Leviticus 14 commentary

LEVITICUS 14 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Cleansing From Defiling Skin Diseases
1 The Lord said to Moses,
BARNES, "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.
GILL, "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.
HENRY, "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.
JAMISON, "Lev_14:1-57. The rites and sacrifices in cleansing of the leper.
K&D, "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
1

days.
COFFMAN, "This remarkable chapter deals not with the cure of leprosy, but with
the ceremonies affecting the reception of the healed person back into the
communion with the covenant people and his re-admission to the status that he
formerly held in the community and within his family. These complicated rituals are
admittedly very ancient and their appearance here is altogether consistent with their
having been included here, at God's command, by Moses himself. Lofthouse
commented that, "Leviticus 14 shows into what a distant period the whole law must
be pushed back."[1] In our opinion, the "pushing back" will never be accurate until
it rests in the time of Moses!
It is astounding that some scholars profess to find a connection here with the
magical rites of ancient paganism. Lofthouse, for example, said, "There is possibly
an original connection with what would now be called magic, getting rid of the spirit
or demon of disease."[2] The error in such a view is manifest in the fact that the
leper in this chapter had to be healed FIRST, before any of the ceremonies here
mentioned could begin. No efficacy whatever to heal the victim is implied or
attributed to the ceremonies. As Wenham declared:
"Israel differed from her neighbors, who went in for exorcism and magical
attempts to cure disease. In Israel, a man had to seek help directly from God in
prayer, and not rely on the dubious remedies of folk medicine."[3]
Since it is obvious that this chapter has nothing to do with the healing of disease,
what is the significance of it? Allis discerned this as follows:
"The fact that leprosy is dealt with so elaborately indicates that this particularly
loathsome and intractable disease is to be regarded as a type of that indwelling sin
in which all the ills and afflictions of mankind have their cause and origin."[4]
We accept this observation as accurate, for it appears that David considered his
forgiveness regarding the transgression with Bathsheba as recalling, at least in some
particulars, the rites of this chapter. "Purify me with hyssop, and I shall be clean.
Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow" (Psalms 51:7).
"And Jehovah 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; and the priest shall look; and, behold, if the plague of leprosy be
healed in the leper, 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: and the
priest shall command to kill one of the birds 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 to be
2

cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let
go the living bird into the open field. 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. 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."
"The law of the leper in the day of his cleansing ..." This carries overtones of that
ultimate "day" when the Son of God who actually had power to heal leprosy would
appear, bringing salvation to people. It is as an effective type of sin that the leprosy
appears here, and it is as a type of the sinner that the leper himself must be
understood. Of course, there is no intimation whatever that lepers were actually
sinners, some innocents doubtless being among the sufferers from this terrible
malady. Just as the apostle Peter's status as a bound prisoner, naked in darkness,
guarded, and condemned to death in Acts 12 appears as an amazing type of all
sinners, yet himself being altogether innocent of any particular sin, in like manner,
the horrible state of the leper in this chapter stands as a true picture of the way it
actually is with sinful people.
"Him that is to be cleansed ..." This expression occurs in Leviticus
14:4,7,8,11,14,17,18,19; and it is of the very greatest interest that eminent Hebrew
authorities challenge and deny the rendition appearing here, affirming that:
"The text uses the reflexive rather than passive inflection to refer to the leper's
process of purification. In both instances (Leviticus 14:7,11) the leper is referred to
as "he who is to cleanse himself" and not as "he who is to be cleansed." This is to
indicate that the leper must do his share to become pure. He himself must seek to
attain purity by way of repentance and appropriate conduct.[5]
That the Jewish understanding of this is correct is corroborated by the N.T.
appearance of exactly the same thought in the commandment of Ananias to Saul of
Tarsus, "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins ..." (Acts 22:16).[6] The
significance of the middle voice in that passage makes the meaning, "Arise, and get
THYSELF baptized."
"Two living clean birds ..." (Leviticus 14:4). The law did not specify the name of the
birds, and the use of sparrows in this ritual appeared to be normal in the Jewish
customs of later ages (after Moses), but we cannot resist the acceptance of McGee's
opinion that, "Most likely they were doves."[7]
"If a plague of leprosy be healed ..." (Leviticus 14:2). Nothing in these ceremonies
had anything to do with the healing, because that had to occur as a direct action of
God, totally removed from anything else. How did it come about? We are not told.
That the sufferer indeed sought remedies and prayed to God may be inferred. It will
be remembered that Moses prayed for Miriam when she was afflicted with leprosy
3

(Numbers 12:13).
"Cedar wood, scarlet, and hyssop ..." (Leviticus 14:4). The hyssop mentioned here is
often held to be unidentifiable; but Bamberger stated that, "It is probably to be
identified with Syrian majoram."[8] That both cedar wood and hyssop were to be
used was understood to mean that, "he was stricken because he exalted himself like
the cedar, but when he abased himself like the hyssop, he was healed."[9] Such
views are not sound, because the attribution to personal sin of the leper as the cause
of his malady is not supported by the text. The scarlet is usually thought to have
been red wool yarn used to make a convenient bundle of the items mentioned here,
which were then used as a kind of broom with which to do the sprinkling.
"Let go the living bird into the open field ..." (Leviticus 14:7). All kinds of notions
exist with reference to this. "It was the survival of the extremely ancient idea of the
transference of uncleanness to animals."[10] "It was a symbol of the leper's new
freedom."[11] "It symbolized the former leper's release from his disease."[12] There
is some merit in all these ideas, but something more is meant. "The letting go of the
living bird (Leviticus 14:53) in connection with the cleansing of a house indicates
that no liberty, privilege, or ability thus came to the house, and so it must be
assumed here that the symbolism points not to new found freedom of the sufferer
but to the means of his deliverance. In the great antitype, the forgiveness of sin, the
means is plain enough, namely, the death and resurrection of the Son of God, and
these two birds are a perfect representation of that. The slaughtered one
represented the death of Christ, and the released one represented his resurrection.
Micklem, therefore, was not amiss in declaring that, "We may suppose that the
escaping bird brought home to the leper the bearing away of his uncleanness."[13]
It was more effectively stated thusly by Jellie: "The symbolism of the slain bird
suggests the death of Christ, and the soaring bird the resurrection of Christ."[14]
This release of the bird also suggests a similar thing observable in the two goats on
the Day of Atonement, one being sacrificed, the other being released to roam beyond
the camp, and the certain identification of that ceremony with Jesus Christ (as
outlined in Hebrews 13:12,13) makes it very likely that a similar identification is
also in this. In the scapegoat analogy, the goat bore the sins of Israel away into the
wilderness, but here the released bird, sprinkled with the blood, flies away into
heaven, suggesting the offering of Christ's blood "in heaven" for us (Hebrews
10:12).
ELLICOTT, "(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 Leviticus 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.
BENSON, "Leviticus 14:1. The priests having been instructed in the foregoing
4

