Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Numbers 35:9
And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying,
9 34. The ‘Cities of Refuge,’ and the Law relating to homicide
In Num 35:9-15 the appointment of the six cities and their purpose are prescribed; Num 35:16-23 contain specimen cases distinguishing deliberate murder from accidental homicide; Num 35:24-28 provide the legal procedure; Num 35:29-34 form a conclusion.
The section presents the latest development in the O.T. of the Law of Asylum. In early days (Exo 21:13 f. E ) an appointed place was provided, to which the manslayer might flee, i.e. an altar, which would be within easy reach of every town; cf. 1Ki 1:50; 1Ki 2:28. In D (Deu 19:1-10), when only one altar was permitted, at the national sanctuary at Jerusalem, which would be practically useless for purposes of asylum, special cities were substituted for the local altars. Three cities were specified, and, if Jehovah enlarged the Israelites’ borders, three more were to be added1 [Note: Three have previously been mentioned in Deu 4:41-43; but it is unlikely that the writer of Deuteronomy 19. understood nine cities to be intended. See Driver, Deut. p. 233.] . If the manslayer be guilty of deliberate murder, the elders of his own city shall send to the city whither he has fled for asylum, and shall deliver him up to the g’l or ‘avenger of blood’; but if the homicide was accidental, he may stay in safety in the city whither he has fled. In the present passage (P ) the regulations are fuller. Of the six cities three are to be on each side of the Jordan (the fulfilment of the command, with the name of the cities, is related in Joshua 20). They receive, for the first time, the title ‘cities of refuge’ (see on Num 35:11). When a manslayer flees to one of these cities, ‘the congregation’ (see on Num 35:12) judges between him and the g’l, to discover whether the manslaughter had been deliberate or accidental. If it is proved to be accidental, the man must be taken back to the city of refuge, where he must remain until the death of the high priest. If he ventures out before that time, the g’l may kill him. If, on the other hand, he is found guilty of deliberate murder, the g’l must kill him.
Gray ( Numb. p. 471) points out that this modifies the ancient custom in three respects: (1) Ancient custom made no distinction between accidental and deliberate manslaughter; the g’l must see that the loss of life suffered by one family is compensated for. (2) In ancient custom the loss could be compensated for by the death of any member of the manslayer’s family. Here the law tacitly insists that the murderer only is to forfeit his life. (3) The present law forbids the forfeited life of the murderer to be redeemed by a money payment. Such redemption was widely prevalent, but except in certain cases not wilful murder (cf. Exo 21:29 f.) it seems to have been prohibited at an early period in Israel, though the present law contains the earliest explicit prohibition. At the same time, the law had not yet reached its final stage of development, in that it still bade the representative of the family, and not the representative of the whole community, perform the judicial act of killing the murderer.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Num 35:9-34
Ye shall appoint you cities, to be cities of refuge for you
The cities of refuge
I.
The position of the homicide exposed to the stroke of the avenger is a type of our position in our sin. Few positions in the drama of life could be more tragic than that of the manslayer as he looks upon his victim and turns to flee with the speed of desperation to the nearest of the refuge cities. And is our case any the less tragic–difficult as it may be to realise it? Is there any sin we have done that is not pursuing us, or whose stroke will be lighter at last than that of the avenger of blood? No law is so sure as that of retribution.
II. The position of the man-slayer with the city of refuge before him is a type of our position before the Cross.
III. The position of the manslayer within the city of refuge is a type of our position under the shelter of the Cross.
1. His safety lies in his remaining within the city. In proportion as a man forgets Christ, the avenging power of sin will find him out and bring darkness on his soul.
2. On the death of the high priest the manslayer may safely leave the refuge (Num 35:28). For then the arm of the avenger is arrested, and the whole land becomes as a city of refuge to the homicide. And was it not because in after years the death of Gods great High Priest should set men free from the condemnation of their sin? Here for the first time we find a hint of a greater sacrifice than bullock or goat–a hint that He who is High Priest is also Himself the sacrifice. (W. Roberts, M. A.)
The cities of refuge
I. Their design.
1. The first object aimed at in them was undoubtedly to save the condemned. The gospel is everything to a sinner, or it belies itself, it is nothing. It is either a cunningly devised fable, a mockery of human woes, or it is a great remedy in a desperate case, an antidote for a mortal poison, help in a total wreck, life for the dead.
2. These cities had, however, a second end in view–they were undoubtedly intended to uphold and honour the Divine law. The Lord Jesus Christ humbled Himself and died to magnify His law and make it honourable; to show His creatures, in the very utmost stretch of His love, how glorious He is in holiness, how determined to do or give up anything rather than suffer one of His commands to fail, rather than suffer the authority of His eternal statutes to be even suspected. Nothing establishes His law, nothing honours it, like His gospel; nothing goes half so far in proving its unchangeableness; the destruction of a universe could not have clothed it with such an awful glory.
II. We come now to the second point we proposed to consider–the means by which the protection of these cities was obtained.
1. The manslayer was, in the first instance, to enter one of them. It is one thing to have the name of Christ in our ears and on our lips, and another to have Christ Himself in our hearts, the hope of glory.
2. But it was not enough for the manslayer to enter the city of refuge; to secure his permanent safety, we are told in this chapter that he must abide in it. Within its walls he was safe; a step out of them, he was once more at the avengers mercy. And here we have another spiritual lesson taught us–the sinner who would be saved by Christ, must not only actually apply to Him for salvation, but must abide as a suppliant at His feet to his dying hour. And here we must stop; but the partial view we have taken of this ancient institution will remind us of the care which God manifested in it of two gracious objects. The first is the safety of the transgressor who seeks his safety in the way which God has prescribed. Another object secured in the appointment of these refuges, was the encouragement of the trembling offender. (C. Bradley, M. A.)
