Biblical Hebrew Forum

[ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk (Ben Crick)]

On Mon 31 May 99 (00:45:56), peter_kirk AT sil.org wrote:
>  [excellent matter snipped]    ...  I wonder why 
> Harrison uses the language of a fundamentalist responding to an attack 
> on the veracity of the Bible? This could at most be an attack on the 
> King James version and on traditional interpretations - and, according 
> to Hartley, KJV was correct in its time as the English word "leprosy" 
> was previously of broader application and became identified with 
> Hansen's disease only in the 19th century.

 Dear Peter,

 Many thanks for your library-delving over the weekend. WRT to your last
 point, it occurs to me that had a sufferer from Hansen's Disease presented
 himself to the priests at the time of the writing of Leviticus, it would
 inevitably have reulted in their pronouncing him as a sufferer from
 CFRA(AT and banishing him to the wilderness.

 OTOH, a sufferer from psoriasis or elephantiasis (as we know them) would
 probably not have been condemned as unclean by Leviticus 13 criteria.
 Psoriasis is congenital and entirely non-contagious; elephantiasis is caused
 by a mosquito bite and is entirely non-contagious, except from another
 mosquito!

 However, Gordon J Wenham writes:

 "/The Structure of Leviticus 13-14/  These chapters deal with 'serious
 skin disease' (tsara`at), in people (13:2-46; 14:1-32), clothes (13:47-58),
 and houses (14:33-53). It is difficult to find one English word to cover
 these diverse conditions. Inspired by the Greek translation (LEPRA),
 traditional English translations have rendered /tsara`at/ by 'leprosy.'
 This is obviously inappropriate in the case of mold and mildew in clothes
 and houses. As for the various skin complaints covered by the Hebrew term,
 it is doubtful if any of them corresponds to true leprosy (Hansen's
 Disease).

 "It may seem strange to modern ears to gove the same name to such diverse
 conditions as mildew and psoriasis. Yet the Hebrew mind saw enough
 similarities between them to do so. All these afflictions, characterised
 as /tsara`at/, are unclean, and may be recognized by discolouring of the
 surface (13:2, 49; 14:37) affecting part of an object, not its totality
 (13:9-13; 14:37, 42, 55), being more than superficial (13:3; 14:37), and
 actively spreading (13:7, 51; 14:44). These symptoms are clearly abnormal,
 and by disfiguring the appearance of man and his works, destroy the
 wholeness that ought to characterize the creation. For this reason these
 conditions are pronounced unclean." (/The Book of Leviticus/, The New
 International Commentary on the Old Testament, Eerdmans, 1979, page 192).

 Ben
-- 
 Revd Ben Crick, BA CF
 <ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk>
 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
 http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm