life. When these exist together, fellowship with God is established.

2. That the priest certify the fact.

(1) “He shall be brought unto the priest,” viz. for this purpose. He is brought by his friends, or they apprise the priest of his condition. Those are the true friends of sinners who bring them to Jesus in person or in prayer.

(2) “The priest shall go forth out of the camp.” This did Jesus, who came to seek and save the lost. The Pharisees found fault with him for mingling with “publicans and sinners” when he acted as the priest among the lepers.

(3) The repentance that satisfies Jesus is genuine (see Luk 18:10-14). And this he certifies in his offices of cleansing.

II. THE OFFERING MADE.

1. The sacrifice.

(1) This consisted of two birds. We say “this in the singular, for the birds must be together viewed as one sacrifice. Unitedly they were intended to prefigure the one true Sacrifice for sins.

(2) The birds were “alive,” to represent him that” hath life in himself.”

(3) They were” clean.” They might be sparrows or quailsany wild birds of the clean kinds. Cleanness was requisite to foreshadow One whose birth and life were spotlessly pure.

2. Its treatment.

(1) One bird was killed over running or “living” water, which was the emblem of the living, purifying Spirit of God. Blood and water together flowed from the opened side of Jesus (see Joh 19:34, Joh 19:35; 1Jn 5:6, 1Jn 5:8). The infinitely superior virtue of the blood of Christ lay in that, being God as well as man, he was able to offer himself through the eternal Spirit without spot (Heb 9:13, Heb 9:14).

(2) The “living bird” was dipped “in the blood of the bird that was killed,” to show that our guilt was laid upon the soul of Jesus as well as upon his body. This truth is indeed expressed in the blood shed; for the “blood is the life of the flesh.” But to impress it upon us it is here presented under another figure (see Isa 53:10-12).

III. ITS APPROPRIATION. This was:

1. Through the sprinkling of blood.

(1) The atonement availed the leper nothing without the application of the blood to his person. So the blood of Christ avails only to those who appropriate its benefits by faith.

(2) The blood was sprinkled upon the leper “seven times” to express perfection and sufficiency, and to point to the seventh period or rest of the gospel (Heb 4:10), in which the atonement by Christ satisfies all the promises of the types. Then he was pronounced “clean.”

(3) The next thing was to let the living bird, stained with the blood of that killed in sacrifice, loose in the open field. What a lively picture! As the leper is assured that he is clean he sees his guilt carried away, and loses sight of it as the bird disappears in the wood. So does Christ bear our sins into oblivion.

2. Through the washing of water.

(1) The leper was to wash his clothes and appear in clean white linen, the emblem of the “righteousness of the saints.”

(2) He had also to shave off all his hair, which had been dishonoured by the plague, that a new growth might crown him in purity.

(3) He had likewise to wash his flesh; and that too “seven times,” to express the thoroughness of his purification. But the true purifier is that sevenfold Spirit of the gospel, issuing as the river of life, from the throne of God and of the Lamb (Rev 5:6; Rev 22:1).

3. By the ministry of the word.

(1) The blood was sprinkled upon the leper by means of a whisk composed of “cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop.” A branch of hyssop seems to have been tied to a handle of cedar by a thread of scarlet wool. But the materials used were evidently intended as emblems, else they would not have been so carefully specified. And we find these very materials on another occasion, thrown into the fire of the altar, to be consumed with the red heifer (see Num 19:6).

(2) As to the hyssop and cedar, they seem to be, as it were, at the extremes in the kingdom of trees, and so generally represent that kingdom. For Solomon in his wisdom “spake of trees, from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall” (1Ki 4:33). We know that the servants of God are compared to trees (Psa 1:3; Psa 92:12; Isa 61:3). They are various in their abilities, yet all serviceable as ministers and instruments of the gospel (1Co 12:21).

(3) As to the wool; it is from the fleece of an animal proper for sacrifice, and its colour is that of blood. A cord of the same colour was hung from her window by Rahab, to express faith in the blood of the Passover to protect her and her house from destruction. It would not be lawful in her to sacrifice a lamb and sprinkle its blood; but she did what she might, and expressed her faith by this sign (Jos 3:1-17 :18, 19). The scarlet cord of a common faith in the blood of Christ binds his servants together, and in their unity makes them efficient instruments in carrying his gospel to mankind.

(4) If it be asked why should the cedar and scarlet and hyssop be burnt with the red heifer, the answer is that there is a sense in which faithful ministers may be “offered upon the sacrifice and service” of the faith of those they benefit (see Act 9:4; 2Co 1:5, 2Co 1:6; 2Co 4:10; Php 2:17; Php 3:10; Col 1:24; 2Ti 1:8; 2Ti 2:10).J.A.M.

Lev 14:10-32

The cleansing of the leper-ceremony in the tabernacle.

The ceremonies for the cleansing of the leper were distributed into two series. The first were conducted “outside the camp.” This suggests that the leper must be taken not only as a type of sinners in general, but of the “sinners of the Gentiles” in particular (comp. Heb 13:10-12). The ceremony in the tabernacle, therefore, must refer to the reception of the Gentiles by the gospel into the fellowship of the saints. We notice

I. THE PRESENTATION.

1. This took place on the eighth day.

(1) The ceremonies in the camp extended over seven days, on the last of which the leper was then pronounced clean. He was now, therefore, eligible to leave his alienation, and mingle with the children of Israel as a fellow-citizen.

(2) Entering the sanctuary, he came into Church recognition. For the court of the priests represented the Church in the visible part (see on Le Lev 8:10-12). This was on the eighth day, which, in the week, corresponds with the first day, a day so memorable for great events of the gospel that, as the “Lord’s day,” it came to replace the Jewish “sabbath” (see on Lev 9:1-7). The Hebrew term for eight (), shemenah, is derived from () shemen, fat or oil; and the oil and fat so extensively used in connection with the offerings and baptisms of the Law represented the Spirit of God in his illuminations and joy-inspiring, graces. The eighth day, or day of oil, was, therefore, appropriately the emblem of the “days of the Son of man,” the dispensations of the Spirit.

2. He was introduced by the priest.

(1) He was presented “before the Lord” (Lev 14:11). As a commoner might be presented by a peer to a monarch at a levee, so was the leper presented by the priest to the Lord, who, in his Shechinah, was enthroned upon the mercy-seat. So are the spiritual priests of the gospel introduced by the Great High Priest of our profession (see Heb 10:21, Heb 10:22).

(2) Being recognized by the King of glory, he became fit for the best society, and could freely mingle with the congregation of Israel, or princes of God. So when God accepts the sinner, though he had been a sinner of the Gentiles, that becomes his passport to the Church (see Act 10:47).

3. The leper did not appear empty.

(1) It would have been a departure from all precedent in the East to be presented to a monarch without bringing gifts. When the Queen of Sheba came to Solomon, she was laden with rich presents (1Ki 10:10).

(2) But when we crone into the presence of God, what have we to bring? The leper brought three blemishless lambs; one for a trespass offering, another for a sin offering, and the third for a burnt offering. He brought also three tenth-deals of fine flour mingled with oil, for a bread offering, together with a log of oil. And we can bring Christ, with the Spirit of his grace, the antitypes.

(3) But “shall we offer unto the Lord that which cost us nothing?” There was a commercial value in the gifts of the leper; but our “Gift” is “unspeakable,” infinitely above all merchandise, such as we could never procure for ourselves. With him we must consecrate ourselves, and our property “as God may prosper us” (Rom 12:1; 1Co 16:2).

II. THE CEREMONIES OF THE PRESENTATION.

1. The sacrifices were of all the kinds.

(1) The lamb for the trespass offering. This was to make atonement for transgression, in order to justification.

(2) The ewe-lamb for a sin offering. This was to make atonement for impurity, in order to sanctification.

(3) The burnt offering, to make atonement for irreverences and imperfections in adoration. And with this was associated the bread offering, to express gratitude and communion.

(4) The order is admirable. When our trespasses are forgiven, and our hearts cleansed from sin, then are we in the moral state to adore with gratitude.

2. The baptisms were ample.

(1) The washings at the laver in the tabernacle appear to have been exclusively those of the sacrifices and priests. The baptisms of the Israelites were in their dwellings (Luk 11:38). The leper was washed with water outside the camp. Cornelius and his company, in whom the kingdom of heaven was opened to the Gentiles by Peter’s key, received the baptism of the Holy Ghost before they had any visible Church recognition (Act 10:44-48).

(2) The leper’s baptisms of blood began outside the camp. The blood of the bird was there seven times sprinkled upon the leper. But now, in the tabernacle, he is again sprinkled with the blood of the trespass offering. It was put on the tip of his right ear, to engage him in future to hear the Law of God; on the thumb of his right hand, to engage him to do the will of God; and on the great toe of his right foot, to engage him to walk in his holy ways.

(3) As there was no baptism of water ministered to the leper in the tabernacle, so was there no baptism of oil ministered to him outside the camp. Coming into the sanctuary, he sees the oil first “sprinkled seven times before the Lord” (Lev 14:16). Then oil was put upon him over the blood on the tip of his right ear, the thumb of his right hand, and the great toe of his right foot (Lev 14:17). The remnant of the oil was then poured upon his head. In this an “atonement was made for him before the Lord” (Lev 14:18). Bishop Patrick says, “The blood seems to have been a token of forgiveness; the oil of healing.” Together they show the intimate connection between the Son of God and the Spirit of God in the work of redemption and salvation.

3. The circumstances of the poor are considered.

(1) He may substitute doves for the lambs of the burnt offering and sin offering, and one tenth-deal of flour for three. “My son, give me thine heart;” and with that the calves of thy lips shall be accepted instead of the calves of the stall.

(2) But the lamb of the trespass offering he must bring. “This may well be looked upon as a figure of the Lamb of God, who alone taketh away the sins of the whole world” (Old Bible).J.A.M.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

C.CLEANSING AND RESTORATION OF A LEPER

Lev 14:1-32

1And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, 2This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing: He shall be brought unto the priest: 3and the priest shall go forth out of the camp; and the priest shall look, and, behold, ifthe plague [spot1] of leprosy be healed in the leper; 4then shall the priest command to take2 for him that is to be cleansed two birds3 alive and clean, and cedar wood and scarlet, and hyssop: 5and the priest shall command that one of the birds be 6killed in an earthen vessel over running [living4] water: as for5 the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running 7[living28] water: and he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open fields. 8And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash [bathe6] himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days.

9But it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall wash his clothes, also he shall wash [bathe30] his flesh in water, and he shall be clean.

10And on the eighth day he shall take two he lambs [two young rams7] without blemish, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, and three tenth deals of fine flour for a meat offering [an oblation8], mingled with oil. and one log of oil. 11And the priest that maketh him clean shall present the man that is to be made clean, and those things, before the Lord, at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: 12and the priest shall take one he lamb [ram31], and offer him for a trespass offering, and the log of oil, and wave them for a wave offering before the Lord:13and Hebrews 9 shall slay the lamb [ram31] in the place where he33 shall kill the sin offering and the burnt offering, in the holy place: for as the sin offering is the priests, so Isaiah 10 the trespass offering: it is most holy: 14and the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and the priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot: 15and the priest shall take some of the log of oil, and pour it into the palm of his own left hand: 16and the priest shall dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand, and shall sprinkle of the oil with his finger seven times before the Lord: 17and of the rest of the oil that is in his hand shall the priest put upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the blood11 of the trespass offering: 18and the remnant of12 the oil that is in the priests hand he shall pour [put13] upon the head of him that is to be cleansed: and the priest shall make an atonement for him before the Lord. 19And the priest shall offer the sin offering, and make an atonement for him that is to be cleansed from his uncleanness; and afterward he shall kill the burnt offering: 20and the priest shall offer the burnt offering and the meat offering [oblation32] upon the altar:14 and the priest shall make an atonement for him, and he shall be clean.

21And if he be poor, and cannot get so much: then he shall take one lamb [ram31] for a trespass offering to be waved, to make an atonement for him, and one tenth 22deal of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering, and a log of oil; and two turtle doves, or two young pigeons, such as he is able to get; and the one shall be a sin offering, and the other a burnt offering. 23And he shall bring them on the eighth day for [of15] his cleansing unto the priest, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, before the Lord. 24And the priest shall take the lamb [ram31] of the trespass offering, and the log of oil, and the priest shall wave them for a wave offering before the Lord: 25and he shall kill the lamb [ram31] of the trespass offering, and the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot: 26and the priest shall pour of the oil into the palm of his own16 left hand: 27and the priest shall sprinkle with his right finger some of the oil that is in his left hand seven times before the Lord: 28and the priest shall put of the oil that is in his hand upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the place of the blood of the trespass offering: 29and the rest of17 the oil that is in the priests hand he shall put upon the head of him that is to be cleansed, to make an atonement for him before the Lord. 30And he shall offer the one of the turtle doves, or of the young pigeons, 31such as he can get; even such as he is able to get, the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering, with the meat offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for him that is to be cleansed before the Lord.

32This is the law of him in whom is the plague [spot1] of leprosy, whose hand is not able to get that which pertaineth to his cleansing.

D.LEPROSY IN A HOUSE

Lev 14:33-53

33And the Lord spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, 34When ye be come into the land of Canaan, which I give to you for a possession, and I put the plague 35[spot1] of leprosy in a house of the land of your possession; and he that owneth the house shall come and tell the priest, saying, It seemeth to me there is as it were a plague [spot1] in the house: 36then the priest shall command that they empty the house, before the priest go into it to see the plague [spot1], that all that is in the house be not made unclean: and afterward the priest shall go in to see the house: 37and he shall look on the plague [spot1], and, behold, if the plague [spot1] be in the walls of the house with hollow strakes,18 greenish or reddish [very green or very red19], which in sight are lower than the wall; 38then the priest shall go out of the house to the door of the house, and shut up the house seven days: 39and the priest shall come again the seventh day, and shall look: and, behold, if the plague [spot1] be spread in the walls of the house; 40then the priest shall command that they take away the stones in which the plague [spot1] is, and they shall cast them into an 41unclean place without the city: and he20 shall cause the house to be scraped within round about, and they shall pour out the dust that they scrape off without the city into an unclean place: 42and they shall take other stones, and put them in the place of those stones; and he44 shall take other mortar, and shall plaister the house. 43And if the plague [spot1] come again, and break out in the house, after that he44 hath taken away the stones, and after he hath scraped the house, and after it is plaistered; 44then the priest shall come and look, and, behold, if the plague [spot1] 45be spread in the house, it is a fretting leprosy in the house: it is unclean. And he44 shall break down the house, the stones of it, and the timber thereof, and all the mortar of the house; and he44 shall carry them forth out of the city into an unclean place. 46Moreover he that goeth into the house all the while that it is shut up shall be unclean until the even. 47And he that lieth in the house shall wash his clothes; and he that eateth in the house shall wash his clothes.21

48And if the priest shall come in, and look upon it, and, behold, the plague [spot1] hath not spread in the house, after the house was plaistered: then the priest shall pronounce the house clean, because the plague [spot1] is healed. 49And he shall take 50to cleanse the house two birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop: and he shall kill the one of the birds in an earthen vessel over running water: 51and he shall take the cedar wood, and the hyssop, and the scarlet, and the living bird, and dip them in the blood of the slain bird, and22 in the running [living28] water, and sprinkle the house seven times: 52and he shall cleanse the house with the blood of the bird, and with the running [living28] water, and with the living bird, and with the cedar wood, and with the hyssop, and with the scarlet: 53but he shall let go the living bird out of the city into the open fields, and make an atonement for the house: and it shall be clean.

E.CONCLUSION

Lev 14:54-57

54, 55This is the law for all manner of plague [spot1] of leprosy, and scall, and for the leprosy of a garment, and of a house, 56and for a rising, and for a scab, and for a bright spot: 57to teach when it is unclean, and when it is clean: this is the law of leprosy.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

Lev 14:2. , a word of very frequent occurrence in these two chapters where it is uniformly translated in the A. V. (except Lev 13:42-43, sore) plague, as it is also in Gen 12:17; Exo 11:1; Deu 24:8 (in reference also to leprosy); 1Ki 8:37-38; Psa 91:10. Elsewhere the renderings of the A. V. are very various: sore, stroke, stripe, wound. By far the most common rendering in the LXX. is =tactus, ictus. The idea of the word is a stroke or blow, and then the effect of this in a wound or spot. Clark therefore would translate here stroke, which meets well enough the meaning of the word itself, but does not in all cases convey the sense in English. It is perhaps impossible to find one word in English which can be used in all cases; but that which seems best adapted to Leviticus is the one given by Horsley and Lee, and adopted here: spot. So Keil, Wilson and others. There is no article in the Heb.

Lev 14:3. The sense is here undoubtedly the scarf skin (Clark), the cuticle, in contradistinction to the cutis, the true skin below. So Wilson, who says: This distinction in reality constitutes one of the most important points of diagnosis between real leprosy and affections of the skin otherwise resembling leprosy. But as we have in Heb. only the one word for both (except the . . , Job 16:15), there does not seem to be warrant for changing the translation, especially as in English skin answers to either with the same indefiniteness.

Lev 14:4. The construction in Lev 14:3-4; Lev 14:10 is without a preposition; in Lev 14:16-17 it is with the preposition , as is expressed in the A. V.

Lev 14:4-5, etc. According to Rosenmller and Gesenius, is used by metonymy for the person upon whom it is. This view is adopted by Lange. It appears in the Targ. of Onk. and in the Vulg., and has been followed by the A. V. Far better is the rendering of the Sam., LXX. and Syr.: the priest shall bind up the spot, or sore. This is the exact translation of the Heb., and is advocated by Horsley, Boothroyd, and many others. Fuerst does not recognize the sense by metonymy. The same change should perhaps also be made in ver.12. See Exegesis. In the case of shutting up the leprous house (Lev 14:38) the word house is distinctly expressed in the Heb.

Lev 14:6. =dim, pale, faint, weak, dying. The idea is that of something in the process of fading away, disappearing. LXX. , Vulg. obscurior.

Lev 14:6. It does not appear why the conjunction in the A. V. should be printed in italics; it is, however wanting in 18 MSS., the Sam., and LXX.

Lev 14:9. The conjunction is wanting in the Heb., but is supplied in the Sam. and versions.

Lev 14:10; Lev 14:24. , according to Rosenmueller and Fuerst an indication, and this is the sense given in Targ., Onk. and the Syr., and apparently also in the Vulg. The LXX. renders , taking the as preposition, and understanding it, as the Rabbins, of a spot of proud flesh in the midst of the cicatrice. The margin of the A. V. is the quickening of living flesh; scar would express the sense, but this is appropriated to , Lev 14:23; Lev 14:28, and mark gives the exact rendering of the Hebrew, and meets the requirements of the context.

Lev 14:2. , a word of very frequent occurrence in these two chapters where it is uniformly translated in the A. V. (except Lev 13:42-43, sore) plague, as it is also in Gen 12:17; Exo 11:1; Deu 24:8 (in reference also to leprosy); 1Ki 8:37-38; Psa 91:10. Elsewhere the renderings of the A. V. are very various: sore, stroke, stripe, wound. By far the most common rendering in the LXX. is =tactus, ictus. The idea of the word is a stroke or blow, and then the effect of this in a wound or spot. Clark therefore would translate here stroke, which meets well enough the meaning of the word itself, but does not in all cases convey the sense in English. It is perhaps impossible to find one word in English which can be used in all cases; but that which seems best adapted to Leviticus is the one given by Horsley and Lee, and adopted here: spot. So Keil, Wilson and others. There is no article in the Heb.

Lev 14:4. The construction in Lev 14:3-4; Lev 14:10 is without a preposition; in Lev 14:16-17 it is with the preposition , as is expressed in the A. V.

Lev 14:13. The pronoun should obviously refer to the man rather than the spot.

Lev 14:16. . This being the same verb as is used in Lev 14:3-4; Lev 14:17, in the same sense, the rendering should certainly be the same. The alteration in the A. V. was evidently on account of the previous translation of by turn. It is better to put the new word there.

Lev 14:17. The preposition is the same as in the previous verse, and the change in the A. V. may have been simply accidental.

Lev 14:18. The word seems redundant, and is wanting in 4 MSS. and the Sam.

Lev 14:19. . The reduplication of the letters in Heb. always intensifies the meaning (see Bochart, Hieroz. Pt. II., lib. V., c. vi., Ed. Rosen. III., p. 612 ss.); if therefore this be translated red at all, it must be very red, which would be inconsistent with the previous white. This obvious inconsistency has led the ancient versions into translations represented by the somewhat reddish of the A. V., and frequently to rendering the previous conjunction or. But as there is no conjunction at all in the Heb., it seems better to follow the suggestion of Pool, Patrick and others, and understand the word as meaning very bright, shining, glistening. Comp the description of leprosy, Exo 4:6; Num 12:10; 2Ki 5:27.

Lev 14:18 (bis), 20, 23. , burning ulcer, would perhaps be a better, because a more general word; but boil was probably understood with sufficient latitude.

Lev 14:23; Lev 14:28. , , Rosenmueller, cicatrix ulceris. So all the ancient versions, and so Gesenius. So also Coverdale and Cranmer, and so Riggs. Fuerst, however, inflammation.

Lev 14:24. The margin of the A. V. is better than the text. This paragraph (Lev 14:24-28) is plainly in relation to leprosy developing from a burn on the skin. So Gesen, Fuerst, Pool, Patrick, etc. So the LXX. and Vulg.

Lev 14:31. The meaning of =black is established. The LXX., yellow, can therefore only be considered as an emendation of the text, substituting , and this is followed by Luther, Knobel, Keil, Murphy and others; it is, however, sustained by no other ancient version nor by any MS., and the change in the LXX. must be considered as simply an effort to avoid a difficulty. Keil and Clark propose, as a less desirable alternative, the omission of the negative particle. There is, however, no real difficulty in the text as it stands. See Exegesis.

Lev 14:32. The Sam. here substitutes , scall, for , spot.

Lev 14:39. , a word . . according to Gesen. a harmless eruption of a whitish color which appears on the dark skin of the Arabs, and is still called by the same name.

Lev 14:40. , used here apparently for the back of the head in contradistinction to the fron4, which occurs only here (but its derivative, , is found Lev 14:42 bis, 43 and 55). , however, is elsewhere baldness in general. Comp. Deu 14:1.

Lev 14:45. Comp. Textual Note5 on Lev 10:6.

Lev 14:45. . There is some doubt as to the true meaning. It is translated beard in the A. V., 2Sa 19:24 (25), and so Fuerst and Gesenius would render it here, guided by the etymology. All the ancient versions, however, translate it either mouth or lips, and a word etymologically signifying beard (or rather the sprouting place of hair) would easily come to have this sense in use. It is a different word from the =beard of Lev 14:29.

Lev 14:46. . The alone of the A. V. would ordinarily be a good enough translation, but is liable to be misunderstood. The leper was simply to dwell apart from the clean Israelites, but might and did live with other lepers.

Lev 14:49. . The reduplication of the letters intensifies the meaning. Comp. note13 on Lev 14:19. , too, as noted above, may here mean either very red, or, as before, glistening. There is so little knowledge about the fact that neither of them can be certainly decided upon; but as in this case we have the disjunctive (as also in Lev 14:37), it seems more probable that two distinct colors were intended.

Lev 14:55. The margin of the A. V. gives the literal rendering of the Heb. bald in the head thereof, or in the forehead thereof, and there can be no doubt that these are terms figuratively applied to the cloth or skin for the right and wrong side, as in the text.

Chap. 14. Lev 14:4. The Sam., LXX. and Syr. here read the verb in the plural, expressing the fulfillment of the command.

Lev 14:4. The margin of the A. V. reads sparrows, for which there seems to be no other authority than the Vulg. The Heb. does not define the kind of bird at all.

Lev 14:5. Better, living water, which is the exact rendering of the Heb. Ordinarily living water is a figure for running water; but here the water is contained in a vessel, and had therefore simply been filled from a spring or running stream.

Lev 14:6. . The conjunction which seems to be needed at the beginning of this verse is supplied in the Sam. and 6 MSS. There is nothing in Heb. answering to the as for of the A. V.

Lev 14:8. is applied only to the washing of the surface of objects which water will not penetrate. Comp. Lev 1:9; Lev 1:13; Lev 9:14, etc. It is a different word from of the previous clause, which is used of a more thorough washing or fulling. The English is unable in all cases to preserve the distinction; but it should be done as far as possible, and is frequently translated bathe in the following chapter (Lev 15:5-8; Lev 15:10-11; Lev 15:13; Lev 15:18; Lev 15:21-22; Lev 15:27) and elsewhere.

Lev 14:10. . See Textual Note5 on Lev 3:7. The age is not exactly specified in the Heb.; but the Sam. and LXX. add of the first year, as in the following clause.

Lev 14:10. See Textual Note2 on Lev 2:1.

Lev 14:12. The Sam. and LXX. have the plural. Probably the sing, of the Heb. is not intended to have the priest for its nominative, but to be impersonal.

Lev 14:13. One MS., the Sam., LXX. and Vulg. supply the particle of comparison, .

Lev 14:17. Two MSS., the LXX. and Vulg. here read, as the Heb. in Lev 14:28, upon the place of the blood.

Lev 14:18. For three MSS. and the Syr. read , as in Lev 14:16. On this use of , however, see Fuerst, Lex. , 3, b. . Gesen. Lex. A. 2.

Lev 14:18. is better translated put, both as more agreeable to the meaning of the word itself, and because the oil remaining in the left hand could hardly suffice for pouring.

Lev 14:20. The Sam. and LXX. add before the Lord.

Lev 14:23. The preposition is here so liable to be misunderstood that it is better to change it. It has reference to the eighth day appointed for his cleansing (as the Vulg.), not to the sacrifices for his cleansing (as the LXX.). So Geddes and Boothroyd. In Lev 14:10 the difficulty does not occur.

Lev 14:26. , an expression understood by Houbigant to mean that one priest should pour into the hand of another; the sense given in the A. V. following the Vulg. is, however, doubtless correct.

Lev 14:29. The Sam. here reverses its change of reading in Lev 14:18, and has for .

Lev 14:36. , a word . ., but its meaning sufficiently well ascertained. The A. V. follows the LXX., Chald. and Vulg., and the same sense is given by Rosenm., Fuerst and Gesen, though by each with a different etymology.

Lev 14:37. See Notes13 on Lev 13:19; Lev 13:24 on Lev 14:49.

Lev 14:41. All the ancient versions except the Vulg. change the causative form of the verb to the plural, as the following verb is plural. Also in Lev 14:42-43; Lev 14:45; Lev 14:49, they have the plural.

Lev 14:47. The LXX. here adds, what is of course implied, and be unclean until the even.

Lev 14:51. The LXX. has dip them in the blood of the bird that has been killed over the living water, and this is doubtless the sense of the text.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

A. The Examination and its result.

The indications of the disease. Lev 14:1-8.

Lev 14:1. This communication is addressed to Moses and Aaron conjointly because it requires examinations and determinations entrusted to the priests.

Lev 14:2-8. The first case, of symptoms like leprosy. Lev 14:2. Man is of course used generically for a person of either sex. No stress is to be laid upon the fact that the expression skin of his flesh is found only in this chapter; for the word skin occurs here nearly as often as in all the rest of the Scripture put together, and very similar expressions do occur elsewhere, e.g.Exo 34:29-30; Exo 34:35, the skin of his face, and the skin is often spoken of as covering the flesh, e.g.Eze 37:6; Eze 37:8, etc.A rising, a scab, or a bright spot, are different indications of incipient leprosy; the disease itself was more deeply seated, but it betrayed itself, as it does still, by these marks. The last two terms are only used in connection with this disease, and the first is only elsewhere used figuratively of dignity or excellency. The name leprosy is derived from =to strike down, to strike to the ground: the leper is he who has been smitten by God. Lange. For the examination of the leper one of the ordinary priests was sufficient as well as the high-priest; the Talmudists assert that priests debarred by physical imperfection from ministering at the altar were competent to the examination of lepers. The priests were expected, if occasion required, to consult with experts, but the formal sentence rested with them alone.

Lev 14:3. These marks, however, might exist without having been caused by leprosy. Two distinguishing characteristics are now mentioned, and if both these concurred, there could be no doubt about the casethe priest was at once to pronounce him unclean; (a) if the hair growing upon the spot had turned white. The hair of the Israelites was normally black; if it had turned white upon the spot it betrayed a cause at work beneath the surface of the skin. (b) If the spot was in appearance deeper than the skin. These signs are recognized by modern observers (e.g. Hensler); and among the Arabs leprosy is regarded as curable if the hair remains black upon the white spots, but incurable if it becomes whitish in color. Keil. Judgment was of course required in the application of the second test; but if the indications were clear, the case was decided, and the duty of the priest was to declare the existing fact.

Lev 14:4-8. The determination of cases in which the indications are not decisive. First, Lev 14:4-6, the case in which the suspicion of leprosy should prove unfounded. If there were suspicious looking spots, but yet they appeared on examination to be merely superficial, and there was no change in the color of the hair growing in them, either of two things might be possible: the spots might be the effect of true leprosy not yet sufficiently developed to give decisive indications: or they might be a mere eruption upon the skin, of no importance. To ascertain which of these was the fact, the priest was to bind up the spot seven days.At the end of that time a second examination was to be made; if then the indications were favorable, the same process was to be repeated. If at the end of this time the indications were still favorable, and especially if the suspicious spot, had become faint, tending to disappear, the priest was to pronounce the man clean. Yet still the very suspicion, unfounded as it proved to be, had brought some semblance of a taint upon the man, and he must wash his clothes. These two periods of seven days each are usually looked upon as periods of a sort of quarantine, during which the man himself was to be secluded, and this view has been incorporated into the A. V. here and throughout these chapters. It is not, however, required by the Hebrew, and in view of the great hardship it would impose upon those who were in reality entirely free from the disease, it seems more likely that the simple rendering of the Hebrew gives the true sense. The extreme slowness with which leprosy is oftentimes developed has been considered a difficulty in the way of a determination in reality, in so short a time; however, the two things are not at all incompatible. A fortnight was quite long enough to determine the character of any ordinary eruption; if it was none of these, and yet possessed the characteristics of leprosy, then it must be decided to be leprosy, although months or years might pass before the disease showed much further progress. Lev 14:7-8, however, show that even the leprous spots themselves did not remain quite unchanged during this time. On the second examination the priest could ascertain if the spots had begun to spread. If not, the disease, although it might possibly already exist, was not pronounced; but if they had spread, all doubt was at an end; the priest shall pronounce him unclean. Another view is taken of Lev 14:7. Rosenmller says that in the word the is to be taken for postquam as in Exo 19:1; Num 1:1; 1Ki 3:18; this sense is followed in the Vulg. and Luther, and adopted by Vatablus, Patrick, and other commentators. According to this the law would relate to the breaking out of the leprosy afresh at some time after he had been pronounced clean by the priest. The translation of the A. V., however, which is here followed, seems more exactly the sense of the Hebrew.

Lev 14:9-11. The second case is one in which ulceration has already begun. Either it is a long-standing case in which the command for inspection has been neglected, or else one in which sentence of cleanness has been pronounced on insufficient grounds. With the appearance of a mark of raw flesh in the rising, in combination with the other indications, all doubt was removed; it must be an old leprosy, and the priest shall at once pronounce him unclean.