The cities of refuge
I. The names of the cities selected as places of refuge have been observed to convey, in the original Hebrew, some allusion to the offices which Christ bears to His Church, and will therefore demand our primary consideration. The name of the first city was Bezer in the wilderness, in the plain country of the Reubenites, which name, in the Hebrew language, means a stronghold, or fortified place, eminently calculated as a shelter to the distressed fugitive. The agreement between the name of this city and the office which the Lord Jesus Christ bears for His people, as their refuge and defence, may be very interestingly traced by observing the expression used, in reference to ibis subject, in Zec 9:12, where the same radical word is used: Turn you to the strong hold, ye prisoners of hope. Thus Christ is called a fortress, a place of defence for His people. The name of the second city was Ramoth, in Gilead, of the Gadites, which signifies high, or exalted, as though the fugitive manslayer when within the walls of the city, was raised out of danger into a place of security. Under the same radical word we find God saying, I have laid help upon one that is mighty; I have exalted one chosen out of the people (Psa 89:19). And Him, declares St. Peter, hath God exalted with His right hand robe a Prince and a Saviour (Act 5:31). His seed are therefore not only a saved people, saved with a present salvation, but they are also raised up together with Him, and made to sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus. The third city was Golan, in Bashan, of the Manassites, a name implying joy, or revelation, a suitable description of the frame of that persons mind who had escaped the avengers sword, and fitly portraying Him who is eminently the joy of His people. The above three cities were upon the other, or eastern, side of the river Jordan; and when the children of Israel were settled in the land of Canaan, the Lord, through Joshua, directed them to appoint three more cities of refuge on this, the western side of the river (see Jos 20:1-9.). Accordingly they appointed Kedesh, in Galilee, in Mount Naphtali, whose name signifies holy, or set apart, which, in fact, all these cities were; for no avenger of blood dared to enter those sanctuaries in order to retaliate for the injury inflicted. As Kedesh, the holy city, was a sacred refuge to the unwitting manslayer, so Jesus, the Holy One of Israel, is a sanctified defence to His people. Again, the name of the fifth city of refuge was Shechem, in Mount Ephraim, a word signifying a shoulder, expressive of a power and readiness to bear burdens, and used in reference to magisterial and regal authority. Thus it is prophesied, concerning the Messiah, The government shall be upon His shoulder (Isa 9:6). And respecting the typical Eliakim, it was declared, The key of the house of David will I lay upon His shoulder: so He shall open, and none shall shut; and He shall shut, and none shall open (Isa 22:22). The last-named city, called Kirjath-arba (which is Hebron), in the mountain of Judah, a name signifying fellowship, or association. As the flier from vengeance shared in the privileges of the city of refuge, and dwelt as one with the inhabitants thereof, so those who have fled to Jesus for refuge dwell in communion with Him and with all His saints: they have fellowship with the Father, and with His Son, Jesus Christ, and have access unto Him at all times.
II. Their convenience for the purpose for which they were selected.
1. They were so situated that there was scarcely any part of the land of Israel more remote than a days journey from some one of these cities, so that the distance was not too great for any one to escape thither. Placed, through the length of the land, on each side of the river Jordan, facility was thus afforded for crossing the river, if occasion required it, while the territory between the northern and southern boundaries of the country were regularly subdivided by them; the distance from the south border to Hebron, from Hebron to Shechem, from Shechem to Kadesh, and from Kadesh to the north border of the land, being nearly equal.
2. The way of access to these cities was also to be kept perfectly free from obstacles; as Moses commanded (Deu 19:3). The gospel is a highway, the way of holiness: the unclean shall not pass over it; but the wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein (Isa 35:8). Is not, then, the access to our refuge easy and plain? And, further, all the obstacles which the law, our depraved nature, and the machinations of Satan had placed in the way, have been graciously removed by our merciful Forerunner and High Priest.
3. It may be observed, also, in connection with this part of our subject, that these cities of refuge were in the inheritance of the priests and Levites (see Jos 21:1-45.); so that the unhappy manslayer might there receive the consolations of religion, and enjoy communion with those who were specially set apart for Gods service, the immediate attendants upon the altar. This may also be considered as an interesting and typical allusion to Him, who not only shelters from wrath and judgment, but guides our feet into the way of peace enriches our souls with spiritual knowledge, and gives everlasting consolation, and good hope, through grace.
4. Lastly, we may remark, that all these cities were situated upon hills; thus serving to direct the distressed person who was fleeing thither, and to encourage him with the hope that, although the last part of his flight was up hill, he would soon be in a place of safety. A striking comparison this, of Him whom God hath exalted with His right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins, who, though once obscure and despised, is now highly exalted; who affirmed, And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto Me; and who now sends forth the savour of His name into all lands, declaring that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life.
III. The safety which they afforded. If once the unintentional manslayer entered into any one of these cities, the avenger of blood had no power to smite or kill him. Thus it is written in Joshua (20:4-6), When he that doth flee, &c. When we remark the particular directions given concerning these cities, and the repeated allusions made to them in various parts of Scripture, we may surely be warranted in concluding that they were, equally with other parts of the Jewish law, of a typical character. As such, therefore, we see in them an eminent type of the protection which Jesus affords to the distressed sinner, who is fleeing from the curse of the law, the penalty of death, and the wrath of God. No other prospect of relief is held out to the penitent transgressor, but in Christ. He is appointed by God the Father as the only way of escape from Divine vengeance. (R. S. Eaton, B. A.)
The Divine guardianship o/ human life
The various provisions of this law afford an impressive illustration of the Divine regard for human life.
I. In the institution of the cities of refuge as a provision that the life of an innocent person should not be taken away. The adaptation of these cities for this purpose appears in–
1. Their accessibility from all places. A reference to the map of Canaan will show that these cities were so situated that one of them could be reached in a few hours from any part of the country.
2. Their accessibility to all persons. For the children of Israel, and for the stranger. Gods regard is not simply for the life of the Israelite, but for the life of man as man.
