Deeper Commentary

Lev 14:1 Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying-
It’s doubtful whether the skin disease referred to in Leviticus is what we now call leprosy, i.e. Hansen’s disease. The descriptions of the disease or affliction in Lev. 13,14 don't sound at all like leprosy as we know it. And the idea of this disease actually being afflicted upon buildings and clothing doesn't sound like mere contamination. Leprosy had no cure in the ancient world. And yet the legislation in Lev. 13,14 sounds as if after a relatively short time, the affliction could be lifted- and then a sin offering had to be made. The decisions and diagnosis of the affliction was to be made by the priests, not physicians. I conclude therefore that we should pay more attention to the Hebrew word here translated "leprosy". It is the same word as used for the "stroke" of Divine judgment. This makes more sense throughout the legislation. God could smite sinners with this affliction, mistranslated as "leprosy". If the sinner repented sufficiently, it would be lifted. But the priest would judge that, and therefore sin offerings were required to complete the cleansing process. It is no sin to get sick with leprosy; but if we understand this affliction as a Divine stroke, then it all makes so much more sense.   

Lev 14:2 This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing. He shall be brought to the priest-
There is a difference between the cleansing and the healing. If someone doesn't externally appear sinful (for leprosy represents sin), this doesn't mean he is therefore acceptable to God. There must still be the cleansing, which speaks of the Lord's work, through His Spirit and through His blood.

Lev 14:3 and the priest shall go forth out of the camp. The priest shall examine him, and behold, if the plague of leprosy is healed in the leper-
I suggested on Lev. 13 that the clothing of the stricken man was examined, and if the evidence from it was that the Lord's striking of the man had finished because of his repentance, then this procedure would be followed.

Lev 14:4 then the priest shall command them to take for him who is to be cleansed two living clean birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop-
The Lord was intensely intellectually conscious throughout His sufferings. His mind was evidently full of the word, He would have seen the symbolism of everything far more than we can, from the thorns in His mock crown, to the hyssop being associated with Him at the very end (the hyssop was the fulfilment of types in Ex. 12:8,22; Lev. 14:4,6,49-52; Num. 19:6,18).

Lev 14:5 The priest shall command them to kill one of the birds in an earthen vessel over running water-
The enigmatic Jn. 7:38 alludes here: "He that believes on me, as the scripture has said, out of his belly ("innermost being", NIV) shall flow rivers of living (Gk. spring) water". What "scripture" did the Lord have in mind? Perhaps the references to spring water being used to cleanse men from leprosy and death (Lev. 14:5; 15:13; Num. 19:16). Out of the innermost being of the true believer, the spring(ing) water of the Gospel will naturally spring up and go out to heal men, both now and more fully in the Kingdom, aided then by the Spirit gifts. The believer, every  believer, whoever  believes, will preach the word to others from his innermost being, both now and in the Kingdom - without the need for preaching committees or special efforts (not that in themselves I'm decrying them). The tendency is to delegate our responsibilities to these committees. There is no essential difference between faith and works. If we believe, we will do the works of witness, quite spontaneously. And note how the water that sprung out of the Lord’s smitten side is to be compared with the bride that came out of the smitten side of Adam. We, the bride, are the water; thanks to the inspiration of the cross, we go forth in witness, the water of life to this hard land in which we walk.

Lev 14:6 As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water-
The running or springing water would have initially referred to the water from the rock which followed them at this time. The two birds, like the two goats on the day of atonement, could have spoken of the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus. The similarity with the day of atonement suggests that atonement is in view here; because as suggested on :1, we are dealing here not simply with leprosy infection, but a specific stroke of Divine judgment in response to sin, which required repentance and atonement.

Lev 14:7 He shall sprinkle on him who is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird go into the open field-
The phrase "let go" is often used of how God let Israel go from Egypt, overruling how the wicked Pharaoh refused to let the people go. The term is used later in the Mosaic legislation; the way Israel had been "let go" from Egypt was to determine how they "let go" others from slavery (Dt. 15:12,13,18); their own experience of redemption was to influence how they released others. Just as ours should. The letting go of the bird and scapegoat into the wilderness was likewise to remind them of how they had been let go from Egypt into the wilderness without being slain for their sins- all by grace (Lev. 14:7,53; 16:10,21,22,26).