Lev 14:12-17. The third case is looked upon according to differing medical views, either as a different disease, the lepra vulgaris, which scarcely affects the general health, and for the most part disappears of itself, though it often lasts for years (Clark); or as a case of the true leprosy in which 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 then fell off (Keil). Patrick compares it to the eruptions in measles and small pox, when there is safety in their full development. The suspected person thus either had a harmless disease, or he had had the leprosy and was cured. In either case sentence of cleanness was to be pronounced. But (Lev 14:14-15) if ulceration appeared (it would seem either at the moment or afterwards) he was at once to be declared unclean. This ulceration, however, might proceed from some other cause; therefore, although the man must be declared unclean in view of so suspicious an indication, yet if it afterwards passed away, the sentence might be reversed, and the man pronounced clean without further investigation.

Lev 14:18-23. The fourth case is that of a suspected leprosy arising from an abscess or boil which had been healed. Such disturbed conditions of the surface were peculiarly apt to become the seat of disease. The indications are much the same as in the other cases, the terms first mentioned here being equally applicable to the others. Reliance is again placed (Lev 14:20) upon the depth of the spot and the change in the color of the hair. If these indications were clear, as in Lev 14:3, the priest should at once pronounce the man unclean; if they were doubtful, he was to proceed as in Lev 14:4, and be guided by the result of a second examination at the end of seven days. In such a case a single interval of a week appears to have been sufficient, and no further examination is provided for. After one week it could be certainly determined whether it was merely the scar of the ulcer, or whether leprosy had really broken out in it.

Lev 14:24-28. The fifth case is that of suspected leprosy developing from a burn, another of those injuries favorable for the development of the disease. The indications and the procedure are precisely the same as before. In Lev 14:26 the A. V. has inserted the word other unfortunately.

Lev 14:29-37. The case of leprosy suspected in an eruption upon the hairy part of the head, or upon the beard. Although this is spoken expressly in regard to both men and women, yet the indications are so dependent upon hair that it is not proper to substitute here chin for beard, as is done by Keil. The word used is a different one from the of Lev 14:45, which is often translated beard; the Ancient Versions, however, give beard here, and either mouth or lips there. Pliny (Nat. Hist. lib. xxvi. 1) speaks of such a disease imported into Italy from Asia in the reign of Tiberius, neither painful nor fatal, yet any death preferable to it. In Lev 14:30 the A. V. has unnecessarily modified the symptoms by inserting the indefinite article before yellow thin hair. The word is collective, as in Lev 14:3, and freq. In this form of the disease the natural hair seems to have been supplanted by thin, yellow (=golden, shining) hair. This is declared to be , translated in the A. V. dry scall, and immediately explained as a leprosy upon the head or beard. The word occurs only in these chapters. The indications given in Lev 14:29-30, were not absolutely decisive. It would seem from Lev 14:31, that in the coming on of true leprosy the effect upon the hair was only gradually produced, part of the hair remaining for a time of its natural color; while in the case of other harmless cutaneous eruptions, of more rapid progress, all the hair on the affected spot was speedily changed. Hence the entire absence of black hair at the first was a favorable symptom. In this view the text is consistent enough with itself as it stands, and Keil is wrong in saying there is certainly an error in the text. In case of this favorable symptom the priest should bind up the spot for two periods of a week, making a further examination at the end of each of them. The favorable indications were that the spot did not spread, did not appear to be deep-seated, and the yellow hair disappeared. If this was the case at the end of the first period, the person was to be shaven with the exception of the spot, and at the end of the second pronounced clean, and to wash his clothes.If, however, (Lev 14:35-36) the trouble afterwards spread, the person was to be again examined by the priest, and being satisfied of this single fact, the priest must pronounce him unclean. Yet if this spreading was only temporary, he might finally be pronounced clean (Lev 14:37) provided the natural hair grew again in the spot.

Lev 14:38-39. This is the case of a harmless eruption in the skin termed , LXX. . It is still known among the Arabs and called by the same name, bohak. It is an eruption upon the skin, appearing in somewhat elevated spots or rings of unequal sizes and a pale white color, which do not change the hair; it causes no inconvenience, and lasts from two months to two years. Keil. It is placed here, because it might be, without proper examination, mistaken for leprosy, and its appearance was probably most nearly assimilated to the symptoms last mentioned. The sufferer by it was at once discharged as clean, without further ceremony.

Lev 14:40-44. The baldness of the head, whether on the front or back, constitutes no uncleanness; yet leprosy might be developed in the bald parts, and then was to be dealt with as in other cases. The reason for speaking of baldness at all in this connection is probably that the color of the hair has been made of so much importance in determining the symptoms of leprosy, that the legislator would cut off all opportunity for cavil in suspected cases.

Lev 14:45-46. The law for the pronounced leper. The leper was in the first place to put on the signs of mourning (comp. Eze 24:17; Eze 24:22), some say for himself as one over whom death had already gained the victory (Clark); but it may have been merely as a mark of great affliction, and some of the signs were also signs of shame (comp. Mic 3:7). And shall cry, Unclean, unclean, as a warning to any passers by. This command is not, as sometimes asserted, to guard against the danger of communicating the disease; but rather to avoid making others ceremonially unclean by contact with a leper. The Rabbins carried this sort of defilement so far as to assert that by merely entering a house, a leper polluted everything without it, (Mishna, Kelim i. 4; Negaim xiii. 11, as cited by Keil). All the days.The law constantly keeps in view the possibility of the recovery of the leper; but it is uncertain whether this indicates that the true leprosy was then less incurable than now, or whether it has regard to the possibility of error in the determination of the disease. In either case, while the symptoms continued for which he had been pronounced unclean, and until by the same authority he was again formally declared clean (Lev 14:1-32), he was to dwell apart; without the camp. Comp. Num 5:2-4; Num 12:14-15; 2Ki 15:5; Luk 17:12. The Jews say that there were three camps from all of which the leper was excluded: that of God (the tabernacle), that of the Levites, and that of Israel. After the settlement in the Holy Land the camp was considered in this, as in other commands, to be represented by the walled city. Yet after the erection of synagogues lepers were allowed to enter a particular part of them set apart for their use, (Mishna ubi supra).

B. Leprosy in clothing and Leather, Lev 13:47-59.

Only three materials for clothing are here mentioned: wool, linen, and skins. The two former were the usual materials among the ancient Egyptians and Greeks, and only these are mentioned Deu 22:11; Pro 31:13; Hos 2:9. It is a dispute among the Talmudists whether garments of camels hair are included or not. Woolen and linen were forbidden by the law (Lev 19:19) to be mixed in the same garment. On the nature of the leprosy here described, see the preliminary note to this chapter. Lev 14:48. Whether it be in the warp or woof has occasioned much unnecessary perplexity on account of the supposed difficulty in one of these remaining unaffected in the cloth by any disintegration occurring in the other; and Keil would translate the flax and the wool; Clark, De Wette, Knobel and others, (with whom Keil also seems to concur) explain it of yarn prepared for warp and yarn prepared for woof. There is really however, no difficulty in the matter, if the trouble is supposed to arise from some original fault in the material or in the processes of its preparation. Whichever was made of such material would first show the defect, and it could be seen in the cloth that the trouble arose from either the warp or the woof, as the case might be. The same sort of thing is sometimes observed in cloth now when the proper proportion has not been observed between the strength of the two kinds of thread, so that the cloth will tear with undue ease in one direction but not in the other; or when, in cloth woven of different colors, one set of threads has been injured in the dyeing. A distinction is made between a skin and any thing made of skin. The former were whole skins, as sheep skins dressed with the wool on for a sort of cloak for the poor, or for mats, etc., and also made into leather for bottles and other uses; the latter the endless variety of smaller articles made of leather. Lev 14:49. A strong green or red spot was prima facie evidence of leprosy, and subjected that in which it appeared to priestly examination. According to Maimonides (cited by Patrick) the spot must be as broad as a bean, and if smaller than this was of no consequence. Lev 14:50. Bind up the spot.Here as in Lev 14:4, etc., the usual interpretation is that of the A. V., shut up it that hath the spot; but the Hebrew in all these places only means necessarily the binding up of the spot itself, not a sort of quarantine upon the person or thing on which it is. See Textual note 4. In this case there is not the same hardship involved in the other rendering as in the case of the human subject: but still the rendering is objectionable as implying much more strongly than the law itself the idea of contagiousness. Lev 14:51-57 describe the appearances by which the priest must determine whether the suspicious spots were really leprosy or not. These turn upon whether the spot increased. If it did, then he was at once to burn that garment. The expression in Lev 14:52, 58, whether warp or woof, and in Lev 14:56 out of the warp or out of the woof is to be understood of the cloth in which the disease has appeared in either the warp or the woof. Fretting, Lev 14:51-52(Bochart, lepra exasperata), is equivalent to corroding. If however, the spot had not increased at the examination made at the end of a week, the suspected article was to be washed and the process repeated. If at the end of another week after the washing there was no change in the color of the spot, the thing was to be condemned and burned, although there was no apparent spreading. In such case it is fret inward,i.e., the material itself was faulty and unfit for use. Whether it be bare within or without; lit. bald in the head thereof, or in the forehead thereof, (Margin A. V. See Texual note 20). As the disease itself is figuratively named from its resemblance to the human leprosy, so these terms are used in the same way, and are generally considered to mean the right or the wrong side of the cloth or skin. On the other hand, if at the end of the week after the washing the spot had become less distinct (Lev 14:56), it was to be torn out of the garment or skin. If it reappeared (Lev 14:57) the thing was to be burned; but otherwise (Lev 14:58) to be washed a second time and then pronounced clean. Lev 14:59 is simply the usual conclusion, stating that the foregoing is the law for the cases specified.

C. Cleansing and restoration of the leper, Lev 14:1-32.

This communication was addressed to Moses alone, because there were no questions to be determined by priestly examination; it simply directs what is to be done in the case of a person already pronounced clean by the priest. Lev 14:1-20 prescribe the normal course, Lev 14:21-31 allow certain modifications for the poor, and Lev 14:32 is the conclusion.

A new Proper Lesson of the law begins here, and extends to the close of the following chapter; the parallel lesson from the prophets is 2Ki 7:3-20, containing the account brought into Samaria by the four lepers of the flight, of the besieging army of the Syrians.

Lange: a. The theocratico-political atonement, or the taking again of the person pronounced clean into the camp, i.e., into the congregation of the people. Hence this first act of atonement took place without the camp (later, before the gate of the city). The leper was to be represented by two birds, living and clean. They must be wild birds, since the tame turtle doves or the young pigeons would not have flown away when released. Since these birds represent the maximum of free motion, we may certainly find this thought indicated: want of free motion was a chief cause of the leprosy. [This inference, however, it is to be remembered, is only an inference, not a part of the law which carefully abstains from any mention of the causes]. One of these birds was slain over a vessel in which there was already some fresh spring or river water. It is not to be understood that in this the purification by water was indicated together with the atoning blood, since the washing follows farther on; on the contrary, in the fresh water the thought of living motion is again brought out. The blood of the slain bird dropped into this water; the few drops of blood, in and of themselves, would not suffice for the sprinkling. Nevertheless also, the blood of the slain bird considered as typically sick, through death became fresh again in its signification. The living bird, which was to remain alive, was dipped in the augmented blood of the dead bird. But very note-worthy are the allegorical accompaniments which jointly serve to illustrate the living bird, and were therefore dipped with it in the blood; a piece of cedar wood, as a symbol of the endurance of life; a piece of scarlet, as a symbol of the freshness of life; some hyssop, as a symbol of the purity of life through constant purifications of life. (See Keil, p. 106, [trans., p. 385 s.]). After the living bird with these accompaniments had been dipped in the blood, the person to be cleansed was sprinkled seven times with this blood. No further mention is made of the dead bird, since its flesh was not a sacrifice; but the living bird, hallowed by the blood of the dead, is set free. We may rightly see in the two birds the double position of the leper in his leprosy: in the slain bird he appears as he had fallen into death; in the one that is set free, on the contrary, he appears as by Gods mercy he is recovered to unrestrained motion. But we might also in this contrast find the thought, that the leprosy, as it falls upon one part of the community, keeps the other part all the more free; or, that health and disease are separated as opposite poles in regard to the common national life. In any case, it is a fact that, in regions where Cretinism prevails, which is analogous to leprosy, the freshest and strongest forms occur near the sick. Meanwhile, the person sprinkled with the blood must complete this purification in several ways: first, by washing his clothes; secondly, by cutting off all his hair from his whole body, (whether also his eyebrows and eyelashes?); thirdly, by bathing himself. Then he might go into the camp, but must yet add seven days more on the outside of his tent. Why? Keil answers with the Chaldee et non accedat ad latus uxoris su. But the law would not have been too modest to say so. With this is to be noticed that this same direction is applied to several analogous cases. He who is healed of a running issue, must wait seven days after the recognition of his healing before he can bring his sacrifice (Lev 15:13). The same applies to the woman with an issue of blood (ib. 28). So too, for the Nazarite in whose presence a man had died (Num 6:10). Particularly weighty is the direction of the seven days waiting which, according to Lev 8:35, must introduce the final consecration of the priests. We cannot say that during these seven days the priest was yet unclean; but he had not indeed become fully clean for the service of the priesthood. When we look back at the ordinance of the second seven days in reference to one who has been recognized as cleanthe leprous man, or garment, or house,there appears a distinction of cleanness of a first and second grade, a negative and a positive cleanness, which latter was a kind of priestly consecration. Every Israelite, in his degree should have this priestly consecration; but especially near to it stood the Nazarite, and next to him we place the cleansed leper. In the new covenant, the highly favored sinner stands higher than the Christian of less experience of salvation; the son, who was lost and found, higher than the elder brother; Mary Magdalene higher than a common maiden. [It must be always borne in mind, however, that this superiority does not rest upon any advantage in having sinned, but upon the earnestness of love on the part of him who has been forgiven. See Luk 7:47. F. G.]. This fact appears to have been typically represented in the Old Testament by the restoration of the cleansed leper to the worship of the congregation. [It was represented, that is to say, in the very full ceremonies and sacrifices accompanying the restoration, but not in any higher position of the cleansed leper after his restoration was accomplished.F. G.].

b. The theocratico-religious atonement. The offering obligatory upon the leper was very extensive; two he-lambs, one ewe-lamb, three tenth parts of wheaten flour mingled with oil, and a log of oil. The trespass offering formed the beginning of the offering, for the leper has by the connection with his people come into its guilt. [Nevertheless, it is hard to see how this could have been the reason, when the leper had been absolutely separated from his people, and was now to be restored to his connection with them. But see under Lev 14:12.F. G.]. The blood of this trespass offering was first treated like the blood of the trespass offering of the priest; it was put on the tip of the right ear, on the thumb of the right hand, and on the thumb or great toe of the right foot, all with the same meaning as in the consecration of the priests. In addition to this, the oil comes into use, which indeed, as being common oil, is different from the anointing oil of the priests, but is still a symbol of the Spiritual life. With this oil in minute measure, the priest, with a finger of his right hand dipped in the oil which had been poured into the hollow of the left, executed a seven-fold sprinkling before the Lord, i.e., towards the sanctuary. Then, with the rest of the oil, the three parts of the body were anointed which had been smeared with the blood of the trespass offering. The blood baptism preceded, as the negative consecration; the oil baptism must follow, as the positive atonement. The head of the leper was also anointed with the oil. He was thus to be made a man of the Spirit in each way, by his tribulation, and his deliverance. Then followed the sin offering, for which, in accordance with Lev 4:28; Lev 4:32, the ewe-lamb was to be used. In this place the addition is made: he shall make an atonement for him that is to be cleansed [Lev 14:31]. Plainly his sin is assumed in this to be individual guilt, in contradistinction from his share in the common guilt. It is rightly presupposed that the leprosy in each one stands in connection with his individual sinfulness; however light, it has for its result, sins of ill-will, of bitterness, of impatience, of self-forgetfulness, of prejudice toward the community. Now first can the presentation of the burnt offering follow, with the other he-lamb, and with the meat offering.

The ordinance may be modified in case the person to be purified is poor. The direction for the sacrifice itself is indeed almost analogous to the direction in the case of the poor woman in child-birth; only here the lamb for the trespass offering, the tenth deal of wheaten flour sprinkled with oil for a meat offering, and the log of oil for anointing, could not be dispensed with by the bringing of two doves or young pigeons. Moreover, the trespass offering, as well as the oil, is directed to be made a wave-offering before Jehovah. It is the same ritual as the wave or the consecration offering at the consecration of the priests (Lev 8:22; Lev 8:27). Thus this waving here also can only signify a peculiar consecration of the leper, which is more strongly expressed in the case of the poor leper who must be shaken free with his gift, must be brought to a swinging up, or heave offering (Aufschwung).

Some points in the above will be found differently treated below.

Lev 14:1-3. The starting point for the following directions is the priestly inspection of the leper supposed to be healed. This must take place without the camp, and if it resulted favorably, then the following directions were to be observed. (The expression , as Keil notes, is a const. prgnans, healed away from, i.e., healed and gone away from).

Lev 14:4-8. The restoration to the camp. This was formally accomplished by a very full and significant ritual, proportioned to the abhorrence in which leprosy was to be held, and the rigidness of the exclusion of the leper from the society of his people. There was no sacrifice, since the person to be cleansed was not yet in a condition to offer sacrifice, nor was anything offered, or even brought by him, nor was anything placed upon the altar. The ceremony was, however, a purification which is always related to sacrifice as a symbolic step towards a restoration to fellowship with God.

For the significance of the things used in this ceremony, Abarbanel is quoted by Patrick to the following effect: the living birds signify that the lepers dead flesh was restored to life and vigor; the cedar wood restoration from putrefaction; the scarlet (wool, or thread, or a bit of cloth) restoration of the color of health to the complexion; the hyssop (which was fragrant) restoration from the exceedingly ill odor of the disease.

An earthen vessel was takenprobably that after this use it might be broken up and destroyedand partly filled with water from a spring or brook, and one of the birds killed over it in such a way that its blood should fall into and be mingled with the water. In this the living bird was to be dipped with the other things, and then the person to be cleansed was sprinkled with it with that sevenfold sprinkling prescribed on occasions of peculiar solemnity (see Lev 4:6); and the person was then to be pronounced clean. After this the living bird was let loose into the open field. In attempting to estimate the significance of this rite, it is to be remembered that precisely the same ritual is prescribed for the cleansing of the leprous house (Lev 14:49-53), and the cedar, scarlet and hyssop, were also burned with the red heifer, whose ashes, placed in water, were to be used for purifications (Num 19:6). The water, the blood, the cedar and the scarlet are mentioned in the Ep. to the Heb. (Lev 9:19-20) as having been used by Moses in sprinkling the Book of the Covenant and the people (see Exo 24:6-8), and generally hyssop was used in various forms of sprinkling. Except therefore in regard to the birds, no significance can be attributed to these things which is not common to other purifications besides those of the leper, and even in regard to the birds, none which is not common to the cleansing of the leprous man and the leprous house (Lev 14:53). In view of this, and of the analogy of the scapegoat (Lev 16:21-22), the living bird let loose must be considered as bearing away the unclean-ness of the leper (Von Gerlach), and not as signifying the social resurrection of the leper in his restoration to the congregation. Of this last, the bird flying away to return no more could hardly have been a symbol. On the natural history of the cedar (Juniperus oxycedrus), and the hyssop, see Clarke. The scarlet is said in the Mishna to have been used for tying the other things to the living bird when they were dipped together in the water mingled with blood. Nothing is said of the disposal of all these things after they had fulfilled their purpose. After this ceremonial, the symbolical cleansing was still further set forth (Lev 14:8) by the lepers washing his clothes, and shaving off all his hair, and bathing himself. He might then enter the camp, but not yet his own tent. This remaining restriction seems designed to still further impress upon the mind the fearful character of the disease from which the leper had recovered: and still more, to postpone the full restoration of the leper to his family until he had first, by the prescribed sacrifices, been restored to fellowship with God.

Lev 14:9. After an interval of a week, the restored person was to be again shaved completely, to again wash his clothes, and again bathe himself. He was now prepared to offer the prescribed sacrifices on the following day; for he was now clean.

Lev 14:10-20. The restoration to fellowship with God, and admission to the sanctuary. Now for the first time the cleansed leper brings himself the things necessary for the completion of his cleansing. Three victims are to be offered; for a trespass, for a sin, and for a burnt offering. With these also he brought the prescribed oblation and the oil for his anointing; the oil was to be waved with the trespass offering (Lev 14:12) as its consecration to God, and the whole oblation (although three tenth deals seem to be required with reference to the three sacrifices) was to be offered upon the altar with the burnt offering (Lev 14:20). The flour amounted to nearly six quarts, the separate oil to about half a pint. Lev 14:12. Offer him for a trespass offering.The offering thus designated was not required to be of a definite value, as in the ordinary trespass offerings, and it was altogether peculiar in its ritual, being waved with the oil for a wave offering before the Lord.This was never done with any part of the ordinary trespass offering (Lev 5:14 to Lev 6:7); only in the sacrifice of Lev 23:20 was the whole victim ever waved; as still another peculiarity, the wave offering was placed in this case, not in the hands of the offerer, but in those of the priest. What then was here the significance of the waving? Keil, Clark, and others, consider it as a consecration of the cleansed leper represented by the victim. It is true that there was, in the ritual as a whole, a kind of consecration of the person to his restored position as one of the people of the Lord; but this can scarcely have been the meaning of this particular ceremony. When the Levites were consecrated to the service of the Lord by a wave offering, they were themselves waved (Num 8:11; Heb. A. V. marg.); when the priests were consecrated, the wave offering was placed in their hands, and consisted of certain parts, not, of a trespass offering, but of their ram of consecration (Lev 8:25-28); when portions of the ordinary peace offerings were consecrated by waving, they were always placed in the hands of the offerer. From all these the waving of the whole ram of the lepers trespass offering essentially differs; nor does it seem possible that it could signify his consecration, unless it were in some way placed in his own hands. More probably, this part of the ritual was simply designed to distinguish the lepers from the ordinary trespass offering; that while it was still to be classed generically with that offering, it was yet specifically distinct from it. A consideration of this fact will remove, partially at least, the difficulty of understanding why a trespass offering should have been required of the cleansed leper. The reason given by Oehler and others, that it was a kind of fine, or satisfaction rendered for the fact, that during the whole period of his sickness, in consequence of his exclusion from the camp, the leper had failed to perform his theocratic duties, is shown by Keil to be entirely untenable, since no such offering was required in parallel cases of persons excluded from the sanctuary when affected with diseased secretions; to this it may be added, that no penalty was required, as in the case of trespass offerings for such offences. Nor is the reason above given by Lange quite satisfactory. The true idea in this offering seems to be that the leper, by his very sickness, had been in the condition of an offender against the theocratic law of purity; yet that this was, in his case, not an actual, but only a quasi trespass, is shown by the omission to require it to be of definite value and by the ritual directing it to be made also into a wave offering. The leper had not merely failed to present his required offerings in consequence of his exclusion from the camp, but he had actually lived in a condition of extremest theocratic uncleanness (far more so than in the case of the secretions), and consequently in symbolic opposition to the Head of the theocracy. He must therefore present a trespass offering; but as all this had been done not only involuntarily, but most unwillingly, the offering was distinguished by being waved. Lev 14:13. For as the sin offering is the priests, so is the trespass offering.This, already known as the general law (Lev 7:7), is here repeated, because otherwise the peculiarity of this trespass offering might seem to make it an exception. It is most holy. See on Lev 2:3.

In regard to the order of the various offerings: here the sin offering (Lev 14:19) precedes the burnt offering according to the general rule; but the trespass offering comes before them both. The reason above given why the trespass offering should have been offered at all, explains also why it should have been offered first. In the case of the reconsecration of the defiled Nazarite (Num 6:11-12), the condition of the offerer was different; he was already in full standing as a member of the theocracy, and offered the sin-offering first, and then the trespass offering. Here the healed leper must present the trespass offering first, as the mark of his restoration to the privileges of the theocratic community, before he offers any other sacrifice.

The restored leper was touched with the blood of the victim (Lev 14:14) in the same way as the priests with the blood of the ram of consecration (Lev 8:23), and doubtless with the same general symbolical meaning. Next comes the use of the oil. It was first employed in a sevenfold sprinkling towards the sanctuary (Lev 14:16), and then touched with the finger of the priest upon all the points which had already been touched with the blood of the victim, which seems to have been a token of forgiveness by the blood, and of healing by the oil. Patrick. With the remnant of the oil in his hand, the priest was to anoint the head of him that is to be cleansed. In all this then there appears with sufficient plainness, a kind of consecration; but it was a consecration, not to any peculiar position or privilege, but simply to his becoming again one of the chosen peoplethe nation who were by their calling a kingdom of priests,from whom he had been temporarily excluded. This is sufficiently shown by the following clause, to make an atonement for him before the LORD. The unction was not as a propitiation for his sin. in the ordinary sense of the wordthat is provided for by the same expression in connection with the sin offering in the following verse (Lev 14:19); but it was to cover over the gulf by which he had been separated, to make an at-one-ment for him who had been alienated and separated by his leprosy. Then follows the sin offering with its proper atonement. There need be no question here of the propriety of the sin offering; it was always in place for sinful man, but especially for one who had been so long debarred from bringing it to the altar. Lastly, came also (Lev 14:20) the burnt offering with its atonement. With the last was offered a three-fold oblation; for although the oblation might not be offered with the trespass and sin offering, yet in this case these were so peculiar in their use that they were able each to pass on an additional oblation, as it were, to the burnt offering.

Lev 14:21-31. The alternative offering of the poor leper. In this case all things proceed as before with the same offerings and the same ritual, except that for the sin and burnt offerings, turtle doves or young pigeons are allowed, and the oblation is reduced to the normal oblation for the burnt offering (Num 15:4) of one tenth deal of fine flour mingled with oil.

It will be seen that the restoration of the healed leper thus consisted of several stages. First, he was examined by the priest, and satisfactory evidence being found that the disease was cured, he was then purified without the camp by a solemn and significant ceremonial, which yet was not a sacrifice. After this he was admitted to the camp, but must still remain a week without entering either his own tent or the sanctuary. At the end of this time he offered a singularly full and solemn sacrifice, consisting of a modified trespass offering, together with a sin and burnt offering. He was touched with the blood of his offering and anointed with oil. Each stage of his restoration was marked by lustrations. Thus at last was he once more restored to full communion with God and full fellowship with the covenant people.

D. Leprosy in a house. Lev 14:33-53.

The communication on this subject is again addressed to Moses and Aaron conjointly, since here again the exercise of the priestly functions of examination and determination is called into play (Lev 14:33), and it all looks forward distinctly to the future, when ye be come into the land of Canaan(Lev 14:34), for in the wilderness, of course, they had no houses. The wholly prospective character of this part of the law explains why it is placed last of all.

This regulation is plainly concerning keeping the houses clean,the sanitary police as regards the houses;just as the Jewish poor-law (see Winer, Art. Arme etc.) is a striking proof of the humanity of the Mosaic legislation. One may well say:the tender care for the superintendence of health and of the poor, which here appears in Israel in typical and legal form, still in the Christian commonwealth comes far short of the true spiritual realization. Trouble of dwellings and poor troubles, bad dwellings and faulty superintendence of the poor, are a chapter which our time has first taken into the circle of its activity. Lange. That the leprous houses were unhealthy, does not yet seem established on sufficient proof; so far as this law is concerned, it may be that the legislation rests entirely on other grounds. At the same time, the view of Lange may be true.

Lev 14:34. I put the spot of leprosy in a house.Thus also these evil conditions in houses are decrees of Jehovah. As the house is the enlarged human family, so the decree upon the house is an enlargement of the decree upon man. Lange. Jehovah here speaks as the Lord of all created things, determining their decay and destruction, as well as their production; comp. Isa 45:7. Clark. Abundant quotations from Jewish authorities are cited by Patrick, showing that they looked upon this infliction (from which, however, they considered Jerusalem to be exempted) as a special and direct divine judgment. Certainly, as Keil notes in opposition to Knobel, the expression here excludes the idea that the leprosy was communicated to houses by infection from man; and this becomes still more certain from the fact that the people who had been in the house are regarded as clean.

When notice had been sent to the priest (Lev 14:35) of a suspicious appearance in the house, he was first to order it to be cleared (Lev 14:36), lest everything in it should become unclean. Consequently, as what was in the house became unclean only when the priest had declared the house affected with leprosy, the reason for the defilement is not to be sought for in physical infection, but must have been of an ideal or symbolical kind. Keil. The rules guiding the priestly examination, and the course to be pursued in consequence of his decision (Lev 14:37-47), are as nearly as possible like those given in the case of cloth and of skin. First: If on the preliminary examination there seemed to be good ground for suspicion, the house was to be shut up for a week (Lev 14:38); it was then re-examined, and if the grounds of suspicion were confirmed by the spread of the trouble, the affected stones were to be taken out, the inside of the house scraped, and the stones and dirt to be carried without the city unto an unclean place. Then other stones were to be put in their place, and the house plastered with other mortar, (Lev 14:42). This ended the matter, if no fresh ground of suspicion arose. But if the trouble reappeared, the priest must examine the house once more, and if he found that the leprosy had broken out afresh, he must command the entire demolition of the house, and the carrying forth of its material to an unclean place (Lev 14:45). Any one entering the house while shut up became unclean till evening; and if he ate or slept in the house, he must also wash his clothes (Lev 14:46-47). From what has been said before, it is clear that the ground of this provision was not any supposed danger of infection, but to prevent the contraction of symbolical uncleanness.

Lev 14:48-53. The ceremony of purification. In case the leprosy did not spread in the house after the means used for its cure, the priest was to pronounce it clean, and then to perform purificatory rites exactly like those used for the leper without the camp. In reference to the views expressed there, Lange says, here One may indeed ask whether the allegorizing there spoken of would also be proper here. The contrast between the living bird, which flies free, and the dead bird, seems here to illustrate the contrast between the healthy sojourn under Gods free heaven, and the harmful sojourn in musty, diseased houses. But the fact is also here well worthy of note, that there is not the least mention made of any atoning worship. In ver 53 it is said that the priest shall make an atonement for the house. This is often spoken of as figurative; but in fact it is better to take it quite literally. According to the primary meaning of the Hebrew word he shall cover, i.e., he shall, by this ceremony, put out of sight the uncleanness of the house; or in its derived and customary sense, he shall make an at-one-ment, i.e., he shall restore the house from its tainted character, shut up and forbidden to be used, to its proper relations and purposes. On leprosy in garments and houses, see preliminary note.

