Chapter 14

1 The rites and sacrifices in cleansing of the leper. 33 The signs of leprosy in a house. 43 The cleansing of that house.

2. The law of the leper. The purification of a leper is given in more detail than that of the purification for any other defilement. As the leper was excluded not only from the sanctuary but from the camp, there were two ceremonies included in the restoration. The first entitled him to reenter the camp and associate with his brethren. The second, a week later, was performed in the court of the tabernacle and restored him to full fellowship and to all the privileges of the covenant relationship.

3. Out of the camp. The first ceremony, which restored the leper to the camp, took place outside the camp.

4. Two birds. Undomesticated birds, says the Talmud; possibly because a tame bird would not fly away as required by the symbolism (v. 7). Some commentators compare the two birds to the two goats used in the Day of Atonement service, the one the Lord’s goat, the other the goat for Azazel. To this there are weighty objections. There is nothing said of atonement in connection with the birds. Cleansing is mentioned, but it should be remembered that the birds were not used for cleansing. The man had been already pronounced clean. In the case of the birds there was no blood sprinkled on the altar for atonement. In fact, the ceremony did not take place at the sanctuary at all, but out in the field. The birds were not of a kind used in any sacrifice at the altar; they were wild birds. The blood used was blood mixed with water, a drop or two in a vessel large enough to hold the cedarwood, which, according to the Talmud, was one cubit long. It was therefore a very weak solution, a token solution, and apparently had no symbolic atoning properties. The birds are not said to be a sin offering, or a trespass, or burnt, or peace, or meat offering. They were, in fact, not sacrifices at all. When the ceremony was finished, the man was not permitted to go to the sanctuary. Indeed, he could not even go to his own tent. It was not until seven days later that the man was permitted to offer his meat, trespass, and burnt offerings. At that time atonement was made (vs. 18-21, 29, 31). See p. 1111.

6. Cedar wood. We are not informed as to the meaning of the cedarwood, hyssop, and scarlet. Perhaps the fragrant cedarwood suggested the fragrant incense that was used only in the sanctuary. Hyssop was symbolic of cleansing (Ps. 51:7). The “scarlet” was a tongue or band of twice-dyed wool used in tying the hyssop to the cedar, since both were dipped in the blood.

7. Let the living bird loose. Before letting the bird go, however, he sprinkled seven times the person to be cleansed, and pronounced him clean. He then commanded the man to wash his clothes, to shave, and to wash himself. After that he might enter the camp. It must have been a joyful company that escorted him into the camp. But he was not yet fully restored. He had not offered a sacrifice. He had not yet been to the sanctuary. He could not even enter his own tent. But he had been found clean, and he was happy.

The ceremony constituted a beautiful picture of what God had done and would do for the leper. A wild bird is killed, and another dipped in its blood and set free. This is a picture of the leper doomed to death, and of his release. Indeed, he was already dying. But he is healed, and the healing miracle performed for him is symbolically related to blood and water. There is only a hint of blood, as it were, a drop or two, but it is sprinkled on him, and he is declared clean. The real sacrifice has not yet been made. The man has not been to the altar. The blood of the wild bird has no cleansing virtue. But presently the priest will take a lamb, and atonement will be made.

10. On the eighth day. A week after the first ceremony, outside the camp (vs. 3–8), the leper appeared at the door of the sanctuary for the final rites.

Three tenth deals. Three omers, or about 6 qt.

One log of oil. This would be approximately 6/10 pt. (0.31 l.), dry.

12. A trespass offering. It is of note that a trespass offering was required in the case of a leper’s cleansing, and also that no mention is made of a peace offering, which usually accompanied a trespass offering. The reason for requiring a trespass offering is far from clear. Such an offering was to be presented in all cases where there was restitution to be made; otherwise a sin offering would be required. The question may be asked, What had the leper done that he must make restitution for? It appears that where a trespass offering was brought instead of a sin offering, the one to be cleansed placed his hand upon the animal and confessed his sins. Although this is not mentioned here, it was doubtless done (see Lev. 5:5; Num. 5:7).