II. In the laws by which the trial of the manslayer was to be conducted. The Divine guardianship of human life is manifested in these laws at least in two respects.
1. In the clear discrimination between intentional and unintentional manslaughter. If he smite him with an instrument, &c. (Num 35:16-24).
2. In the absolute necessity for the evidence of at least two witnesses before a man could be adjudged guilty of murder. One witness might be mistaken in his view of the case, or might be prejudiced against the homicide; hence the importance of the testimony of at least two witnesses in the trial of such cases.
III. In the punishment of the intentional manslayer. The murderer shall surely be put to death (Num 35:16-18; Num 35:21; Num 35:30). As an evidence of the regard of God for human life, this punishment has additional weight from two facts.
1. It could not be averted by any ransom. The crime was too heinous to be expiated by anything less than life itself.
2. It was insisted upon for the most solemn reason. The argument seems to be this: that the shedding of human blood defiled the land, that such defilement could be cleansed only by the blood of the murderer; that the Lord Himself dwelt in that land, and therefore it must be kept free from defilement; if the murder were committed, the murderer must be put to death. To spare the life of a murderer was to insult Jehovah by defiling the land wherein He dwelt.
IV. In the punishment of the unintentional manslayer. When it was proved on the trial that the manslayer was perfectly free from guilty designs, that he had slain another entirely by accident, even then he had to bear no light punishment. He must leave his estate and worldly interests, his home and his family, and dwell in the city of refuge. His dwelling there closely resembled imprisonment; for if he left the city, and its divinely appointed suburbs, the Goel, if he should come upon him, was at liberty to put him to death.
1. Respect human life–that of others, and your own also.
2. Guard against anger; for it leads to murder, and in the estimation of Heaven it is murder.
3. Cultivate brotherly kindness and Christian charity. (W. Jones.)
Security in Christ
The son of a chieftain of the Macgregors was killed in a scuffle at an inn on the moors of Glenorchy, by a young gentleman named Lamont. The manslayer mounted his horse and fled, and though sharply pursued, in the darkness of the night succeeded in reaching a house. It happened to be the house of Macgregor himself. Save my life! cried Lament to the chieftain, men are after me to take it away. Whoever you are, replied Macgregor, while you are under my roof you are safe. Very soon the pursuers arrived, and thundered at the gate. Has a stranger just entered your house? He has; and what may be your business with him?. . . The man has killed your son! Give him up to our vengeance! The terrible news filled the house with lamentation; but the chief with streaming tears said, No; you cannot have the youth, for he has Macgregors word for his safety, and as God lives, while he is in my house he shall stay secure. This story has been told for centuries to illustrate Highland honour. What shall we say of the older story, that illustrates Divine love? To Jew and Gentile, high and low, rich and poor, friend and enemy, the grace of Christ is free.
Hasting from danger
Can you be safe too soon? Can you be happy too soon? Certainly you cannot be out of danger of hell too soon; and, therefore, why should not our closing with Christ, upon His own terms, be our very next work? If the main business of our life is to flee from the wrath to come, as indeed it is (Mat 3:9), and to flee for refuge in Jesus Christ, as indeed it is (Heb 6:18), then all delays are highly dangerous, The manslayer, when fleeing to the city of refuge before the avenger of blood, did not think he could reach the city too soon. Set your reason to work upon this matter ; put the case as it really is: I am fleeing from the wrath to come; the justice of God and the curses of the law are closely pursuing me; is it reasonable that I should sit down in the way to gather flowers or play with trifles? For such are all other concerns in this world, compared with our souls salvation. (J. Flavel.)
The nearest refuge
As the manslayer, being to haste for his life unto one of the cities of refuge, was ordered to flee unto that city which was nearest to him, so it is the duty and privilege of the poor sinners, when they see their miserable condition, to haste immediately unto Christ, the great Saviour; and unto that in Christ, which they have the clearest discerning of, and so, in that regard, is the nearest unto them as being a suitable relief for that part of their misery which most sensibly affects them. And thus some souls, being most sensibly touched with the guilt and filth of sin, have a more clear revelation of the blood of Christ, in its excellency and suitableness to cleanse from all sin, and are enabled to haste unto this, as the immediate refuge set before them. Other souls are more sensible of their misery, as naked creatures, and have a more clear discovery of Christ as a suitable, glorious remedy, in regard to His righteousness, and these are enabled to run in His name, The Lord our Righteousness, as the refuge that is next or most immediate unto them. And others, who have a more general sense of their misery, have a more general revelation of Christs excellency, and are enabled to flee unto Him for refuge, as a complete Saviour that is every way suitable to their case. Though the distinct actings of faith on Christ in all these vary, yet in the main they agree, inasmuch as it is one Christ that is believed on for justification and life. They all flee unto Christ for refuge, and so are all safe, though one flees unto Him under one consideration, and another under another, according to that revelation they have of Him as suitable to their case. For though the souls first actings of faith on Christ may more peculiarly respect one of His distinctive excellences than the rest, yet all are implied–faith acts towards a whole Christ. And those of His excellences, which were not at first so distinctly viewed and acted towards by the soul, are afterwards more fully discovered, and particularly dealt with. (Dutton on Justification.)
.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
And the Lord spake unto Moses,…. At the same time, or he continued his speech unto him:
saying: as follows.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Selection and Appointment of Cities of Refuge for Unpremeditated Manslayers. – Num 35:10, Num 35:11. When the Israelites had come into the land of Canaan, they were to choose towns conveniently situated as cities of refuge, to which the manslayer, who had slain a person ( nephesh ) by accident ( : see at Lev 4:2), might flee. , from , to hit, occurrit, as well as accidit; signifies here to give or make, i.e., to choose something suitable ( Dietrich), but not “to build or complete” ( Knobel), in the sense of , as the only meaning which this word has is contignare, to join with beams or rafters; and this is obviously unsuitable here. Through these directions, which are repeated and still further expanded in Deu 19:1-13, God fulfilled the promise which He gave in Exo 21:13: that He would appoint a place for the man who should unintentionally slay his neighbour, to which he might flee from the avenger of blood.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| The Cities of Refuge. | B. C. 1452. |
9 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 10 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come over Jordan into the land of Canaan; 11 Then ye shall appoint you cities to be cities of refuge for you; that the slayer may flee thither, which killeth any person at unawares. 12 And they shall be unto you cities for refuge from the avenger; that the manslayer die not, until he stand before the congregation in judgment. 13 And of these cities which ye shall give six cities shall ye have for refuge. 14 Ye shall give three cities on this side Jordan, and three cities shall ye give in the land of Canaan, which shall be cities of refuge. 15 These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the children of Israel, and for the stranger, and for the sojourner among them: that every one that killeth any person unawares may flee thither. 16 And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death. 17 And if he smite him with throwing a stone, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death. 18 Or if he smite him with an hand weapon of wood, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death. 19 The revenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer: when he meeteth him, he shall slay him. 20 But if he thrust him of hatred, or hurl at him by laying of wait, that he die; 21 Or in enmity smite him with his hand, that he die: he that smote him shall surely be put to death; for he is a murderer: the revenger of blood shall slay the murderer, when he meeteth him. 22 But if he thrust him suddenly without enmity, or have cast upon him any thing without laying of wait, 23 Or with any stone, wherewith a man may die, seeing him not, and cast it upon him, that he die, and was not his enemy, neither sought his harm: 24 Then the congregation shall judge between the slayer and the revenger of blood according to these judgments: 25 And the congregation shall deliver the slayer out of the hand of the revenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to the city of his refuge, whither he was fled: and he shall abide in it unto the death of the high priest, which was anointed with the holy oil. 26 But if the slayer shall at any time come without the border of the city of his refuge, whither he was fled; 27 And the revenger of blood find him without the borders of the city of his refuge, and the revenger of blood kill the slayer; he shall not be guilty of blood: 28 Because he should have remained in the city of his refuge until the death of the high priest: but after the death of the high priest the slayer shall return into the land of his possession. 29 So these things shall be for a statute of judgment unto you throughout your generations in all your dwellings. 30 Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die. 31 Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death. 32 And ye shall take no satisfaction for him that is fled to the city of his refuge, that he should come again to dwell in the land, until the death of the priest. 33 So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it. 34 Defile not therefore the land which ye shall inhabit, wherein I dwell: for I the LORD dwell among the children of Israel.
We have here the orders given concerning the cities of refuge, fitly annexed to what goes before, because they were all Levites’ cities. In this part of the constitution there is a great deal both of good law and pure gospel.
I. Here is a great deal of good law, in the case of murder and manslaughter, a case of which the laws of all nations have taken particular cognizance. It is here enacted and provided, consonant to natural equity,
1. That wilful murder should be punished with death, and in that case no sanctuary should be allowed, no ransom taken, nor any commutation of the punishment accepted: The murderer shall surely be put to death, v. 16. It is supposed to be done of hatred (v. 20), or in enmity (v. 21), upon a sudden provocation (for our Saviour makes rash anger, as well as malice prepense, to be murder, Mat 5:21; Mat 5:22), whether the person be murdered with an instrument of iron (v. 16) or wood (v. 18), or with a stone thrown at him (Num 35:17; Num 35:20); nay, if he smite him with his hand in enmity, and death ensue, it is murder (v. 21); and it was an ancient law, consonant to the law of nature, that whoso sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed, Gen. ix. 6. Where wrong has been done restitution must be made; and, since the murderer cannot restore the life he has wrongfully taken away, his own must be exacted from him in lieu of it, not (as some have fancied) to satisfy the manes or ghost of the person slain, but to satisfy the law and the justice of a nation; and to be a warning to all others not to do likewise. It is here said, and it is well worthy the consideration of all princes and states, that blood defiles not only the conscience of the murderer, who is thereby proved not to have eternal life abiding in him (1 John iii. 15), but also the land in which it is shed; so very offensive is it to God and all good men, and the worst of nuisances. And it is added that the land cannot be cleansed from the blood of the murdered, but by the blood of the murderer, v. 33. If murderers escape punishment from men, those that suffer them to escape will have a great deal to answer for, and God will nevertheless not suffer them to escape his righteous judgments. Upon the same principle it is provided that no satisfaction should be taken for the life of a murderer (v. 31): If a man would give all the substance of his house to the judges, to the country, or to the avenger of blood, to atone for his crime, it must utterly be contemned. The redemption of the life is so precious that it cannot be obtained by the multitude of riches (Ps. xlix. 6-8), which perhaps may allude to this law. A rule of law comes in here (which is a rule of our law in cases of treason only) that no man shall be put to death upon the testimony of one witness, but it was necessary there should be two (v. 30); this law is settled in all capital cases, Deu 17:6; Deu 19:15. And, lastly, not only the prosecution, but the execution, of the murderer, is committed to the next of kin, who, as he was to be the redeemer of his kinsman’s estate if it were mortgaged, so he was to be the avenger of his blood if he were murdered (v. 19): The avenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer, if he be convicted by the notorious evidence of the fact, and he needed not to have recourse by a judicial process to the court of judgment. But if it were uncertain who the murderer was, and the proof doubtful, we cannot think that his bare suspicion, or surmise, would empower him to do that which the judges themselves could not do but upon the testimony of two witnesses. Only if the fact were plain then the next heir of the person slain might himself, in a just indignation, slay the murderer wherever he met him. Some think this must be understood to be after the lawful judgment of the magistrate, and so the Chaldee says, “He shall slay him, when he shall be condemned unto him by judgment;” but it should seem, by v. 24, that the judges interposed only in a doubtful case, and that if the person on whom he took vengeance was indeed the murderer, and a wilful murderer, the avenger was innocent (v. 27), only, if it proved otherwise, it was at his peril. Our law allows an appeal to be brought against a murderer by the widow, or next heir, of the person murdered, yea, though the murderer have been acquitted upon an indictment; and, if the murderer be found guilty upon that appeal, execution shall be awarded at the suit of the appellant, who may properly be called the avenger of blood.
2. But if the homicide was not voluntary, nor done designedly, if it was without enmity, or lying in wait (v. 22), not seeing the person or not seeking his harm (v. 23), which our law calls chance-medley, or homicide per infortunium–through misfortune, in this case there were cities of refuge appointed for the manslayer to flee to. By our law this incurs a forfeiture of goods, but a pardon is granted of course upon the special matter found. Concerning the cities of refuge the law was, (1.) That, if a man killed another, in these cities he was safe, and under the protection of the law, till he had his trial before the congregation, that is, before the judges in open court. If he neglected thus to surrender himself, it was at his peril; if the avenger of blood met him elsewhere, or overtook him loitering in his way to the city of refuge, and slew him, his blood was upon his own head, because he did not make use of the security which God had provided for him. (2.) If, upon trial, it were found to be willful murder, the city of refuge should no longer be a protection to him; it was already determined: Thou shalt take him from my altar, that he may die, Exod. xxi. 14. (3.) But if it were found to be by error or accident, and that the stroke was given without any design upon the life of the person slain or any other, then the man-slayer should continue safe in the city of refuge, and the avenger of blood might not meddle with him, v. 25. There he was to remain in banishment from his own house and patrimony till the death of the high priest; and, if at any time he went out of that city or the suburbs of it, he put himself out of the protection of the law, and the avenger of blood, if he met him, might slay him, v. 26-28. Now, [1.] By the preservation of the life of the man-slayer God would teach us that men ought not to suffer for that which is rather their unhappiness than their crime, rather the act of Providence than their own act, for God delivered him into his hand, Exod. xxi. 13. [2.] By the banishment of the man-slayer from his own city, and his confinement to the city of refuge, where he was in a manner a prisoner, God would teach us to conceive a dread and horror of the guilt of blood, and to be very careful of life, and always afraid lest by oversight or negligence we occasion the death of any. [3.] By the limiting of the time of the offender’s banishment to the death of the high priest, an honour was put upon that sacred office. The high priest was to be looked upon as so great a blessing to his country that when he died their sorrow upon that occasion should swallow up all other resentments. The cities of refuge being all of them Levites’ cities, and the high priest being the head of that tribe, and consequently having a peculiar dominion over these cites, those that were confined to them might properly be looked upon as his prisoners, and so his death must be their discharge; it was, as it were, at his suit that the delinquent was imprisoned, and therefore at his death it fell. Actio moritur cum persona–The suit expires with the party. Anisworth has another notion of it, That as the high priests, while they lived, by their service and sacrificing made atonement for sin, wherein they prefigured Christ’s satisfaction, so, at their death, those were released that had been exiled for casual murder, which typified redemption in Israel. [4.] By the abandoning of the prisoner to the avenger of blood, in case he at any time went out of the limits of the city of refuge, they were taught to adhere to the methods which Infinite Wisdom prescribed for their security. It was for the honour of a remedial law that it should be so strictly observed. How can we expect to be saved if we neglect the salvation, which is indeed a great salvation!
II. Here is a great deal of good gospel couched under the type and figure of the cities of refuge; and to them the apostle seems to allude when he speaks of our fleeing for refuge to the hope set before is (Heb. vi. 18), and being found in Christ, Phil. iii. 9. We never read in the history of the Old Testament of any use made of these cities of refuge, any more than of other such institutions, which yet, no doubt, were made use of upon the occasions intended; only we read of those that, in dangerous cases, took hold of the horns of the altar (1Ki 1:50; 1Ki 2:28); for the altar, wherever that stood, was, as it were the capital city of refuge. But the law concerning these cities was designed both to raise and to encourage the expectations of those who looked for redemption in Israel, which should be to those who were convinced of sin, and in terror by reason of it, as the cities of refuge were to the man-slayer. Observe, 1. There were several cities of refuge, and they were so appointed in several parts of the country that the man-slayer, wherever he dwelt in the land of Israel, might in half a day reach one or other of them; so, though there is but one Christ appointed for our refuge, yet, wherever we are, he is a refuge at hand, a very present help, for the word is nigh us and Christ in the word. 2. The man-slayer was safe in any of these cities; so in Christ believers that flee to him, and rest in him, are protected from the wrath of God and the curse of the law. There is no condemnation to those that are in Christ Jesus, Rom. viii. 1. Who shall condemn those that are thus sheltered? 3. They were all Levites’ cities; it was a kindness to the poor prisoner that though he might not go up to the place where the ark was, yet he was in the midst of Levites, who would teach him the good knowledge of the Lord, and instruct him how to improve the providence he was now under. It might also be expected that the Levites would comfort and encourage him, and bid him welcome; so it is the work of gospel ministers to bid poor sinners welcome to Christ, and to assist and counsel those that through grace are in him. 4. Even strangers and sojourners, though they were not native Israelites, might take the benefit of these cities of refuge, v. 15. So in Christ Jesus no difference in made between Greek and Jew; even the sons of the stranger that by faith flee to Christ shall be safe in him. 5. Even the suburbs or borders of the city were a sufficient security to the offender, Num 35:26; Num 35:27. So there is virtue even in the hem of Christ’s garment for the healing and saving of poor sinners. If we cannot reach to a full assurance, we may comfort ourselves in a good hope through grace. 6. The protection which the man-slayer found in the city of refuge was not owing to the strength of its walls, or gates, or bars, but purely to the divine appointment; so it is the word of the gospel that gives souls safety in Christ, for him hath God the Father sealed. 7. If the offender was ever caught struggling out of the borders of his city of refuge, or stealing home to his house again, he lost the benefit of his protection, and lay exposed to the avenger of blood; so those that are in Christ must abide in Christ, for it is at their peril if they forsake him and wander from him. Drawing back is to perdition.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Verses 9-12:
Divine Law required capital punishment for the shedding of blood, Ge 9:6. This could be legally done by two ways:
(1) Administered by established law.
