📖 Biblia online

Citește Biblia

Biblia audio Planuri audio structurate — ascultă Biblia zilnică

Leviticul 13

¹ Domnul a vorbit lui Moise şi lui Aaron, şi a zis:

² ,,Când un om va avea pe pielea trupului o umflătură, o pecingine, sau o pată albă, care va semăna cu o rană de lepră pe pielea trupului lui, trebuie adus la preotul Aaron, sau la unul din fiii lui, cari sânt preoţi.

³ Preotul să cerceteze rana de pe pielea trupului. Dacă părul din rană s-a făcut alb, şi dacă rana se arată mai adâncă decât pielea trupului, este o rană de lepră: preotul care va face cercetarea, să declare pe omul acela necurat.

⁴ Dacă pe pielea trupului va fi o pată albă, care nu se arată mai adâncă decât pielea, şi dacă părul nu s-a făcut alb, preotul să închidă şapte zile pe cel cu rana.

⁵ A şaptea zi preotul să-l cerceteze iarăş. Dacă i se pare că rana a stat pe loc şi nu s-a întins pe piele, preotul să-l închidă a doua oară încă şapte zile.

⁶ Preotul să-l cerceteze a doua oară în ziua a şaptea. Dacă rana a mai scăzut şi nu s-a întins pe piele, preotul va spune că omul acesta este curat: este o pecingine; el să-şi spele hainele, şi va fi curat.

⁷ Dar dacă pecinginea s-a întins pe piele, dupăce s-a arătat el preotului şi după ce acesta l-a declarat curat, să se mai supună încă odată cercetării preotului.

⁸ Preotul îl va cerceta. Dacă pecinginea s-a întins pe piele, preotul îl va declara necurat: este lepră.

⁹ Când se va arăta o rană de lepră pe un om, să-l aducă la preot.

¹⁰ Preotul să-l cerceteze. Şi dacă are pe piele o umflătură albă, dacă umflătura aceasta a făcut ca părul să albească, şi în umflătură este şi o urmă de carne vie,

¹¹ atunci pe pielea trupului omului acestuia este o lepră învechită: preotul să-l declare necurat; să nu-l închidă, căci este necurat.

¹² Dacă lepra va face o spuzeală pe piele, şi va acoperi toată pielea celui cu rana, din cap până în picioare, pretutindeni pe unde-şi va arunca preotul privirile,

¹³ preotul să-l cerceteze; şi dacă va vedea că lepra a acoperit tot trupul, să declare curat pe cel cu rana: fiindcă s-a făcut toată albă, el este curat.

¹⁴ Dar în ziua când se va vedea în el carne vie, va fi necurat;

¹⁵ când preotul va vedea carnea vie, să-l declare necurat: carnea vie este necurată, este lepră.

¹⁶ Dacă se schimbă carnea vie şi se face albă, să se ducă la preot;

¹⁷ preotul să-l cerceteze, şi dacă rana s-a făcut albă, preotul să declare curat pe cel cu rana: el este curat.

¹⁸ Când un om va avea pe pielea trupului său o bubă care a fost tămăduită,

¹⁹ şi pe locul unde era buba se va arăta o umflătură albă sau o pată de un alb roşietic, omul acela să se arate preotului.

²⁰ Preotul să-l cerceteze. Dacă pata pare mai adâncă decât pielea, şi dacă părul s-a făcut alb, preotul să-l declare necurat: este o rană de lepră, care a dat în bubă.

²¹ Dacă preotul vede că nu este păr alb în pată, că ea nu este mai adâncă decât pielea, şi că a mai scăzut, să închidă pe omul acela şapte zile.

²² Dacă s-a întins pata pe piele, preotul să-l declare necurat: este o rană de lepră.

²³ Dar dacă pata a rămas pe loc şi nu s-a întins, este semnul rănii uscate unde a fost buba; preotul să-l declare curat.

²⁴ Când un om va avea pe pielea trupului o arsură pricinuită de foc, şi se va arăta pe urma arsurii o pată albă sau de un alb roşietic,

²⁵ preotul să-l cerceteze. Dacă părul din pată s-a făcut alb, şi ea pare mai adâncă decât pielea, este lepră, care a dat în arsură; preotul să declare pe omul acela necurat: este o rană de lepră.

²⁶ Dacă preotul vede că nu este păr alb în pată, că ea nu este mai adâncă decât pielea, şi că a mai scăzut, să închidă pe omul acela şapte zile.

²⁷ Preotul să-l cerceteze a şaptea zi. Şi dacă pata s-a întins pe piele, preotul să-l declare necurat: este o rană de lepră.

²⁸ Dar dacă pata a rămas pe loc, nu s-a întins pe piele, şi a mai scăzut, este o rană pricinuită de umflătura arsurii; preotul să-l declare curat, căci este semnul rănii vindecate a arsurii.

²⁹ Când un bărbat sau o femeie va avea o rană pe cap sau la barbă,

³⁰ preotul să cerceteze rana. Dacă pare mai adâncă decât pielea şi are păr gălbui şi subţire, preotul să declare pe omul acela necurat: este râie de cap, este lepră de cap sau de barbă.

³¹ Dacă preotul vede că rana râiei nu pare mai adâncă decât pielea, şi n-are păr negru, să închidă şapte zile pe cel cu rana de râie la cap.

³² Preotul să cerceteze rana a şaptea zi. Dacă râia nu s-a întins, dacă n-are păr gălbui, şi dacă nu pare mai adâncă decât pielea,

³³ cel cu râia la cap să se radă, dar să nu radă locul unde este râia; şi preotul să-l închidă a doua oară şapte zile.

³⁴ Preotul să cerceteze râia a şaptea zi. Dacă râia nu s-a întins pe piele, şi nu pare mai adâncă decât pielea, preotul să-l declare curat; el să-şi spele hainele, şi va fi curat.

³⁵ Dar dacă râia s-a întins pe piele, dupăce a fost declarat curat,

³⁶ preotul să-l cerceteze. Şi dacă râia s-a întins pe piele, preotul n-are să mai caute să vadă dacă are păr galbui: este necurat.

³⁷ Dacă i se pare că râia a stătut pe loc, şi că din ea a crescut păr negru, râia este vindecată: este curat, şi preotul să-l declare curat.

³⁸ Când un bărbat sau o femeie va avea pete pe pielea trupului, şi anume pete albe,

³⁹ preotul să-l cerceteze. Dacă pe pielea trupului lui sânt pete de un alb gălbui, acestea nu sânt decât nişte pete cari au făcut spuzeală pe piele: este curat.

⁴⁰ Când unui om îi va cădea părul de pe cap, este pleşuv: este curat.

⁴¹ Dacă i-a căzut părul de pe cap numai în partea dinainte, este pleşuv în partea dinainte: este curat.

⁴² Dar dacă în partea pleşuvă dinainte sau dinapoi este o rană de un alb roşietic, este lepră, care a făcut spuzeală în partea pleşuvă dinainte sau dinapoi.

⁴³ Preotul să-l cerceteze. Dacă în partea pleşuvă dinapoi sau dinainte este o umflătură de rană de un alb roşietic, asemănătoare cu lepra de pe pielea trupului,

⁴⁴ este lepros, este necurat: preotul să-l declare necurat; rana lui este pe cap.

⁴⁵ Leprosul, atins de această rană, să-şi poarte hainele sfîşiate, şi să umble cu capul gol; să-şi acopere barba, şi să strige: ,Necurat! Necurat!`

⁴⁶ Câtă vreme va avea rana, va fi necurat: este necurat. Să locuiască singur; locuinţa lui să fie afară din tabără.

⁴⁷ Când se va arăta o rană de lepră pe o haină, fie haină de lână, fie haină de in,

⁴⁸ în urzeală sau în bătătură de in sau de lână, pe o piele sau pe vreun lucru de piele,

⁴⁹ şi rana va fi verzuie sau roşietică pe haină sau pe piele, în urzeală sau în bătătură, sau pe vreun lucru de piele, este o rană de lepră, şi trebuie arătată preotului.

⁵⁰ Preotul să cerceteze rana, şi să închidă şapte zile lucrul cu rana.

⁵¹ Să cerceteze a şaptea zi rana. Dacă rana s-a întins pe haină, în urzeală sau în bătătură, pe piele sau pe lucrul acela de piele, este o rană de lepră învechită: lucrul acela este necurat.

⁵² Să ardă haina, urzeala sau bătătura de lână sau de in, sau lucrul de piele pe care se găseşte rana, căci este o lepră învechită: să fie ars în foc.

⁵³ Dar dacă preotul vede că rana nu s-a întins pe haină, pe urzeală sau pe bătătură, sau pe lucrul acela de piele,

⁵⁴ să poruncească să se spele partea atinsă de rană, şi să-l închidă a doua oară şapte zile.

⁵⁵ Preotul să cerceteze rana, după ce se va spăla. Şi dacă rana nu şi-a schimbat înfăţişarea şi nu s-a întins, lucrul acela este necurat: să fie ars în foc, căci o parte din faţă sau din dos a fost roasă.

⁵⁶ Dacă preotul vede că rana a mai scăzut, după ce a fost spălată, s-o rupă din haină sau din piele, din urzeală sau din bătătură.

⁵⁷ Şi dacă se mai iveşte pe haină, în urzeală sau în bătătură, sau pe lucrul de piele, înseamnă că este o spuzeală de lepră: lucrul atins de rană să fie ars în foc.

⁵⁸ Haina, urzeala sau bătătura, sau vreun lucru de piele, care a fost spălat, şi unde a pierit rana, să se mai spele a doua oară, şi va fi curat.

⁵⁹ Aceasta este legea privitoare la rana leprei, când loveşte hainele de lână sau de in, urzeala sau bătătura, sau un lucru oarecare de piele, şi după care vor fi declarate curate sau necurate.``

