Divine Dermatology

by Douglas Ward, Ph.D.

There’s an old joke that recommends dermatology as an attractive medical practice because the patients don’t die, and they don’t get better.

Having had plenty of skin problems, I can attest that there’s a certain amount of truth to this. Skin ailments are rarely life-threatening, but they tend to hang on for a long time. At twelve years old, a severe case of athlete's foot plagued me for about a year followed by a bout with Poison Ivy. Acne was a familiar companion during my teenage years. And Seborrhea, mostly kept in check with small doses of steroid cream, has been a concern for me since it first flared up in 1993.

Because of my dermatological struggles, I have a special interest in one of the most obscure sections in the Torah, the discussion of skin conditions in Lev 13. The Hebrew word for these conditions, tzara'at, is translated with the Greek word lepra in the Septuagint, from which we get the English word "leprosy." Scholars believe, though, that Lev 13 is not dealing primarily with Hansen's disease, the condition we call leprosy today.(1) Whatever range of diseases is being described in Lev 13, they share the fact that they are visible and more than superficial. When a priest determined that one of these conditions was spreading, the sufferer was pronounced ritually unclean and required to live alone, outside the camp of Israel (Lev 13:46).

These purity regulations require some explanation. Since skin ailments aren't highly contagious, the isolation of the sufferer wasn't a medical quarantine. Ritual uncleanness wasn't about a lack of sanitation, nor was it a matter of sinfulness. Skin conditions and other circumstances that produce ritual impurity—sexual activity, menstruation, childbirth, contact with the dead—are part of ordinary human existence. Instead, uncleanness meant being temporarily disqualified from worship at the tabernacle or temple, a reminder that appearing before the Holy One of Israel was a privilege not to be taken for granted. Dr. Amy-Jill Levine explains, "Going to the Temple should not be the same thing as going to the market. Attending to the birth of a child or the burial of a corpse should not be followed immediately by a return to the world of business as usual, but should require taking the time to recognize the power of life and death."(2)

In the case of a skin condition, the flaking of the skin is a visible representation of physical corruption, decay, and human mortality. Isolating the sufferer communicated the idea that death and decay had no place in the sanctuary of the immortal God. As Richard Hess notes, one who was unclean with a skin condition was "treated like a corpse, with similar restrictions.”(3)

Being a walking symbol of death was not an enviable occupation. Due to isolation from the community, loneliness and shame would accompany the prolonged discomfort and embarrassment of a skin disease.

As in the old joke mentioned above, skin diseases did not quickly get better. The priests were given guidelines in Lev 13 to determine when ritual impurity began and ended, but they were not dermatologists. Without a miraculous healing of the kind received by Naaman (2 Kings 5), the period of uncleanness might be lengthy. The sages would later deem the healing of such a condition to be as difficult as raising the dead.(4)

In a few unique instances—those of Miriam (Num 12), Gehazi (2 Kings 5), and Uzziah (2 Chron 26)—a skin condition was divinely imposed as chastisement. In all three cases, a person in a position of responsibility defied God's authority, and the punishment sent a strong message to the offender and every Israelite.

This background information helps us understand the significance of an incident recorded in Mark 1:40-45, Matthew 8:1-4, and Luke 5:12-16. A man afflicted with a serious skin condition fell at Jesus' feet, pleading, "Lord if you are willing, you can make me clean." Mark observes that Jesus was greatly moved by this gesture, perhaps both by the sufferer's faith and by his plight. In any case, Jesus quickly healed the man.

In order to be officially certified as ceremonially clean Jesus instructed the man to present himself to a priest. He would then carry out the sacrifices prescribed in Lev 14. These actions would be "a testimony to them," a powerful statement of the arrival of the Kingdom of God. As has been noted, the healing of these skin conditions was considered to be tantamount to raising the dead. Jesus later mentioned such healings as evidence of his Messiahship (Luke 7:22). Symbolically, this miracle was a reversal of human corruption and decay, the restoration of one who had the appearance of death. As such it foreshadowed Jesus' resurrection. News of the event traveled quickly, and crowds began to follow him seeking healing (Luke 5:15).

All three synoptic gospels mention that Jesus touched the man, a radical act of kindness toward someone who may have lacked human contact for some time. Even more remarkable was how the act of touching testified that the Spirit-filled life of Jesus transcended human defilement. In this great reversal the clean infected and purified the unclean! All this was in keeping with his messianic mission highlighted by Isaiah's memorable words,

"Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows, yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.” (53:4)

Jesus' healing of "lepers" (the dermatologically afflicted) is a powerful example of how the Son of Man humbled himself and laid down his life for us (see Phil 2:6-8). Incidents like this illustrate what we remembered and rehearsed recently in our Passover and Resurrection celebrations. Our High Priest has defeated the power of sin and its corruption, overcoming death itself! What a privilege to be continually thankful for his touch.

Footnotes:

(1) Dr. Richard Hess states that there are no known cases of Hansen's disease in Israel before the time of Alexander the Great. See "Leviticus," in Genesis-Leviticus, Revised: The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Volume 1, Zondervan, 2008, p. 692.

(2) Short Stories by Jesus, HarperOne, 2014, pp. 117-118.

(3) ”Leviticus,” p. 692.

(4) See William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark, New International Commentary on the New Testament, Eerdmans, 1974, p. 89.

==============

Want to study this subject in-depth? We recommend Jesus, Christians & The Law.

Take me back to the library. Or if you prefer, back to the topic Old Testament.