Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,
Parallel Translations
-
Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,
-
And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
-
And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying:
Cross-references
No cross-references for this verse.
Explain this verse (6 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... At the same…
And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... At the same time, or he continued his speech unto him:
saying: as follows.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 9–34. The ‘Cities of Refuge,’ and the Law relating…
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.
Read full note →
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 gô’çl 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 gô’çl, 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 gô’çl may kill him. If, on the other hand, he is found guilty of deliberate murder, the gô’çl 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 gô’çl 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.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain Vers. 9-29. The manslayer and the cities of refuge.
Vers. 9-29. The manslayer and the cities of refuge.
The law of sanctuary, as it is here laid down, never fails to remind the devout reader of the refuge which God"s mercy has provided in Christ for those who, by their sin, have exposed themselves to the vengeance of the law. This way of regarding the matter can be thoroughly justified. At the same time it is well to bear in mind that the law was framed, in the first instance, for a humbler purpose.
Read full note →
I THE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REFUGE CONSIDERED AS A PART OF THE MOSAIC CRIMINAL LAW. In primitive and barbarous states of society the execution of vengeance for murder was devolved by ancient custom on the next kinsman of the murdered man. The goel, the redeemer and kinsman, was also the avenger of blood. The custom is sufficiently harsh and barbarous, and gives rise to blood-feuds and untold miseries. Yet, for the states of society in which it originated, it cannot be dispensed with. There are at this day tribes without number, especially in the East, in which the sanctity of human life is guarded only by fear of the avenger of blood. Accordingly, the law of Moses does not abolish the custom; the next kinsman was still held bound to take vengeance for blood. The aim of the Mosaic jurisprudence was to conserve what was good in the ancient custom, and at the same time to impose such a check upon it as would prevent its abuse. This twofold design was accomplished in the following way:
1. Certain cities were made sanctuary cities. (Exo_21:13) The avenger of blood might pursue the manslayer to the gate of the city of refuge; might kill him, if he could, before reaching the gate; but at the gate he had to halt and sheathe his sword.
2. Although the gate of the city of refuge was open to every manslayer, the city did not suffer the willful murderer to laugh at the sword of justice. It gave provisional protection to all, but only to save them from the blind and indiscriminating anger of the avenger of blood. The refugees were sheltered only till they had stood a regular trial (verse 12). If it should be proved to the satisfaction of the congregation that the accused person had been guilty of murder, he was to be delivered up to the avenger of blood to be killed.
3. If, on the contrary, it should be found that the manslayer meant no harm, that it was a case of accidental homicide, the city of refuge was to afford him inviolable sanctuary. The law did not (as with us) suffer him to go home free. Accidental homicide is often the result of carelessness. To teach men not to trifle with the sanctity of life, the manslayer, although no murderer, had to confine himself to the city of his refuge. But so long as he abode within its walls he was safe.
II THE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REFUGE CONSIDERED AS A TYPE. That it had a typical reference might be gathered (were there nothing else) from the direction that the manslayer was to continue in the sanctuary city "until the death of the high priest;" a meaningless provision if the statute had been only a piece of criminal law. Considered as a type, the ordinance represents
1. Our condition as sinners. We are exposed to the vengeance of God"s law, and the stroke may fall upon us at any moment. A condition in which there can be no solid peace.
2. What Christ is to those who are found in him. He is their High Priest, whose life is the security for their life; who "is able to save to the uttermost, seeing he ever liveth". (Heb_7:25) And he is their Refuge, insomuch that for them the one thing needful is that they be found in him. (Rom_8:1, Rom_8:38, 39 Php_3:8, 9)
3. How we may obtain the salvation which is in Christ. It is by fleeing into him for refuge and thereafter abiding in him continually. In him we are safe, out of him we are lost. This way of salvation is such as renders inexcusable those who neglect it. The cities of refuge were so distributed that no manslayer had far to run before reaching one. There were three on each side of Jordan; of the three, in each case, one lay near the north border, one near the south border, and one in the middle. Every city was the natural center of its province and accessible from every side. They were so situated that no fugitive required to cross either a river or a mountain chain before reaching his refuge. How strikingly is all this realized in Christ our refuge! B.
HOMILIES BY E.S. PROUT Vers. 9-34. The cities of refuge.