E. Conclusion. Lev 14:54-57.

These verses simply form the conclusion of the whole law of leprosy contained in chapters 13 and 14. Although these chapters are made up of no less than three separate divine communications (Lev 13:1; Lev 14:1; Lev 14:33), yet they constitute altogether but one closely connected series of laws. The summary is in the usual form; but in Lev 14:56 the names of the symptoms of various forms of leprosy are repeated from Lev 13:2.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

I. On leprosy in clothes: The alternative, according to which the Levitical regulations are to have either a religious typical meaning alone, or a dietetic sanitary purpose alone, is here shown with especial clearness to be incorrect. The typical point, indeed, is not to be mistaken: even the attire of men was not to be infected with plague spots of sinful corruption. But not less prominently, the point of the moral duty of cleanliness is brought forward upon a religious basis. Lange. Exeg.
II. On leprosy in man: We must distinguish between the horror of death of the Grecian spirit, and the theocratic antipathy against the signs of death in life, and the remains of the living in the corpse. The act of dying was ethical for the Hebrews in a bad, or in a good sense. Even the Old Testament knows an ethical Euthanasia opposed to the death of despair. But in a sphere where all is founded upon immortal life, a being for life and not for death, all signs of decay must be put aside. Lange, Exeg.
III. The peculiar defilement of leprosy, leading to exclusion from the camp, or in other words, to excommunication from the ancient church, evidently has its foundation in the peculiar character of the disease. It was especially associated with death, usually ultimately resulting in death, and being in its later stages, a sort of living deatha death already begun in the membersand presenting a fearful image of death. But death was the sentence upon sin, and hence leprosy and its treatment have always been understood as symbolizing sin and its treatment, both by Jewish and Christian commentators.
IV. The examination and determination of leprosy was intrusted to the priests, not on account of their being supposed to possess superior medical knowledge, but only in view of its theocratic relations. Any other treatment of the leper might properly be undertaken by physicians when any were to be had; but the exclusion of the leper from, or his restoration to the commonwealth of Israel, the communion of the church of God, was properly a priestly act. It is to this alone that the law applies. This was indeed, in strictness the province of God Himself; but as He committed the administration of His church in general to human hands, so also particularly in this matter. The sentence of the priests was final, and admitted of no appeal; the authority had been Divinely committed to them, and although they might perhaps sometimes decide wrongly, there was no other redress than a further examination when there seemed to be occasion for it, by the same authority. Thus was the priestly authority to bind and loose in the ancient church confirmed in heaven. Of course their decrees of exclusion from the earthly church did not determine anything concerning the lepers salvation.
V. By the extension of the term leprosy to garments and houses, and the similar treatment of them when thus affected, it seems to be taught that there is not merely an analogy, but a certain sympathy between man and the inanimate things by which he is surrounded. (Comp. Rom 8:22). They are to be associated in his mind with his own state and condition, and are to be so treated as to bring home to him in a lively way the things that concern himself. The Rabbins consider the trouble in houses as confined to the land of Canaan, and Divinely sent as a warning to the people against their sinfulness. If this warning were unheeded, then the leprosy passed to their clothes, and finally to their persons. However this may be, it is noticeable that the leprosy here treated is only, as suggested by Lange, in the various habitations of the human spirit; in the body, which is indeed an actual part of the man himself, but which is often looked upon and spoken of as the tabernacle of the soul; in the clothing, which was a still more outer covering; and finally in the house, the outermost dwelling. Not a word is ever spoken of leprosy in animals.

VI. In the ceremonial for the purification of leprosy, so much more full than for any other defilement, it is seen how the purificatory rites rise in importance as the uncleanness becomes a more striking symbol of the impurity of sin. This symbolism reached its climax in the leper, and in his purification; but yet it was only symbolism; for as the defilement of sin lies deeper, so must the sacrifice for its removal be higher.
VII. Calvin observes that the final cleansing of the leper was appointed for the eighth day after his entrance into the camp. As his circumcision, or first admission into the church of God was on the eighth day after his birth into the world; so now he was, on the corresponding day, to be born again into the church after his exclusion. Another parallel, too, may be here carried out between first entering into communion with God, and being restored to it by repentance after having been alienated by sin.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The priestly people of God have always a war to wage with the defilements of the natural life. Especially is the uncleanness of leprosy, and in it of all diseases, to be combated; so also all the Unhealthy conditions of houses and clothes are an object of the priestly battle, of the wrestling after an ideal moulding of all the conditions of life. How much these costly types still lack of their complete fulfillment in the Christian community has already been pointed out. Lange.

Leprosy defiled all who came in contact with it; a lively image of the contaminating effect of sin. See 1Co 15:33. Yet it did not defile the priests, who were to make a close and careful inspection of it, because this was their commanded duty; so neither does sin contaminate those who, in the fear of God and as duty to Him, strive to the utmost to recover and save the sinner.

As the priest for the purification of the leper went without the camp, and there stayed and held converse with the leper for his cleansing, so Christ left His dwelling-place in heaven and came among sinners that He might purify them from their sin. Hesychius. It is remarkable how well even the Jewish teachers themselves understood the symbolical meaning of this regulation [concerning the exclusion of the leper from the camp]; for thus speaks one of them on this place: If a man considers this, he will be humbled and ashamed on account of his sin; since every sin is a leprosy, a spot upon his soul. And, as it is written of the leper, his clothes shall be rent, etc.; in like manner, the defilement on his soul, which is far removed from the holiness on high, shall equally separate him from the camp of Israel. And if a man turns to repentance in order to be cleansed from his spots, behold he is clean from his leprosy, but otherwise the leprosy remains clinging to his soul; and in this world, and in the world to come, he is far removed from the whole camp there above until he has become cleansed. The law instructs how to know leprosy, pronounces the leper unclean, shuts him out from the congregation, but it has not power to heal him; this was reserved for the Son of God, to cleanse bodily in figure, and spiritually also, as the true Redeemer from sin and its consequences. Von Gerlach.

Ceremonial uncleanness involves ceremonial guilt, and demands an atonement. So moral impurity involves moral guilt, which requires a propitiation. The uncleanness and the guilt mutually imply each other; yet they are totally distinct, and must be removed by totally different means. The Spirit of God by the truth of Revelation removes moral impurity; the Mediator, by His undertaking for the guilty, relieves him from the consequences of his guilt.. The symbols of purification and propitiation come together in the ceremonial connected with the lepers re-entrance into communion with God. The water and the blood meet in the initial sacrifice; the oil and the blood are associated in the final one. Murphy.
As the cicatrices left by ulcers and burns were points where leprosy was peculiarly likely to be developed, so Origen, following the allegorical interpretation, notes that the wounds upon the soul, though healed, are peculiarly liable to become the occasion for the development of sin. The integrity of purity once lost, there is a dangerous spot in the heart which needs the care of the great Physician of souls.
The Christian Fathers generally give a spiritual interpretation of the two birds used in the purification of the leper or the leprous house. Thus Theodoret (Qu. 19): They contain a type of the Passion of salvation. For as the one bird was slain and the other, dipped in its blood, was set free; so our Lord was crucified for leprous humanity, the flesh indeed receiving death, but the Divinity appropriating to itself the suffering of the humanity. This thought is quite common in the Fathers. The two birds typify the two natures of Christ, and the purification of the sinner is accomplished only by their union in Him.
The Fathers also consider the leprous house symbolical of Israel. (See e.g. Theodoret. Qu. 18): Israel was examined and purified, and the evil stones of its building removed by the many judgments upon the nation, and especially by the carrying away without the camp to Babylon. But at last when its incurable sin broke out afresh in the crucifixion of the Lord of life, the whole house was pulled down and its stones cast out into an unclean place.

Blood and water are constantly joined together in the purifications of the law, as in this of leprosy, so in all other cases. Whatever may be the underlying truth on which this symbolism rests, the symbolism itself culminates in the reality of the purification for sin accomplished by Christ upon the cross, out of whose side flowed the blood and the water for the cleansing of the world. See Joh 19:34; 1Jn 5:6; 1Jn 5:8.

Footnotes:

[1]Lev 14:2. , a word of very frequent occurrence in these two chapters where it is uniformly translated in the A. V. (except Lev 13:42-43, sore) plague, as it is also in Gen 12:17; Exo 11:1; Deu 24:8 (in reference also to leprosy); 1Ki 8:37-38; Psa 91:10. Elsewhere the renderings of the A. V. are very various: sore, stroke, stripe, wound. By far the most common rendering in the LXX. is =tactus, ictus. The idea of the word is a stroke or blow, and then the effect of this in a wound or spot. Clark therefore would translate here stroke, which meets well enough the meaning of the word itself, but does not in all cases convey the sense in English. It is perhaps impossible to find one word in English which can be used in all cases; but that which seems best adapted to Leviticus is the one given by Horsley and Lee, and adopted here: spot. So Keil, Wilson and others. There is no article in the Heb.

[2] Chap. 14. Lev 14:4. The Sam., LXX. and Syr. here read the verb in the plural, expressing the fulfillment of the command.

[3]Lev 14:4. The margin of the A. V. reads sparrows, for which there seems to be no other authority than the Vulg. The Heb. does not define the kind of bird at all.

[4]Lev 14:5. Better, living water, which is the exact rendering of the Heb. Ordinarily living water is a figure for running water; but here the water is contained in a vessel, and had therefore simply been filled from a spring or running stream.

[5]Lev 14:6. . The conjunction which seems to be needed at the beginning of this verse is supplied in the Sam. and 6 MSS. There is nothing in Heb. answering to the as for of the A. V.

[6]Lev 14:8. is applied only to the washing of the surface of objects which water will not penetrate. Comp. Lev 1:9; Lev 1:13; Lev 9:14, etc. It is a different word from of the previous clause, which is used of a more thorough washing or fulling. The English is unable in all cases to preserve the distinction; but it should be done as far as possible, and is frequently translated bathe in the following chapter (Lev 15:5-8; Lev 15:10-11; Lev 15:13; Lev 15:18; Lev 15:21-22; Lev 15:27) and elsewhere.

[7]Lev 14:10. . See Textual Note5 on Lev 3:7. The age is not exactly specified in the Heb.; but the Sam. and LXX. add of the first year, as in the following clause.

[8]Lev 14:10. See Textual Note2 on Lev 2:1.

[9]Lev 14:12. The Sam. and LXX. have the plural. Probably the sing, of the Heb. is not intended to have the priest for its nominative, but to be impersonal.

[10]Lev 14:13. One MS., the Sam., LXX. and Vulg. supply the particle of comparison, .

[11]Lev 14:17. Two MSS., the LXX. and Vulg. here read, as the Heb. in Lev 14:28, upon the place of the blood.

[12]Lev 14:18. For three MSS. and the Syr. read , as in Lev 14:16. On this use of , however, see Fuerst, Lex. , 3, b. . Gesen. Lex. A. 2.

[13]Lev 14:18. is better translated put, both as more agreeable to the meaning of the word itself, and because the oil remaining in the left hand could hardly suffice for pouring.

[14]Lev 14:20. The Sam. and LXX. add before the Lord.

[15]Lev 14:23. The preposition is here so liable to be misunderstood that it is better to change it. It has reference to the eighth day appointed for his cleansing (as the Vulg.), not to the sacrifices for his cleansing (as the LXX.). So Geddes and Boothroyd. In Lev 14:10 the difficulty does not occur.

[16]Lev 14:26. , an expression understood by Houbigant to mean that one priest should pour into the hand of another; the sense given in the A. V. following the Vulg. is, however, doubtless correct.

[17]Lev 14:29. The Sam. here reverses its change of reading in Lev 14:18, and has for .

[18]Lev 14:36. , a word . ., but its meaning sufficiently well ascertained. The A. V. follows the LXX., Chald. and Vulg., and the same sense is given by Rosenm., Fuerst and Gesen, though by each with a different etymology.

[19]Lev 14:37. See Notes13 on Lev 13:19; Lev 13:24 on Lev 14:49.

[20]Lev 14:41. All the ancient versions except the Vulg. change the causative form of the verb to the plural, as the following verb is plural. Also in Lev 14:42-43; Lev 14:45; Lev 14:49, they have the plural.

[21]Lev 14:47. The LXX. here adds, what is of course implied, and be unclean until the even.

[22]Lev 14:51. The LXX. has dip them in the blood of the bird that has been killed over the living water, and this is doubtless the sense of the text.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

THIRD SECTION
Laws Concerning Leprosy

Chaps. 13, 14

______________
PRELIMINARY NOTE

The disease of leprosy has happily become so rare in modern times in the better known parts of the world that much obscurity rests upon its pathology. The attempt will only be made here to point out those matters which may be considered as fixed by common consent, but which will be found sufficient for the illustration of the more important points in the following chapters.
In the first place, then, it appears indisputable that leprosy is a broad name covering several varieties of disease more or less related to one another. These are separable into two main classes, one covering the different, forms of Elephantiasis (tuberculated and ansthetic); the other, the Lepra vulgaris. Psoriasis, Syphilis, etc. It is the former class alone with which Leviticus has to do as a disease. At the present time the tuberculated variety is said to be the more common in those countries in which leprosy still exists to any considerable extent, while the ansthetic was probably more prevalent in the time of Moses. The latter is described by Celsus under the name of , and Keil maintains that the laws of Moses in regard to leprosy in man relate exclusively to this. Clark, however, has shown that the two in a great number of cases work together, and as it did in the days of Moses, the disease appears occasionally in an ambiguous form. Wilson has recorded a number of cases in detail, showing the interchange of the two forms in the same patient. The symptoms of the disease intended by Moses sufficiently appear in the text itself, and if these symptoms cover what would now appear in medical nomenclature as different diseases, then all those diseases, classified under the general name of leprosy were intended to be included in the Levitical legislation.

Nothing whatever is said in the law either of the origin, the contagiousness, or the cure of the disease. In modern experience it seems to have been sufficiently proved that it is hereditary, but only to the extent of three or four generations, when it gradually disappears; neither is it in all cases hereditary, the children of lepers being sometimes entirely unaffected by leprosy, and on the other hand the disease often appearing without any hereditary taint. In its first appearance it is now often marked only by some slight spot upon the skin, giving no pain or other inconvenience, but obstinately resisting all efforts at removal, and slowly but irresistibly spreading. Sometimes months, sometimes years, even to the extent of twenty or thirty years, intervene between the first appearance of the spots and their development. It is not improbable that in the course of many centuries a considerable modification in the rapidity of its progress may have taken place in a disease which is found gradually to die out by hereditary transmission. The question of its contagiousness is still much mooted among the medical faculty. The better opinion seems to be that it is not immediately contagious, but is propagated by prolonged and intimate intercourse in the case of susceptible persons. At least it is certain that in all known instances of the prevalence of the disease one of the most important of the means of control has been the segregation of the lepers, and where this precaution has been neglected, the disease has continued to prevail. After the leprosy has once acquired a certain degree of development, there is no known means of cure. Everything hitherto attempted has been found to rather aggravate than mitigate the disorder. It is asserted that it yields to medical treatment in its earliest stages when the spots first appear, and a number of distinct cases of cure are recorded; but the doubt will always remain whether the disease which yields is really leprosy, or whether something else has not been confounded with an undeveloped stage of the true disease. However this may be, it is certain that after it has once become developed to any considerable extent it is incurable by any remedies at present known, although spontaneous cures do sometimes occur. The reliance for its control is more upon diet, cleanliness, and general regimen, than upon specific antidotes.
Medical observations upon the disease in modern times have been made in the island of Guadaloupe, where it broke out about the middle of the last century, and was very carefully investigated by M. Peyssonel, a physician sent out by the French government for the purpose. An account of the result, of his examination, as well as of other investigations of English, French, and German physicians in other islands of the West Indies whither it had been imported from Africa, and in other parts of the world is given by Michaelis (Laws of Moses, Art. 208, 210). Also of especial importance is a Report on the leprosy in Norway by Dr. Danielssen, chief physician of the leper hospital at Bergen, and Prof. Boeck (Paris, 1848). The subject of late years has considerably interested physicians, and the London College of physicians have published a report upon it, based upon a series of questions addressed to nearly all parts of the world where the disease now prevails. Many other authorities are cited by Clark in his preliminary note to these chapters. A particularly valuable discussion of the disease may be found in Wilson, Diseases of the skin, ch. xiii. (5th Am. Ed., pp. 300314 and 333381). The disease appears to have been more or less common in Western Europe from the eighth century down, but received a great extension at the time of the crusades. At one time a partial enumeration by Dugdale mentions eighty-five leper houses in England alone, six of which were in London, and it continued to linger in Scotland until the middle of the last century. It still exists to a considerable extent in Iceland and Norway, and in all the countries bordering the Eastern shores of the Mediterranean, especially Syria and Egypt, where it has found a home in all ages, in some parts of Africa, Arabia, and India.

The characteristics of the disease are the exceedingly slight symptoms at its first appearance; its insidious, and usually very slow progress, the horribly repulsive features of its later stages when the face becomes shockingly disfigured, and often the separate joints of the body become mortified and drop off one by one; and its usually sudden and unexpected termination at the last, when the leprosy reaches some vital organ, and gives rise to secondary disease, often dysentery, by which life is ended. Meanwhile, during the earlier stages, generally very prolonged, there is no suffering, and the ordinary enjoyments of life are uninterrupted.
Leprosy, with these characteristics, especially its hidden origin, and its insidious and resistless progress, has always seemed a mysterious disease, and among the heathen as well as among the Jews, has been looked upon as an infliction especially coming from God. In fact in Hebrew history it was so often employed in Divine judgments, as in the case of Miriam, of Gehazi, and of Uzziah, and was also so often healed by miraculous interposition, as in the case of Miriam also, and of Naaman, as to give some reason for this belief; while the peculiar treatment it received in the law tended still further to place leprosy in a position of alienation from the theocratic state, and actually included the leper in that uncleanness which was utterly excluded from approach to the sanctuary. The disease thus became a vivid symbolism of sin, and of the opposition in which this stands to the holiness of God; while at the same time its revolting aspect in its later stages made it such an image, and indeed a beginning, of death itself that it is often most appropriately described by Jewish as well as other writers as a living death. Much of the association with death and the body in the corruption of death, thus attached to leprosy and the corruption at work in leprosy. It is not necessary here to speak of the prevailing Hebrew notion that all suffering was the consequence of individual sin, and was proportioned in severity to the degree of that sin; for however deeply seated such ideas may have been in the minds of many of the Israelites, and however much they may have increased the popular dread and abhorrence of leprosy, they find no shadow of encouragement whatever in the law.
In regard to what is called leprosy in houses, in textile fabrics, and in leather, it is not necessary to suppose that the name is intended to convey the idea of an organic disease in these inanimate things. The law will still be sufficiently clear if we look upon the name as merely applied in these cases to express a kind of disintegration or corruption, such as could be most readily and popularly described, from certain similarities in appearance, by the figurative use of the word. In the same way the terms out of joint, sick, and others have come among ourselves to be popularly used of inanimate things, and such words as blistered, bald, and rotten, have a technical figurative sense almost more common than their original literal one. These modes of disintegration have been often investigated with great learning and labor; but it is not surprising that at this distance of time, and after such profound changes in the arts and the habits of men, the result of all such investigations should remain somewhat unsatisfactory. Just enough has been ascertained to show that inanimate things, of the classes here described, are subject to processes of decay which might be aptly described by the word leprosy; but precisely what the processes were to which the Levitical law had reference it is probably impossible now to ascertain definitely. The most satisfactory treatment of the subject from this point of view is to be found in Michaelis (ubi supra, Art. 211). He instances in regard to houses, the formation of saltpetre or other nitrous salts upon the walls to such an extent in some parts of Germany as to become an article of commercial importance, and to be periodically scraped off for the market. By others the existence of iron pyrites in the dolomitic limestone used for building in Palestine has been suggested as leading in its decomposition to precisely the appearances described in the lawhollow streaks of the green ferrous sulphate and the red of ferric sulphateupon the walls of the houses affected; but proof is wanting of the existence in that stone of pyrites in sufficient abundance to produce the effects contemplated in the law. Both these explanations, however, are suggestive of methods of disintegration which might have occurred, but for the determination of which we have not sufficient data. It is the same with the explanation of Michaelis in regard to woolen fabrics,that the wool itself is affected by diseases of the sheep upon which it has grown. The fact itself does not seem sufficiently well authenticated; nor if it were, would it be applicable to garments of linen. Nevertheless, this is suggestive of defects in the materials,which were in all cases of organic productionarising either from diseased growth, or from unskilfulness in the art of their preparation, which would after a time manifest themselves in the product, much in the same way as old books now sometimes become spotted over with a leprosy arising from an insufficient removal of the chemicals employed in the preparation of the paper pulp.

But whatever the nature and origin of this sort of leprosy, it is plainly regarded in the Levitical law as is no sense contagious, or in any way calculated to produce directly injurious effects upon man. It is provided for in the law, it would appear, partly on the general ground of the inculcation of cleanliness, and partly from association with the human disease to which it bore an external resemblance, and to which the utmost repugnance was to be encouraged. Even the likeness and suggestion of leprosy was to be held unclean in the homes of Israel.
No mention has thus far been made of a theory of this disease adopted by many physicians, and which, if established, might really assimilate the leprosy in houses and garments and skins to that in the human body, and explain the origin of all alike by the same cause. According to this theory, the disease is occasioned by vegetable spores, which find a suitable nidus for their development either in the human skin or in the other substances mentioned. If this theory should be accepted, the origin and effects of the disintegrating agencies would be the same in all cases. The late eminent physician, Dr. J. K. Mitchell, in his work upon the origin of malarious and epidemic fevers (Five Essays, p. 94), after quoting the law in relation to leprosy, says: There is here described a disease whose cause must have been of organic growth, capable of living in the human being, and of creating there a foul and painful disease of contagious character, while it could also live and reproduce itself in garments of wool, linen, or skin; nay more, it could attach itself to the walls of a house, and there also effect its own reproduction. Animalcules, always capable of choice, would scarcely be found so transferable; and we are therefore justified in supposing that green or red fungi so often seen in epidemic periods, were the protean disease of man, and his garment, and his house. He further quotes from Hecker statements corroboratory of his views in regard to the plagues of 786 and 959. This theory, however, has not here been urged, partly because it yet needs further proof, partly because no theory at all is necessary to account for the Levitical legislation in view of the facts presented in the law.

For the literature of the subject, besides the reference above given, see the art. by Hayman, Leper, Leprosy, in Smiths Bibl. Dict., and the Preliminary note on these chapters in Clarks Com. on Lev., together with the appended notes to the same.

At the opening of his Exegetical Lange has the following, which may be appropriately placed here: First of all, it must be made prominent that the leprosy, under the point of view taken, and the sentence of uncleanness, is placed as a companion to the uncleanness of birth, as the representative of all ways of death, of all sicknesses. It is unclean first in itself, as a death element in the stream of lifein the bloodeven as the source of life appears disturbed in the relations of birth; but still more it is unclean as a sickness spreading by transmission and contagion.
Hence it appears also as a polluting element of physical corruption, not only in men, but also through the analogy of an evil diffusing itself, in human garments and dwellings. The analogous evils of these were, on this account, called leprosy.
In this extension over man and his whole sphere it is, in its characteristics, a speaking picture of sin and of evil the punishment of sin; it is, so to speak, the plastic manifestation, the medical phantom or representation of all the misery of sin.
Accordingly the leprosy, and the contact with it, is the specific uncleanness which excluded the bearer of it from the theocratic community, so that he, as the typically excommunicated person, must dwell without the camp.
Nothing is here said of the application of human means of healing in reference to this evil. The leper was left with his sickness to the mercy of God and to the wonderfully deep antithesis of recovery and death; the more so, since leprosy in a peculiar sense is a chronic crisis, a progressive disease, continually secreting matter, whether for life or for death. Mention is made of external counteraction only in regard to leprosy in garments and houses. Hence, from its nature, it is altogether placed under the supervision of the priest. The priest knew the characteristics of the leprosy, and the course of its crises; he had accordingly to decide upon the exclusion and upon the restoration of the sick, and to express the latter by the performance of the sacrifice of purification brought for this purpose by the convalescent.
Thus in conformity to the spirit of Oriental antiquity, the priest here appears as the physician also for bodily sicknesses, as a watchman over the public health. But for the cosmic evils he was still less a match than for those of the body; against such the prophet must reveal miraculous helps, e.g., against the bitterness of the water, and against the bite of the fiery serpents.

The great contrast between the Old and the New Testaments is made prominent in the fact, that in the Old Testament the touch of the leper made unclean,apparently even leprous;while Christ by His touch of the lepers cleansed them from their leprosy. But it continued to be left to the priest, as the representative of the old covenant, to pronounce the fact. See Comm. S. Matt., p. 150.
The name Leprosy, is derived from to strike down, to strike to the ground; the leprosy is the stroke of God. Gesenius distinguishes the leprosy in men, the leprosy in houses (probably the injury done by saltpetre), and the leprosy in garments (mould, mildew). On this chronic form of sickness, fully equal to the acute form of the plague, comp the article Leprosy (Aussatz) in the dictionaries, especially in Herzogs Real-encyclopdie, and in Winer. Four principal forms are distinguished, of which three are particularly described by Winer: 1) The white leprosy, Barras, . This prevailed among the Hebrews (2Ki 5:27, etc.) and has hence been called by physicians lepra Mosaica. See the description in Winer, I. p. 114. 2) The Elephantiasis, lepra nodosa, or tuberculosa, tubercular leprosy, Egyptian boil, thus endemic in Egypt. The sickness of Job was commonly considered in antiquity to have been this kind of leprosy. 3) The black leprosy or the dark Barras. Later medical researches (to which the articles in Bertheaus Conversations-lexicon, and Schenkels Bibel-lexicon refer) show the differences between the various kinds as less defined; the contagious character is called in question by Furrer (in Schenkel). In this matter indeed, it is a question whether the rigid isolation of the leprous has not hindered, in a great degree, the examples of contagion. For a catalogue of the literature, see Knobel, p. 469 and beyond.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

As the former chapter pointed out the tokens whereby the disease of leprosy was to be discovered: so this is directed to the rites and ceremonies to be made use of in the cleansing of it. As the cure is wholly from the LORD, nothing is said in relation to the cure, but only the ceremonial part belonging to the priest’s office, after the signs of recovery were perceived. This chapter, towards the end, contains the signs of the discovery of the leprosy in an house; and also some laws relative to the state of leprosy in general.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

It is profitable to observe in the opening of this chapter, that the priest in his office of examining the leper, evidently shadowed out the features of the LORD JESUS. All communion between the congregation and the leprous person was prohibited, when once the disease was clearly ascertained. But the priest was enjoined to go forth to the camp to visit the leper. Now here JESUS was strongly represented. For as the priest was liable to no infection by the visit, when all others would have been in danger: so let the reader recollect that our dear LORD, though taking upon him our sins, was not tainted with the least defilement from them. Heb 7:26 . And doth not this teach us how ministers, who are the servants of JESUS, in imitation of his bright example, are expected to visit the worst of sinners, under their spiritual as well as bodily diseases to minister unto them? Mar 6:13Mar 6:13 ; Jas 5:14 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

The Law of Leprosy

Lev 13 , Lev 14

The thirteenth and fourteenth chapters are occupied with the question of leprosy. With that disease we have now, happily, nothing to do in this country; yet those who care to peruse the note at the end of this discourse will find that England was once ravaged by that terrible disease. It would be pleasant to turn over the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters, and to escape to subjects less revolting; but pleasure is not the law of life. It is here that so many men fritter away their days and altogether mistake the divine purpose of education. Men set up their “taste.” When a man talks about his “taste,” he has no taste to be proud of. Look at this large question in the light of religious history and human progress. What was to be done when leprosy was suspected? “The priest shall look.” Would you hasten away from that great saying? Why that is the key of history. You would escape from the richest thought if you escaped from the fact that God has trained the human race from the religious instinct. Where was the doctor? There was no doctor then; he is a later creation. He came in due course and by pressure of necessity, having regard to the widening expanse of civilisation; but the priest was the doctor, and the priest is the only true doctor in every age. “The priest shall look”? Why not confine himself to his own work? Why not stay within the church and do the priestly rites and ceremonies, and let the leper alone? No work is excluded from the priest. The priest has, indeed, lived downwards and backwards, and given up his heritage and his rights and properties, and has cut down his divine vocation with a ruthless hand; but, rightly interpreted, the minister of God is the doctor of the world, the musician of the world, the father of the fatherless, the leader of the blind, the great schoolmaster, the gentle unwearying shepherd, he is the son of man. He has allowed himself to be snubbed out of nine-tenths of his work; he has permitted himself to be enclosed in a certain way, and to be shut up within certain boundaries and points; but that is his blame his apostasy in the Eden which includes the world and if he has fallen into a little man, it is not because God’s vocation was a limited call. The Church is the true lazar-house; the Church is the great hospital; the Church is the dame-school, presided over by gentlest mother, who collects us all around her, and helps us in the spelling and building up and speaking out of words. But we have allowed the fool to prate over us and to tell ministers to confine themselves to their own work, as if they were artisans or specialists, not having right over all flesh, all history, all poetry, all music, all progress. The doctor is but part of the minister a spark flashed out of the greater fire. The true priest the seer, and interpreter is the foremost man of the age: beyond him is One only, and that is God. In old history the priests were the doctors; in our own history the priests are the leeches. What is the meaning of this? The profound philosophy of it is, that it is from the religious point, or instinct, that all history is developed. We are told that of course in the early ages all learning was with the monks. That does not impair the proposition that has been laid down; that circumstance rather increases the evidence of the truthfulness and cogency of that proposition. How did all learning come to be associated with the monk, or religious man? The same philosophy is here. Life is associated with the religious instinct, prying into all things, knocking at every door to have it opened, looking over every water and wondering what shores are lying beyond its waves. If religion has allowed itself to be shut up in some church cellar, religion, in its human relations, must blame itself. It was meant to stand on the mountains, to rule the nations, to lead every holy war, and to settle the tumult of the world into the peace of heaven. The largeness of the religious responsibility continues. The Church is responsible for the ignorance of the world. Do not blame the State a poor little machine, a shed run up in the night-time for protection against the weather. The Church is responsible for every man this day that does not know the name of Christ, the claim of God, the holiness of honour, and the duties of civilisation. The Church is responsible for every child that cannot write its name. But the Church has fallen upon small ideas, little comforts, seventh-day indulgences, half-day hearings, and these marked by extreme reluctance or spoiled by pedantic criticism. The heroic conception the vocation to seize the world, arrest it, fight its enemies, shut up its hell has been misinterpreted or forgotten. Read history, and be just to the religious instinct It is easy to see where civilisation, having entered into elaborate redistribution of offices and positions, may have forgotten its original obligations: it is easy for a man to forget at whose torch he lighted his own; but search back through the days and nights of history, and you will find that the first torch was kindled by the hand of God. We soon become forgetful; it is easy to drop into the spirit of ingratitude. We may look at the sky until its very blue becomes commonplace.

All this care, outlined with so complete an elaboration, was not meant for the sake of the individual alone, it contemplated the protection of the whole body of the people. Why this anxiety about a man who shows signs of the plague? For his own sake, certainly; but largely for the sake of the uncontaminated host. The man was to be put outside the camp or to be shut up in a dwelling of his own: for a period he was to be cut off from his people and made to live a solitary life. Did the priest order this punishment with the view of afflicting the poor sufferer himself? Unquestionably not; the priest had no wish to add solitude to pain, exile to defilement. The priest represented the spirit of compassion soft, tender, healing pity; but it was the large pity that not only looked at the sufferer himself, but regarded the unnumbered hosts who might be affected by the defilement of the leper, were the leper permitted to sustain his customary relations. “No man liveth to himself.” The camp was afraid of contagion. Save the untouched by expelling the defiled. Look at the precautions taken by ourselves in case of disease: how we publish the names of affected neighbourhoods; how we protest against the erection of buildings appropriated to endeavours to cure certain malignant and infectious diseases; how we blanch under the intelligence that cholera or small-pox has threatened an invasion of the country. What anxiety! What endeavours to prevent the ravages of the disease! All this is right; but it throws into tremendous and appalling contrast our carelessness about the contagion that poisons the soul. There is a moral contamination; there is a mental defilement. “Evil communications corrupt good manners.” “My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.” We do not know what evil we are working by the subtle influence of contagion. It is not needful for the infected man to go and deliberately touch the unaffected man, as if by an act of violence: we spoil the air. We drop a word and think no more about it; but that word is working for evil in the soul of the youth who heard it; we indulge a jest which hides impurity, and the impurity works when the jest is forgotten; we throw out a suspicion, and pass away as if we had done no wrong, better fill the air with poison and kill a thousand men a day than unsettle the soul’s faith, trouble the moral confidence, risk the eternal destiny of men. Why are we not consistent with our own logic? Why do we not complete our own view of cleanness? Any man who can content himself with external purity is not a pure man; he is a trickster, a mechanician, a man who attends to externals. Only he is clean in the flesh who is clean in the spirit. You cannot wash a man with an unclean spirit to any effect, even in the flesh; the evil oozes through the burnished skin; the iniquity comes through every pore. What we should look after is moral consistency. We are anxious to shut out a disease that would kill the body, and yet open all the doors and all the windows and let in the diseases which infect and poison and damn the soul. Out of thine own mouth will I condemn thee!

