Duvduv

I never understood the suggestion of the existence of leprosy from the gospels because the disease described as leprosy in the Torah is not "leprosy" at all, but rather a totally spiritual disease that ceased to exist after the destruction of the first Temple. It was diagnosed solely by the priests and was a function of the result of the sin of slander ("lashon harah").
It had nothing to do with leprosy, but I presume the authors of the gospels didn't know that, despite knowing other things related to Judaism.

outhouse

from what ive read there atleast 3 different diseases all blamed for called leprosy

there were many diseases and what made christianity so popular was its free health carer of dispersing evil spirits that caused said affliction

free as in bring me in for dinner scraps lol

Duvduv

It's funny though because there is no record anywhere of the phenomenon of TSARAAT appearing in the Second Temple period, including anywhere in the midrashim or Talmud. On the other hand the gospel account could just be talking of generic illness called leprosy, but then it could have been any incurable disease and not specifically leprosy if the author's intent was to make a big impression. Even if he was trying to imitate the story of Elisha curing Naaman of TSARAAT, presumably the author knew that nowhere in second temple times did that disease appear among Jews.

outhouse

um, why would jewish material be in roman writing?


yes they were influenced by the OT but had no ties to remain loyal, and they cherry picked it.

Iskander

Nahum Sarna in, Exploring Exodus (or via: amazon.co.uk) says that the word “tsarat”, is often translated as “leprosy”, but this is wrong because tsarat does not refer to leprosy (Hansen’s disease).


Tsarat includes a group of skin conditions described in Leviticus and also a change affecting clothes as well as the wall of houses and it is often considered in the Bible to be a sign of god’s displeasure in reaction to a human offense.


It is amusing to realize how the word of the mighty gods depends on the abilityof humans to understand the language and background of the ones who can no longer clarify the all important meaning of those transcendental words: translations that can kill, and torture the defeated.


Nahum M. Sarna
Exploring Exodus
Schoken books New York
ISBN 9780805210637
Page 60

steve_bnk

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leprosy#History

'..In the West, the earliest known description of leprosy there was made by the Roman encyclopedist Aulus Cornelius Celsus (25 BCE – 37 CE) in his De Medicina; he called leprosy "elephantiasis".[88] The Roman author Pliny the Elder (23–79 CE) mentioned the same disease.[88] Although "sara't" of Leviticus (Old Testament) is translated as "lepra" in the 5th century CE Vulgate, the original term sara't found in Leviticus was not the elephantiasis described by Celsus and Pliny; in fact, sara't was used to describe a disease that could affect houses and clothing..'


But Leviticus desribes specific observable sskin symptoms does it not. Sounds like it may be miore a tarslation issue and there was a real disease..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tzaraath#Hebrew_Bible

'..According to some[who?] the three subdivisions of skin tzaraath are best left transliterated, rather than translated, because there are no equivalent English terms and any attempt to translate them greatly diminishes the distinctiveness and focus of the Hebrew term. Though this is not the view of the Jewish Publication Society nor of the Bible Society. Additionally, a diagnosis of tzaraath is not to be performed by anyone but a kohen (member of the priestly caste).[citation needed]

Some[who?] say the manifestation of tzaraath is termed a negah (נגע) "spiritual disease" or literally "a memory," nega'im (plural: נגעים) and there are three varieties of nega'im that relate to human flesh:
1.boils and burns (Leviticus 13:18-28)
2.bald patches or lesions of the scalp or beard, the negah of which is called a נתק (netek)(Leviticus 13:29-44)

[edit] Mishnah

The laws of tzaraath are dealt with in Mishnah Nega'im.

[edit] Patches of the skin

Patches of the skin are confirmed as tzaraath by the occurrence of one of three signs:[6]
1.white hair (והיא הפכה שיער לבן) - if at least two hairs within the confines of the negah turn white[7]
2.healthy flesh (ומחית בשר חי) - if skin of a normal appearance appears within the confines of the patch[7]
3.spreading (ואם פשה תפשה המספחת בעור) - if the patch became enlarged since the time of the initial examination by the Kohen[..'

Duvduv

My point about all this is that if the story referred to tzaraat it did not exist in the Second Temple period and the authors could have just as easily made the point about healing with any serious disease or wound.
I don't know Greek, so perhaps the intention was leprosy as a disease and not tzaraat.

Duvduv

Delete

Iskander

The Jewish Annotated New Testament (JANT) says this:

The footnote in Matt 8:1-3 explains that the Greek word lepra did not mean Hansen’s disease, but a generic term for a skin condition which created a serious ritual impurity. The JANT calls this scaly skin condition “biblical leprosy”.

Curing biblical leprosy indicates a prophetic role -2 kings 5:8- missionary work -10:8....

The footnote in Mark 1:40-45 says, among many other things, that this episode is comparable to the cleansing of Naaman in 2 Kings 5:10, indeed Jesus commands the man to present the offering prescribed by law.




It seems to me that curing or cleansing ritual impurities in the narrative of the new Testament is an activity which appears not to be out of place in the land of Israel during the century of Tiberius.

steve_bnk

There is an archeolgical site with ritual baths, basis for the baptism? The waters ritual cleansing of the spiirit.