And Jehovah spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying,
Leviticus 13 opens with God speaking to both Moses and Aaron, and a long law about leprosy follows. From the first line, this is too serious a matter for human opinion — and it belongs to the priest as much as to Moses.
God gave the law about uncleanness at birth to Moses alone. Here He speaks to Aaron too.
Even in the type it was a holy rather than a medical question. Leprosy was not so much an illness as a stroke or plague. The priest looked at the suspected person under careful direction from Jehovah, not as a doctor making a diagnosis. The consequence was most serious for an Israelite, so the priest had to take the most scrupulous care. Uncleanness from birth was an obvious fact. There Jehovah spoke to Moses about what concerned every mother and child. For leprosy He spoke to Moses and to Aaron.
One writer connects that double address with what the disease pictures.
This chapter gives its instructions to Aaron as well as Moses, because spotting and treating leprosy was the priest's own job. Note that leprosy, as a type, stresses not so much the guilt of sin as its corrupting and defiling power.
The nature of the disease is what makes it a picture of sin.
Leprosy is the most stubborn and loathsome of diseases. It starts so slightly, holds on so surely, and spreads so readily both inside and around the unhappy person who has it. Its end is terrible. It serves as the fitting type of the corruption of sin. God Himself therefore takes it into His own hand. He alone is competent to deal with it, and with Him alone its cure was found.
The picture goes deeper than behaviour.
It was not what the leper did that made him unclean, but what he was... It is what we are, as well as what we do, that makes us unclean. That is why the leper had to go to the priest — not to the doctor — to be made clean. Notice, it was not only a question of being healed, but of being cleansed.
The law removed the decision from the person most involved.
Other illnesses might look like leprosy and be only suspicious symptoms. So there was this important provision: a man is not made the judge of his own sin. The law laid down that the Israelite should submit his condition to another man's inspection. That other man is the type of a spiritual man, for that is what a priest means. He is one who is called to have the right of access to God. So he should have his senses trained to tell good from evil by the standard of the sanctuary.
God placed real power in a fallible man's hands, and then fenced it in.
Suspicion would not be enough to brand a person a leper. Nor was the priest left to his own devices to decide what counted as leprosy. The Lord revealed all of that in His word; to it the priest was to be subject, and by it alone he was to be guided. God placed the power of exclusion from the camp in the hands of a priest — a failing, sinful creature. So it was of the utmost importance that this power should not be abused. Jehovah made known in His Word, within everyone's reach, the marks by which the priest could tell whether the person, the garment, or the house really was struck with this plague.
The priest's authority also had a boundary.
His sphere is limited to Israel, those among whom God dwelt. He had no instructions for cases among Gentiles. So we are to judge those who are inside, while God judges those outside.
The priest could go wrong in two opposite ways.
The priest was not to pronounce judgment hastily in any case. The most patient care was needed, so that no one should be put out as a leper who really was not one, and so that no real case of leprosy should escape. There was to be no haste and no indifference.
Putting the leper out was not God's last word.
Suppose Jehovah cared only about maintaining this holiness. Then the leper would have stayed outside the camp for good, cut off from the Tabernacle and from fellowship with God's people. But He cared for the leper, and provided for his reinstatement into all his privileges in the camp, if only he was first healed... Money, pleading, promises, efforts — none of it would help. Jehovah Himself must heal the man, or he could never be cleansed. So grace had room to display itself, once the claims of divine holiness had been acknowledged.
- Two names. God speaks to Moses and Aaron, because leprosy was a holy question, not a medical one, and the priest had to handle it.
- Two natures of the trouble. Leprosy pictures sin less as guilt than as a defiling power that spreads. It made a man unclean by what he was, not only by what he did.
- Two safeguards. No one judges his own case. The priest himself is bound by God's written marks, so his power can never run wild.
- Two dangers. Haste and indifference are both wrong. Patient care keeps the priest from putting out a clean man, and from letting a real case slip by.