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.
WHEDON, " THE CEREMONIAL CLEANSING OF THE LEPER, Leviticus
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, Numbers 12:13-15;
Naaman, at the command of Elisha, 2 Kings 5:14; and the instances of healing by
Jesus Christ, Matthew 8:3; Luke 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. Luke 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, (Leviticus 13:13,
note,) and may be constructively called healed.
PETT, "Verse 1
The Return Of Some Who Were Smitten (Leviticus 14:1-32).
Leviticus 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 Leviticus 13:1; Leviticus 14:33; Leviticus 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.
EBC, "THE CLEANSING OF THE LEPER
Leviticus 14:1-32
5

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 (Leviticus 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
6

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 (Leviticus
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 (Leviticus
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 Leviticus 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,
7

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 leper’s 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 leper’s 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 (Leviticus 14:10-20)
with those appointed for the Nazarite, when defiled by the dead. {Numbers 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
8

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 man’s 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 leper’s 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 man’s 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
9

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
10

pointed: {1 John 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." {Romans 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 God’s 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 God’s people; one can then hardly fail to recognise in the
week’s delay appointed to him, before he could come into the immediate presence of
God, an adumbration of the fact that between the sinner’s 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
11

might still lurk. Which, translated into New Testament language, gives us the charge
of the Apostle Paul {2 Corinthians 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 God’s 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 God’s 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: {Revelation 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 {Romans 8:11} that the final quickening of our mortal bodies
shall be accomplished by the Spirit of God, so the leper, now in God’s 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 leper’s condition.,
PULPIT, "THE FORM OF PURIFICATION OF THE LEPER (Leviticus 14:1-32).
This is the most minute of all the forms of purification, those for purification from
contact with a dead body (Numbers 19:1-22) and for the cleansing of a defiled
Nazarite (Numbers 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 (Leviticus 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
12

its special ceremonies. The manner of the first reconciliation is detailed in Leviticus
14:1-8, of the second in Leviticus 14:9-32.
LANGE, "PRELIMINARY NOTE ON CLEAN AND UNCLEAN ANIMALS—
AND ON DEFILEMENT BY CONTACT
______________
There has been no little debate as to the origin and ground of the distinction
between clean and unclean animals. Such a question can only be settled historically.
In Genesis 7:2 Noah is directed to take into the ark “of every clean beast by sevens,
the male and his female,” while “of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and
his female.” There was then already a recognized distinction, and this distinction
had nothing to do with the use of animal food, since this had not yet been allowed to
man. After the flood, when animal food was given to man ( Genesis 9:3), it was given
without limitation. “Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as
the green herb have I given you all things.” It may therefore be confidently affirmed
that this distinction did not have its origin and ground in the suitableness or
unsuitableness of different kinds of animal food, as has been contended by many.
Neither could it possibly have been founded in any considerations peculiar to the
chosen people, since it is here found existing so many ages before the call of
Abraham. Immediately after the flood, however, we have a practical application of
the distinction which seems to mark its object with sufficient plainness: “Noah
builded an altar unto the Lord; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean
fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar” ( Genesis 8:20). The original
distinction must therefore be held to have been between animals fit and unfit for
sacrifice (comp. Calvin in Leviticus 11:1). On what ground the selection was
originally made for sacrifice is wholly unknown; but it is altogether probable that
the same kind of animals which were “clean” in the time of Noah were included in
the list of the clean under the Levitical law. Many of the latter, however, were not
allowable for sacrifice under the same law, nor is it likely that, they ever were; on
the other hand, all were admissible for food in Noah’s time, while under the
Levitical law many are forbidden. While, therefore, the original distinction must be
sought in sacrificial use, it is plain that the details of this distinction are largely
modified under the Levitical law prescribing the animals that may be allowed for
food.
When inquiry is now made as to the grounds of this modification, the only reason
given in the law itself is comprehensive ( Leviticus 11:43-47; Leviticus 20:24-26;
Deuteronomy 14:21): “For I am the Lord your God; ye shall therefore sanctify
yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy.” “I am the Lord your God, which
have separated you from other people.” This points plainly to the separation of the
Israelites by their prescribed laws of food from other nations; and it is indisputable
that the effect of these laws was to place almost insurmountable impediments in the
way of familiar social intercourse between the Israelites and the surrounding
heathen. When this separation was to be broken down in the Christian Church, an
13

intimation to that effect could not be more effectively conveyed than by the vision of
St. Peter of a sheet let down “wherein were all manner of four-footed beasts, and
creeping things, and fowls of the air,” with the command, “Rise, Peter, kill and eat”
( Acts 10:13). The effectiveness of the separation, however, is to be sought in the
details, not in the general character of the distinction, as it is now well known that
the ordinary diet of the Egyptians and other nations of antiquity was substantially
the same with that of the Israelites. Various reasons given by the fathers and others,
with replies showing their fallacy, may be found in Spencer, de leg. Hebr. I. c. vii, §
1, what he considers the true reasons (seven in number) being given in the following
section. Comp. also Calvin in Leviticus 11:1.
It is to be observed that the distinction of clean and unclean animals has place only
at their death. All living animals were alike clean, and the Hebrew had no scruple in
handling the living ass or even the dog. The lion and the eagle, too, as has been well
observed by Clark, were used in the most exalted symbolism of prophetic imagery.
But as soon as the animals were dead, a question as to their cleanness arose; this
depended on two points: a) the manner of the animal’s death; and b) the nature of
the animal itself. All animals whatever which died of themselves were unclean to the
Israelites, although they might be given or sold to “strangers” ( Deuteronomy
14:21), and the touch of their carcasses communicated defilement ( Leviticus
11:39-40). This then was one broad distinction of the law, and was evidently based
upon the fact that from such animals the blood had not been withdrawn.
But a difference is further made between animals, even when properly slaughtered.
In a very general way, the animals allowed are such as have been generally
recognized among all nations and in all ages as most suitably forming the staple of
animal food; yet the law cannot be considered as founded upon hygienic or any
other principles of universal application, since no such distinction was recognized,
in the grant to Noah. Moreover, the obligation of its observance was expressly
declared to have been abrogated by the council at Jerusalem, Acts 15. The
distinction was therefore temporary, and peculiar to the chosen people. Its main
object, as already shown, was to keep them a separate people, and it is invested with
the solemnity of a religious observance. In providing regulations for this purpose,
other objects were doubtless incidentally regarded, such as laws of health, etc., some
of which are apparent upon the surface, while others lie hidden in our ignorance of
local customs and circumstances.
Before closing this note it is worthy of remark that the dualistic notions which
formed the basis of the distinction between clean and unclean animals among the
Persians were absolutely contradicted by the theology of the Israelites. Those
animals were clean among the Parsees which were believed to have been created by
Ormuzd, while those which proceeded from the evil principle, Ahriman, were
unclean. The Hebrews, on the contrary, were most emphatically taught to refer the
origin of all things to Jehovah, and however absolute might be the distinction among
animals, it was yet a distinction between the various works of the one Creator.
14