It is interesting and instructive to note that the pure man can alone deal effectively and harmlessly with corrupt and pestilent subjects. This lesson can never be taught to some minds. The priest represented purity; we have seen what pains have been taken to purify him, to sanctify him, and consecrate him; we have been present in all the process, and now the priest ideally represents purity, divine holiness. 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. Send the holy to the unholy; send the Christ of God to the sinners of the earth: he has “gone to be guest with a man that is a sinner.” Religious men should take up all bad questions; but they will not. The mischief is that such men should take upon themselves the responsibility of representing the kingdom of God. Why are not they infidels, if we must have infidels upon the earth for a time? I should turn all the imperfect and misinterpreting professors of Christianity into infidels, for such they are, and they are such of the very worst type. The Church is burdened with men who do not understand the genius of the kingdom of heaven. When our holiest women are found in our unholiest places, know ye that the kingdom of heaven is at hand: the day is dawning; the sweetest wife we have is away seeking the piece that is lost. But she will be defiled? Never! She will be exposed to danger? No! Not when the theologues have balanced their wordy battles and foolish misunderstandings, but when the holy lives are sitting down with lives unholy, will the orient whiten and the day dawn, and Christ “see of the travail of his soul.” It is no sign of piety to turn away from revolting subjects and to say, We cannot enter into this because our taste is offended, and our feelings are shocked. Whoever says so is a knave in the Church; he has no right to sit down where Christ sits; he is worse than Iscariot; he is a traitor for whom no death has been devised sufficiently awful. These people abound on every hand; they are the plague of society! Raise a very evil report about a man: make it very bad: spare no charge: enlarge the accusation until it takes in all things revolting, shocking, and instantly nearly all the pious people you have ever known will leave the man because the accusations are so shocking. Accuse him of some trifling violation of etiquette, or propriety, and twenty men may be willing to share his fate, or abate the force of the social blow that is aimed at him; but make the accusation bad enough: especially introduce into it elements of obscenity, and you will hear so-called Christian people say that they have no wish to enter into subjects of that kind. The very people who ought to say “What are they? when did they occur? let the witnesses stand up” will speak of their taste and their sensitiveness, and the delicacy of their bringing-up, and will abandon the man. Those people are the infidels. Do not believe I speak to inquirers as to the extent of the divine temple and the meaning of the divine kingdom do not believe that wordy opponents are the infidels; those are the infidels who profess to know Christ, and yet know nothing of the infinite pity, valour, nobleness, and deity of his spirit. Let the priest look on the man accused. The priest must never be afraid. The priest must enter the house where small-pox is, or leprosy, or cholera; let others cry fear if they will the priest resigns his priesthood when he resigns his courage. Christ was holy, harmless, un-defiled; yet he was the Guest of sinners, he received sinners, he ate and drank with sinners, he spake to sinners as never man spake; to the lost woman he said, Sister, begin again.

Men turn away from the perusal of such chapters, and look complacently upon moral leprosy. Men who would walk a mile to avoid an infected house, will read the very last book that the devil has published, and allow the devil to cut the pages for them; men who are so dainty that they could on no account pass by certain hospitals, have in their libraries books that poison the soul; men who would be alarmed if they knew that their children were exposed to companionship with children who have the whooping-cough, will tell lies by the hour; pitiable men! shameful men! Men who would not allow any child of theirs to look upon a drunken man, will allow their children to hear themselves speaking evil of their neighbour all day long. What inconsistency! what irony! But this is the difficulty of Christ: that whatever is objective, tangible, and fleshly, has, by reason of its substance, an advantage over the moral, spiritual, invisible, and immortal. The conduct of men is not always against God only, it is against inward honour, conscience, moral right, spiritual sensitiveness; the atheism is not a speculation which challenges the heavens, it is a practice which embitters the fountains of life.

Read the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters of Leviticus through without stopping, then read Jesus Christ’s cure of leprosy, and compare the two. The leper said: “Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean…. I will” and the man was cleansed. “Jesus, Master, have mercy on us”; and Jesus said, “Go show yourselves unto the priests”; and as they went the burden fell off, and they stood up in the purity and suppleness of renewed youth; one soul was so filled with gratitude that he went back to bless his Benefactor. You can hardly have a more striking instance of the difference between the ancient ritual and the Christian dispensation than by reading the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters of Leviticus, and then reading in immediate connection the history of the cure of leprosy by Jesus Christ. We are all afflicted with leprosy; the disease is within. Jesus Christ is within our cry: we can now make him hear: let each say with an honest heart, “Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean; create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me,” and we shall escape all this elaborate ritual, all this exclusion, and separation, and purification, and at a word the creative, redeeming word we shall stand up clean men, pure souls. “Lord, I believe, help thou mine unbelief.”

Note

Many imagine leprosy to be some obscure disease alluded to only in the Bible. Leprosy was also a disease of the Middle Ages, more widely spread and more fearful in its results than any other in ancient or modern times. It is probable that the worst form of leprosy in early Jewish history was that now known as elephantiasis. The milder form of Jewish leprosy, called bohak , was neither severe nor contagious.

Leprosy in England and Europe arose gradually after the destruction of the Roman Empire, as fast as barbarism spread with its uncleanliness of personal habits, and its resort to animal food and beer as nearly exclusive articles of daily diet. In all ancient towns it was early found necessary to erect hospitals and retreats and churches for those afflicted with leprosy. We have 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 9,000 hospitals in Europe for leprosy alone. Louis VII. of France left legacies to over 2,000 hospitals for lepers in his country. We have extant a touching account of a knight of vast wealth and influence, named Amiloun, expelled from his castle to be a beggar, almost in sight of his vast possessions and stately home; for the Normans in France virtually outlawed, as well as expelled from their homes all lepers, and, as soon as their influence was established in England, they extended their sanitary measures and benevolent enterprise to lepers.

Hugo, or Eudo Dapifer the steward for William the Conqueror having received from him vast possessions of land in Essex, built or rebuilt, and endowed a St. Mary Magdalen Hospital for lepers in Colchester. The hospital for lepers, dedicated to the same saint, in the city of Exeter, is of unknown antiquity. Bartholomew, bishop of that city and diocese (1161-1184), finding its usefulness limited for want of funds, and the sufferings of lepers unlimited, endowed it with considerable wealth. He gave it for ever five marks of silver yearly the tenth of a certain toll, and the profits arising for ever from the sale of the bark of his wood at Chudleigh. His example stimulated the chapter of St. Peter’s, in the same city, to grant a weekly dole of bread for ever. The good bishop Bartholomew wearied the Pope to give a charter to the hospital, making the endowment an everlasting benefaction, as he viewed the curse of leprosy to be as wide-spreading as humanity, and as lasting as the race of man. But he died before his wishes were gratified. However, Pope Celestine III. granted or confirmed a charter in the year 1192, and the charity exists to this day.

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.” The writ is in our ancient law-books, entitled De Leprose Amovendo, and it is fully stated by Judge Fitz-Herbert in his Natura Brevium. King Edward III., finding that, in spite of the old law, leprous persons were concealed in houses inhabited by other persons, gave commandment to the Lord Mayor and Sheriffs to make proclamation in every ward of the city and its suburbs, “that all leprous persons inhabiting there should avoid within fifteen days next,” etc., etc.

At the city of Bath, a bath, with physicians and attendants, was endowed exclusively for lepers and the endowments are still paid. That the bath was occasionally effiacious, in connection with improved diet, we have sure evidence; for one leper in late days had fixed to the bath a mural tablet to say that “William Berry, of Garthorpe, near Melton Mowbray, in the county of Leicester, was cured of a dry leprosy by the help of God and the bath, 1737,”

Gibson Ward.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

VI

THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN CLEAN AND UNCLEAN

Leviticus 11-15

The scope of Leviticus 11-15.

The minds of commentators, Bible students, and people generally have been very much perplexed to account for this feature of the Levitical law. In other words, that only certain animals must be used for food, and then, uncleanness coming from three other directions, one of which is exceedingly delicate; that, you will have to read about and not have the discussion of it. First, the sexual uncleanness of man or woman; and second, the touching of dead bodies, whether they are clean or unclean; and third, leprosy. And when you have taken those three, you have taken all except what is based on the distinction between the clean and the unclean animals. This applies in two directions, viz.: as to use in sacrifices and more largely as to use in eating. This Levitical distinction between the clean and the unclean and remedies for removing uncleanness have perplexed the minds of more Bible students, perhaps, than any other one thing. And their difficulty is, to account for the principle which determines such legislation, and various opinions have been entertained as to the principle which accounts for this Levitical legislation. I am quite sure that no man could rationally account for the principles that were in the Divine Mind as to these distinctions apart from what the Divine Mind has said. He may attempt philosophically to account for the state which depended only upon the law, but that does not account for the reason or principle underlying it. And there is always a reason for every law. Whether that reason is assigned or not, there is a reason. My own mind is pretty well settled on the subject, though I have tried hard enough to confuse it by reading the literature of various men that have tried to account for it in various ways.

There are certain antecedent facts that are necessary to a settlement of the question, and the first fact is that as God made man before he was a sinner he was a vegetarian. I mean to say that he was permitted to eat only fruits, cereals, and salads and things of that kind. This is the first fact. The second significant fact on the eating question is found in the beginning of Gen 9 . When Noah came out of the ark, this language is used: “And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth.” You see this is an entirely new race commission. The first race commission begins with Adam. Now the race starts anew with an entirely new head. “And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth . . .” Now comes the clause, “Every moving thing that liveth shall be food for you; as the green herb have I given you all.” Now, the reference there, “as I have given you the green herb,” refers to the first law on the subject, the law of Eden. I quote: “And God said, Behold I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for food” (Gen 1:29 ).

Now, that is the original commission about what man must eat, but in this more enlarged commission given to the race through Noah in chapter 9 before there were any Jews, Noah and his family standing for the race, God says, “As I gave you the green herb for food so now I give you every living thing that moveth.” In no discussion that I have ever seen are the facts brought out that I am giving you now. So you see the race is spoken of, Noah being the head of the race; there is no legislation against what you shall eat, either vegetable or animal food, no clean or unclean animals.

Now, the third fact, and I am discussing only the eating now, is that when God gave to Peter the key to the kingdom of heaven that opened the door to the Gentiles, as recorded in Act 10 , he let down a great ark or white sheet from heaven and in that ark were all the animals, whether brutes, that is, beasts, or birds, or creeping things; and he says, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” Peter says “Not so, Lord; I have never been accustomed to eat anything unclean.” And God says, “What I have cleansed call thou not common.” The import of all which is, that whatever legislation was made by Moses with reference to distinction of meats in eating, stops with the Jews; and hence the apostle Paul elaborately argues his liberty to eat anything if it is received with thankfulness. So that it is a fact that in the New Testament the Levitical law as to the distinction between clean and unclean animals is abrogated.

Now, notice the bearing of this fact on the New Testament, i.e., the principle that led to the legislation. When you come to the New Testament times and the kingdom of God is taken from the Jews and given to the Gentiles, again there is no limitation. These facts force us to look for a reason in the Divine Mind that applied to this people, that is, the Jews as a people in order to get at the distinction. Now I venture to say that you never get beyond the reach of these facts.

The next thing is the distinction between clean and unclean, not as to eating, but as to sacrifice. When did that originate? It did not originate with Noah, as far as sacrifices are concerned, for God commissioned Noah to take into the ark with him one pair of unclean animals and birds and seven pairs of clean animals and birds, as if Noah understood it, and Noah did understand it. And so when Noah came out of the ark he took of the animals and offered sacrifice to God; so this question is forced upon us: Where did the distinction between the clean and unclean animals for sacrifice originate? Not with Adam, not with Noah. Now I will give you the origin. It is equal to a plain statement. It originated as soon as man sinned; when he was expelled from the garden and the symbolical, or typical, method of approach to God was appointed. We know this to be true. In Gen 4 , when one of Adam’s sons brought the clean beast from the flock and God received it, and the other offered simply the produce from his farm, his was rejected; so that I offer to you as the conviction of my mind that the distinction between clean and unclean animals for sacrifice originated when man sinned.

Now, when an issue stands perfectly clear in my own mind, I am on pretty sure ground and my conviction is very clear so far as clean and unclean animals are concerned, that it originated when man sinned, by the appointment of God and would necessarily cease when the Antitype came. So that we find God’s own distinction in animals for sacrifice going back to the sin of man, further back than we carry the distinction of eating. Now, these facts will help us to get at the origin of the distinction between the clean and the unclean in the Divine Mind establishing this regulation. So I point out, first, that the distinction between clean and unclean animals both as to sacrifice and eating was to symbolize certain great spiritual truths and when the symbol was fulfilled, the obligation to continue would then cease. That is principle one. Principle two is for hygienic reasons, sanitary reasons. You know what “hygienic” means. You have studied medicine enough to know that. Sanitary reasons had something to do with it but modern scientists claim that it had everything to do with this distinction between the unclean and the clean animals. Now it is a sad truth that they consider only one principle and that is the sanitary reason, claiming that, as far as eating is concerned, it is the only one worth discussing. I admit the sanitary reason, but I do not give it the prominence that they do, since the commission to Noah did not include it as a race commission. Therefore, the sanitary reason for the whole race does not explain it.

It is wise to use those foods, the use of which is the least dangerous to human health. God knew that this law would last only until the Messiah came and that it applied to the Jews, and that the Jews would simply be around the Mediterranean Sea, in a tropical country, and if I were living in that country now, I wouldn’t eat swine meat, for sanitary reasons. In the tropics it is not best to eat hog meat, and this law proscribes some food that can’t be eaten. Whether in the tropics or out of it, it is not best to eat blood. Statistics have been carefully gathered, that to me are intensely significant. You take the Jews living now in any country of the world, and where they follow the regimen of diet prescribed in the book of Leviticus, these Jews average a longer life than other people, better health than other people and less liable to contagious diseases than other people. Read an account of an epidemic sweeping clear over the country and it is astonishing how very few Jews have it. Now, that fact shows that the food we eat has a great deal to do with the health of the body. Look at those people in the camp life in the wilderness, in the blazing hot country, and for sanitary reasons, these Levitical reasons, they were forbidden to eat certain things. I mention that as the second principle.

Now the third principle. It was the purpose of God to isolate Israel from all the nations of the earth; and in order to isolate Israel) her worship was to be separated from that of other people. .For if they came to the table with the Gentiles, then intermarriage is permitted, and with intermarriage comes the idolatry of the heathen. The history, as you will see when you study Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles, shows the introduction of idolatry to come with the association of the Jews with the heathen. A Jewish king with a heathen wife came near blotting religion from the world, and in it all Elijah stood alone with the exception of 7,000 people that had not bowed their knees to Baal. But he thought he was alone in the world and asked God to take him out of the world. So these people must be kept separate from the other people, there must be things that separate them; things that would not permit that degree of intimate association that permits marriage. So these things were given to make a line of demarcation between the Jews and the Gentiles. But when the Jewish policy had served its purpose, then the same God that drew that line tore it down and blotted out the distinction between the clean and the unclean. Those are the three reasons that are satisfactory to my mind, and while I might cite fifty others, advocated by commentators, none of them seems to be of any force but these three. Now note carefully: First, the distinction was made in order to symbolize certain great spiritual truths that would be brought out; second, hygienic or sanitary reasons led to this distinction, and third, this legislation was to isolate Israel and tend to keep it as a separate and particular people.

I come now to another feature of the case, viz.: the touching of dead bodies. If one was defiled, there was a ritual prescribed by which he could become clean ceremonially, before God. It is easy to see in that case the spiritual truth that is embodied in that symbolism. Death is the wages of sin, and the body without the spirit is dead. Now then, in order to make these people realize the necessity of holiness, they must keep apart from the dead. “Let the dead bury their dead.” And if propriety would admit of the discussion of the sexual feature of it, I could make that explanation perfectly satisfactory to you also.

Now we come to the case of leprosy. Why was leprosy and no other form of sickness selected? The commentaries discuss much whether the leprosy of Leviticus is the leprosy of modern times as we understand it. I say to you that it is. I have not time to prove it, but you may just take my assurance that when Leviticus says leprosy it means leprosy in its most loathsome form. Why, now, was leprosy put along beside the bodies of dead men? Simply because one declared to be leprous was as one dead. It was a living death. As it progressed and disfigured the body, it would eat away the nose and the different parts of the body. In other words, -the soul was confined in the charnel house of corruption. He must be segregated, he must hide himself, must not allow other people to come near him. The law commanded him to cover his upper lip, and when he saw any one coming toward him he must cry out, “Unclean, unclean, unclean!” Therefore we find leprosy selected both in the Old and the New Testaments as expressive of sin, and the healing of leprosy as the exercise of the power of God. Medicine cannot cure leprosy when it gets to a certain stage.

A great many things commence like leprosy, and such cases had to be tested, therefore some of these regulations. A man is segregated and the high priest examines him and keeps him segregated until it is known not to be leprosy. Here are the symptoms: First, if the skin turns perfectly white, this is the first step; second, there appear growing out of that spot hairs that are white; that man is pronounced a leper, and then that last fearful sloughing off, eating form comes. Sometimes people would have this white spot and the white hair appearing in this spot and not have leprosy. It was because it did not develop a case in full, but the high priest was to count them lepers until it was shown not to be leprosy. Lepers regarded leprosy as a stroke from God, and indeed that is the etymological meaning of the word. The Hebrew word means a stroke, that is, stroke from God. When the application was made to the king of Israel to heal Naaman, who was a leper, he says, “They seek occasion against me; am I God, that I can make alive?” He meant that it required supernatural power, divine power, to heal a leper. Some of the most noted sermons that have ever been preached have been sermons on leprosy as a type of sin.

Now we come to consider the distinction, not as to the reason of its appointment, but what the distinction itself was between the clean and the unclean, and that is easy to tell. Of the beasts, there must be two things to make it a clean beast, and it did not merely apply to sacrifices. I will show you the limitation directly. No beast could be offered as sacrifice or be eaten as food, unless it possessed two characteristics, viz.: a cloven hoof and the chewing of the cud. Now, the camel’s hoof is not cloven but it chews the cud; the sheep’s hoof is cloven and it does chew the cud; the hog’s hoof is cloven but it does not chew the cud. A number of wild animals are good for food because they divide the hoof and chew the cud, but only domestic animals that divide the hoof and chew the cud could be used as sacrifice. The others were unclean, but any animal, domestic or otherwise, that chewed the cud and divided the hoof could be eaten, for instance, the antelope, the deer, and all other animals of that kind. Now this is the distinction of beasts.

Now we come to the birds and there the distinction is expressed in classes. Certain birds are mentioned, for instance, the dove, the pigeon. They could be used as sacrifice. They had the characteristic generally attributed to them, of innocence. They were not birds of prey. Certain others are specified. All carnivorous birds were excluded, and some birds eat bad flesh, as you know, and that applied to the beasts. There were graminivorous beasts; that means “grass-eating” beasts. They did not have tusks. They had molars, or grinders. The graminivorous beast perhaps would be clean, but none could be clean that was not a grass-eating beast. The eagle, the vulture, the owl, the bat, the stork, the heron, and the crane are mentioned by name as not clean. The goose, the duck, the chicken, and all the variety of quail could be eaten, but only certain ones could be used as sacrifice.

Now we come to another class, and here is what the Hebrew, literally translated, says about a certain class of things that were clean: First, he must be winged, and second, he must have four legs beside the hind legs used for hopping and jumping; as locusts, crickets, etc. Many people eat them. John the Baptist was a “bug-eater,” and in some countries the locust is a general article of food. Now think of that, fellow. First) he must be able to fly; he must be able to walk on all fours; he must have wings to fly, and his hind legs must be hopping legs. There is, of course, in this country, a great deal of prejudice against eating grasshoppers, but I am sure that if you were over in those countries and did not know what they were, you would eat them. They are dried in the sun and then ground up into flour and baked into a kind of cake. So you would not know what it was. I confess I don’t want any myself.

Now, have you got that perfectly clear? The animal in order to be eaten, must divide the hoof and chew the cud, and in order to be used as a sacrifice, must not only do that but it must be domestic; as, the cow, the sheep, the goat. The birds are specified by classes and must not be carnivorous birds. The grasshopper class must have four legs, two hoppers, and be able to fly. Now, there is one more class and that is the fishes. Two characteristics the fish must have in order to be Levitically fit to eat. It must have fins and it must have scales fins and scales both. The catfish wouldn’t do. It has no scales; but there are others that would not do; as, the oyster. There people didn’t eat many oysters and we leave them out in the hot months. Now suppose it was hot all the time, as it is there; we would eat very few oysters. The rule will not apply to fishes as to birds. The fishes that have fins and scales are carnivorous; for instance, take a big trout. He eats the smaller fish and is carnivorous and voracious. There are four distinctions in fact, and I have discussed the principles.

Now the method of removing uncleanness, and the details are elaborate. I recommend again the volume on Leviticus in the Expositors Bible, as one of the best expositions of the book I ever read, by Kellogg. He is not poisoned by higher criticism, as most of these books are. When I go over a book, I am sure to tell you what books to use. The Expositor’s and the Cambridge Bibles are widely used; while some parts of them you cannot rely on, you can rely on the Leviticus volume of the Expositor’s Bible.

Dr. Wilkinson, of Chicago, came down to Texas to deliver a series of lectures. One of his subjects was “The Book of Leviticus” and all his lectures were on the introduction to the book. He came to me and said, “What have you on Leviticus that is any account?” I said, “Take Kellogg, of the Expositor’s Bible.” He says, “It is in mighty bad company.” But when he brought the book back, he said, “I thank you that you called my attention to that book. I had such a dislike for the Expositor’s Bible that I never thought to look in there for anything good, but it is superb.”

Now, I will tell you of another that will bring out the spiritual, and that is Mackintosh. He is spiritual, though a premillennialist. They do stand foursquare for the truth and I have always loved that kind of a man. If they stand square and do not yield to the higher critics; if they are spiritually minded and their teaching is spiritual, I am going to take them close to my heart and convert them as fast as I can. There are some mighty good people among them. Moody was one. A. C. Dixon, W. B. Riley, and others are among them and they are mighty good people.

Our next lesson is on Lev 17 and we take up the law of holiness in that. That refers to eating, which has been discussed in this study, but solely with reference to the distinction of meats. That law of holiness governs eating in other respects, viz.: the purity of life, the purity in the marriage relation all that comes under the head of this law. The most interesting part of Leviticus after we pass chapter 16 is the times, the set times in which Israel is to appear before God. It follows out this idea viz.: that Leviticus is the developments of that part of the law which is the altar and shows the way of approach to God, through what one shall approach God, through whom he shall approach God, and then gives the inauguration of the service after it has been established, the culmination of that service in regard to the clean and the unclean animals, and the times to come before God, i.e., the set times: First, the evening and the morning; second, the weekly sabbaths; third, the monthly, or lunar sabbaths; fourth, the great annual sabbaths; fifth, the landsabbath, or the seventh-year sabbath; and sixth, the Jubilee sabbath, the seven times seven, or fiftieth-year sabbath, the Jubilee.

QUESTIONS

1. What puzzling question relative to the distinction between, the clean and the unclean in eating and in sacrifice?

2. What is the real difficulty with Bible students on this question?

3. What three divisions of uncleanness as relating to persons?

4. Who two classes, or divisions, as relating to animals?

5. How, then, account for these principles?

6. What antecedent facts necessary to a settlement of this question as it relates to eating?

7. What is the import of the revelation to Peter in. Act 10 ?

8. What, then, does Paul say on this question?

9. What bearing has this principle on New Testament revelation?

10. What do these facts force us to look for?

11. When did the distinction between the clean and unclean animals for sacrifice originate?

12. Then, when would this distinction between the clean and unclean animals for sacrifice necessarily cease?

13. According to these facts, what is principle number one as to the distinction between clean and unclean animals relating to both sacrifice and eating?

14. What, then, is principle number two?

15. What is the contention of modern scientists on this and your reply?

16. How did this principle apply to the Jews?

17. What evidence of its influence on the Jewish life?

18. What is principle number three?

19. What three things were essential to accomplish the isolation of Israel?

20. When were these distinctions blotted out?

21. Why did the touching of a dead body render one unclean?

22. Why was leprosy and no other form of sickness selected?

23. Why was leprosy selected in both Testaments as expressive of sin?

24. What are the symptoms of leprosy?

25. How did lepers regard leprosy and why?

26. What distinction between clean and unclean beasts as to eating?

27. What distinction as to sacrifice?

28. What distinction as to birds?

29. What is said of the grasshopper class?

30. What distinguishes the clean from the unclean in fishes?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Lev 14:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Ver. 1. And the Lord spake unto Moses. ] And to Aaron also, though not here mentioned, as he is, Lev 14:33 .

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Leviticus Chapter 14

CHAPTER 28.

THE LEPER PRONOUNCED CLEAN.

Lev 14:1-7 .

Now we come to the other side, the grace that can and does cleanse the leper. What a mercy in

a world of misery and suffering through sin! There is no desert in man; there is love in God. Yea God is love. Here it appears in His dealings as Jehovah with Israel. They are without doubt as the leper. Their unbelief owns not the truth: else they would now cry, Unclean, unclean, as they surely will in a day that hastens. They are with out their inheritance, though Jehovah gave it to them; but their sins and iniquities, their uncleanness in a word, made it a righteous necessity that they should be chased out of it, deprived quite of their land and national being, and out of that sanctuary in the place which Jehovah chose to cause His name to dwell there. No judgment of expulsion more certain and clear than that now lying on His ancient people. Their pride rebels; their distance from Him seeks to disguise it even from themselves; but it is written indelibly on their past and present history: thank God, not for ever. Leprous Israel shall assuredly be cleansed, as prophecy declares in sure and abundant and glowing testimonies.

Here however the type is so abstract that we are entitled in no way to narrow the application, but to see how grace adapts it to the need of every and any ruined sinner.

” 1 And Jehovah spoke to Moses saying, 2 This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing. He shall be brought to the priest, 3 and the priest shall go out of the camp; and the priest shall look, and, behold, the sore of leprosy is healed in the leper; 4 then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two living clean birds, and cedar wood and scarlet and hyssop. 5 And the priest shall command to kill one of the birds in an earthen vessel over living water. 6 As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood and the scarlet and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird killed over the living water; 7 and he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let go the living bird into the open field” (vers. 1-7).

Typically viewed, the priest is the Mediator, the Saviour. As the leper could not come where He was, the priest must go out of the camp to the leper. Indeed “the Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost.” It was not only that the sinner needed such love to reach a heart steeped in the selfishness and distrust which sin produces in man, along with known rebellion against God and guilty conscience, the sad monitor of coming judgment. Infinite mercy belongs to God; and who could possibly manifest it like His own Son emptying Himself to take a bondman’s form, and humbling Himself in obedience even unto death, ay, death of the cross? Thus it was that in Him all the fulness was pleased to dwell, and through Him to reconcile . . ., having made peace by the blood of His cross.

Here then the priest is said to look, “and, behold, the sore of leprosy is healed.” How this was does not enter into “the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing” beyond the fact here notified. In the application it is a new life given. But the day was not come to reveal such a boon. It awaited Christ, the True Light, in Whom was life, and the life was the light of men. Life and incorruption He brought to light through the gospel. The explanation was left in abeyance. But the arrest of the plague was manifestly effected before him who saw according to God; and thereon followed the means ordained for the leper’s purification. It was an immensely serious work, and thus the shadows here seen are pregnant with deep interest and weighty truth.

On the face of it, the work first of all was done for the leper, not in the least degree by himself. The priest commanded to take for him that is to be cleansed two clean living birds, and cedar wood, scarlet, and hyssop. Then he commanded further that one bird be killed in an earthen vessel over living water. The living bird he took with the cedar wood, the scarlet, and the hyssop, and dipt them all in blood of the bird killed over the living water; and lastly he sprinkled upon the man to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, pronouncing. him clean, and letting the living bird free.

The two clean birds thus set forth Christ dead and risen, the one killed, the other let loose into the open field. But there is far more here; for the bird to die was killed in an earthen vessel over living water. How plain the indication of Him who through the Eternal Spirit offered Himself spotless to God, deigning to be crucified in weakness! Again, what can be more evident than the pains taken to identify the living bird with the slain one by dipping it in the blood of the one killed over the living water? So Christ was given up For our offences and raised for our justification, as says the apostle (Rom 4:25 ).

Nor was this all the truth presented in this pattern of things to come. The taking of the cedar wood and the scarlet and the hyssop, the dipping them also in the blood of the bird that was slain, has a worthy meaning and like the rest is written for our admonition. The death of Christ has pronounced for him that is cleansed death on all with which man is here conversant. The chosen emblems of the highest in nature and of the lowest, along with that which figures the conventional glory of the world, were dipped in the blood; just as in Num 19:6 they were cast into the midst of the burning of the Red Heifer. In what had not man corrupted himself, perverting all that God gave and sanctioned to His dishonour? But every evil is counteracted for the believer in Christ’s atoning death. The leper was himself sprinkled with the blood seven times in token of complete cleansing, and was formally pronounced clean by the priest, with the significant mark of the living blood-sprinkled bird let go into the open field.

Yet much more, as we are told, had to follow. How sedulous is scripture to impress the solemn ways of God, even when a soul is supposed to be converted, and the deadly evil of sin no longer active but at a stay, before it can enjoy the full place and privileges of salvation! How little is this understood by revivalism or even evangelicalism!

Indeed under grace, as we are, the deep moment of God’s ways with the soul ought to be readily felt. For in the current preaching and faith of Christ, how little is understood the distinct truth taught so elaborately in the latter half of Rom 5 to the end of chap. 8! Yet how marked is the care of the Holy Spirit in the discussion of chap. 7 to bring home the need of it to the individual in a way beyond all other examples in the N.T.! This is undone by Arminians, who try to persuade themselves and others that the “I” of Rom 7:7-25 , or at least 24, is an unconverted man whom Paul personifies; by Calvinists, that it is the normal state of the apostle and of all Christians.

But God will have us, not only to confess our sins, our guilt, in order to forgiveness; He leads us into a more or less profound sense of ourselves of indwelling sin, without which the hale of Christian blessing is unknown, and this the better and more positive half in which we know, not Christ dead for our sins only, but ourselves dead with Him to sin. And this, though of course a matter of faith, has to be learnt experimentally in order to our being brought out of bondage into liberty and the blessed sense that we are “in Christ” where is “no condemnation.”