- Two outcomes. Holiness put the leper out. Grace brought him back — but only God could heal him first.
When a man shall have in the skin of his flesh a rising or a scab, or bright spot, and it become in the skin of his flesh a sore [as] of leprosy, then he shall be brought unto Aaron the priest, or unto one of his sons the priests.
Leviticus 13 opens a long, careful section on one disease. It begins with three small marks on the skin — a swelling, an eruption, a spot — that may or may not be serious. The question the verse raises is not medical but moral: what does this outbreak mean, and who has the right to judge it?
Commentators read this disease as God's picture of sin.
Leprosy is the picture of indwelling sin and its awful corruption. The Lord chose this horrible disease to picture sin because of how vile it is. Like sin, it keeps spreading until it affects the whole person. It is passed down from parent to child, and it cannot be cured. As the disease goes on, the victim grows less and less aware of his dreadful condition, and is even content with it.
The verse speaks of what a man has, not what he has done.
Leprosy may affect almost any part of the body. It was not what the leper did that made him unclean, but what he was… It is what we are, as well as what we do, that makes us unclean. So the leper had to go to the priest (not to the doctor) to be made clean. Notice, it was not only a question of being healed, but cleansed.
The verse lists three different marks. Older translations call them a rising, a scab and a bright spot.
There might appear in the skin of the flesh a swelling, or a scab, or a bright spot. The outbreaks of leprosy looked different from one another, just as sin works in different ways. But each of them points to what is hateful to God. And Aaron or one of his sons must examine the man.
One writer stops at the third mark — the bright spot.
"A bright spot." We read in Hebrews 11:25 of "the fleeting pleasures of sin." Sin does have its pleasures, and often it looks very bright. We read in Hebrews 3:13 of "the deceitfulness of sin," and that is always true. Satan would turn our eyes away from the danger of sin, and would tell us how very profitable, how very bright it is.
One writer pictures the man's reluctance to go.
Perhaps he was not willing to go to the priest. Perhaps he thought he could decide for himself about the rising, the scab or the bright spot. Perhaps he thought the small spot on his body would soon get better. But the Word of God stands sure: "He shall be brought to the priest." It does not even say that he himself shall go to the priest. It says, "He shall be brought to the priest."
Behind that lies a principle running through the whole chapter.
There was this important provision: a man is not made the judge of his own sin. The law laid down that the Israelite must let another person examine his condition. That other person pictures a spiritual man, for that is what a priest means. A priest is really someone called to have the right of access to God. So his senses should be trained to tell good from evil by the standard of the sanctuary.
The priest was bound too, and by the same book.
The priest was not to judge any case in haste, or decide it without care. He was not to form an opinion from mere hearsay. He had to see for himself, to use priestly discernment, to think calmly, and to hold strictly to the written word — the holy, faultless guide book. He needed all of this to form a sound judgement of each case.
The priest could go wrong in two opposite directions, and the law guarded against both.
Two things claimed the priest's careful attention. One was the purity of the assembly. The other was the grace that could not shut out any member, except on the clearest grounds. Holiness could not let anyone stay in who ought to be out. Grace, on the other hand, would not have anyone out who ought to be in. Things might seem small which were in fact serious, and things might look like leprosy which were not leprosy at all.
No treatment is ordered here, and that silence points forward.
God Himself takes this disease into His own hand. He is the only One able to deal with it, and the only One with whom its cure was found… So if no natural remedy is given, or even hinted at, for this disease, we shall surely find the cure for the spiritual illness in the means God appointed for cleansing the leper.
- Disease — leprosy pictures sin: it begins small, spreads, and dulls the sufferer to his own condition.
- Depth — the leper was unclean for what he was, not only for what he did; the trouble was in him, not just on him.
- Deference — "he shall be brought" means no one is the judge of his own case; the matter goes to another.