The general principles of determination of clean animals were the same among the
Israelites as among other ancient nations; in quadrupeds, the formation of the foot
and the method of mastication and digestion; among birds, the rejection as unclean
of birds of prey; and among fish, the obvious possession of fins and scales. All these
marks of distinction in the Levitical law are wisely and even necessarily made on the
basis of popular observation and belief, not on that of anatomical exactness.
Otherwise the people would have been continually liable to error. Scientifically, the
camel would be said to divide the hoof, and the hare does not chew the cud. But laws
for popular use must necessarily employ terms as they are popularly understood.
These matters are often referred to as scientific errors; whereas they were simply
descriptions, necessarily popular, for the understanding and enforcement of the law.
Defilement by contact comes forward very prominently in this chapter, as it is also
frequently mentioned elsewhere. It is not strange that in a law whose educational
purpose is everywhere so plain, this most effective symbolism should hold a place,
and the contaminating effect of converse with evil be thus impressed upon this
people in their spiritual infancy. It thus has its part with all other precepts of
ceremonial cleanness in working out the great spiritual purposes of the law. But
beyond this, there is here involved the great truth, but imperfectly revealed under
the old dispensation, that the body, as well as the soul, has its part in the relations
between God and man. The body, as well as the soul, was a sufferer by the primeval
sentence upon sin, and the body, as well as the soul, has part in the redemption of
Christ, and awaits the resurrection of the just. The ascetic notions of the mediæval
ages regarded the body as evil in a sense entirely incompatible with the
representations of Scripture. For not merely is the body the handmaid of the soul,
and the necessary instrument of the soul’s action, but the service of the body as well
as the soul is recognized in the New Testament (e.g., Romans 12:1) as a Christian
duty. On its negative side, at least, this truth was taught under the old dispensation
by the many laws of bodily purity, the series of which begins in this chapter. The
laws of impurity from physical contact stand as an appendix to the laws of food and
as an introduction to the other laws of purity, and form the connecting link between
them.
2 “These are the regulations for any diseased
person at the time of their ceremonial cleansing,
when they are brought to the priest:
15

GILL, "This shall be the law of the leper, in the day of his cleansing,.... Or the
rules, rites, ceremonies, and sacrifices to be observed therein. Jarchi says, from hence we
learn that they were not to purify a leper in the night:
he shall be brought unto the priest: not into the camp, or city, or house, where the
priest was, for till he was cleansed he could not be admitted into either; besides, the
priest is afterwards said to go forth out of the camp to him; but he was to be brought
pretty near the camp or city, where the priest went to meet him. As the leper was an
emblem of a polluted sinner, the priest was a type of Christ, to whom leprous sinners
must be brought for cleansing; they cannot come of themselves to him, that is, believe in
him, except it be given unto them; or they are drawn with the powerful and efficacious
grace of God, by which souls are brought to Christ, and enabled to believe in him; not
that they are brought against their wills, but being drawn with the cords of love, and
through the power of divine grace, sweetly operating upon their hearts, they move
towards him with all readiness and willingness, and cast themselves at his feet, saying,
as the leper that came to Christ, "Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean", Mat_8:2
Mar_1:40; and it is grace to allow them to come near him, and amazing goodness in him
to receive and cleanse them.
JAMISON 2-3, "law of the leper in the day of his cleansing — Though quite
convalescent, a leper was not allowed to return to society immediately and at his own
will. The malignant character of his disease rendered the greatest precautions necessary
to his re-admission among the people. One of the priests most skilled in the diagnostics
of disease [Grotius], being deputed to attend such outcasts, the restored leper appeared
before this official, and when after examination a certificate of health was given, the
ceremonies here described were forthwith observed outside the camp.
K&D, "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 (‫ן‬ ִ‫מ‬ ‫א‬ָ‫פּ‬ ְ‫ר‬ִ‫,נ‬ 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 (‫ת‬ ‫יּ‬ ַ‫,ח‬ 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).
CALVIN, "2This shall be the law of the leper. Moses now treats of the manner in
which those who were cured of leprosy were to be cleansed and restored. Thus far
he had shewn whom the priest was to admit into the holy congregation, and account
16

to be clean; he now prescribes the rite of expiation, whereby the people might learn
how greatly God abominates the uncleanness, which He commands to be purified by
a solemn propitiation; and also that he who is healed may acknowledge that he is
rescued from death by God’s special blessing, and may in future be more diligent in
seeking to be pure. For there were two parts in the sacrifice here demanded-
purification and thanksgiving. But we must ever keep in view the object which I
have stated in the last chapter, that the Israelites were instructed by this ceremony
to serve God in chastity and purity, and to keep far away from those defilements,
whereby religion would be profaned. Since, then, leprosy was a kind of pollution,
God was unwilling that those who were cured of it should be received into the holy
congregation, (13) except after the offering of a sacrifice; as if the priest reconciled
them after excommunication. It will now be well to discuss the points which are
worthy of consideration. The office of cleansing is imposed on the priest; yet he is at
the same time forbidden to cleanse any except those who were already pure and
clean. In this, on the one hand, God claims for Himself the honor of the cure, lest
men should assume it; and also establishes the discipline which He would have to
reign in His Church. To make the matter clearer, it belongs to God only to forgive
sins; what, then, remains to man, except to be the witness and herald of the grace
which He confers? God’s minister can, therefore, absolve none whom God has not
before absolved. In sum, absolution is not in the power or will of man: the minister
only sustains an inferior part, to endorse God’s judgment, or rather to proclaim
God’s sentence. Hence that remarkable expression of Isaiah, “I, even I, am he that
blotteth out thy transgressions, O Israel, and none but me. ” (14) (Isaiah 43:25.) In
which sense, too, God everywhere promises by the prophets that the people shall be
clean, when He shall have cleansed them. Meanwhile, however, this does not prevent
those who are called to the office of teaching from purging the uncleanness of the
people in a certain peculiar way. For, since faith alone purifies the heart, in so far as
it receives the testimony which God proffers by the mouth of man, the minister who
testifies that we are reconciled to God, is justly reckoned to take away our pollution.
This expiation is still in force, though the ceremony has long ceased to be in use. But,
since the spiritual healing, which we receive by faith, proceeds from the mere grace
of God, the ministry of man does not at all detract from His glory. Let us, then,
remember that these two things are perfectly consistent with each other, that God is
the sole author of our purity; and yet that the method, which He uses for our
justification, must not on that account be neglected. And this is properly referred to
discipline, that whosoever has been once cast out of the holy congregation by public
authority, must not be received again except upon professing penitence and a new
life. We must observe, too, that this jurisdiction was given to the priests not only on
the ground that they represented Christ, but also in respect to the ministry, which
we have in common with them.
COKE, "Leviticus 14:2. He shall be brought unto the priest— The priests, being
instructed in the diagnostics of the leprosy, are now informed, what ceremonies and
sacrifices were to be used for the purification of the leper, when it appeared that his
leprosy was healed. The reader will observe, what we have before remarked, that
these ceremonies were not used for the purpose of healing the disorder, but for the
17