CHAPTER 29.

THE LEPER WASHES.

Lev 14:8 , Lev 14:9 .

Thus we have seen that in the first place all was done for the leper, not by him. Another was active, not himself. He was to be brought to the priest; and the priest had to go forth out of the camp. The all-important thing was, not that the leper, but that the priest should look and ascertain that the sore of leprosy was at a stay, or rather healed in the leper. The priest had to direct the means then to be employed; and when one of the clean birds was killed in an earthen vessel over living water, it was he that took the other live bird with the various accompaniments he had prescribed, dipt them and the live bird in the blood of the killed bird, sprinkled the leper therewith, and pronounced him clean, letting the live bird go free. Now, and not before, we are told of the leper’s activity.

” 8 And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave all his hair, and bathe in water, and he shall be clean; and after that he shall come into the camp, but shall dwell outside his tent seven days. 9 And it shall be on the seventh day that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair shall he shave: and he shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe, his flesh in water, and he shall be clean” (vers. 8, 9).

The blood shed and sprinkled, precious and efficacious as it is judicially for the unclean, is not all. There is and must be a moral cleansing also by the water of the word applied to the sinner. Out of the pierced side of Jesus flowed not blood only but water, of which the inspired witness bore record. To this John also refers in his First Epistle, 1Jn 5 “This is he that came through water and blood; not by water only, but by water and blood.” The sinner needs for blessing not only expiation, but purification.

Here it is typically presented. We know that all is vain unless our hearts are purified by faith; but these shadows as usual do not rise above external actions. “And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and bathe himself in water, and he shall be clean.” However strange it may appear for the priest to have pronounced the leper clean in ver. 7, this is the sure and cheering ground for beginning the practical work of cleansing himself as in vers. 8, 9. To be pronounced clean by divine authority affords the highest assurance; but it does not supersede the moral cleansing which Jehovah enjoins in all respects. On the contrary it gives invaluable encouragement to enter on and go through every detail as here. ‘` His garments,” what is displayed to the eye, are at once to be dealt with, and the Spirit applies the word to cleanse them. Former things must be judged by the expressed will of God. But there is much more to be heeded. “All his hair ” he had to shave. This belongs to his person; the natural comeliness attaching to man’s head must be shorn, and himself must bathe in water. There is no sparing of aught wherein impurity might lurk. The efficacy of Christ’s death and resurrection, by which alone one could be pronounced clean before God, only makes it the more incumbent to cleanse oneself from every pollution of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in fear of God. Then is it added, “and he shall be clean.”

“And afterwards shall he come into the camp, and shall abide out of his tent seven days.” Even so, though made free of his public position, he cannot enjoy his individual place till the purifying is complete. With such nice care as to every minute source of defilement is the full cleansing of the leper guarded. Now there is in the gospel what meets each and all more thoroughly than any of these requirements of the law; and this, by a redemption which is “eternal ” and thus superior to legal demands of time. Of this the robber saved on the cross is a clear proof and witness; for his case is really an example, though unbelief of God’s grace and Christ’s work treats it as an exception to the deprivation of a vast deal of the blessing. So naturally do saints swerve, from the light which already shines, to the shadows of the law.

Verse 9 makes plain that the purifying goes on to the last. “And it shall come to pass on the seventh day that he shall shave all his hair, his head and his beard, and his eyebrows, even all his hair shall he shave, and he shall wash his clothes, and shall bathe his flesh in water, and shall be clean.” It is open to our notice that on the last day of the set term the washing is ordered still more minutely than ever, the beard and the eyebrows, no less than the head, and “his flesh” to make the bathing explicit. How blessed for us that we have One to apply the word to our souls and ways in the power of God’s Spirit! If the fathers of our flesh chastened us for a few days as seemed good to them, the Father of our spirits so does for profit, in order to the partaking of His holiness.

CHAPTER 30.

THE LEPER ON THE EIGHTH DAY,

Lev 14:10-20 .

Here we have the shadow of truth, both of high import, and unthought of since the apostles passed away, when men took their place whose scanty faith fell woefully short of the inspired deposit. Thus we need peculiarly that we be on our guard and looking up for divine guidance so as to read the written word with that discernment which only the Holy Spirit can give.

” 10 And on the eighth day he shall take two he-lambs without blemish, and one ewe-lamb of the first year without blemish, and three tenths of fine flour mingled with oil for an oblation [or, meal-offering], and one log of oil. 11 And the priest that cleanseth shall present the man that is to be cleansed and those things before Jehovah at the entrance of the tent of meeting. 12 And the priest shall take one he-lamb, and present it for a trespass offering, and the log of oil, and wave them for a wave offering before Jehovah. 13 And he shall slaughter the he-lamb at the place where the sin offering and the burnt offering are slaughtered, in a holy place; for as the sin offering, so the trespass-offering is the priest’s; it is most holy. 14 And the priest shall take of the blood of the trespass offering and the priest shall put it on the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and on the thumb of his right hand, and on the great toe of his right foot. 15 And the priest shall take of the log of oil, and pour it into the palm of his own left hand; 16 and the priest shall dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand, and shall sprinkle of the oil with his finger seven times before Jehovah. 17 And of the rest of the oil that is in his hand the priest shall put on the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and on the thumb of his right hand, and on the great toe of his right foot, upon the blood of the trespass offering. 18 And the remainder of the oil that is in the priest’s hand he shall put upon the head of him that is to be cleansed, and the priest shall make atonement for him before Jehovah. 19 And the priest shall offer the sin offering, and make atonement for him that is to be cleansed from his uncleanness; and afterwards he shall slaughter the burnt offering. 20 And the priest shall offer the burnt offering and the oblation upon the altar; and the priest shall make atonement for him, and he shall be clean” (vers. 10-20).

The ritual of the eighth day foreshadows the work of Christ in the light of His resurrection, the Christian’s rich appropriation, and the consequent gift of the Holy Spirit. It is not merely the general and indispensable efficacy of Christ’s blood with the [action of the Spirit as living water in order to purification morally as well as judicially. Here we have the conscience cleansed from dead works to serve or worship a living God, and be at home as it were, coming not merely into the camp but into his tent. It is in its measure a consecration like the priests’. Only here it is founded, not on a sin offering (Lev 8:14 , Lev 9:2 ) but on a trespass offering (Lev 14:12 , Lev 14:13 ); for there had been a violation of a holy relation to meet. And the priest applied its blood to the right ear, right thumb, and right great toe (14). All the man is brought under the most holy blood, what he hears and does, with his walk; he belongs wholly to God in thought, work, and way. In the case of the priests it was the blood of a peace offering.

Then follows the unction from the Holy One (15-18). The waving too of all was before Jehovah, so was the application, as with the priestly consecration. The oil was put where the blood had been. How clearly was prefigured the full blessing first enjoyed at Pentecost. Not only was Christ’s death for removing evil, but entered into in all its fulness as before God’ and in the Holy Spirit’s power to give personal consciousness and enjoyment of it all, as having redemption in Christ through His blood, as well as priestly access to the sanctuary, we may add. We are meant to be already in known and near relation to God. Whatever be the intrinsic efficacy of Christ’s work (and here it is viewed in its various value as it is really infinite), how much we owe to the Spirit sent personally to abide in and with us! For thereby we dwell in God and God in us, as 1Jn 4 says of the Christian. The heart is thus free intelligently to realise God’s righteousness and grace in Christ’s work to His glory, when the worshipper once purged has no more conscience of sins. But this can never be rightly or safely unless the conscience has first been searched and cleansed in the light of God.

There is great forge in the figurative state of ver. 18, crowning the previous details. Yet when the completeness of the Spirit’s power is thus set out, how sedulously God takes care to mark after this in ver. 19 the sin offering offered, as well as the burnt offering and its accompanying meal offering, each essential to make atonement for him that was to be cleansed from his uncleanness, and all offered that he should be clean and know it with the utmost assurance. For atoning virtue Christ is the all; yet has the Spirit His own blessed function. What a testimony to that which God is in grace and truth and righteousness withal on behalf of the evil and lost!

CHAPTER 31.

THE POOR LEPER.

Lev 14:21-32 .

Here, as elsewhere, appears the gracious consideration of God, not for the poor only, but also for what is so represented typically. Jehovah at least does care for such as have no earthly resources; and this is attested in the strongest way when they suffer from an extreme evil which leprosy was and figures. Does He not compassionate the poor in faith, due in general to defective teaching?

” 21 And if he [be] poor, and his hand be not able to get it, then he shall take one lamb a trespass offering, a wave offering to atone for him; and one tenth part of fine flour mingled with oil for a meal offering; 22 and a log of oil, and two turtle doves or two young pigeons, as his hand may be able to get: the one shall be a sin offering, and the other a burnt offering. 23 And he shall bring them on the eighth day of his cleansing to the priest unto the entrance of the tent of meeting before Jehovah. 24 And the priest shall take the he-lamb of the trespass offering, and the log of oil, and the priest shall wave them a wave offering before Jehovah. 25 And he shall slaughter the he-lamb of the trespass offering; and the priest shall take the blood of the trespass offering, and put [it] upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of the right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot. 26 And the priest shall pour of the oil into the priest’s left hand, 27 and the priest shall sprinkle with his right finger of the oil that [is] in his left hand seven times before Jehovah. 28 And the priest shall put of the oil that [is] in his hand upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the place of the blood of the trespass offering. 29 And the remainder of the oil that [is] in the priest’s hand he shall put upon the head of him that is to be cleansed to atone for him before Jehovah. 30 And he shall offer one of the turtle doves or of the young pigeons, of what his hand was able to get; 31 of what his hand was able to get the one a trespass offering, the other a burnt offering with the meal offering; and the priest shall atone for him that is to be cleansed before Jehovah. 32 This is the law [for him] in whom [is] the sore of leprosy; whose hand cannot get what is for his cleansing” (vers. 21-32).

The allowance of grace here is solely for the falling short on the eighth day; and it is here where poverty is now and long has been found. Few rise up to the riches of God’s grace in its Christian form and fulness. But the principle must be maintained if the right measure is deficient. If unable to take two unblemished he-lambs and one like ewe lamb, with three measures of fine flour, with oil for the oblation, and a log of oil besides, the poor leper was to take one lamb with one deal of oil mingled for the oblation, with a log of oil. This was indispensable for rich or poor alike. The priest began with the lamb slain for a trespass offering, and not a sin offering simply, still less a ram of consecration of sweet savour. Such was the blood sprinkled on each characteristic organ of his body; nothing other or less was permitted. The defilement must be felt and met adequately. Intrinsic cleansing by blood over the living water to be sprinkled did not suffice.

There is judicial cleansing in the sprinkled blood of the trespass offering, which is the leper’s consecration to God, suited to the new creation, and hence applied to the renewed mind, as for work, and for walk. Then and not till then, for poor as for rich, is the unction from the Holy One. Not life only nor redemption or rather purification by blood which dedicates to God, but divine power is figured by the oil which follows the blood; and this oil is completely sprinkled before Jehovah anterior to putting it on each member of the poor leper, and the rest poured on his head. For the priest did all as punctiliously for him as for the richest But two turtle doves, or two young pigeons, such as he could get, we’re sufficient, one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. His poverty must not hinder his full cleansing and acceptance.

Thus what to the superficial reader seems strange if not tiresome repetition is in reality the witness of God’s rich mercy and His loving the poorest with great love. But such a scripture ought also to be a serious guard from that levity which modern revivalism accentuates, though it has ever been the snare of those who are carried away onesidedly with the freeness of grace to forget its fulness. In reaction from a systematic putting under law as a preparatory course for due reception of this gospel, they confound conversion with salvation, and as it were argue the interested soul to believe and say, I am saved! I am saved! before the soul has any genuine sense of sin before God. Those who are strong have no need of a physician but such as are sick; and if the wounds are deep, it is well if they be probed without haste to cover them up. Repentance is most important, lest a crop of such faith arise as Jas 2 refuses to own. Consider the Prodigal in Luk 15 and indwelling sin dealt with, as well as sins.

The jailer, though speedily and truly converted (Act 16 ), was not proclaimed as a saved soul there and then; nor does scripture ever speak with the hurry-scurry so popular among many excellent persons and ardent evangelists. What Paul and Silas said was, Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. So the pious and prayerful Cornelius had to hear words whereby he should be saved, and his house. No doubt when he received the Spirit of adoption, he was duly enabled to know that by grace he was saved as a continuous fact. It is well if the preacher is not precipitate, and that the work in souls be deeply laid and sure. It is not for forgiveness only but for deliverance, and communion with God, yea with the Father and with His Son, Jesus Christ. There is a vast body of truth which the believer has to learn, and heavenly truth never revealed before Christ ascended up on high, stretching over to His coming again to receive us and present us where He is. But even the gospel has far greater depth than is ordinarily preached and known, if we go no farther than the first half of the Epistle to the Romans, consistent as it is with all the rest of that “better thing ” which is our portion.

CHAPTER 32.

LEPROSY IN THE HOUSE, AND ITS CLEANSING.

Lev 14:33-53 .

What we have seen is leprosy in the man and his raiment, and the cleansing of the leper. There is this further case, rightly reserved for the end, leprosy in the house. The preceding regarded the person, and his immediately surrounding circumstances. Here we have to look at the assembly typified, not of course in its full heavenly aspect in union with Christ, but in that which is formed on earth by the Spirit’s indwelling. It therefore fittingly pointed to the land, not to the wilderness. Neither relation could be before Pentecost.

” 33 And Jehovah spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying, 34 When ye come into the land of Canaan, which I give to you for a possession, and I put a leprous plague in a house of the land of your possession, 35 then he whose house it is shall come and tell the priest, saying, It seemeth to me like a plague in the house; 36 and the priest shall command that they empty the house before the priest go to see the plague, that all that [is] in the house be not made unclean; and afterwards the priest shall go in to see the house. 37 And he shall look on the plague, and, behold, the plague [is] in the walls of the house, greenish or reddish hollows, and their look [is] deeper than the wall, 38 then the priest shall go out of the house to the entrance of the house, and shut up the house seven days. 39 And the priest shall come again the seventh day, and he shall look, and, behold, the plague hath spread in the walls of the house, 40 then the priest shall command that they take away the stones in which the plague [is], and they shall cast them out of the city in an unclean place. 41 And he shall cause the house to be scraped within round about, and they shall pour out the dust that they scraped off, out of the city in an unclean place. 42 And they shall take other stones, and put [them] in the place of those stones: and they shall take other mortar, and shall plaster the house. 43 And if the plague come again and break out in the house, after he hath taken away the stones and after he hath scraped the house and after it is plastered, 44 then the priest shall come, and shall look, and, behold, the plague hath spread in the house, it [is] a corroding leprosy in the house; it [is] unclean. 45 And they shall break down the house, the stones of it, the timber of it and the mortar of the house, and shall carry [them] forth out of the city to an unclean place. 46 And he that goeth into the house as long as it is shut Up shall be unclean until the even. 47 And he that sleepeth in the house shall wash his raiment, and he that eateth in the house shall wash his raiment. 48 But if the priest shall come in and look and, behold, the plague hath not spread in the house, after the house hath been plastered, the priest shall pronounce the house clean; for the plague is healed.

49 And he shall take to purge the house the two birds and cedar-wood and scarlet and hyssop; 50 and he shall kill one bird in an earthen vessel over living water; 51 and he shall take the cedar-wood and the hyssop and the living bird, and dip them in the blood of the bird that was killed, and in the living water, and shall sprinkle the house seven times; 52 and he shall purge the house from the defilement with the blood of the bird, and with the living water, and with the living bird, and with the cedar-wood and with the hyssop and with the scarlet; 53 and he shall let go the living bird out of the city into the open field; and he shall atone for the house, and it is clean ” (vers. 33-53).

Literally, as the Israelites dwelt in tents, and had no proper houses till they entered the land of promise, it is clear that the provisions here laid down could not apply while they were in the wilderness. But the typical force does apply to Christians while here below, because there is in Christ association with heaven also before going there themselves. It was not so while Christ was with His disciples, who were living stones indeed but not yet builded together. “Upon this rock,” said He, “I will build my church.” But men build too since His ascension; and hence there is room for what defiles and corrupts, as well as for what is precious and holy. There is collective evil as well as individual; and consequently God insists on purity in that way no less than this. The allowance of evil is the plague spot for the assembly. Holiness becometh, not the believer only, but “thy house, O Jehovah, for evermore.” Any evil may enter from time to time, none too flagrant or deadly; but if judged according to God and put out, the saints prove themselves pure in the matter.

It is altogether different when known evil abides in the midst. Then it is the leprous plague in the house. But even then it is “the priest ” who is looked to in order to pronounce. He is over the house of God. Man is apt to be hasty and unreliable, whether lax or severe. Christ never fails, and makes His judgment felt by the spiritual, and knows how to warn in the Spirit all concerned. If the defilement be removed by the adequate means prescribed in His word, it is well: the house is again recognisable, though the atoning work of Christ is just as needful for it as for the sinner. But if the evil remains despite the scriptural measures to extirpate it, there is nothing for the faithful but its demolition. They must at all costs and in the most absolute way abandon what is incurably unclean. There is most solemn responsibility here in the Lord’s name. Compromise is fatal.

Is it not striking and instructive to see how completely the truth of the leprous house is ignored by all who fail to recognise the church or assembly as taught in the New Testament? One need not quote names or books; this would be invidious indeed, where all is a blank or worse, as may be seen in the most celebrated, when compared with Scripture.

CHAPTER 33.

LEPROSY SUMMED UP.

Lev 14:54-57 .

The subject concludes with a general summary. “This [is] the law for every sore of leprosy, and for the scall; and for leprosy of raiment, and for houses; and for a rising and for a scab, and for a bright spot, to teach in the day of uncleanness, and in the day of cleanness; this [is] the law of leprosy” (vers. 54-57).

God is intimating to us thereby how sin permeates the person, the immediate environment, and the collective or corporate responsibility. It is not only destructive but defiling, so that no earthly cleanness can avail: only Himself according to His word, and through Christ’s holy sacrifice. We who believe are bound to spare it not in any degree or in any respect. There is a divine provision of grace to which He calls us to conform. Our own opinion or that of other men is nothing. Having a great High Priest, passed as He has through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, we are therefore to hold fast our confession. For we have not a high-priest that cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but one that has been in all points tempted likewise, sin excepted. Let us therefore approach with boldness unto the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy, and find grace for seasonable help. Yet more too, where sin has wrought its evil way, and not infirmities simply, there is not only a Saviour of the lost; but the believer has, we have, an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.

Hence it is unwise as well as unholy and unbelieving to shrink from the humbling truth. For God commends His love to us, in that when we were still sinners Christ died for us. If upright by grace, let us not deceive ourselves, but submit to the light of God in which the true character of all things is exposed: for that which makes every thing manifest is light. “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us ” (1Jn 1:8 ); for if it were, we should speedily learn that we have still a nature, which if not discerned and disallowed would draw us away to gratify its will which is nothing but sin. Our having a new nature, which never sins and delights in God’s will, makes us responsible as children to please our Father. But we are bound to take account of the old nature which is there still, and to judge it as incurably evil.

And we must not be hasty, nor trust our own thoughts. We have to do with the most accessible of priests. Neither Aaron nor any other was comparable to our Lord Jesus. If willing to judge ourselves thoroughly according to His word, we are all wrong to despair of His succour. If there be a common danger of self-love and shirking full self-judgment, there may be an occasional tendency to exaggeration which is not the truth. We need Christ to secure it; and so grace has given Him. And it is ours, whether about ourselves or about others, to confide in the unerring judgment which He knows how to make us feel. For He is not dead but alive again for ever more, and ever lives to intercede for us in our weakness.

For feeble we are: it may not be any sore of leprosy, but the scall. We may err too as to raiment or the house. It may not be more than a rising in the flesh that alarms us, or a scab, or a bright spot; for to judge according to the reality we are not competent without Christ. And if we trusted to our judgment, it might soon prove not only hasty but unrighteous. He works in us by His word and Spirit; so that we can, if dependent on the Lord, look for His grace in the day of uncleanness and in the day of cleanness. The two conditions are found now in the evil day. We still wait for the good day of His manifested presence and power for the world to come, the habitable earth; when at least the dweller in the land shall not say, I am sick: the people that dwell therein shall be forgiven their iniquity. Righteousness shall then reign.

But evil as the day is now, we have the very distinct certainty of grace reigning through righteousness unto life eternal through Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom 5:21 ). None the less is Satan the god of this age, blinding the thoughts of the faithless so that they should not discern the illumination of the gospel of the glory of Christ, Who is God’s image, and in all possible ways both hindering His servants and maligning His saints. Blessed as these are by His redemption and with Him in every spiritual blessing on high, they are all the more peremptorily exhorted to cleanse themselves from every pollution of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in fear of God (2Co 7:1 ). It is the possession of the blessing which is the expressed ground for the purifying.

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

Leviticus

THE FIRST STAGE IN THE LEPER’S CLEANSING

Lev 14:1 – Lev 14:7 .

The whole treatment of leprosy is parabolic. Leprosy itself is a ‘parable of death.’ The horrible loathsomeness, the contagiousness, the non-curableness, etc. So the man was shut out from camp and from sanctuary. There was a double process in the cleansing rite, restoring to each.

I. Sketch the ceremonial. Two birds, one slain over a vessel of water so that its blood drained in. Then the living bird was to be dipped into this water and blood, along with cedar, scarlet, and hyssop, and the man sprinkled seven times and the living bird set loose.

II. The significance. This elaborate symbolism was partly intelligible even then. Two birds, like the two goats on the Atonement Day. Did both in some sense symbolise the man? The first one was not exactly a sacrifice. Its death points to the physical death which was the end of the disease, but also in some sense its death symbolised the death by which cleansing was secured.

a The purifying water is made by blood added to it, i.e . cleansing by sacrifice.

‘By water and by blood.’

b The sevenfold sprinkling. The cedar, symbol of incorruptibility; the scarlet, of full vital energy; the hyssop, of purifying. So the thought was suggested of the communication of cleansing, full health and incorruption, undecaying strength; all physical contrasts to leprosy sevenfold.

c The free, glad activity. The freed bird. The restored leper.

Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren

spake. This was delivered to Moses alone, who was to communicate these regulations to Aaron and his sons; while the rules by which the plague was to be discerned were given to both Moses and Aaron. Thus the position of Moses as the great lawgiver was upheld and secured. See note on Lev 5:14.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 14

In chapter fourteen it begins with very fascinating words,

And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing ( Lev 14:1-2 ):

Interesting, indeed, because leprosy is incurable. So God in the law made provision for the operation of His grace apart from human instrument. For in a technical sense leprosy was incurable, it is still incurable to the present day. And yet God has made there within the law the provision giving Him the leeway to work in a supernatural way to heal. And thus, the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing. And it is interesting God declares the priest shall first go out of the camp and examines the person, because any person with leprosy had to live outside the camp. He was ostracized from the community. And so the priest had to go out from the camp and examine the man.

And then, if he beholds the plague of leprosy is healed in the leper; then he shall command him to take, the man that is cleansed, to take two birds alive and clean, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop: And the priest shall command that one of the birds shall be killed in an earthen vessel over running water: As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water: And he shall sprinkle upon him that is cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and he shall pronounce him clean, and he shall let the living bird loose into the open field. Then he that is cleansed shall wash his clothes, shave all of his hair, wash himself with water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and he shall tarry abroad out of his tent for seven days. But it shall be on the seventh day, he shall shave all his hair off his head, his beard, his eyebrows, even all the hairs he shall shave off and shall wash his clothes, and he shall wash his flesh with water, and be cleaned. The eighth day he is to take two lambs without blemish, the one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, and the three tenths of a deal of fine flour for the meal offering, mingled with oil ( Lev 14:3-10 ).

He is to offer a trespass offering, a sin offering, and then a burnt offering or an offering of consecration.

And he shall take the blood of the trespass offering, and put it upon the right ear, and upon the thumb of the right hand, and upon the great toe of the right foot of the leper who has been cleansed: And he, the priest shall pour some of the oil into the palm of his own left hand: And he shall dip his right finger in the oil, and then he shall sprinkle the oil with his finger seven times before Lord: the rest of the oil the priest is to put on the right ear, and upon the right thumb, and the big toe of the right foot ( Lev 14:14-17 ).

And thus, the process whereby the leper was brought back into the community and allowed to live once again among the people.

Leprosy has often been used as typical of sin, typical of sin because of the mystery of its origin and of its transmission. We don’t know how leprosy is transmitted from one person to another. We don’t know how a person gets leprosy, even as we don’t know how sin is actually transmitted from one to another. And yet, there seems to be death has passed unto all men for all sin and there is that transmission, but we don’t know how. Leprosy by all human standards is incurable.

Now through medicine, they can arrest leprosy in its development; but they can’t cure it. It can only be arrested. It’s incurable as far as human standards go. So sin incurable, as far as man is concerned. Leprosy is deadly, so also is sin deadly in its result. Leprosy is insidious in its development within the body. Destroying, first of all, the nerves progressing until it hits a vital area; even as sin seems to be progressive and insidious in that it destroys man’s will to resist.

And so we see then in the cleansing of the leper, the two birds-the one that is killed, the blood caught in this clay vessel. The second bird dipped in that watery, blood mixture. I’m certain that if you sought to really look, you would find great symbolisms and a reason for the cedar wood, a reason for the scarlet, a reason for the hyssop, and a reason for the bloody water. For I am sure that in them there is something that does point to Jesus Christ and His sacrifice for us.

It is interesting that there is sort of a scarlet thread woven through the Old Testament pointing to Jesus Christ. Here the leper was to bring scarlet. We remember that Rahab the harlot was to allow a scarlet cord out the window so that all that would be in the house where the scarlet cord was hanging from the window would be saved when the children of Israel captured Jericho. But the cedar wood could, of course, be looking forward to the cross. And I’m sure that they all in some way looked forward to the cross. Could it be that the cross was of cedar? I don’t know. I wouldn’t be surprised. The bloodied water surely speaks to us of when Jesus had his side pierced by the Roman soldier and there came forth blood and water. And it speaks of our cleansing through the blood of Jesus Christ. The hyssop, we remember while he was there upon the cross. They took the hyssop bush and they put vinegar upon it and put it to his lips when He cried, “I thirst.” So I’m certain that in all of this, there is beautiful symbolism.

And as you read it and just open your heart to the Spirit, I’m sure that God can speak to you and give application to these things to your heart. I am not much of one to get into spiritualizing of scripture, though I believe there are spiritual analogies all the way through. That is just not my method or type of teaching; and thus, I will leave that to others who seem to have greater insights into those types of spiritual applications. I find them very interesting and beautiful when they are pointed out.

And so then the dedication of the man having been cleansed. The blood upon his ear, upon his thumb, and upon foot is really the symbol of the consecration of your life now to God. This was the thing that was done for Aaron when he was sanctified toward the priesthood, the blood upon his ear, thumb, and right toe. By speaking that your ear might be opened to God, that your hand might be busy doing the work of God and your feet walking in the path of God. And so we, having been cleansed from our sin, that isn’t the end of it. We are now to live a life that is consecrated unto God, a life of commitment unto Him. Our ears open to His voice. Our hands doing His work. Our feet walking in His path. And so there is a whole analogy here of the leprous man and his cleansing with the sinful man and his cleansing; and thus, his consecration and commitment unto God.

And so he goes ahead and he details the laws of those that were plagued with leprosy. Verse thirty-two, it sort of gives a capsulation.

This is the law of him in whom is the plague of leprosy, whose hand is not able to get that which pertains to his cleansing. The Lord spake to Moses and Aaron, saying ( Lev 14:32-33 ),

Now when you come in the land there was a plague that would also get in the houses. Probably sort of a mildew. And if this growth was in the houses, they were to scrape the rocks, they were to re-plaster them, and if it broke out again, they were to just tear down the house completely. But if after the re-plastering, it didn’t break out again, then the house was considered clean, and they could go ahead and live in it. And so again the bringing of the birds and killing the one over the water and all much the same this is the law of leprosy, chapter fourteen.

“

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

The possibility of the restoration of a leper to health was recognized and provision was made accordingly. In the case of the individual, the ceremony was elaborate. The priest must first visit him without the camp. If he found that the man was indeed cured of his leprosy, a religious ceremony initiated the movement of his return to communion. Then ere he was admitted to the camp he must himself be washed and his hair shaved.

After seven days of waiting there was to be another guilt offering, the anointing of the man with blood and oil, after which a sin offering, a burnt offering, and a meal offering were to be presented. Then he was restored to worship.

Once more the strictness of the law is revealed in the instructions given as to the cleansing of the house of the leper, which was to be observed in the time ahead when the people would be dwelling in the land.

The reading of this whole section (chapters 13, 14) impresses the mind with the strictness of the law of God concerning such things. It reveals the interest of God in the physical wellbeing of His people and His unceasing antagonism to everything likely to harm them. In our own day and land the purely Eastern qualities of these laws may seem to have no application, but their permanent values speak with no uncertain sound, teaching us among other things that it is impossible for men to be loyal to God and careless in any measure concerning the laws of sanitation. For example, it is ungodly for a community claiming to be in any sense Christian to tolerate the existence of dwellings which are infected in the slightest degree with what may be harmful to the highest physical condition of the people.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

the Law of the Cleansed Leper

Lev 14:1-20

The penalty, when leprosy had unmistakably declared itself, included compulsory severance from the camp, the rent garments, the bare head, the covered lip, the cry unclean, Lev 14:45. Sin severs us from fellowship with God and His saints, and makes us a source of contamination to all in contact with us, though they may not realize that we are defiling them.

Being cured, the leper was first restored to the camp, Lev 14:1-9. The birds are striking types of death and resurrection. Notice that the blood of one was mingled with fresh, i.e., running, water, because of the perennial freshness of the blood of Christ; and that the ascension of the other, when liberated, is significant of the freedom from the law of sin and death which the soul of the believer experiences through the power of the Holy Spirit. See Rom 8:1-4.

Secondly, the leper was restored to the sanctuary, Lev 14:10-20. On the eighth day of resurrection, the blood and oil were placed on thumb and toe and ear, because all our senses have been purchased and consecrated to the service of God. Let us, in gratitude for our own cleansing from sin, consecrate ourselves anew to God!

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

4. The Cleansing of the Leper

CHAPTER 14

1. The cleansing of the leper (Lev 14:1-32)

2. Leprosy in the house and its purification (Lev 14:33-54)

The cleansing and restoration of the leper is full of significance, foreshadowing once more the blessed work of our Saviour. Two parts in this ceremonial are to be noticed first of all. The first thing done was to restore the leper among the people from whom he had been put away. The second part of the ceremony restored him fully to communion with God. The first part was accomplished on the first day; the second part on the eighth day. A careful distinction must be made between the healing and the cleansing. All the ceremonies could not heal the leper. Jehovah alone could heal that loathsome disease. But after the healing, the cleansing and restoration had to be accomplished. However, what was done for the leper is a most blessed illustration of the work of Christ and of the gospel in which the believing sinner is saved, and the sinning saint cleansed and restored. The leper outside the camp could not do anything for himself. He was helpless and could not cleanse himself; it had to be done for him. The priest had to make the start for his cleansing and restoration. He had to go forth out of the camp to seek the leper; the leper could not come to the priest, the priest had to come to him. Well may we think here of Him, who left the Fathers glory and came to this earth, the place of sin and shame, where the lepers are, shut out from Gods holy presence. He came to seek and to save what is lost.