- Discernment — the priest judged by the written word, not by hearsay or feeling. Holiness kept no leper in, and grace shut no clean man out.
- Deliverance — the chapter names no medicine. The cure lies in the cleansing God appointed for the leper.
And when the priest looketh on the sore in the skin of the flesh, and the hair in the sore is turned white, and the sore looketh deeper than the skin of his flesh, it is the sore of leprosy; and the priest shall look on him and pronounce him unclean.
Leviticus 13 gives the priest a set of tests for a suspected skin disease, and verse 3 names the two signs that settle the case. On that evidence the priest says one word — unclean — so why did God make a skin check a matter of holiness?
One writer reads the chapter as a picture of sin, and names which side of sin it shows:
Leviticus 13 is lengthy in contrast with chapter 12. That is easy to understand. Chapter 12 deals with the defilement that marks the very start of man's life. This chapter deals with how that defilement works and grows all through his life, and that takes a great deal of detail. There is no doubt that leprosy is as striking a picture of sin as the Bible gives. God gave the instructions of this chapter to Aaron as well as to Moses, because finding and treating leprosy was the priest's own work. Note that leprosy, as a picture, stresses not the guilt of sin so much as its corrupting and defiling power.
Each of the two marks named in the verse carries its own meaning:
If both signs showed up — the hair in the sore turned white, and the sore deeper than the skin — then no question remained. It was leprosy, and the priest was to pronounce the patient unclean. The white hair speaks of spiritual strength decaying. The sore deeper than the skin shows that the sin is not just a light slip. Seeing this needs true spiritual perception, and it takes great care to keep any judgment under God's guidance. But when the case is clear, God's word is clear: the priest must pronounce the man unclean.
One writer turns the deciding phrase straight on the reader:
Friend, the plague is deeper than the skin. It is not only a surface trouble with you. No, the real trouble is far deeper. It is in our heart. The Priest pronounces the heart "deceitful above all things, and desperately sick." And He adds, "Who can understand it? I the LORD search the heart." He knows well that you do not know your own heart. Only the Lord knows how bad you really are.
The examiner is a priest, not a doctor, and that changes what the test is about:
Even in the picture it was a holy question, not a medical one. Leprosy was not so much an illness as a plague or a blow. The priest looked at the man under suspicion with detailed direction from the Lord. This was not a doctor making a diagnosis. The result was so serious for an Israelite that the priest owed the case the most careful attention… Sin works and shows itself. But rushing to pronounce on evil, even when it is out in the open and active, is as far from God as ignoring it. Both are the opposite of grace. The priest — the spiritual man who is at home in God's presence — judges by the written word.
A verdict could go wrong in either direction, so the priest is told to be patient:
Notice the care, the watchfulness, the perfect patience urged on the priest. He must not treat something as leprosy when it is not. He must not let real leprosy slip past him either. Many things might appear on the skin — the place where trouble shows — looking like a case of leprous disease, and patient examination by the priest would find them to be only skin-deep… And yet what seemed a surface mark might turn out to be something deeper than the skin, something below the surface, something affecting the man's whole body from within… Some slight neglect, some small oversight, might lead to disastrous results.
Feelings are no guide here, because the disease itself deadens feeling:
You can stick a needle into the part affected by leprosy, and the man does not feel it. In the same way, a man who keeps going on in sin no longer feels his conscience prick him, and does not know he is a sinner… The leper might reply, "But I feel in excellent health; I never felt better in my life." "I am sorry," the priest replies, "but it is my sad duty to pronounce you unclean." The man's feelings and opinions had nothing to do with the case; everything rested on the word of the priest. "When the priest has examined him, he shall pronounce him unclean." That ended the matter. The man knew he was unclean because the priest said so, not because he felt unclean.
- Looked at. A priest does the examining, not a doctor, and he judges by God's written word.
- Signs. White hair says strength is decaying; a sore below the surface says this is no small slip.
- Depth. What makes the case serious is that the trouble is not on the skin but underneath — in the heart.
- Verdict. The priest speaks, and his word settles it; the man's feelings and opinions count for nothing.
- Balance. Rushing to condemn is as far from God as ignoring evil — both are the opposite of grace.
But if the bright spot be white in the skin of his flesh, and look not deeper than the skin, and the hair thereof be not turned white, the priest shall shut up [him that hath] the sore seven days.
A man comes to the priest with a white spot on his skin. It looks alarming, but two warning signs are missing. The spot does not lie deeper than the skin, and the hair in it has not turned white. So the priest neither clears him nor condemns him. He shuts him up for seven days, and that pause is the lesson of the verse.
The priest weighed two marks together, not one alone. One writer links the white hair to spiritual decay and the deeper spot to evil at work inside a person.
Spiritual decay (the "hair turned white") is always present when evil is active in a person. But it can also come from other causes. So it must not be the only ground for judging a case to be leprosy. But if this is found together with the energy of inward evil (a "spot deeper than the skin"), then it is a clear case. Spiritual discernment will tell the difference between surface signs — what is only casual and unintended — and signs of deep-seated evil.
A mark on the skin might be nothing, or it might be the start of ruin. The priest could go wrong in either direction, and both mistakes carry a cost.
But notice the care, the watchfulness, and the perfect patience required of the priest. He must not treat anything as leprosy that was not leprosy. He must not let anything escape that really was leprosy. Many things might appear "in the skin" — the place where things show — "like the plague of leprosy." Patient examination by the priest would show they were only on the surface… Some slight neglect, some small oversight, might lead to disastrous consequences. It might leave a confirmed leper in place and so defile the assembly. Or it might expel a genuine member of the Israel of God over a surface blemish.
The seven days hold the man in place. The priest does not send him out of the camp while the question is still open.
If there was still room for doubt, he was to be shut up for a while — not shut out, but shut up. Israel must not be defiled by a possible leper, while on the other hand the man must not be treated as what he may not be. God's people must not act in the dark, but in the light.
For those seven days the man is under an examiner's eye. What is that examiner like?
You will not find the Priest impatient or cruel. You will find One who is filled with love and sympathy. He will look on those risings or swellings — that scab which marks some old trouble, maybe some old quarrel or bad feeling. He will look on those bright spots which you rather like, but which tell of something wrong within, perhaps some self-indulgence which you love. He will not look hurriedly. His eye will never make a mistake. If there is any question, He will shut up the one with these complaints for seven days — or even another seven days if need be.
One writer applies the seven days to a church facing a case that is serious but still unclear.
Sometimes the evil is serious, yet not fully developed or made plain. Then those who care for the assembly may ask the person to hold back willingly, for the time being, from taking the Lord's Supper, where fellowship is expressed, until the matter is cleared up… This would be a sort of "shutting one up" as in Leviticus 13. This is not a grade of discipline. It is only a temporary measure while waiting for investigation or further examination… No person should be asked to refrain from breaking bread on a mere suspicion of evil.
Kelly sees the chapter guarding against two dangers at once: a gloomy verdict, and an examination that spares itself trouble.
But there is also provision against a gloomy judgment and despair, which Satan knows how to use for injury and ruin. It guards against that as well as against the more common danger of too light and self-sparing an examination. A man or a woman might have "bright spots, white bright spots" in the skin of their flesh. Here again the priest's discernment is required. If the spots were pale or dull in colour, this was not leprosy but a different rash that had broken out in the skin. The person was clean. It is holy, but neither hard nor careless or compromising. God is light, and God is love.
- Look. The priest examines the spot himself. No one acts on mere suspicion.
- Weigh. The white hair alone proves nothing. White hair plus a spot deeper than the skin makes a clear case, and surface marks must be told apart from deep-seated evil.
- Wait. Where the marks are missing, the answer is seven days — time given so the case can declare itself.