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":5461,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Boil","title_en":"Boil","content_ro":"<h3>BOIL<\/h3>\nInflamed localized swelling on the skin. In modern medicine the term “boil” is restricted to a pus-filled swelling caused by infectious germs, usually staphylococci. The pus is a mixture of germs and white blood cells, which are the body’s defense against germs. Although painful, boils usually heal naturally after rupturing or being lanced. A more severe boil with several openings is called a carbuncle. If the infection goes deeper and injures internal organs or tissues, it is called an abscess and can even be fatal.<\/p>\nIn the Bible the word translated “boil” probably referred to a variety of skin diseases. The sixth plague that God inflicted on Egypt through Moses and Aaron was a plague of boils (Ex 9:9-11; Dt 28:27, 35) or blisters. Boils or skin eruptions of a certain type were described in the Mosaic health and sanitation code as one indication of leprosy (Lv 13:1-8, 18-23). Job’s “terrible case of boils from head to foot” (Jb 2:7-8, 12, nlt<\/span>) were probably too extensive to be boils in the modern sense; he may have had smallpox, psoriasis, tubercular leprosy, or some other disease accompanied by severe itching. King Hezekiah’s boil was probably a carbuncle (2 Kgs 20:1-7; Is 38:21). See<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Disease; Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BOIL<\/h3>\nInflamed localized swelling on the skin. In modern medicine the term “boil” is restricted to a pus-filled swelling caused by infectious germs, usually staphylococci. The pus is a mixture of germs and white blood cells, which are the body’s defense against germs. Although painful, boils usually heal naturally after rupturing or being lanced. A more severe boil with several openings is called a carbuncle. If the infection goes deeper and injures internal organs or tissues, it is called an abscess and can even be fatal.<\/p>\nIn the Bible the word translated “boil” probably referred to a variety of skin diseases. The sixth plague that God inflicted on Egypt through Moses and Aaron was a plague of boils (Ex 9:9-11; Dt 28:27, 35) or blisters. Boils or skin eruptions of a certain type were described in the Mosaic health and sanitation code as one indication of leprosy (Lv 13:1-8, 18-23). Job’s “terrible case of boils from head to foot” (Jb 2:7-8, 12, nlt<\/span>) were probably too extensive to be boils in the modern sense; he may have had smallpox, psoriasis, tubercular leprosy, or some other disease accompanied by severe itching. King Hezekiah’s boil was probably a carbuncle (2 Kgs 20:1-7; Is 38:21). See<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Disease; Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BOIL Inflamed localized swelling on the skin. In modern medicine the term “boil” is restricted to a pus-filled swelling caused by infectious germs, usually staphylococci. The pus is a mixture of germs and white blood cells, which are the body’s defense against germs. Although painful, boils usually heal naturally after rupturing or being lanced. A more severe boil with several openings is called a carbuncle. If the infection goes deeper and injures internal organs or tissues, it is called an ...","summary_en":"BOIL Inflamed localized swelling on the skin. In modern medicine the term “boil” is restricted to a pus-filled swelling caused by infectious germs, usually staphylococci. The pus is a mixture of germs and white blood cells, which are the body’s defense against germs. Although painful, boils usually heal naturally after rupturing or being lanced. A more severe boil with several openings is called a carbuncle. If the infection goes deeper and injures internal organs or tissues, it is called an ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6816,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Regulations concerning Cleanness and Uncleanness","title_en":"and Uncleanness, Regulations concerning, Cleanness","content_ro":"<h3>CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning<\/h3>\nAspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\nThe OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and personal lines—God’s personal nature being expressed in his giving of the law to Moses. The personal and uniquely consistent character of Israel’s Lord made him morally a completely different being from the many gods of pagan cultures. Unlike the Lord, the Baals of the Canaanites were capricious and vicious; nobody expected them to be ethically consistent. Israel’s Lord, on the other hand, could be trusted to keep his word (a verbal communication through his chosen prophets). Nobody, not even the high priest or the king, was above the law, which expressed not only God’s character but also his sovereign will for the individual and the nation. His moral consistency carried over into his miraculous interventions into history to protect his people, to judge them and their enemies, and to redeem humanity itself.<\/p>\nCleanness as defined in the book of Leviticus, therefore, was always conditioned by the presence of the personal God who gave the law. As the people sought to approach the Lord, they necessarily did so on his terms and therefore within the framework of the cultic ceremonies he had prescribed. Details of the Levitical ceremonies were designed to illustrate the moral implications of the sinner’s approach to God and God’s provision for his people to become morally clean in his sight.<\/p>\nThe meaning of the Levitical system was stated clearly in the psalmist’s words: “Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord<\/span>? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully” (Ps 24:3-4, rsv<\/span>). One’s state of cleanness depends not only on external actions but also on an internal relationship with God. As a result, the sinner’s inability to satisfy the moral demands of a holy God leads to his or her complete dependence on God and on God’s provision for satisfying his own demands. That provision was detailed in the law.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Early History<\/p>\n• Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n• Purification Rites<\/p>\n• New Testament Perspective<\/p>\nEarly History<\/p>\n<h5>Gentile Religious Background<\/h5>\nThe gentile conscience was no doubt a strong influence on the development of ethnic notions of clean and unclean. The subjective sense of sin’s uncleanness is universally encountered in one form or another in the literature of every great religion, whatever explanation is given for it. Many religions have rites of purification based on water and washings. The Hebrews’ ritual avoidance of certain objects, some because of their holiness and others because of their unholiness, finds an analogy in the taboos of many primitive religions, including some of those with which the early Hebrews came into contact.<\/p>\nThe similarities between the Hebrew and other ancient religions are easily established by superficial comparison. It would be surprising if there were none. Those differences that give biblical religion its distinctive character, however, must be accounted for.<\/p>\nLevitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<h5>Ceremonial and Moral Law<\/h5>\nThe relationship between the external ceremonial details of the Mosaic law and the internally directed moral requirements of such parts of it as the Ten Commandments is one of the fundamental issues of OT theology. It is possible to demonstrate that, throughout the OT, uncleanness and sin are virtually synonymous. In many passages sin is described as uncleanness (e.g., Lv 16:16, 30; the ordeal of the bitter water in Nm 5:11-28; Zec 13:1).<\/p>\nThe relationship between ceremonial and moral cleanness can be illustrated from passages mentioning clean hands on the one hand (2 Sm 22:21; Jb 17:9; 22:30) and a clean heart on the other (Pss 24:4; 51:10; 73:13; Prv 20:9). The prophet Isaiah felt convicted of “unclean lips” when he was in God’s presence; a purifying coal, perhaps representing forgiveness and atonement, cleansed him (Is 6:5-7). In many passages cleanness represents innocence before God (Jb 11:4; 33:9; Ps 51:7-10; Prv 20:9), and uncleanness is said to come from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 64:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Causes of Uncleanness<\/h5>\nFrom the Mosaic law a number of causes of uncleanness can be derived.<\/p>\n1. Some foods were not to be eaten. Various laws concerning animals make a “distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten” (Lv 11:47, rsv<\/span>). Permitted food was what was acceptable to God (see also Dt 14:3-21; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<li>2. Diseases, especially leprosy, produced an unclean state (Lv 13–14). The story of Naaman refers to leprous defilement (2 Kgs 5:1-14). The Gospels refer often to lepers (e.g., Mt 8:1-4; 10:8; 11:5; Lk 4:27). Many swellings, sores, and rashes were included under that heading, including Hansen’s disease (modern leprosy). The defilement of disease included all things touched by a diseased person (Lv 14:33-57).<\/li>\n<li>3. Bodily discharges were unclean, and contact with them defiled a person for various periods of time. Emission of semen produced uncleanness until the evening, whether in intercourse (Lv 15:16-18) or inadvertently during the night (Dt 23:10). An unnatural discharge, since it usually indicated disease, made a person unclean for seven days after it had ceased (Lv 15:1-15). Menstruation also produced uncleanness lasting seven days after it ceased (Lv 15:19-24; 2 Sm 11:4). Sexual intercourse during that time made both partners unclean (Lv 15:19-24; 20:18). Contact with the spittle of an unclean person produced uncleanness for a day (15:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Dead bodies, or even parts of them such as bone, caused uncleanness (Nm 19:16). Persons who touched a dead body were unclean for a month, and only after that period could they celebrate their own Passover if they had missed it (9:6-11). The high priest could not even bury his own parents because of his special ritual responsibilities (Lv 21:10-11; cf. Nm 6:6-7; Hg 2:13; Mt 23:27).<\/li>\n<li>5. Idolatry was the greatest source of spiritual defilement. The entire nation of Israel was defiled because of it (Ps 106:38; Is 30:22; Ez 36:25), as were the Gentiles (Jer 43:12). Consequently, contact with Gentiles was thought to produce defilement. The gospel’s universal appeal confronted that conviction (e.g., Jn 4:9; Acts 10:28; cf. Gal 2:11-14). Closely related to the defilement of idolatry was the defilement caused by unclean spirits (Zec 13:2; cf. Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23-27).<\/li>\n<h5>Laws about Objects<\/h5>\nCertain laws illustrate the principle that uncleanness was transmitted much like a contagion. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched, as did dead insects and certain crawling things (Lv 11:29-38). It is interesting that dry grain, running springwater, and water in a cistern were expressly excluded from that law of contamination; perhaps otherwise, starvation would have resulted, dead insects and mice being found in grain and water every day in an agricultural community. Unclean pottery had to be broken, but wooden vessels merely required washing (Lv 15:12). Even uncovered pots in a house where a person had died became unclean (Nm 19:15); everyone who entered the house was unclean.<\/p>\nBecause of their idolatrous associations, the possessions of pagans were unclean; therefore, booty taken in war had to be cleansed by fire or washing (Nm 31:21-24). Clothing of wool, linen, or leather could contract unclean “leprosy” from diseased persons and had to be tested. If the leprous spots (greenish or reddish patches) spread after a test period, the garments had to be burned (Lv 13:47-59; 14:33-53).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Places<\/h5>\nThe land and people of Israel were holy; they could be defiled by the uncleanness of economic oppression or idolatry (Jos 22:17-19; Jer 13:27). Jerusalem was a holy city, but it could be defiled by the sins of its people (Ez 22:2-4; Lam 1:8) or by the blood of its slaughtered inhabitants (Lam 4:15).<\/p>\nThe temple could be defiled by unclean persons. It was necessary for Hezekiah to cleanse the temple after Ahaz’s idolatrous worship (2 Chr 29:15-19); Nehemiah had to cleanse the rooms in which Tobiah had been living (Neh 13:9). One of the functions of the Day of Atonement was removal of impurities transferred to the temple by the sins of the Israelites during the past year (Lv 16:16-19; 31-33).<\/p>\nAn unclean place received the pieces of a leprous house after its demolition (Lv 14:45). The valley of Hinnom became Jerusalem’s garbage dump in later years, giving rise to the visions of “Gehenna” as a place of eternal punishment in NT eschatology. Since the Israelite camp was a holy place, care was taken to bury human excrement outside its boundaries (Dt 23:12-14). The value of that simple expedient in preventing disease during military excursions can hardly be exaggerated, since plagues were a great scourge of ancient armies.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Food<\/h5>\nCertain kinds of animals were unclean and thus could not be eaten (Lv 11; Dt 14:3-21). Animals that died of old age, disease, or injury, or had been wounded by predators, were unclean. Animals that did not both chew the cud and have a cloven hoof were unclean, a definition that included pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits among others. Israelites could eat only those fish that had both fins and scales. Birds of prey and scavengers were unclean. All winged insects were unclean except hopping insects (locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets). A large classification of “crawling things” was prohibited, including worms, lizards, snakes, weasels, and mice. In addition to all those was the ancient prohibition against eating blood (Gn 9:4; Lv 17:14-15; Dt 12:16-23; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\nPurification Rites<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Lapse of Time<\/h5>\nSecondary contamination could often be canceled simply by waiting until the evening (Lv 11:24) or for 7, 14, 40, or 80 days. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched for 7 days (Nm 19:11), as did menstruation (Lv 15:19). When a child was born, the mother’s unclean condition lasted 7 days for a boy and 14 days for a girl. An additional 33 days for a male child and 66 days for a female were required before the mother could touch any sacred thing.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Water<\/h5>\nContact with unclean things, such as bodily discharges, often required washing of hands and clothing, usually accompanied by the lapse of a day (Lv 15:5-11).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Ceremonial Substances<\/h5>\nCeremonial substances used in purification rites included the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water (Nm 19:1-10), and (in cases of leprosy) cedarwood, scarlet cloth, hyssop, and blood (Lv 14:2-9). When the altar was used in a purification ceremony, only blood was suitable, since the altar was the place of sacrifice for sin (Lv 16:18-19; Ez 43:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Sacrifice<\/h5>\nSacrifice was the ultimate source of both ritual and moral purification. All bodily discharges except sexual ones were purified by offerings of doves and pigeons (Lv 15:14-15, 29-30). Childbirth required a lamb and a bird (12:6). Poor people could offer birds in place of an animal (Lv 12:8; 14:21-32; Lk 2:24).<\/p>\nIn sacrifice, blood was symbolic of a life given and therefore a death experienced; the uncleanness of disease or sin was thought of as being transferred to the victim, thus removing the uncleanness (Lv 14:7). Sacrificial death, therefore, always had a substitutionary element. Only blood sacrifice could provide the moral cleansing necessary for sin itself; such sacrifice was therefore the basis of all cleansing, including that of disease.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Fire<\/h5>\nSome contamination could be removed only by fire, such as contamination of metal pots (Nm 31:22-23). Incest was punishable not only by death but also by burning the bodies (Lv 20:14). Idolatry had to be put away by total destruction of the objects and by burning (Ex 32:20). Cities consecrated to pagan deities were to be burned.<\/p>\nNew Testament Perspective<\/p>\nThe NT did not reject the OT concept of clean and unclean, but rather reinterpreted it in a new context. It stressed in particular the moral sense of the concept as well as the identification of uncleanness with sin.<\/p>\nThe Gospels were written in the context of OT law and its Pharisaic and Sadducean accretions. Jesus obeyed the law but was often at odds with the practical casuistry (system) that had grown up around it. Jesus taught that true defilement came from the sinner’s heart and not from outside contamination (Mk 7:14-23; Lk 11:39-41). A central element in his teaching was his attack on the ceremonial externalism of the Pharisees. Thus it has been said that Jesus “internalized” the law. It would be more correct to say that he forced attention to the law’s demands on people’s inner lives.<\/p>\nThe intrinsic wickedness of demons is underscored by the use of the term “unclean spirit” throughout the Gospels. In fact, the word “unclean” itself always appears in the Gospels in the context of spirit, a detail that illustrates the NT shift of emphasis from ritual uncleanness to sin and its guilt.<\/p>\nAn important episode in the life of the early church came in Acts 10, when God taught the apostle Peter that Gentiles were not unclean in themselves and that Peter was obliged to receive them. The result was Cornelius’s conversion.<\/p>\nJesus’ assertion that uncleanness originates in the heart bore fruit in the apostle Paul’s doctrine of Christian freedom. Paul, a Pharisee who could say of himself that he had never broken an external law, came to see that nothing is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14-20). Throughout his epistles, cleanness is the result of obedience of the heart flowing from regeneration; it is based on the cleansing power of the Atonement (see Rom 6:19; 1 Thes 2:3-4, where uncleanness is strictly moral).<\/p>\nChrist’s atonement was the final cleansing agent for sin and its moral results (Heb 9:14, 22; 1 Jn 1:7), doing in reality what the blood of bulls and goats only typified. Thus those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rv 7:14) are seen as wearing clean white robes (15:6; 19:8-14). His blood, symbolizing the life given and the death died by the Son at the behest of the Father, satisfies the attributes of personal justice of the triune God. Because the personal character of a righteous Father was vindicated, the personal forgiveness of sinners is morally possible. God can be in history only what he is eternally: he is both just and the justifier of believers in Christ (Rom 3:24-26).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Baptism; Circumcision; Uncircumcision; Offerings and Sacrifices; Law, Biblical Concept of; Dietary Laws.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning<\/h3>\nAspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\nThe OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and personal lines—God’s personal nature being expressed in his giving of the law to Moses. The personal and uniquely consistent character of Israel’s Lord made him morally a completely different being from the many gods of pagan cultures. Unlike the Lord, the Baals of the Canaanites were capricious and vicious; nobody expected them to be ethically consistent. Israel’s Lord, on the other hand, could be trusted to keep his word (a verbal communication through his chosen prophets). Nobody, not even the high priest or the king, was above the law, which expressed not only God’s character but also his sovereign will for the individual and the nation. His moral consistency carried over into his miraculous interventions into history to protect his people, to judge them and their enemies, and to redeem humanity itself.<\/p>\nCleanness as defined in the book of Leviticus, therefore, was always conditioned by the presence of the personal God who gave the law. As the people sought to approach the Lord, they necessarily did so on his terms and therefore within the framework of the cultic ceremonies he had prescribed. Details of the Levitical ceremonies were designed to illustrate the moral implications of the sinner’s approach to God and God’s provision for his people to become morally clean in his sight.<\/p>\nThe meaning of the Levitical system was stated clearly in the psalmist’s words: “Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord<\/span>? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully” (Ps 24:3-4, rsv<\/span>). One’s state of cleanness depends not only on external actions but also on an internal relationship with God. As a result, the sinner’s inability to satisfy the moral demands of a holy God leads to his or her complete dependence on God and on God’s provision for satisfying his own demands. That provision was detailed in the law.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Early History<\/p>\n• Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n• Purification Rites<\/p>\n• New Testament Perspective<\/p>\nEarly History<\/p>\n<h5>Gentile Religious Background<\/h5>\nThe gentile conscience was no doubt a strong influence on the development of ethnic notions of clean and unclean. The subjective sense of sin’s uncleanness is universally encountered in one form or another in the literature of every great religion, whatever explanation is given for it. Many religions have rites of purification based on water and washings. The Hebrews’ ritual avoidance of certain objects, some because of their holiness and others because of their unholiness, finds an analogy in the taboos of many primitive religions, including some of those with which the early Hebrews came into contact.<\/p>\nThe similarities between the Hebrew and other ancient religions are easily established by superficial comparison. It would be surprising if there were none. Those differences that give biblical religion its distinctive character, however, must be accounted for.<\/p>\nLevitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<h5>Ceremonial and Moral Law<\/h5>\nThe relationship between the external ceremonial details of the Mosaic law and the internally directed moral requirements of such parts of it as the Ten Commandments is one of the fundamental issues of OT theology. It is possible to demonstrate that, throughout the OT, uncleanness and sin are virtually synonymous. In many passages sin is described as uncleanness (e.g., Lv 16:16, 30; the ordeal of the bitter water in Nm 5:11-28; Zec 13:1).<\/p>\nThe relationship between ceremonial and moral cleanness can be illustrated from passages mentioning clean hands on the one hand (2 Sm 22:21; Jb 17:9; 22:30) and a clean heart on the other (Pss 24:4; 51:10; 73:13; Prv 20:9). The prophet Isaiah felt convicted of “unclean lips” when he was in God’s presence; a purifying coal, perhaps representing forgiveness and atonement, cleansed him (Is 6:5-7). In many passages cleanness represents innocence before God (Jb 11:4; 33:9; Ps 51:7-10; Prv 20:9), and uncleanness is said to come from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 64:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Causes of Uncleanness<\/h5>\nFrom the Mosaic law a number of causes of uncleanness can be derived.<\/p>\n1. Some foods were not to be eaten. Various laws concerning animals make a “distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten” (Lv 11:47, rsv<\/span>). Permitted food was what was acceptable to God (see also Dt 14:3-21; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<li>2. Diseases, especially leprosy, produced an unclean state (Lv 13–14). The story of Naaman refers to leprous defilement (2 Kgs 5:1-14). The Gospels refer often to lepers (e.g., Mt 8:1-4; 10:8; 11:5; Lk 4:27). Many swellings, sores, and rashes were included under that heading, including Hansen’s disease (modern leprosy). The defilement of disease included all things touched by a diseased person (Lv 14:33-57).<\/li>\n<li>3. Bodily discharges were unclean, and contact with them defiled a person for various periods of time. Emission of semen produced uncleanness until the evening, whether in intercourse (Lv 15:16-18) or inadvertently during the night (Dt 23:10). An unnatural discharge, since it usually indicated disease, made a person unclean for seven days after it had ceased (Lv 15:1-15). Menstruation also produced uncleanness lasting seven days after it ceased (Lv 15:19-24; 2 Sm 11:4). Sexual intercourse during that time made both partners unclean (Lv 15:19-24; 20:18). Contact with the spittle of an unclean person produced uncleanness for a day (15:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Dead bodies, or even parts of them such as bone, caused uncleanness (Nm 19:16). Persons who touched a dead body were unclean for a month, and only after that period could they celebrate their own Passover if they had missed it (9:6-11). The high priest could not even bury his own parents because of his special ritual responsibilities (Lv 21:10-11; cf. Nm 6:6-7; Hg 2:13; Mt 23:27).<\/li>\n<li>5. Idolatry was the greatest source of spiritual defilement. The entire nation of Israel was defiled because of it (Ps 106:38; Is 30:22; Ez 36:25), as were the Gentiles (Jer 43:12). Consequently, contact with Gentiles was thought to produce defilement. The gospel’s universal appeal confronted that conviction (e.g., Jn 4:9; Acts 10:28; cf. Gal 2:11-14). Closely related to the defilement of idolatry was the defilement caused by unclean spirits (Zec 13:2; cf. Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23-27).<\/li>\n<h5>Laws about Objects<\/h5>\nCertain laws illustrate the principle that uncleanness was transmitted much like a contagion. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched, as did dead insects and certain crawling things (Lv 11:29-38). It is interesting that dry grain, running springwater, and water in a cistern were expressly excluded from that law of contamination; perhaps otherwise, starvation would have resulted, dead insects and mice being found in grain and water every day in an agricultural community. Unclean pottery had to be broken, but wooden vessels merely required washing (Lv 15:12). Even uncovered pots in a house where a person had died became unclean (Nm 19:15); everyone who entered the house was unclean.<\/p>\nBecause of their idolatrous associations, the possessions of pagans were unclean; therefore, booty taken in war had to be cleansed by fire or washing (Nm 31:21-24). Clothing of wool, linen, or leather could contract unclean “leprosy” from diseased persons and had to be tested. If the leprous spots (greenish or reddish patches) spread after a test period, the garments had to be burned (Lv 13:47-59; 14:33-53).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Places<\/h5>\nThe land and people of Israel were holy; they could be defiled by the uncleanness of economic oppression or idolatry (Jos 22:17-19; Jer 13:27). Jerusalem was a holy city, but it could be defiled by the sins of its people (Ez 22:2-4; Lam 1:8) or by the blood of its slaughtered inhabitants (Lam 4:15).<\/p>\nThe temple could be defiled by unclean persons. It was necessary for Hezekiah to cleanse the temple after Ahaz’s idolatrous worship (2 Chr 29:15-19); Nehemiah had to cleanse the rooms in which Tobiah had been living (Neh 13:9). One of the functions of the Day of Atonement was removal of impurities transferred to the temple by the sins of the Israelites during the past year (Lv 16:16-19; 31-33).<\/p>\nAn unclean place received the pieces of a leprous house after its demolition (Lv 14:45). The valley of Hinnom became Jerusalem’s garbage dump in later years, giving rise to the visions of “Gehenna” as a place of eternal punishment in NT eschatology. Since the Israelite camp was a holy place, care was taken to bury human excrement outside its boundaries (Dt 23:12-14). The value of that simple expedient in preventing disease during military excursions can hardly be exaggerated, since plagues were a great scourge of ancient armies.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Food<\/h5>\nCertain kinds of animals were unclean and thus could not be eaten (Lv 11; Dt 14:3-21). Animals that died of old age, disease, or injury, or had been wounded by predators, were unclean. Animals that did not both chew the cud and have a cloven hoof were unclean, a definition that included pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits among others. Israelites could eat only those fish that had both fins and scales. Birds of prey and scavengers were unclean. All winged insects were unclean except hopping insects (locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets). A large classification of “crawling things” was prohibited, including worms, lizards, snakes, weasels, and mice. In addition to all those was the ancient prohibition against eating blood (Gn 9:4; Lv 17:14-15; Dt 12:16-23; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\nPurification Rites<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Lapse of Time<\/h5>\nSecondary contamination could often be canceled simply by waiting until the evening (Lv 11:24) or for 7, 14, 40, or 80 days. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched for 7 days (Nm 19:11), as did menstruation (Lv 15:19). When a child was born, the mother’s unclean condition lasted 7 days for a boy and 14 days for a girl. An additional 33 days for a male child and 66 days for a female were required before the mother could touch any sacred thing.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Water<\/h5>\nContact with unclean things, such as bodily discharges, often required washing of hands and clothing, usually accompanied by the lapse of a day (Lv 15:5-11).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Ceremonial Substances<\/h5>\nCeremonial substances used in purification rites included the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water (Nm 19:1-10), and (in cases of leprosy) cedarwood, scarlet cloth, hyssop, and blood (Lv 14:2-9). When the altar was used in a purification ceremony, only blood was suitable, since the altar was the place of sacrifice for sin (Lv 16:18-19; Ez 43:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Sacrifice<\/h5>\nSacrifice was the ultimate source of both ritual and moral purification. All bodily discharges except sexual ones were purified by offerings of doves and pigeons (Lv 15:14-15, 29-30). Childbirth required a lamb and a bird (12:6). Poor people could offer birds in place of an animal (Lv 12:8; 14:21-32; Lk 2:24).<\/p>\nIn sacrifice, blood was symbolic of a life given and therefore a death experienced; the uncleanness of disease or sin was thought of as being transferred to the victim, thus removing the uncleanness (Lv 14:7). Sacrificial death, therefore, always had a substitutionary element. Only blood sacrifice could provide the moral cleansing necessary for sin itself; such sacrifice was therefore the basis of all cleansing, including that of disease.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Fire<\/h5>\nSome contamination could be removed only by fire, such as contamination of metal pots (Nm 31:22-23). Incest was punishable not only by death but also by burning the bodies (Lv 20:14). Idolatry had to be put away by total destruction of the objects and by burning (Ex 32:20). Cities consecrated to pagan deities were to be burned.<\/p>\nNew Testament Perspective<\/p>\nThe NT did not reject the OT concept of clean and unclean, but rather reinterpreted it in a new context. It stressed in particular the moral sense of the concept as well as the identification of uncleanness with sin.<\/p>\nThe Gospels were written in the context of OT law and its Pharisaic and Sadducean accretions. Jesus obeyed the law but was often at odds with the practical casuistry (system) that had grown up around it. Jesus taught that true defilement came from the sinner’s heart and not from outside contamination (Mk 7:14-23; Lk 11:39-41). A central element in his teaching was his attack on the ceremonial externalism of the Pharisees. Thus it has been said that Jesus “internalized” the law. It would be more correct to say that he forced attention to the law’s demands on people’s inner lives.<\/p>\nThe intrinsic wickedness of demons is underscored by the use of the term “unclean spirit” throughout the Gospels. In fact, the word “unclean” itself always appears in the Gospels in the context of spirit, a detail that illustrates the NT shift of emphasis from ritual uncleanness to sin and its guilt.<\/p>\nAn important episode in the life of the early church came in Acts 10, when God taught the apostle Peter that Gentiles were not unclean in themselves and that Peter was obliged to receive them. The result was Cornelius’s conversion.<\/p>\nJesus’ assertion that uncleanness originates in the heart bore fruit in the apostle Paul’s doctrine of Christian freedom. Paul, a Pharisee who could say of himself that he had never broken an external law, came to see that nothing is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14-20). Throughout his epistles, cleanness is the result of obedience of the heart flowing from regeneration; it is based on the cleansing power of the Atonement (see Rom 6:19; 1 Thes 2:3-4, where uncleanness is strictly moral).<\/p>\nChrist’s atonement was the final cleansing agent for sin and its moral results (Heb 9:14, 22; 1 Jn 1:7), doing in reality what the blood of bulls and goats only typified. Thus those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rv 7:14) are seen as wearing clean white robes (15:6; 19:8-14). His blood, symbolizing the life given and the death died by the Son at the behest of the Father, satisfies the attributes of personal justice of the triune God. Because the personal character of a righteous Father was vindicated, the personal forgiveness of sinners is morally possible. God can be in history only what he is eternally: he is both just and the justifier of believers in Christ (Rom 3:24-26).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Baptism; Circumcision; Uncircumcision; Offerings and Sacrifices; Law, Biblical Concept of; Dietary Laws.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people. The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and persona...","summary_en":"CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people. The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and persona...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22967,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Leprosy Leper","title_en":"Leprosy Leper","content_ro":"<h3>LEPER, LEPROSY<\/h3>\nOne afflicted with a chronic infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae,<\/em> 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 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.<\/p>\nThe 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 over whether the records refer to modern leprosy. The 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.<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nLeviticus 13 and 14 contain the most details about what is called “leprosy” in the Scriptures (in traditional versions such as the kjv<\/span> and rsv<\/span>). However, careful study of the descriptions of the disease given in these passages strongly suggests that what is now called leprosy is not the skin disease described in Leviticus. 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 (or Hansen’s disease) 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, biblical leprosy is not synonymous with modern leprosy. Consequently, modern versions do not use the word “leprosy” in Leviticus 13 and 14; rather, it is rendered as “contagious skin disease” in the nlt<\/span> and “infectious skin disease” in the niv<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nIn the NT there is no description of the disease referred to as leprosy, so again we cannot be certain whether it is the modern disease or not. Modern leprosy was known to the people of that day, but it is doubtful whether they were always able to accurately distinguish it from other skin conditions. The Greek word translated “leprosy” in the NT basically means “scaly.” The Greeks used it to designate psoriasis-like skin conditions, and they referred to leprosy by the word we translate as “elephantiasis,” a word not found in the NT. Confusion concerning the use of the word “leprosy” extends even to the Middle Ages, leaving historians uncertain at times concerning the historical spread of the disease. When we read in the NT that Christ cleansed lepers, we know only that he healed chronic skin conditions considered to be defiling.