Two birds which the priest commanded to be taken for the leper are a beautiful type of Christ in His death, and Christ risen from the dead. The birds are typically belonging to heaven. The first bird was killed in an earthen vessel over running water. This likewise typifies Christ. The earthen vessel stands for the humanity of Christ. The running water is the Holy Spirit, who filled Him and then He gave Himself and shed His precious blood. And that blessed blood of atonement is what cleanses from all sin, and on account of that blood the leper can be restored. The second bird did not die, but was set at liberty to take up a heavenward journey. The second bird was dipped into the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water. This bird typifies Christ in resurrection. The bird in its upward flight, singing perchance a melodious song, bearing upon its white wings the precious token, the blood, typifies Christ in His accomplished work, risen from the grave and going back from where He came. He died for our offences and was raised for our justification. But with the living bird there was also used the cedar wood, the scarlet and the hyssop; these, with the living bird, were dipped into the blood. What do these things signify? Scarlet is the bright and flashing color, which typifies the glory of the world (Dan 5:7; Nah 2:3; Rev 17:3-4; Rev 18:12; Rev 18:16). Cedar wood and hyssop are things of nature. The cedar stands in Gods Word always for that which is high and lofty. The insignificant small hyssop typifies that which is low.

From the lofty cedar which crowns the sides of Lebanon, down to the lowly hyssop–the wide extremes and all that lies between–nature in all its departments is brought under the power of the cross; so that the believer sees in the death of Christ the end of all his guilt, the end of all earths glory, and the end of the whole system of nature–the entire old creation. And with what is he to be occupied? With Him who is the antitype of that living bird, with blood-stained feathers, ascending into the open heavens. Precious, glorious, soul-satisfying object! A risen, ascended, triumphant, glorified Christ, who has passed into the heavens, bearing in His sacred person the marks of an accomplished atonement. It is with Him we have to do: we are shut up to Him. He is Gods exclusive object; He is the centre of heavens joy, the theme of angels song. We want none of earths glory, none of natures attractions. We can behold them all, together with our sin and guilt, forever set aside by the death of Christ (C.H. Mackintosh).

It is a beautiful illustration of the great truth stated in Gal 6:14. God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, whereby the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. The leper was sprinkled seven times with the dipped bird, scarlet, cedar wood and hyssop. It was put upon him. And thus it is upon us, redeemed by blood, to live as dead unto the world. Throughout the entire ceremony the leper did nothing. Only after the blood was sprinkled and the bird set loose began he to wash his clothes, shave off his hair, and wash himself in water. After we are saved and cleansed we must go to the Word and cleanse by it our habits and our ways.

The second part of the ceremony on the eighth day restored the leper completely to his privileges. All is done again before the Lord, a phrase missing in the first part of the ceremony but repeatedly mentioned in the second part. The trespass offering occupies the prominent place. And the blood of the lamb was put upon the right ear, the thumb of the right hand and upon the great toe of the right foot. The symbolical meaning is clear; the ear is cleansed and restored to hear the Word; the hand to serve and the foot to walk. The blood of atonement in its cleansing power is therefore blessedly foreshadowed in this ceremony. It has the same meaning as it had in the consecration of the priests. The leper was like one who came out of the realms of death and corruption to become again a member of the priestly nation. The oil was put then upon the blood. Where the blood was, the oil was also applied. The work of the Holy Spirit in the sanctification of the redeemed sinner is typified by this anointing. The oil was then poured upon him, the type of the unction of the Holy One, which is upon all who are redeemed by blood.

But there is still another lesson connected with all this. The delay in the full acceptance of the healed and cleansed leper and his full reinstitution and presentation before the Lord on the eighth day is of deeper meaning. The eighth day in the Word of God represents the resurrection and the new creation. We are now as His redeemed people healed and cleansed but not yet in the immediate presence of the Lord. The seven days the cleansed leper had to wait for his full restoration and to enter in, typify our life here on earth, waiting for the eighth day, the blessed morning, when the Lord comes and we shall possess complete redemption and appear in the presence of Himself and behold His glory. The eighth day came and it was impossible for the leper, upon whom the blood of the sacrificial bird had been sprinkled, to be kept out from appearing in His presence and receive the blessings of full redemption. Even so there comes for us, His redeemed people, the eighth day. May we also remember that the leper, waiting for the eighth day, had to cleanse himself by the washing of water (verse 9). Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2Co 7:1). And every man that hath this hope in Him purifies himself, even as He is pure (1Jn 3:3).

Nor must we forget Israel typified in this entire ceremony. Israel blinded is morally like a leper. They are outside and separated from Jehovah on account of their condition. In the future the remnant of Israel will be cleansed and then wait for that full restoration which God in His gracious purposes has promised unto them.

Then follows a description of the plague of leprosy in a house. Leprosy, like other diseases, is caused by germs. These germs existing in the blood of the victim also may exist outside of the body, and under favorable conditions, especially in darkness, multiplying rapidly, spread the infection over a house and its contents. Bacteriology after years of laborious research has discovered these facts. Moses did not know about these bacteria in a house, but Jehovah knew.

The house with leprosy in it has often been applied to Israel. What was done to the house to arrest the plague is applied to what God did to His people. But the plague re-appeared and culminated in the rejection of Christ; then the house was completely broken down. Others apply it to the church and see that the leprosy has entered into the professing church and will some day terminate in the complete judgment of Christendom. We do not believe this to be the entire meaning of leprosy in the house. It likewise typifies the presence and working of sin in the place where man has his abode, that is, the material creation of God. All has been dragged down by the fall of man. All creation is under a bondage of corruption, made subject to vanity and therefore travaileth in pain and groaneth. But there is hope, for groaning creation is to be delivered. Then for the cleansing of the house the same ceremony with the two birds was enacted and the house was cleansed by the sprinkling of the blood. This is typical of the work of Christ as it will eventually bring blessing to all creation and all things will be reconciled (Col 1:20). But here is also indicated the judgment by fire which is in store for the earth (2Pe 3:10). Then there will be a new heaven and a new earth.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

Lev 14:1. The priests having been instructed in the foregoing chapter how to judge of the leprosy, are here directed concerning the kinds and manner of those sacrifices and ceremonies which were requisite for the legal purification of the leper, after the priest judged him to be healed, in order that he might be readmitted to the civil and religious privileges of the Jewish community.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Lev 14:3. The plague of leprosy. This loathsome disease rendered the body torpid, and severely depressed the spirits, as is affirmed by our learned travellers in the east. It commences with white spots on the hands and feet, or on the face, assuming gradually a scaly appearance. It spreads up the arms and legs; in its progress the joints become less active, the skin swells, and the pulse is lowered. In more stubborn cases the flesh looks like that of horses, when said to have greasy heels. The disease having exhausted the more vital principles of the part affected, dries up, and afterwards breaks out in fresh places; so that its whole progress is the slow and certain march of death.

Lev 14:4. Two birds. Two sparrows, as many copies read.

Lev 14:5. Running water. In the west of Africa men are often slain over running water. During the insurrection at St. Domingo, some blacks, as well as French, were slain at the seaside. 1Ki 18:40.

Lev 14:7. Let the living bird loose, as in the case of the scape-goat.

Lev 14:10. One log of oil. The twelfth part of a hin, or the measure of six hens eggs.

Lev 14:19. Sin-offeringand make atonement. In the Hebrew Theocracy all sicknesses and uncleannesses were accounted as sins. Psa 103:3. Isa 38:17. The leprosy was often inflicted as a punishment for sin. The case of Ahaziah, and of several others, are instances of divine displeasure for presumptuous sins.

REFLECTIONS.

The cleansing of the healed leper is the subject of a new revelation; and it contains some peculiar circumstances, highly admonitory to purity and holiness. The priest must go forth to the tent, or house of the leper, and examine his case. Ministers in like manner should examine the state of those desirous of being purged from sin, and who are seeking fellowship and communion with the church of God. Theirs is the right to preach deliverance to the captives, and to comfort all that mourn. The cleansing of the leper was with great ceremony, and to the rich it was attended with expensive oblations. One of the birds was to be killed over running water, or over water taken from a stream, to indicate that the disease was occasioned by sin, and that there is no remission but by the shedding of blood. The sprinkling was with a rod of cedar, to indicate incorruption; and with hyssop, to show that the bitterness of Gods displeasure was past. The dying bird would indicate to the leper, the death to which he had been exposed; and the living by its escape, the health and liberty to which he was now restored. But evangelically we see in the former a figure of our Saviour dying for man; and in the living one sprinkled with gore, we see his escape from death by the resurrection, and his flight to the mansions of eternal joy. Hence to be cleansed from the leprosy of guilt and sin is no easy task; but all things are possible, and all things are easy with God.

By the ceremony of washing and anointing, we are farther instructed in the operations of grace to sanctify and adorn the soul, as well as to cleanse it from sin; as the garments were washed, the pans scoured or broken, if earthen vessels, so let us learn from this process to defile ourselves no more with any allowed or presumptuous transgression. Let us hate the garments spotted with the flesh, and not shrink from burning that which is fretted by the leprosy.

The blood of atonement, and the anointing oil, were applied to the ear, to the thumb, and to the toe of the cleansed leper. We farther learn, that whatever is cleansed from sin, is at the same time anointed to God. Our members are no more to be yielded as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin, but as instruments of righteousness unto God. Our ears must no more listen to temptation and vain discourse, but to the words of divine truth. Our feet being cleansed must henceforth walk in the ways of holiness; and no iniquity must be found in our consecrated hands. Oh Lord, purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. And as to the daily impurity we may contract by intercourse with the world, we have every moment a fountain open, every moment the sprinkling of blood before the throne, and every moment the anointing of the Spirit to keep us right with God, free from condemnation, and in the glorious liberty of his children. Rom 8:1; Rom 8:21.

But if the Lord have cleansed our souls from the foul leprosy of sin, let us next cleanse our houses; for the house which is not cleansed must be demolished, and removed to an unclean place. Elis household, uncleansed by admonition from adultery and sacrilege, was totally demolished. Sauls household, not obeying the Lord, was rejected. He will spare neither the priest nor the prince, where sin is indulged and spared. Let us therefore fear this God of sanctifying truth, and never exalt our children above submission to his law. Joshua, apprized of this, resolved that he and his house should serve the Lord; and David, dreading the contagion of a moral leprosy, determined that no liar should be near his person.

How mistaken then are those who compare the leprous house to indwelling sin, for which there is no cure but by dissolution; so that the grave, or the unclean place, is the sepulchre of the unruly desires which have had the dominion over us in life! Do they mean to say that this is the case with all good men? What then do they make of those houses, which were actually cleansed? Do they mean to say that some good men are cleansed from sin in this life, and others not? Surely that is not their design. And if so, can the unclean place make us clean! Can corruption produce incorruption? For the bodies of the saints shall be glorious as the body of Christ. If then it be dangerous to make the grave a source of purity, let us adhere most strictly to the language of the new covenant, and expect pardon and holiness from the blood of atonement, and from the efficacious operations of the Holy Spirit. Let us expect those blessings from the Redeemer, and in an instantaneous way; for he is still able to say, I will, be thou clean.

Lastly, if the plague of leprosy was so dreadful in a mans flesh, and in a house; how much more dreadful is it when the leprosy of sin infects a whole nation. The whole house of Israel became so infected with idolatry, and with reigning crimes of every kind, that there was no remedy but to take it down by sickness, famine and the sword; and to remove the remnants left of successive invasions to Babylon, till a new generation was born, and the polluted land had enjoyed her sabbatical years. How dreadful are thy judgments, oh Lord!

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Leviticus 13 – 14

Of all the functions which, according to the Mosaic ritual, the priest had to discharge, none demanded more patient attention, or more strict adherence to the divine guide-book, than the discernment and proper treatment of leprosy. This fact must be obvious to every one who studies, with any measure of care, the very extensive and important section of our book at which we have now arrived.

There were two things which claimed the priest’s vigilant care, namely, the purity of the assembly, and the grace which could not admit of the exclusion of any member, save on the most clearly-established grounds. Holiness could not permit any one to remain in who ought to be out; and, on the other hand, grace would not have any one out who ought to be in. Hence, therefore, there was the most urgent need, on the part of the priest, of watchfulness, calmness, wisdom, patience, tenderness, and enlarged experience. Things might seem trifling which, in reality, were serious; and things might look like leprosy which were not it at all. The greatest care and coolness were needed. Judgement rashly formed, a conclusion hastily arrived at, might involve the most serious consequences, either as regards the assembly or some individual member thereof.

This will account for the frequent occurrence of such expressions as the following, namely, “The priest shall look;” – “The, priest shall shut up him that hath the plague seven days;” – “And the priest shall look on him the seventh day;” – “Then the priest shall shut him up seven days more” – “And the priest shall look on him again the seventh day;” – “And the priest shall see him;” – “Then the priest shall consider.” No case was to be hastily judged, or rashly decided. No opinion was to be formed from mere hearsay. Personal observation, priestly discernment, calm reflection, strict adherence to the written word – the holy, infallible guide book – all these things were imperatively demanded of the priest, if he would form a sound judgement of each case. He was not to be guided by his own thoughts, his own feelings, his own wisdom, in any thing. He had ample guidance in the word, if only he was subject thereto. Every point, every feature, every movement, every variation, every shade and character, every peculiar symptom and affection – all was provided for, with divine fullness and forethought; so that the priest only needed to be acquainted with, and subject to, the word in all things, in order to be preserved from ten thousand mistakes.

Thus much as to the priest and his holy responsibilities.

We shall now consider the disease of leprosy, as developed in a person, in a garment, or in a house.

Looking at this disease in a physical point of view, nothing can possibly be more loathsome; and being, so far as man is concerned, totally incurable, it furnishes a most vivid and appalling picture of sin – sin in one’s natures – in his circumstances – sin in an assembly. What a lesson for the soul in the fact that such a vile and humiliating disease should be used as a type of moral evil, whether in a member of God’s assembly, in the circumstances of any member, or in the assembly itself!

1. And first, then, as to leprosy in a person; or, in other words, the working of moral evil, or of that which might seem to be evil, in any member of the assembly. This is a matter of grave and solemn import – a matter demanding the utmost vigilance and care on the part of all who are concerned in the good of souls and in the glory of God, as involved in the well-being and purity of His assembly as a whole, or of each individual member thereof.

It is important to see that, while the broad principles of leprosy and its cleansing apply, in a secondary sense, to any sinner, yet, in the scripture now before us, the matter is presented in connection with those who were God’s recognised people. The person who is here seen as the subject of priestly examination, is a member of the assembly of God. It is well to apprehend this. God’s assembly must be kept pure, because it is His dwelling-place. No leper can be allowed to remain within the hallowed precincts of Jehovah’s habitation.

But, then, mark the care, the vigilance, the perfect patience, inculcated upon the priest, lest ought that was not leprosy might be treated as such, or lest ought that really was leprosy might be suffered to escape. Many things might appear “in the skin” – the place of manifestation” – like the plague of leprosy,” which, upon patient, priestly investigation, would be found to be merely superficial. This was to be carefully attended to. Some blemish might make its appearance, upon the surface, which, though demanding the jealous care of the one who had to act for God, was not, in reality, defiling. And, yet, that which seemed but a superficial blemish might prove to be something deeper than the skin, something below the surface, something affecting the hidden springs of the constitution. All this claimed the most intense care on the part of the priest. (See ver. 2-11) Some slight neglect, some trifling oversight, might lead to disastrous consequences. It might lead to the defilement of the assembly, by the presence of a confirmed leper, or to the expulsion, for some superficial blemish, of a genuine member of the Israel of God.

Now, there is a rich fund of instruction in all this for the people of God. There is a difference between personal infirmity and the positive energy of evil – between mere defects and blemishes in the outward character, and the activity of sin in the members. No doubt, it is important to watch against our infirmities; for, if not watched, judged, and guarded against, they may become the source of positive evil. (See ver. 14-25) Everything of nature must be judged and kept down. We must not make any allowance for personal infirmity, in ourselves, though we should make ample allowance for it in others. Take, for example, the matter of an irritable temper. I should judge it in myself; I should make allowance for it in another. It may, like “the burning boil,” in the case of an Israelite, (ver. 19, 20,) prove the source of real defilement – the ground of exclusion from the assembly. Every form of weakness must be watched, lest it become an occasion of sin. “A bald forehead” was not leprosy, but it was that in which leprosy might appear, and, hence, it had to be watched. There may be a hundred things which are not, in themselves, sinful, but which may become the occasion of sin, if not diligently looked after. Nor is it merely a question of what, in our estimation, may be termed Blots, blemishes, and personal infirmities, but even of what our hearts might feel disposed to boast of. Wit, humour, vivacity of spirit and temper; all these may become the source and centre of defilement. Each one has something to guard against – something to keep him ever upon the watch-tower. How happy it is that we have a Father’s heart to come to and count on, with respect to all such things We have the precious privilege of coming, at all times, into the presence of unrebuking, unupbraiding love, there to tell out all, and obtain grace to help in all, and full victory over all. We need not be discouraged, so long as we see such a motto inscribed on the door of our Father’s treasury, “He giveth more grace.” Precious motto! It has no limit. It is bottomless and boundless.

We shall now proceed to inquire what was done in every case in which the plague of leprosy was unquestionably and unmistakably defined. The God of Israel could bear with infirmity, blemish, and failure; but the moment it became a case of defilement, whether in the head, the beard, the forehead, or any other part, it could not be tolerated in the holy assembly. “The leper, in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and his head bare, and he shall put a covering upon his upper lip, and shall cry, Unclean, unclean. All the days wherein the plague shall be in him he shall be defiled; he is unclean: he shall dwell alone; without the camp shall his habitation be.” (Ver. 45, 46) Here was the leper’s condition – the leper’s occupation – the leper’s place. With rent garments, bare head, and covered lip; crying, Unclean, unclean; and dwelling outside, in the dreary solitude, the dismal desert waste. What could be more humiliating, what more depressing than this? “He shall dwell alone.” He was unfit for communion or companionship. He was excluded from the only spot, in all the world, in which Jehovah’s presence was known or enjoyed.

Reader, behold, in the poor, solitary leper, a vivid type of one in whom sin is working. This is really what it means. It is not, as we shall see presently, a helpless, ruined, guilty, convicted sinner, whose guilt and misery have come thoroughly out, and who is, therefore, a fit subject for the love of God, and the blood of Christ. No; we see in the excluded leper, one in whom sin is actually working – one in whom there is the positive energy of evil. this is what defiles and shuts out from the enjoyment of the divine presence and the communion of saints. So long as sin is working, there can be no fellowship with God, or with His people. “He shall dwell alone; without the camp shall his habitation be.” How long? “All the days wherein the plague shall be in him.” This is a great practical truth. The energy of evil is the death-blow to communion. There may be the outward appearance, the mere form, the hollow profession; but communion there can be none, so long as the energy of evil is there. It matters not what the character or amount of the evil may be, if it were but the weight of a feather, if it were but some foolish thought, so long as it continues to work, it must hinder communion, it must cause a suspension of fellowship. It is when it rises to a head, when it comes to the surface, when it is brought thoroughly out, that it can be perfectly met and put away by the grace of God and by the blood of the Lamb.

This leads us to a deeply-interesting point in connection with the leper – a point which must prove a complete paradox to all save those who understand God’s mode of dealing with sinners. “And if a 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 foot, wheresoever the priest looketh; then the priest shall consider; and, behold, if the leprosy be covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: it is all turned white: he is clean.” (Lev. 13: 12, 13) The moment a sinner is in his true place before God, the whole question is settled. Directly his real character is fully brought out, there is no further difficulty. He may have to pass through much painful exercise, ere he reaches this point – exercise consequent upon his refusal to take his true place – to bring out “all the truth,” with respect to what he is; but the moment he is brought to say, from his heart, “just as I am,” the free grace of God flows down to him. “When I kept silence, my bones waxed old, through my roaring all the day long. For day and night thy hand was heavy upon me: my moisture is turned into the drought of summer.” (Ps. 32: 3, 4) How long did this painful exercise continue? Until the whole truth was brought out – until all that which was working inwardly came fully to the surface. “I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin.” (Ver. 5)

It is deeply interesting to mark the progress of the Lord’s dealing with the leprous man, from the moment that the suspicion is raised, by certain features in the place of manifestation, until the disease covers the whole man, “from the crown of the head unto the sole of the foot.” There was no haste, and no indifference. God ever enters the place of judgement with a slow and measured pace; but when He does enter, He must act according to the claims of His nature. He can patiently investigate. He can wait for “seven days;” and should there be the slightest variation in the symptoms, He can wait for “seven days more;” but, the moment it is found to be the positive working of leprosy, there can be no toleration. “Without the camp shall his habitation be.” How long? Until the disease comes fully to the surface. “If the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean.” This is a most precious and interesting point. The very smallest speck of leprosy was intolerable to God; and yet, when the whole man was covered, from head to foot, he was pronounced clean – that is, he was a proper subject for the grace of God and the blood of atonement.

Thus is it, in every case, with the sinner. God is “Of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look upon iniquity;” (Hab. 1: 13;) and yet, the moment a sinner takes his true place, as one thoroughly lost guilty, and undone – as one in whom there is not so much as a single point on which the eye of Infinite Holiness can rest with complacency – as one who is so bad, that he cannot, possibly, be worse, there is an immediate, a perfect, a divine settlement of the entire matter. The grace of God deals with sinners; and when I know myself to be a sinner, I know myself to be one whom Christ came to save. The more clearly any one can prove me to be a sinner, the more clearly he establishes my title to the love of God, and the work of Christ. “For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God.” (1 Peter 3: 18) Now, if I am “unjust;” I am one of those very people for whom Christ died, and I am entitled to all the benefits of His death. “There is not a just man upon earth;” and, inasmuch as I am “Upon earth,” it is plain that I am “unjust;” and it is equally plain that Christ died for me – that he suffered for my sins. Since, therefore, Christ died for me, it is my happy privilege to enter into the immediate enjoyment of the fruits of His sacrifice. This is as plain as plainness itself. It demands no effort whatsoever. I am not called to be anything but just what I am. I am not called to feel, to experience, to realise anything. The word of God assures me that Christ died for me just as I am; and if He died for me I am as safe as He is Himself. There is nothing against me. Christ met all. He not only suffered for my “sins,” but He “made an end of sin.” He abolished the entire system in which, as a child of the first Adam, I stood, and He has introduced me into a new position, in association with Himself, and there I stand, before God, free from all charge of sin, and all fear of judgement.

Just as I am – without one plea,

But that thy blood was shed for me,

And that thou bidst me come to thee,

O Lamb of God, I come!

How do I know that His blood was shed for me? By the Scriptures. Blessed, solid, eternal ground of knowledge! Christ suffered for sins. I have gotten sins. Christ died “the just for the unjust.” I am unjust. Wherefore, the death of Christ appropriates itself to me, as fully, as immediately, and as divinely, as though I were the only sinner upon earth. It is not a question of my appropriation, realisation, or experience. Many souls harass themselves about this. How often has one heard such language as the following, “Oh! I believe that Christ died for sinners, but I cannot realise that my sins are forgiven. I cannot apply, I cannot appropriate, I do not experience the benefit of Christ’s death.” All this is self and not Christ. It is feeling and not Scripture. If we search from cover to cover of the blessed volume, we shall not find a syllable about being saved by realisation, experience, or appropriation. The Gospel applies itself to all who are on the ground of being lost. Christ died for sinners. That is just what I am. Wherefore, He died for me. How do I know this? Is it because I feel it? By no means. How then? By the word of God. “Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures; he was buried and rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures.” (1 Cor. 15: 3, 4) Thus it is all “according to the Scriptures.” If it were according to our feelings, we should be in a deplorable way, for our feelings are hardly the same for the length of a day; but the scriptures are ever the same. “For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.” “Thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name

No doubt, it is a very happy thing to realise. to feel, and to experience; but, if we put these things in the place of Christ, we shall neither have them nor the Christ that yields them. If I am occupied with Christ, I shall realise; but if I put my realisation in place of Christ, I shall have neither the one nor the other. This is the sad condition of thousands. Instead of resting on the stable authority of “the Scriptures,” they are ever looking into their own hearts, and, hence, they are always uncertain and, as a consequence, always unhappy. A condition of doubt is a condition of torture. But how can I get rid of my doubt? Simply by relying on the divine authority of “the Scriptures.” Of what do the Scriptures testify? Of Christ. (John 5) They declare that Christ died for our sins, and that He was raised again for our justification. (Rom. 4) This settles everything. The self-same authority that tells me I am unjust, tells me also that Christ died for me. Nothing can be plainer than this. If I were ought else than unjust, the death of Christ could not be for me at all, but being unjust, it is divinely fitted, divinely intended, and divinely applied to me. If I am occupied with anything in, of, or about myself, it is plain I have not entered into the full spiritual application of Lev. 13: 12, 13. I have not come to the Lamb of God, “just as I am.” It is when the leper is covered from head to foot that he is on the true ground. It is there and there alone that grace can meet him. “Then the priest shall consider; 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.” Precious truth! “Where sin abounded grace did much more abound.” So long as I think there is a single spot which in not covered with the direful disease, I have not come to, the end of myself. It is when my true condition is fully disclosed to my view, that I really understand the meaning of salvation by grace.

The force of all this will be more fully apprehended when we come to consider the ordinances connected with the cleansing of the leper, in Lev. 14. We shall, now, briefly enter upon the question of leprosy in a garment, as presented in Lev. 13: 47-59.

2. The garment or skin suggests to the mind the ides of a man’s circumstances or habits. This is a deeply practical point. We are to watch against the working of evil in our ways just as carefully as against evil in ourselves. The same patient investigation is observable with respect to, a garment as in the case of a person. There is no haste; neither is there any indifference. “The priest shall look upon the plague, and shut up it that hath the plague seven days.” There must be no indifference, no indolence, no carelessness. Evil may creep into our habits and circumstances, in numberless ways; and, hence, the moment we perceive ought of a suspicious nature, it must be submitted to a calm, patient process of priestly investigation. It must be “shut up seven days,” in order that it may have full time to develop itself perfectly.

“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 a skin, or in any work that is made of skin, the plague is a fretting leprosy; it is unclean. He shall therefore burn that garment.” The wrong habit must be given up, the moment I discover it. If I find myself in a thoroughly wrong position, I must abandon it. The burning of the garment expresses the act of judgement upon evil, whether in a man’s habits or circumstances. There must be no trifling with evil. In certain cases the garment was to be “washed,” which expresses the action of the Word of God upon a man’s habits. “Then the priest shall command that they wash the thing wherein the plague is, and he shall shut it up seven days more.” There is to be patient waiting in order to ascertain the effect of the Word. “And the priest shall look on the plague, after that it is washed; and, behold, if the plague have not changed . . . . thou shalt burn it in the fire.” When there is any thing radically and irremediably bad in one’s position or habits, the whole thing is to be given up. “And if the priest look, and, behold, the plague be somewhat dark: after the washing of it; then he shall rend it out of the garment.” The Word may produce such an effect as that the wrong features in a man’s character, or the wrong points in his position, shall be given up, and the evil be got rid of; but if the evil continue, after all, the whole thing must be condemned and set aside.

There is a rich mine of practical instruction in all this. We must look well to the position which we occupy, the circumstances in which we stand, the habits we adopt, the character we wear. There is special need of watchfulness. Every suspicious symptom and trait must be sedulously guarded, lest it should prove, in the sequel, to be “a fretting “or “spreading leprosy,” whereby we ourselves and many others may be defiled. We may be placed in a position attached to which there are certain wrong things which can be given up, without entirely abandoning the position; and, on the other hand, we may find ourselves in a situation in which it is impossible to” “abide with God.” Where the eye is single, the path will be plain. Where the one desire of the heart is to enjoy the divine presence, we shall easily discover those things which tend to deprive us of that unspeakable blessing.

May our hearts be tender and sensitive. May we cultivate a deeper, closer walk with God; and may we carefully guard against every form of defilement, whether in person, in habit, or in association!

We shall, now, proceed to consider the beauteous and significant ordinances connected with the cleansing of the leper, in which we shall find some of the most precious truths of the gospel presented to us.

“And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing: he shall be brought unto the priest: and the priest shall go forth out of the camp.” (Lev. 14: 1-3) We have already seen the place which the leper occupied. He was outside the camp, in the place of moral distance from God – from His sanctuary and His assembly. Moreover, he dwelt in dreary solitude, in a condition of uncleanness. He was beyond the reach of human aid; and, as for himself, he could only communicate defilement to every one and every thing he touched. It was, therefore, obviously impossible that he could do ought to cleanse himself. If, indeed, he could only defile by his very touch, how could he possibly cleanse himself How could he contribute towards, or co-operate in, his cleansing? Impossible. As an unclean leper, he could not do so much as a single thing for himself; all had to be done for him. He could not make his way to God, but God could make His way to him. He was shut up to God. There was no help for him, either in himself or in his fellow-man. It is clear that one leper could not cleanse another; and it is equally clear that if a leper touched a clean person he rendered him unclean. His only resource was in God. He was to be a debtor to grace for everything.

Hence we read, “The priest shall go forth out of the camp. It is not said, “the leper shall go.” this was wholly out of the question. It was of no use talking to the leper about going or doing. He was consigned to dreary solitude; whither could he go? He was involved in helpless defilement; what could he do? He might long for fellowship and long to be clean; but his longings were those of a lonely helpless leper. He might make efforts after cleansing; but his efforts could but prove him unclean, and tend to spread defilement. Before ever he could be pronounced “clean,” a work; had to be wrought for him – a work which he could neither do nor help to do – a work which had to be wholly accomplished by another. The leper was called to “stand still,” and behold the priest doing a work in virtue of which the leprosy could be perfectly cleansed. The priest accomplished all. The leper did nothing.

“Then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed, two birds, alive and clean, and cedarwood, and scarlet, and hyssop. and the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water.” In the priest going forth from the camp – forth from God’s dwelling place – we behold the blessed Lord Jesus coming down from the bosom of the Father, His eternal dwelling-place, into this polluted world of ours, where He beheld us sunk in the polluting leprosy of sin. He, like the good Samaritan, “came where we were.” He did not come half-way, merely. He did not come nine-tenths of the way. He came all the way. This was indispensable. He could not, consistently with the holy claims of the throne of God, have bidden our leprosy to depart had He remained in the bosom. He could call worlds into existence by the word of His mouth; but when leprous sinners had to be cleansed, something more was needed. “God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son.” When worlds were to be framed, God had but to speak, When sinners had to be saved, He had to give His Son. “In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.” (1 John 4: 9, 10)

But there was far more to be accomplished than the mission and incarnation of the Son. It would have availed the leper but little indeed, had the priest merely gone forth from the camp and looked upon his low and forlorn condition. Blood shedding was essentially necessary ere leprosy could be removed. The death of a spotless victim was needed. “Without shedding of blood is no remission.” (Heb. 9: 22) And, be it observed, that the shedding of blood was the real basis of the leper’s cleansing. It was not a mere circumstance which, in conjunction with others, contributed to the leper’s cleansing. By no means. the giving up of the life was the grand and all-important fact. when this was accomplished the way was open; every barrier was removed; God could deal in perfect grace with the leper. this point should be distinctly laid hold of, if my reader would fully enter into the glorious doctrine of the blood.