(2) The next of kin, the “Avenger,” goel, from gaal, “to set free from blood,” could execute the manslayer.
It became custom that the nearest of kin should hunt down and kill one who had slain his near relative.
The purpose of the “Cities of Refuge” was to provide a place where the manslayer might go for sanctuary, until he could stand trial to determine his guilt or innocence.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
E. REGULATIONS REGARDING THE CITIES OF REFUGE vv. 915
TEXT
Num. 35:9. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, 10. Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come over Jordan into the land of Canaan; 11. Then ye shall appoint you cities to be cities of refuge for you; that the slayer may flee thither, which killeth any person at unawares. 12. And they shall be unto you cities for refuge from the avenger; that the manslayer die not, until he stand before the congregation in judgment. 13. And of these cities which ye shall give, six cities shall ye have for refuge. 14. Ye shall give three cities on this side Jordan, and three cities shall ye give in the land of Canaan, which shall be cities of refuge. 15. These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the children of Israel, and for the stranger, and for the sojourner among them: that every one that killeth any person unawares may flee thither.
PARAPHRASE
Num. 35:9. And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, 10. Speak unto the children of Israel and tell them, When you cross the Jordan into the land of Canaan, 11. you shall select for yourselves cities to be your cities of refuge, in order that the man-killer who has killed any person unintentionally may flee unto them. 12. And the cities shall be as a refuge unto you from the avenger, so that the man-killer may not die until he appears before the congregation in judgment. 13. And the cities which you are to give shall be your six cities of refuge. 14. You shall give three cities across the Jordan and three cities in the land of Canaan: they are to be cities of refuge. 15. These six cities shall be for refuge for the children of Israel, and for the alien and for the traveler among them, so that anyone who kills a person unintentionally may flee unto them.
COMMENTARY
The first thing to be noticed in the appointment of the six cities of refuge is that they were not intended to protect that individual who had committed deliberate, willful murder. Only where some reasonable doubt existed in reference to the circumstances might that man expect to be permitted sanctuary; otherwise, the sentence of the law was clear and emphatic: he must be stoned to death.
The perspective of the account is clearly that of Israels being yet on the east side of the Jordan: the cities were not even to be selected until they lived in Canaan. At that time, three cities on each side of the river should be appointed. In the event of any homicide in which the killer believed himself not to have been guilty of murder, he was obliged to scurry rapidly to the nearest city of refuge. Hence, the location of the six cities was to be a matter of careful concern. As the manslayer fled to the sanctuary, the avenger of blood, or the male next of kin to the deceased was obliged to make pursuit and, if he overtook the manslayer, he might put him to death without guilt of blood upon his hands.
The import of this law has been much discussed. The emerging value of the law is its emphasis upon the value of human lifeeven a careless act which results in the death of another is no light matter, and preventable homicide imposes a punishment upon that one who is careless, negligent or unconcerned about another human being. The law was to be enforced not upon the Israelites only, but upon any strangers, and even sojourners in their land. By this method all people who came within the scope of the laws force came under the instruction of those who saw its value and the rationale for the law itself. The basic concept was a gigantic stride forward from any law to be found in pagan contemporary society. The inherent value of each individuals life, and the awesome nature of divine justice are well established.
QUESTIONS AND RESEARCH ITEMS
638.
What were the cities of refuge specifically not designed to do?
639.
Why should any distinction be made among the manners by which homicide was committed?
640.
Describe the conduct expected of the manslayer and of the avenger of blood?
641.
Who was the avenger of blood?
642.
Why would the avenger of blood be permitted to slay the manslayer outside the city of refuge, or before he reached the city?
643.
Show what primary principles were established by this law.
644.
For what reasons were strangers and sojourners included under the law?
645.
How does this law compare with attitudes and laws of other countries relative to treatment of killers?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
6). Provision of Cities of Refuge and Prevention of Defilement of the Land ( Num 35:9-34 ).
Central to maintaining the purity of the land was the need to prevent within it the shedding of innocent blood. If a man deliberately slew another his life was forfeit. Blood would have to be given for blood, however shed (Exo 21:23; Deu 19:21). For to slay a man was to take what belonged to God, his very life, the breath of God (Gen 2:7), and to despatch his lifeblood into the dust before the time determined by Yahweh (Ecc 12:7), and thus his own life would be forfeit (Gen 9:5-6). In that way would the land be cleansed from blood guilt. If the murderer could not be discovered special provisions were made for an atonement ceremony so that the guilt could be purged (Deu 21:1-9).
But the question arose, what about the accidental shedding of blood? Provision was made for this in the cities of refuge. There the manslayer could be isolated until the death of the High Priest, whose blood would in some way then allow for the manslayer’s release, probably because the High Priest died and his blood was shed as the representative of the whole of Israel before Yahweh. Until then the ‘innocent’ manslayer could not be allowed to roam the land. His life was, as it were, held in suspense, until the death of the High Priest had finally expunged the consequences of shedding blood. By this the sacredness of human life was stressed. It was not a punishment. He was not imprisoned, his movements were not restricted, but he knew that if he moved away from the shelter of the city of refuge the avenger of blood was duty bound to seek him out in order to kill him.
For further stress on the cities of refuge see Exo 21:13; Deu 19:1-13; compare Jos 20:2; Jos 20:8. They symbolise the place of safety in Christ for all who flee to Him from ‘unwitting sin’.