<\/p>\nThe attitude of Jesus toward those afflicted with leprosy was in marked contrast to that of the rabbis of his day. One rabbi would not eat an egg purchased in a street where there was someone with leprosy. Another rabbi threw stones at lepers in order to keep them away. But Jesus touched a man with leprosy, thereby demonstrating his power to overcome uncleanness as represented by leprosy (Mt 8:3; Mk 1:41-42; Lk 5:12-13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Plague.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEPER, LEPROSY<\/h3>\nOne afflicted with a chronic infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae,<\/em> 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 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.<\/p>\nThe 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 over whether the records refer to modern leprosy. The 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.<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nLeviticus 13 and 14 contain the most details about what is called “leprosy” in the Scriptures (in traditional versions such as the kjv<\/span> and rsv<\/span>). However, careful study of the descriptions of the disease given in these passages strongly suggests that what is now called leprosy is not the skin disease described in Leviticus. 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 (or Hansen’s disease) 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, biblical leprosy is not synonymous with modern leprosy. Consequently, modern versions do not use the word “leprosy” in Leviticus 13 and 14; rather, it is rendered as “contagious skin disease” in the nlt<\/span> and “infectious skin disease” in the niv<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nIn the NT there is no description of the disease referred to as leprosy, so again we cannot be certain whether it is the modern disease or not. Modern leprosy was known to the people of that day, but it is doubtful whether they were always able to accurately distinguish it from other skin conditions. The Greek word translated “leprosy” in the NT basically means “scaly.” The Greeks used it to designate psoriasis-like skin conditions, and they referred to leprosy by the word we translate as “elephantiasis,” a word not found in the NT. Confusion concerning the use of the word “leprosy” extends even to the Middle Ages, leaving historians uncertain at times concerning the historical spread of the disease. When we read in the NT that Christ cleansed lepers, we know only that he healed chronic skin conditions considered to be defiling.<\/p>\nThe attitude of Jesus toward those afflicted with leprosy was in marked contrast to that of the rabbis of his day. One rabbi would not eat an egg purchased in a street where there was someone with leprosy. Another rabbi threw stones at lepers in order to keep them away. But Jesus touched a man with leprosy, thereby demonstrating his power to overcome uncleanness as represented by leprosy (Mt 8:3; Mk 1:41-42; Lk 5:12-13).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Plague.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEPER, LEPROSY One afflicted with a 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...","summary_en":"LEPER, LEPROSY One afflicted with a 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...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23099,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Leviticus","title_en":"Book of Leviticus","content_ro":"<h3>LEVITICUS, Book of<\/h3>\nThird book of the OT, largely concerned with the duties of the Levitical priests.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nA traditional alternative title of Leviticus is the Third Book of Moses, which gives proper credit to the man who most deserves to be called its author. For though the book never says that Moses wrote down any of the material, it repeatedly states that God revealed the contents of Leviticus to Moses. It may be that Leviticus was not put into writing as soon as it was revealed, but there is little to commend the common critical view that it was composed nearly a thousand years after Moses. The spelling and grammar of Leviticus was, like other books of the OT, revised from time to time to make it understandable to later generations of Jewish readers, but that does not mean the essential content of the book was modified.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nGod revealed some of the laws in Leviticus by speaking to Moses from the tent of meeting, or tabernacle (Lv 1:1). Other laws were revealed on Mt Sinai (26:46). Such statements show that Moses learned the contents of Leviticus after the tabernacle had been built but before the Israelites left Mt Sinai. This fits in with Exodus 40:17, which says that the tabernacle was erected exactly a year after the Israelites left Egypt. They then spent another month at Sinai, during which time the laws in Leviticus were given to Moses. Then one month later (Nm 1:1) Moses was commanded to prepare the people to leave Sinai to conquer the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\nIt is difficult to give an exact date for the Israelite exodus from Egypt. Dates at the end of the 15th century BC<\/span> or early in the 13th century are put forward by different scholars. Whichever view is adopted, the origin of Leviticus must be one year later than the exodus. But certainty about the absolute date of Leviticus is unimportant so long as the religious setting of the book is understood.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAbout 400 years before the exodus, God promised Abraham that his descendants would be very numerous and live in the land of Canaan. The family of Abraham multiplied, but as a result of famine they had to go and live in Egypt. Afraid of the Israelites, the rulers of Egypt turned them into slaves.<\/p>\nThe book of Exodus tells how God, acting through Moses, brought the Israelites out of Egypt in a miraculous way. Moses led them to Mt Sinai, where God appeared in fire and smoke on the top of the mountain. Moses went up the mountain, and there God gave him the Ten Commandments and explained various laws. Through these acts God showed that he had chosen the nation of Israel to be his special holy people, different from all the other nations because they would show God’s character through their behavior (cf. Ex 19:5-6).<\/p>\n\nGod’s revelation at Sinai was unique and unrepeatable. But he disclosed to Moses that he wanted to live among the people of Israel permanently. They were told to build a portable royal palace that would be suitable for the divine King of kings. The building of this portable palace, traditionally called the tabernacle, is described in Exodus 35–40. When it was completed, the fire and cloud that had been seen on Mt Sinai appeared over the tabernacle as a sign that God was now dwelling in it (Ex 40:34-38).<\/p>\nExodus also tells how Moses was told to appoint his brother, Aaron, and Aaron’s sons to serve in the tabernacle as priests (Ex 28–29). Unfortunately, before the Israelites even began to build the tabernacle, they made a golden calf under Aaron’s leadership and started to worship it instead. The people were spared only as a result of Moses’ prayers. The book of Exodus therefore leaves the reader in suspense. The tabernacle has been built, but no one knows how to worship God in it. Though Aaron and his family are alive, we are left wondering whether they will still be allowed to lead the worship of God after the idolatry of the golden calf. The book of Leviticus answers this question.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theology<\/p>\nThe Ten Commandments explain briefly and simply how God expects his people to behave. The first four commandments explain our duty toward our neighbor. The book of Leviticus follows a similar scheme. Chapters 1–17 show how God wanted Israel to worship him, while chapters 18–27 are mainly concerned with how people should behave toward each other. Whereas the Ten Commandments are general and can be applied quite easily to every society, the book of Leviticus is much more detailed and specifically geared to the special circumstances of ancient Israel. If modern readers are to profit from reading Leviticus, they must look behind the specific regulations to the underlying religious principles that do not change—in other words, to the theology of Leviticus.<\/p>\nFour themes are very important in the theology of Leviticus: (1) the presence of God, (2) holiness, (3) sacrifice, and (4) the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>The Presence of God<\/h5>\nGod is always present with Israel in a real way. Sometimes his presence becomes visible in fire and smoke. But even when there is no miraculous sign, God is present. He is especially near when people worship him and offer sacrifice. The many animal sacrifices mentioned in the book are all brought to the Lord. When the animals are burnt, God is pleased with the smell (1:9). The priests who offer the sacrifices must be especially careful since they come closer to God than other people do. If they are careless in their duties and break God’s commands, they may die (10:1-2).<\/p>\nGod is present not just in worship but in all the ordinary duties of life. The recurring refrain of the later chapters, “I, the Lord<\/span>, am your God” (18:2; 19:3), reminds the Israelites that every aspect of their life—religion (chs 21–24), sex (chs 18, 20), and relations with neighbors (chs 19, 25)—matters to God. The behavior of every Israelite must mirror that of God himself (20:7). The fear of God should prompt persons to help the blind, the deaf, the elderly, and the poor. Though such people may have no redress against unfair treatment, God cares about what happens to them (19:14, 32; 25:17, 36, 43).<\/p>\n<h5>Holiness<\/h5>\n“You must be holy because I am holy” (11:44-45; 19:2; 20:26) could be termed the motto of Leviticus. “Holy,” “clean,” and “unclean” are common words in this book. God is the supremely holy person in the Bible, and holiness is the distinctive feature of his character. But earthly creatures can become holy too. To become holy, a person must be chosen by God and undergo the correct ceremony. Thus, at Sinai all Israel became a holy nation (Ex 19:6). Leviticus 8–9 explains how Aaron and his sons were ordained priests. This made them more holy than ordinary Israelites and therefore able to approach God and offer sacrifice.<\/p>\nBefore anyone could become holy, they had to be “clean.” Cleanness in Leviticus means more than just being free of dirt, though this idea is included. It means being free of any abnormality. Whenever a person appears to fall short of perfection, he is described as “unclean.” Thus, the worst uncleanness is death, the very opposite of perfect life. But bleeding and other discharges and patchy skin diseases can make someone unclean. Animals that move in peculiar ways or have strange habits are also called unclean (Lv 11–15).<\/p>\nHoliness and its opposite, uncleanness, can describe behavior as well as outward appearance. To be holy means to obey God and to act like God. Chapters 18–25 explain what holiness means in daily living. It means avoiding illicit sexual relations, caring for the poor, being honest, being fair, and loving your neighbor as yourself. This sort of behavior made Israel different from other peoples. Through their holiness the whole nation was supposed to demonstrate what God was like.<\/p>\n<h5>Sacrifice<\/h5>\nIn practice, unfortunately, the nation and the individuals within it rarely lived up to these ideals of holiness. Even if one did not commit a grievous sin, he or she was always liable to become unclean through contact with someone else, touching a dead animal, or in some other way. To maintain contact with a holy God, Israel’s sins and uncleanness had to be removed. This is what the sacrifices were for. They brought the forgiveness of sins and cleansing from uncleanness. Because sin affects relations between God and humans in various ways, Leviticus provides four different types of offerings to cover the different cases (Lv 1–6), and explains which sacrifices must be offered on which occasions (chs 7–17). All these rituals served to underline the seriousness of sin and helped preserve peace and fellowship between God and humanity.<\/p>\n<h5>The Sinai Covenant<\/h5>\nAll the laws contained in Leviticus form part of the Sinai covenant. They fill out and apply the principles of the Ten Commandments to the specific circumstances of ancient Israel. But they are more than a set of detailed rules, because they were given as part of the covenant. Three things have to be remembered about this covenant. First, the covenant created a personal relationship. The Lord became Israel’s king, and Israel became his special treasure set apart from the other nations of the world. Second, the covenant was based on God’s grace. He had made a promise to Abraham and, in saving the people from Egyptian slavery, he demonstrated his faithfulness to his promise and his love for Israel. Israel, in turn, was to show its gratitude for salvation by keeping the law. In no way did keeping the law earn them salvation. The law was given to a redeemed people. Finally, there were promises and threats built into the covenant (Lv 26). When the nation keeps the law, God promises they will enjoy good harvests, victory over their enemies, and God walking among them as he did in Eden. But if they reject God’s laws, terrible calamities will befall them: drought, famine, defeat, and even expulsion from the land God had promised to give them. These covenant curses form the background to the prophets’ warnings in later times.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Kinds of Sacrifices (1–7)<\/h5>\nThese chapters explain how the different kinds of sacrifices were to be offered. Most of these sacrifices also formed part of the regular worship in the tabernacle and later in the temple. But these chapters are concerned with personal offerings made when someone had sinned or made a vow or recovered from an illness. They explain what the offerer must do and what the priest must do, which parts of the animal must be burned, which parts may be eaten by the priest, and what is to be done with the blood of the animal.<\/p>\nFirst, the offerer brought the animal into the outer court of the tabernacle. In the presence of the priest he put his hand on the head of the animal and explained why he was bringing the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and chopped it up. The priest then took over. He caught the blood as it ran out of the dying animal and splashed it over the altar, and burned at least some of the animal on the great altar in the court of the tabernacle. These acts were performed with all the animal sacrifices.<\/p>\nThe special feature of the burnt offering (Lv 1) was that the whole animal, which had to be unblemished, was burned on the altar. All that the priest received was the skin. This was the most common sacrifice and was offered on many different occasions. In giving the whole animal to God in the sacrifice, the worshiper dedicated himself or herself totally to God’s service. “Lay your hand on its head so the Lord<\/span> will accept it as your substitute, thus making atonement for you” (1:4, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nChapter 2 deals with the grain offering that always accompanied the burnt offering, but which could also be offered alone. Only part of this offering was burned; the rest was given to the priests to eat. The sacrifices formed an important part of their income.<\/p>\nThe peace (fellowship) offering’s special feature was that it was the only sacrifice where the offerer was allowed to eat part of the meat (Lv 3). Since in the earliest period Israelites were not permitted to kill animals except for sacrifice (ch 17), every meal that included meat had to be preceded by a peace offering. Leviticus 7:11-18 mentions three occasions that might prompt a peace-offering “thanksgiving”: when someone had something to praise God for or some sin to acknowledge; a vow promising a sacrifice if God would help one out of a difficulty; and a voluntary offering, made just because the person felt like it.<\/p>\nDespite its name, the sin offering (Lv 4) was not the only offering dealing with sin. The other sacrifices also made the forgiveness of sin possible. The special significance of this sacrifice is emphasized by its unusual ritual. Instead of the blood being splashed over the altar, as in the other sacrifices, it was carefully smeared over the horns (corners) of the large altar in the courtyard (4:30) or over the small altar inside the holy place (v 18); once a year the blood was sprinkled over the ark in the Holy of Holies (16:14). Sin makes these different parts of the tabernacle unclean, unfit for the presence of God. And if God is not present in the tabernacle, worship has no point. The blood acts as a spiritual disinfectant, making the tabernacle clean and holy again. The sin offering was required whenever a person inadvertently broke one of the commandments or had suffered from a discharge or skin disease that made him or her unclean for a week or more (chs 12, 15).<\/p>\nThe guilt offering (5:14–6:7) was for more serious offenses, such as stealing holy property or deliberately using God’s name in a false oath. Such an offense was seen as robbing God. Therefore, a ram had to be offered as a sort of repayment. Whereas the poor person could offer just a bird for the other sacrifices, a ram was always required for a guilt offering.<\/p>\nChapters 6:8–7:38 contain various other regulations about sacrifice, mainly specifying how much of each sacrifice the priests may eat and how much must be burned. One important rule for those who weren’t priests was that they were not to eat any fat or blood or eat sacrificial meat when they were unclean. If they did, they could be cut off from Israel (7:21-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Beginnings of the Priesthood (8–10)<\/h5>\nThough Leviticus looks like a law book, because it contains so many regulations, it is really a history book describing the events that occurred about a year after the exodus. These chapters remind us of the true character of the book, for they tell how Moses ordained Aaron and his sons to be priests and how they offered their first sacrifices.<\/p>\nAwed by the complexity of the ordination rituals, the modern reader may miss the marvel that Aaron should have been appointed high priest. For it was Aaron who had presided over the making of the golden calf and encouraged its worship (Ex 32). Had not Moses interceded for Israel, the whole nation would have been destroyed in the wilderness. Here the gracious forgiveness of God is most clear. Aaron, the chief sinner, is appointed chief mediator between God and the people. In the NT the career of Peter parallels Aaron’s in some respect.<\/p>\nThe greatness of the high priesthood is symbolized by the richly decorated robes Aaron wore. He and his sons were anointed with oil, and then Moses offered the three most common sacrifices on their behalf. They were confined to the court of the tabernacle for a week, and it seems likely that some of the rituals were repeated each day. By this means they were set apart from the rest of the people and entirely consecrated to their holy office.<\/p>\nBy the eighth day the process was complete. Now Aaron and his sons could offer sacrifice. This time, Moses only told them what to do; he did not offer sacrifices himself. Chapter 9 concludes by telling that, after they had offered the sacrifices for themselves and the people, fire came out of the tabernacle to burn up the offerings, thereby displaying God’s approval of their actions.<\/p>\nAfter this, 10:1-2 presents an unexpected turn of events: “Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu put coals of fire in their incense burners and sprinkled incense over it. In this way, they disobeyed the Lord<\/span> by burning before him a different kind of fire than he had commanded. So fire blazed forth from the Lord<\/span>’s presence and burned them up, and they died there before the Lord<\/span>” (nlt<\/span>). We do not know exactly what is meant by unholy fire. What is important is that the priests did something that God had not commanded them. The priests were supposed to set an example of total obedience to God’s word: this is the essence of holiness. Instead, they decided to follow their own plans and the consequences were dire.<\/p>\n“Aaron was silent” (10:3). He was warned not even to mourn his sons’ deaths, lest he be suspected of condoning their sin (vv 6-7). Yet, despite his sons’ actions, Aaron and his surviving sons were confirmed as priests. They were reminded that their job was “to distinguish between what is holy and what is ordinary, what is ceremonially unclean and what is clean. And you must teach the Israelites all the laws that the Lord<\/span> has given through Moses” (vv 10-11, nlt<\/span>). The chapter closes on another note of grace. Although the priests made a mistake in offering one of the sin offerings, God would overlook it on this occasion.<\/p>\n<h5>Cleanness and Uncleanness (11–16)<\/h5>\nDistinguishing between the unclean and the clean is the theme of chapters 11–15, which prepare for the great Day of Atonement ceremonies of chapter 16. These are designed to cleanse the tabernacle from the uncleannesses of the people of Israel, thereby ensuring that God would continue to dwell among them (16:16, 19).<\/p>\nChapter 11 discusses unclean animals, that is, animals that may not be eaten. Land animals are dealt with first, then fish and birds, and finally various miscellaneous creatures such as locusts and reptiles. To be clean, a land animal must have cloven hooves and chew the cud; that covers sheep and cattle but excludes pigs and camels. Fish must have fins and scales to be edible; without them, they count as unclean. Birds are clean unless they are birds of prey or scavengers that eat carrion. Insects that resemble birds in having wings and two large legs to hop with—for example, locusts—are clean. Other flying insects are unclean. All squirming creatures that dart hither and thither, such as lizards, are unclean.<\/p>\nThe reasons for declaring some animals clean and others unclean has long been a great puzzle. One suggestion is that the unclean animals were used in sacrifice by pagan worshipers or were thought to represent pagan deities. Certainly some unclean animals were used in pagan worship, but so were some clean ones, and that fact makes this explanation unsatisfactory. A second possibility is that the rules were hygienic: the clean animals were safe to eat whereas the unclean were not. There may be some truth in this explanation, but it is not completely adequate, for some clean animals can be harmful while some unclean ones are all right to eat.<\/p>\nUnclean animals could not be eaten, but there was no harm in touching them. Israelites could ride camels, for example. However, all dead animals, unless killed for sacrifice, were unclean. Anyone who touched the carcass of a dead creature became unclean himself and therefore could not enter the tabernacle that day (11:39-40).<\/p>\nThe following chapters deal with other conditions that make people unclean. Chapter 12 states that childbirth, or more precisely the bloody discharge that follows childbirth, makes a woman unclean. In OT theology death is the ultimate uncleanness, and conditions that are abnormal or threaten to lead to death are also unclean. When the discharge has ceased, after a fixed period the mother must bring a burnt offering and a sin offering to atone for any sin she may have committed, and to purify the tabernacle that may have been polluted through her uncleanness.<\/p>\nChapters 13–14 deal with the uncleanness caused by skin diseases. Detailed regulations are given to distinguish between different diseases so that the priests can decide whether people are unclean or not. If they are unclean, they must live outside the camp until their skin heals. Traditionally the unclean skin disease has been called leprosy. But this is unlikely to be correct, since leprosy was unknown in the Middle East in OT times. Rather, it was any disease that led to the skin peeling off in patches, such as psoriasis. This explains why the disease might spontaneously get better.<\/p>\nIf the disease did retreat sufficiently, the sufferer could call the priest, and if the priest was satisfied with the cure, the sufferer could be readmitted to the community after following the rituals prescribed in chapter 14. This also explains what is to be done if patches of mold are found in pieces of cloth or house walls.<\/p>\nChapter 15 explains how men can become unclean through discharges from their sexual organs, due to gonorrhea or sexual intercourse, while women become unclean through menstruation or a long-term discharge. Part of the purpose of these regulations is to prevent the sacred prostitution that was common in the ancient world. Since sexual intercourse made people unclean, they could not go to worship immediately afterward. Further, the uncleanness of menstruation should have discouraged men from being overfamiliar with unmarried girls.<\/p>\nThe broad scope of these uncleanness regulations meant that nearly every Israelite would be unclean at some time in his or her life. This uncleanness could contaminate God’s dwelling place, the tabernacle, making it impossible for God to continue to live there. To avert this catastrophe, a Day of Atonement was held once a year. This is the most solemn day in the Jewish calendar, and the ceremonies for it are described in detail in Leviticus 16.<\/p>\nThere are three acts on the Day of Atonement that are described in this chapter. There was first the special sin offering offered by the high priest, in the course of which the outer altar of burnt offering, the incense altar inside the Holy Place, and finally the ark itself in the Holy of Holies were sprinkled with blood to purify each part of the tabernacle. This was the one occasion in the year when the high priest entered the presence of God in the Holy of Holies, and elaborate precautions were taken to screen the high priest from God’s holiness (16:2-4, 11-17). There was another public act that pictured the sins of Israel being taken away. A goat was chosen by lot. Then the high priest placed his hands on its head and recited over it the nation’s sin. This goat was then led away and driven into a solitary place; in later times it was pushed over a precipice. These actions pictured Israel’s sins being carried away, so that they could not disturb the peace between God and his people. The third important feature of the Day of Atonement was public prayer and fasting. This showed that sin could not be eliminated without effort, but only through a complete change of heart by every person in Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Rules for Daily Life (17–25)<\/h5>\nWhereas the opening chapters of Leviticus are entirely concerned with the Godward side of religion, the later chapters are more concerned with practical religious duties toward other persons. However, chapter 17 repeats some of the rules about sacrifice and makes one new one: that all sacrifice must be offered in the tabernacle courtyard. This was to prevent people from secretly worshiping heathen gods.<\/p>\nChapters 18 and 20 spell out the rules governing sexual relations in ancient Israel. Chapter 19 gives further examples of what holiness means in everyday life. Positively, it means helping the poor by leaving some grain behind in the fields at harvesttime (19:9-10); paying people promptly (v 13); avoiding gossip (v 16); honoring the elderly, helping the immigrant, and being honest in business (vv 32-36). But holiness goes beyond deeds and words. It should transform thoughts: “Never seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone, but love your neighbor as yourself” (v 18, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nChapters 21 and 22 discuss how the holy men of Israel, the priests, are to demonstrate their holiness in their lives. First, they must avoid approaching dead bodies unless the dead are very close relatives. Second, they must marry women of known moral uprightness. Third, deformed priests—for example, a blind or lame priest—may never offer sacrifices. Here the principle is plain that men who represent God must reflect the perfection of God in normal, healthy bodies. However, those who are temporarily unclean, through skin disease or a discharge, may resume their duties as soon as their uncleanness is cured.<\/p>\nChapter 23 lists the main holy days and the sacrifices that had to be offered on each one. Chapter 24 deals with the lamp and special bread kept within the tabernacle. A case of blasphemy that occurred in the wilderness is mentioned. Because the man actually used the sacred name of God in a curse, he was sentenced to death.<\/p>\nChapter 25 deals with the jubilee year. In every society people fall into debt. Today the effects of debt are somewhat cushioned by state welfare payments and bank overdrafts, but ancient societies did not have such aid available. People in debt had to sell off their family land, on which they depended for their living, or in more serious situations, they could sell themselves into slavery. Once impoverished in this way, it was exceedingly difficult ever to recover one’s land or one’s freedom. But this law in Leviticus provided an escape. Every 50 years was a jubilee. In this year every slave was released from bondage, and everyone who had sold his land was given it back free. Thus, everyone who fell into debt was given a chance to make a fresh start. Though this law was primarily designed to help the poor, it also served to prevent the accumulation of too much wealth in the hands of a few rich men.<\/p>\n<h5>Blessings, Curses, and Vows (26–27)<\/h5>\nChapter 26 contains the blessings and curses that traditionally concluded a covenant. Israel is promised great material and spiritual prosperity if she keeps the law but is warned that tragedy will befall if she is disobedient.<\/p>\nChapter 27 is an appendix dealing with vows and other gifts made to God. When a person promises to give something to God, it becomes holy and cannot be retracted unless a suitable payment is made instead. This chapter sets out the rules about such dedications.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Aaron; Moses; Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEVITICUS, Book of<\/h3>\nThird book of the OT, largely concerned with the duties of the Levitical priests.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nA traditional alternative title of Leviticus is the Third Book of Moses, which gives proper credit to the man who most deserves to be called its author. For though the book never says that Moses wrote down any of the material, it repeatedly states that God revealed the contents of Leviticus to Moses. It may be that Leviticus was not put into writing as soon as it was revealed, but there is little to commend the common critical view that it was composed nearly a thousand years after Moses. The spelling and grammar of Leviticus was, like other books of the OT, revised from time to time to make it understandable to later generations of Jewish readers, but that does not mean the essential content of the book was modified.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nGod revealed some of the laws in Leviticus by speaking to Moses from the tent of meeting, or tabernacle (Lv 1:1). Other laws were revealed on Mt Sinai (26:46). Such statements show that Moses learned the contents of Leviticus after the tabernacle had been built but before the Israelites left Mt Sinai. This fits in with Exodus 40:17, which says that the tabernacle was erected exactly a year after the Israelites left Egypt. They then spent another month at Sinai, during which time the laws in Leviticus were given to Moses. Then one month later (Nm 1:1) Moses was commanded to prepare the people to leave Sinai to conquer the Promised Land of Canaan.<\/p>\nIt is difficult to give an exact date for the Israelite exodus from Egypt. Dates at the end of the 15th century BC<\/span> or early in the 13th century are put forward by different scholars. Whichever view is adopted, the origin of Leviticus must be one year later than the exodus. But certainty about the absolute date of Leviticus is unimportant so long as the religious setting of the book is understood.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAbout 400 years before the exodus, God promised Abraham that his descendants would be very numerous and live in the land of Canaan. The family of Abraham multiplied, but as a result of famine they had to go and live in Egypt. Afraid of the Israelites, the rulers of Egypt turned them into slaves.<\/p>\nThe book of Exodus tells how God, acting through Moses, brought the Israelites out of Egypt in a miraculous way. Moses led them to Mt Sinai, where God appeared in fire and smoke on the top of the mountain. Moses went up the mountain, and there God gave him the Ten Commandments and explained various laws. Through these acts God showed that he had chosen the nation of Israel to be his special holy people, different from all the other nations because they would show God’s character through their behavior (cf. Ex 19:5-6).<\/p>\n\nGod’s revelation at Sinai was unique and unrepeatable. But he disclosed to Moses that he wanted to live among the people of Israel permanently. They were told to build a portable royal palace that would be suitable for the divine King of kings. The building of this portable palace, traditionally called the tabernacle, is described in Exodus 35–40. When it was completed, the fire and cloud that had been seen on Mt Sinai appeared over the tabernacle as a sign that God was now dwelling in it (Ex 40:34-38).<\/p>\nExodus also tells how Moses was told to appoint his brother, Aaron, and Aaron’s sons to serve in the tabernacle as priests (Ex 28–29). Unfortunately, before the Israelites even began to build the tabernacle, they made a golden calf under Aaron’s leadership and started to worship it instead. The people were spared only as a result of Moses’ prayers. The book of Exodus therefore leaves the reader in suspense. The tabernacle has been built, but no one knows how to worship God in it. Though Aaron and his family are alive, we are left wondering whether they will still be allowed to lead the worship of God after the idolatry of the golden calf. The book of Leviticus answers this question.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theology<\/p>\nThe Ten Commandments explain briefly and simply how God expects his people to behave. The first four commandments explain our duty toward our neighbor. The book of Leviticus follows a similar scheme. Chapters 1–17 show how God wanted Israel to worship him, while chapters 18–27 are mainly concerned with how people should behave toward each other. Whereas the Ten Commandments are general and can be applied quite easily to every society, the book of Leviticus is much more detailed and specifically geared to the special circumstances of ancient Israel. If modern readers are to profit from reading Leviticus, they must look behind the specific regulations to the underlying religious principles that do not change—in other words, to the theology of Leviticus.<\/p>\nFour themes are very important in the theology of Leviticus: (1) the presence of God, (2) holiness, (3) sacrifice, and (4) the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<h5>The Presence of God<\/h5>\nGod is always present with Israel in a real way. Sometimes his presence becomes visible in fire and smoke. But even when there is no miraculous sign, God is present. He is especially near when people worship him and offer sacrifice. The many animal sacrifices mentioned in the book are all brought to the Lord. When the animals are burnt, God is pleased with the smell (1:9). The priests who offer the sacrifices must be especially careful since they come closer to God than other people do. If they are careless in their duties and break God’s commands, they may die (10:1-2).<\/p>\nGod is present not just in worship but in all the ordinary duties of life. The recurring refrain of the later chapters, “I, the Lord<\/span>, am your God” (18:2; 19:3), reminds the Israelites that every aspect of their life—religion (chs 21–24), sex (chs 18, 20), and relations with neighbors (chs 19, 25)—matters to God. The behavior of every Israelite must mirror that of God himself (20:7). The fear of God should prompt persons to help the blind, the deaf, the elderly, and the poor. Though such people may have no redress against unfair treatment, God cares about what happens to them (19:14, 32; 25:17, 36, 43).