Josué 20
Bob Utley · Citado em PreceptAustin
Josué 20
Utley - “cities of refuge” Originally those who were fleeing from hasty justice could grab the horns of the altar for safety (cf. Exod. 21:14; 1 Kgs. 1:50–53; 2:28–31). However, this system was replaced by having set cities within the Promised Land. Moses had already designated three cities in the trans-Jordan area (cf. Deut. 4:41ff). There are several discussions in the Pentateuch related to the cities of refuge (cf. Exod. 21:12–14; Num. 35:10–28; Deut. 19:1–13). If a person killed a fellow Israelite by accident, he could flee to one of these six cities. There, a trial would be held (cf. v. 4). If innocent of premeditated murder, he still had to remain in the city until the death of the High Priest. If guilty of murder, he was turned over to the blood avenger of the family he violated for the immediate punishment of death (cf. v. 9). (Commentary) Refuge (04733) miqlat is a masculine noun that refers to a refuge, a place of safety and security. An asylum where a person guilty of manslaughter could flee for protection from the blood avenger (the goel) REFUGE is from a Latin word meaning to escape and depicts a place which provides shelter or protection from trouble, danger or distress. This noun is always used in connection with the cities appointed to provide asylum for those guilty of involuntary manslaughter. Such a provision prevented excesses in the law of retribution. Initially, those not guilty of intentional or premeditated killing could seek asylum at the altar (Ex 21:12–14), but those who killed with premeditation should be dragged from the altar and executed (cf. 1Ki 2:28–31). Once Israel was in the Promised Land distance would potentially render successful flight more difficult and place innocent men at risk of being killed by the blood avenger. God in His perfect wisdom instructed Israel to establish cities of refuge throughout the promised land (Nu 35:9–34). Miqlat - 20v all translated "refuge" - Num. 35:6; Num. 35:11; Num. 35:12; Num. 35:13; Num. 35:14; Num. 35:15; Num. 35:25; Num. 35:26; Num. 35:27; Num. 35:28; Num. 35:32; Jos. 20:2; Jos. 20:3; Jos. 21:13; Jos. 21:21; Jos. 21:27; Jos. 21:32; Jos. 21:38; 1 Chr. 6:57; 1 Chr. 6:67 GEORGE BUSH Notes Critical and Practical on the Book of Joshua - Chapter 20 Appoint out for your cities of refuge. Heb. תנו לכם tenu lâkem, give for yourselves. No delinquency on the part of Joshua is to be inferred from this command, as if he had neglected, or were likely to neglect, a very important part of the arrangements designed to be carried into effect after the settlement of Israel in Canaan. He was well aware of the divine intention in this respect, and would doubtless have acted upon it, as well as upon every other order with which he was charged, but God saw fit to interpose to remind him that now was the precise time, when the tribes had just received their inheritances, and while they were yet together, to separate the cities of refuge for the uses for which they were intended, and respecting which such copious instructions had been before given, Num. 35:11–34; Deut. 19:2–10. To the notes on these passages the reader is referred for a fuller account of the nature and object of this institution. It was an essential appendage to the patriarchal system of government, as far as the avenging of blood was concerned. It has been already remarked, that the nearest of kin to a deceased person had not only the right of redeeming an inheritance that had been forfeited or alienated, but had also authority to slay on the spot the person who had slain his relative. But as a man might casually kill another against whom he had no ill will, and with whom he had no quarrel, and might thus be liable to lose his own life undeservedly, at the hands of the avenger of blood, these privileged cities were wisely and humanely appointed for the protection of those who had committed accidental homicide, till the cause could receive a judicial hearing from the magistrate. They had authority, according as, upon strict examination, they found him guilty or not of wilful murder, to deliver him up to the avenger of blood, or, after the lapse of a certain time, to grant him a discharge. By the hand of Moses. By the agency, by the ministry of Moses; by him as an organ of communication. QUESTION - What were the cities of refuge in the Old Testament? ANSWER - The cities of refuge were part of the distribution of the Promised Land among the twelve tribes of Israel. Only one tribe, the Levites, was not given land to develop. Instead, they were to be the priests of the Lord and the overseers of the tabernacle and all its rites and furnishings. Only the Levites could carry and set up the tabernacle (Numbers 2:5-13). As the Levites were to have no territorial domain allocated to them like the other tribes in the conquest of Canaan, they were to be distributed throughout the land in certain cities appropriated to their use. Part of their inheritance consisted of forty-eight cities spread throughout the land (Numbers 35:6-7). Of these forty-eight cities, six were designated as cities of refuge. The cities were Kedesh, Shechem, Hebron, Bezer, Ramoth, and Golan (Joshua 20:7-8). The Mosaic Law stated that anyone who committed a murder was to be put to death (Exodus 21:14). But for unintentional deaths, God set aside these cities to which the murderer could flee for refuge (Exodus 21:13). He would be safe from the avenger—the family member charged with avenging the victim’s death (Numbers 35:19)—until the case could go to trial. The congregation would judge to find if the attacker acted unintentionally. If he did, he would return to the city of refuge and live there safely until the death of the high priest who was in office at the time of the trial, at which point he could return to his property. If the attacker left the city of refuge before the death of the high priest, however, the avenger would have the right to kill him (Numbers 35:24-28). The establishment of those privileged sanctuaries among the cities of the Levites is probably traceable to the idea that the Levites would be the most suitable and impartial judges, that their presence and counsels might calm or restrain the stormy passions of the blood avenger. By their consecration as priests, the Levites were mediators between the Israelites and God. As such, they would have been gifted to calmly mediate between the attacker and the victim’s family, ensuring that no further bloodshed would occur. The cities of refuge are types of Christ, in whom sinners find a refuge from the destroyer of our souls. Just as the guilty person sought refuge in the cities set up for that purpose, we flee to Christ for refuge from sin (Hebrews 6:18). We run to Christ to escape the danger we are in from the curse and condemnation of the law, from the wrath of God, and from an eternity in hell. Only Christ provides refuge from these things, and it is to Him alone that we must run. Just as the cities were open to all who fled to them for safety, it is Christ who provides safety to all who come to Him for refuge from sin and its punishment.GotQuestions.org Related Resources: What is an avenger of blood in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org What is the law of retribution? | GotQuestions.org Cities of Refuge - Holman Bible Dictionary - in depth discussion of cities of refuge Cities of Refuge - Jewish Encyclopedia J
Josué 20
Utley - This is a good place to point out that the commandment “You shall not murder” (cf. Exod. 20:13; Deut. 5:17) does not mean “kill” (KJV), but do not commit “non-legal, premeditated murder” (BDB 953, cf. Exod. 21:12–14). There was legal premeditated killing - blood avenger, holy war, judicial sentences (Commentary) Campbell - According to Jewish tradition the roads leading to these cities were kept in excellent condition and the crossroads were well marked with signposts reading, “Refuge! Refuge!” Runners were also stationed along the way to guide the fugitives. (The Bible Knowledge Commentary Old Testament) Utley on “the avenger of blood” This is the Hebrew term, which denoted a near relative who rendered aid to the family and avenged the family in a case of injury (cf. Num. 35:19, 21, 24, 25, 27; Deut. 19:6, 12). The concept first appears in Gen. 4:14 and 9:5, 6. The positive side can be seen in Ruth 3:13. It is also mentioned in Lev. 25:25; Num. 5:8 and Jer. 32:7. (Commentary) Howard on the avenger of blood - The idea of blood vengeance behind our passage here in Joshua 20 (and the related passages in Numbers 35 and Deuteronomy 19) is more limited than the broader idea of the "kinsman-redeemer." The "avenger of blood" was not free to take private vengeance: the Bible clearly reserves vengeance to God alone (Deut. 32:35; Isa. 34:8; Rom. 12:19). Numbers 35 states clearly that the avenger of blood was only free to kill someone who had killed another if (1) that person ventured forth from a city of refuge (Num. 35:26-28) or (2) that person was guilty of murder and not manslaughter (Num. 35:16-21). The avenger of blood had a legal status in society to carry out society's (i.e., God's) judgments and was by no means one who was to exact private vengeance (Joshua: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture Volume 5 The New American Commentary) David
Josué 20