- Hold, don't expel. The man is shut up, not shut out. Israel stays undefiled, and no one treats him as what he may not be.
- Then speak. The priest gives his verdict only when the case is plain. Grace is as opposed to harshness as it is to looseness.
And the priest shall look on him the seventh day; and behold, in his sight, the sore remaineth as it was, the sore hath not spread in the skin, then the priest shall shut him up seven days a second time.
A suspected case of disease is not a settled case. This verse keeps a man waiting a second week, neither cleared nor condemned, while the priest watches one thing: has the spot spread, or has it stopped?
Why does God put this one disease under such careful rules? Writers point to what it pictures.
It is the most stubborn and loathsome of diseases. It is so slight in its beginnings, so sure in its grip and in its power to spread both within and around the unhappy person who has it, so terrible in its end. That is why it is used as the fitting picture of the corruption of sin. God Himself therefore takes it into His own hand, as indeed the only One competent to deal with it, and with whom alone its cure was found.
The chapter keeps repeating the same few verbs, and the repetition is deliberate.
This explains why the same expressions keep coming back: "The priest shall look"; "And the priest shall look on him the seventh day"; "Then the priest shall shut him up seven days more"... The priest was not to judge any case in haste, or decide it rashly. He was not to form an opinion from mere hearsay. The priest had to have all of this to judge each case soundly: seeing for himself, the discernment of a priest, calm reflection, and strict obedience to the written word — the holy, infallible guide book.
And the examination was never handed to the person under question:
And of these the priest was to be the interpreter — for us the spiritual man, able to draw near to God, and having the mind of God. The priest could never leave the judgment to the man whose own case was in question. No one asked his opinion, and no one could accept it — an opinion about a matter in which he was too closely involved to be impartial.
The waiting is not a punishment. It refuses both verdicts until the case is clear.
Sometimes the unmistakable signs were missing, yet there was still real cause for concern — some visible spot, for God would not allow acting on mere suspicion. Then the priest was neither to dismiss the man free, nor shut him out of the camp, but to shut him up seven days. He was neither denied his place altogether, nor allowed to enjoy it. Indifference was impossible: tenderness and watchfulness each had their place. If the disease then seemed to be at a standstill, that was still not enough, for it was not yet recovery.
For the people of God today, writers see a pause in privileges, not an expulsion:
This does not picture someone being put out of fellowship. It pictures only the loss of certain privileges of practical fellowship for a time, until the matter is cleared up.
The delay protects in both directions at once.
The priest had to make sure that no real leper stayed among the people of Israel. He had to be just as careful not to put out anyone who was not a leper. "Holiness could not allow anyone to stay in who ought to be out; and grace would not have anyone out who ought to be in."
What the priest weighs is not how bad the spot looks. It is whether the evil goes deep, and whether it moves.
There might be "the bright spot," but no deep purpose underneath, and no active evil in result. On the seventh day he looks again, and if there is no spreading in the skin but the sore has stopped, he shuts the man up seven days more. Then he looks, and if the sore is pale and dim, with no spread of it in the skin, the priest pronounces the man clean. It is only a scab; and he is to wash his clothes, and be clean.
The waiting is real, but it is not endless, and it is not softness.
There was no haste, and no indifference. God always enters the place of judgment with a slow and measured step. But once He enters, He must act according to the claims of His nature. He can patiently investigate. He can wait for "seven days." If the symptoms change even slightly, He can wait for "seven days more." But the moment the disease proves to be leprosy truly at work, there can be no toleration.
- Look. Judgment starts with the priest's own inspection. It never starts with hearsay, or with the opinion of the man under question.
- Wait. When the signs are unclear, God commands delay — seven days, and seven more if needed. He will not act on suspicion.
- Shut up, not out. The man keeps his place but not its enjoyment; this is a suspended verdict, not an expulsion.