It is interesting that here, as in the case of the Balaam stories, we now have three threefold sequences placed within a chiastic framework. In both cases the divine is being directly affected by the activities of a human, in the former case by sorcery, in the latter by the extinguishing of the breath of Yahweh, of the image of God, in a man.
a When they pass over Jordan they are to provide cities of refuge for unwitting manslayers (to prevent the shedding of innocent blood) (Num 35:9-11).
b The city is for a manslayer’s protection until he is brought for trial (Num 35:12).
c Six cities to be appointed, three in Canaan and three beyond Jordan. These cities available for both Israelites and resident aliens (Num 35:13-15),
d Three descriptions of slayings which deserve death (Num 35:16-18).
e The avenger of blood may put such to death when he meets him (Num 35:19).
d Three further descriptions of slayings which deserve death (Num 35:20-21 a).
e The avenger of blood may put him to death when he meets him (Num 35:21 b).
d Three descriptions of accidental slayings which do not deserve death (Num 35:22-23).
e The congregation will judge them and put them in safety in a city of refuge until the death of the High Priest. (Num 35:24-25).
c If the manslayer leaves his appointed city of refuge before that he can be slain by the avenger of blood without him incurring guilt (Num 35:26-28).
b The deliberate manslayer will be slain at the mouth of witnesses (at least two) (Num 35:29-30).
a No ransom to be allowed for manslaying, whether deliberate or accidental. This is because violent shedding of blood pollutes the land and there must be a death for it, for the land is not to be defiled because Yahweh dwells in it (Num 35:31-34).
The Provision of Cities of Refuge for Unwitting Manslayers (to prevent the shedding of innocent blood) ( Num 35:9-11 ).
Num 35:9
‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’
Once more we are reminded that we have here Yahweh’s word given to Moses.
Num 35:10-11
“ Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them, When you pass over the Jordan into the land of Canaan, then you shall appoint for yourselves cities to be cities of refuge for you, that the manslayer who kills any person unwittingly may flee there.”
The need for cities of refuge is declared by this requirement for their being ‘appointed’. They were needed in order to prevent the shedding of innocent blood, but also in order to isolate from the land anyone who had shed blood and slain another. The sacredness to God of human life was such that none who had taken such a life could be allowed to roam free in the land unless a parallel death had taken place. For thereby the land would be defiled.
Num 35:12
“ And the cities shall be to you for refuge from the avenger (goel), that the manslayer die not, until he stand before the congregation for judgment.”
These cities would act as a refuge from ‘the Avenger’ (the goel). The ‘goel’ often signified the ‘next-of-kin’, the kinsman-redeemer (Num 5:8; Num 27:11; Lev 25:25; Lev 25:49), and the term was used of those seen as responsible in the family for the protection of its name, its integrity, its wholeness and its inheritance from Yahweh. A man could sometimes be his own goel (Lev 25:26, compare Gen 4:24; Gen 27:45). Most would thus see ‘the avenger’ as a member of the family of a slain man who had the right to seek blood vengeance, the idea partly being that murder could be best controlled by allowing swift justice to be carried out by those most affected. Such an avenger could not then be accused of murder because he was judicially avenging the death of a member of his own family, and taking ‘life for life’. He was acting as official executioner. Such a concept was known from the earliest times. Cain feared that his family would kill him on sight (Gen 4:14). This sense of a right to family revenge is still in vogue among some supposedly civilised people even today, and treated as acceptable, even though usually illegal, an indication that man with all his outward sophistication, is still a beast at heart. Some others see the Avenger as being an appointed official whose responsibility it was to seek out murderers and slay them.
Note that the refuge was only until the manslayer was brought to trial before the people’s representatives. But that would probably only happen if an accusation was brought against him. It then remained his refuge either if he was not accused or if he was found not guilty of deliberate murder. But stress is laid on the fact that for a guilty man there was no permanent refuge.
“Stand before the congregation for judgment.” ‘Before the congregation’ generally indicates the whole of Israel (16:9; 32:4). Thus this was probably before the Tent of Meeting, with the justices and elders conducting the trial, with all who would being able to gather to hear the verdict. For the fact that if not guilty he was to be returned to the city of refuge confirms that it took place away from there. Alternately it might have been in the locality where the manslaying had been committed (19:12), where witnesses could be found, but in that case we might have expected that to be explained. And that would not really be ‘before the congregation’, unless ‘before the congregation’ is seen as signifying being judged by one’s peers.
Something of the procedure is described in Jos 20:4. The manslayer would flee from the avenger of blood to a city of refuge, and there he would stand before the gates of the city, and, having been brought within the gate area, would state his case before the elders. They were then to decide whether to receive him into the city, and give him a place in order that he might dwell among them, or whether to reject him because he admitted to deliberate murder. In cases of doubt they were not to deliver him up to the avenger of blood until he had stood ‘before the congregation’ for judgment.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Regulations Concerning the Cities of Refuge
v. 9. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, v. 10. Speak unto the children of Israel and say unto them, When ye be come over Jordan into the land of Canaan, v. 11. then ye shall appoint you cities to be cities of refuge for you, that the slayer may flee thither which killeth any person at unawares, v. 12. And they shall be unto you cities for refuge from the avenger v. 13. And of these cities which ye shall give six cities shall ye have for refuge.
v. 14. Ye shall give three cities on this side Jordan, v. 15. These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the children of Israel and for the stranger and for the sojourner among them, that every one that killeth any person unawares, v. 16. And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death.
