The Pulpit Commentary — Deuteronomy — Section 325

Vcrs. 1-13.-0itics of re/11-ge. The institution of cities of refuge (cf. eh. iv. 41- 48) seems to have been peculiar to the legislation of Moses. It is an institution reflecting strong light on the wisdom, justice, and humanity of the Mosaic code. The system of blood revenging, while securing a rude kind of justice in communities where no proper means existed of bringing criminals to public trial, was liable to great abuses (,;er. G). The usage was, however, too deeply rooted to be at once abolished, and Moses, by this ordinance, did not seek prematurely to abolish it. 'l'he worst evils of the system were checked, and principles were asserted which were certain in course of time to lead to its abandonment. In particular the two principles were asserted: 1. Tho distinction between accidental homicide (vers. 4, 5) and intentional mur<ler (ver. 11). ~- The right of every criminal to a legal t1ial. It is a proof of tbe wisdom of the institution that, under its operation, blood avenging seems very early to have died out in Israel. These old cities of refuge, though their grey walls have long since crumbled to decay, have still much about them to interest us. We can scarcely regard them as ordained types of gospel realities, but they certainly furnish valuable illustrations of important gospel truths. To a reader of the New Testament, Christ is suggested by them, and shines through them, and the best use we can make of them is to learn from them the need of seeking a like security in Christ to that which the manslayer found in his strong city (see i11fra).-J. 0. T"ers. I-13.-The cities of refuge as types. Using the word in a popular and not in a tLeological sense, we may speak of them in this way, We have in the law ordaining them- I. A "\'"IVID PICTURE OF THE DANGER OF THE SIN1''ER. In certain points the contrast is stronger than the resemblance. 1. The manslayer might be guiltless of the crime imputed to him. His act may have been unintentional. He had in that case done notuing worthy of death (ver. 6). 'l'o slay him would have been to shed "innocent blood." Tl,e sinner who seeks refuge in Christ cannot enter this plea. His sins are only too real and inexcusable. 2. The avenger of blood may have pursued the man- slayer unjustly. He may have sought his death in blind fury and passion. His hot heart would make no distinctions. 'l'Le .Avenger whom we have to iear is holy and just. His breast harbours no vindictiveness, nor does he pursue without just cause. Yet h.e does pun;ue, for sin is the one thing which Go<l cannot tolerate in his universe, and he will not allow it to pass UDjudged and unavenged. These are points of difference, but in the one point of awful and immediate danger, the parallel is exact. Outside the walls of the city of refuge the manslayer knew that there was no safety for him. .A sword was _UDsheathed which would certainly drink his blood, if the pursuer could but ovcrt.ake hun. Delay meant death, and he would not tempt it by pausing one instant CH, XIX, 1-21.] THE BOOK OF DEUTERONOMY. 323