- Guard both sides. Holiness will not keep in what ought to be out; grace will not keep out what ought to be in.
- Then decide. If the spot has stopped and fades, the man is clean and only washes his clothes. If the disease is at work, patience ends and there can be no toleration.
And the priest shall look on him again the seventh day, and behold, the sore is become pale and the sore hath not spread in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him clean; it is a scab; and he shall wash his garments and be clean.
By this point the priest has looked twice and waited twice. Now the verdict comes, and it raises two questions: how do you tell a passing blemish from a spreading disease, and what does a cleared man still have to do?
The priest does not decide at first sight. He looks again, because a mistake could go two ways, and both would be a disaster.
But notice the care, the watchfulness, the perfect patience urged on the priest. He must not treat anything as leprosy that was not leprosy. He must not let anything slip through that really was leprosy... Some slight neglect, some small oversight, might lead to disastrous consequences. A confirmed leper might stay and defile the assembly, or the priest might put out a genuine member of the Israel of God over a surface blemish.
The waiting is not coldness. One writer describes the priest who does the looking:
You will not find the Priest impatient or cruel. You will find One who is filled with love and sympathy. He will look at those risings or swellings — that scab which marks some old trouble, maybe some old quarrel, or bad feeling; those bright spots that you quite like, but that tell of something wrong inside, perhaps some self-indulgence which you love. He will not look in a hurry. His eye will never make a mistake.
The whole test is whether the trouble stays on the surface. The verse calls the mark "only an eruption" — older translations say "a scab." It is real, but it is not deep, and so the man goes free.
There might be "the bright spot," but no deep purpose underneath, and no active evil in result. In this case the priest shut the case up for seven days, though he could not dismiss it as clear, for there was plainly an appearance of evil; but as there was no more, he waits patiently. ... Then he looks, and if the mark is pale and dim, and has not spread in the skin, the man is pronounced clean. It is only a scab; and he is to wash his clothes, and be clean.
Two words carry the diagnosis: faded and not spread. One writer draws a plain rule from them, and a test we can use on ourselves.
In verse 6 it is clear that if the sore suspected of being leprosy had not spread, but faded, the patient was pronounced clean... So for us today, if evil is at work, it will spread; if not, it will fade. How do we discern this? The surest sign that evil is not active is seen in an attitude of self-judgment. In a case like this, an attitude of self-defence almost always shows that the evil is spreading.
A blemish that passes the test is still not nothing. Commentators draw a line between weakness and active sin:
There is a difference between personal infirmity and the positive energy of evil — between mere defects and blemishes in the outward character, and the activity of sin in the members. No doubt it is important to watch against our infirmities; for if they are not watched, judged, and guarded against, they may become the source of positive evil.
The two seven-day waits are not the same as being shut out of the camp as a leper.
The person was to be isolated for seven days. This would not speak of one being put out of fellowship, but only of his being deprived of certain privileges of practical fellowship for the time being, until the matter was cleared. If no change had taken place after seven days, then another seven days of probation were added.
The verse does not end with the verdict. The clean man still has something to do himself:
The clothes tell us of what touches us — our associations, what we have to do with, what the world around sees as connected with us. Perhaps people have been used to seeing us in the gambling halls, or in other evil places. All these associations and ways must be "washed." How do we wash our ways and associations? We get that question answered for us in Psalm 119:9 — "How can a young man keep his way pure?" Here is God's own answer: "By guarding it according to your word."
- Look twice. The priest looks again before he decides. That blocks two mistakes: leprosy left inside the assembly, and a true member of God's people thrown out over a surface mark.
- Look deep. The question is not how bad the mark looks. It is whether the trouble is only skin deep.
- Watch the direction. Evil that is active spreads; evil that has been judged fades. Self-judgment is the sign it is fading; self-defence usually means it is spreading.
- Wait, don't expel. The seven days held back some privileges while the case was unclear. That is not the same as being put outside the camp.