legal purification of the leper when healed; (see Leviticus 14:3.) and for this reason,
instead of the words cleansing and cleansed in this chapter, it would be more proper
to use purifying and purified, which would be equally agreeable to the original. The
leper being excluded from the camp now, as afterwards from the city, the priest was
to go forth to him without the camp, and there inspect him. When our Saviour, by
his omnipotent word, healed the leper, he commanded him to go, and shew himself
unto the priest.
ELLICOTT, " (2) This shall be the law of the leper.—That is, the manner in which
an Israelite cured of his leprosy shall be purified and restored to the communion of
the sanctuary on the day when he is pronounced clean.
He shall be brought unto the priest.—He is to be conducted from his place of
seclusion (see Leviticus 13:46) to an appointed place on the borders of the camp. It
was this coming to the priest to which Christ referred when He said to the leper
whom He had healed, “Go, show thyself to the priest, and ofter the gift that Moses
commanded” (Matthew 8:4).
TRAPP, "Leviticus 14:2 This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing:
He shall be brought unto the priest:
Ver. 2. He shall be brought unto the priest.] To teach us to go to Jesus Christ the
High Priest of our profession, who healeth all our diseases. [Psalms 103:3] He cured
the leprosy, to others altogether incurable, by a touch of his hand only. [Mark 1:41]
Yea, "he sent his word and healed them," [Psalms 107:20] and so he doth the souls
of sinners that come unto him.
WHEDON, " 2. He shall be brought unto the priest — Here is intimated the
intervention of a third party, a mediator, to bring the case unto the knowledge of the
priest. The Holy Spirit draws penitent sinners to Jesus, the cleansing Priest. When
he healed lepers in his earthly ministry he sent them to the priests, that their office
might be honoured, their sacrificial perquisites secured to them, and the cure be
authenticated by their endorsement.
The priest shall go forth — The leper was forbidden to come into the camp until he
had been officially pronounced cleansed. Jesus descended from a holy heaven to
cleanse and lead once leprous souls from earth to glory.
PETT, "Verses 2-20
The Law of The Skin-Diseased In The Day Of His Cleansing (Leviticus 14:2-20)
Leviticus 14:2-4
“This shall be the law of the skin-diseased in the day of his cleansing, He shall be
brought to the priest, and the priest shall go forth out of the camp, and the priest
18

shall look, and, behold, if the plague of suspicious skin disease be healed in the
diseased person, then shall the priest command to take for him who is to be cleansed
two living clean birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop.”
The first point here is the expectancy that some would recover from their suspicious
skin disease. In the mercy of God it was not necessarily to be seen as the end. And
then the person could send a message to the priest claiming healing. He would have
been living alone outside the camp, probably provided with assistance by friends
and relatives, who would, however, beware of coming too close. But now they could
be messengers of the joyous news. He was healed. His skin disease had subsided.
They would hasten to the priests who would send one of their number out of the
camp to check out the true situation. We have an illustration of this in Mark 1:44
where Jesus told the leper whom He had healed to show himself to the priests and
make his offerings as demanded in the Law of Moses.
The priest would approach the hopefully no longer diseased man and would
examine him in accordance with the criteria laid down in the previous chapter, and
if he was satisfied that the man was truly healed he would command the correct
procedures to begin. ‘Then shall the priest command to take for him who is to be
cleansed two living clean birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop.’ This is the
first stage in the process.
“This shall be the law of the skin-diseased in the day of his cleansing.” The
procedures were strictly laid down. For this phrase compare Leviticus 11:46;
Leviticus 12:7; Leviticus 13:59; Leviticus 14:32; Leviticus 14:54; Leviticus 14:57;
Leviticus 15:32 also Leviticus 6:9 to Leviticus 7:37; Numbers 5:29; Numbers 6:13;
Numbers 6:21; Numbers 19:14. We note that included in his cleansing are all the
offerings described in detail in Leviticus 1-7. He is coming from the most appalling
of conditions to total restoration by the grace of God. But first there is to be a
unique ceremony.
PULPIT, "Leviticus 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
19

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.
BI 2-32, "The law of the leper in the day of his cleansing.
Cleansing the leper
I. The disease.
1. Its peculiar designation. Leprosy the “plague of boils” (Deu_28:1-68.), 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 religions. So sinners corrupt others, while their abominable ways shut them
from the communion of the faithful.
II. The cure 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 man’s 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 (Luk_17:14; Isa_51:7). Nothing was prescribed or attempted for the removal
of this distemper. And none but God can remove sin, &c. (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).
III. 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, &c.). (W. Sleigh.)
20

The leper
1. How God is the Author of plagues and diseases. Not to hurt man, but to help him;
for man being afflicted, is humbled; being humbled, he runs to Him who can raise
him up.
2. That sin infects men’s bodies, garments, and houses.
3. Of the office of ministers, in visiting the sick (Lev_14:44).
4. Of our cleansing by the blood of Christ.
5. Of the honourable calling of physicians. They should be—
(1) Skilful.
(2) Faithful to their patient.
(3) Religious, referring all to God’s glory.
(4) Not covetous. (A. Willet, D. D.)
Lessons
1. Regeneration must be total in every part.
2. That vicious persons be not with too great facility reconciled.
3. God accepts of our obedience according to our heart.
4. To give thanks to God for our health. (A. Willet, D. D.)
The leper cleansed
Although leprosy was not curable by human remedies, it did not always continue for life.
It was often sent as a special judgment, as in the eases of Miriam, Azariah, and Gehazi.
The Jews generally looked upon it in this light. Its very name denotes a stroke of the
Lord. This of itself rather implies that it may cease with the repentance and forgiveness
of the smitten offender. It was the anticipation of the healing, of at least some persons
leprously affected, that formed the basis of the provisions here laid down. They
constitute “the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing”; and if there was no
possibility of cure, there was no use of this law. You will observe, however, that these
regulations were not for the cure of the leper, but for his ceremonial cleansing after the
cure. The disease had first to be stayed, and then began this process of cleansing off all
its lingering effects and disabilities. I therefore take the deepest intention of these rites
to be to illustrate the nature of sanctification. Justification is also implied, but only as
connected with sanctification.
1. In the first place, it is presupposed that the leper’s disease had been stayed. And
this healing again points to some putting forth of Divine power and grace quite
different from anything here brought to view, and far anterior to the commencement
of these services. The first motion of our salvation is from God. It begins while we are
21