The two birds may foreshadow the death and resurrection of Jesus. The bird which flew away  in joyful, thankful freedom symbolized Christ’s resurrection and the freedom from sin which is enabled for us who were spiritual lepers; thanks to the death of Christ, represented by the death of the first bird.

Lev 14:8 He who is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and bathe himself in water; and he shall be clean. After that he shall come into the camp, but shall dwell outside his tent seven days-
This washing was because the stricken person had been involved in actual sin; see on :1. Washing the body was also what the priests had to do in order to begin their active service. So the idea was that the forgiven, cleansed person was now to give their lives to serving God in the spirit of priesthood. We see something of this in the command to Naaman: "Go and wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh shall be restored, and you shall be clean" (2 Kings 5:10).  Although this was not Christian baptism, it is perhaps analogous. Because humility was elicited by this request to dip in Jordan, as it is by the ritual of baptism. Elisha was aiming to convert Naaman, not simply heal him, so that he could continue as general of the forces who were marauding Israel. The fact there were plenty of lepers in Israel (Lk. 4:27) was evidence enough that the waters of Jordan contained no healing powers of themselves; Naaman was being taught faith in God's word, rather than supposed healing waters. The seven dippings recall the way Jericho was to be circled for six days before victory on the seventh (Josh. 6:3-5), the child sneezed seven times before resurrection (2 Kings 4:35) and the way Elijah was only answered at his seventh prayer (1 Kings 18:43). The intention was that through the six times performing something which had no immediate answer, faith, hope and humility were elicited. Lev. 14:8; 15:13 speak of the healed leper washing after the cure, in order to be then also ritually clean. And there were various sprinkling / cleansing rituals which had to be performed seven times upon the leper (Lev. 14:7,16,27). So Naaman was potentially cured of his leprosy, but what was necessary was that he become ritually clean, and therefore he had to take the step of faith in washing. Had he not done that, the potential cure would have remained an unrealized potential. He was bidden grasp that he had been cured by Elisha; but now he had to wash in order to become spiritually clean and acceptable within Israelite, and not Syrian, society (see on 2 Kings 5:1).  

Lev 14:9 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. He shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe his body in water, then he shall be clean-
The cleansed leper was to become as a baby, and be washed in water. This looked ahead to baptism by full immersion into Christ as the new birth (Jn. 3:3-5).

Lev 14:10 On the eighth day he shall take two male lambs without blemish, and one ewe lamb a year old without blemish, and three tenths of an ephah of fine flour for a grain offering, mingled with oil, and one log of oil-
No animal actually is without blemish. God recognizes that we will not attain perfection in this life, but we are to do our best towards it; and His love imputes righteousness to us, counting us as unblemished because of our status in Christ. For only Christ was the sacrifice totally without moral blemish (1 Pet. 1:19). So this looked ahead to the unblemished character of the Lord Jesus. The offering of sacrifices "without blemish" uses a word which is used about Abraham and Noah being "without blemish" (AV "perfect") before God (Gen. 6:9; 17:1). Although the word is used about the sacrifices, it is really more appropriate to persons- "you shall be perfect with Yahweh your God" (Dt. 18:13), "serve Him in sincerity (s.w. "without blemish")" (Josh. 24:14). The idea, therefore, was that the offerer was invited to see the animal as representative of himself. Our lives too are to be as "living sacrifices" (Rom. 12:1). And yet in practical terms, no animal is without blemish. They were to give the best they could, and God would count it as without blemish; as He does with us. David frequently uses the term in the Psalms about himself and the "upright", even though he was far from unblemished in moral terms.

Lev 14:11 The priest who cleanses him shall set these things and the man who is to be cleansed before Yahweh, at the door of the Tent of Meeting-
It is commonly stated in the Mosaic law that the priest made atonement. Any thoughtful person would have soon concluded that indeed the blood of bulls and goats could not of itself atone for sin (Heb. 10:4). The role of the priest in bringing about the atonement was therefore critical. And yet they too were flawed. So this invited the spiritually minded to look forward to the coming of an ideal priest, the Lord Jesus. See on :15.

Lev 14:12 The priest shall take one of the male lambs, and offer him for a trespass offering, with the log of oil, and wave them for a wave offering before Yahweh-
The portion to be waved was placed on the priests hands (Ex. 29:25), and then 'waved' or 'swung' towards the altar and then back- not from right to left. The idea was that the offerings were first given to God, recognizing they should be consumed on the altar to God; but then given back to the priest by God. So they ate them having first recognized that their food was really God's, all was of Him, and He had given it back to them to eat. This should be our spirit in partaking of any food, as we are the new priesthood. Our prayers of thanks for daily food should include this feature. All things are God's and anything we 'offer' to Him is only giving Him what He has given to us (1 Chron. 29:14,16).

Lev 14:13 He shall kill the male lamb in the place where they kill the sin offering and the burnt offering, in the place of the sanctuary; for as the sin offering is the priest’s, so is the trespass offering. It is most holy-
Again we note that the cleansing of the leper was very much associated with cleansing from sin. This is not because it was sinful to get leprosy, or leprosy made a person sinful. Rather I suggested on :1 that we are not reading here of leprosy as we know it, but of being struck with Divine punishment for sin.

Lev 14:14 The priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and the priest shall put it on the tip of the right ear of him who is to be cleansed, and on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot-
The leper was to continually live under the impression of the fact he or she had been healed and cleansed, just as we should. The fact the blood of Christ was shed for us personally should affect how we hear (hence the blood was put on the ear), what we do with our hands (the right thumb) and where we go with our feet (the right big toe). The process was repeated with oil (:16), perhaps foreshadowing the sanctifying work of the Spirit in the lives of those in Christ. The ritual here is similar to that at the inauguration of the priests. The idea was that having been cleansed from sin (see on :1), the repentant sinner was to devote themselves to the service of others in the spirit of priesthood, whether or not he or she was a Levite.

Lev 14:15 The priest shall take some of the log of oil, and pour it into the palm of his own left hand-
A log of oil is about half a pint, a third of a litre. We note the personal association of the priest with the cleansed person. No vessel is used, only the palm and fingers of the priest. See on :11.

Lev 14:16 The priest shall dip his right finger in the oil that is in his left hand, and shall sprinkle some of the oil with his finger seven times before Yahweh-
The rituals similar to this usually involved the sprinkling of blood in this way. But here it is the sprinkling of oil. The idea is clearly that the Spirit of God is involved here. The stricken sinner was worthy of death; see on :1. But they had been saved by grace. And that experience as it were anointed them for further service in response to the grace shown. See on :18.

Lev 14:17 The priest shall put some of the rest of the oil that is in his hand on the tip of the right ear of him who is to be cleansed, and on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot, upon the blood of the trespass offering-
The ritual here is similar to that at the inauguration of the priests. The idea was that having been cleansed from sin (see on :1), the repentant sinner was to devote themselves to the service of others in the spirit of priesthood, whether or not he or she was a Levite.

Lev 14:18 The rest of the oil that is in the priest’s hand he shall put on the head of him who is to be cleansed, and the priest shall make atonement for him before Yahweh-
Were people really morally unclean before God because of bodily situations over which they had no control? Surely not. Anointing the head and body with oil by a Divine representative was effectively an anointing, which implied a call to service. Those stricken for their sin but who then repented... were called not simply to utter thanks to God for His grace, but to respond in some specific way. And this is the consistent pattern with all God's servants. Their service was a response to grace received. And of course the ultimate anointed one was the Lord Jesus. We are to seek to be Him in this world in response to the gracious salvation and cleansing we receive, washed in water [cp. baptism] and then granted the washing of regeneration by the Spirit which the oil represented.

Lev 14:19 The priest shall offer the sin offering, and make atonement for him who is to be cleansed because of his uncleanness: and afterward he shall kill the burnt offering-
This repeats the usual progression from sin offering to burnt offering to peace offering [represented by the grain offering of :20), although in this case the equivalent of the peace offering was fire coming from Heaven in response to the sin and burnt offering. Conviction of sin leads to a desire to make complete dedication to God, which results in the peace with God celebrated in the peace offering. So the person was being convicted of his sin, so that their dedication to Yahweh's service was no mere ritual, but a from the heart desire to serve Him from gratitude for the forgiveness of sin.  

Lev 14:20 and the priest shall offer the burnt offering and the grain offering on the altar. The priest shall make atonement for him, and he shall be clean-
I suggested on :19 that this grain offering was a kind of peace offering. As discussed on :1, it was not that the disease of leprosy was removed by this act of cleansing. The person had been struck for sin and had now repented. So this was a specific statement of moral forgiveness.

Lev 14:21 If he is poor, and can’t afford so much, then he shall take one male lamb for a trespass offering to be waved, to make atonement for him, and one tenth of an ephah of fine flour mingled with oil for a grain offering, and a log of oil-
We get the impression that God was very strict about the offerings. He was. But He made concession to the man who couldn't bring what he ought to: "If he be poor, and cannot get much... two young pigeons, such as he is able to get" (Lev. 14:22). If they were blemished in some way, and even though they were not the animal God desired, God would accept such as the man was able to get. However it could be argued that in this case, by all means the male lamb must be offered; or it can be read as if the two birds of :22 could replace that male lamb. Likewise the offerings had to involve the shedding of blood; but God was prepared to accept a food offering if a man really couldn't get an animal. The eagerness of God to accept what a man can do rather than the insistence on legal principles really comes over. He recognized the Israelites would be living on different levels. Such an eagerness involved accepting a lower standard of adherence to God's ideal principles. In harmony with this, the Passover ‘lamb’ could be either a sheep, or if necessary, a goat (Ex. 12:5), even though the use of a goat would somewhat spoil the foreshadowing of Christ.

Lev 14:22 and two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, such as he is able to afford; and the one shall be a sin offering, and the other a burnt offering-
Even within the bird offerings there was a gradation. Turtledoves were larger than pigeons and more valuable, but they are only in Israel at certain times of the year; whereas pigeons are in Israel all year round, were easier to catch and were therefore cheaper. The various possible levels within God's law reflect our opportunities to serve on different levels, just as the good soil of the sower parable brings forth different amounts. Some will make more of God's truth than others. The very existence of these levels, rather than a simple binary demand of obedience / disobedience, pass / fail, of itself inspires us to serve God as extensively as we can. For who can be a minimalist in response to His love.

Lev 14:23 On the eighth day he shall bring them for his cleansing to the priest, to the door of the Tent of Meeting, before Yahweh-
The following verses appear a repetition of what we have just read. There is huge emphasis upon this material. Because the grace of saving a condemned sinner was indeed remarkable. Therefore the commandments about what was to happen on the eighth day are repeated- this was indeed to be what happened.

Lev 14:24 The priest shall take the lamb of the trespass offering, and the log of oil, and the priest shall wave them for a wave offering before Yahweh-
The portion to be waved was placed on the priests hands (Ex. 29:25), and then 'waved' or 'swung' towards the altar and then back- not from right to left. The idea was that the offerings were first given to God, recognizing they should be consumed on the altar to God; but then given back to the priest by God. So they ate them having first recognized that their food was really God's, all was of Him, and He had given it back to them to eat. This should be our spirit in partaking of any food, as we are the new priesthood. Our prayers of thanks for daily food should include this feature. All things are God's and anything we 'offer' to Him is only giving Him what He has given to us (1 Chron. 29:14,16).


Lev 14:25 He shall kill the lamb of the trespass offering. The priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering and put it on the tip of the right ear of him who is to be cleansed, and on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot-
The stricken person was to continually live under the impression of the fact he or she had been healed and cleansed, just as we should. The fact the blood of Christ was shed for us personally should affect how we hear (hence the blood was put on the ear), what we do with our hands (the right thumb) and where we go with our feet (the right big toe). The process was repeated with oil (:16), perhaps foreshadowing the sanctifying work of the Spirit in the lives of those in Christ. The ritual here is similar to that at the inauguration of the priests. The idea was that having been cleansed from sin (see on :1), the repentant sinner was to devote themselves to the service of others in the spirit of priesthood, whether or not he or she was a Levite.

Lev 14:26 The priest shall pour some of the oil into the palm of his own left hand-
A log of oil is about half a pint, a third of a litre. We note the personal association of the priest with the cleansed person. No vessel is used, only the palm and fingers of the priest. See on :11.

Lev 14:27 and the priest shall sprinkle with his right finger some of the oil that is in his left hand seven times before Yahweh-
The rituals similar to this usually involved the sprinkling of blood in this way. But here it is the sprinkling of oil. The idea is clearly that the Spirit of God is involved here. The stricken sinner was worthy of death; see on :1. But they had been saved by grace. And that experience as it were anointed them for further service in response to the grace shown. See on :18.

Lev 14:28 Then the priest shall put some of the oil that is in his hand on the tip of the right ear of him who is to be cleansed, and on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot, on the place of the blood of the trespass offering-
The placing of the oil upon the blood was required along with the washing in water. The same three entities are found in the enigmatic 1 Jn. 5:8. These three are the witness made in earth to the saving work of God's Son. The connection is at best oblique, but the idea may be that we are all in the position of the condemned, stricken person who has been saved by grace through these things, all of them associated with the work of the Lord Jesus.

Lev 14:29 The rest of the oil that is in the priest’s hand he shall put on the head of him who is to be cleansed, to make atonement for him before Yahweh-
Were people really morally unclean before God because of bodily situations over which they had no control? Surely not. Anointing the head and body with oil by a Divine representative was effectively an anointing, which implied a call to service. Those stricken for their sin but who then repented... were called not simply to utter thanks to God for His grace, but to respond in some specific way. And this is the consistent pattern with all God's servants. Their service was a response to grace received. And of course the ultimate anointed one was the Lord Jesus. We are to seek to be Him in this world in response to the gracious salvation and cleansing we receive, washed in water [cp. baptism] and then granted the washing of regeneration by the Spirit which the oil represented.

Lev 14:30 He shall offer one of the turtledoves, or of the young pigeons, such as he can lay his hand on-
Even within the bird offerings there was a gradation. Turtledoves were larger than pigeons and more valuable, but they are only in Israel at certain times of the year; whereas pigeons are in Israel all year round, were easier to catch and were therefore cheaper. The various possible levels within God's law reflect our opportunities to serve on different levels, just as the good soil of the sower parable brings forth different amounts. Some will make more of God's truth than others. The very existence of these levels, rather than a simple binary demand of obedience / disobedience, pass / fail, of itself inspires us to serve God as extensively as we can. For who can be a minimalist in response to His love.

Lev 14:31 even such as he is able to afford, the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering, with the grain offering. The priest shall make atonement for him who is to be cleansed before Yahweh-
The Mosaic Law countered the idea that only the rich can be generous. They all had to tithe. And it’s possible to argue that they had to give around 27%, not just 10% (10% to the Levites, 10% of the rest to support the feasts; and 10% of the rest for the poor). The purification after childbirth and the cleansing of the leper allowed a lower grade of offering to be made by the very poor- to underline that no one is exempted from giving to the Lord, no matter how poor they are. Consider the emphasis: "Every man shall give as he is able... he shall offer even such as he is able to get... then the disciples (consciously motivated by these principles?) every man according to his ability, determined to send relief... let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him" (Dt. 16:17; Lev. 14:30,31; Acts 11:29; 1 Cor. 16:2). God reckons a man’s generosity according to what he has; if there is the desire to give, a generous spirit, then this is seen as generosity. This is exemplified by the Lord’s high estimation of the widow’s giving. The amount was not as important as the spirit behind it. “The Lord blesseth a cheerful giver, and will supply the deficiency of his works” (Prov. 22:8 LXX; although not in the Hebrew text, this passage is quoted in the NT as inspired).

Lev 14:32 This is the law for him in whom is the plague of leprosy, who is not able to afford the sacrifice for his cleansing-
Lepers  / stricken sinners (see on :1) had to live outside the camp of Israel and couldn’t work, so they would’ve typically been very poor. But the concept of sacrifice was important; they weren’t to assume ‘I’m a leper, of course I have nothing, I don’t have to sacrifice anything’. They had to lay their hand on at least some kind of animal- and the Hebrew could possibly carry the sense of ‘whatever he can lay his hand on’ (:30). It was important that they gave at least something in recognition of their need for cleansing, and their receipt of it by God’s grace. We shouldn’t consider our poverty, in whatever area, to mean that we don’t have to sacrifice anything to God.

Lev 14:33 Yahweh spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying-
I suggest that the following legislation about "leprosy" in a house is further evidence that we are not reading here about leprosy as we know it, i.e. Hansen's disease, but rather the specific striking of a person because of their sin (see on :1).

Lev 14:34 When you have come into the land of Canaan which I give to you for a possession, and I put a spreading leprosy in a house in the land of your possession-
Constantly Israel were reminded that God would indeed give them the promised Kingdom, even though at that time as they wandered in the wilderness it must’ve seemed merely a nice idea. He encourages us likewise.

I argued on Lev. 13:45 that the final exclusion "outside the camp" was permanent. It looked forward to the final condemnation of the wicked at the last day. But in Num. 12:14,15 we have an example of Miriam being made a leper and being shut out of the camp for seven days. "Shut out" there is s.w. "isolate" in Lev. 13:50. But she repented, and was allowed back in. So I deduce that the implication is that the shut out person could still repent after seven days. The priest could not have contact with the excluded person. But their clothing and housing could be examined, and if the plague within it had not spread, then the person had repented and could be received back in. Leprosy as we know it is not cured in seven days; as explained on Lev. 13:1, 'leprosy' here means literally a striking from the Lord, and not the leprosy we know today as Hansen's disease.

Lev 14:35 then he who owns the house shall come and tell the priest, saying, ‘There seems to me to be some sort of plague in the house’-
It would’ve been tempting for the owner to just cover up the signs of disease within his house, rather than ask the priest to inspect it. We are to be open before God, freely confessing our sins and possible sins or liabilities to sin, in open dialogue before Him in prayer. When David invites God to search his heart and see if there be any wicked way in him (Ps. 139:23), he was alluding to the language of the house owner inviting the priest to inspect his house for leprosy.

Lev 14:36 The priest shall command that they empty the house, before the priest goes in to examine the plague, that all that is in the house not be made unclean; and afterward the priest shall go in to inspect the house-
If a literal contagious disease like leprosy were in view, then everything in the house would surely be unclean anyway. But here the reasoning is different; whatever was in the house would not be unclean even if the house were declared unclean- if it was removed before the priest entered it. Clearly "the plague" spoke of a specific judgment for sin upon someone. And as explained on :34, this was a condition brought upon the housing and clothing of the stricken person whilst the priest couldn't have contact with them. It was to reveal whether or not they were truly repentant, and Divine judgment had now run its course.

Lev 14:37 He shall examine the plague; and behold, if the plague is in the walls of the house with hollow streaks, greenish or reddish, and it appears to be deeper than the wall-
Just as leprosy / the Divine striking was defined by being deeper than the flesh, so the stroke upon housing was defined by being deeper than the surface. A person can appear to have the stroke of Divine judgment / leprosy when in fact it’s only a surface level appearance of it; but only the priest, representing Jesus, can declare this. We must of course be careful not to excuse our  failings as merely surface level sin; but when it comes to judging others, we must accept that someone can appear sinful to us but it’s only a surface appearance; we must not ultimately judge whether a person will be saved or not, quite simply because we cannot do so. Only the priest, the Lord Jesus, can do so.

Lev 14:38 then the priest shall go out of the house to the door of the house, and shut up the house seven days-
The spreading of plague in the sense of Divine judgment (see on :1) is found in Num. 16:46-48, and it was repentance and the intercession of Aaron which stopped it spreading further. We are therefore to understand this spreading of the plague in the person as a sign that they were continuing under Divine judgment. 

Lev 14:39 The priest shall come again on the seventh day, and look. If the plague has spread in the walls of the house-
This looks forward to Christ as the ultimate priest coming again on the final [seventh] day and inspecting the degree to which sin has spread within us, or remained merely on the level of appearance. 1 Pet. 2:12 alludes here, by calling the day of Christ’s return “the day of inspection” (Gk.).

Lev 14:40 then the priest shall command that they take out the stones in which is the plague, and cast them into an unclean place outside of the city-
This looks ahead to the casting of the rejected into Gehenna, the place of condemnation outside the city of Jerusalem. As explained on :34, the state of the person's clothing and property reflected whether Divine judgment was still ongoing, in reflection of whether or not the person had truly repented. The fate of their property or living place was therefore reflective of their own fate.

Lev 14:41 and he shall cause the inside of the house to be scraped all over, and they shall pour out the mortar that they scraped off outside of the city into an unclean place-
The removing and scraping of diseased stones is a figure alluded to later in the Bible. The stones of Tyre were to be removed and scraped (Ez. 26:4)- for it was a sinful city. Jesus makes the same allusion when He said that the stones of the temple were to be removed one by one, because the Jews refused to accept the day of Christ’s inspection (Lk. 19:44 Gk.). When He entered the temple, looked around it and then walked out, He was acting as a priest inspecting a leprous house (Mk. 11:11). But the Jews refused to accept Him as priest and insisted that their hypocrisy was in fact holiness. The new stones which were to be brought in (:42) refer to the Christian believers, who were to be built up into a new temple (1 Pet. 2:5). It was a radical thing indeed for Jesus to liken the temple, the very symbol of human piety and the very quintessence of the Jewish religion, to a leprous house which needed to be pulled down. Established religion today likely has the same judgment from Him.

Lev 14:42 They shall take other stones, and put them in the place of those stones; and he shall take other mortar, and shall plaster the house-
I explained on :41 that on a national level, these things looked ahead to the judgment and destruction of God's own temple, which He struck with judgment. The other stones brought in to replace them were therefore symbols of the Gentiles, who are built up as lively /healthy stones in the new sanctuary (1 Pet. 2:5).

Lev 14:43 If the plague comes again, and breaks out in the house, after he has taken out the stones, and after he has scraped the house, and after it was plastered-
As discussed on :41,42, the striking of God's house and replacing the stones with the Gentiles was still not guaranteed to bring about complete freedom from condemnation. For many of the Gentiles brought in were to likewise turn away and fall under Divine judgment. "Scraped" is s.w. "cut off", and it was sinners who brought shame upon their own house to cut it off (s.w. Hab. 2:10). But Yahweh was to scrape or cut off the house of Israel (s.w. 2 Kings 10:32). We could see this plastering, scraping and removal of offending individuals as God's attempt to reform Israel- and it failed. For the language of plastering a house is used of how God tried to do this with His people, but it didn't work (Ez. 13:10-15; 22:28 s.w.).

Lev 14:44 then the priest shall come in and look; and behold, if the plague has spread in the house, it is a destructive mildew in the house. It is unclean-
"Mildew" is the word usually translated "leprosy" in this section, and as suggested on :1,34, it refers not to "leprosy" as we know it but to a specific Divine judgment for sin upon individuals. This legislation highlights the issue of whether the condition has spread. This was a sign that the Divine judgment was still ongoing. And in spiritual terms, the question is whether or not sin is spreading in us. We are either on the upward spiral of the Holy Spirit, or the downward spiral of the flesh. We cannot be on both at the same time.

Lev 14:45 He shall break down the house, its stones, and its timber, and all the mortar of the house. He shall carry them out of the city into an unclean place-
The language of breaking down the house of Israel is very often used in the prophets (s.w.) concerning what God did to Israel. It is also often used of the breaking down of idol shrines. Again we get the impression that the house was being destroyed not for practical reasons of stopping contamination, but rather in judgment for sin, especially idolatry. Ez. 13:10-15; 22:28 condemn Israel for shoddy building without proper mortar. And so it would fall down itself, and God's judgment was in confirmation of that.  

Lev 14:46 Moreover he who goes into the house while it is shut up shall be unclean until the evening-
There was no excuse for doing so because everything in the house was to be removed before the inspection (:36). We wonder if the Lord had this in mind when urging His people in Jerusalem not to return back into their homes in the day of His coming (Lk. 17:31; Mk. 13:15). The day of judgment of the leprous house had begun, and there was to be no return into it.

Lev 14:47 He who lies down in the house shall wash his clothes; and he who eats in the house shall wash his clothes-
There was greater culpability the more consciously a person did things which he or she knew were unclean. Thus to lie down in the unclean house required a washing of clothes, whereas just going into it merited a lesser requirement for cleansing. Clearly knowledge is associated with responsibility.

Lev 14:48 If the priest shall come in, and examine it, and behold, the plague hasn’t spread in the house, after the house was plastered, then the priest shall pronounce the house clean, because the plague is healed-
If leprosy or a contagious disease were in view, then there would surely have been some legislation surely about the priest cleansing himself after entering a contaminated building. But there is none. Because this was not a contagious disease, but as explained on :1, a stroke of Divine judgment.

Lev 14:49 To cleanse the house he shall take two birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop-
We note the association of hyssop with the Lord's death on the cross (Jn. 19:29), before which He had been clothed in scarlet. That hyssop had been dipped in red wine, representing blood, and the Lord surely saw the relevance to Himself. "I am that hyssop", He would have thought. On the cross, He was the door (Jn. 10:9), and He experienced hyssop with red wine (representing blood) brushed against Him. Just as the doors at Passover had blood brushed onto them using a hyssop plant, and this was the basis of Israel's salvation.    

Lev 14:50 He shall kill one of the birds in an earthen vessel over running water-
The Lord taught that He was the rock, and we like Israel drink of what came out of Him. The Law of Moses included several rituals which depended upon what is called " the running water" (Lev. 14:5,6,50-52; 15:18; Num. 19:17). "Running" translates a Hebrew word normally translated "living". This living water was what came out of the smitten rock. The Lord taught that the water that would come out of Him would only come after His glorification (Jn. 7:38)- an idea He seems to link with His death rather than His ascension (Jn. 12:28,41; 13:32; 17:1,5 cp. 21:19; Heb. 2:9). When He was glorified on the cross, then the water literally flowed from His side on His death. The rock was "smitten", and the water then came out. The Hebrew word used here is usually translated to slay, slaughter, murder. It occurs in two clearly Messianic passages: " ...they talk to the hurt of him [Christ] whom thou hast smitten" (Ps. 69:26); "we esteemed him [as He hung on the cross] smitten of God" (Is. 53:4). The living waters were representative of the Holy Spirit which is given to us- not the miraculous gifts, but the power of God within the human spirit, to bring us to have His Spirit and mind which was in Christ. It is this which now is the cleansing agent, making our sacrifices acceptable, cleansing our motives in a way in which we cannot do, at least not by any conscious intellectual process.

Lev 14:51 He shall take the cedar wood, and the hyssop, and the scarlet, and the living bird, and dip them in the blood of the slain bird, and in the running water, and sprinkle the house seven times-
Wood, hyssop and scarlet clothing all featured in the final suffering and crucifixion of Christ. This is the basis for our cleansing from the leprosy of sin and condemnation.

Lev 14:52 He shall cleanse the house with the blood of the bird, and with the running water, with the living bird, with the cedar wood, with the hyssop, and with the scarlet-
It is commonly stated in the Mosaic law that the priest made atonement- looking ahead to the work of the Lord Jesus. Any thoughtful person would have soon concluded that indeed the blood of bulls and goats could not of itself atone for sin (Heb. 10:4). The role of the priest in bringing about the atonement was therefore critical. And yet they too were flawed. So this invited the spiritually minded to look forward to the coming of an ideal priest, the Lord Jesus. See on :15.

Lev 14:53 but he shall let the living bird go out of the city into the open field. So shall he make atonement for the house; and it shall be clean-
The running or springing water would have initially referred to the water from the rock which followed them at this time. The two birds, like the two goats on the day of atonement, could have spoken of the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus. The similarity with the day of atonement suggests that atonement is in view here; because as suggested on :1, we are dealing here not simply with leprosy infection, but a specific stroke of Divine judgment in response to sin, which required repentance and atonement.

Lev 14:54 This is the law for any plague of leprosy, and for an itch-
The idea is that this is the way to distinguish between the stroke of God in Divine judgment (see on :1), and the appearance of it which was just an ordinary case of scurf ("itch"). The law was simply that the priest alone could discern the difference between that which appeared to be Divine judgment, and what was indeed Divine judgment.

Lev 14:55 and for the destructive leprosy of a garment, and for a house-
I suggested on :1,34 that the garment and house of a stricken person was also given a form of Divine judgment in order to demonstrate to the priest whether or not the condemned sinner had repented, during the period they were isolated from the community after having been stricken.

Lev 14:56 and for a rising, and for a scab, and for a bright spot-
The idea is that this is the way to distinguish between the stroke of God in Divine judgment (see on :1), and the appearance of it which was just an ordinary case of a scab or spot on the skin. The law was simply that the priest alone could discern the difference between that which appeared to be Divine judgment, and what was indeed Divine judgment.

Lev 14:57 to teach when it is unclean, and when it is clean. This is the law of leprosy-
We note "when" and not "what" is clean or unclean. As explained on :1, the purpose of these regulations was not for the sake of hygiene; rather they were designed to reflect when and whether the person stricken with judgment had repented.