“And the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water.” Here we have the acknowledged type of the death of Christ, “who through the eternal Spirit, offered himself without spot to God.” “He was crucified in weakness.” (Heb. 9; 2 Cor. 13) The greatest, the mightiest, the most glorious, the most momentous work that ever was accomplished, throughout the wide universe of God, was wrought “in weakness.” Oh! my reader, how terrible a thing must sin be, in the judgement of God, when His own beloved Son had to come down from heaven, and hang upon yonder cursed tree, a spectacle to men, to angels, and to devils, in order that you and I might be forgiven! And what a type of sin have we in leprosy! Who would have thought that that little “bright spot” appearing on the person of some member of the congregation was a matter of such grave consequence? But, ah! that little “bright spot” was nothing less than the energy of evil, in the place of manifestation. It was the index of the dreadful working of sin in the nature; and ere that person could be fitted for a place in the assembly, or for the enjoyment of communion with a holy God, the Son of God had to leave those bright heavens, and descend into the lowest parts of the earth, in order to make a full atonement for that which exhibited itself merely in the form of a little “bright spot.” Let us remember this. Sin is a dreadful thing in the estimation of God. He cannot tolerate so much as a single sinful thought. Before one such thought could be forgiven, Christ had to die upon the cross. The most trifling sin, if any sin can be called trifling, demanded nothing less than the death of God’s Eternal and Co-equal Son. But, eternal praise be to God, what sin demanded, redeeming love freely gave; and now God is infinitely more glorified in the forgiveness of sins than He could have been had Adam maintained his original innocency. God is more glorified in the salvation, the pardon, the justification, the preservation, and final glorification of guilty man, than He could have been in maintaining an innocent man in the enjoyment of creation blessings. Such is the precious mystery of redemption. May our hearts enter, by the power of the Holy Ghost, into the living and profound depths of this wondrous mystery!

“As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water. And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open field.” The blood being shed, the priest can enter directly and fully upon his work. Up to this, we read, “the priest shall command;” but now he acts immediately himself. The death of Christ is the basis of His priestly ministration. Having entered with His own blood into the holy place, He acts as our Great High Priest, applying to our souls all the precious results of His atoning work, and maintaining us in the full and divine integrity of the position into which His sacrifice has introduced us. “For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. For if he were on earth he should not be a priest.” (Heb. 8: 3, 4)

We could hardly have a more perfect type of the resurrection of Christ than that presented in “the living bird let loose into the open field.” It was not let go until after the death of its companion; for the two birds typify one Christ, in two stages of His blessed work, namely, death and resurrection. Ten thousand birds let loose would not have availed for the leper. It was that living bird, mounting upward into the open heavens, bearing upon his wing that significant token of accomplished atonement – it was that which told out the great fact that the work was done – the ground cleared, the foundation laid. Thus is it in reference to our blessed Lord Jesus Christ. His resurrection declares the glorious triumph of redemption. “He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.” “He was raised again for our justification.” It is this that sets the burdened heart free, and liberates the struggling conscience. The scripture assures me that Jesus was nailed to the cross under the weight of my sins; but the same Scriptures assure me that He rose from the grave without one of those sins upon Him. Nor is this all. The same Scriptures assure me that all who put their trust in Jesus are as free from all charge of guilt as He is; that there is no more wrath or condemnation for them than for Him; that they are in Him, one with Him, accepted in Him; co-quickened, co-raised, co-seated with Him. Such is the peace giving testimony of the Scriptures of truth – such, the record of God who cannot lie. (See Rom. 6: 6-11; Rom. 8: 1-4; 2 Cor, 5: 21; Eph. 2: 5, 6; Col. 2: 10-15, 1 John 4: 17)

But we have another most important truth set before us in ver 6 of our chapter. We not only see our full deliverance from guilt and condemnation, as beautifully exhibited in the living bird let loose, but we see also our entire deliverance from all the attractions of earth and all the influences of nature. “The scarlet” would be the apt expression of the former, while “the cedar wood and hyssop” would set forth the latter. The cross is the end of all this world’s glory. God presents it as such, and the believer recognises it as such. “God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, whereby the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.” (Gal. 6: 14)

Then, as to the “cedar wood and hyssop,” they present to us, as it were, the two extremes of nature’s wide range. Solomon “spoke of trees, from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall.” (1 Kings 4: 33) From the lofty cedar which crowns the sides of Lebanon, down to the lowly hyssop – the wide extremes and all that lies between – nature, in all its departments, is brought under the power of the cross; so that the believer sees, in the death of Christ, the end of all his guilt, the end of all earth’s glory, and the end of the whole system of nature – the entire old creation. And with what is he to be occupied? With Him who is the Antitype of that living bird, with blood-stained feathers, ascending into the open heavens. Precious, glorious, soul-satisfying object! A risen, ascended, triumphant, glorified Christ, who has passed into the heavens, bearing in His sacred Person the marks of an accomplished atonement. It is with Him we have to do. We are shut up to Him. He is God’s exclusive object. He is the centre of heaven’s joy, the theme of angels’ song. We want none of earth’s glory, none of nature’s attractions. We can behold them all, together with our sin and guilt, for ever set aside by the death of Christ. We can well afford to dispense with earth and nature, inasmuch as we have gotten, instead thereof “the unsearchable riches of Christ.”

“And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy, seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the bird loose into the open field.” The more deeply we ponder over the contents of Lev. 13 the more clearly we shall see how utterly impossible it was for the leper to do ought towards his own cleansing. All he could do was to “put a covering upon his upper lip;” and all he could say was, “Unclean, unclean.” It belonged to God, and to Him alone, to devise and accomplish a work whereby the leprosy could be perfectly cleansed; and, further, it belonged to God, and to Him alone, to pronounce the leper “clean.” Hence it is written,” the priest shall sprinkle;” and “he shall pronounce him clean.” It is not said, “the leper shall sprinkle, and pronounce, or imagine himself, clean.” This would never do. God was the Judge – God was the Healer – God was the Cleanser. He alone knew what leprosy was, how it could be put away, and when to pronounce the leper clean. The leper might have gone on all his days covered with leprosy, and yet be wholly ignorant of what was wrong with him. It was the word of God – the Scriptures of truth – the divine Record, that declared the full truth as to leprosy; and nothing short of the self-same authority could pronounce the leper clean, and that, moreover, only, on the solid and indisputable ground of death and resurrection. There is the most precious connection between the three things in verse 7: the blood is sprinkled, the leper pronounced clean, and the living bird let loose. There is not so much as a single syllable about what the leper was to do, to say, to think, or to feel. It was enough that he was a leper; a fully revealed, a thoroughly judged leper, covered from head to foot. this sufficed for him; all the rest pertained to God.

It is of all importance, for the anxious inquirer after peace, to enter into the truth unfolded in this branch of our subject. So many are tried by the question of feeling, realising, and appropriating, instead of seeing, as in the leper’s case, that the sprinkling of the blood was as independent and as divine as the shedding of it. It is not said, “The leper shall apply, appropriate, or realise, and then he shall be clean.” By no means. The plan of deliverance was divine; the provision of the sacrifice was divine; the shedding of the blood was divine; the sprinkling of the blood as divine; the record as to the result was divine: in short, it was all divine.

It is not that we should undervalue realisation, or, to speak more correctly, communion, through the Holy Ghost, with all the precious results of Christ’s work for as. Far from it: we shall see, presently, the place assigned thereto, in the divine economy. But then, we are no more saved by realisation, than the leper was cleansed by it. The gospel, by which we are saved, is that “Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures.” There is nothing about realisation here. No doubt, it is happy to realise. It is a very happy thing for one, who was just on the point of being drowned, to realise himself in a life-boat; but, clearly, he is saved by the boat and not by his realisation. So it is with the sinner that believes on the Lord Jesus Christ. He is saved by death and resurrection. Is it because he realises it? No; but because God says it. It is “according to the Scriptures.” Christ died and rose again; and, on that ground, God pronounces him clean.

“No condemnation, O, my soul!

‘Tis God that speaks the word

This gives immense peace to the soul. I have to do with God’s plain record, which nothing can ever shake. That record has reference to God’s own work. It is He Himself, who has wrought all that was needful, in order to my being pronounced clean in His sight. My pardon no more depends upon my realisation than upon any “works of righteousness that I have done;” and it no more depends upon my works of righteousness than it does upon my crimes. In a word, it depends, exclusively, upon the death and resurrection of Christ. How do I know it? God tells me. It is “according to the scriptures.”

There are, perhaps, few things which disclose the deep-seated legality of our hearts, more strikingly, that this oft-raised question of realisation. We will have in something of self, and thus so sadly mar our peace and liberty in Christ. It is mainly because of this that I dwell, at such length, upon the beautiful ordinance of The cleansing of the leper, and especially on the truth unfolded in Lev. 14: 7. It was the priest that sprinkled the blood; and it was the priest that pronounced the leper clean. Thus it is in the case of the sinner. The moment he is on his true ground, the blood of Christ and the word of God apply themselves without any further question or difficulty whatever. But the moment this harassing question of realisation is raised, the peace is disturbed, the heart depressed, and the mind bewildered. the more thoroughly I get done with self, and become occupied with Christ, as presented in “the Scriptures,” the more settled my peace will be. If the leper had looked at himself, when the priest pronounced him clean, would he have found any basis for the declaration? Surely not. The sprinkled blood was the basis of the divine record, and not anything in, or connected with, the leper. The leper was not asked how he felt, or what he thought. He was not questioned as to whether he had a deep sense of the vileness of his disease. He was an acknowledged leper; that was enough. It was for such an one the blood was shed; and that blood made him clean. How did he know this? Was it because he felt it? No; but because the priest, on God’s behalf, and by His authority told him so. The leper was pronounced clean on the very same ground that the living bird was let loose. The same blood which stained the feathers of that living bird was sprinkled upon the leper. This was a perfect settlement of the whole affair, and that, too, in a manner entirely independent of the leper, the leper’s thoughts, his feelings, and his realisation. Such is the type. had when we look from the type to the Antitype, we see that our blessed Lord Jesus Christ entered heaven, and laid on the throne of God the eternal record of an accomplished work, in virtue of which the believer enters also. This is a most glorious truth, divinely calculated to dispel from the heart of the anxious inquirer every doubt, every fear, every bewildering thought, and every harassing question. A risen Christ is God’s exclusive object, and He sees every believer in Him. May every awakened soul find abiding repose in this emancipating truth.

“And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days.” (Ver. 8) The leper, being pronounced clean, can begin to do what he could not even have attempted to do before, namely, to cleanse himself, cleanse his habits, shave off all his hair; and, having done so, he is privileged to take his place in the camp – the place of ostensible, recognised, public relationship with the God of Israel, whose presence in that camp it was which rendered the expulsion of the leper needful. The blood having been applied in its expiating virtue, there is the washing of water, which expresses the action of the word on the character, the habits, the ways, so as to render the person, not only in God’s view, but also in the view of the congregation, morally and practically fit for a place in the public assembly.

But, be it observed, the man, though sprinkled with blood and washed with water, and thus entitled to a position in the public assembly, was not permitted to enter his own tent. He was not permitted to enter upon the full enjoyment of those private, personal privileges, which belonged to his own peculiar place in the camp. In other words, though knowing redemption through the shed and sprinkled blood, and owning the word as the rule, according to which his person and all his habits should be cleansed and regulated, he had yet to be brought, in the power of the Spirit, into full, intelligent communion with his own special place, portion, and privileges in Christ.

I speak according to the doctrine of the type; and I feel it to be of importance to apprehend the truth unfolded therein. It is too often overlooked. There are many, who own the blood of Christ as the alone ground of pardon, and the word of God as that whereby alone their habits, ways, and associations are to be cleansed and ordered, who, nevertheless, are far from entering, by the power of the Holy Ghost, into communion with the preciousness and excellency of that One, Whose blood has put away their sins, and whose word is to cleanse their practical habits. They are in the place of ostensible and actual relationship; but not in the power of personal communion. It is perfectly true, that all believers are in Christ, and, as such, entitled to communion with the very highest truths. Moreover, they have the Holy Ghost, as the power of communion. All this is divinely true; but, then, there is not that entire setting aside of all that pertains to nature, which is really essential to the power of communion with Christ, in all the aspects of His character and work. In point of fact, this latter will not be fully known to any until “the eighth day” – the day of resurrection-glory, when we shall know even as we are known. Then, indeed, each one for himself, and all together, shall enter into the full, unhindered Power of communion with Christ, in all the precious phases of His Person, and features of His character, unfolded from verse 10 to 20 of our chapter. Such is the hope set before us; but, even now, in proportion as we enter, by faith, through the mighty energy of the indwelling Spirit, into the death of nature and all pertaining thereto, we can feed upon and rejoice in Christ as the portion of our souls, in the place of individual communion.

“But it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair off his head, and his beard, and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall wash his clothes, also he shall wash his flesh in water, and he shall be clean.” (Ver. 9.) Now, it is clear, that the leper was just as clean, in God’s judgement, on the first day, when the blood was sprinkled upon him, in its sevenfold or perfect efficacy, as he was on the seventh day. Wherein, then, was the difference? Not in his actual standing and condition, but in his personal intelligence and communion. On the seventh day, he was called to enter into the full and complete abolition of all that pertained to nature. He was called to apprehend that, not merely was nature’s leprosy to be put away, but nature’s ornaments – yea, all that was natural – all that belonged to the old condition.

It is one thing to know, as a doctrine, that God sees my nature to be dead, and it is quite another thing for me to “reckon” myself as dead – to put off, practically, the old man and his deeds – to mortify my members which are on the earth. This, probably, is what many godly persons mean when they speak of progressive sanctification. They mean a right thing, though they do not put it exactly as the Scriptures do. The leper was pronounced clean, the moment the blood was sprinkled upon Him; and yet he had to cleanse himself. How was this? In the former case, he was clean, in the judgement of God; in the latter, he was to be clean practically, in his own personal intelligence, and in his manifested character. Thus it is with the believer. He is, as one with Christ, “washed, sanctified, and justified” – “accepted” – “complete.” (1 Cor. 6: 11; Eph. 1: 6; Col 2: 10) Such is his unalterable standing and condition before God. He is as perfectly sanctified as he is justified, for Christ is the measure of both the one and the other, according to God’s judgement and view of the case. But, then, the believer’s apprehension of all this, in his own soul, and his exhibition thereof in his habits and ways, open up quite another line of things. Hence it is we read,” Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” (2 Cor. 7: 1) It is because Christ has cleansed us by His precious blood that therefore we are called to” cleanse ourselves” by the application of the word, through the Spirit. “This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness. because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear record, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” (1 John 5: 6-8) Here we have atonement by the blood, cleansing by the word, and power by the Spirit, all founded upon the death of Christ, and all vividly foreshadowed in the ordinances connected with the cleansing of the leper.

“And on the eighth day he shall take two he lambs without blemish, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish, and three tenth deals of fine flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and one log of oil. And the priest that maketh him clean shall present the man that is to be made clean, and those things, before the Lord, at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And the priest shall take one he lamb, and offer him for a trespass offering, and the log of oil, and wave them for a wave offering before the Lord.” (Ver. 10-12) The entire range of offerings is here introduced; but it is the trespass offering which is first killed, inasmuch as the leper is viewed as an actual trespasser. This in true in every case. As those, who have trespassed against God, we need Christ as the one who atoned, on the cross, for those trespasses. “Himself bare our sins in his own body on the tree.” The first view which the sinner gets of Christ is as the Antitype of the trespass offering.

“And the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and the priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot.” “The ear” – that guilty member which had so frequently proved a channel of communication for vanity, folly, and even uncleanness – that ear must be cleansed by the blood of the trespass offering. Thus all the guilt, which I have ever contracted by that member, is forgiven according to God’s estimate of the blood of Christ. “The right hand,” which had, so frequently, been stretched forth for the execution of deeds of vanity, folly, and even uncleanness, must be cleansed by the blood of the trespass offering. Thus all the guilt, which I have ever contracted by that member, is forgiven, according to God’s estimate of the blood of Christ. “The foot,” which had so often run in the way of vanity, folly, and even uncleanness, must now be cleansed by the blood of the trespass offering, so that all the guilt, which I have ever contracted by that member, is forgiven, according to God’s estimate of the blood of Christ. Yes; all, all, all is forgiven – all is cancelled – all forgotten – all sunk as lead in the mighty waters of eternal oblivion. Who shall bring it up again? Shall angel, man, or devil, be able to plunge into those unfathomed and unfathomable waters, to bring up from thence those trespasses of “foot,” “hand,” or “ear,” which redeeming love has cast thereinto? Oh! no; blessed be God, they are gone, and gone for ever. I am better off, by far, than if Adam had never sinned. Precious truth! To be washed in the blood is better far than to be clothed in innocency.

But God could not rest satisfied with the mere blotting out of trespasses, by the atoning blood of Jesus. This, in itself, is a great thing; but there is something greater still.

“And the priest shall take some of the log of oil, and pour it into the palm of his own left hand: and the priest shall dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand, and shall sprinkle of the oil with his finger seven times before the Lord. And of the rest of the oil that is in his hand shall the priest put upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot, upon the blood of the trespass offering; and the remnant of the oil that is in the priest’s hand, he shall pour upon the head of him that is to be cleansed; and the priest shall make an atonement for him before the Lord.” (Ver. 15-18) Thus, not only are our members cleansed by the blood of Christ, but also consecrated to God, in the power of the Spirit. God’s work is not only negative, but positive. The ear is no longer to be the vehicle for communicating defilement, but to be “swift to hear” the voice of the Good Shepherd. The hand is no longer to be used as the instrument of unrighteousness, but to be stretched forth in acts of righteousness, grace, and true holiness. The foot is no longer to tread in folly’s paths, but to run in the way of God’s holy commandments. And, finally, the whole man is to be dedicated to God in the energy of the Holy Ghost.

It is deeply interesting to see that “the oil” was put upon the blood of the trespass offering.” The blood or Christ is the divine basis of the operations of the Holy Ghost. The blood and the oil go together. As sinners we could know nothing of the latter save on the ground of the former. The oil could not have been put upon the leper until the blood of the trespass offering had first been applied. “In whom also, after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of Promise.” The divine accuracy of the type evokes the acclamation of the renewed mind. The more closely we scrutinise it – the more of the light of Scripture we concentrate upon it – the more its beauty, force, and precision, are perceived and enjoyed. All, as might justly be expected, is in the most lovely harmony with the entire analogy of the word of God. There is no need for any effort of the mind. Take Christ as the key to unlock the rich treasury of the types; explore the precious contents by the light of Inspiration’s heavenly lamp; let the Holy Ghost be your interpreter; and you Cannot fail to be edified, enlightened, and blessed.

“And the priest shall offer the sin offering, and make an atonement for him that is to be cleansed from his uncleanness.” Here we have a type of Christ, not only as the bearer of our trespasses, but also as the One, who made an end of sin, root and branch; the One, who destroyed the entire system of sin – “The Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world.” “The propitiation for the whole world.” As the trespass offering, Christ put away all my trespasses. As the sin offering, He met the great root from whence those trespasses emanated. He met all; but it is as the trespass offering I first know Him, because it is as such I first need Him. It is the “conscience of sins” that first troubles me. This is divinely met by my precious Trespass Offering. Then, as I get on, I find that all these sins had a root, a parent stem, and what root or stem I find within me. This, likewise, in divinely met by my precious Sin Offering. The order, as presented in the leper’s case, is perfect. It is precisely the order which we can trace in the actual experience of every soul. The trespass offering comes first, and then the sin offering.

“And afterward he shall kill the burnt offering.” This offering presents the highest possible aspect of the death of Christ. It is Christ offering Himself without spot to God, without special reference to either trespasses or sin. It is Christ in voluntary devotedness, walking to the cross, and there offering Himself as a sweet savour to God.

“And the priest shall offer the burnt offering and the meat offering upon the altar: and the priest shall make an atonement for him, and he shall be clean.” (ver. 20.) The meat offering typifies “the man Christ Jesus” in His perfect human life. It is intimately associated, in the case of the cleansed leper, with the burnt offering; and so it is in the experience of every saved sinner. It is when we know our trespasses are forgiven, and the root or principle of sin judged, that we can, according to our measure, by the power of the Spirit, enjoy communion with God about that blessed One, who lived a perfect human life, down here, and then offered Himself without spot to God on the cross. Thus, the four classes of offerings are brought before us in their divine order, in the cleansing of the leper – namely, the trespass offering, the sin offering, the burnt offering, and the meet offering, each exhibiting its own specific aspect of our blessed Lord Jesus Christ.

Here closes the record of the Lord’s dealings with the leprous man; and, oh! what a marvellous record it is! What an unfolding of the exceeding hatefulness of sin, the grace and holiness of God, the preciousness of Christ’s Person, and the efficacy of His work! Nothing can be more interesting than to mark the footprints of divine grace forth from the hallowed precincts of the sanctuary, to the defiled place where the leper stood, with bare head, covered lip, and rent garments. God visited the leper where he was; but He did not leave him there. He went forth prepared to accomplish a work, in virtue of which he could bring the leper into a higher place, and higher communion than ever he had known before. On the ground of this work, the leper was conducted from his Place of defilement and loneliness to the very door of the tabernacle of the congregation, the priestly place, to enjoy priestly privileges. (Comp. Ex. 29: 20, 21, 32) How could he ever have climbed to such an elevation! Impossible For ought he could do, he might have languished and died in his leprosy, had not the sovereign grace of the God of Israel stooped to lift him from the dunghill, to set him among the princes of His people. If ever there was a case in which the question of human effort, human merit, and human righteousness, could be fully tried and perfectly settled, the leper is, unquestionably, that case. Indeed it were a sad loss of time to discuss such a question in the presence of such a case. It must be obvious, to the most cursory reader, that nought but free grace, reigning through righteousness, could meet the leper’s condition and the leper’s need. And how gloriously and triumphantly did that grace act! It travelled down into the deepest depths, that it might raise the leper to the loftiest heights. See what the leper lost, and see what he gained! He lost all that pertained to nature, and he gained the blood of atonement and the grace of the Spirit. I mean typically. Truly, he was a gainer, to an incalculable amount. He was infinitely better off than if he had never been thrust forth from the camp. Such is the grace of God! Such the power And value, the virtue and efficacy, of the blood of Jesus!

How forcibly does all this remind us of the prodigal, in Luke 15! In him, too, leprosy had wrought and risen to a head. He had been afar off in the defiled place, where his own sins and the intense selfishness of the far country had created a solitude around him. But, blessed for ever be a Father’s deep and tender love, we know how it ended. The prodigal found a higher place, and tasted higher communion than ever he had known before. “The fatted calf’ had never been slain for him before. “The best robe” had never been on him before. And how was this? Was it a question of the prodigal’s merit? Oh! no; it was simply a question of the Father’s love.

Dear reader, let me ask, can you ponder over the record of God’s dealings with the leper, in Leviticus 14, or the Father’s dealings with the prodigal, in Luke 15, and not have an enlarged sense of the love that dwells in the bosom of God, that flows through the Person and work of Christ, that is recorded in the Scriptures of truth, and brought home to the heart by the Holy Ghost? Lord grant us a deeper and more abiding fellowship with Himself!

From verse 21 to 32 we have “the law of him in whom is the plague of leprosy, whose hand is not able to get that which pertaineth to his cleansing.” This refers to the sacrifices of “the eighth day,” and not to the “two birds alive and clean.” These latter could not be dispensed with in any case, because they set forth the death and resurrection of Christ as the alone ground on which God can receive a sinner back to Himself. On the other hand, the sacrifices of” the eighth day,” being connected with the soul’s communion, must, in some degree, be affected by the measure of the soul’s apprehension. But, whatever that measure may be, the grace of God can meet it with those peculiarly touching words, “such as he is able to get.” And, not only so, but” the two turtle doves” conferred the same privileges on the “poor,” as the two lambs conferred upon the rich, inasmuch as both the one and the other pointed to “the precious blood of Christ,” which is of infinite, changeless, and eternal efficacy in the judgement of God. All stand before God on the ground of death and resurrection. All are brought into the same place of nearness; but all do not enjoy the same measure of communion – all have not the same measure of apprehension of the preciousness of Christ in all the aspects of His work. They might, if they would; but they allow themselves to be hindered, in various ways. Earth and nature, with their respective influences, act prejudicially; The Spirit is grieved, and Christ is not enjoyed as He might be. It is utterly vain to expect that, if we are living in the region of nature, we can be feeding upon Christ. No; there must be self emptiness, self-denial, self-judgement, if we would habitually feed upon Christ. It is not a question of salvation. It is not a question of the leper introduced into the camp – the place of recognised relationship. By no means. It is only a question of the soul’s communion, of its enjoyment of Christ. As to this, the largest measure lies open to us. We may have communion with the very highest truths; but, if our measure be small, the unupbraiding grace of our Father’s heart breathes in the sweet words, “such as he is able to get.” The title of all is the same, however our capacity may vary; and, blessed be God, when we get into His presence, all the desires of the new nature, in their utmost intensity, are satisfied; all the powers of the new nature, in their fullest range, are occupied. May we prove these things in our souls’ happy experience, day by day!

We shall close this section with a brief reference to the subject of leprosy in a house.

3. The reader will observe, that a case of leprosy, in a person, or in a garment, might occur in the wilderness; but, in the matter of a house, it was, of necessity, confined to the land of Canaan. “When ye be come into the land of Canaan, which I give to you for a possession, and I put the plague of leprosy in a house of the land of your possession, . . . . .then the priest shall command that they empty the house, before the priest go into it to see the plague, that all that is in the house be not made unclean; and afterward the priest shall go in to see the house. And he shall look on the plague; and, behold, if the plague be in the walls of the house with hollow strakes, greenish or reddish, which in sight are lower than the wall; then the priest shall go out of the house to the door of the house, and shut up the house seven days.”

Looking at the house as the type of an assembly, we have some weighty principles presented to us as to the divine method of dealing with moral evil, or suspicion of evil, in a congregation. We observe the same holy calmness and perfect patience with respect to the house, as we have already seen, in reference to the person or the garment. There was no haste, and no indifference, either as regards the house, the garment, or the individual. The man who had an interest in the house was not to treat with indifference any suspicious symptoms appearing in the wall thereof; neither was he to pronounce judgement himself upon such symptoms. It belonged to the priest to investigate and to judge. The moment that ought of a questionable nature made its appearance, the priest assumed a judicial attitude with respect to the house. The house was under judgement, though not condemned. The perfect period was to be allowed to run its course, ere any decision could be arrived at. The symptoms might prove to be merely superficial, in which case there would be no demand for any action whatever.

“And the priest shall come again The seventh day, and shall look: and, behold, if the plague be spread in the walls of the house, then the priest shall command that they take away the stones in which the plague is, and they shall cast them into an unclean place without the city.” The whole house was not to be condemned. The removal of the leprous stones was first to be tried.

“And if the plague come again, and break out in the house, after that he hath taken away the stones, and after that he hath scraped the house, and after that it is plastered; then the priest shall come and look; and, behold, if the plague be spread in the house. it is a fretting leprosy in the house: it is unclean. And he shall break; down the house, the stones of it, and the timber thereof, and all the mortar of the house; and he shall carry them forth out of the city into an unclean place.” The case was hopeless, the evil irremediable, the whole building was annihilated.

“Moreover, he that goeth into the house all the while that it is shut up shall be unclean until the even. And he that lieth in the house shall wash his clothes; and he that eateth in the house shall wash his clothes.” This is a solemn truth. Contact defiles! Let us remember this. It was a principle largely inculcated under the Levitical economy; and, surely, it is not less applicable now.

“And if the priest shall come in, and look upon it, and, behold, the plague hath not spread in the house, after the house was plastered; then the priest shall pronounce the house clean, because the plague is healed.” The removal of the defiled stones, &c., had arrested the progress of the evil, and rendered all further judgement needless. The house was no longer to be viewed as in a judicial place; but, being cleansed by the application of the blood, it was again fit for occupation.

And, now, as to the moral of all this. It is, at once, interesting, solemn, and practical. Look, for example, at the church at Corinth. It was a spiritual house, composed of spiritual stones; but, alas! the eagle eye of the apostle discerned upon its walls certain symptoms of a most suspicious nature. Was he indifferent? Surely not. He had imbibed far too much of the spirit of the Master of the house to admit, for one moment, of any such thing. But he was no more hasty than indifferent. He commanded the leprous stone to be removed, and gave the house a thorough scraping. Having acted thus faithfully, he patiently awaited the result. And what was that result? All that the heart could desire. “Nevertheless, God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus; and not by his coming only, but by the consolation wherewith he was comforted in you, when he told us your earnest desire, your mourning, your fervent mind toward me; so that I rejoiced the more . . . . . . . In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter.” (Comp. 1 Cor. 5 with 2 Cor. 7: 11) This is a lovely instance. The zealous care of the apostle was amply rewarded; the plague was stayed, and the assembly delivered from the defiling influence of unjudged moral evil.

Take another solemn example. “And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write: These things saith he that hath the sharp sword with two edges; I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan’s seat is; and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth. But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, Which thing I hate. Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.” (Rev. 2: 12-16.) Here the divine Priest stands in a judicial attitude with respect to His house at Pergamos. He could not be indifferent to symptoms so alarming; but He patiently and graciously gives time to repent. If reproof or warning, and discipline, prove unavailing, judgement must take its course.

These things are full of practical teaching as to the doctrine of the assembly. The seven churches of Asia afford various striking illustrations of the house under priestly judgement. We should ponder them deeply and prayerfully. They are of immense value. We should never sit down, at ease, so long as ought of a suspicious nature is making its appearance in the assembly. We may be tempted to say, “It is none of my business;” but it is the business of every one who loves the Master of the house to have a jealous, godly care, for the purity of that house; and if we shrink; from the due exercise of this care, it will not be for our honour or profit, in the day of the Lord.

I shall not pursue this subject any further in these pages and shall merely remark, in closing this section, that I do not doubt, in the least, that this whole subject of leprosy has a great dispensational bearing, not only upon the house of Israel, but also upon the professing church.

Fuente: Mackintosh’s Notes on the Pentateuch

1115. Ritual Cleanliness and Uncleanliness.

Leviticus 11, Animals; Leviticus 12, Childbirth; Leviticus 13, Skin diseases (including tainted garments); Lev 14:1-32, Purgation for skin diseases; Lev 14:33-57, Leprosy in houses, and general conclusion to the Law; Leviticus 15, Issues.

