The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
Cleansing a Home
Leviticus 14:48–57 — Cleansing a Home. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
48If, however, the priest comes and inspects it, and the mildew has not spread after the house has been replastered, he shall pronounce the house clean, because the mildew is gone.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·’im- hak·kō·hên bō yā·ḇō wə·rā·’āh wə·hin·nêh han·ne·ḡa‘ lō- p̄ā·śāh bab·ba·yiṯ ’a·ḥă·rê hab·bā·yiṯ hiṭ·ṭō·aḥ ’eṯ- hak·kō·hên ’eṯ- hab·ba·yiṯ wə·ṭi·har kî han·nå̄·ḡaʿ nir·pā
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-if coming the priest comes-in and-sees, and-behold the plague has-not spread in-the-house after the-house was-replastered, then-the-priest shall-pronounce the-house clean, because the-plague is-healed.
Where the English smooths the original
The plague hath not spread. —If at the end of the second week’s quarantine the distemper has not spread, having been checked by the means prescribed in Leviticus 14:42-43 , the priest is to declare it clean, and fit for re-habitation. This is the same criterion adopted in the case of leprous men and garments. (See Leviticus 13:6 ; Leviticus 13:58 .)
If the priest should find, however, that after the fresh plastering the mole had not appeared again, or spread (to other places), he was to pronounce the house clean, because the evil was cured, and ( Leviticus 14:49-53 ) to perform the same rite of purification as was prescribed for the restoration of a man, who had been cured of leprosy
The leprosy in a house is unaccountable to us, as well as the leprosy in a garment; but now sin, where that reigns in a house, is a plague there, as it is in a heart. Masters of families should be aware, and afraid of the first appearance of sin in their families, and put it away, whatever it is.Henry’s whole-section note (vv. 33–53); the line names the moral key the bare statute only implies — house-plague as an image of indwelling sin.
The use of this ceremony in the cleansing of a house shows that, in the case of the leper, the symbolical meaning of letting go the living bird out of the city into the open fields cannot be, as has been maintained, the restoration of the cleansed man to his natural movements of liberty in the camp. If a bird's flight represents the freedom of a man going hither and thither as he will, it certainly does not represent any action that a house could take.The Pulpit note heads the whole 48–53 block; this is its decisive argument — because the released-bird rite is here used for a house, the bird’s flight (v. 53) cannot mean a cured man’s restored liberty, but the carrying-off of the evil.
49He is to take two birds, cedar wood, scarlet yarn, and hyssop to purify the house;
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·lā·qaḥ šə·tê ṣip·po·rîm ’e·rez wə·‘êṣ ū·šə·nî ṯō·w·la·‘aṯ wə·’ê·zōḇ lə·ḥaṭ·ṭê ’eṯ- hab·ba·yiṯ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-shall-take to-purge-from-sin the-house two birds, and-cedar wood, and-scarlet of-worm, and-hyssop.
Where the English smooths the original
And he shall take to cleanse the house. —The same rites are prescribed for cleansing the house which were performed in cleansing the healed leper (see Leviticus 14:3-7 ), with the exception of the sacrifices which the man brought afterwards, and which were necessarily absent in the case of the restored leprous house.
Cleanse the house - Strictly, "purge the house from sin." The same word is used in Leviticus 14:52 ; and in Leviticus 14:53 it is said, "and make an atonement for it." Such language is used figuratively when it is applied to things, not to persons.
It seems that this was a lace or string to bind the hyssop to the wood, and so was made a sprinkle: the apostle to the Hebrews calls it scarlet wool, He 9:19.The Geneva gloss (keyed ‘o’ to ‘scarlet’) supplies the apparatus’s own cross-reference to Hebrews 9:19, where this scarlet-and-hyssop is taken up; quoted with its scriptural citation intact.
The birds here indeed are not described as "alive and clean", Leviticus 14:4 ; but both are plainly implied and the house is said to be cleansed with the blood of the slain bird, as well as with the living bird; and it was the upper door post of the house which was sprinkled seven times with it, but there were no sacrifices offered
50and he shall slaughter one of the birds over fresh water in a clay pot.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·šā·ḥaṭ ’eṯ- hā·’e·ḥāṯ haṣ·ṣip·pōr ’el- ḥay·yîm ma·yim ḥe·reś ‘al- kə·lî-
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-shall-slaughter the-one bird over living water in-a-vessel-of clay.