The laws in regard to the cities of refuge and manslaughter suggest truths on the following subjects. We see in them
I A TOLERATION OF WHAT GOD NEITHER HAS APPOINTED NOR APPROVES. The old custom of blood-avenging by the goel, though open to grave abuses, was not altogether proscribed. The laws given by God to Moses were not always absolutely the best, though, relatively to the state of the people, the best they could endure. Other illustrations are found in the laws relating to divorce, polygamy, and slavery. These examples of a wise conservatism suggest lessons for parents, who have to "overlook" (Act_17:30) the times of ignorance of their children, and for missionaries, who may have for a time to tolerate inevitable evils in converts whose consciences are not yet trained. As God dealt with the Jews during their childhood as a nation, so does he in mercy deal with his sinful children during their education in this life. (Psa_19:12 Psa_130:3, Psa_130:4)
II AN EDUCATION BY MEANS OF THE CUSTOMS OF THE PAST. God tolerated the old custom, but not in its entirety. He modified it, and thus carried on the education of the nation. On the one hand, the cities of refuge were not like the asyla of the Greeks and Romans, for willful murderers were led forth from them to justice (verse 30). On the other band, the homicide by accident was safe under certain conditions (verse 12, 25-28). So too now God discriminates between willful sins (Heb_10:26-31, Heb_10:38, Heb_10:39) and sins of ignorance and imprudence, which may bring after them serious disabilities, but do not doom to destruction.
III A PREFIGURATION OF SPIRITUAL TRUTH IN THE FUTURE. The cities of refuge, if not strictly a type, are an illustration of Christ, the sinner"s refuge. The rules prescribed by Jews in regard to the road being kept in good condition, finger-posts being provided, &c., suggest various applications. ;
1. The cities of refuge were near every portion of the land, and Christ is within reach of every one of us.
2. The way was to be made plain; and the word of the truth of the gospel is plain, so that "he that readeth it may run" straight to the refuge.
3. Every manslayer, native or foreign, received the shelter of the refuge; and sinners of every degree of guilt and every nation have no safety except in Christ.
4. Within the city, and "in Christ," there is no condemnation.
5. To quit the refuge, and to "go away" from Christ, is to meet destruction.
6. A murderer had but the appearance of safety within the city, and the willful sinner can find no shelter from the wrath of God even when professing to believe in Christ. P.
Vers. 9-34. The cities of refuge.
We in our modern English life have an experience of the stability of social order, of general submission to a national law, and of confidence in the strict administration of justice, which causes this provision for the cities of refuge to come on us in a very unexpected way. We are not unprepared to read the other announcements which come at the close of this Booki.e., the strict injunction to expel the Canaanites, the allotment of the inheritance, and the Divine marking out of the boundaries of the land; but this appointment of the cities of refuge is like a great light suddenly lighted up to reveal to us the peculiar social state of Israel.
I We are brought face to face with A TIME WHEN THERE WAS NO GENERAL AND SECURE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. God had to make provision here for a strong feeling which had evidently grown up through many centuries. This provision pointed back to those unsocial days when the only effectual avengers of murder were the kinsmen of the slain person. The punishment of the murderer had come to be regarded as a family duty, because no one else would concern himself with it. And in the course of time what had begun in necessity ended in a conventional sense of honour, and of the obligations of kinship, which there was no way of escaping. Private revenge, whatever its abuses, whatever the dark instigations to it in the heart of the avenger, was in a certain sense imperatively necessary when there was no efficient public tribunal of justice. Thus we see how much of the barbaric element still remained in Israel. It is a matter of common agreement among us that a man must not take the law into his own hands, but in ancient Israel every man seems to have done it without the slightest hesitation.
II We have here another illustration of THE ALLOWANCE THAT WAS MADE FOR HARDNESS OF HEART ON THE PART OF ISRAEL. When the Pharisees came to our Lord, tempting him with a question concerning divorce, he replied, "Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives". (Mat_19:8) So here we may say that Moses, because of the hardness of heart in Israel, provided these cities of refuge. It was no manner of use to tell the goel, the blood avenger, not to pursue the manslayer. If he had neglected to do so he would have rested under heavy reproach all the days of his life. Moses knew well how deeply fixed was this institution of blood revenge. Had he not himself, in his patriotic zeal, taken the law into his own hand some eighty years before, and slain the Egyptian? God might indeed have forbidden this blood revenge altogether, but the command would have been a dead letter. He did a more efficacious thing in providing these cities of refuge. The existence of them was incompatible with the continuance in undiminished vigour of the practice of blood revenge. By appointing them God recognized the necessity out of which the practice had arisen. He allowed all that might be good and conscientious in the motive of the avenger. If the person pursued were really guilty of willful murder, he could not escape; the city of refuge was no refuge for him. The line between murder and accidental homicide was very plainly drawn. Under such a system as God had established in Israel he could not but protect the unfortunate man who was fleeing from a passionate, unreasoning pursuer, and secure for him a fair inquiry. Everything was done to secure the best interests of all. God could not but honour his own solemn and exalted command, "Thou shalt not kill.
III An illustration also of THE UNDESERVED CALAMITIES WHICH MAY COME UPON A MAN IN A WORLD WHERE SIN REIGNS EVEN UNTO DEATH, One man slaying another unwittingly deserves our deepest pity and sympathy. We have heard of those to whom such a misfortune had come having to walk softly all the days of their life because of the unintended act. They could not get it out of their minds. Yet here, in addition to possible grief of heart, there was a serious, a long, perhaps a life-long, disadvantage. The homicide, however really innocent he might be, had to flee for his life and stay in the city of refuge till the death of the high priest. Thus we have another proof of the manifold power which death has to disturb the world. These inconveniences to the manslayer could not all at once be removed. We live in a world where we not only may in a spirit of love bear one another"s burdens, but some of them we must bear as a matter of necessity. The unwitting homicide had to bear the consequences of his fellow-man being mortal. Yet at the same time we are made to see how God was surely advancing to break the power of death. The lot of the manslayer was greatly mended by the institution of these cities of refuge. We may well believe that in the course of time their character became so recognized that this particular obligation of the goel would fall into disuse; the nation would come to accept the security, the superiority, and the rightness of public justice.
IV Consider the points in connection with the institution of cities of refuge which show THE RESPECT FOR HUMAN LIFE WHICH GOD WAS SEEKING TO TEACH THE PEOPLE. The path of Israel from Egypt to Canaan had indeed been marked by much of violent death. The overwhelming of Pharaoh"s army, all the sudden visitations of Divine wrath upon Israel, the slaying in battle of the Amalekites, Amorites, and Midianites these had made God to seem as if he were continually girt with the horrid instruments of the executioner. But for all these acts, dreadful as they were, there was a reason a Divine, and therefore sufficient, reason. Whatever was done Was done judicially. If the circumstances and times of the Israelites are taken into account, sufficient cause will appear for the frequency with which God had recourse to violent death in the carrying out of his punitive purposes. Then, with respect to murder, it was the feeling of the time that a murderer must not be suffered to live. Putting the murderer to death was the only effectual way in those semi-savage times of teaching respect for life. Respect for life was taught to the avenger by putting the city of refuge between him and the unwitting homicide. Respect for life was taught also by the inconvenience, to say the least of it, to which the homicide was put. It was taught by the requiring of more than one witness to establish a capital charge. And we also need more respect for human life than we often, show. We should not take it so recklessly and exultingly in war; we should not take it under an insufficient plea of necessity on the gallows. There is a lamentable way of speaking of the brutal and hardened members of society, the class from which murderers so often come, as if they were little better than vermin. Many seem to think that it is a matter of no great consequence whether a man be hanged or not. True, he has to die at last; but surely there is a great difference between death when it comes in spite of the attempts of physician and attendants to ward it off, and when it comes by our deliberate infliction of it. We have all sorts of institutions and instruments to defend life by land and by sea; we have one hideous instrument, the gallows, to take it away. And as we see God advancing men, by the appointment of these cities of refuge, from the "wild justice" of private revenge to a calm reliance on public justice, so we may hope that the spirit of love and the spirit of Christ will more and more prevail amongst us, till at last the gallows will be banished, if not into utter oblivion, at all events into antiquarian obscurity.
V CONSIDER HOW THESE CITIES OF REFUGE WERE TO BE LEVITICAL CITIES, It was fitting that the Levites should have charge of these cities, since the Levites belonged to no tribe in particular, but to the whole nation. They were removed from the temptation which would otherwise have come, if the city of refuge had belonged to the same tribe as the blood avenger. Unless the city of refuge was made really efficacious, it was no city of refuge at all. Giving Levi the charge of these cities also prevented jealousies between tribes. It conferred too on the homicide certain privileges he might not otherwise have had; he gained opportunities of Levitical instruction. God can make his own abiding compensations to those who fall into calamity by no fault of their own. None can really hurt us but ourselves in that which is inward, permanent, and of real importance.
VI CONSIDER HOW THE DEATH OF THE HIGH PRIEST AFFECTED THE POSITION OF THE UNWITTING MANSLAYER. He was then free from any further disability and need of confinement. The death of the high priest had a great expiatory effect. According to the value of the types, he was holier than all the unblemished beasts, and his death counted for very much indeed in its cleansing efficacy. Thus we see, by this reference to the death of the high priest, how God regarded his own honour as a holy God. Blood defiled the land, even when spilt unwittingly, and nothing less than the death of the high priest could cleanse away the stain. Nothing less could do it, but this did it quite sufficiently. Y.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain Ye shall appoint you cities, to be cities of…
Num_35:9-34
Ye shall appoint you cities, to be cities of refuge for you
Read full note →
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.)
.
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain Regulations Concerning the Cities of Refuge
Regulations Concerning the Cities of Refuge
v. 9. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
Read full note →
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, by error, inadvertently, without premeditation or malice.
v. 12. And they shall be unto you cities for refuge from the avenger (of blood), that the manslayer die not until he stand before the congregation in judgment and be able to clear himself of the charge of malicious murder.
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, in the territory of the two and one half tribes, and three cities shall ye give in the land of Canaan, which shall be cities of refuge.
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, unintentionally, may flee thither. These regulations are still further expanded in Deu 19:1-13, especially with regard to the avenger of blood, for so the nearest relative of any person to whom an injustice had been done was called. By God’s permission such a person was empowered to revenge a wrong, even to the extent of putting a slayer to death, the present precept regulating the custom. There follow regulations concerning the legal process in the case of manslaughter.
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, with a stone large enough to fill the hand, and therefore presumably heavy enough to cause death, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death.
v. 18. Or if he smite him with an hand-weapon of wood, one whose holding requires the full size of the hand, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death.
v. 19. The revenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer; when he meeteth him, he shall slay him. In these three cases, where a heavy iron instrument, an ax or hammer, a large stone, or a heavy wooden tool or cudgel was used in striking down the neighbor, the evidence that he deliberately took the neighbor’s life was considered conclusive from the outset.
v. 20. But if he thrust him of hatred, or hurl at him by laying of wait, with deliberate intent, that he die,
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, the elders of the city of refuge in that case being obliged to deliver the murderer to the avenger of blood, Deu 19:11-12.
v. 22. But if he thrust him suddenly without enmity, without a previous quarrel, or have cast upon him anything without laying of wait, without malicious intention,
v. 23. or with any stone wherewith a man may die, seeing him not, and cast it upon him that he die, as might happen, for instance, during the building of a house, and was not his enemy, neither sought his. harm, had absolutely no intention of hurting him,
v. 24. then the congregation shall judge between the slayer and the revenger of blood according to these judgments, according to the regulations as contained in this Chapter;
v. 25. and the congregation shall deliver the slayer out of the hand of the revenger of blood, save his life by preventing his execution by the hand of the revenger, and the congregation shall restore him to the city of his refuge, grant him safe-conduct to this haven of safety, whither he was fled, for the trial, of course, took place in his own city; and he shall abide in it unto the death of the high priest which was anointed with the holy oil, the incumbent of the office at the time of the trial. The death of the high priest thus released him from his banishment.
v. 26. But if the slayer shall at any time come without the border of the city of his refuge, whither he was fled, where he enjoyed the protection of the Levites under the provisions of this law,
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 (the revenger) shall not be guilty of blood, shall not be considered a murderer,
v. 28. because he (the slayer) 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, to his own inheritance in the midst of his tribe, since his life was now safeguarded by the Law of God.
v. 29. So these things shall be for a statute of judgment unto you throughout your generations in all your dwellings, these precepts belonged to the ordinances which should remain in power as long as the nation of Israel endured.
v. 30. Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses, their testimony being needed to convict him; but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die. Where the life of a person was in jeopardy, the testimony of a single person, no matter how trustworthy he might be otherwise, should not be deemed sufficient for conviction. Cf Deu 17:6; Deu 19:15.
v. 31. Moreover, ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer which is guilty of death, he could not save his life by paying a sum of money as ransom; but he shall be surely put to 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; no payment of money should procure for him a release from his banishment.
v. 33. So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are, by sparing the life of a murderer, due to false sentiment or the acceptance of bribe money; for blood, it defileth the land, namely, that shed in willful murder; and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein but by the blood of him that shed it, Gen 9:6; only by this expiation is the justice of God satisfied.
v. 34. Defile not, therefore, the land which ye shall inhabit, wherein I dwell; for I, the Lord, dwell among the children of Israel, and every desecration of the land would call forth His avenging justice, Lev 18:25. Although this special precept belongs to the Levitical Law of the Old Testament, it would be well for legislative bodies and executives, in our country especially, to lay aside the false sentimentalism which spares the lives of murderers and has proved itself a curse to the nation.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 accidentally or without wanting to or trying to
unintentionally
accidentally or without wanting to or trying to
Read full note →
translationWords
Yahweh
Moses
Jordan River
Canaan
refuge
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.