<\/p>\n<h5>Holiness<\/h5>\n“You must be holy because I am holy” (11:44-45; 19:2; 20:26) could be termed the motto of Leviticus. “Holy,” “clean,” and “unclean” are common words in this book. God is the supremely holy person in the Bible, and holiness is the distinctive feature of his character. But earthly creatures can become holy too. To become holy, a person must be chosen by God and undergo the correct ceremony. Thus, at Sinai all Israel became a holy nation (Ex 19:6). Leviticus 8–9 explains how Aaron and his sons were ordained priests. This made them more holy than ordinary Israelites and therefore able to approach God and offer sacrifice.<\/p>\nBefore anyone could become holy, they had to be “clean.” Cleanness in Leviticus means more than just being free of dirt, though this idea is included. It means being free of any abnormality. Whenever a person appears to fall short of perfection, he is described as “unclean.” Thus, the worst uncleanness is death, the very opposite of perfect life. But bleeding and other discharges and patchy skin diseases can make someone unclean. Animals that move in peculiar ways or have strange habits are also called unclean (Lv 11–15).<\/p>\nHoliness and its opposite, uncleanness, can describe behavior as well as outward appearance. To be holy means to obey God and to act like God. Chapters 18–25 explain what holiness means in daily living. It means avoiding illicit sexual relations, caring for the poor, being honest, being fair, and loving your neighbor as yourself. This sort of behavior made Israel different from other peoples. Through their holiness the whole nation was supposed to demonstrate what God was like.<\/p>\n<h5>Sacrifice<\/h5>\nIn practice, unfortunately, the nation and the individuals within it rarely lived up to these ideals of holiness. Even if one did not commit a grievous sin, he or she was always liable to become unclean through contact with someone else, touching a dead animal, or in some other way. To maintain contact with a holy God, Israel’s sins and uncleanness had to be removed. This is what the sacrifices were for. They brought the forgiveness of sins and cleansing from uncleanness. Because sin affects relations between God and humans in various ways, Leviticus provides four different types of offerings to cover the different cases (Lv 1–6), and explains which sacrifices must be offered on which occasions (chs 7–17). All these rituals served to underline the seriousness of sin and helped preserve peace and fellowship between God and humanity.<\/p>\n<h5>The Sinai Covenant<\/h5>\nAll the laws contained in Leviticus form part of the Sinai covenant. They fill out and apply the principles of the Ten Commandments to the specific circumstances of ancient Israel. But they are more than a set of detailed rules, because they were given as part of the covenant. Three things have to be remembered about this covenant. First, the covenant created a personal relationship. The Lord became Israel’s king, and Israel became his special treasure set apart from the other nations of the world. Second, the covenant was based on God’s grace. He had made a promise to Abraham and, in saving the people from Egyptian slavery, he demonstrated his faithfulness to his promise and his love for Israel. Israel, in turn, was to show its gratitude for salvation by keeping the law. In no way did keeping the law earn them salvation. The law was given to a redeemed people. Finally, there were promises and threats built into the covenant (Lv 26). When the nation keeps the law, God promises they will enjoy good harvests, victory over their enemies, and God walking among them as he did in Eden. But if they reject God’s laws, terrible calamities will befall them: drought, famine, defeat, and even expulsion from the land God had promised to give them. These covenant curses form the background to the prophets’ warnings in later times.<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\n<h5>Kinds of Sacrifices (1–7)<\/h5>\nThese chapters explain how the different kinds of sacrifices were to be offered. Most of these sacrifices also formed part of the regular worship in the tabernacle and later in the temple. But these chapters are concerned with personal offerings made when someone had sinned or made a vow or recovered from an illness. They explain what the offerer must do and what the priest must do, which parts of the animal must be burned, which parts may be eaten by the priest, and what is to be done with the blood of the animal.<\/p>\nFirst, the offerer brought the animal into the outer court of the tabernacle. In the presence of the priest he put his hand on the head of the animal and explained why he was bringing the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and chopped it up. The priest then took over. He caught the blood as it ran out of the dying animal and splashed it over the altar, and burned at least some of the animal on the great altar in the court of the tabernacle. These acts were performed with all the animal sacrifices.<\/p>\nThe special feature of the burnt offering (Lv 1) was that the whole animal, which had to be unblemished, was burned on the altar. All that the priest received was the skin. This was the most common sacrifice and was offered on many different occasions. In giving the whole animal to God in the sacrifice, the worshiper dedicated himself or herself totally to God’s service. “Lay your hand on its head so the Lord<\/span> will accept it as your substitute, thus making atonement for you” (1:4, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nChapter 2 deals with the grain offering that always accompanied the burnt offering, but which could also be offered alone. Only part of this offering was burned; the rest was given to the priests to eat. The sacrifices formed an important part of their income.<\/p>\nThe peace (fellowship) offering’s special feature was that it was the only sacrifice where the offerer was allowed to eat part of the meat (Lv 3). Since in the earliest period Israelites were not permitted to kill animals except for sacrifice (ch 17), every meal that included meat had to be preceded by a peace offering. Leviticus 7:11-18 mentions three occasions that might prompt a peace-offering “thanksgiving”: when someone had something to praise God for or some sin to acknowledge; a vow promising a sacrifice if God would help one out of a difficulty; and a voluntary offering, made just because the person felt like it.<\/p>\nDespite its name, the sin offering (Lv 4) was not the only offering dealing with sin. The other sacrifices also made the forgiveness of sin possible. The special significance of this sacrifice is emphasized by its unusual ritual. Instead of the blood being splashed over the altar, as in the other sacrifices, it was carefully smeared over the horns (corners) of the large altar in the courtyard (4:30) or over the small altar inside the holy place (v 18); once a year the blood was sprinkled over the ark in the Holy of Holies (16:14). Sin makes these different parts of the tabernacle unclean, unfit for the presence of God. And if God is not present in the tabernacle, worship has no point. The blood acts as a spiritual disinfectant, making the tabernacle clean and holy again. The sin offering was required whenever a person inadvertently broke one of the commandments or had suffered from a discharge or skin disease that made him or her unclean for a week or more (chs 12, 15).<\/p>\nThe guilt offering (5:14–6:7) was for more serious offenses, such as stealing holy property or deliberately using God’s name in a false oath. Such an offense was seen as robbing God. Therefore, a ram had to be offered as a sort of repayment. Whereas the poor person could offer just a bird for the other sacrifices, a ram was always required for a guilt offering.<\/p>\nChapters 6:8–7:38 contain various other regulations about sacrifice, mainly specifying how much of each sacrifice the priests may eat and how much must be burned. One important rule for those who weren’t priests was that they were not to eat any fat or blood or eat sacrificial meat when they were unclean. If they did, they could be cut off from Israel (7:21-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Beginnings of the Priesthood (8–10)<\/h5>\nThough Leviticus looks like a law book, because it contains so many regulations, it is really a history book describing the events that occurred about a year after the exodus. These chapters remind us of the true character of the book, for they tell how Moses ordained Aaron and his sons to be priests and how they offered their first sacrifices.<\/p>\nAwed by the complexity of the ordination rituals, the modern reader may miss the marvel that Aaron should have been appointed high priest. For it was Aaron who had presided over the making of the golden calf and encouraged its worship (Ex 32). Had not Moses interceded for Israel, the whole nation would have been destroyed in the wilderness. Here the gracious forgiveness of God is most clear. Aaron, the chief sinner, is appointed chief mediator between God and the people. In the NT the career of Peter parallels Aaron’s in some respect.<\/p>\nThe greatness of the high priesthood is symbolized by the richly decorated robes Aaron wore. He and his sons were anointed with oil, and then Moses offered the three most common sacrifices on their behalf. They were confined to the court of the tabernacle for a week, and it seems likely that some of the rituals were repeated each day. By this means they were set apart from the rest of the people and entirely consecrated to their holy office.<\/p>\nBy the eighth day the process was complete. Now Aaron and his sons could offer sacrifice. This time, Moses only told them what to do; he did not offer sacrifices himself. Chapter 9 concludes by telling that, after they had offered the sacrifices for themselves and the people, fire came out of the tabernacle to burn up the offerings, thereby displaying God’s approval of their actions.<\/p>\nAfter this, 10:1-2 presents an unexpected turn of events: “Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu put coals of fire in their incense burners and sprinkled incense over it. In this way, they disobeyed the Lord<\/span> by burning before him a different kind of fire than he had commanded. So fire blazed forth from the Lord<\/span>’s presence and burned them up, and they died there before the Lord<\/span>” (nlt<\/span>). We do not know exactly what is meant by unholy fire. What is important is that the priests did something that God had not commanded them. The priests were supposed to set an example of total obedience to God’s word: this is the essence of holiness. Instead, they decided to follow their own plans and the consequences were dire.<\/p>\n“Aaron was silent” (10:3). He was warned not even to mourn his sons’ deaths, lest he be suspected of condoning their sin (vv 6-7). Yet, despite his sons’ actions, Aaron and his surviving sons were confirmed as priests. They were reminded that their job was “to distinguish between what is holy and what is ordinary, what is ceremonially unclean and what is clean. And you must teach the Israelites all the laws that the Lord<\/span> has given through Moses” (vv 10-11, nlt<\/span>). The chapter closes on another note of grace. Although the priests made a mistake in offering one of the sin offerings, God would overlook it on this occasion.<\/p>\n<h5>Cleanness and Uncleanness (11–16)<\/h5>\nDistinguishing between the unclean and the clean is the theme of chapters 11–15, which prepare for the great Day of Atonement ceremonies of chapter 16. These are designed to cleanse the tabernacle from the uncleannesses of the people of Israel, thereby ensuring that God would continue to dwell among them (16:16, 19).<\/p>\nChapter 11 discusses unclean animals, that is, animals that may not be eaten. Land animals are dealt with first, then fish and birds, and finally various miscellaneous creatures such as locusts and reptiles. To be clean, a land animal must have cloven hooves and chew the cud; that covers sheep and cattle but excludes pigs and camels. Fish must have fins and scales to be edible; without them, they count as unclean. Birds are clean unless they are birds of prey or scavengers that eat carrion. Insects that resemble birds in having wings and two large legs to hop with—for example, locusts—are clean. Other flying insects are unclean. All squirming creatures that dart hither and thither, such as lizards, are unclean.<\/p>\nThe reasons for declaring some animals clean and others unclean has long been a great puzzle. One suggestion is that the unclean animals were used in sacrifice by pagan worshipers or were thought to represent pagan deities. Certainly some unclean animals were used in pagan worship, but so were some clean ones, and that fact makes this explanation unsatisfactory. A second possibility is that the rules were hygienic: the clean animals were safe to eat whereas the unclean were not. There may be some truth in this explanation, but it is not completely adequate, for some clean animals can be harmful while some unclean ones are all right to eat.<\/p>\nUnclean animals could not be eaten, but there was no harm in touching them. Israelites could ride camels, for example. However, all dead animals, unless killed for sacrifice, were unclean. Anyone who touched the carcass of a dead creature became unclean himself and therefore could not enter the tabernacle that day (11:39-40).<\/p>\nThe following chapters deal with other conditions that make people unclean. Chapter 12 states that childbirth, or more precisely the bloody discharge that follows childbirth, makes a woman unclean. In OT theology death is the ultimate uncleanness, and conditions that are abnormal or threaten to lead to death are also unclean. When the discharge has ceased, after a fixed period the mother must bring a burnt offering and a sin offering to atone for any sin she may have committed, and to purify the tabernacle that may have been polluted through her uncleanness.<\/p>\nChapters 13–14 deal with the uncleanness caused by skin diseases. Detailed regulations are given to distinguish between different diseases so that the priests can decide whether people are unclean or not. If they are unclean, they must live outside the camp until their skin heals. Traditionally the unclean skin disease has been called leprosy. But this is unlikely to be correct, since leprosy was unknown in the Middle East in OT times. Rather, it was any disease that led to the skin peeling off in patches, such as psoriasis. This explains why the disease might spontaneously get better.<\/p>\nIf the disease did retreat sufficiently, the sufferer could call the priest, and if the priest was satisfied with the cure, the sufferer could be readmitted to the community after following the rituals prescribed in chapter 14. This also explains what is to be done if patches of mold are found in pieces of cloth or house walls.<\/p>\nChapter 15 explains how men can become unclean through discharges from their sexual organs, due to gonorrhea or sexual intercourse, while women become unclean through menstruation or a long-term discharge. Part of the purpose of these regulations is to prevent the sacred prostitution that was common in the ancient world. Since sexual intercourse made people unclean, they could not go to worship immediately afterward. Further, the uncleanness of menstruation should have discouraged men from being overfamiliar with unmarried girls.<\/p>\nThe broad scope of these uncleanness regulations meant that nearly every Israelite would be unclean at some time in his or her life. This uncleanness could contaminate God’s dwelling place, the tabernacle, making it impossible for God to continue to live there. To avert this catastrophe, a Day of Atonement was held once a year. This is the most solemn day in the Jewish calendar, and the ceremonies for it are described in detail in Leviticus 16.<\/p>\nThere are three acts on the Day of Atonement that are described in this chapter. There was first the special sin offering offered by the high priest, in the course of which the outer altar of burnt offering, the incense altar inside the Holy Place, and finally the ark itself in the Holy of Holies were sprinkled with blood to purify each part of the tabernacle. This was the one occasion in the year when the high priest entered the presence of God in the Holy of Holies, and elaborate precautions were taken to screen the high priest from God’s holiness (16:2-4, 11-17). There was another public act that pictured the sins of Israel being taken away. A goat was chosen by lot. Then the high priest placed his hands on its head and recited over it the nation’s sin. This goat was then led away and driven into a solitary place; in later times it was pushed over a precipice. These actions pictured Israel’s sins being carried away, so that they could not disturb the peace between God and his people. The third important feature of the Day of Atonement was public prayer and fasting. This showed that sin could not be eliminated without effort, but only through a complete change of heart by every person in Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Rules for Daily Life (17–25)<\/h5>\nWhereas the opening chapters of Leviticus are entirely concerned with the Godward side of religion, the later chapters are more concerned with practical religious duties toward other persons. However, chapter 17 repeats some of the rules about sacrifice and makes one new one: that all sacrifice must be offered in the tabernacle courtyard. This was to prevent people from secretly worshiping heathen gods.<\/p>\nChapters 18 and 20 spell out the rules governing sexual relations in ancient Israel. Chapter 19 gives further examples of what holiness means in everyday life. Positively, it means helping the poor by leaving some grain behind in the fields at harvesttime (19:9-10); paying people promptly (v 13); avoiding gossip (v 16); honoring the elderly, helping the immigrant, and being honest in business (vv 32-36). But holiness goes beyond deeds and words. It should transform thoughts: “Never seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone, but love your neighbor as yourself” (v 18, nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nChapters 21 and 22 discuss how the holy men of Israel, the priests, are to demonstrate their holiness in their lives. First, they must avoid approaching dead bodies unless the dead are very close relatives. Second, they must marry women of known moral uprightness. Third, deformed priests—for example, a blind or lame priest—may never offer sacrifices. Here the principle is plain that men who represent God must reflect the perfection of God in normal, healthy bodies. However, those who are temporarily unclean, through skin disease or a discharge, may resume their duties as soon as their uncleanness is cured.<\/p>\nChapter 23 lists the main holy days and the sacrifices that had to be offered on each one. Chapter 24 deals with the lamp and special bread kept within the tabernacle. A case of blasphemy that occurred in the wilderness is mentioned. Because the man actually used the sacred name of God in a curse, he was sentenced to death.<\/p>\nChapter 25 deals with the jubilee year. In every society people fall into debt. Today the effects of debt are somewhat cushioned by state welfare payments and bank overdrafts, but ancient societies did not have such aid available. People in debt had to sell off their family land, on which they depended for their living, or in more serious situations, they could sell themselves into slavery. Once impoverished in this way, it was exceedingly difficult ever to recover one’s land or one’s freedom. But this law in Leviticus provided an escape. Every 50 years was a jubilee. In this year every slave was released from bondage, and everyone who had sold his land was given it back free. Thus, everyone who fell into debt was given a chance to make a fresh start. Though this law was primarily designed to help the poor, it also served to prevent the accumulation of too much wealth in the hands of a few rich men.<\/p>\n<h5>Blessings, Curses, and Vows (26–27)<\/h5>\nChapter 26 contains the blessings and curses that traditionally concluded a covenant. Israel is promised great material and spiritual prosperity if she keeps the law but is warned that tragedy will befall if she is disobedient.<\/p>\nChapter 27 is an appendix dealing with vows and other gifts made to God. When a person promises to give something to God, it becomes holy and cannot be retracted unless a suitable payment is made instead. This chapter sets out the rules about such dedications.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Aaron; Moses; Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEVITICUS, Book of Third book of the OT, largely concerned with the duties of the Levitical priests. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Purpose and Theology • Content Author A traditional alternative title of Leviticus is the Third Book of Moses, which gives proper credit to the man who most deserves to be called its author. For though the book never says that Moses wrote down any of the material, it repeatedly states that God revealed the contents of Leviticus to Moses. It may be that Le...","summary_en":"LEVITICUS, Book of Third book of the OT, largely concerned with the duties of the Levitical priests. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Purpose and Theology • Content Author A traditional alternative title of Leviticus is the Third Book of Moses, which gives proper credit to the man who most deserves to be called its author. For though the book never says that Moses wrote down any of the material, it repeatedly states that God revealed the contents of Leviticus to Moses. It may be that Le...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26778,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Naaman","title_en":"Naaman","content_ro":"<h3>NAAMAN<\/h3>\n<li>1. Grandson of Benjamin and son of Bela, who gave his name to the Naamite clan (Gn 46:21; Nm 26:38-40; 1 Chr 8:4, 7).<\/li>\n<li>2. Commanding general of the Aramean army during the reign of Ben-hadad, king of Syria (2 Kgs 5). He was held in honor by the king, evidently for his character as well as for military achievements, “but he had leprosy.” This did not exclude him from society, as it would have done in Israel (cf. Lv 13–14), but the possibility of a cure suggested by a captive Israelite girl sent Naaman, with Ben-hadad’s approval and gifts, to the court of his highly suspicious neighboring monarch (unnamed, but probably Jehoram). Elisha the prophet intervened and prescribed an unlikely mode of healing. The reluctant Naaman followed through because of the good sense of his servants, who said, “If the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it?” Naaman confessed that the one true God is in Israel, and he returned home with two mule-loads of earth, perhaps on the assumption that this was a God who could be worshiped only on his own ground (cf. Ex 20:24). In Luke 4:27 Jesus reminds his synagogue listeners of how Naaman, a non-Israelite, was the only one of his time to be cleansed of leprosy.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>NAAMAN<\/h3>\n<li>1. Grandson of Benjamin and son of Bela, who gave his name to the Naamite clan (Gn 46:21; Nm 26:38-40; 1 Chr 8:4, 7).<\/li>\n<li>2. Commanding general of the Aramean army during the reign of Ben-hadad, king of Syria (2 Kgs 5). He was held in honor by the king, evidently for his character as well as for military achievements, “but he had leprosy.” This did not exclude him from society, as it would have done in Israel (cf. Lv 13–14), but the possibility of a cure suggested by a captive Israelite girl sent Naaman, with Ben-hadad’s approval and gifts, to the court of his highly suspicious neighboring monarch (unnamed, but probably Jehoram). Elisha the prophet intervened and prescribed an unlikely mode of healing. The reluctant Naaman followed through because of the good sense of his servants, who said, “If the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it?” Naaman confessed that the one true God is in Israel, and he returned home with two mule-loads of earth, perhaps on the assumption that this was a God who could be worshiped only on his own ground (cf. Ex 20:24). In Luke 4:27 Jesus reminds his synagogue listeners of how Naaman, a non-Israelite, was the only one of his time to be cleansed of leprosy.<\/li>","summary_ro":"NAAMAN 1. Grandson of Benjamin and son of Bela, who gave his name to the Naamite clan (Gn 46:21; Nm 26:38-40; 1 Chr 8:4, 7). 2. Commanding general of the Aramean army during the reign of Ben-hadad, king of Syria (2 Kgs 5). He was held in honor by the king, evidently for his character as well as for military achievements, “but he had leprosy.” This did not exclude him from society, as it would have done in Israel (cf. Lv 13–14), but the possibility of a cure suggested by a captive Israelite gi...","summary_en":"NAAMAN 1. Grandson of Benjamin and son of Bela, who gave his name to the Naamite clan (Gn 46:21; Nm 26:38-40; 1 Chr 8:4, 7). 2. Commanding general of the Aramean army during the reign of Ben-hadad, king of Syria (2 Kgs 5). He was held in honor by the king, evidently for his character as well as for military achievements, “but he had leprosy.” This did not exclude him from society, as it would have done in Israel (cf. Lv 13–14), but the possibility of a cure suggested by a captive Israelite gi...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31284,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Priesthood","title_en":"Priesthood","content_ro":"<h3>PRIESTHOOD<\/h3>\nOffice or function of a priest. The modern word “priest” (in French prêtre<\/em> and in German priester<\/em>) is used of a clergyman in episcopalian churches (Roman, Orthodox, and Anglican). It is also used in the description of the whole church as “a royal priesthood” (1 Pt 2:9). To ascertain how this usage arose and to see what priesthood means, it is necessary to look briefly at both biblical and theological developments.<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nIn the covenant made between God and Israel, the whole people was seen as a “kingdom of priests” and thus a holy people (Ex 19:6). Within this context, specific priestly activities belonged to three orders—high priest, priest, and Levite. “Priests” were male descendants of Aaron, who was a Levite (Nm 3:10), and “Levites” were other male members of the tribe of Levi. The chief functions of the priesthood took place in the temple. Priests looked after the ceremonial vessels and performed the sacrifices. In doing their duties they dressed in special, symbolic vestments. They were also teachers, passing on the sacred traditions of the nation as well as such matters as medical information (Lv 13–15). The high priest was the spiritual head of Israel and he had special functions, such as entering the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement (ch 16). The Levites assisted the priests and served the congregation in the temple. They sang the psalms, kept the temple courts clean, helped to prepare certain sacrifices and offerings, and also had a teaching function. Through this threefold order, the priesthood of the nation was exercised. By it the people offered worship to God, made intercessions and petitions, and learned of God’s will. Thus what occurred in every pious home, as the head of the house guided his family in worship, occurred in a larger and more ceremonial way in the temple.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nIt is remarkable that the term “priest” is never used in the NT of a minister or order in the church. Certainly the usage with reference to Judaism and paganism continues (Acts 4:1, 6; 14:13), but it is never introduced into the church. The Letter to the Hebrews presents the OT priesthood as fulfilled in Jesus Christ. First of all, he has been appointed high priest by God himself (Heb 5:4-6). Yet his is a superior priesthood to that of Aaron (ch 7). Second, being totally sympathetic to the needs of sinful people and tempted in all points like them, he is without sin (4:15; 7:26). Third, instead of offering animal sacrifices to take away sin, he offers himself, as the sinless Lamb, to take away sin. This is a perfect atonement (7:27; 9:24-28; 10:10-19).<\/p>\nNot only was the OT sacrificial system fulfilled; it was also finished by the unique, unrepeatable, and unlimited sacrifice of Christ. Having risen from the dead, he is a priest forever (Heb 7:17) and he remains the same yesterday and today and forever (13:8). Part of his high priesthood is to offer intercession for his people (7:25). He is the mediator of a new and better covenant (7:22; 8:6; 9:15). Only through him are sinful human beings able to enter the holy presence of God and be accepted as children of God (Jn 14:6; 2 Cor 5:18-20; 1 Tm 2:5). Therefore, whatever priesthood Christians have, they have it only in and through Christ, their high priest and Mediator.<\/p>\nThe NT (quoted from the rsv<\/span>) describes believers as “a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Pt 2:5); “priests to his God and Father” (Rv 1:6); “a kingdom and priests to our God” (5:10); “priests of God and of Christ, and they shall reign with him a thousand years” (20:6).<\/p>\nWhat, then, does the priesthood of all believers mean in the NT? The high priesthood of Christ may be defined as his complete dedication and obedience to God, his Father, and unlimited compassion for his fellow human beings. At the center is his sacrificial death on the cross. On this basis and in union with him, the priesthood of Christians is their sacrificial obedience to God; this involves spiritual worship and love of God and compassionate activity and prayer for their fellow human beings. Paul wrote, “Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship” (Rom 12:1, rsv<\/span>). Each Christian offers his whole body to Christ and each local church offers itself wholly to Christ, and Christ offers his whole body (the church) to God the Father. Thus, in and by Christ, the priesthood of believers is exercised and made effectual. In the hearts of believers is the indwelling Spirit, and it is in his power that acceptable service and worship is offered. Christ is the pattern of priesthood as well as being high priest.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Worship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRIESTHOOD<\/h3>\nOffice or function of a priest. The modern word “priest” (in French prêtre<\/em> and in German priester<\/em>) is used of a clergyman in episcopalian churches (Roman, Orthodox, and Anglican). It is also used in the description of the whole church as “a royal priesthood” (1 Pt 2:9). To ascertain how this usage arose and to see what priesthood means, it is necessary to look briefly at both biblical and theological developments.<\/p>\nIn the Old Testament<\/p>\nIn the covenant made between God and Israel, the whole people was seen as a “kingdom of priests” and thus a holy people (Ex 19:6). Within this context, specific priestly activities belonged to three orders—high priest, priest, and Levite. “Priests” were male descendants of Aaron, who was a Levite (Nm 3:10), and “Levites” were other male members of the tribe of Levi. The chief functions of the priesthood took place in the temple. Priests looked after the ceremonial vessels and performed the sacrifices. In doing their duties they dressed in special, symbolic vestments. They were also teachers, passing on the sacred traditions of the nation as well as such matters as medical information (Lv 13–15). The high priest was the spiritual head of Israel and he had special functions, such as entering the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement (ch 16). The Levites assisted the priests and served the congregation in the temple. They sang the psalms, kept the temple courts clean, helped to prepare certain sacrifices and offerings, and also had a teaching function. Through this threefold order, the priesthood of the nation was exercised. By it the people offered worship to God, made intercessions and petitions, and learned of God’s will. Thus what occurred in every pious home, as the head of the house guided his family in worship, occurred in a larger and more ceremonial way in the temple.<\/p>\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\nIt is remarkable that the term “priest” is never used in the NT of a minister or order in the church. Certainly the usage with reference to Judaism and paganism continues (Acts 4:1, 6; 14:13), but it is never introduced into the church. The Letter to the Hebrews presents the OT priesthood as fulfilled in Jesus Christ. First of all, he has been appointed high priest by God himself (Heb 5:4-6). Yet his is a superior priesthood to that of Aaron (ch 7). Second, being totally sympathetic to the needs of sinful people and tempted in all points like them, he is without sin (4:15; 7:26). Third, instead of offering animal sacrifices to take away sin, he offers himself, as the sinless Lamb, to take away sin. This is a perfect atonement (7:27; 9:24-28; 10:10-19).<\/p>\nNot only was the OT sacrificial system fulfilled; it was also finished by the unique, unrepeatable, and unlimited sacrifice of Christ. Having risen from the dead, he is a priest forever (Heb 7:17) and he remains the same yesterday and today and forever (13:8). Part of his high priesthood is to offer intercession for his people (7:25). He is the mediator of a new and better covenant (7:22; 8:6; 9:15). Only through him are sinful human beings able to enter the holy presence of God and be accepted as children of God (Jn 14:6; 2 Cor 5:18-20; 1 Tm 2:5). Therefore, whatever priesthood Christians have, they have it only in and through Christ, their high priest and Mediator.<\/p>\nThe NT (quoted from the rsv<\/span>) describes believers as “a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Pt 2:5); “priests to his God and Father” (Rv 1:6); “a kingdom and priests to our God” (5:10); “priests of God and of Christ, and they shall reign with him a thousand years” (20:6).<\/p>\nWhat, then, does the priesthood of all believers mean in the NT? The high priesthood of Christ may be defined as his complete dedication and obedience to God, his Father, and unlimited compassion for his fellow human beings. At the center is his sacrificial death on the cross. On this basis and in union with him, the priesthood of Christians is their sacrificial obedience to God; this involves spiritual worship and love of God and compassionate activity and prayer for their fellow human beings. Paul wrote, “Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship” (Rom 12:1, rsv<\/span>). Each Christian offers his whole body to Christ and each local church offers itself wholly to Christ, and Christ offers his whole body (the church) to God the Father. Thus, in and by Christ, the priesthood of believers is exercised and made effectual. In the hearts of believers is the indwelling Spirit, and it is in his power that acceptable service and worship is offered. Christ is the pattern of priesthood as well as being high priest.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Worship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRIESTHOOD Office or function of a priest. The modern word “priest” (in French prêtre and in German priester) is used of a clergyman in episcopalian churches (Roman, Orthodox, and Anglican). It is also used in the description of the whole church as “a royal priesthood” (1 Pt 2:9). To ascertain how this usage arose and to see what priesthood means, it is necessary to look briefly at both biblical and theological developments. In the Old Testament In the covenant made between God and Israel, th...","summary_en":"PRIESTHOOD Office or function of a priest. The modern word “priest” (in French prêtre and in German priester) is used of a clergyman in episcopalian churches (Roman, Orthodox, and Anglican). It is also used in the description of the whole church as “a royal priesthood” (1 Pt 2:9). To ascertain how this usage arose and to see what priesthood means, it is necessary to look briefly at both biblical and theological developments. In the Old Testament In the covenant made between God and Israel, th...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38717,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Worship","title_en":"Worship","content_ro":"<h3>WORSHIP<\/h3>\nExpression of reverence and adoration of God.<\/p>\nWorship in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC<\/span>) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted more than three centuries until its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. When the Jews returned from exile, they built a new temple, which was later renovated and enlarged by Herod the Great. Though all the temple buildings were destroyed by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70, the foundations remained. Jews still pray by the Western Wall (called the Wailing Wall).<\/p>\nIf the form of worship changed with times and situations, its heart and center did not. God revealed himself to Abraham, promising that his children would inherit the land of Canaan. Abraham demonstrated his faith through prayer and sacrifice. Throughout the biblical period listening to God’s Word, prayer, and sacrifice constituted the essence of worship. The promises to Abraham were constantly recalled as the basis of Israel’s existence as a nation and its right to the land of Canaan.<\/p>\nFrom time to time every family visited the temple in Jerusalem. Eight days after a baby boy was born, he was circumcised to mark his membership in Israel. Then, a month or two later, the baby’s mother went to the temple to offer sacrifice (Lv 12; cf. Lk 2:22-24).<\/p>\nAnimals were sacrificed in the lambing and calving season. The first lamb or calf born to every ewe or cow was presented in sacrifice (Ex 22:30). Similarly, at the beginning of the harvest season, a basket of the first fruits was offered, and at the end, a tenth of all the harvest, the tithe, was given to the priests as God’s representatives (Nm 18:21-32). Deuteronomy 26:5-15 gives a typical prayer for use on such occasions.<\/p>\nSometimes a person would decide to offer a sacrifice for more personal reasons. In a crisis, vows could be made and sealed with a sacrifice (Gn 28:18-22; 1 Sm 1:10-11). Then when the prayer was answered, a second sacrifice was customarily offered (Gn 35:3, 14; 1 Sm 1:24-25). Serious sin or serious sickness were also occasions for sacrifice (Lv 4–5, 13–15).<\/p>\nThe worshiper brought the animal into the temple court. Standing before the priest, he placed one hand on its head, thereby identifying himself with the animal, and confessed his sin or explained the reason for offering the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and cut it up for the priest to burn on the great bronze altar. Some sacrifices (burnt offerings) involved the whole animal being burnt on the altar. In others, some of the meat was set aside for the priests, while the rest was shared by the worshiper and his family. But in every case the worshiper killed the animal from his own flock with his own hands. These sacrifices expressed in a vivid and tangible way the cost of sin and the worshiper’s responsibility. As the worshiper killed the animal, he recalled that sin would have caused his own death, had God not provided an escape through animal sacrifice.<\/p>\nThree times a year all adult men went to the temple to celebrate the national festivals (Ex 23:17; Dt 16:16): Passover (held in April), the Feast of Weeks (held in May), and the Feast of Booths (in October). When possible, the whole family accompanied the men. But if they lived a long way from Jerusalem, they would go up for only one of the festivals (1 Sm 1:3; Lk 2:41).<\/p>\nThese festivals were tremendous occasions. Hundreds of thousands of people converged on Jerusalem. They would stay with relatives or camp in tents outside the city. The temple courts would be thronged with worshipers. The temple choirs sang psalms appropriate for the festival, while the priests and Levites offered hundreds (at Passover, thousands) of animals in sacrifice. Groups of worshipers carried away with emotion would break forth into dancing. Those of more sober temperament were content to join in the singing or simply pray quietly.<\/p>\nThe major festivals were joyful occasions, for they celebrated the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. At Passover each family ate roasted lamb and bitter herbs to reenact the last meal their forefathers ate before leaving Egypt (Ex 12). At the Feast of Booths, they built shelters of branches and lived in them for a week, as a reminder that the Israelites camped in tents during the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness (Lv 23:39-43). These great festivals served as reminders of how God had delivered them from slavery in Egypt and had given them the land of Canaan as he had promised to Abraham.<\/p>\nEach of these three festivals lasted a week, but there was one day in the year that was totally different, the Day of Atonement, when everyone fasted and mourned for their sins. On this day the high priest confessed the nation’s sins as he pressed his hand on the head of a goat. Then the goat was led away into the wilderness, symbolizing the removal of sin from the people (Lv 16).<\/p>\nSometime after the destruction of the first temple, synagogues developed for public worship. The services were more like modern church worship, consisting exclusively of prayer, Bible reading, and preaching. There were no sacrifices made in the synagogues. When the second temple was destroyed in AD<\/span> 70, synagogues became the only places where Jews could worship in public. Then there were no more sacrifices at all. The NT pictures this as fitting, for Jesus was the true Lamb of God (Jn 1:29); because of his death, there is no need for further animal sacrifice (Heb 10:11-12).<\/p>\nWorship in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe Jews had become far too dependent on a physical place, the temple, for their worship. When Jesus arrived on the scene, he proclaimed that he himself was the temple of God; in resurrection, he would provide the spiritual dwelling where God the Spirit and people, in spirit, could have spiritual communion (see Mt 12:6; Jn 2:19-22). In other words, worship would no longer be in a place but in a person—through Jesus Christ and his Spirit the worshipers could come directly to God (see Jn 14:6; Heb 10:19-20).<\/p>\nThis shift in worship—from physical to spiritual—is the theme of John 4, a chapter that recounts Jesus’ visit to the Samaritans. After Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman, she acknowledged that he must be a prophet, and then she launched into a discussion concerning the religious debate between the Jews and the Samaritans over which place of worship was the right one—Jerusalem or Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans had set up a place for worship on Mt Gerizim in accordance with Deuteronomy 11:26-29 and 27:1-8, while the Jews had followed David and Solomon in making Jerusalem the center of Jewish worship. The Scriptures affirmed Jerusalem as the true center for worship (Dt 12:5; 2 Chr 6:6; 7:12; Ps 78:67-68). But Jesus told her that a new age had come in which the issue no longer concerned a physical site. God the Father would no longer be worshiped in either place. A new age had come in which the true worshipers (Jew, Samaritan, or Gentile) must worship the Father in spirit and in truth.<\/p>\n“In spirit” corresponds to Jerusalem, and “in truth” corresponds to the Samaritans’ unknowledgeable ideas of worship, God, etc. Formerly, God was worshiped in Jerusalem, but now the true Jerusalem would be in a person’s spirit. Indeed, the church is called “the habitation of God in spirit” (Eph 2:22). True worship required a people to contact God, the Spirit, in their spirit, as well as a people who knew the truth. New Testament worship must be in spirit and in truth. Since “God is Spirit,” he must be worshiped in spirit. Human beings possess a human spirit, the nature of which corresponds to God’s nature, which is spirit. Therefore, people can have fellowship with God and worship God in the same sphere that God exists in.<\/p>\nIn a sense, John 4 anticipates Revelation 21 and 22, where God provides the rivers of the water of life to all the believers and where the Lamb and God are the temple in the New Jerusalem. The believers receive life from God and they worship in God. There is a profound, even mystical connection between drinking of the Spirit and worshiping God in the Spirit (see 1 Cor 12:13). This is also described in Ezekiel 47, which pictures the river flowing from God’s temple as a symbol of God’s never-ending supply. In John 4, Jesus provides the living waters to all who receive the gift of God, and he directs people to a new temple, a spiritual one, where God is worshiped in spirit.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORSHIP<\/h3>\nExpression of reverence and adoration of God.<\/p>\nWorship in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC<\/span>) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted more than three centuries until its destruction by the Babylonians in 586 BC<\/span>. When the Jews returned from exile, they built a new temple, which was later renovated and enlarged by Herod the Great. Though all the temple buildings were destroyed by the Romans in AD<\/span> 70, the foundations remained. Jews still pray by the Western Wall (called the Wailing Wall).<\/p>\nIf the form of worship changed with times and situations, its heart and center did not. God revealed himself to Abraham, promising that his children would inherit the land of Canaan. Abraham demonstrated his faith through prayer and sacrifice. Throughout the biblical period listening to God’s Word, prayer, and sacrifice constituted the essence of worship. The promises to Abraham were constantly recalled as the basis of Israel’s existence as a nation and its right to the land of Canaan.<\/p>\nFrom time to time every family visited the temple in Jerusalem. Eight days after a baby boy was born, he was circumcised to mark his membership in Israel. Then, a month or two later, the baby’s mother went to the temple to offer sacrifice (Lv 12; cf. Lk 2:22-24).<\/p>\nAnimals were sacrificed in the lambing and calving season. The first lamb or calf born to every ewe or cow was presented in sacrifice (Ex 22:30). Similarly, at the beginning of the harvest season, a basket of the first fruits was offered, and at the end, a tenth of all the harvest, the tithe, was given to the priests as God’s representatives (Nm 18:21-32). Deuteronomy 26:5-15 gives a typical prayer for use on such occasions.<\/p>\nSometimes a person would decide to offer a sacrifice for more personal reasons. In a crisis, vows could be made and sealed with a sacrifice (Gn 28:18-22; 1 Sm 1:10-11). Then when the prayer was answered, a second sacrifice was customarily offered (Gn 35:3, 14; 1 Sm 1:24-25). Serious sin or serious sickness were also occasions for sacrifice (Lv 4–5, 13–15).<\/p>\nThe worshiper brought the animal into the temple court. Standing before the priest, he placed one hand on its head, thereby identifying himself with the animal, and confessed his sin or explained the reason for offering the sacrifice. Then the worshiper killed the animal and cut it up for the priest to burn on the great bronze altar. Some sacrifices (burnt offerings) involved the whole animal being burnt on the altar. In others, some of the meat was set aside for the priests, while the rest was shared by the worshiper and his family. But in every case the worshiper killed the animal from his own flock with his own hands. These sacrifices expressed in a vivid and tangible way the cost of sin and the worshiper’s responsibility. As the worshiper killed the animal, he recalled that sin would have caused his own death, had God not provided an escape through animal sacrifice.<\/p>\nThree times a year all adult men went to the temple to celebrate the national festivals (Ex 23:17; Dt 16:16): Passover (held in April), the Feast of Weeks (held in May), and the Feast of Booths (in October). When possible, the whole family accompanied the men. But if they lived a long way from Jerusalem, they would go up for only one of the festivals (1 Sm 1:3; Lk 2:41).<\/p>\nThese festivals were tremendous occasions. Hundreds of thousands of people converged on Jerusalem. They would stay with relatives or camp in tents outside the city. The temple courts would be thronged with worshipers. The temple choirs sang psalms appropriate for the festival, while the priests and Levites offered hundreds (at Passover, thousands) of animals in sacrifice. Groups of worshipers carried away with emotion would break forth into dancing. Those of more sober temperament were content to join in the singing or simply pray quietly.<\/p>\nThe major festivals were joyful occasions, for they celebrated the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. At Passover each family ate roasted lamb and bitter herbs to reenact the last meal their forefathers ate before leaving Egypt (Ex 12). At the Feast of Booths, they built shelters of branches and lived in them for a week, as a reminder that the Israelites camped in tents during the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness (Lv 23:39-43). These great festivals served as reminders of how God had delivered them from slavery in Egypt and had given them the land of Canaan as he had promised to Abraham.<\/p>\nEach of these three festivals lasted a week, but there was one day in the year that was totally different, the Day of Atonement, when everyone fasted and mourned for their sins. On this day the high priest confessed the nation’s sins as he pressed his hand on the head of a goat. Then the goat was led away into the wilderness, symbolizing the removal of sin from the people (Lv 16).<\/p>\nSometime after the destruction of the first temple, synagogues developed for public worship. The services were more like modern church worship, consisting exclusively of prayer, Bible reading, and preaching. There were no sacrifices made in the synagogues. When the second temple was destroyed in AD<\/span> 70, synagogues became the only places where Jews could worship in public. Then there were no more sacrifices at all. The NT pictures this as fitting, for Jesus was the true Lamb of God (Jn 1:29); because of his death, there is no need for further animal sacrifice (Heb 10:11-12).<\/p>\nWorship in the New Testament<\/p>\nThe Jews had become far too dependent on a physical place, the temple, for their worship. When Jesus arrived on the scene, he proclaimed that he himself was the temple of God; in resurrection, he would provide the spiritual dwelling where God the Spirit and people, in spirit, could have spiritual communion (see Mt 12:6; Jn 2:19-22). In other words, worship would no longer be in a place but in a person—through Jesus Christ and his Spirit the worshipers could come directly to God (see Jn 14:6; Heb 10:19-20).<\/p>\nThis shift in worship—from physical to spiritual—is the theme of John 4, a chapter that recounts Jesus’ visit to the Samaritans. After Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman, she acknowledged that he must be a prophet, and then she launched into a discussion concerning the religious debate between the Jews and the Samaritans over which place of worship was the right one—Jerusalem or Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans had set up a place for worship on Mt Gerizim in accordance with Deuteronomy 11:26-29 and 27:1-8, while the Jews had followed David and Solomon in making Jerusalem the center of Jewish worship. The Scriptures affirmed Jerusalem as the true center for worship (Dt 12:5; 2 Chr 6:6; 7:12; Ps 78:67-68). But Jesus told her that a new age had come in which the issue no longer concerned a physical site. God the Father would no longer be worshiped in either place. A new age had come in which the true worshipers (Jew, Samaritan, or Gentile) must worship the Father in spirit and in truth.<\/p>\n“In spirit” corresponds to Jerusalem, and “in truth” corresponds to the Samaritans’ unknowledgeable ideas of worship, God, etc. Formerly, God was worshiped in Jerusalem, but now the true Jerusalem would be in a person’s spirit. Indeed, the church is called “the habitation of God in spirit” (Eph 2:22). True worship required a people to contact God, the Spirit, in their spirit, as well as a people who knew the truth. New Testament worship must be in spirit and in truth. Since “God is Spirit,” he must be worshiped in spirit. Human beings possess a human spirit, the nature of which corresponds to God’s nature, which is spirit. Therefore, people can have fellowship with God and worship God in the same sphere that God exists in.<\/p>\nIn a sense, John 4 anticipates Revelation 21 and 22, where God provides the rivers of the water of life to all the believers and where the Lamb and God are the temple in the New Jerusalem. The believers receive life from God and they worship in God. There is a profound, even mystical connection between drinking of the Spirit and worshiping God in the Spirit (see 1 Cor 12:13). This is also described in Ezekiel 47, which pictures the river flowing from God’s temple as a symbol of God’s never-ending supply. In John 4, Jesus provides the living waters to all who receive the gift of God, and he directs people to a new temple, a spiritual one, where God is worshiped in spirit.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORSHIP Expression of reverence and adoration of God. Worship in the Old Testament The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted ...","summary_en":"WORSHIP Expression of reverence and adoration of God. Worship in the Old Testament The 1,500 years from the days of Abraham to the time of Ezra (c. 1900–450 BC) saw many significant changes in the form of worship in ancient Israel. Abraham, the wandering nomad, built altars and offered sacrifices wherever God appeared to him. In Moses’ time the tabernacle served as a portable sanctuary for the Israelite tribes journeying through the wilderness. Solomon built a temple in Jerusalem that lasted ...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44207,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:1","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:1","content_ro":"13:1–14:57<\/strong> Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.<\/p>","content_en":"13:1–14:57<\/strong> Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:1–14:57 Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.","summary_en":"13:1–14:57 Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44208,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:1","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:1","content_ro":"13:1-46<\/strong> a serious skin disease<\/em> (Hebrew tsara‘at<\/span>): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:46). Not just people, but clothing (13:47-59) and even buildings (14:33-53) could contract such infections.<\/p>","content_en":"13:1-46<\/strong> a serious skin disease<\/em> (Hebrew tsara‘at<\/span>): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:46). Not just people, but clothing (13:47-59) and even buildings (14:33-53) could contract such infections.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:1-46 a serious skin disease (Hebrew tsara‘at): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:4...","summary_en":"13:1-46 a serious skin disease (Hebrew tsara‘at): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:4...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71833,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:1","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:1","content_ro":"13:1–14:57<\/strong> Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.<\/p>","content_en":"13:1–14:57<\/strong> Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:1–14:57 Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.","summary_en":"13:1–14:57 Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71834,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:1","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:1","content_ro":"13:1-46<\/strong> a serious skin disease<\/em> (Hebrew tsara‘at<\/span>): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:46). Not just people, but clothing (13:47-59) and even buildings (14:33-53) could contract such infections.<\/p>","content_en":"13:1-46<\/strong> a serious skin disease<\/em> (Hebrew tsara‘at<\/span>): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:46). Not just people, but clothing (13:47-59) and even buildings (14:33-53) could contract such infections.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:1-46 a serious skin disease (Hebrew tsara‘at): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:4...","summary_en":"13:1-46 a serious skin disease (Hebrew tsara‘at): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:4...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99459,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:1","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:1","content_ro":"13:1–14:57<\/strong> Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.<\/p>","content_en":"13:1–14:57<\/strong> Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:1–14:57 Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.","summary_en":"13:1–14:57 Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99460,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:1","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:1","content_ro":"13:1-46<\/strong> a serious skin disease<\/em> (Hebrew tsara‘at<\/span>): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:46). Not just people, but clothing (13:47-59) and even buildings (14:33-53) could contract such infections.<\/p>","content_en":"13:1-46<\/strong> a serious skin disease<\/em> (Hebrew tsara‘at<\/span>): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:46). Not just people, but clothing (13:47-59) and even buildings (14:33-53) could contract such infections.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:1-46 a serious skin disease (Hebrew tsara‘at): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:4...","summary_en":"13:1-46 a serious skin disease (Hebrew tsara‘at): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:4...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127085,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:1","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:1","content_ro":"13:1–14:57<\/strong> Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.<\/p>","content_en":"13:1–14:57<\/strong> Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:1–14:57 Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.","summary_en":"13:1–14:57 Concerning the regulations pertaining to infections, the principle of normal and abnormal comes into play (see “Clean, Unclean, and Holy” Theme Note). Whether in a person, clothing, or a building, infections are not normal: They indicate disease and death, the antitheses of wholeness, and were therefore declared unclean.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127086,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:1","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:1","content_ro":"13:1-46<\/strong> a serious skin disease<\/em> (Hebrew tsara‘at<\/span>): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:46). Not just people, but clothing (13:47-59) and even buildings (14:33-53) could contract such infections.<\/p>","content_en":"13:1-46<\/strong> a serious skin disease<\/em> (Hebrew tsara‘at<\/span>): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:46). Not just people, but clothing (13:47-59) and even buildings (14:33-53) could contract such infections.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:1-46 a serious skin disease (Hebrew tsara‘at): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:4...","summary_en":"13:1-46 a serious skin disease (Hebrew tsara‘at): The Hebrew word is much broader than the severely disfiguring Hansen’s disease (see study note on 13:2). This larger range included symptoms such as an open sore (13:10), a boil (13:18), a burn (13:24), a sore on the head or chin (13:29), shiny white patches (13:38), or abnormal baldness (13:40). A general test was whether or not the abnormality was spreading (13:5-8). If so, a quarantine was ordered for as long as the disorder persisted (13:4...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":44209,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:2","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:2","content_ro":"13:2<\/strong> Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin,<\/em> required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served as physicians. • one of his sons:<\/em> These priestly functions were to apply to future generations of priests as well.<\/p>","content_en":"13:2<\/strong> Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin,<\/em> required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served as physicians. • one of his sons:<\/em> These priestly functions were to apply to future generations of priests as well.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:2 Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin, required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served ...","summary_en":"13:2 Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin, required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71835,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:2","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:2","content_ro":"13:2<\/strong> Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin,<\/em> required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served as physicians. • one of his sons:<\/em> These priestly functions were to apply to future generations of priests as well.<\/p>","content_en":"13:2<\/strong> Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin,<\/em> required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served as physicians. • one of his sons:<\/em> These priestly functions were to apply to future generations of priests as well.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:2 Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin, required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served ...","summary_en":"13:2 Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin, required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99461,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:2","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:2","content_ro":"13:2<\/strong> Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin,<\/em> required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served as physicians. • one of his sons:<\/em> These priestly functions were to apply to future generations of priests as well.<\/p>","content_en":"13:2<\/strong> Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin,<\/em> required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served as physicians. • one of his sons:<\/em> These priestly functions were to apply to future generations of priests as well.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:2 Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin, required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served ...","summary_en":"13:2 Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin, required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127087,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:2","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:2","content_ro":"13:2<\/strong> Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin,<\/em> required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served as physicians. • one of his sons:<\/em> These priestly functions were to apply to future generations of priests as well.<\/p>","content_en":"13:2<\/strong> Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin,<\/em> required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served as physicians. • one of his sons:<\/em> These priestly functions were to apply to future generations of priests as well.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:2 Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin, required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served ...","summary_en":"13:2 Skin disorders that were potentially contagious, such as swelling or a rash or discolored skin, required precautions to arrest their spread. Until a disorder was healed, the person was deemed unclean. The diseases described in this section may range from something as simple as an allergic rash, ringworm, or eczema to something as serious as gangrene. In Old Testament times, skin conditions were diagnosed by observation. The priests not only had a religious function, but they also served ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":44210,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:3","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:3","content_ro":"13:3<\/strong> more than skin-deep:<\/em> This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).<\/p>","content_en":"13:3<\/strong> more than skin-deep:<\/em> This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:3 more than skin-deep: This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).","summary_en":"13:3 more than skin-deep: This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71836,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:3","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:3","content_ro":"13:3<\/strong> more than skin-deep:<\/em> This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).<\/p>","content_en":"13:3<\/strong> more than skin-deep:<\/em> This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:3 more than skin-deep: This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).","summary_en":"13:3 more than skin-deep: This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99462,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:3","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:3","content_ro":"13:3<\/strong> more than skin-deep:<\/em> This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).<\/p>","content_en":"13:3<\/strong> more than skin-deep:<\/em> This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:3 more than skin-deep: This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).","summary_en":"13:3 more than skin-deep: This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127088,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:3","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:3","content_ro":"13:3<\/strong> more than skin-deep:<\/em> This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).<\/p>","content_en":"13:3<\/strong> more than skin-deep:<\/em> This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:3 more than skin-deep: This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).","summary_en":"13:3 more than skin-deep: This indicates that either the infection had eaten away the skin or the infection was visible beneath the skin. The white hair, together with the depression in the skin, indicated a skin disease that could spread (13:21-23). This made the person unclean (13:8).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":7145,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Color","title_en":"Color","content_ro":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","summary_en":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44211,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:4","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:4","content_ro":"13:4-5<\/strong> The purpose of a quarantine<\/em> was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.<\/p>","content_en":"13:4-5<\/strong> The purpose of a quarantine<\/em> was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:4-5 The purpose of a quarantine was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.","summary_en":"13:4-5 The purpose of a quarantine was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71837,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:4","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:4","content_ro":"13:4-5<\/strong> The purpose of a quarantine<\/em> was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.<\/p>","content_en":"13:4-5<\/strong> The purpose of a quarantine<\/em> was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:4-5 The purpose of a quarantine was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.","summary_en":"13:4-5 The purpose of a quarantine was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99463,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:4","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:4","content_ro":"13:4-5<\/strong> The purpose of a quarantine<\/em> was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.<\/p>","content_en":"13:4-5<\/strong> The purpose of a quarantine<\/em> was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:4-5 The purpose of a quarantine was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.","summary_en":"13:4-5 The purpose of a quarantine was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127089,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:4","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:4","content_ro":"13:4-5<\/strong> The purpose of a quarantine<\/em> was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.<\/p>","content_en":"13:4-5<\/strong> The purpose of a quarantine<\/em> was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:4-5 The purpose of a quarantine was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.","summary_en":"13:4-5 The purpose of a quarantine was primarily diagnostic. It gave the priest an opportunity to examine the patient’s symptoms over a period of time.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":44212,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:8","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:8","content_ro":"13:8<\/strong> If the rash<\/em> had spread,<\/em> then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.<\/p>","content_en":"13:8<\/strong> If the rash<\/em> had spread,<\/em> then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:8 If the rash had spread, then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.","summary_en":"13:8 If the rash had spread, then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71838,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:8","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:8","content_ro":"13:8<\/strong> If the rash<\/em> had spread,<\/em> then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.<\/p>","content_en":"13:8<\/strong> If the rash<\/em> had spread,<\/em> then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:8 If the rash had spread, then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.","summary_en":"13:8 If the rash had spread, then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99464,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:8","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:8","content_ro":"13:8<\/strong> If the rash<\/em> had spread,<\/em> then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.<\/p>","content_en":"13:8<\/strong> If the rash<\/em> had spread,<\/em> then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:8 If the rash had spread, then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.","summary_en":"13:8 If the rash had spread, then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127090,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:8","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:8","content_ro":"13:8<\/strong> If the rash<\/em> had spread,<\/em> then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.<\/p>","content_en":"13:8<\/strong> If the rash<\/em> had spread,<\/em> then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:8 If the rash had spread, then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.","summary_en":"13:8 If the rash had spread, then the priest declared the person unclean and the isolation became long-term.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":7142,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Color","title_en":"Color","content_ro":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","summary_en":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44213,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:10","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:10","content_ro":"13:10<\/strong> The presence of an open sore<\/em> was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.<\/p>","content_en":"13:10<\/strong> The presence of an open sore<\/em> was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:10 The presence of an open sore was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.","summary_en":"13:10 The presence of an open sore was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71839,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:10","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:10","content_ro":"13:10<\/strong> The presence of an open sore<\/em> was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.<\/p>","content_en":"13:10<\/strong> The presence of an open sore<\/em> was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:10 The presence of an open sore was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.","summary_en":"13:10 The presence of an open sore was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99465,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:10","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:10","content_ro":"13:10<\/strong> The presence of an open sore<\/em> was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.<\/p>","content_en":"13:10<\/strong> The presence of an open sore<\/em> was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:10 The presence of an open sore was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.","summary_en":"13:10 The presence of an open sore was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127091,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:10","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:10","content_ro":"13:10<\/strong> The presence of an open sore<\/em> was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.<\/p>","content_en":"13:10<\/strong> The presence of an open sore<\/em> was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:10 The presence of an open sore was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.","summary_en":"13:10 The presence of an open sore was the crucial factor, because it indicated infection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":44214,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:12","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:12","content_ro":"13:12-13<\/strong> The completely white<\/em> skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.<\/p>","content_en":"13:12-13<\/strong> The completely white<\/em> skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:12-13 The completely white skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.","summary_en":"13:12-13 The completely white skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71840,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:12","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:12","content_ro":"13:12-13<\/strong> The completely white<\/em> skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.<\/p>","content_en":"13:12-13<\/strong> The completely white<\/em> skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:12-13 The completely white skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.","summary_en":"13:12-13 The completely white skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99466,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:12","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:12","content_ro":"13:12-13<\/strong> The completely white<\/em> skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.<\/p>","content_en":"13:12-13<\/strong> The completely white<\/em> skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:12-13 The completely white skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.","summary_en":"13:12-13 The completely white skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127092,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:12","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:12","content_ro":"13:12-13<\/strong> The completely white<\/em> skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.<\/p>","content_en":"13:12-13<\/strong> The completely white<\/em> skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:12-13 The completely white skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.","summary_en":"13:12-13 The completely white skin might refer simply to a loss of pigment (see also 13:3), whereas raw flesh (13:10, 14) indicated infection and ceremonial uncleanness.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":7118,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Color","title_en":"Color","content_ro":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","summary_en":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":44215,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:24","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:24","content_ro":"13:24-25<\/strong> The priest was to inspect the burned area<\/em> to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white:<\/em> See 13:18-23.<\/p>","content_en":"13:24-25<\/strong> The priest was to inspect the burned area<\/em> to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white:<\/em> See 13:18-23.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:24-25 The priest was to inspect the burned area to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white: See 13:18-23.","summary_en":"13:24-25 The priest was to inspect the burned area to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white: See 13:18-23.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71841,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:24","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:24","content_ro":"13:24-25<\/strong> The priest was to inspect the burned area<\/em> to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white:<\/em> See 13:18-23.<\/p>","content_en":"13:24-25<\/strong> The priest was to inspect the burned area<\/em> to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white:<\/em> See 13:18-23.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:24-25 The priest was to inspect the burned area to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white: See 13:18-23.","summary_en":"13:24-25 The priest was to inspect the burned area to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white: See 13:18-23.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99467,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:24","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:24","content_ro":"13:24-25<\/strong> The priest was to inspect the burned area<\/em> to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white:<\/em> See 13:18-23.<\/p>","content_en":"13:24-25<\/strong> The priest was to inspect the burned area<\/em> to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white:<\/em> See 13:18-23.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:24-25 The priest was to inspect the burned area to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white: See 13:18-23.","summary_en":"13:24-25 The priest was to inspect the burned area to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white: See 13:18-23.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127093,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:24","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:24","content_ro":"13:24-25<\/strong> The priest was to inspect the burned area<\/em> to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white:<\/em> See 13:18-23.<\/p>","content_en":"13:24-25<\/strong> The priest was to inspect the burned area<\/em> to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white:<\/em> See 13:18-23.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:24-25 The priest was to inspect the burned area to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white: See 13:18-23.","summary_en":"13:24-25 The priest was to inspect the burned area to see if the wound had become infected (see 13:9-17). • hair . . . turned white: See 13:18-23.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":4010,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Beard","title_en":"Beard","content_ro":"<h3>BEARD<\/h3>\nHair growing on the lower part of a man’s face, worn as a sign of maturity among all ancient Semitic peoples, including the Israelites. Among the Israelites, care of the beard took on religious significance (Lv 19:27). Levitical law prohibited priests from shaving their heads or clipping their beards (21:5-6). David’s ambassadors to an Ammonite king were humiliated by having one side of their beards shaved off by the Ammonites. That indignity and others led to war (2 Sm 10:1-8). Removal of an Israelite’s beard, however, was considered appropriate under certain circumstances. Suspicion of leprosy on the head or face required shaving around the suspected spot to permit better diagnosis (Lv 13:29-37). A shaven head, along with wailing and the wearing of sackcloth, was a way of proclaiming impending or prevailing doom (Is 15:1-3). Ezra dramatized Israel’s spiritual disaster by pulling hair out of his head and beard (Ezr 9:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BEARD<\/h3>\nHair growing on the lower part of a man’s face, worn as a sign of maturity among all ancient Semitic peoples, including the Israelites. Among the Israelites, care of the beard took on religious significance (Lv 19:27). Levitical law prohibited priests from shaving their heads or clipping their beards (21:5-6). David’s ambassadors to an Ammonite king were humiliated by having one side of their beards shaved off by the Ammonites. That indignity and others led to war (2 Sm 10:1-8). Removal of an Israelite’s beard, however, was considered appropriate under certain circumstances. Suspicion of leprosy on the head or face required shaving around the suspected spot to permit better diagnosis (Lv 13:29-37). A shaven head, along with wailing and the wearing of sackcloth, was a way of proclaiming impending or prevailing doom (Is 15:1-3). Ezra dramatized Israel’s spiritual disaster by pulling hair out of his head and beard (Ezr 9:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BEARD Hair growing on the lower part of a man’s face, worn as a sign of maturity among all ancient Semitic peoples, including the Israelites. Among the Israelites, care of the beard took on religious significance (Lv 19:27). Levitical law prohibited priests from shaving their heads or clipping their beards (21:5-6). David’s ambassadors to an Ammonite king were humiliated by having one side of their beards shaved off by the Ammonites. That indignity and others led to war (2 Sm 10:1-8). Removal...","summary_en":"BEARD Hair growing on the lower part of a man’s face, worn as a sign of maturity among all ancient Semitic peoples, including the Israelites. Among the Israelites, care of the beard took on religious significance (Lv 19:27). Levitical law prohibited priests from shaving their heads or clipping their beards (21:5-6). David’s ambassadors to an Ammonite king were humiliated by having one side of their beards shaved off by the Ammonites. That indignity and others led to war (2 Sm 10:1-8). Removal...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"30":[{"id":34070,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Scall*","title_en":"Scall*","content_ro":"<h3>SCALL*<\/h3>\nKJV rendering for an eruption, a skin rash, in Leviticus 13:30-37 and 14:54. See<\/em> Sore.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SCALL*<\/h3>\nKJV rendering for an eruption, a skin rash, in Leviticus 13:30-37 and 14:54. See<\/em> Sore.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SCALL* KJV rendering for an eruption, a skin rash, in Leviticus 13:30-37 and 14:54. See Sore.","summary_en":"SCALL* KJV rendering for an eruption, a skin rash, in Leviticus 13:30-37 and 14:54. See Sore.","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44216,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:30","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:30","content_ro":"13:30<\/strong> The scabby sore<\/em> suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.<\/p>","content_en":"13:30<\/strong> The scabby sore<\/em> suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:30 The scabby sore suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.","summary_en":"13:30 The scabby sore suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71842,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:30","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:30","content_ro":"13:30<\/strong> The scabby sore<\/em> suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.<\/p>","content_en":"13:30<\/strong> The scabby sore<\/em> suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:30 The scabby sore suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.","summary_en":"13:30 The scabby sore suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99468,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:30","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:30","content_ro":"13:30<\/strong> The scabby sore<\/em> suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.<\/p>","content_en":"13:30<\/strong> The scabby sore<\/em> suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:30 The scabby sore suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.","summary_en":"13:30 The scabby sore suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127094,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:30","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:30","content_ro":"13:30<\/strong> The scabby sore<\/em> suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.<\/p>","content_en":"13:30<\/strong> The scabby sore<\/em> suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:30 The scabby sore suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.","summary_en":"13:30 The scabby sore suggested a fungal infection in the scalp or beard, hidden by hair. The symptoms included loss of hair and crusty skin.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":7035,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Color","title_en":"Color","content_ro":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","summary_en":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"38":[{"id":44217,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:38","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:38","content_ro":"13:38-39<\/strong> If a skin rash<\/em> showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.<\/p>","content_en":"13:38-39<\/strong> If a skin rash<\/em> showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:38-39 If a skin rash showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.","summary_en":"13:38-39 If a skin rash showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71843,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:38","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:38","content_ro":"13:38-39<\/strong> If a skin rash<\/em> showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.<\/p>","content_en":"13:38-39<\/strong> If a skin rash<\/em> showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:38-39 If a skin rash showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.","summary_en":"13:38-39 If a skin rash showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99469,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:38","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:38","content_ro":"13:38-39<\/strong> If a skin rash<\/em> showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.<\/p>","content_en":"13:38-39<\/strong> If a skin rash<\/em> showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:38-39 If a skin rash showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.","summary_en":"13:38-39 If a skin rash showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127095,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:38","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:38","content_ro":"13:38-39<\/strong> If a skin rash<\/em> showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.<\/p>","content_en":"13:38-39<\/strong> If a skin rash<\/em> showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:38-39 If a skin rash showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.","summary_en":"13:38-39 If a skin rash showed pus or inflammation (13:42), it was probably an infection. If it only showed as a whitened area, it was probably vitiligo (leucoderma). With this harmless disorder, patches of skin lose their pigmentation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"40":[{"id":3553,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Baldness","title_en":"Baldness","content_ro":"<h3>BALDNESS<\/h3>\nCondition of having little or no hair on the scalp. Natural baldness due to age is referred to only indirectly in the Bible, where it is contrasted with baldness due to leprosy (Lv 13:40-42). The Israelites were forbidden to shave their heads or shape their beard in ways that resembled pagan religious practices (Dt 14:1). Such restrictions applied particularly to Israelite priests (Lv 21:5). Shaving off the hair and offering it as a sacrifice to God was a special act prescribed for men or women taking a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:1-5, 18; Acts 18:18).<\/p>\nThe Egyptians and other peoples shaved off their hair (and eyebrows) as a sign of respect for the dead. There are many biblical references to the non-Israelite custom of shaving the head as a sign of mourning or anguish (Jer 16:6; 48:37; Ez 27:31; Mi 1:16). Most of these passages speak of God’s judgment against pagan cities or nations. Since baldness was associated primarily with leprosy, venereal disease, idolatry, or death, the prediction or threat of baldness sometimes accompanied prophetic warnings (Is 3:16-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BALDNESS<\/h3>\nCondition of having little or no hair on the scalp. Natural baldness due to age is referred to only indirectly in the Bible, where it is contrasted with baldness due to leprosy (Lv 13:40-42). The Israelites were forbidden to shave their heads or shape their beard in ways that resembled pagan religious practices (Dt 14:1). Such restrictions applied particularly to Israelite priests (Lv 21:5). Shaving off the hair and offering it as a sacrifice to God was a special act prescribed for men or women taking a Nazirite vow (Nm 6:1-5, 18; Acts 18:18).<\/p>\nThe Egyptians and other peoples shaved off their hair (and eyebrows) as a sign of respect for the dead. There are many biblical references to the non-Israelite custom of shaving the head as a sign of mourning or anguish (Jer 16:6; 48:37; Ez 27:31; Mi 1:16). Most of these passages speak of God’s judgment against pagan cities or nations. Since baldness was associated primarily with leprosy, venereal disease, idolatry, or death, the prediction or threat of baldness sometimes accompanied prophetic warnings (Is 3:16-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BALDNESS Condition of having little or no hair on the scalp. Natural baldness due to age is referred to only indirectly in the Bible, where it is contrasted with baldness due to leprosy (Lv 13:40-42). The Israelites were forbidden to shave their heads or shape their beard in ways that resembled pagan religious practices (Dt 14:1). Such restrictions applied particularly to Israelite priests (Lv 21:5). Shaving off the hair and offering it as a sacrifice to God was a special act prescribed for m...","summary_en":"BALDNESS Condition of having little or no hair on the scalp. Natural baldness due to age is referred to only indirectly in the Bible, where it is contrasted with baldness due to leprosy (Lv 13:40-42). The Israelites were forbidden to shave their heads or shape their beard in ways that resembled pagan religious practices (Dt 14:1). Such restrictions applied particularly to Israelite priests (Lv 21:5). Shaving off the hair and offering it as a sacrifice to God was a special act prescribed for m...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"42":[{"id":44218,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:42","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:42","content_ro":"13:42<\/strong> A reddish white sore<\/em> perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.<\/p>","content_en":"13:42<\/strong> A reddish white sore<\/em> perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:42 A reddish white sore perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.","summary_en":"13:42 A reddish white sore perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71844,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:42","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:42","content_ro":"13:42<\/strong> A reddish white sore<\/em> perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.<\/p>","content_en":"13:42<\/strong> A reddish white sore<\/em> perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:42 A reddish white sore perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.","summary_en":"13:42 A reddish white sore perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99470,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:42","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:42","content_ro":"13:42<\/strong> A reddish white sore<\/em> perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.<\/p>","content_en":"13:42<\/strong> A reddish white sore<\/em> perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:42 A reddish white sore perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.","summary_en":"13:42 A reddish white sore perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127096,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:42","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:42","content_ro":"13:42<\/strong> A reddish white sore<\/em> perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.<\/p>","content_en":"13:42<\/strong> A reddish white sore<\/em> perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:42 A reddish white sore perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.","summary_en":"13:42 A reddish white sore perhaps indicated pus and inflammation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"45":[{"id":44219,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:45","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:45","content_ro":"13:45<\/strong> Tearing one’s clothing,<\/em> letting one’s hair go uncombed,<\/em> and covering the mouth<\/em> were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean!<\/em> denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.<\/p>","content_en":"13:45<\/strong> Tearing one’s clothing,<\/em> letting one’s hair go uncombed,<\/em> and covering the mouth<\/em> were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean!<\/em> denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:45 Tearing one’s clothing, letting one’s hair go uncombed, and covering the mouth were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean! denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.","summary_en":"13:45 Tearing one’s clothing, letting one’s hair go uncombed, and covering the mouth were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean! denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71845,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:45","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:45","content_ro":"13:45<\/strong> Tearing one’s clothing,<\/em> letting one’s hair go uncombed,<\/em> and covering the mouth<\/em> were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean!<\/em> denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.<\/p>","content_en":"13:45<\/strong> Tearing one’s clothing,<\/em> letting one’s hair go uncombed,<\/em> and covering the mouth<\/em> were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean!<\/em> denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:45 Tearing one’s clothing, letting one’s hair go uncombed, and covering the mouth were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean! denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.","summary_en":"13:45 Tearing one’s clothing, letting one’s hair go uncombed, and covering the mouth were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean! denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99471,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:45","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:45","content_ro":"13:45<\/strong> Tearing one’s clothing,<\/em> letting one’s hair go uncombed,<\/em> and covering the mouth<\/em> were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean!<\/em> denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.<\/p>","content_en":"13:45<\/strong> Tearing one’s clothing,<\/em> letting one’s hair go uncombed,<\/em> and covering the mouth<\/em> were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean!<\/em> denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:45 Tearing one’s clothing, letting one’s hair go uncombed, and covering the mouth were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean! denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.","summary_en":"13:45 Tearing one’s clothing, letting one’s hair go uncombed, and covering the mouth were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean! denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127097,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:45","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:45","content_ro":"13:45<\/strong> Tearing one’s clothing,<\/em> letting one’s hair go uncombed,<\/em> and covering the mouth<\/em> were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean!<\/em> denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.<\/p>","content_en":"13:45<\/strong> Tearing one’s clothing,<\/em> letting one’s hair go uncombed,<\/em> and covering the mouth<\/em> were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean!<\/em> denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:45 Tearing one’s clothing, letting one’s hair go uncombed, and covering the mouth were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean! denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.","summary_en":"13:45 Tearing one’s clothing, letting one’s hair go uncombed, and covering the mouth were common ways of expressing mourning (10:6). • The cry of Unclean! Unclean! denoted social unacceptability as much as a health threat. It warned others that the individual’s skin disorder could be contagious and that holy things should not touch the unclean person.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"46":[{"id":22767,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Concept of Law","title_en":"Biblical Concept of Law","content_ro":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\nGod’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Historical Context<\/p>\n• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\nHistorical Context<\/p>\nWhen man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\nYet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\nThe father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\nHowever, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\nLaw in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is Torah<\/span>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\nSynonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\nThese words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\nHow could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\nIsraelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\nIsrael’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\nOld Testament Laws<\/p>\nThe legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\nThe commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\nThe commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\nThe purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\nGod’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\nThe tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\nBy means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\nThe priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\nThe holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\nThe laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\nThe holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\nBoth promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\nThe Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\nPurposes of the Law<\/p>\nThe law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\nThe law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\nThe purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\nMaturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAW, Biblical Concept of<\/h3>\nGod’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Historical Context<\/p>\n• Law in the Old Testament<\/p>\n• Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\n• Old Testament Laws<\/p>\n• Purposes of the Law<\/p>\nHistorical Context<\/p>\nWhen man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). However, in his exalted status as ruler over God’s creation on earth, man had to prove his loyalty to the Lord. For this purpose God set up a simple test: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man was prohibited from eating the fruit of that tree (2:17). His disobedience marked him as unfit for fellowship with the great King. He was rebellious and by nature full of treachery, as the subsequent accounts of Cain (4:1-16), the generation of the Flood (6:1-13), Ham and Canaan (9:18-26; 10:6-20), and the Tower of Babel (11:1-9) demonstrate.<\/p>\nYet in the midst of all this the Lord graciously called Abraham. He promised to bless him, his seed, and the families of the earth that would join in a common expression of faith (Gn 12:2-3; 17:4-7). Abraham responded to God in faith (15:6), willingly observed the ritual of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (17:10; cf. 21:4), and walked before God with integrity of heart (17:1). Abraham subsequently learned that God had sovereignly and graciously chosen him with the purpose that Abraham’s family might distinguish itself from the nations “by doing righteousness and justice” (18:19). The Lord was pleased with his servant Abraham, who, though he had not received detailed laws, was a man of integrity. His heart was right with God, so that he willingly did what God commanded.<\/p>\nThe father of faith was the father of the faithful; the Lord testified that Abraham “obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws” (Gn 26:5, niv<\/span>). His faith resulted in the fruits of righteousness (Jas 2:21-24).<\/p>\nHowever, Israel, blessed by the Lord in the increase of descendants, the exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, and his presence, did not respond to him in faith. They murmured and complained at Mt Sinai, at Kadesh-barnea, and in the plains of Moab. They proved themselves to be a rebellious and stiff-necked people (Ex 32:9; 33:3, 5; 34:9; Dt 9:6, 13). Though they had shown their character, the Lord was faithful to Abraham by covenanting himself to them. Israel became his people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation (Ex 19:5-6; Dt 26:18-19). He gave Israel the Ten Commandments, the law, and the covenant, symbolized by the two tablets of the testimony (Ex 32:15-16). Even after Moses had broken them in anger because of the people’s idolatrous worship of the golden calf, the Lord renewed his covenant by writing again the words of the covenant (34:28). On one hand, the context in which the law was given reflects God’s grace and forbearance with Israel’s sins (vv 6-7) and his determination to use Israel in the unfolding of his plan of redemption for the world. On the other hand, the context reflects Israel’s immaturity and stubbornness. Therefore, the law in the OT has positive and negative purposes.<\/p>\nLaw in the Old Testament<\/p>\nThe OT has many words for God’s law. The most general word is Torah<\/span>,<\/em> which signifies instruction of any kind: religious and secular, written and oral, divine and human. Law in Israel was God’s law, mediated through Moses (Ex 20:19; Dt 5:23-27). Because Israel rejected the direct revelation of God’s oracles, the law was mediated through Moses the servant of God (Jn 1:17).<\/p>\nSynonyms for law are, in various translations, word (cf. Ex 24:3; 34:27), judgment (cf. Ex 24:3), decree (cf. Nm 30:16; Dt 4:1), ordinance (cf. Nm 9:12, 14; Dt 6:2), command(ment) (cf. Dt 6:1, 25), statutes (Lv 3:17; 10:11), precepts (a Hebrew word used only in Psalms; cf. 119:4, 15, 27, 40, 45, 56, 63, 69, 78, 87, 93, 94, 100, 104, 110, 128, 134, 141, 159, 168, 173), stipulations, requirements, testimonies (cf. Dt 4:45; 6:20; 1 Kgs 2:3), precept (a Hebrew term not in the Pentateuch; cf. Ps 119:15), or simply the “way(s)” (cf. 1 Kgs 2:3; Pss 18:21; 25:9; 37:34).<\/p>\nThese words form a semantic field, and it is far from easy to distinguish clearly among the various forms of laws. Generally “the words” pertain to the duties of man toward God, especially the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1; 34:27). The “judgments” contain civil regulations and duties to one’s fellows and to the social environment (21:1–23:9); these are often in the form of “if . . . then. . . .” In Leviticus and in cultic formulations the word “ordinances” has the technical sense of cultic regulations—the ceremonial laws. However, in other contexts, especially in a series of synonyms for law, it signifies any expectation or regulation. The “commandments” are those regulations given by a higher authority. Though the OT has many words for law, the connotation of one word is often indistinguishable from that of other words, especially in series such as “the decrees and laws” (Dt 4:1, 5; 5:1), “the commands, decrees and laws” (6:1), “walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3, niv<\/span>).<\/p>\nThe motivation for keeping the divine law lies in the acts and presence of the Lord. The prologue to the Decalogue reminds us of God’s mighty acts: “I am the Lord<\/span> your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Ex 20:2, rsv<\/span>). In the historic acts of Israel’s redemption, revelation at Mt Sinai, and consecration of Israel to be his people, he involved himself with Israel as a “father.” He adopted Israel to sonship and consecrated them; that is, he declared them holy (Ex 19:6; 31:13; Lv 20:8; 22:32; cf. Rom 9:4). Sometimes the two concepts of redemption and consecration are placed together, but whether they are or not, they are inseparable: “I am the Lord<\/span>, who makes you holy” (Lv 22:32b, niv<\/span>). The ground of obedience can be stated simply by an appeal to God’s name: “I am Yahweh” (cf. Lv 18:6, 21, 30; 19:10, 14, 16, 18, 28, 30-31, 34, 36-37). The requisite of practical holiness is also based on the experience of God’s presence. The Lord commanded Israel to be holy because he is holy (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2). The “holy one of Israel” dwelt in the midst of his people (Ex 25:8; 29:45; Nm 5:3; 35:34).<\/p>\nHow could rebellious Israel grasp what God required, if it were not by precise moral, social, civil, and cultic regulations? The Lord had observed that they did not have “the heart” to serve him as a covenant-loyal people (Dt 5:29). By Israel’s very nature, it could not develop an adequate moral and cultic system to please God. Because of the people’s hardness of heart, God had to reveal (i.e., “spell out”) his will.<\/p>\nIsraelite Law and the Ancient Near East<\/p>\nIsrael’s law reflected the practices of its ancient Near Eastern context. Ancient Babylonian law codes (Eshnunna, Hammurabi) show similarities with the biblical codes. The similarities go beyond similarity of cases and include legal formulations (casuistic law). Israelite law is distinct in that it is divine law. Moses is the mediator and not the promulgator of the law, as was the practice of a king who, like Hammurabi, put into force a legal code. The Lord himself gave Israel its laws (cf. Dt 4:5-8). The laws in the ancient Near East dealt with the ordering of society. But Israel’s laws were given to regulate every aspect of life: personal, familial, social, and cultic. The laws were to teach Israel to distinguish between holy and profane, between clean and unclean, and between just and unjust.<\/p>\nOld Testament Laws<\/p>\nThe legal corpus of the OT is not given in one book or in one section. Moreover, the laws reflect the development from the desert context (Exodus) to the context of the land (Deuteronomy). The OT legal material is complex, full of variations and duplications. It is found in Exodus (chs 20–24; 25–31), Leviticus, Numbers (chs 3–6; 8–10; 15; 18; 19; 28–30), and Deuteronomy (chs 5–26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ten Commandments<\/h5>\nThe commandments are simply designated as “the words” of God (Ex 20:1). They appear in Exodus 20:1-17 and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but minor variations and individual commandments occur in other contexts (e.g., Ex 34:14, 17, 21; Lv 19:1-8; Dt 27:15-16). As a part of the covenant, the commandments were first addressed to Israel; they now form the basis of morality in Christianity. The abiding relevance of the moral law is clear from the NT. Our Lord established his authority as interpreter of all the commandments (Mt 5:17-48; 12:1-14; 23:23-24). He summarized the law in terms of love for God and man (cf. Mt 22:37-40; Mk 12:28-34; Lk 10:27; cf. Rom 13:8-9; Gal 5:14). Since he is also the Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath cannot be divorced from the other commandments (Mt 12:8). The apostle Paul also upheld the law, as his “ethics of the Spirit” reflects an internalization of the law of God in the hearts of believers (cf. Rom 8:1-17; 12:1–15:13; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 5:1-8; 10:23–11:1; Gal 5:13–6:10; Eph 4:17–6:9; Phil 2:1-18; Col 3:1–4:6; 1 Thes 4:1-12; 5:12-24; 2 Thes 3:6-15; 1 Tm 6:3-10; Ti 3:1-11).<\/p>\nThe commandments were written on both sides of the two tablets by the Lord (Ex 32:15-16). It is unclear whether the tablets were duplicate copies, how the commandments were divided, and how the commandments were numbered. They were kept in the ark of the covenant as a testimony to the covenant (40:20).<\/p>\n<h5>The Book of the Covenant (Ex 20:23–23:19)<\/h5>\nThe purpose of the covenant code was to exemplify and to set into motion the legal machinery by which Israel as a nation could reflect God’s concern for justice, love, peace, and the value of life. The laws in the Book of the Covenant are mainly of the casuistic type. They regulate life in an agricultural society with servants, donkeys, bulls, oxen, sheep, and fields of grain. The regulations pertain to relations with women (including widows), aliens, orphans; to legal concerns (liability, damages, ownership); as well as to religious obligations (altar, Sabbath). Often the law requires restitution, but restitution is not the rule when human life is involved (Ex 21:12-29; 22:2-3), especially when it involves one’s family (21:15-17, 22-25). The penal code attached to the case laws makes clear the value of human life, which is protected by the lex talionis<\/em> (“law of retaliation”). The lex talionis<\/em> does not point to a lack of forgiveness under the OT but rather was intended to be a legal principle giving coherence and justice to a society. The Book of the Covenant explicates by means of principles and cases how Israel must live together as a nation embracing the law of God and applying it justly<\/em> (without discrimination or twisting of rights), lovingly<\/em> (with a concern for the parties involved), and peaceably.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>The Priestly Law<\/h5>\nGod’s concern for holiness and purity comes to expression in the priestly laws (Ex 25–31; 35–40; Lv 1–27; Nm 4–10). The regulations pertain to the construction of the tabernacle, the consecration and ordination of priests, the offerings and sacrifices, rules of purity, the holy days, and vows.<\/p>\nThe tabernacle was set in the middle of Israel’s camp in the wilderness. It symbolized the presence of God with his people. The priests and Levites were encamped around the tabernacle to serve and protect God’s holiness. All the tribes were situated around the tabernacle, and though the members of the tribes did not have access to all parts of the tabernacle, they had to be ritually clean to live in the camp. Anyone who was ritually defiled (Lv 13:46; Nm 5:1-3) or had sinned grievously was put outside the camp (Lv 24:10-23; Nm 15:32-36). This regulation even included objects that had become defiled (Lv 8:17; 9:11).<\/p>\nBy means of prescribed offerings and sacrifices (Lv 1–7; 16; Nm 15:1-31; 28), God assured Israel, individually and corporately, of forgiveness when it had unwittingly sinned. The offerings and sacrifices concretely embodied the purpose of the offerer, whether forgiveness, dedication, or fellowship.<\/p>\nThe priests and Levites taught the law of God (Dt 31:9-13), applied its regulations, and served in courts (17:8-13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Holiness Code (Lv 17–26)<\/h5>\nThe holiness code forms a significant part of the book of Leviticus. Here Moses addressed all of Israel (cf. Lv 17:2; 18:2; 19:2; 20:2; 21:24; 23:2; 24:2; 25:2; 26:46; 27:2).<\/p>\nThe laws are in the form of prohibitions and direct commands. They pertain to the place of sacrifice and the prohibition of eating meat with blood in it (ch 17); the prohibition of sexual relations with specified family members (ch 18); and regulations promoting godliness, holiness, justice, and love in society (ch 19). The penal code applies penalties to those who sin against the regulations (ch 20; 24:10-23). Chapters 21–24 apply the cultic regulations to the priests and to all Israelites. The institutions of the sabbatical year and the Year of Jubilee regulate the remission of debts, freedom of people, and restitution of land (ch 25).<\/p>\nThe holiness code spells out the qualities required of a holy people: devotion to God (offerings, sacrifices, priests) and love for man (Lv 19:18b) demonstrated in concern for justice, peace, freedom, the value of human life, and a concern for the family. Many of the laws reflect the spirit of the Decalogue (ch 19).<\/p>\nBoth promises and curses are attached to the holiness code (ch 26). The curses predict exile as a consequence of breaking the laws. But always underlying the laws and penalties is the grace of the Lord, who promises freely to forgive the people’s sins and to renew the broken covenant (26:44-45).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws of Deuteronomy<\/h5>\nThe Deuteronomic laws are explications and new applications of the Book of the Covenant in view of Israel’s new historical situation. Israel was about to enter the Promised Land when Moses outlined to them the law of God (Dt 1:5). The impersonal element of the Book of the Covenant is here transformed by personal appeal. Moses strongly appeals to Israel to be loyal to the Lord, the covenant, and the covenantal stipulations. The Deuteronomic laws envision the people in the land of promise, with a central sanctuary (12:5, 11-18; 14:23; 15:20; 16:5-7, 16, 21; 17:8; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11) and with a king (17:14-20). The blessings and the curses motivate covenant loyalty (ch 28). However, Israel is also here assured that even if it breaks God’s law, the Lord remains gracious and forgiving.<\/p>\nPurposes of the Law<\/p>\nThe law revealed at Mt Sinai was intended to lead Israel closer to God. Rebellious though they were, God used the law as his righteous instrument to teach, in a very specific way, what sin is (cf. Rom 5:20; 7:7-8) and how they should walk on a path that kept them undefiled by sin and holy to the Lord. The law was the teacher and the keeper of Israel (Gal 3:24). The detailed explications of the laws in all areas of life (work, society, family, cult, and nation) had an important place in God’s dealings with Israel. Israel was a nation in a special land, with a theocratic government, and was in need of a legislative corpus. Moreover, Israel’s condition at Mt Sinai was such that it could not receive direct revelation. The revelation had to be mediated through Moses. It had to be set forth in detail because Israel had no intuitive grasp of what the revelation of God’s holiness, justice, righteousness, love, and forebearance required of them. They had adopted Egyptian ways and had to learn the divine will by revelation. However, Moses and the prophets emphasize that the purpose of the law is not strict adherence to the law for its own sake (legalism) or for a reward (Pharisaism). Keeping the law is an act of devotion to God, for the sake of God. Our Lord confirmed the purpose of the law: to establish a dynamic way of life in which one continually seeks God’s kingdom and his righteousness (Mt 6:33).<\/p>\nThe law of God is his means of sanctification. He consecrated Israel by an act of grace, and he required Israel to remain holy. Jesus confirmed those uses of the law whereby one may know his sinfulness and by which he may be driven to Christ. On the cross our Lord carried the penalties of the law, fulfilled in a greater way the tabernacle\/temple presence of God, fulfilled the Father’s expectations of atonement, and demonstrated the love of the Father. He, the Son and greater than Moses, gave the essence of the law in the summary of God’s requirements: love of God and love of neighbor (Mt 23:23-24; Lk 11:42-44). Jesus taught that the purpose of obedience is not primarily to receive a reward but to serve as salt (Mt 5:13) and light (Mt 5:14-16; cf. Eph 4:17–5:20), and to bear fruit (Jn 15:1-17). The purpose of the law of God is the gradual transformation of the children of God to reflect the image of the Son (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Col 3:10), to be an imitation of the Father (Eph 5:1-2), and to be filled with the Spirit of God (Gal 5:18, 22-24). For this purpose Jesus gave us the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount, which summarize the intent of the teaching of Moses and the prophets (Mt 5–7).<\/p>\nThe purpose of the law is to transform regenerated believers into maturity. Spiritual maturity is not a privilege that was reserved for believers after Christ; OT saints also walked with God (Enoch, Gn 5:22-24; Noah, 6:9; Abraham, 17:1). These were mature men who lived with integrity in the presence of God (cf. Gn 17:1; Dt 18:13; Pss 15:1-2; 18:26; 101:2, 6; 119:80; Prv 11:5).<\/p>\nMaturity, or integrity, is that response to God whereby the believer no longer needs to live by individual stipulations or in fear of mistakes and sins of omission, but delights in doing the Lord’s will (Pss 1:2; 112:1). Since the coming of Christ and Pentecost, the Holy Spirit has been poured out on every believer. He has come not only to internalize the law of God (Jer 31:33) but also to help us develop Christian maturity by giving the fruits of godliness in greater fullness (Gal 5:22-24). Whereas maturity and freedom were experienced by some OT saints, it is God’s gift to all his children in Christ (Acts 2:39; 1 Cor 12:13). The purpose is still the same, “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped [mature] for every good work” (2 Tm 3:17, niv<\/span>), but the means to accomplish this and the status of the child of God is so much better since Pentecost.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Cleanness and Uncleanness, Regulations Concerning; Criminal Law and Punishment; Galatians, Letter to the; Hammurabi, Law Code of; Justification; Romans, Letter to the; Commandments, The Ten; Torah; Tradition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","summary_en":"LAW, Biblical Concept of God’s means of consecrating his people to himself. The nature and content of “law” may change, but the goal remains the same: maturity and conformity to the image of God. Preview • Historical Context • Law in the Old Testament • Israelite Law and the Ancient Near East • Old Testament Laws • Purposes of the Law Historical Context When man was created in God’s image, he received glory, rule, and provision for his daily sustenance from the Creator-King (Gn 1:27-30). Howe...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44220,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:46","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:46","content_ro":"13:46<\/strong> The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp.<\/em> This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive to those suffering from skin disorders. The uneaten sin offering was taken there and burned (Lev 4:21). Criminals were executed there (24:14, 23), and corpses were carried there to avoid contaminating the area where the people lived (10:4-5). Even bodily functions were attended to outside the camp (Deut 23:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"13:46<\/strong> The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp.<\/em> This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive to those suffering from skin disorders. The uneaten sin offering was taken there and burned (Lev 4:21). Criminals were executed there (24:14, 23), and corpses were carried there to avoid contaminating the area where the people lived (10:4-5). Even bodily functions were attended to outside the camp (Deut 23:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:46 The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp. This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive...","summary_en":"13:46 The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp. This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71846,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:46","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:46","content_ro":"13:46<\/strong> The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp.<\/em> This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive to those suffering from skin disorders. The uneaten sin offering was taken there and burned (Lev 4:21). Criminals were executed there (24:14, 23), and corpses were carried there to avoid contaminating the area where the people lived (10:4-5). Even bodily functions were attended to outside the camp (Deut 23:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"13:46<\/strong> The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp.<\/em> This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive to those suffering from skin disorders. The uneaten sin offering was taken there and burned (Lev 4:21). Criminals were executed there (24:14, 23), and corpses were carried there to avoid contaminating the area where the people lived (10:4-5). Even bodily functions were attended to outside the camp (Deut 23:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:46 The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp. This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive...","summary_en":"13:46 The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp. This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99472,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:46","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:46","content_ro":"13:46<\/strong> The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp.<\/em> This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive to those suffering from skin disorders. The uneaten sin offering was taken there and burned (Lev 4:21). Criminals were executed there (24:14, 23), and corpses were carried there to avoid contaminating the area where the people lived (10:4-5). Even bodily functions were attended to outside the camp (Deut 23:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"13:46<\/strong> The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp.<\/em> This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive to those suffering from skin disorders. The uneaten sin offering was taken there and burned (Lev 4:21). Criminals were executed there (24:14, 23), and corpses were carried there to avoid contaminating the area where the people lived (10:4-5). Even bodily functions were attended to outside the camp (Deut 23:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:46 The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp. This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive...","summary_en":"13:46 The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp. This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127098,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:46","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:46","content_ro":"13:46<\/strong> The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp.<\/em> This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive to those suffering from skin disorders. The uneaten sin offering was taken there and burned (Lev 4:21). Criminals were executed there (24:14, 23), and corpses were carried there to avoid contaminating the area where the people lived (10:4-5). Even bodily functions were attended to outside the camp (Deut 23:12-14).<\/p>","content_en":"13:46<\/strong> The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp.<\/em> This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive to those suffering from skin disorders. The uneaten sin offering was taken there and burned (Lev 4:21). Criminals were executed there (24:14, 23), and corpses were carried there to avoid contaminating the area where the people lived (10:4-5). Even bodily functions were attended to outside the camp (Deut 23:12-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:46 The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp. This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive...","summary_en":"13:46 The Tabernacle containing the Ark was in the center of the camp so that God could be considered as being in the camp (Deut 23:14). As long as an individual’s skin disorder persisted, he or she was to stay in isolation . . . outside the camp. This ensured that the infection would not spread to others and that the uncleanness would not come in contact with holy things. Even Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron, had to spend seven days outside the camp (Num 12:15). This area was not exclusive...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"47":[{"id":6849,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Regulations concerning Cleanness and Uncleanness","title_en":"and Uncleanness, Regulations concerning, Cleanness","content_ro":"<h3>CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning<\/h3>\nAspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\nThe OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and personal lines—God’s personal nature being expressed in his giving of the law to Moses. The personal and uniquely consistent character of Israel’s Lord made him morally a completely different being from the many gods of pagan cultures. Unlike the Lord, the Baals of the Canaanites were capricious and vicious; nobody expected them to be ethically consistent. Israel’s Lord, on the other hand, could be trusted to keep his word (a verbal communication through his chosen prophets). Nobody, not even the high priest or the king, was above the law, which expressed not only God’s character but also his sovereign will for the individual and the nation. His moral consistency carried over into his miraculous interventions into history to protect his people, to judge them and their enemies, and to redeem humanity itself.<\/p>\nCleanness as defined in the book of Leviticus, therefore, was always conditioned by the presence of the personal God who gave the law. As the people sought to approach the Lord, they necessarily did so on his terms and therefore within the framework of the cultic ceremonies he had prescribed. Details of the Levitical ceremonies were designed to illustrate the moral implications of the sinner’s approach to God and God’s provision for his people to become morally clean in his sight.<\/p>\nThe meaning of the Levitical system was stated clearly in the psalmist’s words: “Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord<\/span>? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully” (Ps 24:3-4, rsv<\/span>). One’s state of cleanness depends not only on external actions but also on an internal relationship with God. As a result, the sinner’s inability to satisfy the moral demands of a holy God leads to his or her complete dependence on God and on God’s provision for satisfying his own demands. That provision was detailed in the law.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Early History<\/p>\n• Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n• Purification Rites<\/p>\n• New Testament Perspective<\/p>\nEarly History<\/p>\n<h5>Gentile Religious Background<\/h5>\nThe gentile conscience was no doubt a strong influence on the development of ethnic notions of clean and unclean. The subjective sense of sin’s uncleanness is universally encountered in one form or another in the literature of every great religion, whatever explanation is given for it. Many religions have rites of purification based on water and washings. The Hebrews’ ritual avoidance of certain objects, some because of their holiness and others because of their unholiness, finds an analogy in the taboos of many primitive religions, including some of those with which the early Hebrews came into contact.<\/p>\nThe similarities between the Hebrew and other ancient religions are easily established by superficial comparison. It would be surprising if there were none. Those differences that give biblical religion its distinctive character, however, must be accounted for.<\/p>\nLevitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<h5>Ceremonial and Moral Law<\/h5>\nThe relationship between the external ceremonial details of the Mosaic law and the internally directed moral requirements of such parts of it as the Ten Commandments is one of the fundamental issues of OT theology. It is possible to demonstrate that, throughout the OT, uncleanness and sin are virtually synonymous. In many passages sin is described as uncleanness (e.g., Lv 16:16, 30; the ordeal of the bitter water in Nm 5:11-28; Zec 13:1).<\/p>\nThe relationship between ceremonial and moral cleanness can be illustrated from passages mentioning clean hands on the one hand (2 Sm 22:21; Jb 17:9; 22:30) and a clean heart on the other (Pss 24:4; 51:10; 73:13; Prv 20:9). The prophet Isaiah felt convicted of “unclean lips” when he was in God’s presence; a purifying coal, perhaps representing forgiveness and atonement, cleansed him (Is 6:5-7). In many passages cleanness represents innocence before God (Jb 11:4; 33:9; Ps 51:7-10; Prv 20:9), and uncleanness is said to come from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 64:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Causes of Uncleanness<\/h5>\nFrom the Mosaic law a number of causes of uncleanness can be derived.<\/p>\n1. Some foods were not to be eaten. Various laws concerning animals make a “distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten” (Lv 11:47, rsv<\/span>). Permitted food was what was acceptable to God (see also Dt 14:3-21; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<li>2. Diseases, especially leprosy, produced an unclean state (Lv 13–14). The story of Naaman refers to leprous defilement (2 Kgs 5:1-14). The Gospels refer often to lepers (e.g., Mt 8:1-4; 10:8; 11:5; Lk 4:27). Many swellings, sores, and rashes were included under that heading, including Hansen’s disease (modern leprosy). The defilement of disease included all things touched by a diseased person (Lv 14:33-57).<\/li>\n<li>3. Bodily discharges were unclean, and contact with them defiled a person for various periods of time. Emission of semen produced uncleanness until the evening, whether in intercourse (Lv 15:16-18) or inadvertently during the night (Dt 23:10). An unnatural discharge, since it usually indicated disease, made a person unclean for seven days after it had ceased (Lv 15:1-15). Menstruation also produced uncleanness lasting seven days after it ceased (Lv 15:19-24; 2 Sm 11:4). Sexual intercourse during that time made both partners unclean (Lv 15:19-24; 20:18). Contact with the spittle of an unclean person produced uncleanness for a day (15:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Dead bodies, or even parts of them such as bone, caused uncleanness (Nm 19:16). Persons who touched a dead body were unclean for a month, and only after that period could they celebrate their own Passover if they had missed it (9:6-11). The high priest could not even bury his own parents because of his special ritual responsibilities (Lv 21:10-11; cf. Nm 6:6-7; Hg 2:13; Mt 23:27).<\/li>\n<li>5. Idolatry was the greatest source of spiritual defilement. The entire nation of Israel was defiled because of it (Ps 106:38; Is 30:22; Ez 36:25), as were the Gentiles (Jer 43:12). Consequently, contact with Gentiles was thought to produce defilement. The gospel’s universal appeal confronted that conviction (e.g., Jn 4:9; Acts 10:28; cf. Gal 2:11-14). Closely related to the defilement of idolatry was the defilement caused by unclean spirits (Zec 13:2; cf. Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23-27).<\/li>\n<h5>Laws about Objects<\/h5>\nCertain laws illustrate the principle that uncleanness was transmitted much like a contagion. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched, as did dead insects and certain crawling things (Lv 11:29-38). It is interesting that dry grain, running springwater, and water in a cistern were expressly excluded from that law of contamination; perhaps otherwise, starvation would have resulted, dead insects and mice being found in grain and water every day in an agricultural community. Unclean pottery had to be broken, but wooden vessels merely required washing (Lv 15:12). Even uncovered pots in a house where a person had died became unclean (Nm 19:15); everyone who entered the house was unclean.<\/p>\nBecause of their idolatrous associations, the possessions of pagans were unclean; therefore, booty taken in war had to be cleansed by fire or washing (Nm 31:21-24). Clothing of wool, linen, or leather could contract unclean “leprosy” from diseased persons and had to be tested. If the leprous spots (greenish or reddish patches) spread after a test period, the garments had to be burned (Lv 13:47-59; 14:33-53).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Places<\/h5>\nThe land and people of Israel were holy; they could be defiled by the uncleanness of economic oppression or idolatry (Jos 22:17-19; Jer 13:27). Jerusalem was a holy city, but it could be defiled by the sins of its people (Ez 22:2-4; Lam 1:8) or by the blood of its slaughtered inhabitants (Lam 4:15).<\/p>\nThe temple could be defiled by unclean persons. It was necessary for Hezekiah to cleanse the temple after Ahaz’s idolatrous worship (2 Chr 29:15-19); Nehemiah had to cleanse the rooms in which Tobiah had been living (Neh 13:9). One of the functions of the Day of Atonement was removal of impurities transferred to the temple by the sins of the Israelites during the past year (Lv 16:16-19; 31-33).<\/p>\nAn unclean place received the pieces of a leprous house after its demolition (Lv 14:45). The valley of Hinnom became Jerusalem’s garbage dump in later years, giving rise to the visions of “Gehenna” as a place of eternal punishment in NT eschatology. Since the Israelite camp was a holy place, care was taken to bury human excrement outside its boundaries (Dt 23:12-14). The value of that simple expedient in preventing disease during military excursions can hardly be exaggerated, since plagues were a great scourge of ancient armies.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Food<\/h5>\nCertain kinds of animals were unclean and thus could not be eaten (Lv 11; Dt 14:3-21). Animals that died of old age, disease, or injury, or had been wounded by predators, were unclean. Animals that did not both chew the cud and have a cloven hoof were unclean, a definition that included pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits among others. Israelites could eat only those fish that had both fins and scales. Birds of prey and scavengers were unclean. All winged insects were unclean except hopping insects (locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets). A large classification of “crawling things” was prohibited, including worms, lizards, snakes, weasels, and mice. In addition to all those was the ancient prohibition against eating blood (Gn 9:4; Lv 17:14-15; Dt 12:16-23; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\nPurification Rites<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Lapse of Time<\/h5>\nSecondary contamination could often be canceled simply by waiting until the evening (Lv 11:24) or for 7, 14, 40, or 80 days. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched for 7 days (Nm 19:11), as did menstruation (Lv 15:19). When a child was born, the mother’s unclean condition lasted 7 days for a boy and 14 days for a girl. An additional 33 days for a male child and 66 days for a female were required before the mother could touch any sacred thing.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Water<\/h5>\nContact with unclean things, such as bodily discharges, often required washing of hands and clothing, usually accompanied by the lapse of a day (Lv 15:5-11).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Ceremonial Substances<\/h5>\nCeremonial substances used in purification rites included the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water (Nm 19:1-10), and (in cases of leprosy) cedarwood, scarlet cloth, hyssop, and blood (Lv 14:2-9). When the altar was used in a purification ceremony, only blood was suitable, since the altar was the place of sacrifice for sin (Lv 16:18-19; Ez 43:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Sacrifice<\/h5>\nSacrifice was the ultimate source of both ritual and moral purification. All bodily discharges except sexual ones were purified by offerings of doves and pigeons (Lv 15:14-15, 29-30). Childbirth required a lamb and a bird (12:6). Poor people could offer birds in place of an animal (Lv 12:8; 14:21-32; Lk 2:24).<\/p>\nIn sacrifice, blood was symbolic of a life given and therefore a death experienced; the uncleanness of disease or sin was thought of as being transferred to the victim, thus removing the uncleanness (Lv 14:7). Sacrificial death, therefore, always had a substitutionary element. Only blood sacrifice could provide the moral cleansing necessary for sin itself; such sacrifice was therefore the basis of all cleansing, including that of disease.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Fire<\/h5>\nSome contamination could be removed only by fire, such as contamination of metal pots (Nm 31:22-23). Incest was punishable not only by death but also by burning the bodies (Lv 20:14). Idolatry had to be put away by total destruction of the objects and by burning (Ex 32:20). Cities consecrated to pagan deities were to be burned.<\/p>\nNew Testament Perspective<\/p>\nThe NT did not reject the OT concept of clean and unclean, but rather reinterpreted it in a new context. It stressed in particular the moral sense of the concept as well as the identification of uncleanness with sin.<\/p>\nThe Gospels were written in the context of OT law and its Pharisaic and Sadducean accretions. Jesus obeyed the law but was often at odds with the practical casuistry (system) that had grown up around it. Jesus taught that true defilement came from the sinner’s heart and not from outside contamination (Mk 7:14-23; Lk 11:39-41). A central element in his teaching was his attack on the ceremonial externalism of the Pharisees. Thus it has been said that Jesus “internalized” the law. It would be more correct to say that he forced attention to the law’s demands on people’s inner lives.<\/p>\nThe intrinsic wickedness of demons is underscored by the use of the term “unclean spirit” throughout the Gospels. In fact, the word “unclean” itself always appears in the Gospels in the context of spirit, a detail that illustrates the NT shift of emphasis from ritual uncleanness to sin and its guilt.<\/p>\nAn important episode in the life of the early church came in Acts 10, when God taught the apostle Peter that Gentiles were not unclean in themselves and that Peter was obliged to receive them. The result was Cornelius’s conversion.<\/p>\nJesus’ assertion that uncleanness originates in the heart bore fruit in the apostle Paul’s doctrine of Christian freedom. Paul, a Pharisee who could say of himself that he had never broken an external law, came to see that nothing is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14-20). Throughout his epistles, cleanness is the result of obedience of the heart flowing from regeneration; it is based on the cleansing power of the Atonement (see Rom 6:19; 1 Thes 2:3-4, where uncleanness is strictly moral).<\/p>\nChrist’s atonement was the final cleansing agent for sin and its moral results (Heb 9:14, 22; 1 Jn 1:7), doing in reality what the blood of bulls and goats only typified. Thus those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rv 7:14) are seen as wearing clean white robes (15:6; 19:8-14). His blood, symbolizing the life given and the death died by the Son at the behest of the Father, satisfies the attributes of personal justice of the triune God. Because the personal character of a righteous Father was vindicated, the personal forgiveness of sinners is morally possible. God can be in history only what he is eternally: he is both just and the justifier of believers in Christ (Rom 3:24-26).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Baptism; Circumcision; Uncircumcision; Offerings and Sacrifices; Law, Biblical Concept of; Dietary Laws.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning<\/h3>\nAspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\nThe OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and personal lines—God’s personal nature being expressed in his giving of the law to Moses. The personal and uniquely consistent character of Israel’s Lord made him morally a completely different being from the many gods of pagan cultures. Unlike the Lord, the Baals of the Canaanites were capricious and vicious; nobody expected them to be ethically consistent. Israel’s Lord, on the other hand, could be trusted to keep his word (a verbal communication through his chosen prophets). Nobody, not even the high priest or the king, was above the law, which expressed not only God’s character but also his sovereign will for the individual and the nation. His moral consistency carried over into his miraculous interventions into history to protect his people, to judge them and their enemies, and to redeem humanity itself.<\/p>\nCleanness as defined in the book of Leviticus, therefore, was always conditioned by the presence of the personal God who gave the law. As the people sought to approach the Lord, they necessarily did so on his terms and therefore within the framework of the cultic ceremonies he had prescribed. Details of the Levitical ceremonies were designed to illustrate the moral implications of the sinner’s approach to God and God’s provision for his people to become morally clean in his sight.<\/p>\nThe meaning of the Levitical system was stated clearly in the psalmist’s words: “Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord<\/span>? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully” (Ps 24:3-4, rsv<\/span>). One’s state of cleanness depends not only on external actions but also on an internal relationship with God. As a result, the sinner’s inability to satisfy the moral demands of a holy God leads to his or her complete dependence on God and on God’s provision for satisfying his own demands. That provision was detailed in the law.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Early History<\/p>\n• Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n• Purification Rites<\/p>\n• New Testament Perspective<\/p>\nEarly History<\/p>\n<h5>Gentile Religious Background<\/h5>\nThe gentile conscience was no doubt a strong influence on the development of ethnic notions of clean and unclean. The subjective sense of sin’s uncleanness is universally encountered in one form or another in the literature of every great religion, whatever explanation is given for it. Many religions have rites of purification based on water and washings. The Hebrews’ ritual avoidance of certain objects, some because of their holiness and others because of their unholiness, finds an analogy in the taboos of many primitive religions, including some of those with which the early Hebrews came into contact.<\/p>\nThe similarities between the Hebrew and other ancient religions are easily established by superficial comparison. It would be surprising if there were none. Those differences that give biblical religion its distinctive character, however, must be accounted for.<\/p>\nLevitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<h5>Ceremonial and Moral Law<\/h5>\nThe relationship between the external ceremonial details of the Mosaic law and the internally directed moral requirements of such parts of it as the Ten Commandments is one of the fundamental issues of OT theology. It is possible to demonstrate that, throughout the OT, uncleanness and sin are virtually synonymous. In many passages sin is described as uncleanness (e.g., Lv 16:16, 30; the ordeal of the bitter water in Nm 5:11-28; Zec 13:1).<\/p>\nThe relationship between ceremonial and moral cleanness can be illustrated from passages mentioning clean hands on the one hand (2 Sm 22:21; Jb 17:9; 22:30) and a clean heart on the other (Pss 24:4; 51:10; 73:13; Prv 20:9). The prophet Isaiah felt convicted of “unclean lips” when he was in God’s presence; a purifying coal, perhaps representing forgiveness and atonement, cleansed him (Is 6:5-7). In many passages cleanness represents innocence before God (Jb 11:4; 33:9; Ps 51:7-10; Prv 20:9), and uncleanness is said to come from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 64:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Causes of Uncleanness<\/h5>\nFrom the Mosaic law a number of causes of uncleanness can be derived.