Where the English smooths the original
And he shall kill the one of the birds in an earthen vessel over running water. See Gill on Leviticus 14:5 .Gill’s terse cross-reference to 14:5 makes the point of the whole pericope explicit: the house-rite simply repeats, step for step, the leper-rite already expounded.
As a house could not contract any impurity in the sight of God, the "atonement" which the priest was to make for it must either have a reference to the sins of its occupants or to the ceremonial process appointed for its purification, the very same as that observed for a leprous person.
The leprosy in houses, the leprosy in clothing, and the terrible disease in the human body, were representative forms of decay which taught the lesson that all created things, in their own nature, are passing away, and are only maintained for their destined uses during an appointed period, by the power of Yahweh.
51Then he shall take the cedar wood, the hyssop, the scarlet yarn, and the live bird, dip them in the blood of the slaughtered bird and the fresh water, and sprinkle the house seven times.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·lā·qaḥ ’eṯ- hā·’e·rez wə·’eṯ- ‘êṣ- hā·’ê·zōḇ wə·’êṯ šə·nî hat·tō·w·la·‘aṯ wə·’êṯ ha·ḥay·yāh haṣ·ṣip·pōr wə·ṭā·ḇal ’ō·ṯām bə·ḏam haš·šə·ḥū·ṭāh haṣ·ṣip·pōr ha·ḥay·yîm ū·ḇam·ma·yim wə·hiz·zāh ’el- hab·ba·yiṯ še·ḇa‘ pə·‘ā·mîm
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-shall-take the-cedar wood and-the-hyssop and-the-scarlet of-worm and-the-living bird, and-shall-dip them in-the-blood of-the-slaughtered bird and-in-the-living-water, and-shall-sprinkle the-house seven times.
Where the English smooths the original
And he shall take the cedar wood, and the hyssop, and the scarlet, and the living bird,.... See Gill on Leviticus 14:6 . and sprinkle the house seven times. See Gill on Leviticus 14:7 .
And he shall take the cedar wood, and the hyssop, and the scarlet, and the living bird, and dip them in the blood of the slain bird, and in the running water, and sprinkle the house seven times:
If the leprosy is got into the house, the infected part must be taken out. If it remain in the house, the whole must be pulled down. The owner had better be without a dwelling, than live in one that was infected. The leprosy of sin ruins families and churches.
52And he shall cleanse the house with the bird’s blood, the fresh water, the live bird, the cedar wood, the hyssop, and the scarlet yarn.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·ḥiṭ·ṭê ’eṯ- hab·ba·yiṯ haṣ·ṣip·pō·wr bə·ḏam ha·ḥay·yîm ū·ḇam·ma·yim ha·ḥay·yāh ū·ḇaṣ·ṣip·pōr hā·’e·rez ū·ḇə·‘êṣ ū·ḇā·’ê·zōḇ ū·ḇiš·nî hat·tō·w·lā·‘aṯ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-shall-purge-from-sin the-house with-the-blood of-the-bird and-with-the-living water and-with-the-living bird and-with-the-cedar wood and-with-the-hyssop and-with-the-scarlet of-worm.
Where the English smooths the original
Cleanse the house - Strictly, "purge the house from sin." The same word is used in Leviticus 14:52 ; and in Leviticus 14:53 it is said, "and make an atonement for it." Such language is used figuratively when it is applied to things, not to persons.
And he shall cleanse the house with the blood of the bird,.... See Gill on Leviticus 14:4 .
And he shall cleanse the house with the blood of the bird, and with the running water, and with the living bird, and with the cedar wood, and with the hyssop, and with the scarlet:
53Finally, he is to release the live bird into the open fields outside the city. In this way he will make atonement for the house, and it will be clean.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·šil·laḥ ’eṯ- ha·ḥay·yāh haṣ·ṣip·pōr ’el- pə·nê haś·śā·ḏeh mi·ḥūṣ lā·‘îr ’el- wə·ḵip·per ‘al- hab·ba·yiṯ wə·ṭā·hêr
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-he-shall-send-away the-living bird unto the-face-of the-field outside the-city, and-shall-make-atonement for the-house, and-it-shall-be-clean.
Where the English smooths the original
The purpose was also the same, namely, to cleanse (חטּא cleanse from sin) and make atonement for the house, i.e., to purify it from the uncleanness of sin which had appeared in the leprosy. For, although it is primarily in the human body that sin manifests itself, it spreads from man to the things which he touches, uses, inhabits, though without our being able to represent this spread as a physical contagion.
This solemn declaration that it was "clean," as well as the offering made on the occasion, was admirably calculated to make known the fact, to remove apprehension from the public mind, as well as relieve the owner from the aching suspicion of dwelling in an infected house.JFB’s note runs across vv. 48–57; this clause is drawn for v. 53, the verse where the house is finally declared clean.
But he shall let go the living bird out of the city into the open fields,.... See Gill on Leviticus 14:7 .
54This is the law for any infectious skin disease, for a scaly outbreak,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
zōṯ hat·tō·w·rāh lə·ḵāl haṣ·ṣā·ra·‘aṯ ne·ḡa‘ wə·lan·nā·ṯeq
Literal — word-for-word from the original
This is the-law for-every plague-of-leprosy and-for-the-scaly-outbreak,
Where the English smooths the original
(54-56) This is the law for all manner of plague. —These verses sum up the laws of leprosy given in Leviticus 13, 14. The various names contained in Leviticus 14:56 are repeated from Leviticus 13:2 .
54–57 . A summary of the cases dealt with in chs. 13, 14. Special sections have also their closing verses, see Leviticus 13:59 , Leviticus 14:32 .
This is the law for all manner of plague of leprosy, and scall. The leprosy in general in the bodies of men, and of that in particular which was on the head and beard, and went by the name of the scall, Leviticus 13:29 .
When that God who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us by his grace, Eph 2:4,5, we shall manifest the change by repenting, and forsaking former sins.Henry’s note on vv. 54–57 turns the dry recapitulation into gospel: the cleansed leper is the soul ‘quickened by grace,’ proving the change by repentance.
55for mildew in clothing or in a house,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ū·lə·ṣā·ra·‘aṯ hab·be·ḡeḏ wə·lab·bā·yiṯ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
and-for-leprosy-of the-garment and-for-the-house,
Where the English smooths the original
And for the leprosy of a garment,.... Of which see Leviticus 13:47 , and of an house; largely treated of in this chapter, Leviticus 14:34 .
Leviticus 14:54-57 contain the concluding formula to ch. 13 and 14. The law of leprosy was given "to teach in the day of the unclean and the clean," i.e., to give directions for the time when they would have to do with the clean and unclean.
And for the leprosy of a garment, and of a house,
56and for a swelling, rash, or spot,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·laś·’êṯ wə·las·sap·pa·ḥaṯ wə·lab·be·hā·reṯ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
and-for-the-swelling and-for-the-scab and-for-the-bright-spot,
Where the English smooths the original
And for a rising, and for a scab, and for a bright spot. Which were three sorts of leprosy in the skin of man's flesh; See Gill on Leviticus 13:2 .
the priest shall pronounce the house clean, because the plague is healed—The precautions here described show that there is great danger in warm countries from the house leprosy, which was likely to be increased by the smallness and rude architecture of the houses in the early ages of the Israelitish history.JFB’s single note spans vv. 48–57; the clause is drawn here to close the summary list with its observation on the physical conditions that made house-leprosy a real danger.
The leprosy in houses, the leprosy in clothing, and the terrible disease in the human body, were representative forms of decay which taught the lesson that all created things, in their own nature, are passing away
57to determine when something is clean or unclean. This is the law regarding skin diseases and mildew.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lə·hō·w·rōṯ bə·yō·wm ū·ḇə·yō·wm haṭ·ṭā·hōr haṭ·ṭā·mê zōṯ tō·w·raṯ haṣ·ṣā·rā·‘aṯ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
to-teach in-the-day-of the-unclean and-in-the-day-of the-clean; this is the-law of-the-leprosy.
Where the English smooths the original
To teach; to direct the priest when to pronounce a person or house clean or unclean. So it was not left to the priest’s power or will, but they were tied to plain rules, such as the people might discern no less than the priest.
The ancient authorities, however, insisted upon the literal rendering which is substantially exhibited in the Margin of the Authorised Version, viz., “To teach concerning the day of uncleanness and concerning the day of cleanness: i.e., to instruct the people on which days this distemper may be examined and decided.
Upon the whole, we may see in these laws the religious care we ought to take of ourselves to keep our minds from the dominion of all sinful affections and dispositions, which are both their disease and their defilement, that we may be fit for the service of God. We ought also to avoid all bad company
To teach when it is unclean, and when it is clean,.... A man, his garment, or his house; for it respects them all, as Aben Ezra observes; which was the business of the priests to teach men, and they by the above laws and rules were instructed how to judge of cases
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
The unit opens at the moment of acquittal. After the diseased stones were pulled out, the walls scraped, the house replastered (vv. 40–42), the priest returns — and the Hebrew marks the return as deliberate: בֹּא יָבֹא (bō yāḇō), ‘if he indeed comes in.’ If the נֶגַע (negaʻ, ‘the stroke,’ the same word used of human leprosy in Leviticus 13:2) has not spread (pāśāh, the one diagnostic verb the whole law turns on), the priest pronounces the house clean ‘because the plague is healed.’ Ellicott notes this is ‘the same criterion adopted in the case of leprous men and garments (see Leviticus 13:6; 13:58).’ The most arresting word is the last: נִרְפָּא (nir·pā), ‘is healed’ — the verb of curing a sick body, applied to a wall. Keil reads the equivalence outright: ‘the evil was cured.’ A house is spoken of as a patient because, in the logic of this law, it is one.
What follows is, step for step, the rite already performed over the cleansed leper in 14:4–7 — every voice says so. Ellicott: ‘the same rites are prescribed for cleansing the house which were performed in cleansing the healed leper… with the exception of the sacrifices.’ Gill, again and again, simply refers the reader back: ‘See Gill on Leviticus 14:5… 14:6… 14:7.’ Two birds; one slaughtered (šāḥaṭ, the sacrificial verb) over ‘living water’ (מַיִם חַיִּים) in a breakable clay vessel; the living bird, with cedar, scarlet, and hyssop, dipped (ṭāḇal) in the dead bird’s blood and sprinkled (nāzāh) on the house seven times. The verb that frames the whole, in vv. 49 and 52, is the privative Piel חִטֵּא (ḥiṭṭê), and Barnes will not let it be softened: ‘Strictly, ‘purge the house from sin.’’ The house is not disinfected; it is de-sinned. JFB wrestles honestly with the strangeness — ‘a house could not contract any impurity in the sight of God’ — and concludes the atonement ‘must either have a reference to the sins of its occupants or to the ceremonial process.’ Barnes widens the lens beyond sin to mortality itself: the three leprosies — ‘in houses, in clothing, and… in the human body — were representative forms of decay which taught the lesson that all created things, in their own nature, are passing away, and are only maintained for their destined uses during an appointed period, by the power of Yahweh.’ The rite over a crumbling wall preaches the same sermon as the rite over a dying body.
The rite ends as the leper’s did: the surviving bird is sent away (שִׁלַּח, šillaḥ, the scapegoat-verb of Leviticus 16:22) ‘unto the face of the field outside the city.’ The Pulpit Commentary seizes on precisely this house-version to settle a disputed point about the leper: since the same released-bird ceremony is here used for a house, the bird’s flight cannot mean a cured man’s restored ‘liberty,’ ‘for it certainly does not represent any action that a house could take.’ The freed bird carries the evil off; that is its meaning in both rites. Then the boldest word of the unit: the priest ‘shall make atonement’ (כִּפֶּר, kipper, ‘to cover’) for the house, ‘and it shall be clean.’ Keil states the rationale: ‘to cleanse and make atonement for the house, i.e., to purify it from the uncleanness of sin which had appeared in the leprosy. For, although it is primarily in the human body that sin manifests itself, it spreads from man to the things which he touches, uses, inhabits.’ Sin, on this reading, is contagious to places — and so places, too, need covering.
The unit closes with the formal subscription to all of chapters 13–14. Ellicott, Cambridge, the Pulpit Commentary, and Keil are unanimous that vv. 54–57 are ‘the concluding formula.’ The list gathers every case under one term, צָרַעַת (ṣāraʻaṯ): the body’s leprosy and the head’s scall (neṯeq), the garment’s and the house’s, the rising and scab and bright spot ‘repeated from Leviticus 13:2’ (Ellicott). And it states the law’s purpose: לְהוֹרֹת (lə·hôrōṯ), ‘to teach’ — the root of tôrāh itself — ‘in the day of the unclean and the day of the clean.’ Poole draws the democratic upshot: the priest was ‘not left to his power or will, but tied to plain rules, such as the people might discern no less than the priest.’ Henry turns the dry recapitulation to the gospel of Ephesians 2: God ‘who is rich in mercy… hath quickened us by his grace,’ and the cleansed will ‘manifest the change by repenting, and forsaking former sins.’ The whole edifice, body and cloth and wall, ends on one definite word: haṣṣārāʻaṯ — ‘the leprosy.’
Set against the rule that Scripture alone is the final authority, three things stand out in these ten verses — offered as a reading to be tested, not a verdict to be trusted.
The contagion of sin reaches the walls. This is the strangest thing in the pericope and the voices feel it: a house is said to be ‘healed’ (v. 48), to be ‘purged from sin’ (vv. 49, 52, Barnes), to receive ‘atonement’ (v. 53). JFB protests that ‘a house could not contract any impurity in the sight of God,’ and Keil answers that sin, though it ‘primarily’ shows in the body, ‘spreads from man to the things which he touches, uses, inhabits.’ Defilement is not merely personal; it seeps into the spaces a fallen people make. The God who legislates the home will not pretend the home is neutral ground.
And the same blood cleanses the great and the small. The identical rite — two birds, the slain one’s blood carried by a living bird, sprinkled sevenfold — covers a leprous man (14:7) and a leprous wall (14:53). Cedar and hyssop, the towering tree and the lowliest wall-herb (1 Kings 4:33), are bound together in one sprinkle. The economy of cleansing does not scale with the dignity of the thing cleansed; one blood does for all. The released bird carries the evil out past the city, into ‘the face of the field’ — the same motion the scapegoat makes (Leviticus 16:22).
The law’s end is to teach the difference. The whole vast apparatus exists ‘to teach in the day of the unclean and the clean’ (v. 57) — and the teaching is public: ‘the people might discern no less than the priest’ (Poole). A people learning to tell clean from unclean in their very houses is a people being trained to know the holy God in whose camp they live.
And the spreading stroke is also a parable of decay. Not every voice reads the house-plague morally. Barnes reads it as mortality: the leprosy of wall and cloth and flesh are alike ‘representative forms of decay,’ teaching that ‘all created things, in their own nature, are passing away, and are only maintained for their destined uses during an appointed period, by the power of Yahweh.’ The crumbling wall is the law’s standing memento mori — a sign that the whole material order is on loan, held in being by God and headed, apart from him, for dissolution. Held as a reading to be weighed: this transience-theme and the contagion-of-sin theme are not rivals but two faces of one fallenness, the world both defiled and dying, and a single sprinkled blood is set against both.
The same blood that cleansed the leper’s body is flung seven times against the leper’s wall — proof that no part of a fallen world is too small, or too inanimate, to need covering. (a reading offered, not a verse)
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
The house-cleansing of vv. 49–53 is not a new ceremony; it is the leper’s cleansing of 14:4–7 performed over a building. The Verifier confirms the tie as verbal: the two passages share the rare lexeme אֵזוֹב (’êzôḇ, hyssop — found in only ten verses of the whole Hebrew Bible) together with ṣippôr (bird), šānî (scarlet), tôlaʻaṯ (worm-crimson), and ’erez (cedar). The co-occurrence of hyssop with cedar-and-scarlet-and-two-birds is so distinctive to this one rite that the link is a genuine lexical chain, not common vocabulary. Every named voice says the same in prose: Ellicott — ‘the same rites… which were performed in cleansing the healed leper (see Leviticus 14:3–7)’; Gill repeatedly refers each step back to 14:4, 14:5, 14:6, 14:7; Keil — ‘the same rite of purification as was prescribed for the restoration of a man… (Leviticus 14:4–7).’
Leviticus 14:49 · Leviticus 14:51 · Leviticus 14:53 · Leviticus 14:4 · Leviticus 14:6 · Leviticus 14:7
basis: Verifier (Lev 14:49 ↔ Lev 14:6): shared rare lexeme H231 ʼêzôwb (only 10 vv) plus H6833 tsippôwr (36 vv), H8144 shânîy (42 vv), H8438 tôwlâʻ (43 vv), H730 ʼerez (69 vv). The low frequency of hyssop, combined with the cedar/scarlet/bird cluster, makes the house-rite a verbal re-citation of the leper-rite, not shared common words.
The closing summary (vv. 54–56) gathers the whole leprosy law under terms quoted, in order, from its opening diagnosis. The Verifier ties v. 54 to Leviticus 13:2 on the shared lexemes צָרַעַת (ṣāraʻaṯ, leprosy — 33 vv) and נֶגַע (negaʻ, the stroke/plague — 62 vv), and ties the ‘scall’ of v. 54 to Leviticus 13:30 on the rare term נֶתֶק (neṯeq, only nine verses). Ellicott names the device exactly: ‘the various names contained in Leviticus 14:56 are repeated from Leviticus 13:2,’ and the rising–scab–bright-spot triad of v. 56 is indeed that opening list resumed. Held honestly: the tier is structural, not ‘verbal / quotation,’ because this is the standard summary-formula of priestly law (a recapitulating inclusio that re-uses the technical vocabulary), not one text citing another as a proof or fulfillment — the shared words are the subject-terms the whole law is built from.
Leviticus 14:54 · Leviticus 14:56 · Leviticus 13:2 · Leviticus 13:30
basis: Verifier (Lev 14:54 ↔ Lev 13:2): shared H6883 tsâraʻath (33 vv), H5061 negaʻ (62 vv); (Lev 14:54 ↔ Lev 13:30): additionally shared rare H5424 netheq (only 9 vv). Held structural because vv. 54–57 are the closing inclusio of chs. 13–14, re-using the subject-vocabulary of 13:2 — a recapitulating formula, not a quotation of one text by another.
The materials and gestures of the house-rite recur across the Pentateuch’s central purification ceremonies, and the rare hyssop-word is the lexical hinge each time. The Verifier confirms that v. 51 shares with the Passover (Exodus 12:22) the lexemes אֵזוֹב (’êzôḇ, hyssop, 10 vv), טָבַל (ṭāḇal, ‘to dip,’ 16 vv), and dām (blood) — Israel’s elders ‘dipped’ hyssop in blood and struck the door, exactly the gesture here; and that v. 51 shares with the red-heifer water (Numbers 19:18) hyssop, dipping, and the sprinkling-verb נָזָה (nāzāh, 22 vv). Each of these is a genuine verbal anchor: the hyssop-and-dipping cluster is rare enough that its co-occurrence is a real chain, not coincidence. The whole family of rites — Passover blood, red-heifer water, leper’s and house’s blood-and-water — speaks one ritual language of blood-bearing hyssop, dipped and applied.
Leviticus 14:51 · Leviticus 14:49 · Exodus 12:22 · Numbers 19:6 · Numbers 19:18
basis: Verifier (Lev 14:51 ↔ Exod 12:22): shared rare H231 ʼêzôwb (10 vv), H2881 ṭâbal (16 vv), H1818 dâm; (Lev 14:51 ↔ Num 19:18): shared H231 ʼêzôwb (10 vv), H2881 ṭâbal (16 vv), H5137 nâzâh (22 vv). The rare hyssop+dip+sprinkle cluster makes these genuine verbal chains across the Pentateuchal purification rites.
The two woods of the rite — the towering אֶרֶז (’erez, cedar) and the lowly אֵזוֹב (’êzôḇ, hyssop) — are the very pair Scripture elsewhere uses to name the entire scale of the plant world: ‘he spake of trees, from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall’ (1 Kings 4:33). The Verifier registers the shared lexemes (cedar 69 vv, hyssop 10 vv, ‘êts ‘wood/tree’ 288 vv) and auto-tags it ‘verbal.’ Held honestly — downgraded: this is not a quotation or a citation. Solomon’s verse is a merism (greatest tree to least herb) drawn from natural observation; its overlap with the leper-rite is a coincidence of the same two well-known plants, not a literary dependence. I therefore tier it structural / thematic, not ‘verbal,’ against the Verifier’s default — the cord is the symbolic pairing of greatest and smallest, which the cleansing rite enacts (cedar and wall-herb bound in one sprinkle) and Solomon’s wisdom names.
Leviticus 14:49 · Leviticus 14:51 · 1 Kings 4:33
basis: Verifier (Lev 14:49 ↔ 1 Kgs 4:33) reports shared H231 ʼêzôwb (10 vv), H730 ʼerez (69 vv), H6086 ʻêts (288 vv) and auto-tags 'verbal' — deliberately DOWNGRADED here to structural: 1 Kgs 4:33 is a natural-history merism (cedar-to-hyssop = greatest-to-least), not a citation of or by the rite; the shared words are the same two common plants, not a literary quotation. Under-claiming per the tier rules.
Psalm 51:7 takes the leper-and-house ritual and prays it inward: ‘Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean.’ The Verifier confirms a real verbal tie to this unit on two shared lexemes — the rare אֵזוֹב (’êzôḇ, hyssop, 10 vv) and טָהֵר (ṭāhēr, ‘to be clean,’ the goal-verb of vv. 48, 53) — plus the verb ḥāṭāʼ (‘to sin / un-sin,’ the very privative-Piel root of vv. 49, 52). David is not describing a ritual; he is asking that the de-sinning the priest did to a wall be done to him. Held honestly: the tier is structural / thematic — the shared words are real and the rare hyssop anchors them, but the Psalm is a figural appropriation (the ceremonial cleansing prayed as moral cleansing), not a quotation of the Leviticus text as such. The thread is the move from outward rite to inward purity that the Psalm makes explicit.
Leviticus 14:48 · Leviticus 14:49 · Leviticus 14:53 · Psalm 51:7
basis: Verifier (Lev 14:52 ↔ Ps 51:7): shared rare H231 ʼêzôwb (10 vv) and H2398 châṭâʼ (220 vv); (Lev 14:48 ↔ Ps 51:7 via the rite) shares H2891 ṭâhêr (79 vv). Real verbal overlap anchored by rare hyssop, but tiered structural because Ps 51:7 is a figural interiorizing of the cleansing rite, not a citation of this text.
The Geneva Study Bible, glossing the scarlet of v. 49, sends the reader to the New Testament: ‘the apostle to the Hebrews calls it scarlet wool, He 9:19.’ Hebrews 9:19 indeed names ‘water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop’ as Moses sprinkled the book and the people at Sinai — the same kit of materials (water, scarlet, hyssop, blood) that purges the house here. Held honestly — flagged: this is a cross-Testament link. Hebrews is Greek, Leviticus Hebrew, so no shared Strong’s number can carry it and it can never be tiered ‘verbal.’ Hebrews 9:19 is moreover an interpretive composite — it describes the Sinai covenant-ratification of Exodus 24, adding ‘scarlet wool and hyssop’ details not in that Exodus text but drawn from this very purification family (Leviticus 14; Numbers 19); the provenance of those added materials is exactly what is debated among commentators. It is flagged so the reader sees the basis is an argued material-parallel asserted by the named voice (Geneva) and the writer of Hebrews, not a lexical identity in the Verifier’s index.
Leviticus 14:49 · Leviticus 14:51 · Hebrews 9:19
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek Hebrews ↔ Hebrew Leviticus): no shared Strong's lexeme possible, so not tierable as 'verbal.' Heb 9:19's 'scarlet wool and hyssop' is a composite description whose source materials (drawn from the Lev 14 / Num 19 rites rather than Exod 24 itself) are debated; the link rests on the Geneva gloss and Hebrews' own argument, not the Verifier's index. Flagged so the argued, contested basis is shown, not asserted as verbal.
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
The rite’s deepest figure is the pair of birds: one is slaughtered (šāḥaṭ) and its blood becomes the cleansing medium; the other, dipped in that blood, is sent away living ‘unto the face of the field outside the city’ (v. 53). The fathers read here, as in the leper’s identical rite, a single shadow cast in two halves — a death that supplies the blood and a release that bears the evil away, the two effects the one Christ accomplishes (blood shed, sin carried off; cf. the parallel two-goat figure of Leviticus 16). Held as widely-held: the typological reading of the paired birds — death and removal of guilt — is the long-standing Christian reading of this rite, here offered as such and not as this tool’s invention; the bare text gives only the two birds and their fates.
Leviticus 14:50 · Leviticus 14:53 · Leviticus 16:22
The boldest word of the unit is that the priest makes atonement (כִּפֶּר) for a house, and ‘it shall be clean’ (v. 53). Keil grounds it: sin ‘spreads from man to the things which he touches, uses, inhabits,’ so even a dwelling needs covering. Offered as this tool’s own reading, to be tested: the New Testament names the people of God a house — ‘whose house we are’ (Hebrews 3:6), ‘a spiritual house’ (1 Peter 2:5), a temple indwelt by God (1 Corinthians 3:16–17) — defiled by the leprosy of sin and needing a cleansing the two-bird rite could only picture. What the priest did with blood-sprinkled hyssop to a stone house, Christ does to the living house: ‘that he might sanctify and cleanse it… that it should be holy and without blemish’ (Ephesians 5:26–27). Henry already drew the moral half of this on v. 54, quickened from death-in-sins by grace; the typological reach to Christ cleansing his house is held here as a reading under Scripture, to be weighed.
Leviticus 14:52 · Leviticus 14:53 · Ephesians 5:26-27 · 1 Peter 2:5
David takes the hyssop of this very rite and prays it into the soul: ‘Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow’ (Psalm 51:7) — the same rare hyssop, the same goal-word ṭāhēr. The trajectory the Psalm opens (outward rite → inward purity) lands, in the long Christian reading, on the cross: the One offered ‘outside the city’ (Hebrews 13:12 — the very place the living bird is released) accomplishes the cleansing the hyssop only signified, and at his death ‘they… put it upon hyssop’ (John 19:29). Held as widely-held: the reading of the hyssop-rites as pointing to a cleansing made real in Christ is ancient and broadly shared; named here on the witness of the tradition and of the Psalm’s own interiorizing of the rite, not asserted as the bare text’s claim.
Leviticus 14:49 · Leviticus 14:53 · Psalm 51:7 · Hebrews 13:12
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
The base text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). The named voices (✦) are quoted verbatim from public-domain commentaries on BibleHub — Ellicott, Benson, Henry, Barnes, Jamieson–Fausset–Brown, Poole, Gill, Geneva, Cambridge, Pulpit, and Keil & Delitzsch — each attributed in place. Several whole-section notes (Henry on vv. 33–53 and 54–57; JFB and Pulpit on the 48–57 block) are quoted on the single verse to which their argument most directly attaches, with an editorial_note recording the original scope; none has been altered. The BSB itself renders the one Hebrew word צָרַעַת (ṣāraʻaṯ) variously as ‘infectious skin disease,’ ‘mildew,’ and (in the gloss) ‘skin diseases and mildew’ — a translator’s choice for readability that the divergence-notes flag, since the Hebrew uses one governing term over body, garment, and house.
The literal renderings, the ‘where the English smooths the Hebrew’ notes, the parses-as-read, and all synthesis (⚙) are this tool’s own fallible work; check them against a lexicon (BDB, HALOT) and a standard grammar. Three thread-tiers are held with extra honesty. (1) The 1 Kings 4:33 link (cedar-and-hyssop) is deliberately downgraded from the Verifier’s auto-‘verbal’ to structural: Solomon’s verse is a natural-history merism, and its overlap with the rite is the same two common plants, not a literary citation. (2) The Psalm 51:7 link, though carried by the rare hyssop-word, is tiered structural because the Psalm is a figural interiorizing of the rite, not a quotation. (3) The Hebrews 9:19 ‘scarlet wool and hyssop’ link is flagged: it is cross-Testament (Greek↔Hebrew, so no shared Strong’s number is possible), and Hebrews 9:19 is itself a composite whose added materials are drawn from this purification family rather than from the Exodus 24 scene it describes — a debated provenance, so the basis is shown as argued, never asserted as verbal. This unit contains no Joshua 1:5, so the Joshua→Hebrews 13:5 flag rule does not apply here. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)