yet in the very depths of our defilement and guilt. “While we were yet sinners, Christ
died for us.” A full and free forgiveness of all our sins is provided. And the only
remaining requirement is to “go show thyself to the priest, and offer for thy
cleansing, according as Moses commanded.”
2. The leper, finding his leprosy stayed, was to go to the judge in the case and claim
exemption from the sentence that was upon him. And to render this the more easy
for him, the priest had to “go forth out of the camp” to meet him. The very moment
the sinner believes in the healing proclaimed to him in the gospel, and sets himself to
move for his cleansing, Christ meets him.
3. And when the healed leper thus presented himself to the priest, there was no
alternative left. He had to be pronounced cured. And so Christ hath bound Himself
to acquit and absolve every sinner who thus comes to Him in the strength of the
gospel message. There is no further hindrance in the way. The man is justified. The
sentence that was against him is rescinded and taken away. But the mere absolution
of the priest did not fully restore the leper. Though his disease was stayed, there was
a taint of it remaining to be purged off before he could join the camp or the holy
services. And so our whole salvation must miscarry if it does not also take in an
active holiness, purifying our hearts and lives, and transforming us into the image of
our Redeemer. How this sanctification is effected is what we are now to consider.
I. To cleanse the recovered leper, the first thing to be done was the procurement of two
clean birds, the one of which was to be slain, and the other to be dipped in its fellow’s
blood and set at liberty. These two doves, the gentlest of all God’s creatures, at once
carry our thoughts back to Christ and His wonderful history. The fate of the one shows
us how He was mangled for human guilt, crushed to death for the sins of others, and
brought down to the depths of the earth. The other, coming up out of the earthern
vessel, out of the blood of its fellow, shows us how Jesus rose again from the rocky
sepulchre, and ascended up out of the hand of His captor on strong and joyous pinions
far into the high abodes of heaven, scattering as He went the gracious drops of cleansing
and salvation. The introduction of these birds, in this connection, presents a great
theological fact. As they typify Christ, they show that our sanctification, as well as our
justification, proceeds from His Cross and resurrection.
II. The next thing to be done for the cleansing of the recovered leper was the
arrangement and use of means to apply the cleansing of blood. Christ has appointed
certain instruments and agencies to convey to us the purifying elements. First of all is
the cedar stem of His Word, durable, fragrant, and instinct with celestial power and life,
speaking through all the visible creation, but much more distinctly and powerfully in the
written Scriptures. Along with this, and fastened to it, is the scarlet wool of the holy
sacraments, absorbing, as it were, the whole substance of’ Christ crucified, and
performing an important part in the impartation of the same to our souls. And along
with this scarlet wool, and bound to the same stem, are the many little aromatic stems of
prayer, with the sanctifying blood running out and hanging in drops on every point,
ready to flow upon and cleanse the humble worshipper.
III. A third requirement for the leper’s cleansing was, that he should “wash his clothes,
and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water.” This was his own work. It was to
be done by the leper himself. Its spiritual significance is easily understood. It refers to
the sinner’s repentance and reformation. He must cleanse himself from all his old and
base surroundings. He must separate between himself and everything suspicious.
22

IV. But there is another particular entering into this ritual cleansing. After everything
else had been done, sacrifices were to be offered. We must wash, and repent, and reform;
but it avails nought without blood. Water, the purest that ever dropped from mossy
rock, or gushed from the mountain spring, is not able to cleanse a man for heaven. Tears
of repentance, though pure as those which trickled down the Saviour’s cheeks, cannot
wash out the stains of sin, except they be mingled with the blood that dripped from His
wounds. And no moral improvements can entitle us to eternity’s honours if they are not
connected with the suretyship and sacrifice of Jesus. The source of all sanctification is in
His death and resurrection. All the glories of eternal life still refer us back to Calvary.
Grace in Christ Jesus commenced the work, and grace in Christ Jesus must complete it.
The only peculiarity which I notice here is that some of the blood and oil was to be
touched to the cleansed leper, the same as in the consecration of the priests. It points to
the very culmination and crown of Christian sanctity. The blood of the trespass-offering
stands for the blood of Christ, and the holy oil for the Holy Spirit. These are the two
great consecrating elements of Christianity. “With these our High Priest approaches us
through the gospel, to complete our cleansing and ordain us to the dignities and duties
of our spiritual calling.
V. There is one point more in these ceremonies to which I will call your attention. I refer
to the time which they required. A leper could by no possibility get through with his
cleansing under seven days. One day was enough to admit him into the camp; but seven
full days were requisite to admit him to his home. There was therefore a complete period
of time necessary to the entireness of his cleansing. This arrangement was not
accidental. It has its full typical significance. It refers to the fact that no one is completely
sanctified in the present life; and that a complete period of time must ensue before we
reach the rest to which our cleansing entitles us. We have attained unto very high
honours. We have secured very exalted privileges. But everything has not yet been done,
and all our disabilities are not yet removed. Great services yet remain to take place when
the seven days have elapsed. And until then we must patiently wait. The influences of sin
still linger about the old tenement, and we must suffer the consequences of it until the
term of this present dispensation ends. Then shall our High Priest come forth again, and
“change our vile bodies, and fashion them like unto His own glorious body.” The last
lurking-places of defilement shall then be cut off. The last act of the leper’s cleansing was
to shave off his hair. When that was done he entered upon all the high services of the
Tabernacle, and went to his home a saved man. (J. A. Seiss, D. D.)
Ceremonies on recovery of the leper
First of all, “he shall be brought unto the priest; and the priest shall go forth out of the
camp,” and see him; and then the priest, when he finds that he is clean, shall pronounce
him clean. Next the priest was to take “two birds alive and clean, and cedar-wood and
scarlet, and hyssop: and the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an
earthern vessel over running water.” Now it seems absurd to speak of an earthern vessel,
and water in it called “running water.” But all the absurdity is taken away when we
recollect that the original is “living water.” It is the same expression that occurs in other
parts of Scripture. “I will give unto him living water”—“It shall be in him a well of living
water.” And the real meaning of this passage is “fresh water” from the fountain, and not
stagnant, and unfit for physical, or for spiritual, or for ecclesiastical purposes. Then it
has been supposed that the one bird that was slain was meant to describe the death of
23