- Then wash. God's word declares the man clean. Washing the clothes is his own part: old habits and company cleared out, his way kept by Scripture.
But if the scab have spread much in the skin, after that he hath been seen by the priest for his cleansing, he shall be seen by the priest again;
The priest has examined a man, kept him in isolation, and declared him clean — then the trouble comes back and spreads. This verse sends him back to the priest, and raises two questions: why is a person never his own judge, and what does a relapse show that the first look could not?
The law never lets the priest judge from a distance or on someone else's report. One writer sets out what the priest must do, and what he must say when the trouble is spreading:
The Lord asks for personal inspection by the priest, not a report. If there is proof that evil is at work now — and still more, that it is no passing outbreak but persistent, deliberate, deeply penetrating evil — then doubt is over. The priest must pronounce the man unclean... But if the scab spreads after he has shown himself to the priest for cleansing, he must show himself to the priest again. The priest sees the spreading, and the truth must be spoken, for the evil is at work. It is leprosy. It must not be hid.
Spreading is the sign that decides the case. One writer compares it to leaven working through dough:
Leprosy spreads. Even "a little leaven leavens the whole lump." Some may say it does not spread, because they cannot see its damage. But leaven works quietly and unnoticed, and it works surely. God's word assures us that leaven, even a little, leavens. So the priest watched to see whether the plague spread. If it did, that was sometimes enough evidence to decide the case.
The sufferer does not judge his own case. The examiner must also be free from the pressure of what everyone else thinks:
Here we have the most characteristic type of sin under the sign of that foul and hopeless disease. Other diseases might wear its evil look, yet in fact be only suspicious symptoms. So the law made this important provision: a man is not the judge of his own sin. The Israelite had to submit his condition to another man's inspection. That other man pictures a spiritual man, for that is what a priest means... As such he must not be carried away by conventional opinions, traditional thoughts, or what men call public opinion. Such opinion is one of the most damaging things that corrupt the holy moral judgment of God's children.
A wrong verdict can fall in either direction. One writer weighs both dangers:
But notice the care, the watchfulness, the perfect patience urged on the priest. He must not treat anything as leprosy that was not leprosy, and he must not let real leprosy escape... Some slight neglect, some small oversight, might lead to disastrous results. It might leave a confirmed leper inside the assembly and defile it. Or it might expel a genuine member of the Israel of God over some surface blemish.
The verse allows for a clean verdict that later proves premature. One writer reads it as the difference between real self-judgment and something that only looks like it:
It may take a little time to discern whether self-judgment is genuine. So verse 7 shows that self-judgment could appear to be there when it was not. If the same thing surfaced again, even after the priest had pronounced the man clean, the priest was to examine him again. If he found it had spread, he was to pronounce him unclean. If a believer falls into the same type of sin after forgiveness, this shows that he has not judged the root of the matter.
Another writer describes what judging the root means. It is tracing the fall back to where the heart first turned aside:
A brother in fellowship may fall and then sincerely acknowledge his fault as an evil. He may even be restored to his place. But he is always in danger of falling again if he has not judged the root of it. It is there that he got to a distance from God. Communion with God is not fully restored, and self and its will are not fully broken, until the Christian finds the point where his heart began to lose its spiritual sensitivity.
A second summons is not hostility. One writer describes the Priest who examines you:
You will not find the Priest impatient or cruel. You will find One who is filled with love and sympathy. He will look on those risings or swellings. He will look at that scab which marks some old trouble — maybe an old quarrel or bad feeling. He will look at those bright spots which you rather like, but which tell of something wrong within, perhaps some self-indulgence which you love. He will not look hurriedly. His eye will never mistake.
- Look, don't assume. God asks the priest to look for himself, never to act on hearsay.
- Look for spread. Evil that is alive moves, the way leaven works quietly through dough; evil that is dying fades.
- Look again. A clean verdict is not beyond review — if the trouble returns, the case reopens.
- Look deeper. A relapse says the surface was cleaned and the root was left. Real self-judgment traces the fall to where the heart first drifted.
- Look in love. The Priest who reopens the case is never hurried, never cruel and never mistaken — He looks with love and sympathy.
and the priest shall look on him, and behold, the scab hath spread in the skin; then the priest shall pronounce him unclean it is leprosy.
Leviticus 13 puts a man's future in the hands of a priest with instructions to look, wait, and look again. In verse 8 the waiting ends: the man comes back, the sore has spread, and the priest declares him unclean.
The chapter spends more space on this disease than on any other, and commentators read that care as deliberate. One writer explains why God chose this particular sickness to stand for something deeper:
Leprosy is the most stubborn and loathsome of diseases. It is so slight in its beginnings. It holds on so surely, and it spreads both inside and around the unhappy person who has it. Its end is so terrible. So it stands as the fitting picture of the corruption of sin. God Himself therefore takes it into His own hand. He is the only One able to deal with it, and the only One with whom its cure is found.
The priest's task is to see whether the sore has moved outward since the last look. One writer shows why that test carries such weight:
Leprosy spreads. Even "a little leaven leavens the whole lump." Some may say it does not spread, because they cannot see its damage. But leaven works quietly and unnoticed, and it works most surely. So the priest watched closely to see if the plague spread. If it did, that would sometimes be enough evidence to decide the case. This would be a true sign of leprosy, whether in a man, a garment, or a house… But when a person is pronounced to be a leprous man, he must be put outside the camp. Then his cry will be, "Unclean, unclean!"
The man here had already been through this process and come out clean. Verse 8 now overturns that earlier ruling:
A possible leper must not defile Israel. On the other hand, no one must treat the man as what he may not be. God's people must not act in the dark, but in the light. The great deciding point would now be whether or not the disease would spread or was stopped. If it did not spread, the priest was to tell him to wash his clothes, and he would be clean. There had been minor uncleanness, or there would have been no need of this pause in judgment. But if the disease spread even after this, the earlier decision had to be recalled: the man was unclean.
One writer applies the same test to believers, and points to a person's own attitude:
So for us today, if evil is at work, it will spread; if not, it will fade. How do we discern this? The surest sign that evil is not active is an attitude of self-judgment. In a case like this, self-defence almost always shows that the evil is spreading… If a believer falls into the same type of sin after being forgiven, this shows that he has not really judged the root of the matter.
Two weeks of waiting stand between the first suspicion and the sentence of verse 8:
There was no haste, and no indifference. God always enters the place of judgment with a slow and measured step. But when He does enter, He must act according to the claims of His nature. He can investigate with patience. He can wait for "seven days." Should there be the slightest change in the symptoms, He can wait for "seven days more." But the moment it proves to be the positive working of leprosy, there can be no toleration.
The verdict on this man comes from outside him, and one writer shows why:
Here we have the most characteristic picture of sin under the sign of that foul and hopeless disease. Other illnesses might wear its evil appearance, but they were in fact only suspicious symptoms. So there was this important provision: a man is not made the judge of his own sin. The law laid down that the Israelite must show his condition to another man for inspection. That other man is a picture of a spiritual man, for that is what a priest means. He is really someone called to have the right of access to God. So he should train his senses to discern both good and evil by the standard of the sanctuary.
- Picture — Leprosy pictures sin because it starts small, holds on, and spreads; only God has its cure.
- Test — The one question the priest asks is whether it has spread. Evil that is alive moves; evil that has been dealt with fades.
- Reversal — A clean verdict is not permanent. When the sore spreads after the man was cleared, the earlier decision is recalled.
- Pace — God investigates slowly and waits twice over. Once the disease is proven He tolerates none of it, and the leprous man lives outside the camp.
- Verdict — The sufferer never rules on his own case. The judgment belongs to someone trained to discern good and evil before God.