There are five points in which the trespass offering for the cleansing of a leper was distinctive: (1) The animal presented was not to be of any stipulated value, as in the ordinary trespass offering (Lev. 5:16; 6:6). (2) It was waved, whereas the ordinary trespass offering was not waved. (3) It was waved by the priest, whereas the ordinary wave offering was waved by the offerer whose hands were guided by the priest (ch. 7:30). (4) The whole animal was waved (ch. 14:12), which was true in only one other case (ch. 23:20). (5) Oil accompanied the presentation of the offering.

The reason most often advanced to account for a trespass offering instead of a sin offering is that the Lord had been deprived of the services of the leper during all the years of his sickness. But this could have been true only where the person had purposely done something that incapacitated him for service.

If a man so lives as to impair his health, he deprives God of service that he owes Him. In the nature of the case, such a man should offer a trespass offering and make restitution as far as possible. Too many give their best years to the world, and when they are old and sick they turn to God. God will accept such; but the fact remains that they have deprived God and humanity of service they could and should have rendered, had they early in life dedicated themselves to Him.

14. The tip of the right ear. This part of the ritual was similar to that of the consecration of the priest, and perhaps had the same meaning (ch. 8:23).

16. The oil. This part of the ceremony is peculiar to the rites of purification for leprosy. In no other case is oil ever sprinkled. Blood and oil are used together (ch. 8:30), but not oil alone.

19. The sin offering. After the trespass offering the sin and burnt offering followed. The trespass offering had effected atonement (v. 18). All past neglect had been forgiven. Finally, the priest offered the sin offering and the accompanying burnt offering.

21. If he be poor. A poor man might substitute two turtledoves or two young pigeons for the two lambs required for the sin offering and the burnt offering. However, there was no substitution for the lamb of the trespass offering. That must be furnished whether he was rich or poor. Also, there was a diminution in the amount of flour required, for 1/10 deal of flour (about 2 qt., or 2.2 l.) was accepted instead of 3/10, as was the case in v. 10. The log of oil remained the same.

With these exceptions the ritual was carried on as described in vs. 10–20. The man received forgiveness for all past delinquencies, and atonement was extended. He was restored to full membership in the congregation and could again participate in the various religious services.

34. I put. This may or may not imply a direct act of God. In the Bible many such expressions occur in which there is clearly no reference to an act of God. For example, God feeds the birds (Luke 12:24). When He puts a plague in a house, it may be a direct act of God, or it may be a result of the man’s failure to build wisely.

49. He shall take to cleanse the house. The house was not merely to be cleansed with the blood of the bird and with running water, but also with “cedar wood, and with the hyssop, and with the scarlet” (v. 52).

additional note on chapter 14

The attitude toward leprosy, leading to exclusion from the camp, doubtless has its origin in the peculiar character of the disease. True leprosy was especially associated with death, in which it ordinarily eventuated, and in its later stages was a sort of “living death,” in which various members of the body died and sloughed off. Toward the last the leper was a specter of death, and illustrated in a graphic manner the wages of sin. For this reason leprosy has throughout the ages been considered, among both Jewish and Christian commentators, a symbol of sin and its results.

One who had been placed outside the camp on suspicion of “leprosy” could call for a priest if he had the slightest indication that he was improving. It was the duty of the priest to go when he was called, but we may suppose that at times he did so with reluctance. Feeling sure that there had been no improvement, he would be tempted to become impatient and reluctant to respond. He needed patience, so as never to lose the feeling of compassion the leper so much needed. He must learn not to shun the leper, but to pity and help him. This is a lesson for the servants of God today. Like the priest of old, the minister of God today must “have compassion” (Heb. 5:2).

Leprosy was not specifically painful, but the dread and horror of it must have vitally affected the whole life of the sufferer. In like manner sin may not be felt so keenly, and a man may hardly be conscious of its malignant nature. Leprosy was corrosive, and penetrated almost unfelt and unseen until it blossomed in ulcers and raw flesh, and wasted away parts of the body. So sin also eats out all spiritual life and beauty, even though outwardly there may be no striking evidence of the condition within. Finally, the disease broke forth externally, and the man became a living skeleton, a mass of loathsome corruption. So sin at last comes to fruition, until the image of God in man is practically obliterated. As leprosy ended in death, so sin ends in death. It would seem, therefore, that leprosy is a disease especially adapted to typify sin in its various features as no other malady could.

Ellen G. White comments

4-7PP 275

45-47MH 278