v. 17. And if he smite him with throwing a stone, v. 18. Or if he smite him with an hand-weapon of wood, v. 19. The revenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer; when he meeteth him, he shall slay him. v. 20. But if he thrust him of hatred, or hurl at him by laying of wait, v. 21. or in enmity smite him with his hand that he die, he that smote him shall surely be put to death; for he is a murderer; the revenger of blood shall slay the murderer when he meeteth him, v. 22. But if he thrust him suddenly without enmity, v. 23. or with any stone wherewith a man may die, seeing him not, and cast it upon him that he die, v. 24. then the congregation shall judge between the slayer and the revenger of blood according to these judgments, v. 25. and the congregation shall deliver the slayer out of the hand of the revenger of blood, v. 26. But if the slayer shall at any time come without the border of the city of his refuge, whither he was fled, v. 27. and the revenger of blood find him without the borders of the city of his refuge, and the revenger of blood kill the slayer, he v. 28. because he v. 29. So these things shall be for a statute of judgment unto you throughout your generations in all your dwellings, v. 30. Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses, v. 31. Moreover, ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer which is guilty of death, v. 32. And ye shall take no satisfaction for him that is fled to the city of his refuge, that he should come again to dwell in the land, until the death of the priest; v. 33. So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are, v. 34. Defile not, therefore, the land which ye shall inhabit, wherein I dwell; for I, the Lord, dwell among the children of Israel,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
As one and the same subject is continued through these verses, I have not interrupted the Reader in its perusal, until he hath arrived at the close of it, in the end of the chapter. But it will be now proper to make a pause, and to take a serious and leisurely survey of the whole. And first, how sweet and refreshing is it to behold in those cities of refuge, the lively type of our Almighty Refuge, the LORD JESUS CHRIST. What murder have not you and I committed against our own souls, by sin; against GOD’S laws, against JESUS himself by crucifying him again and again, and putting him to an open shame! If death, judgment, and the law, which act as the avenger of blood, had overtaken us before we gained JESUS, the city of refuge, where would have been our remedy? Precious JESUS! in thee, and thy righteousness, we find a city of refuge, and are fully and everlastingly delivered from the avenger.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Num 35:9-34. Conditions Limiting the Privilege of Sanctuary.Anciently the holiness of a sanctuary extended to all who came in contact with it, so that the right of asylum was liable to be abused; but by this law protection at a city of refuge was to be refused to those homicides who in the judgment of the community, on the evidence of two witnesses, were guilty of murder, as inferred from (a) the existence of previous enmity or evidence of premeditation, (b) the use of a murderous weapon. Those who were guilty of manslaughter only (see Deu 19:4 f.) were safe within the city during the lifetime of the high priest: after his death they ceased to be liable to vengeance. Though the law promoted justice by discriminating between the intentional and the unintentional homicide, it still left the punishment of the former to private revenge instead of committing it to the community.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Cities of refuge 35:9-34
Six of these Levitical towns were also cities of refuge.
The appointment of cities of refuge was a divine provision for the safety of a killer who was not guilty of premeditated murder (cf. Deu 19:1-13; Joshua 20). God had told the Israelites not to murder (Exo 20:13). The right and duty of man to execute murderers was ancient (Gen 4:15; Gen 9:5-6). Ancient Near Easterners practiced capital punishment widely as part of the law of retaliation. The Mosaic Law regarding the cities of refuge regulated this practice of retaliating in harmony with God’s will.
Three of the cities stood west of the Jordan (Hebron, Shechem, and Kedesh), and three on the east side (Bezer, Ramoth-gilead, and Golan; Deu 4:43; Jos 20:7-8; Jos 21:13; Jos 21:21; Jos 21:27; Jos 21:32; Jos 21:36; Jos 21:38).
A manslayer (i.e., an unintentional killer) could find refuge in one of these cities, but a murderer (one who premeditated his act) could not. The next of kin to the victim (the blood avenger, Num 35:19) was not just free to kill the murderer, but he had an obligation to do so (Num 35:19; Num 35:21). This was the duty of the next of kin. Moses called him the "avenger of blood." There was no police force as such in Israel.
When a manslayer fled to a city of refuge, the residents of that city would determine if the guilty person was a murderer or a manslayer. The residents would have been mainly Levites since the cities of refuge were Levitical cities. If they judged him to be a murderer, the residents would turn him over to the avenger of blood who would kill him. If he was a manslayer, he would have to live in the city of refuge until the high priest died. He could not leave the city; it became his prison. If he left the city, he would be sinning against God. In this case the avenger of blood could hunt him down and kill him for his double offense of manslaughter and leaving his city of refuge.
"The sanctity of human life is clear both from the fact of capital punishment as the only suitable punishment for murder (Gen 9:5-9) and, on the other hand, from the prohibition against enacting the death penalty in cases where premeditation cannot be proved. To execute the innocent is as evil in God’s sight as to exonerate the guilty." [Note: Merrill, "Numbers," in The Old . . ., p. 126.]
The death of the high priest atoned for the sins of manslayers. The death of the high priest had atoning value. Consequently after the high priest died, the manslayer was free to go home. However, until the high priest died, his act of killing another human being, even though it was unintentional, rendered him guilty before God (of manslaughter; i.e., shedding blood, but not of murder, since it was unintentional).
"His death may have been understood as fulfilling the principle that shed human blood can only be expiated by shed human blood (Gen 9:6). In this case, the high priest’s death was on behalf of the killer, much as the priest offers sacrifices on behalf of the people elsewhere." [Note: Ashley, p. 654. Cf. Keil and Delitzsch, 3:265; and Budd, p. 384.]
God required at least two witnesses to give testimony before anyone in Israel suffered execution as a murderer. This was a requirement in the ancient Near East generally. [Note: See the Code of Hammurabi, sections 9-11, in James B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, p. 166.]
In some cases of law-breaking the guilty party could pay for his redemption. He could substitute a payment of money that the priest took as a covering for his sin. However, God did not permit this in the case of murderers or manslayers. The reason for this was that "blood pollutes the land" (Num 35:33). That is, these crimes brought uncleanness on the land because they involved killing people without divine authorization. The land was to be clean in this sense because the Lord dwelt in it among His people (Num 35:34). Canaan was not just the Promised Land, but it was to be the Holy Land as well.
These regulations underscore again the uniqueness and value of human life. We see this both in the consequences for killing another person and in the safeguards granted the killer. The basic human rights of people are extremely important to God. The cities of refuge are also illustrative of Christ who provides shelter for the sinner from judgment (cf. Rom 8:1; Rom 8:33-34; Heb 6:17-20).