Christ; and the dismissal of the other bird, after being dipped in the blood of the slain
bird, was meant to be a type and prefiguration of the resurrection. It is nowhere in
Scripture said to be so, but it is obviously typical of sacrifice; and no one sacrifice, no one
symbol, could set forth the completeness of the work of Christ; and therefore many
symbols may have been employed and combined to set forth that great and blessed act.
We read, then, that the person, after this, was still to present an offering of “two he-
lambs, without blemish”; and to remain at the door of the Tabernacle of the
congregation till the priest had offered these; and by this he was to have access to the
congregation. We read that the priest was to sprinkle him seven times; that is,
completely, the number meant to denote perfection. He was also to touch the tip of his
right ear, to denote that that ear should be opened only to all that was pure. He was also
to touch the thumb of the right hand, to teach that every act was to be consistent with
his character. And upon the right foot, to show that he was to walk in God’s ways, which
are ways of pleasantness and of peace. So that the man should feel—what is stated by the
apostle in Rom_12:1-21.
that he was to present himself, soul and body, a living sacrifice, acceptable to God
through Jesus Christ. Now the language employed here-the hyssop, and the cedar-wood,
and the sprinkling—casts light upon many passages in the Psalms, and those passages,
again, cast light upon the phraseology of the New Testament. “Ye are come unto the
sprinkling of the blood of Jesus.” We read again, in another passage, of “the sprinkling of
His blood,” the “blood of sprinkling.” The meaning of that is, just as the life of the
turtledove, the lamb, or the bird, was sacrificed by the shedding of its blood, and
typically and ecclesiastically, or Levitically, virtue or qualification was imparted to the
person related to it; so the efficacy of Christ’s death, represented by His blood—that is,
the atoning efficacy of it—is to be applied so to our hearts and consciences that we may
have peace with God, free pardon of our sins, and the hope of an inheritance among all
them that are sanctified. (J. Cumming, D. D.)
Do not forget the remedy
Cecil had been a great sufferer for years, and none of his medical friends had been able
to ascertain the cause. At length Mrs. Cecil was told of a physician who was extremely
skilful in intricate cases, and whom she entreated him to consult. On entering the
physician’s room, he said, “Welcome, Mr. Cecil; I know you well by character, and as a
preacher. We must have some conversation after I have given you my advice.” Mr. Cecil
then described his sufferings. The physician considered a moment, and then said, “Dear
sir, there is only one remedy in such a case as yours; do first try it; it is perfectly simple,”
and then he mentioned the medicine. Mr. Cecil, fearing to occupy too much of his time,
rose to leave, but the physician said, “No, sir, we must not part so soon, for I have long
wished for an opportunity of conversing with you.” So they spent half an hour more,
mutually delighted with each other’s society. On returning home, Mr. Cecil said to his
wife, “You sent me to a most agreeable man—such a fund of anecdote, such originality of
thought, such a command of language.” “Well, but what did he prescribe for you?” Mrs.
Cecil anxiously inquired. There was a pause, and then Mr. Cecil exclaimed, “I have
entirely forgotten the remedy; his charms of manner and conversation put everything
else out of my mind.” “Now, young men,” said Mr. Cecil, “it will be very pleasant for you
if your congregations go away saying, ‘ What eloquence! what original thought! and what
an agreeable deliver!’ Take care they do not forget the remedy, the only remedy, Christ
24

and His righteousness, Christ and His atonement, Christ and His advocacy.” (Memoir of
Wm. Marston.)
The cured and uncured
Christ cared the demoniac, the paralytic, the leper. He took the most chronic and
complicated diseases, and they could not stand before His fiat. To one He said, “Be thou
clean”; to another He said, “Take up thy bed and walk”; to another, “Damsel, arise”; and
all these were not only cured as to the body, but cured as to the sicknesses of the soul. A
pastor went into the house where there was a young Christian dying in great triumph.
He entered the room to congratulate her as she was about to enter heaven, and as he
went into the room and began to talk cheerfully about the joys that were immediately
before her, her sister left the room. A few weeks after the pastor was called to the same
house, and this sister who had left the room was about to take her departure into the
eternal world, but she was not ready. She said to the pastor, “You don’t remember me,
do you?” “Oh, yes,” he replied, “I remember you.” “Do you remember when you were
talking to my sister about heaven I left the room?” “Yes,” he said, “I remember that.” She
said, “Do you know why I left?” “No,” he replied, “I don’t.” “Well,” she said, “I didn’t
want to hear anything about my soul, or about heaven, and now I am dying. Oh, sir, it is
a dreadful thing to die!” Now, what was the difference between those two sisters? The
one was perfectly cured of the terrible disease of sin, the other was not. (T. De Witt
Talmage.)
Christ the only Healer
Now, children, if my watch has lost its mainspring, where shall I go to get it mended? To
the tailor’s? No. To the blacksmith’s? No. To the watchmaker’s? Yes. Why? Because he
makes watches, and knows how to mend them. Now, if your hearts are bad, where will
you go to have them healed? To your parents? No. To the priest? No. To Jesus Christ?
Yes. Why? Because Be made the heart, and knows how to heal it. (The Church Scholars’
Magazine.)
Christ is an Almighty Doctor
Christ is an Almighty Doctor. At midnight a sudden disease comes upon your little child.
You hasten for a physician, or you telegraph for the doctor as soon as you can, and hour
after hour there is a contest between science and the King of Terrors. And yet you stand
there and you watch and you see the disease is conquering fortress of strength after
fortress of strength, until after a while you stand over the lifeless form and have to
confess that there is a limit beyond which human medicament cannot go. But I hail at
this moment an Almighty Doctor, who never lost a patient. Why, a leper came out with a
bandage over his mouth and utterly loathsome, so they drove him out from all society,
and when he came out the people all ran, and Christ ran. But Christ ran in a different
direction from the people. They all ran away from the poor man; Christ ran towards him.
And then a second leper came out with a bandage over his mouth, and a third, and a
fourth, and so on until there were ten lepers, and I see Christ standing among them. It is
a dangerous experiment, you say. Why, if you caught the breath of one such man as that,
25

it would be certain death. There, sublimely great in goodness, Christ stood among the
ten lepers, and He cured the first, and the second, and the tenth. (T. De Witt Talmage.)
Christ can remove the root of the disease of sin
Some time ago a man wished to cut down a tree in his garden, and took it in hand to do
it himself. Taking a spade, he cleared away the earth from the roots, and laid them bare
for the axe. He hewed all the roots and suckers he saw, and then pushed and pulled at
the tree, but it remained as firm as ever. Going to his gardener, he consulted him about
it, and his reply was, “Ah, sir, you have not cut the tap-root. You may hack and cut away
at all the rest of the roots, but unless you cut it the tree will never fall.” There are
hundreds of sin-sick souls who persist in pruning away this sin and that sin, but they
wilfully refuse to cut the tap-root of sin.
Two birds.—
The two birds considered typically
I. In the first bird let us see the saviour.
1. The bird was to be “clean.” Christ perfectly holy.
2. A bird’s being chosen in this rite may point us whence our Saviour came—from
heaven.
3. The bird was slain. Christ tasted death for us. This shows—
(1) The evil of sin.
(2) The certainty of its punishment.
(3) God’s unspeakable love.
4. As to what bird it was, we do not certainly know, but commentators tell us all the
birds prescribed by Moses were common and accessible. So the Saviour is not far off,
but near at hand.
5. The “earthern vessel” reminds us of the Saviour’s humanity. And the fact that it
contained not only blood but also clear water, may remind us that He saves by His
Spirit as well as by His blood—that His salvation includes sanctification as well as
justification.
II. Let us see in the other bird the believer.
1. That the Christian is represented by a bird, just as the Saviour is, may teach us—
(1) That Jesus in some sense makes the Christian equal to Himself; and
(2) That every Christian should seek to be Christlike (see 1Jn_3:4).
2. That the Christian is represented by a clean bird teaches—
(1) That the man who believes is justified from all things; and
(2) That the Christian’s effort should ever be after cleanness of character as well
as of condition.
3. That this bird was dipped in the blood of the slain bird shows us plainly the way of
26

salvation—by faith.
4. That the bird on being dipped was then let loose into the open field, teaches the
blessed freedom, the glorious change which immediately takes place on a man’s
believing.
5. May we not also learn that while the Christian is free, yet he will always use his
liberty as the bird does, not to sink earthward, but to soar heavenward?
III. As the living bird seems to have been dipped into the blood of the dead by means of
a cedar staff, to which, along with a bundle of hyssop, it was attached by a band of scarlet
wool, we take this staff as a representation of the gospel, through the foolishness of
preaching which it pleases God to save them who believe. Doing so, we learn from 1Ki_
4:30, that cedar-wood and hyssop were regarded as the two extremes of vegetable
creation; and so the gospel is
(1) adapted to the two extremes of men;
(2) addressed to the highest and lowest;
(3) to the best and the worst. (D. Jamison, B. A.)
The two birds
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 (1Jn_5:6). 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 nought, 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 (Rom_4:25). (S. H. Kellogg, D. D.)
27

The two birds
There is nothing more suggestive than a caged bird. In the down of its breast you can see
the glow of southern climes. In the sparkle of its eyes you can see the flash of distant
seas. In its voice you can hear the song it learned in the wild wood. It is a child of the sky
in captivity.
1. Now the dead bird of my text, captured in the air, suggests the Lord Jesus, who
came down from the realms of light and glory. He once stood in the sunlight of
heaven. He was the favoured of the land. He was the King’s Son. But one day there
came word to the palace that an insignificant island was in rebellion, and was cutting
itself to pieces with anarchy. I hear an angel say: “Let it perish. The King’s realm is
vast enough without the island. The tributes to the King are large enough without
that. We can spare it.” “Not so,” said the Prince, the King’s Son; and I see Him push
out one day, under the protest of a great company. He starts for the rebellious island.
He lands amid the execrations of the inhabitants, that grow in violence until the
malice of earth has smitten Him, and the spirits of the lost world put their black
wings over His dying head and shut the sun out. The hawks and vultures swooped
down upon this dove of the text, until head and breast and feet ran blood—until,
under the flocks and beaks of darkness the poor thing perished. No wonder it was a
bird taken and slain over an earthern vessel of running water. It was a child of the
skies. It typified Him who came down from heaven in agony and blood to save our
souls.
2. I notice also in my text that the bird that was slain was a clean bird. The text
demanded that it should be. The raven was never sacrificed, nor the cormorant, nor
the vulture. It must be a clean bird, says the text, and it suggests the pure Jesus, the
holy Jesus. Although He spent His boyhood in the worst village on earth, although
blasphemies were poured into His ear enough to have poisoned any one else, He
stands before the world a perfect Christ.
3. I remark also, in regard to this first bird, mentioned in the text, that it was a
defenceless bird. When the eagle is assaulted, with its iron beak it strikes like a bolt
against its adversary. This was a dove or a sparrow—most probably the former. Take
the dove, or pigeon, in your hand, and the pecking of its beak upon your hand makes
you laugh at the feebleness of its assault. The reindeer, after it is down, may fell you
with its antlers. The ox, after you think it is dead, may break your leg in its death
struggle. The harpooned whale, in its last agony, may crush you in the coil of the
unwinding rope. But this was a dove—perfectly harmless, perfectly defenceless—type
of Him who said, “I have trod the winepress alone, and there was none to help.”
None to help! The murderers have it all their own way. Where was the soldier in the
Roman regiment who swung his sword in the defence of the Divine Martyr? Did they
put one drop of oil on His gashed feet? Was there one in all that crowd manly and
generous enough to stand up for Him? Were the miscreants at the Cross any more
interfered with in their work of spiking Him fast than the carpenter in his shop
driving a nail through a pine board? The women cried, but there was no balm in their
tears. None to help! none to help!
4. But I come now to speak of this second bird of the text. The priest took the second
bird, tied it to the hyssop branch, and then plunged it in the blood of the first bird.
Ah, that is my soul plunged for cleansing in the Saviour’s blood. There is net enough
28

water in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans to wash away our smallest sin. Sin is such an
outrage on God’s universe that nothing but blood can atone for it. You know the life
is in the blood, and as the life had been forfeited, nothing could buy it back but
blood. What was it that was sprinkled on the door-post when the destroying angel
went through the land? Blood. What was it that went streaming from the altar of
ancient sacrifice? Blood. What was it that the priest carried into the Holy of Holies,
making intercession for the people? Blood. What was it that Jesus sweat in the
Garden of Gethsemane? Great drops of blood. What does the wine in the
sacramental cup signify? Blood. What makes the robes of the righteous in heaven so
fair? “They are washed in the blood of the Lamb.” What is it that cleanses all our
pollution? “The blood of Jesus Christ, which cleanses from all sin.”
5. I notice now that as soon as this second bird was dipped in the blood of the first
bird, the priest unloosed it, and it was free—free of wing and free of foot. It could
whet its beak on any tree-branch it chose; it could pick the grapes of any vineyard it
chose. It was free. A type of our souls after we have been washed in the blood of the
Lamb. We can go where we will. We can do what we will. You say, “Had you better
not qualify that?” No; for I remember in conversion the will is changed, and the man
will not will that which is wrong.
6. The next thing I noticed about this bird, when it was loosed—and that is the main
idea—is, that it flow away. Which way did it go? When you let a bird loose from your
grasp which way does it fly? Up. What are wings for? To fly with. We should be going
heavenward. That is the suggestion. But I know that we have a great many
drawbacks. You had them yesterday, or the day before; and although you want to be
going heavenward, you are constantly discouraged. But, I suppose, when that bird
went out of the priest’s hands it went by inflections—sometimes stooping. A bird
does not shoot directly up—but this is the motion of a bird. So the soul soars towards
God, rising up in love, and sometimes depressed by trial. It does not always go just in
the direction it would like to go. But the main course is right. (T. De Witt Talmage.)
Freedom and exultation of the restored life
Alas for any poor beguiled soul that turns away in scorn of the glorious gospel of the
blessed God! Ye mistake it who regard it as a summons to a slavish and sorrowful life. It
is a great voice out of heaven crying, “Come up hither.” It is a call of the radiant
dayspring as it bursts on the poor bird nestling in the withering grass, revealing the
grandeurs of the everlasting firmament, that it may fly—fly—fly! Let me tell you again my
old story of the eagle. For many months it pined and drooped in its cage, and seemed to
have forgotten that it was of the lineage of the old plumed kings of the forest and the
mountain; and its bright eye faded, and its strong wings drooped, and its kingly crest
was bowed, and its plumes were torn and soiled amid the bars and dust of its prison-
house. So in pity of its forlorn life we carried its cage out to the open air, and broke the
iron wire and flung wide the lowly door; and slowly, falteringly, it crept forth to the
sultry air of that cloudy summer noon and looked listlessly about it. But just then, from a
rift in an overhanging cloud, a golden sunbeam flashed upon the scene. And it was
enough. Then it lifted its royal crest, the dim eye blazed again, the soiled plumes
unfolded and rustled, the strong wings moved themselves, with a rapturous cry it sprang
heavenward. Higher, higher, in broader, braver circles it mounted toward the
firmament, and we saw it no more as it rushed through the storm-clouds and soared to
29

the sun. And would, O ye winged spirits! who dream and pine in this poor earthly
bondage, that only one ray from the blessed Sun of Righteousness might fall on you this
hour! for then would there be the flash of a glorious eye, and a cry of rapture, and a sway
of exulting wings, as another redeemed and risen spirit sprang heavenward unto God!
(C. Wadsworth, D. D.)
Blood-washed Christians
It is said in Germany, of one Prince Henry, when a little boy, that he had a great aversion
to his bath. He didn’t like it, and cried and squealed every morning when the time for his
ablutions came round. One morning, to his very great pleasure, the nurse said he need
not have it, and he soon took to showing to the other children how he had conquered the
nurse to his royal mother’s aggravation. He went out for a walk later in the day, and
when he entered the palace gates on the return journey, the sentinel at that point offered
him no salute, and that had never happened before. Being a prince he was greatly
respected, and felt proud of the salute of the soldiers. Coming up to the palace door,
there the soldier stood on guard, but no salute was given. The little boy went up to the
stalwart sentinel quite angry, and said, “Do you know who I am?” . . . “Oh, yes, Prince
Henry, but we never salute unwashed princes.” He never said anything in reply, but
passed quietly into the palace, and the next morning he took his bath as required. They
did not salute unwashed princes, and the world does not salute unwashed Christian:..
You are a royal blood-washed prince if you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and the
world will take knowledge of you if you have been with Jesus, taking knowledge of Christ
in you the hope of glory. (J. Spencer.)
Appropriate return for the Saviour’s blood-shedding
In an Italian hospital was a severely wounded soldier. A lady visitor spoke to him,
dressed his wounds, smoothed his pillow, and made him all right for the day. When
leaving she took a bouquet of flowers, and laid it beside his head. The soldier, with his
pale face and eyes full of tears, looked up, and said: “That is too much kindness.” She
was a lady with a true Italian heart, and looking back to the soldier, she quietly replied,
“No, not too much for one drop of Italian blood.” Shall we not freely own that the
consecration of all our powers of body and spirit is not too much to give in return for the
shedding of our Emmanuel’s blood on our behalf? (S. S. Chronicle.)
Christian consecration
Did you ever hear of Hedley Vicars, that good soldier? He was once reading the Bible,
and accidentally—he was not religious then, I believe—accidentally he happened to come
upon the verse—“The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin.” Be
thought, “Is that true? Is that true to me? Does the blood of Jesus Christ wash out all my
sin? Then I resolve I will henceforth live as a man who has been washed in the blood of
Jesus Christ.” A noble resolve! Remember it—” I will live as a man ought to live who has
been washed in the blood of Jesus Christ.” How is a man to live who has been washed in
the blood of Christ? That was a noble resolve! (John Vaughan.)
30

Hyssop.—
A sermon to children on hyssop
(Lev_14:4.) Text chosen to illustrate one simple truth. A very little and insignificant
thing may be used for very important work. Of this “hyssop” the Jews were to make a
sort of brush to sprinkle the door-posts with. It was but a little plant, for of Solomon it is
said, “He spake of trees, from the cedar-tree even unto the hyssop that springeth out of
the wall.” It is a short-stemmed plant, growing in crevices like the ferns in our walls. It is
bristly, and so suitable for making into a brush. It is bitter, and so it was thought to have
cleansing properties; and, therefore, the Psalmist prays, “Purge me with hyssop, and I
shall be clean.”
1. God uses little things for His work. True He uses the great cedar for making His
temple, and the acacia boards for His tabernacle; but He also uses the little hyssop.
Children are but “little things,” and yet the Lord needs and uses them. Illustration:
Naaman’s maid. Children at our Lord’s triumphal entry. The nurse who influenced
the good Lord Shaftesbury.
2. God chooses the little things He wants to use. There are many little plants besides
the hyssop; but only that one was chosen for this particular work. There are many
sorts of grass, but only one, with specially interlacing roots, is used to keep up the
great dams that hold back the sea in Holland. God will find out some particular work
for each one of us; and all through life, as well as now, our joy will be to do what He
finds for us to do.
3. God expects us to put something of our own into our service. The hyssop had
something of its own. It put it into its work when it was used to soothe Christ’s pain
on the Cross. It is not enough just to do right, we must try to do right earnestly,
skilfully, cheerfully, prettily: putting our own best selves into the doing. We are to be
God’s agents, but we must never forget this—He would have us put our love, our
goodwill, our abilities, and our happy spirit, into all His work.
If he be poor.—
Provision for the poor
The poor man is often overlooked. There is always a strong tendency in the more
favoured classes to pass him by, and to forget, if not to despise him. But God does not
forget him. The directions for his particular case are just as special and authoritative as
any contained in this ritual. The Lord would thus assure him of His care—that He feels
for him the same deep interest as for others, and brings atonement equally within his
reach. There is a common level in the Divine administrations, upon which “the rich and
poor meet together, and the Lord is the Maker of them all.” The poor are His children, as
well as the rich. He anointed His Son Jesus, to preach the gospel to them. And the most
neglected and down-trodden child of want has just as good a right to cleansing and
heaven, and may count as much upon the sympathy and grace of God, as his wealthy
neighbour. If he cannot get three lambs, he is just as welcome and acceptable with one
lamb and two doves. The poor widow’s mite cast into the treasury of the Lord receives a
higher commendation than all the costly donations of the wealthy. Mary, with her two
young pigeons is just as completely cleansed as she who could add thereto a lamb of a
year old. But although the law favoured the leper who was poor it did not exempt him. It
31

Leviticus 14 commentary

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à Leviticus 14 commentary

Similaire à Leviticus 14 commentary (20)

Plus de GLENN PEASE

Plus de GLENN PEASE (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Leviticus 14 commentary