<\/p>\n1. Some foods were not to be eaten. Various laws concerning animals make a “distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten” (Lv 11:47, rsv<\/span>). Permitted food was what was acceptable to God (see also Dt 14:3-21; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<li>2. Diseases, especially leprosy, produced an unclean state (Lv 13–14). The story of Naaman refers to leprous defilement (2 Kgs 5:1-14). The Gospels refer often to lepers (e.g., Mt 8:1-4; 10:8; 11:5; Lk 4:27). Many swellings, sores, and rashes were included under that heading, including Hansen’s disease (modern leprosy). The defilement of disease included all things touched by a diseased person (Lv 14:33-57).<\/li>\n<li>3. Bodily discharges were unclean, and contact with them defiled a person for various periods of time. Emission of semen produced uncleanness until the evening, whether in intercourse (Lv 15:16-18) or inadvertently during the night (Dt 23:10). An unnatural discharge, since it usually indicated disease, made a person unclean for seven days after it had ceased (Lv 15:1-15). Menstruation also produced uncleanness lasting seven days after it ceased (Lv 15:19-24; 2 Sm 11:4). Sexual intercourse during that time made both partners unclean (Lv 15:19-24; 20:18). Contact with the spittle of an unclean person produced uncleanness for a day (15:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Dead bodies, or even parts of them such as bone, caused uncleanness (Nm 19:16). Persons who touched a dead body were unclean for a month, and only after that period could they celebrate their own Passover if they had missed it (9:6-11). The high priest could not even bury his own parents because of his special ritual responsibilities (Lv 21:10-11; cf. Nm 6:6-7; Hg 2:13; Mt 23:27).<\/li>\n<li>5. Idolatry was the greatest source of spiritual defilement. The entire nation of Israel was defiled because of it (Ps 106:38; Is 30:22; Ez 36:25), as were the Gentiles (Jer 43:12). Consequently, contact with Gentiles was thought to produce defilement. The gospel’s universal appeal confronted that conviction (e.g., Jn 4:9; Acts 10:28; cf. Gal 2:11-14). Closely related to the defilement of idolatry was the defilement caused by unclean spirits (Zec 13:2; cf. Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23-27).<\/li>\n<h5>Laws about Objects<\/h5>\nCertain laws illustrate the principle that uncleanness was transmitted much like a contagion. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched, as did dead insects and certain crawling things (Lv 11:29-38). It is interesting that dry grain, running springwater, and water in a cistern were expressly excluded from that law of contamination; perhaps otherwise, starvation would have resulted, dead insects and mice being found in grain and water every day in an agricultural community. Unclean pottery had to be broken, but wooden vessels merely required washing (Lv 15:12). Even uncovered pots in a house where a person had died became unclean (Nm 19:15); everyone who entered the house was unclean.<\/p>\nBecause of their idolatrous associations, the possessions of pagans were unclean; therefore, booty taken in war had to be cleansed by fire or washing (Nm 31:21-24). Clothing of wool, linen, or leather could contract unclean “leprosy” from diseased persons and had to be tested. If the leprous spots (greenish or reddish patches) spread after a test period, the garments had to be burned (Lv 13:47-59; 14:33-53).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Places<\/h5>\nThe land and people of Israel were holy; they could be defiled by the uncleanness of economic oppression or idolatry (Jos 22:17-19; Jer 13:27). Jerusalem was a holy city, but it could be defiled by the sins of its people (Ez 22:2-4; Lam 1:8) or by the blood of its slaughtered inhabitants (Lam 4:15).<\/p>\nThe temple could be defiled by unclean persons. It was necessary for Hezekiah to cleanse the temple after Ahaz’s idolatrous worship (2 Chr 29:15-19); Nehemiah had to cleanse the rooms in which Tobiah had been living (Neh 13:9). One of the functions of the Day of Atonement was removal of impurities transferred to the temple by the sins of the Israelites during the past year (Lv 16:16-19; 31-33).<\/p>\nAn unclean place received the pieces of a leprous house after its demolition (Lv 14:45). The valley of Hinnom became Jerusalem’s garbage dump in later years, giving rise to the visions of “Gehenna” as a place of eternal punishment in NT eschatology. Since the Israelite camp was a holy place, care was taken to bury human excrement outside its boundaries (Dt 23:12-14). The value of that simple expedient in preventing disease during military excursions can hardly be exaggerated, since plagues were a great scourge of ancient armies.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Food<\/h5>\nCertain kinds of animals were unclean and thus could not be eaten (Lv 11; Dt 14:3-21). Animals that died of old age, disease, or injury, or had been wounded by predators, were unclean. Animals that did not both chew the cud and have a cloven hoof were unclean, a definition that included pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits among others. Israelites could eat only those fish that had both fins and scales. Birds of prey and scavengers were unclean. All winged insects were unclean except hopping insects (locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets). A large classification of “crawling things” was prohibited, including worms, lizards, snakes, weasels, and mice. In addition to all those was the ancient prohibition against eating blood (Gn 9:4; Lv 17:14-15; Dt 12:16-23; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\nPurification Rites<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Lapse of Time<\/h5>\nSecondary contamination could often be canceled simply by waiting until the evening (Lv 11:24) or for 7, 14, 40, or 80 days. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched for 7 days (Nm 19:11), as did menstruation (Lv 15:19). When a child was born, the mother’s unclean condition lasted 7 days for a boy and 14 days for a girl. An additional 33 days for a male child and 66 days for a female were required before the mother could touch any sacred thing.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Water<\/h5>\nContact with unclean things, such as bodily discharges, often required washing of hands and clothing, usually accompanied by the lapse of a day (Lv 15:5-11).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Ceremonial Substances<\/h5>\nCeremonial substances used in purification rites included the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water (Nm 19:1-10), and (in cases of leprosy) cedarwood, scarlet cloth, hyssop, and blood (Lv 14:2-9). When the altar was used in a purification ceremony, only blood was suitable, since the altar was the place of sacrifice for sin (Lv 16:18-19; Ez 43:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Sacrifice<\/h5>\nSacrifice was the ultimate source of both ritual and moral purification. All bodily discharges except sexual ones were purified by offerings of doves and pigeons (Lv 15:14-15, 29-30). Childbirth required a lamb and a bird (12:6). Poor people could offer birds in place of an animal (Lv 12:8; 14:21-32; Lk 2:24).<\/p>\nIn sacrifice, blood was symbolic of a life given and therefore a death experienced; the uncleanness of disease or sin was thought of as being transferred to the victim, thus removing the uncleanness (Lv 14:7). Sacrificial death, therefore, always had a substitutionary element. Only blood sacrifice could provide the moral cleansing necessary for sin itself; such sacrifice was therefore the basis of all cleansing, including that of disease.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Fire<\/h5>\nSome contamination could be removed only by fire, such as contamination of metal pots (Nm 31:22-23). Incest was punishable not only by death but also by burning the bodies (Lv 20:14). Idolatry had to be put away by total destruction of the objects and by burning (Ex 32:20). Cities consecrated to pagan deities were to be burned.<\/p>\nNew Testament Perspective<\/p>\nThe NT did not reject the OT concept of clean and unclean, but rather reinterpreted it in a new context. It stressed in particular the moral sense of the concept as well as the identification of uncleanness with sin.<\/p>\nThe Gospels were written in the context of OT law and its Pharisaic and Sadducean accretions. Jesus obeyed the law but was often at odds with the practical casuistry (system) that had grown up around it. Jesus taught that true defilement came from the sinner’s heart and not from outside contamination (Mk 7:14-23; Lk 11:39-41). A central element in his teaching was his attack on the ceremonial externalism of the Pharisees. Thus it has been said that Jesus “internalized” the law. It would be more correct to say that he forced attention to the law’s demands on people’s inner lives.<\/p>\nThe intrinsic wickedness of demons is underscored by the use of the term “unclean spirit” throughout the Gospels. In fact, the word “unclean” itself always appears in the Gospels in the context of spirit, a detail that illustrates the NT shift of emphasis from ritual uncleanness to sin and its guilt.<\/p>\nAn important episode in the life of the early church came in Acts 10, when God taught the apostle Peter that Gentiles were not unclean in themselves and that Peter was obliged to receive them. The result was Cornelius’s conversion.<\/p>\nJesus’ assertion that uncleanness originates in the heart bore fruit in the apostle Paul’s doctrine of Christian freedom. Paul, a Pharisee who could say of himself that he had never broken an external law, came to see that nothing is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14-20). Throughout his epistles, cleanness is the result of obedience of the heart flowing from regeneration; it is based on the cleansing power of the Atonement (see Rom 6:19; 1 Thes 2:3-4, where uncleanness is strictly moral).<\/p>\nChrist’s atonement was the final cleansing agent for sin and its moral results (Heb 9:14, 22; 1 Jn 1:7), doing in reality what the blood of bulls and goats only typified. Thus those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rv 7:14) are seen as wearing clean white robes (15:6; 19:8-14). His blood, symbolizing the life given and the death died by the Son at the behest of the Father, satisfies the attributes of personal justice of the triune God. Because the personal character of a righteous Father was vindicated, the personal forgiveness of sinners is morally possible. God can be in history only what he is eternally: he is both just and the justifier of believers in Christ (Rom 3:24-26).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Baptism; Circumcision; Uncircumcision; Offerings and Sacrifices; Law, Biblical Concept of; Dietary Laws.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people. The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and persona...","summary_en":"CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people. The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and persona...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38566,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Wool","title_en":"Wool","content_ro":"<h3>WOOL<\/h3>\nImportant commodity of the ancient Near East. King Mesha of Moab, a sheep breeder, annually sent the wool of 100,000 rams as tribute to King Ahab of Israel (2 Kgs 3:4), and the people of Damascus traded wool with Tyre’s merchants (Ez 27:18). Woolen garments were commonly worn by the Israelites (Lv 13:47-59; Is 51:8; Hos 2:5, 9), though woolen garments mingled with linen fabric were forbidden (Dt 22:11). In fact, wearing wool was prohibited entirely for Israelite priests serving in the sanctuary’s inner court (Ez 44:17).<\/p>\nWool is sometimes a biblical symbol for whiteness and purity, it is a simile for redemption (Is 1:18), for the hair of the Ancient of Days (Dn 7:9), and for the hair and head of the Son of Man (Rv 1:14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WOOL<\/h3>\nImportant commodity of the ancient Near East. King Mesha of Moab, a sheep breeder, annually sent the wool of 100,000 rams as tribute to King Ahab of Israel (2 Kgs 3:4), and the people of Damascus traded wool with Tyre’s merchants (Ez 27:18). Woolen garments were commonly worn by the Israelites (Lv 13:47-59; Is 51:8; Hos 2:5, 9), though woolen garments mingled with linen fabric were forbidden (Dt 22:11). In fact, wearing wool was prohibited entirely for Israelite priests serving in the sanctuary’s inner court (Ez 44:17).<\/p>\nWool is sometimes a biblical symbol for whiteness and purity, it is a simile for redemption (Is 1:18), for the hair of the Ancient of Days (Dn 7:9), and for the hair and head of the Son of Man (Rv 1:14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WOOL Important commodity of the ancient Near East. King Mesha of Moab, a sheep breeder, annually sent the wool of 100,000 rams as tribute to King Ahab of Israel (2 Kgs 3:4), and the people of Damascus traded wool with Tyre’s merchants (Ez 27:18). Woolen garments were commonly worn by the Israelites (Lv 13:47-59; Is 51:8; Hos 2:5, 9), though woolen garments mingled with linen fabric were forbidden (Dt 22:11). In fact, wearing wool was prohibited entirely for Israelite priests serving in the sa...","summary_en":"WOOL Important commodity of the ancient Near East. King Mesha of Moab, a sheep breeder, annually sent the wool of 100,000 rams as tribute to King Ahab of Israel (2 Kgs 3:4), and the people of Damascus traded wool with Tyre’s merchants (Ez 27:18). Woolen garments were commonly worn by the Israelites (Lv 13:47-59; Is 51:8; Hos 2:5, 9), though woolen garments mingled with linen fabric were forbidden (Dt 22:11). In fact, wearing wool was prohibited entirely for Israelite priests serving in the sa...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44221,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:47","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:47","content_ro":"13:47-59<\/strong> The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot and mold in buildings (14:33-53).<\/p>","content_en":"13:47-59<\/strong> The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot and mold in buildings (14:33-53).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:47-59 The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot...","summary_en":"13:47-59 The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":44222,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:47","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:47","content_ro":"13:47<\/strong> mildew:<\/em> The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.<\/p>","content_en":"13:47<\/strong> mildew:<\/em> The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:47 mildew: The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.","summary_en":"13:47 mildew: The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71847,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:47","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:47","content_ro":"13:47-59<\/strong> The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot and mold in buildings (14:33-53).<\/p>","content_en":"13:47-59<\/strong> The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot and mold in buildings (14:33-53).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:47-59 The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot...","summary_en":"13:47-59 The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":71848,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:47","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:47","content_ro":"13:47<\/strong> mildew:<\/em> The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.<\/p>","content_en":"13:47<\/strong> mildew:<\/em> The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:47 mildew: The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.","summary_en":"13:47 mildew: The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99473,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:47","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:47","content_ro":"13:47-59<\/strong> The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot and mold in buildings (14:33-53).<\/p>","content_en":"13:47-59<\/strong> The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot and mold in buildings (14:33-53).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:47-59 The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot...","summary_en":"13:47-59 The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":99474,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:47","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:47","content_ro":"13:47<\/strong> mildew:<\/em> The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.<\/p>","content_en":"13:47<\/strong> mildew:<\/em> The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:47 mildew: The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.","summary_en":"13:47 mildew: The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127099,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:47","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:47","content_ro":"13:47-59<\/strong> The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot and mold in buildings (14:33-53).<\/p>","content_en":"13:47-59<\/strong> The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot and mold in buildings (14:33-53).<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:47-59 The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot...","summary_en":"13:47-59 The rainy season in Israel, when the weather is humid and cool, extends from mid-October through March. Mildew flourishes during this time, and the spores can trigger serious allergic reactions, posing a health problem. The regulations for mildew in clothing were similar to those for infections in people. If the mildew showed signs of spreading, it was serious. If it could be stopped or washed or cut out, a garment could be saved. This process was also similar to the treatment of rot...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":127100,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Leviticul 13:47","title_en":"Study Note: Leviticul 13:47","content_ro":"13:47<\/strong> mildew:<\/em> The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.<\/p>","content_en":"13:47<\/strong> mildew:<\/em> The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.<\/p>","summary_ro":"13:47 mildew: The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.","summary_en":"13:47 mildew: The word refers here to a variety of molds or mildews that infected cloth or leather.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"48":[{"id":22865,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Leather","title_en":"Leather","content_ro":"<h3>LEATHER<\/h3>\nPrepared animal hide, used extensively in Bible times for a wide variety of purposes. It was used as clothing in early times (Gn 3:21). At the beginning of the period of the prophets, their raiment, made from animal skins, became a means of identifying them (2 Kgs 1:8; Zec 13:4). Elijah’s mantle (1 Kgs 19:13, 19; 2 Kgs 2:8, 13-14) is described in the Greek OT as sheepskin. Animal skins were also used to make shoes (Ez 16:10), girdles (Mt 3:4), and other articles of clothing (Lv 13:48).<\/p>\nSome household utensils were made of leather. The most common was the container for holding liquids, such as milk (Jgs 4:19), wine (Mk 2:22), and water (Gn 21:14). Oil, extracted from olives, then purified and refined, was also stored in skins, until required for cooking, toiletry, or medicinal purposes, or as fuel for lamps. In all probability leather was used for beds, chairs, and other household articles. There is no reference to leather being used to make tents, but animal skins were employed in the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 25:5; Nm 4:8). Clearly, the references are to tanned skins. Their use would ensure that the roof was waterproof.<\/p>\nThe Bible is silent concerning the use of leather for making armor or weapons; however, it would be a natural choice for helmets and shields for defense, slings for offense, and quivers to hold arrows. Rubbing oil into the surface of shields, presumably to keep them from becoming brittle and therefore useless, is referred to in 2 Samuel 1:21 and Isaiah 21:5 and points to their being made of leather. A painting in the tomb of an Egyptian nobleman from about 1900 BC<\/span> supplements the meager knowledge that the Bible provides concerning the use of leather in OT times. In the painting the men wear sandals and the women boots. A leather water bottle is strapped to one man’s back. Another, an archer, carries a quiver on his back. The asses are carrying objects that have been identified as two pairs of goatskin bellows.<\/p>\nLeather was used extensively as writing material, but early on almost wholly in Egypt. There, parchment, also derived from animal hides, has a very ancient history. The difference between leather and parchment is that the former is tanned, whereas the latter is produced by treating the skins with solutions of lime, salt, or dyes, scraping off the hair on one side and the flesh on the other, stretching and drying them in a frame, then rubbing them with a pumice stone to produce smooth surfaces on both sides. The use of prepared skins for writing material was known before 2000 BC<\/span> in Egypt, but according to Pliny, the term “parchment” did not come into use until about 160 BC<\/span> in other areas.<\/p>\nNo leather documents have been recovered from Assyria or Babylonia, probably because leather was used much less extensively there than elsewhere in the ancient East. Middle East literary allusions point to its having come into use there at a later period. The term “parchment” is not found before the Persian period, and the phrase “written on parchment” does not occur before the early years of the Seleucids (312–64 BC<\/span>). Even then papyrus was the chief writing material.<\/p>\nAnother leather product, vellum, is fine parchment made from calf, kid, lamb, or antelope skins. In Rome, from the first century BC<\/span> through the second century AD<\/span>, vellum was in restricted use. Not until the third and fourth centuries did vellum prevail. It was at this time that the celebrated Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus were produced. The whole Bible now could be gathered into a single codex, which was in the form of a modern book with folded sheets, whereas previously a set of from 30 to 40 rolls of papyrus would be required for the Bible. Vellum also allowed for the palimpsest, from which the original writing could be erased and written upon again.<\/p>\nIn the OT leather or skins are not mentioned in connection with writing. Books in roll form are mentioned in Psalm 40:7, Jeremiah 36, and Ezekiel 2:9–3:3, but these were probably papyrus. Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest reference to Jews using parchment or leather as writing material is found in Josephus, toward the end of the first century AD<\/span>. However, we now know that around 100 BC<\/span> parchment was used by Jews. The Talmud requires the Law to be written on skins of clean animals, a regulation that still stands for books to be used in the synagogue, but it is not certain that this points to an ancient tradition.<\/p>\nSome of the Dead Sea Scrolls were written on leather. For example, the great scroll of Isaiah, written about 100 BC<\/span>, consists of 17 sheets sewn together into a length of almost 23 feet (7 meters). The autographs of the NT were probably written on papyrus. Certainly John wrote his second letter on papyrus (2 Jn 1:12) within the last quarter of the first century.<\/p>\nTanning is not mentioned in the OT, but it is implied in Exodus 25:5 and Leviticus 13:48. The possible use of skins of unclean animals and the constant contact with dead bodies made tanning an unclean trade, and it was forbidden in the city. However, the preparation of skins for parchment was considered an honorable calling.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Letter Writing, Ancient; Writing.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEATHER<\/h3>\nPrepared animal hide, used extensively in Bible times for a wide variety of purposes. It was used as clothing in early times (Gn 3:21). At the beginning of the period of the prophets, their raiment, made from animal skins, became a means of identifying them (2 Kgs 1:8; Zec 13:4). Elijah’s mantle (1 Kgs 19:13, 19; 2 Kgs 2:8, 13-14) is described in the Greek OT as sheepskin. Animal skins were also used to make shoes (Ez 16:10), girdles (Mt 3:4), and other articles of clothing (Lv 13:48).<\/p>\nSome household utensils were made of leather. The most common was the container for holding liquids, such as milk (Jgs 4:19), wine (Mk 2:22), and water (Gn 21:14). Oil, extracted from olives, then purified and refined, was also stored in skins, until required for cooking, toiletry, or medicinal purposes, or as fuel for lamps. In all probability leather was used for beds, chairs, and other household articles. There is no reference to leather being used to make tents, but animal skins were employed in the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 25:5; Nm 4:8). Clearly, the references are to tanned skins. Their use would ensure that the roof was waterproof.<\/p>\nThe Bible is silent concerning the use of leather for making armor or weapons; however, it would be a natural choice for helmets and shields for defense, slings for offense, and quivers to hold arrows. Rubbing oil into the surface of shields, presumably to keep them from becoming brittle and therefore useless, is referred to in 2 Samuel 1:21 and Isaiah 21:5 and points to their being made of leather. A painting in the tomb of an Egyptian nobleman from about 1900 BC<\/span> supplements the meager knowledge that the Bible provides concerning the use of leather in OT times. In the painting the men wear sandals and the women boots. A leather water bottle is strapped to one man’s back. Another, an archer, carries a quiver on his back. The asses are carrying objects that have been identified as two pairs of goatskin bellows.<\/p>\nLeather was used extensively as writing material, but early on almost wholly in Egypt. There, parchment, also derived from animal hides, has a very ancient history. The difference between leather and parchment is that the former is tanned, whereas the latter is produced by treating the skins with solutions of lime, salt, or dyes, scraping off the hair on one side and the flesh on the other, stretching and drying them in a frame, then rubbing them with a pumice stone to produce smooth surfaces on both sides. The use of prepared skins for writing material was known before 2000 BC<\/span> in Egypt, but according to Pliny, the term “parchment” did not come into use until about 160 BC<\/span> in other areas.<\/p>\nNo leather documents have been recovered from Assyria or Babylonia, probably because leather was used much less extensively there than elsewhere in the ancient East. Middle East literary allusions point to its having come into use there at a later period. The term “parchment” is not found before the Persian period, and the phrase “written on parchment” does not occur before the early years of the Seleucids (312–64 BC<\/span>). Even then papyrus was the chief writing material.<\/p>\nAnother leather product, vellum, is fine parchment made from calf, kid, lamb, or antelope skins. In Rome, from the first century BC<\/span> through the second century AD<\/span>, vellum was in restricted use. Not until the third and fourth centuries did vellum prevail. It was at this time that the celebrated Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus were produced. The whole Bible now could be gathered into a single codex, which was in the form of a modern book with folded sheets, whereas previously a set of from 30 to 40 rolls of papyrus would be required for the Bible. Vellum also allowed for the palimpsest, from which the original writing could be erased and written upon again.<\/p>\nIn the OT leather or skins are not mentioned in connection with writing. Books in roll form are mentioned in Psalm 40:7, Jeremiah 36, and Ezekiel 2:9–3:3, but these were probably papyrus. Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest reference to Jews using parchment or leather as writing material is found in Josephus, toward the end of the first century AD<\/span>. However, we now know that around 100 BC<\/span> parchment was used by Jews. The Talmud requires the Law to be written on skins of clean animals, a regulation that still stands for books to be used in the synagogue, but it is not certain that this points to an ancient tradition.<\/p>\nSome of the Dead Sea Scrolls were written on leather. For example, the great scroll of Isaiah, written about 100 BC<\/span>, consists of 17 sheets sewn together into a length of almost 23 feet (7 meters). The autographs of the NT were probably written on papyrus. Certainly John wrote his second letter on papyrus (2 Jn 1:12) within the last quarter of the first century.<\/p>\nTanning is not mentioned in the OT, but it is implied in Exodus 25:5 and Leviticus 13:48. The possible use of skins of unclean animals and the constant contact with dead bodies made tanning an unclean trade, and it was forbidden in the city. However, the preparation of skins for parchment was considered an honorable calling.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Letter Writing, Ancient; Writing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEATHER Prepared animal hide, used extensively in Bible times for a wide variety of purposes. It was used as clothing in early times (Gn 3:21). At the beginning of the period of the prophets, their raiment, made from animal skins, became a means of identifying them (2 Kgs 1:8; Zec 13:4). Elijah’s mantle (1 Kgs 19:13, 19; 2 Kgs 2:8, 13-14) is described in the Greek OT as sheepskin. Animal skins were also used to make shoes (Ez 16:10), girdles (Mt 3:4), and other articles of clothing (Lv 13:48)...","summary_en":"LEATHER Prepared animal hide, used extensively in Bible times for a wide variety of purposes. It was used as clothing in early times (Gn 3:21). At the beginning of the period of the prophets, their raiment, made from animal skins, became a means of identifying them (2 Kgs 1:8; Zec 13:4). Elijah’s mantle (1 Kgs 19:13, 19; 2 Kgs 2:8, 13-14) is described in the Greek OT as sheepskin. Animal skins were also used to make shoes (Ez 16:10), girdles (Mt 3:4), and other articles of clothing (Lv 13:48)...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"49":[{"id":7091,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Color","title_en":"Color","content_ro":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","summary_en":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"54":[{"id":3948,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bathing Bathe","title_en":"Bathing Bathe","content_ro":"<h3>BATHE, BATHING<\/h3>\nTo cleanse as with water; to wash oneself. In the Bible the terms “bathing” and “washing” translate, often interchangeably, a number of different words. One OT passage uses one Hebrew word for cleaning clothes, another for washing other objects, including the body (Lv 15:8-12).<\/p>\nIsrael’s dry climate and scarcity of water discouraged bathing except where a stream or pool was available (2 Kgs 5:10; Jn 9:7). Yet people still washed babies at birth (Ez 16:4), dead bodies in preparation for burial (Acts 9:37), and sheep for their shearing (Sg 6:6). Frequent bathing of the whole body was probably reserved for the rich (Ex 2:5), but the prevalence of dust made frequent washing of the face, hands, and feet necessary (Gn 18:4; 19:2; 24:32; 43:24; Jgs 19:21; Sg 5:3). Good grooming for the privileged demanded washing of one’s body before anointing with oil (Ru 3:3; 2 Sm 12:20; Ez 23:41). A good host provided water for a guest’s feet (Gn 18:4; Jgs 19:21; Lk 7:44; Jn 13:4-5). To wash someone’s feet was the task of a servant. For anyone else to do so was a sign of humility (1 Sm 25:41; Lk 7:44-47; Jn 13:3-16; 1 Tm 5:10).<\/p>\nMost biblical references to washing or bathing deal with ritual cleansing. Priests and Levites were required to wash their clothes and faces, and sometimes bodies, before approaching the altar and on ceremonial occasions (Ex 29:4; 30:19-21; 40:7, 12, 30-32; Nm 8:21). Before a slain animal was sacrificed, its legs and intestines were washed (Lv 1:9, 13; 8:21; 9:14). Anyone who was once unclean (e.g., a leper who was healed or someone who had experienced a genital discharge) had to wash his or her clothes and bathe to be ritually pure (Lv 14:8-10; 15:5-11, 21-27). Any garment that became polluted had to be ceremonially cleansed (Lv 6:27; 13:54).<\/p>\n“Washing” is also used figuratively for a cleansing from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 4:4; Jer 2:22; 4:14; 1 Cor 6:11; Heb 10:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BATHE, BATHING<\/h3>\nTo cleanse as with water; to wash oneself. In the Bible the terms “bathing” and “washing” translate, often interchangeably, a number of different words. One OT passage uses one Hebrew word for cleaning clothes, another for washing other objects, including the body (Lv 15:8-12).<\/p>\nIsrael’s dry climate and scarcity of water discouraged bathing except where a stream or pool was available (2 Kgs 5:10; Jn 9:7). Yet people still washed babies at birth (Ez 16:4), dead bodies in preparation for burial (Acts 9:37), and sheep for their shearing (Sg 6:6). Frequent bathing of the whole body was probably reserved for the rich (Ex 2:5), but the prevalence of dust made frequent washing of the face, hands, and feet necessary (Gn 18:4; 19:2; 24:32; 43:24; Jgs 19:21; Sg 5:3). Good grooming for the privileged demanded washing of one’s body before anointing with oil (Ru 3:3; 2 Sm 12:20; Ez 23:41). A good host provided water for a guest’s feet (Gn 18:4; Jgs 19:21; Lk 7:44; Jn 13:4-5). To wash someone’s feet was the task of a servant. For anyone else to do so was a sign of humility (1 Sm 25:41; Lk 7:44-47; Jn 13:3-16; 1 Tm 5:10).<\/p>\nMost biblical references to washing or bathing deal with ritual cleansing. Priests and Levites were required to wash their clothes and faces, and sometimes bodies, before approaching the altar and on ceremonial occasions (Ex 29:4; 30:19-21; 40:7, 12, 30-32; Nm 8:21). Before a slain animal was sacrificed, its legs and intestines were washed (Lv 1:9, 13; 8:21; 9:14). Anyone who was once unclean (e.g., a leper who was healed or someone who had experienced a genital discharge) had to wash his or her clothes and bathe to be ritually pure (Lv 14:8-10; 15:5-11, 21-27). Any garment that became polluted had to be ceremonially cleansed (Lv 6:27; 13:54).<\/p>\n“Washing” is also used figuratively for a cleansing from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 4:4; Jer 2:22; 4:14; 1 Cor 6:11; Heb 10:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BATHE, BATHING To cleanse as with water; to wash oneself. In the Bible the terms “bathing” and “washing” translate, often interchangeably, a number of different words. One OT passage uses one Hebrew word for cleaning clothes, another for washing other objects, including the body (Lv 15:8-12). Israel’s dry climate and scarcity of water discouraged bathing except where a stream or pool was available (2 Kgs 5:10; Jn 9:7). Yet people still washed babies at birth (Ez 16:4), dead bodies in preparat...","summary_en":"BATHE, BATHING To cleanse as with water; to wash oneself. In the Bible the terms “bathing” and “washing” translate, often interchangeably, a number of different words. One OT passage uses one Hebrew word for cleaning clothes, another for washing other objects, including the body (Lv 15:8-12). Israel’s dry climate and scarcity of water discouraged bathing except where a stream or pool was available (2 Kgs 5:10; Jn 9:7). Yet people still washed babies at birth (Ez 16:4), dead bodies in preparat...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"55":[{"id":7016,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Color","title_en":"Color","content_ro":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\nThe OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\nThe word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\nIn the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\nThough many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\nColors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\nBecause the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\nColors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\nAnother word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\nReferences to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, kjv<\/span>; rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","summary_en":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}

Leviticul 13

Citește Biblia

Leviticul 13

Niciun rezultat

Redare audio

Bine ai venit! 👋