Probably to most modern readers, this section is the least intelligible in the book. We must consider it (a) in its ethnological and (b) its specifically Hebrew aspect, (a) These laws are properly taboos. The term is Polynesian, signifying what is in itself, or artificially, forbidden, either for the whole community, or else for common people, or priests, or kings (p. 629). Taboos may relate to places, or to the sexes, or to certain ages. Certain kinds of food may be taboo, universally, or as determined temporarily by a chief; individuals may be taboo to one anotherspeech with a mother-in-law is very widely forbidden, and also approach to ones wife after childbirth; or the wife must not pronounce her husbands name. In the Australian initiation ceremonies, speaking is taboo to the initiates for certain periods. The origin of taboo is still obscure. What is not customary comes in time to excite horror (cf. the varying laws of decency in different primitive tribes). This horror is felt to be religious, and it can be easily used by chiefs or priests, for selfish or for hygienic purposes. (b) Heb. practice shows a notable restriction in the institution. In early times a chief could temporarily impose a ban (Jos 6:18, 1Sa 14:24); and taboos are recognised on priests (Lev 10:6, etc.) and in connexion with animals, birth, and certain diseases. Why? From the nature of things, or for moral or hygienic or ritual reasons? The suggestion of Nature is an insecure guide, since taboos on animals (e.g, swine, holy animals among Greeks and Arabs) and actions (e.g. sexual rules) vary so widely. Morality will not explain taboos on animal flesh (save that perhaps some kinds of flesh may arouse passion) or the restriction on the young mother. Hygiene may explain some taboos; but why the restriction of food to animals Levitically clean, or why should a mother be unclean for forty days after the birth of a boy, eighty days after the birth of a girl? Ritual may explain some prohibitions, as of animals which were only used in heathen rites; it may be, as Bertholet suggests, that whatever is under the protection or power of an alien god is unclean or taboo (hence perhaps the rejection of horseflesh for food; horses were sacred among the heathen Saxons; camels are forbidden to Thibetan lamas). What, then, of the infected house? Probably all four reasons were operative; given the concept of things not to be associated with ordinary life, the class would grow by the addition of things which, for various reasons, were disliked. Note the traces of systemisation in the code. The connexion of the ideas underlying it with institutions so widespread in primitive thought shows that the law carries us back to a period far anterior to Moses, though the distinction between clean and unclean is not mentioned in Exodus 21-23. Clean must be distinguished from holy. The former is the condition of intercourse with all society; the latter of approach to God. Hence, there are grades of holiness; but uncleanness exhibits only differences of duration (until the evening, etc.). The holy and the unclean, however, are alike in being untouchable by man, though for different reasons; hence the Rabbinic phrase, used of canonical books, they defile the hands (p. 39). [We may infer from Hag 2:11-13 that the infection of uncleanness was more virulent than the infection of holiness. Holy flesh could convey holiness to the skirt but the skirt could not convey it to the food it touched. The corpse could convey uncleanness to the person who touched it, and he in turn could convey it to the food. The holy communicates its quality only to one remove, the unclean to two. The reason is apparently that the holiness of a holy thing is always derivative, since nothing is holy in itself but becomes holy only through consecration to God, the sole fount of holiness (p. 196). A thing may, however, be unclean in itself. There are therefore really four terms in the holy, only three in the unclean series in this passage; viz. (a) God, holy flesh, skirt, food; (b) corpse, man unclean through contact, food. Holiness and uncleanness are thus each infectious at two removes from the source, but no further.A. S. P.] The section is probably not original in this place; it breaks the connexion between chs. 10 and 16. Some parts are distinct from the rest, e.g. Lev 11:24-40, Lev 11:43-45; Lev 13:1-46 must have been originally distinct from Lev 14:3-20. A similar code is found in Deuteronomy 14. Probably Deuteronomy 14 is a copy of an older version of Leviticus 11, e.g. Dt. omits the cormorant (17). In one respect Lev. is milder than Dt. (contrast Lev 11:39 f. with Deu 14:21). Lev. adds the permission of leaping insects, and gives a special direction as to fishes.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

RESTORING OF A LEPER (vv. 1-20)

Even a case of leprosy may be healed, though this is not frequently seen in the Old Testament. Miriam’s leprosy was healed very soon after her infliction (Num 12:9-16) because of the intercession of Moses. She was shut out of the camp only seven days. Naaman was healed of his leprosy, but he was a Gentile (2Ki 5:1; 2Ki 5:14), and therefore the Jewish ritual would not apply to him. Many lepers were in Israel at the time, but none of them were healed (Luk 4:27). The Lord Jesus healed lepers (Mat 8:2-3; Luk 17:12-14), and told them to show themselves to the priests.

If a leper were healed he was to be brought to the priest (v. 2), and the priest was to examine him outside the camp. The healing being confirmed, then the priest was to command that two live and clean birds should be brought, and cedar wood, scarlet and hyssop. One bird was then to be killed in an earthen vessel over running water. Then the living bird, the cedar wood, scarlet and hyssop were to be dipped in the blood of the bird that was killed. over running water (v. 5). The blood then was to be sprinkled seven times upon the recovered leper, and the living bird was let loose.

Both birds speak of Christ, the first one picturing His sacrifice on Calvary. The earthen vessel reminds us that He came in a human body (a vessel) of lowly humiliation to be a willing sacrifice. Running water or living water symbolizes the living power of the Spirit of God energizing that wonderful sacrifice, so that life would triumph over death.

Therefore the living bird is a picture of Christ in resurrection. The cedar wood represents all that is exalted and dignified in manhood, while the hyssop is the opposite, speaking of the lowliest of mankind. Whether high or low, rich or poor, Christ’s work has been necessary for all, and sufficient for all; and the scarlet (in between) is the warmth of the love of God that brings all together. This is manifested only in Christ raised from the dead. The blood sprinkled on all these tells us that in resurrection the cross can never be forgotten, and the great blessing that Christ has accomplished for Himself in unity with His blood-bought people is dependent on His blood shed at Calvary. Thus, as the living bird is set free, so all believers are blessed in the liberty that belongs to Christ in resurrection.

Yet, though those things in verses 1 to 7 are basic in the restoration of the leper, there is much more added in verses 8 to 20, dealing with practical details of restoration.

To begin with, there is cleansing by water, first, of the person’s clothes, and after shaving off all his hair, then he himself washed (v. 8). The sacrifice of the bird had to do with what was done for him, but the washing of water is the application of the word of God to his personal condition. We also need both. Yet even then he must stay outside his tent for seven days, though allowed inside the camp. On the eighth day he was to repeat what he had done a week earlier, shaving off all his hair, including even his eyebrows, wash his clothes and his own body. Then we are told he shall be clean (v. 9).

In the first cleansing the person is restored to his place in the camp, while in the second he is fully restored to God and to his accustomed dwelling among the people of God, speaking of practical fellowship restored, through the washing of water by the word. All of this shows us that God does provide the means of restoration that is there for the appropriation of every returning wanderer. He takes advantage of it and is thus far restored (to the camp), yet God seeks a deeper work within the person, by which restoration becomes vital to him.

Though at the end of verse 9 the leper is now said to be clean, yet on this same eighth day he must bring two male lambs, one ewe lamb of the first year, all without blemish, three-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as a grain offering, and one log of oil. The priest was then to take one male lamb and offer it as a trespass offering before the Lord (v. 12). The waving speaks of Christ ascended back to glory, though in the type this was done before the sacrifice was killed.

These things also are evidently connected with the cleansing process, for verse 14 speaks of one who is to be cleansed. The priest was to take some of the blood of the lamb and put it on the tip of the person’s right ear, on the thumb of his right hand and on the big toe of his right foot. This indicates that cleansing is to have a practical effect on how and what a person hears, on what he does with his hand and how he walks.

Then the priest was to pour some of the oil into the palm of his left hand and with his right finger sprinkle the oil seven times before the Lord perhaps at the altar of burnt offering, or possibly at the door of the tabernacle. Then he was to put the oil on the tip of the right ear, the thumb of the right hand and the big toe of the right foot of the healed leper, just as he had done with the blood, and the rest of the oil on the head of the person (vv. 15-18). The oil is typical of the Holy Spirit, who is the power by which the ear takes in the truth, the power by which one’s actions are made right and by which the walk is corrected. Put on the head indicates the intelligence being brought into subjection by the power of the Spirit.

The other lambs were then offered, one as a sin offering, the other a burnt offering, and with the burnt offering a meal offering (or grain offering). Thus the seriousness of leprosy is emphasized, for the trespass offering first stresses the need of meeting the details of sinful practice (which is typified in leprosy), while the sin offering deals with sin as the hateful principle of evil that has corrupted our very nature. The burnt offering is that which gives all glory to God in the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus, for God is the source of all blessing in restoration. The accompanying meal offering reminds us that the only One who could be a satisfactory offering for sin must be a true Man of sinless character, for the fine meal is typical of the purity of the details of the entire life of the Lord Jesus so totally in contrast to leprosy. All of these things are therefore involved in our being cleansed from the foul disease of sin, for when God works He does a complete work.

A PROVISION FOR POVERTY (vv. 21-32)

We have before seen an exception made on account of poverty (Lev 5:7), and so it is in the case of the restoring of a leper. If one could not bring three lambs, he might bring only one male lamb as a trespass offering, one tenth of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as a meal offering, one log of oil, and two turtledoves or young pigeons to substitute for two of the lambs.

The ritual was the same as in the first case, but the birds took the place of lambs in the sin offering and the burnt offering. In this is seen typically a poverty of apprehension as to the sin offering and burnt offering. There are many who are too poor spiritually to realize properly how sin is dealt with and condemned in the sacrifice of Christ, and they have only a small understanding of that sacrifice being above all for the glory of God (the burnt offering). How good it is then to see God’s gracious care for the weak.

LEPROSY IN A HOUSE (vv. 33-47)

As in the case of a garment, it seems strange that leprosy could literally be present in a house. No example of this is recorded in scripture either. Again therefore, the spiritual significance must be the matter of real importance. If the owner of the house found evidence of such a plague in his house, he must report it to the priest, who would examine it.

On the one hand there is an application to the whole house of Israel in this scripture. Its condition gave cause for alarm even before the days of David. The prophets have examined it, and with one consent have found it in such a state as Isa 1:6 describes, From the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness in it, but wounds and bruises and putrefying sores. There have been many efforts by God to restore the nation, even after its being taken into captivity, symbolizing its isolation. But finally, in rejecting Christ, Israel has exposed its hopeless leprous condition. Christ makes the pronouncement, Your house is left to you desolate’ (Mat 23:38), and the whole house has been taken away. It will therefore be a miracle of God that will restore the house of Israel, as will be true in the millennium, as Eze 36:36 declares, I, the Lord, have rebuilt the ruined places, and planted what was desolate (NKJV).

As was true of the house of Israel in its being under suspicion of leprosy, a similar application is true of the professing Church. God has dealt with her alarming symptoms in seeking to restore her, but her state has deteriorated, so that the exposure of leprosy is clearly seen in the address to Laodicea (Rev 3:14-22). She is to be spit out of the Lord’s mouth (v. 16), involving His refusal of her. For Laodicea professes to be God’s Church, but is composed only of unbelievers. It is plainly a leprous house, ready to be demolished.

Yet there is an application also to a local fellowship of professed believers. If sin breaks out among them that seems to be of a serious character, the matter should be immediately put into the hands of the Lord, the One having true priestly discernment. Of course, others also from another assembly, men of spiritual experience and priestly discernment, may unite with the Lord in forming a judgment as to whether this is a case that demands rigorous action, and as to how far the action should go.

Even if the plague appeared serious to the priest, he was to wait for a week before a second examination (vv. 37-38). If then the plague had spread, the priest was to command that the stones in which the plague was should be taken out and thrown into an unclean place (v. 44). This would speak of individuals who have been guilty of positive sinful practice being excommunicated from fellowship.

The house was also to be scraped, typical of the self-judgment of all in the house in divesting themselves of any association with the evil. New stones were added in place of the old and the house was freshly plastered (v. 42). But if the plague came back after this, it was evident that the leprosy was settled into the house itself, and the priest was to break down the house, having all of it taken to an unclean place outside the city (vv. 44-45). So any assembly in which serious evil persists after proper labor with it, is totally unfit for anyone’s fellowship. Other assemblies must cease all identification with it. Also, anyone who had even come into the house would be unclean till the evening, but if he had laid down in the house or if one had eaten in the house, he must wash his clothes. Thus today also, if only we are present in a location where spiritual evil is practiced, we shall be defiled by it, and more so if we linger in the place. This is a serious consideration for every Christian.

CLEANSING OF A HOUSE (vv. 48-52)

If after the house was freshly plastered there was no recurrence of any plague, the priest was to pronounce the house clean. However, he was to follow the same procedure as in the case of the cleansing of a leper (Lev 14:1-7), taking two birds with cedar wood, scarlet and hyssop, killing one bird in an earthen vessel over running water, then taking the live bird, the cedar wood, hyssop and scarlet, dipping them in the blood of the dead bird and in running water, and with this sprinkle the house seven times (v. 51). When this means of cleansing was complete, the priest was to let loose the live bird into the open field (v. 52). We have seen that the sacrificed bird is typical of Christ sacrificed for us, and the live bird, Christ raised from the dead. Again therefore, as with a person, so with an assembly, restoration is based on the value of the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus.

Verses 54-57 sum up the whole matter of the law concerning leprosy, whether in a person, in a garment or in a house.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

The ritual cleansing of abnormalities in human skin 14:1-32

"If Leviticus 13 is bleak, speaking of separation from the holy presence, Leviticus 14 is full of hope, for in it the sufferer is restored to the covenant community. The Israelite learned even more about the nature of the holy God through these provisions for restoration to fellowship in the community." [Note: Ibid., p. 285.]

The procedures described here were not curative but ritual. God prescribed no treatment for the cure of "leprosy" here, but He explained how the priests and the Israelites could recognize healed skin so formerly afflicted individuals could resume worship in the community. Anthropologists refer to such rites as "rites of aggregation," ceremonies in which people in abnormal social conditions experience reintegration into ordinary society. Shaving, washing, and offering sacrifices are regular parts of such rites. [Note: See E. R. Leach, Culture and Communication, pp. 78-79.] The ritual involved two acts separated by an interval of seven days.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

The first act took place outside the camp and restored the formerly unclean person to the fellowship of the other Israelites from whom he had experienced separation because of his skin disease.

Clean animals, including clean birds, represented Israel. [Note: Wenham, The Book . . ., p. 208.] Both of the birds used in this ritual evidently symbolized the Israelite who was about to reenter the covenant community. The bird killed probably represented the formerly unclean person whose fate was death but for God’s mercy. The bird released stood for the same person cleansed, released from the bondage of his disease, endowed with new life, and at liberty to enter the covenant fellowship again. These two birds served a symbolic function similar to that of the two goats on the Day of Atonement (ch. 16). [Note: D. J. Davies, "An Interpretation of Sacrifice in Leviticus," Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 89 (1977):397; and J. R. Porter, Leviticus, p. 108.]

Cedar wood had antiseptic qualities and was slow to decay, so it probably represented the continuance of life. The scarlet color of the thread looked like blood and symbolized sacrificial blood. The hyssop represented purification from the corruption of death since the priests used this spongy plant for purification in Israel’s rituals. The blood-water used to sprinkle the individual probably signified life and purification.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

THE CLEANSING OF THE LEPER

Lev 14:1-32

THE ceremonies for the restoration of the leper, when healed of his disease, to full covenant privileges, were comprehended in two distinct series. The first part of the ceremonial took place without the camp, and sufficed only to terminate his condition as one ceremonially dead, and allow of his return into the camp, and his association, though still under restriction, with his fellow Israelites. The second part of the ceremonial took up his case on the eighth day thereafter, where the former ceremonial had left him, as a member, indeed, of the holy people, but a member still under defilement such as debarred him from approach to the presence of Jehovah; and, by a fourfold offering and an anointing, restored him to the full enjoyment of all his covenant privileges before God.

This law for the cleansing of the leper certainly implies that the disease, although incurable by human skill, yet, whether by the direct power of God, as in several instances in Holy Scripture, or for some cause unknown, might occasionally cease its ravages. In this case, although the visible effects of the disease might still remain, in mutilations and scars, yet he would be none the less a healed man. That occasionally instances have occurred of such arrest of the disease, is attested by competent observers, and the law before us thus provides for the restoration of the leper in such cases to the position from which his leprosy had excluded him.

The first part of the ceremonial (Lev 14:3-9) took place without the camp; for until legally cleansed the man was in the sight of the law still a leper, and therefore under sentence of banishment from the congregation of Israel. Thus, as the outcast could not go to the priest, the priest, on receiving word of his desire, went to him. For the ceremony which was to be performed, he provided himself with two living, clean birds, and with cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop; also he took with him an earthen vessel filled with living water, -i.e., with water from some spring or flowing stream, and therefore presumably pure and clean. One of the birds was then killed in such a manner that its blood was received into the vessel of water; then the living bird and the hyssop-bound, as we are told, with the scarlet band to the cedar wood-were dipped into the mingled blood and water, and by them the leper was sprinkled therewith seven times by the priest, and was then pronounced clean; when the living bird, stained with the blood of the bird that was killed, was allowed to fly away. Thereupon, the leper washed his clothes, shaved off all his hair, bathed in water, and entered the camp. This completed the first stadium of his restoration.

Certain things about this symbolism seem very clear. First of all, whereas the leper, afflicted, as it were, with a living death, had become, as regards Israel, a man legally dead, the sprinkling with blood, in virtue of which he was allowed to take his place again in the camp as a living Israelite, symbolised the impartation of life; and, again, inasmuch as death is defiling, the blood was mingled with water, the uniform symbol of cleansing. The remaining symbols emphasise thoughts closely related to these. The cedar wood (or juniper), which is almost incorruptible, signified that with this new life was imparted also freedom from corruption. Scarlet, as a colour, is the constant symbol, again, like the blood, of life and health. What the hyssop was is still in debate; but we can at least safely say that it was a plant supposed to have healing and purifying virtues.

So far all is clear. But what is the meaning of the slaying of the one bird, and the loosing afterward of the other, moistened with the blood of its fellow? Some have said that both of the birds symbolised the leper: the one which was slain, the leper as he was, -namely, as one dead, or under sentence of death by his plague; the other, naturally, then, the leper as healed, who, even as the living bird is let fly whither it will, is now set at liberty to go where he pleases. But when we consider that it is by means of being sprinkled with the blood of the slain bird that the leper is cleansed, it seems quite impossible that this slain bird should typify the leper in his state of defilement. Indeed, if this bird symbolised him as under his disease, this supposition seems even absurd; for the blood which cleansed must then have represented his own blood, and his blood as diseased and unclean!

Neither is it possible that the other bird, which was set at liberty, should represent the leper as healed, and its release, his liberation; however plausible, at first thought, this explanation may seem. For the very same ceremony as this with. the two birds was also to be used in the cleansing of a leprous house (Lev 14:50-53), where it is evident that the loosing of the living bird could not have any. such significance; since the notion of a liberty given would be wholly inapplicable in the case of a house. But whatever the true meaning of the symbolism may be, it is clear that it must be one which will apply equally well in each of the two cases, the cleansing of the leprous house, no less than that of the leprous person.

We are therefore compelled to regard the slaying of the one bird as a true sacrifice. No doubt there are difficulties in the way, but they do not seem insuperable, and are, in any case, less than those which beset other suppositions. It is true that the birds are not presented before Jehovah in the tabernacle; but as the ceremony took place outside the camp, and therefore at a distance from the tabernacle, this may be explained as merely because of the necessity of the case. It is true, again, that the choice of the bird was not limited, as in the tabernacle sacrifices, to the turtledove or pigeon; but it might easily be that when, as in this case, the sacrifice was elsewhere than at the tabernacle, the rules for service there did not necessarily apply. Finally and decisively, when we turn to the law for the cleansing of the leprous house, we find that atoning virtue is explicitly ascribed to this rite with the birds (Lev 14:53): “He shall make atonement for the house.”

But sacrifice is here presented in a different aspect from elsewhere in the law. In this ceremonial the central thought is not consecration through sacrifice, as in the burnt offering; nor expiation of guilt through sacrifice, as in the sin offering; nor yet satisfaction for trespass committed, as in the guilt offering. It is sacrifice as procuring for the man for whom it is offered purity and life, which is the main thought.

But, according to Lev 14:52-53, the atonement is made with both the dead and the living bird. The special thought which is emphasised by the use of the latter, seems to be merely the full completeness of the work of cleansing which has been accomplished through the death of the other bird. For the living bird was represented as ideally identified with the bird which was slain, by being dipped in its blood; and in that it was now loosed from its captivity, this was in token of the fact that the bird, having now given its life to impart cleansing and life to the leper, has fully accomplished that end.

Obviously, this explanation is one that will apply no less readily to the cleansing of the leprous house than of the leprous person. For the leprosy in the house signifies the working of corruption and of decay and death in the wall of the house, in a way adapted to its nature, as really as in the case of the person; and the ceremonial with the birds and other material prescribed means the same with it as with the other, -namely, the removal of the principle of corruption and disease, and impartation of purity and wholesomeness. In both cases the sevenfold sprinkling, as in analogous cases elsewhere in the law, signified the completeness of the cleansing. to which nothing was lacking, and also certified to the leper that by this impartation of new life, and by his cleansing, he was again brought into covenant relations with Jehovah.

With these ceremonies, the lepers cleansing was now in so far effected that he could enter the camp; only he must first cleanse himself and his clothes with water and shave his hair, -ceremonies which, in their primary meaning, are most naturally explained by the importance of an actual physical cleansing in such a case. Every possible precaution must be taken that by no chance he bring the contagion of his late disease into the camp. Of what special importance in this connection, besides the washing, is the shaving of the hair, will be apparent to all who know how peculiarly retentive is the hair of odours and infections of every kind.

The cleansed man might now come into the camp; he is restored to his place as a living Israelite. And yet he may not come to the tabernacle. For even an Israelite might not come, if defiled for the dead; and this is precisely the lepers status at this point. Though delivered from the power of death, there is yet persisting such a connection of his new self with his old leprous self as precludes him from yet entering the more immediate presence of God. The reality of this analogy will appear to anyone who compares the rites which now follow (Lev 14:10-20) with those appointed for the Nazarite, when defiled by the dead. {Num 6:9-12}

Seven days, then, as in that case, he remains away from the tabernacle. On the seventh day, he again shaves himself even to the eyebrows, thus ensuring the most absolute cleanness, and washes himself and his clothes in water. The final restoration ceremonial took place on the eighth day, -the day symbolic of the new creation, -when he appeared before Jehovah at the tent of meeting with a he-lamb for a guilt offering, and another for a sin offering, and an ewe-lamb for a burnt offering; also a meal offering of three tenth-deals, one tenth for each sacrifice, mingled with oil, and a log (3.32 qts.) of oil. The oil was then waved for a wave offering before the Lord, as also the whole lamb of the guilt offering (an unusual thing), and then the lamb was slain and offered after the manner of the guilt offering.

And now followed the most distinctive part of the ceremonial. As in the case of the consecration of the priests was done with the blood of the peace offering and with the holy oil, so was it done here with the blood of the guilt offering and with the common oil-now by its waving consecrated to Jehovah-which the cleansed leper had brought. The priest anoints the mans right ear, the thumb of his right hand, and the great toe of his right foot, first with the blood of the guilt offering, and then with the oil, having previously sprinkled of the oil seven times with his finger before the Lord. The remnant of the oil in the hand of the priest he then pours upon the cleansed lepers head; then offers for him the sin offering, the burnt offering, and the meal offering; and therewith, at last, the atonement is complete, and the man is restored to his full rights and privileges as a living member of the people of the living God.

The chief significance of this ceremonial lies in the prominence given to the guilt offering. This is evidenced, not only by the special and peculiar use which is made of its blood, in applying it to the leper, but also in the fact that in the case of the poor man, while the other offerings are diminished, there is no diminution allowed as regards the lamb of the guilt offering, and the log of oil. Why should the guilt offering have received on this occasion such a place of special prominence? The answer has been rightly given by those who point to the significance of the guilt offering as representing reparation and satisfaction for loss of service due. By the fact of the mans leprosy, and consequent exclusion from the camp of Israel, God had been, for the whole period of his excision, defrauded, so to speak, of His proper dues from him in respect of service and offerings; and the guilt offering precisely symbolised satisfaction made for this default in service which he had otherwise been able to render.

Nor is it a fatal objection to this understanding of the matter that, on this principle, he also that for a long time had had an issue should have been required, for his prolonged default of service, to bring a guilt offering in order to his restoration; whereas from him no such demand was made. For the need, before the law, for the guilt offering lay, not in the duration of the leprosy, as such apprehend it, but in the nature of the leprosy, as being, unlike any other visitation, in a peculiar sense, a death in life. Even when the man with an issue was debarred from the sanctuary, he was not, like the leper, regarded by the law as a dead man; but was still counted among them that were living in Israel And if precluded for an indefinite time from the service and worship of God at the tabernacle, he yet, by his public submission to the demands of the law, in the presence of all, rendered still to God the honour due from a member of the living Israel. But in that the leper, unlike any other defiled person, was reckoned ceremonially dead, obviously consistency in the symbolism made it impossible to regard him as having in any sense rendered honour or service to God so long as he continued a leper, any more than if he had been dead and buried. Therefore he must bring a guilt offering, as one who had, however unavoidably, committed “a trespass in the holy things of the Lord.” And so this guilt offering, in the case of the leper, as in all others, represented the satisfaction of debt; and as the reality or the amount of a debt cannot be affected by the poverty of the debtor, the offering which symbolised satisfaction for the debt must be the same for the poor leper as for the rich leper.

And the application of the blood to ear, hand, and foot meant the same as in the case of the consecration of the priests. Inducted, as one now risen from the dead, into the number of the priestly people, he receives the priestly consecration, devoting ear, hand, and foot to the service of the Lord. And as it was fitting that the priests, because brought into a relation of special nearness to God, in order to be ministers of reconciliation to Israel, should therefore be consecrated with the blood of the peace offering, which specially emphasised the realisation of reconciliation, -so the cleansed leper, who was reestablished as a living member of the priestly nation, more especially by the blood of the guilt offering, was therefore fittingly represented as consecrated in virtue, and by means of that fact.

So, like the priests, he also was anointed by the priest with oil; not indeed with the holy oil, for he was not admitted to the priestly order; yet with common oil, sanctified by its waving before God, in token of his consecration as a member of the priestly people. Especially suitable in his case was this anointing, that the oil constantly stands as a symbol of healing virtue, which in his experience he had so wondrously received.

Remembering in all this how the leprosy stands as a preeminent type of sin, in its aspect as involving death and corruption, the application of these ceremonies to the antitypical cleansing, at least in its chief aspects, is almost self-evident. As in all the Levitical types, so in this case, at the very entrance on the redeemed life stands the sacrifice of a life, and the service of a priest as mediator between God and man. Blood must be shed if the leper is to be admitted again into covenant standing with God; and the blood of the sacrifice in the law ever points to the sacrifice of Christ. But that great Sacrifice may be regarded in various aspects. Sin is a many-sided evil, and on every side it must be met. As often repeated, because sin as guilt requires expiation, hence the type of the sin offering; in that it is a defrauding of God of His just rights from us, satisfaction is required, hence the type of the guilt offering; as it is absence of consecration, life for self instead of life for God, hence the type of the burnt offering. And yet the manifold aspects of sin are not all enumerated. For sin, again, is spiritual death; and, as death, it involves corruption and defilement. It is with special reference to this fact that the work of Christ is brought before us here. In the clean bird, slain that its blood may be applied to the leper for cleansing, we see typified Christ, as giving Himself, that His very life may be imparted to us for our life. In that the blood of the bird is mingled with water, the symbol of the Word of God, is symbolised the truth, that with the atoning blood is ever inseparably united the purifying energy of the Holy Ghost through the Word. Not the water without the blood, nor the blood without the water, saves, but the blood with the water, and the water with the blood. So it is said of Him to whom the ceremony pointed: {1Jn 5:6} “This is He that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood.”

But the type yet lacks something for completeness; and for this reason we have the second bird, who, when by his means the blood has been sprinkled on the leper, and the man is now pronounced clean, is released and flies away heavenward. What a beautiful symbol of that other truth, without which even the atonement of the Lord were naught, that He who died, having by that death for us procured our life was then released from the bonds of death, rising from the dead on the third day, and ascending to heaven, like the freed bird, in token that His life-giving, cleansing, work was done. Thus the message which, as the liberated bird flies carolling away, sweet as a heavenly song, seems to fall upon the ear, is this, “Delivered up for our trespasses, and raised for our justification.” {Rom 4:25; see Gr.}

But although thus and then restored to his standing as a member of the living people of God, not yet was the cleansed leper allowed to appear in the presence of God at the tent of meeting. There was a delay of a week, and only then, on the eighth day, the day typical of resurrection and new creation, does He appear before God. Is there typical meaning in this delay? We would not be too confident. It is quite possible that this delay of a week, before the cleansed man was allowed to present himself for the completion of the ceremonial which reinstated him in the plenary enjoyment of all the rights and privileges of a child of Israel, may have been intended merely as a precautionary rule, of which the purpose was to guard against the possibility of infection, and the defilement of the sanctuary by his presence, through renewed activity of the disease; while, at the same time, it would serve as a spiritual discipline to remind the man, now cleansed, of the extreme care and holy fear with which, after his defilement, he should venture into the presence of the Holy One of Israel; and thus, by analogy, it becomes a like lesson to the spiritually cleansed in all ages.

But perhaps we may see a deeper significance in this week of delay, and his appointed appearance before the Lord on the eighth day. If the whole course of the leper, from the time of his infection till his final reappearing in the presence of Jehovah at the tent of meeting, be intended to typify the history and experience of a sinner as saved from sin; and if the cleansing of the leper without the camp, and his reinstatement thereupon as a member of Gods Israel, represents in type the judicial reinstatement of the cleansed sinner, through the application of the blood and Spirit of Christ, in the number of Gods people; one can then hardly fail to recognise in the weeks delay appointed to him, before he could come into the immediate presence of God, an adumbration of the fact that between the sinners acceptance and the appointed time of his appearing, finally and fully cleansed, before the Lord, on the resurrection morning, there intervenes a period of delay, even the whole lifetime of the believer here in the flesh and in the disembodied state. For only thereafter does he at last, wholly perfected, appear before God in the heavenly Zion. But before thus appearing, the accepted man once and again had to cleanse his garments and his person, that so he might remove everything in which by any chance uncleanness might still lurk. Which, translated into New Testament language, gives us the charge of the Apostle Paul {2Co 7:1} addressed to those who had indeed received the new life, but were still in the flesh: “Let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.”

But, at last, the week of delay is ended. After its seventh day follows an eighth, the first-day morning of a new week, the morning typical of resurrection and therewith completed redemption, and the leper now, completely restored, appears before God in the holy tabernacle. Even so shall an eighth-day morning dawn for all who by the cleansing blood have been received into the number of Gods people. And when that day comes, then, even as when the cleansed man appeared at the tent of meeting, he presented guilt offering, sin offering, and burnt offering, as the warrant for his presence there, and the ground of his acceptance, so shall it be in that day of resurrection, when every one of Gods once leprous but now washed and accepted children shall appear in Zion before Him. They will all appear there as pleading the blood, the precious blood of Christ; Christ, at last apprehended and received by them in all His fulness, as expiation, satisfaction, and righteousness. For so John represents it in the apocalyptic vision of the blood-washed multitude in the heavenly glory: {Rev 7:14-15} “These are they which come out of the great tribulation, and they washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Therefore are they before the throne of God; and they serve Him day and night in His temple.”

And as it is written {Rom 8:11} that the final quickening of our mortal bodies shall be accomplished by the Spirit of God, so the leper, now in Gods presence, receives a special anointing; a type of the unction of the Holy Ghost in resurrection power, consecrating the once leprous ear, hand, and foot, and therewith the whole body, now cleansed from all defilement, to the glad service of Jehovah our God and our Redeemer.

Such, in outline at least, appears to be the typical significance of this ceremonial of the cleansing of the leper. Some details are indeed still left unexplained, but, probably, the whole reason for some of the regulations is to be formal in the immediate practical necessities of the lepers condition.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles