Short Question on Biblical "Leprosy"
[July 31,2010]
Someone asked this brief question
on terminology:
"In the old testament part of the law
involved keeping lepers separate from the main population. I always
assumed this was because the disease was very contagious and God did
not want it to spread. However i have since learned that leprosy is not
very contagious at all and that one could live with a leper and not get
leprosy. Since the spread of the disease was not an issue why would god
still make them stay separate?
"I'd call this an apolegetics issue (albeit minor) because it plays a
role in the continuity of the bible with history. If lepers were
separated because of superstition or for no society benefiting purpose
like they are in many other cultures then Gods law would seem petty(in
this area) since he would have these people separated and potentially
harmed for no good reason.
I was able to reply while
traveling:
Actually, biblical 'leprosy' wasnt the modern 'leprosy' at all... We
dont really know what the biblical disease was, except that its symptoms were NOT the same
as modern leprosy:
"Leprosy, Leper. Chronic
infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae, a bacterium similar
to the tuberculosis bacillus. The disease is manifested by changes in
the skin, mucous membranes, and peripheral nerves. In the skin there
are often patches of depigmentation but rarely a total loss of pigment,
so a pure white patch of skin is definitely not characteristic of
leprosy. Loss of sensation to touch and temperature is frequently
associated with the depigmented patches. Thickening of the skin and
nodule formation cause the lionlike facial appearance commonly
associated with leprosy. Peripheral nerve involvement may cause
paralysis of a hand, leg, or face, or it may cause loss of sensation so
complete that serious injury or ulceration to an extremity may occur
without the afflicted person knowing it. The eyes, ears, and the nose
are also frequently involved. An effective though prolonged treatment
has been developed, and sometimes spontaneous arrest may occur. The disease is
spread through prolonged contact with an individual having leprosy.
Children
are more susceptible than adults, but in any case the
transmissibility is low. ...The early history of leprosy is shrouded in
uncertainty. Possible references to leprosy have been cited in ancient
Egyptian, Babylonian, and Indian writings, but authorities disagree
whether the records refer to modern leprosy. This ambiguity in these
early records is significant because it limits the help they might give
toward our understanding of the meaning of “leprosy” in the OT.
In the Old
Testament. Leviticus 13 and 14 contain the most details about
what is called “leprosy” in the Scriptures. Careful study of the
descriptions of the disease given in these passages strongly suggests
that what we now diagnose leprosy is not intended. If a priest
today used the criteria given in these verses, he would probably
declare many leprosy patients unclean; but he would also pronounce
unclean many individuals with a variety of other skin conditions. The
disease we call leprosy does not fit the description given in
Leviticus. The
white hairs referred to so frequently in these verses are not typical
of leprosy and may be found in many skin diseases. A white patch of
skin is not characteristic of leprosy, nor is the scalp ordinarily
affected. A 7- to 14-day period is usually inadequate to
observe changes in the disease. If modern leprosy is being described in
these verses, it seems strange that the more obvious characteristics of
the disease are not mentioned. The bacillus of leprosy has defied
attempts by bacteriologists to cultivate it, so leprosy of garments or
houses is most unlikely to occur. Therefore the biblical leprosy is not
synonymous with modern leprosy. The Hebrew word translated “leprosy” is
derived from an Arabic word meaning to strike down or scourge; thus it
could be a generic term for serious skin diseases or for signs of
defilement on the surface of inanimate objects. ... Criteria are given
in Leviticus 13:2–8 by which the priest would determine whether a given
skin condition was to be regarded as leprosy. Different types of
leprosy are described in Leviticus 13:9–59. An ulcer appearing with
white skin and hairs was termed chronic leprosy, and the person was
declared unclean but without the need of a quarantine period. Another
type of leprosy, involving the entire skin, did not make the person
unclean. Leprosy coming after the healing of a boil is described in
verses 18–23, and after a burn in verses 24–28. In verses 29–39 the
description given for leprosy of the scalp and beard is suggestive of a
fungus infection. Leprosy in connection with baldness is described in
verses 47–59. If “defiling disease” instead of “leprosy” were used in
the translation of these verses, as suggested by an eminent
leprologist, it would eliminate much confusion and probably convey the
true meaning of the original word more accurately." [Freedman, D. N.
(1996, c1992). The Anchor Bible
Dictionary (4:277). New York: Doubleday.]
"The fourteen-day quarantine for suspected malignant saraat has been
quite correctly regarded as much too
short for clinical leprosy to develop. But it would have allowed
certain differential diagnoses, such
as scabies or ringworm, to be made. Thus the quarantine would
have helped to safeguard the interests of priests and patients alike,
since the diagnosis of leprosy even today can be difficult in the early
stages of the disease. " [ISBE]
The Christian ThinkTank...[http://www.Christianthinktank.com]
(Reference Abbreviations)