Why were there cities of refuge on the Old Testament?
 |
| Moses with the tablets of the Ten Commandments, painting by Rembrandt (1659) (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
These were cities that had an altar. The Old Testament records only two incidents in which Israelites made use of this right: Adonijah, David’s son, who proclaimed himself king and whose life was spared by Solomon, David’s actual successor (1 Kgs. 1:50–53); and Joab, David’s general (who was not, in fact, granted asylum by King Solomon on account of the innocent lives he had taken [2:28–34]).
Because not every Israelite who needed to was able to flee to the central sanctuary (the tabernacle or temple), the Lord commanded Moses to urge the Israelites to select from the levitical cities six cities of refuge—three on either side of the Jordan—once they reached the promised land (Num. 35:9–15). Having appointed the three Transjordanian cities of refuge (Deut. 4:41–43), Moses stipulated that after the Conquest the Israelites would be able to appoint the three cities west of the Jordan (Deut. 19:1–3).
Because not every Israelite who needed to was able to flee to the central sanctuary (the tabernacle or temple), the Lord commanded Moses to urge the Israelites to select from the levitical cities six cities of refuge—three on either side of the Jordan—once they reached the promised land (Num. 35:9–15). Having appointed the three Transjordanian cities of refuge (Deut. 4:41–43), Moses stipulated that after the Conquest the Israelites would be able to appoint the three cities west of the Jordan (Deut. 19:1–3).
In this way the cities of refuge would fulfill the function of protection which the national altar had occupied previously. In time Joshua, Moses’ successor, set apart these six cities: the three in Transjordan—Gezer in the tribal territory of Reuben, Ramoth in Gilead, and Golan in Manasseh (Josh. 20:8; cf. Deut. 4:41–43)—and the three in Cisjordan—Kedesh in Galilee, Shechem in Ephraim, and Kiriath-arba or Hebron in Judah (Josh. 20:7).
Before asylum could be granted, the “congregation” in one of the cities of refuge (Num. 35:12) would determine whether or not there had been any enmity between the slayer and his victim prior to the crime (Deut. 4:42; 19:4–6; Josh. 20:5). According to Josh. 20:4 it seems that a preliminary hearing before the local authorities preceded the more formal hearing before the assembly (5:6). (The biblical accounts vary on the location of these inquiries.)
Before asylum could be granted, the “congregation” in one of the cities of refuge (Num. 35:12) would determine whether or not there had been any enmity between the slayer and his victim prior to the crime (Deut. 4:42; 19:4–6; Josh. 20:5). According to Josh. 20:4 it seems that a preliminary hearing before the local authorities preceded the more formal hearing before the assembly (5:6). (The biblical accounts vary on the location of these inquiries.)
If at such a hearing the manslayer was found to have acted unintentionally, he was to remain in the city of refuge to which he had fled (5:6) “until the death of the high priest” (cf. Num. 35:28), an event which may have effected a general atonement or which may have severed the ties between the manslayer and the city of refuge, of which the Levites and hence the high priest were representative. After the death of the high priest the manslayer could safely return to his own home (Num. 35:28; Josh. 20:6).
Myers, A. C. (1987). In The Eerdmans Bible dictionary (p. 219). Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
