This photo is
not a representation for the article involving Sanctuaries for
Christians. The plague shows the
existence of the name Jehovah for the Jewish community, even back in 1733.
What do you think:
Did
the cities of refuge in ancient Israel become Sanctuaries for Criminals?
In the ancient pagan world, many
temples served as asylums for fugitives or criminals. In medieval Christendom,
abbeys and churches served the same function. The rules governing ancient
Israel’s cities of refuge, however, ensured that they did not become
sanctuaries for criminals.
The Mosaic Law stated that cities of
refuge protected only the
unintentional manslayer.
“Now this is what should take place
regarding the manslayer who may flee there in order to live: When he strikes
his fellow man unintentionally and he
did not previously hate him; as when
he goes with his fellow man into the forest to gather wood and he raises his
hand to cut the tree with the ax, but the ax head flies off the handle and hits
his fellow man and he dies, the manslayer should flee to one of these cities to
live.” Deuteronomy 19:4, 5.
(Italics added.)
The unintentional manslayer could
flee to the nearest city of refuge, out of reach of the victim’s nearest male
relative, who could otherwise avenge the shed blood. Upon reaching a city of
refuge, the fugitive was to state his case to the older men at the city gate
and was to be received hospitably. To prevent willful murderers from taking
cover under this provision, the fleeing one, after entering the city of refuge,
had to stand trial at the city gates in the city having jurisdiction where the
killing occurred, in order to prove his innocence. The elders reviewed the
relationship between the fugitive and the victim, noting if prior hatred
existed.
“If death resulted because he pushed
him out of hatred or threw something at him with malicious intent, or out of
hatred he struck him with his hand, and he died, the one who struck him will be
put to death without fail. He is a murderer. The avenger of blood will put the murderer
to death when he encounters him. “‘But if
it was unexpectedly and not out of
hatred that he pushed him or threw any article at him without malicious
intent, or if he did not see him and caused a stone to fall on him and he was
not an enemy or seeking his injury, and the person died, the assembly
should then judge between the one who struck him and the avenger of blood, in
harmony with these judgments.” Numbers
35:20-24
“”Otherwise, in the heat of anger,
the avenger of blood may chase after the manslayer, overtake him, and kill him,
because the distance to the city was too far. However, he did not deserve to
die, since he did not previously hate
his fellow man. That is why I am commanding you: ‘Set three cities apart.’” Deuteronomy 19:6, 7.
“He must flee to one of these cities and stand
at the entrance of the city gate and present his case in the hearing of the
elders of that city. Then they must receive him into the city and give him a
place and he will live with them. If the avenger of blood chases after him,
they should not surrender the manslayer into his hand, for he killed his fellow
man accidentally and he did not previously hate him.” Joshua 20:4, 5.
““The cities that you will give to
the Levites will be 6 cities of refuge, which you will give for the manslayer to flee to, as well as 42
other cities.” Numbers 35:6.
“”The assembly should then save the
manslayer from the hand of the
avenger of blood and return him to his city of refuge to which he had fled, and
he must dwell in it until the death of the high priest who was anointed with
the holy oil. “‘But if the manslayer goes out of the boundary of his city of
refuge to which he fled and the avenger of blood finds him outside the boundary
of his city of refuge and slays the manslayer, he has no bloodguilt. For he
must dwell in his city of refuge until the high priest’s death. But after the
high priest’s death, the manslayer may return to the land that he owns.” Numbers 35:25-28.
You
noticed? … If found innocent, the fugitive returned to
the city of refuge and had to remain
in its immediate vicinity. But, these cities were not prisons. The
refugee worked and served as a useful member of society. Yet, his safety could be guaranteed only if he
remained in the city the rest of his life or until the death of the high
priest. No ransom could be accepted to
alter these terms.
“And you must not take
a ransom for one who has fled to his city of refuge, allowing him to resume
dwelling in his land before the death of the high priest.” Nu 35:32.
“He must dwell in that
city until he stands trial before the assembly and remain there until the death
of the high priest who is in office at that time. Then the manslayer may return
to the city from which he fled, and he may enter his city and his house.’” Jos
20:6.
Upon the death of the
high priest, all refugees could leave the cities of refuge in safety.
However, in the case of a murderer,
the blood of his victim was avenged and the law of ‘life for life’ was
satisfied when the murderer was put to death “without fail” by the avenger of
blood. Ex 21:23; Nu 35:21. Even Jehovah’s sacred altar provided no protection
for murderers, as was illustrated in the case of Joab—a former commander of the Armies of Israel. Ex 21:14; 1Ki 1:50; 2:28-34. Jehovah’s
law on the sanctity of blood was very explicit. The shedding of human blood
polluted the land in which the sons of Israel lived, in the midst of which
Jehovah was residing, and it could be atoned for only by the blood of the one
shedding it. Ge 9:5, 6; Nu 35:33, 34.
In some lands today, the law seems
to show more leniency and favor to the criminals than it does concern for the
victims. For instance, thieves may spend time in prison. Meanwhile, the victims
may still be without their goods, yet they have to pay the taxes that house and
feed such criminals. In ancient Israel, there were no prisons as we know them
today. . . For further information see: www.JW.org.
.JPG)