Utley - “until the death of the one who was High Priest in those days” Even though the man was protected there still was a price to be paid for his actions: he was separated from his own tribal allocation and home (but not his immediate family) until the death of the High Priest (cf. Num. 35:25). Part of the penalty was also the fact that the person had to live with the Levites and, therefore, would be trained in the way of the Law for these many years. (Commentary) Gangel has an interesting comment on the death of the high priest - This must also be another one of God's dramatic pictures of redemption and atonement. In a sense, in God's eyes, the death of the high priest paid the debt for the freedom of those who were guilty of manslaughter. An accused person could not buy his own freedom; it could only be purchased with the life of a high priest. And forgiveness was forgiveness despite the intensity of the crime or the amount of time served in a city of refuge. Murderers and liars both go to hell if they do not trust Christ's salvation. But murderers and liars can also be saved in the same instant under the same conditions with no lingering spiritual consequences of the severity of their crimes. (Holman Old Testament Commentary - Joshua) Believer's Study Bible - God's concern for human life is shown not only in His desire to protect the manslayer, but also in the exile of the manslayer in the city. God considers the spilling of human blood to be a significant event, whatever the cause (cf. Gen. 4:10; 9:5, 6). The death of the high priest may have been understood as a form of satisfaction or cleansing of the land for the blood that had been shed (Deut. 21:1-9). THOUGHT - The question arises as to how this applies to NT believers. I'm glad you asked! The short answer is that in the Garden of Eden Satan murdered Adam (Jn 8:44) and since that fateful day all mankind has in effect been murdered, born dead in our trespasses and sins (Ro 5:12+, Eph 2:1+). We were in need of a blood avenger, a near kinsman to avenge our murder. Jesus Christ became a Man that He might become our Kinsman-Redeemer (see Table depicting Jesus as our Kinsman-Redeemer), but not only did He become our Kinsman-Redeemer but He also became our Blood Avenger (See discussion) Grant notes that there is a reference to the cities of refuge in Hebrews: "That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us" (Heb 6:18). The writer is encouraging the readers that the promise of God can never fail. He refers back to the great promise made in Genesis 22:16-17. God had made the promise and had confirmed it by an oath, and "an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife" (Heb 6:16), that is an end of all argument. This promise from God is an encouragement to those who "have fled for refuge". We have fled to the Lord for refuge, but there is one great difference. Whereas those who found shelter in the cities of refuge were not guilty of premeditated sin, we have been guilty, not only of what we may regard as "accidental sin" in the sense that we were overtaken by it, but also by deliberate sin. The Lord Jesus, therefore, provides refuge, even when we have deliberately sinned, although only those who repent from their sins (AND BELIEVE IN THE LORD JESUS CHRIST) enjoy such refuge. The purpose of fleeing was to "lay hold upon the hope set before us". The cities of refuge provided a temporary place of safety, but that provided by the Lord Jesus is eternal. (What the Bible Teaches) GEORGE BUSH Notes Critical and Practical on the Book of Joshua - Chapter 20 Until he stand before the congregation for judgment. In order to a still greater security for the interests of justice, and to guard with the utmost vigilance against a wrong decision, another hearing seems to have been appointed, after a considerable interval, and before a larger court, whose verdict was to be final in the case. It is probable that the ‘congregation’ here spoken of was that of his own city, or of the people at large, who were also allowed to constitute a tribunal, and to sit in judgment on the case. Compare Notes on Num. 35:25. Joshua 20:7 So they set apart Kedesh in Galilee in the hill country of Naphtali and Shechem in the hill country of Ephraim, and Kiriath-arba (that is, Hebron) in the hill country of Judah. Kedesh: Jos 21:32 1Ch 6:76 Shechem: Jos 21:21 Ge 33:18,19 2Ch 10:1 Kirjatharba: Jos 14:15 21:11,13 hill country: Lu 1:39 Joshua 20 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Map to help visualize cities of refuge - UNDERLINED Zondervan Atlas of the Bible: C. Rasmussen (recommended resource - do not reproduce) THREE CITIES OF REFUGE WEST OF THE JORDAN RIVER So they set apart (qadash) Kedesh in Galilee (because there was another Kedesh) in the hill country of Naphtali and Shechem in the hill country of Ephraim, and Kiriath-arba (that is, Hebron) in the hill country of Judah - Kedesh, Shechem and Hebron were "set apart" (qadash) which means made holy, consecrated or sanctified. All three cities were located west of the Jordan and all three were Levitical cities (see underlined cities in map above which also have triangles) The other 3 cities of refuge were on the east side of the Jordan River. Note that all three cities were in the hill country (see Morris' comment below). Henry