Saturday Soliloquy: Sob Story :)

The last three days have been difficult. I’ve been SO sick, and completely uncomfortable!

Flu? Nope. Covid? Nope. Old age? Nope.

It was a humongous, incredibly itchy SPIDER bite! At least, I think it was a spider. I didn’t see it. It got me sometime during the night.

A sneak attack.

Spiders are NOT cute, but I just didn’t have the nerve to put up a picture of a real one.

The bite site is on the back of my leg, a couple of inches above my knee. The itching was–still is–intense. It’s a bit less miserable today, finally. I’ve spent the last two days with cold packs on the bite site. Today, I haven’t used one. Yet. We’ll see.

I have a history of strong reactions to bug bites. When I was about 15, I got a mosquito bite on the inside of my elbow. Couldn’t bend my arm because of the swelling. The doctor put me on an anithistamine, which reduced the swelling in about two days. Again, the itching was intense.

Later, shortly after we were married, another critter got me near my eye. Swelled up like a ballon. Intense itching. There have been others, along the way. Bee stings are particularly scary for me.

Not only do I swell up and itch like crazy. The sting affects my whole system, makes me feel just miserable. I’m better today, finally, and I think I’m going to survive–just barely.

I really, really hate biting insects. They should be banned to one of the deepest circles of hell. Dante should have put them in his Inferno, forever and ever.

Amen!

Leprosy in Hair or Beard

Lev. 19-32.

If a man or woman have a plague upon the head or the beard;

Then the priest shall see the plague: and, behold, if it be in sight deeper than the skin; and there be in it a yellow thin hair; then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a dry scall, even a leprosy upon the head or beard.

And if the priest look on the plague of the scall, and, behold, it be not in sight deeper than the skin, and that there is no black hair in it; then the priest shall shut up him that hath the plague of the scall seven days:

And in the seventh day the priest shall look on the plague: and, behold, if the scall spread not, and there be in it no yellow hair, and the scall be not in sight deeper than the skin;

He shall be shaven, but the scall shall he not shave; and the priest shall shut up him that hath the scall seven days more:

And in the seventh day the priest shall look on the scall: and, behold, if the scall be not spread in the skin, nor be in sight deeper than the skin; then the priest shall pronounce him clean: and he shall wash his clothes, and be clean.

But if the scall spread much in the skin after his cleansing;

Then the priest shall look on him: and, behold, if the scall be spread in the skin, the priest shall not seek for yellow hair; he is unclean.

But if the scall be in his sight at a stay, and that there is black hair grown up therein; the scall is healed, he is clean: and the priest shall pronounce him clean.

I’ve been thinking about the people who had to go to the priest because of a spot, a scab, or a scall (eruption in the skin) that could be leprosy. How frightened they must have been, knowing that they could be experiencing the first signs of this dreaded disease. They knew that, following confinement and re-examination, they could be pronounced unclean and barred from the rest of the camp.

Imagine, if you will, this young woman finding something on her head that could be nothing more than a scab of some sort. Did she debate with herself about going to the priest? Did she talk with her father or her husband? Did she have small children who could be deprived of their mother? Was she facing the rest of her life exiled from all those she loved?

I believe it took courage, both physical and moral, to submit oneself to and examination that could result in the dreaded pronounciation, “UNCLEAN!” How awful to hear that word, and to face the reality of living the rest of one’s life exiled from home, friends, and family.

The process of examination and diagnosing a suspicious place in the hair or beard is much like the process we have already covered. A week of confinement, re-examination, another week of confinement, and then the final diagnosis of leprosy or not leprosy. The priests had to know every step of the process, and bore the responsibility of pronouncing a person as clean or unclean. I am quite sure that there was relief and rejoicing for everyone involved when the priest said, “You a clean! It is not leprosy!”

Upon reading through the above verses one last time, I noted that a man’s beard must be shaved around the scall. Perhaps his entire beard had to be shaved. We are not told if a woman’s head must likewise be shaved around the scall, or perhaps her entire head must be shaved so that the priest could see if there were any spread of the sore place. This, in itself, was an ordeal for a woman, whose hair was typically never cut.

A Burning Spot

Lev. 13:24-28.

Or if there be any flesh, in the skin whereof there is a hot burning, and the quick flesh that burneth have a white bright spot, somewhat reddish, or white;

Then the priest shall look upon it: and, behold, if the hair in the bright spot be turned white, and it be in sight deeper than the skin; it is a leprosy broken out of the burning: wherefore the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is the plague of leprosy.

But if the priest look on it, and, behold, there be no white hair in the bright spot, and it be no lower than the other skin, but be somewhat dark; then the priest shall shut him up seven days:

And the priest shall look upon him the seventh day: and if it be spread much abroad in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is the plague of leprosy.

And if the bright spot stay in his place, and spread not in the skin, but it be somewhat dark; it is a rising of the burning, and the priest shall pronounce him clean: for it is an inflammation of the burning.

Last week, we saw several different tests for leprosy. This process continues throughout Chapter 15. I heard a message from J. Vernon McGee yesterday on my way to church that addressed this issue, and I thought it worth a review here today.

First, he pointed out the importance of the book of Leviticus as a keystone book in the Bible, setting out God’s Law for His people. He emphasized that clean and unclean appear repeatedly. I have noted before that God never handed out rules arbitrarily, but rather for the safety and health of His people.

Leprosy is a picture of sin and destruction. It pollutes every cell of the body, slowly eating away until the flesh is literally falling off. It always led to death. Once discovered, the person bearing the plague was cut off from the congregation so that the plague would not be spread among the entire congregation.

Following the Law that protected the people from the spread of leprosy was important for the preservation of God’s people. Obeying God’s Word in the matter of recognizing and dealing with sin is just as important.

Why did God take such care as to give three full chapters to the subject of leprosy? Because, like sin, it can spread like wildfire from one person to another until God’s Word is no longer obeyed. Romans 6:23 tells us that the wages of sin is death. That is an absolute statement. BUT, it goes on to say, the gift of God is eternal life.

In the New Testament, Jesus healed lepers. Only He had the power to do so. And only He has the power over sin and death, through His shed blood as the final sacrifice for the sin of all mankind. He did the work; we reap the benefit when we confess, repent, and accept His death and resurrection as the only way to salvation.

The book of Leviticus set the pattern. Jesus Christ fulfilled it.

Saturday Soliloquy: A Highlight

Earlier this week I went with two friends to see the new movie based on Jane Austen’s Sense and Sensibility. I was a bit concerned that it would be sexualized to appeal to a modern audience, but it was not. I enjoyed it immensely.

One of the things I appreciated was the accuracy in clothing, for both men and women, as well as the uncontrived hair styles. Also,the strict adherence to the social norms of the day were honored. Those norms seem stiff and artificial to us, because we no longer hold to such high standards of social behavior.

The story begins with the heartbreaking reality of a family of women whose husband and father had recently died. Inheritance did NOT fall to the widow and her daughters, because–well, they were women. In- heritance, in 1811, always went to the nearest male relative. So the widow and her daughters were forced to leave their home, which was enormous and well-appointed. They reluctantly accepted the offer of a “cottage” on the property of a remote connection. Their lives were turned upside down, with no hope of recovery of their previous lifestyle unless the daughters could marry men who had the financial resources to restore them to that lifestye.

All the tragedy and romantic twists and turns of Austen’s novels ensued. I won’t ruin the story for you.

One of my friends just couldn’t wrap her head around the need of these young women to marry well, as if it were the only possible answer to their destitution. It is indeed difficult for us to put ourselves in such a situation from our 2026 perspective, in which women can find ways to survive quite well if they’re willing to prepare and work for it–without having to depend upon a husband!

However, we are not under the then-existing British laws of inheritance. Two hundred years ago, there was not much a disinherited lady could do except to become a nanny or a governess. And those jobs, back then, were definitely not glamorous, as some novelists portray them to be. The chances of the male head of the household falling in love with the governess were quite slim, to say the least. Marrying into one’s own class and level of financial wealth was primary. Falling in love could happen after the wedding, but that was not a requirement.

I’m glad I didn’t live back then, but it was what they knew and to which they were accustomed.

Austen was never married, never had children. She died young, at age 41, and had lived a quiet life. She had a sharp wit, though, and observed the habits of her time with a keen observation of the human character. It is helpful, in understanding her novels, to know something of the habits and mores of the day. They were very different from our own outlook on life. Women were rarely of independent means, able to provide their own living and make choices that seem normal to us, but were far from normal then.

If you’d like to travel back in time, I highly recommend this movie. It is both entertaining and thought-provoking, taking us back to a time that was very different from our own.

Leprosy and Boils

Lev. 13: 18-23.

The flesh also, in which, even in the skin thereof, was a boil, and is healed,

And in the place of the boil there be a white rising, or a bright spot, white, and somewhat reddish, and it be shewed to the priest;

And if, when the priest seeth it, behold, it be in sight lower than the skin, and the hair thereof be turned white; the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a plague of leprosy broken out of the boil.

But if the priest look on it, and, behold, there be no white hairs therein, and if it be not lower than the skin, but be somewhat dark; then the priest shall shut him up seven days:

And if it spread much abroad in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a plague.

But if the bright spot stay in his place, and spread not, it is a burning boil; and the priest shall pronounce him clean.

I’ve never had a boil. I remember my parents both getting boils when I was a teen. Mom had been in the hospital for surgery, and picked up a staph infection that resulted in boils–which she unhappily shared with my dad. It was miserable for both of them. It was the first time I understood that hospitals are not free of infection.

Sometimes, in the Israeli congregation, a boil would heal but leave a residue. If that residue was a rising white spot, bright, and somewhat reddish, it was a leprosy growing out of the boil. The person was declared unclean by the priest after being isolated for a week with no lessening of the spot.

After that week, the priest reexamined the spot in question. If there were no white hairs and no raw flesh, the person was declared clean.

If the bright spot stayed, the person was still considered clean. The problem was called a “burning boil,” or inflammation of the skin from the boil. Sounds painful, doesn’t it?

This is a picture of a boil on someone’s neck:

The larger white spot is the core. Once it is removed, the boil drains and begins to shrink.

I am thankful I never had one!

White Skin

Lev. 13:12-17.

And if a leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that hath the plague from his head even to his foot, wheresoever the priest looket

Then the priest shall consider: and, behold, if the leprosy have covered all his flesh, he shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: it is all turned white: he is clean.

But when raw flesh appeareth in him, he shall be unclean.

And the priest shall see the raw flesh, and pronounce him to be unclean: for the raw flesh is unclean: it is a leprosy.

Or if the raw flesh turn again, and be changed unto white, he shall come unto the priest;

And the priest shall see him: and, behold, if the plague be turned into white; then the priest shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague: he is clean.

The major thing of interest here aside from the artistic license of including so many men of color into this Jewish community, is that when the leprosy has turned ALL of a person’s skin white, then that person is considered clean.

Of course, I wanted to know WHY a leper was considered clean once his leprosy had turned his skin all white. The answer, agreed among many sources, was that the complete depigmentation was a sign that the disease was stable and non-infectuous, and had become inactive.

However, if there were any sign of raw flesh, the person would again be considered unclean. The raw, sore flesh would signal that the disease had again become contagious.

(I should also note that the artist filled his picture with buildings and walls, which were not yet pertinent to Israel’s time in the desert, when these laws were given.)

More on Leprosy

Lev. 13: 9-11.

When the plague of leprosy is in a man, then he shall be brought unto the priest;

And the priest shall see him: and, behold, if the rising be white in the skin,and it have turned the hair white, and there be quick raw flesh in the rising;

It is an old leprosy in the skin of his flesh, and the priest shall pronounce him unclean, and shall not shut him up: for he is unclean.

When the leprosy has already taken hold, the person so afflicted is to be brought to the priest. The priest does not need to set him apart for the seven days to see what happens to the spot; it is already established that the person has leprosy.

Verse 10-11 says that if there is a rising in the skin, and the spot is white and the hair has turned white, and if there is “quick, raw flesh,” then the person is not set apart for further observation. He has leprosy, and he is unclean.

That “quick, raw flesh” indicates living flesh not yet killed by the leprosy, but the flesh is raw and sore. That person will not be set aside for seven days. He is unclean, because he has leprosy.

One may wonder at the precision of these directives. It is God’s protection of His people. The diagnosis must be carefully made, not just quickly assumed after one inspection. A diagnosis of leprosy was a serious matter, separating the person from his home and family and friends for the rest of his life.

Test for Leprosy

Lev. 13: 1-8.

And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, saying,

When a man shall have in the skin of his flesh a rising, a scab, or bright spot, and it be in the skin of his flesh like the plague of leprosy; then he shall be brought unto Aaron the priest, or unto one of his sons the priests:

And the priest shall look on the plague in the skin of the flesh: and when the hair in the plague is turned white, and the plague in sight be deeper than the skin of his flesh, it is a plague of leprosy: and the priest shall look on him, and pronounce him unclean.

If the bright spot be white in the skin of his flesh, and in sight be not deeper than the skin, and the hair thereof be not turned white; then the priest shall shut up him that hath the plague seven days:

And the priest shall look on him the seventh day: and, behold, if the plague in his sight be at a stay, and the plague spread not in the skin; then the priest shall shut him up seven days more:

And the priest shall look on him again the seventh day: and, behold, if the plague be somewhat dark, and the plague spread not in the skin, the priest shall pronounce him clean: it is but a scab: and he shall wash his clothes, and be clean.

But if the scab spread much abroad in the skin, after that he hath been seen of the priest for his cleansing, he shall be seen of the priest again:

And if the priest see that, behold, the scab spreadeth in the skin, then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a leprosy.

Leprosy! That much-dreaded disease had no cure back in this period of history, and resulted in disfigurement by loss of fingers, toes, facial features, and eventual death. It was considered to be highly contagious. Those who had leprosy were unclean, and barred from contact with people who did not have leprosy. The disease was much feared, and it was believed that it could easily spread from one person to another.

Here is a quote from The Cleveland Clinic:

“Leprosy is a bacterial infection that damages your nerves, muscles, skin, eyes and respiratory tract. It can cause patches of pale or discolored skin, loss of sensation (numbness) and permanent disabilities.

Leprosy was once a mysterious disease that created a lot of fear. People with leprosy were often treated unfairly and isolated from others. We now know the cause and that it’s a treatable disease. It doesn’t spread easily from person to person.

Leprosy is also called Hansen’s disease. Some people prefer that name because of the stigma associated with the word leprosy.”

Leprosy still exists today, but is treated with a specific antibiotic that kills the bacteria.

However, in Old Testament times there was not the knowledge that exists today. The diagnosis was up to the priests, who followed the specific steps in today’s scripture portion:

  1. Go to a priest if you see a white or bright spot on your skin, or the spot is rising or scabby.
  2. The priest looks carefully, and if the spot goes deeper than the skin and has white hair growing from it, he is declared to have leprosy, and is unclean.
  3. If the spot does not meet all the criteria above, the person is set apart from the congregation for seven days and is then re-examined. If the spot is the same, with no change, the person is set aside for seven more days.
  4. After the second week, if the place has not grown, and is just a little dark, the person is declared clean. He must wash his clothing, but is free to return to his home.
  5. However, if the scab begins to spread and shows more of the signs of leprosy, the person is declared unclean and must remain outside the camp.

It is my understanding, from various sources, that people with leprosy were not left to starve to death. They were cared for by their families, who would take them food and water but could not touch them or go too near to them.

Some have compared leprosy to sin, which can seem innocent at first but gradually gains a hold on one’s heart and soul. Its tentacles grow deep, and eventually consume a person who refuses to confess and repent of the sin. Leprosy can now be cured with the appropriate treatment; sin can also be cured by the blood of Jesus, which is available without a prescription. However, the person caught in ongoing sin must confess, repent, and claim the forgiving power of the blood of Jesus Christ.

Mother of a Girl Baby

Lev. 12: 5-8.

But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.

And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest:

Who shall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female.

And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.

Here’s a graphic I found that shows the difference between the purification period for boy babies or girl babies:

The thing that is NOT explained, however, is why purification after giving birth to a girl is twice as long as that for giving birth to a boy. So I did some further research, because one thing I have learned is that God always has a reason when He gives a commandment.

In my reading, I learned what some Jewish exegetes/philosopers, as well as nonJewish scholars, thought about this topic several centuries ago. Most of it seems nonsensical to our more modern ideas. There was a great emphasis on the differing values given to boy babies, which were always preferred over girls. There was a great deal of misinformation about the mother’s sexual function, including the contruction of the uterus which was considered to be the deciding factor in gender.

There is also a theory that, since Eve was created from Adam’s side, it took longer for her to become complete than it did for Adam, and that genetic tendency is passed to the children. What, in my opinion, is lacking in that theory is that God the Creator did NOT need extra time to create Eve! He could have done it with a word or a snap of His fingers, but He chose to do it in such a way that symbolized Adam and Eve being one flesh. There is a great deal that could be said about that.

The most sensible idea I found is that, as the birth-giving being that God created, the woman, who is a sinner, brings a girl into the world who will also give birth to other sinners.

The fact of the matter is that no clear explanation for the difference in the period of purification exists in scripture–at least, in all my searching, I could not find such an explanation. I do find it interesting, though, that modern science is discovering a great deal about the connections between mothers of sons and mothers of daughters.

I’ve read that cells from a boy baby stay in the mother’s body for all time, and the opposite is also true–cells from the mother remain in the son. For girls, it is known scientifically that every girl baby carries the eggs for her own children in her ovaries, and that is one reason DNA research can trace origins back for generations. My own DNA is absolutely connected to that of Eve, as is that of every female who lives or has ever lived on this earth. All of this relatively new research is a very strong evidence of creation, rather than evidence of evolution.