Joshua 20:3

Jos 20:3 That the slayer that killeth [any] person unawares [and] unwittingly may flee thither: and they shall be your refuge from the avenger of blood.

Ver. 3. That killeth any person unawares and unwittingly.] Not presumptuously, with a high hand, and of forethought malice; but either by chance medley, as they call it, or in his own necessary defence, when he must either kill or be killed, and he cannot avoid it. For that tenet of Soto is false, Defensio cum interfectione est licita, quia fuga est ignominiosa.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Jos 20:3. Unwittingly — Hebrew, Through ignorance, or error, or mistake, and without knowledge. The same thing is twice repeated, to cut off all expectations that wilful murderers might have of protection here. God having declared that such should be taken even from his altar, that they might be killed. It is strange that any Christians should make their sanctuaries give protection to such persons whom God hath so expressly excepted from it! Avenger — The nearest kinsman, who had right or power to demand or take vengeance for the slaughter.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20:3 The relatives of a murder or manslaughter victim had the responsibility of seeking revenge for the death. If the avenger (Hebrew go’el) found the killer outside a city of refuge, he could kill him without punishment.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

At unawares, and bearing him no grudge.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

3. That the slayer that killeth any person unawares] In accordance with these regulations a wide distinction was made between the man who committed wilful murder, and one who slew another by mistake, in ignorance, and unintentionally. (a) In the former case the guilty criminal met with no compassion from the Mosaic Code. He was regarded as accursed. The horns of the altar were to be no refuge for him. He was to be dragged from them by force to suffer his doom, nor could rank or wealth exempt him from it (Num_35:31-32). (b) In the latter case, where life had been taken unawares, a more merciful system of legislation intervened. In contradistinction to the customs of the Greeks and Romans and even of the Middle Ages, which made places of sanctuary available to criminals of every kind, the Jewish Lawgiver reserved them for unintentional acts of murder, and for these alone. The distinguishing marks of such acts are clearly laid down in Num_35:25-34; Deu_19:4-6.

from the avenger of blood] “that he moue ascaap the wrath of the neiçboure, that is wreker of the blood,” Wyclif. The involuntary shedder of blood was permitted to take flight to a city of refuge.

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.

That the slayer that killeth any person unawares, and unwittingly, may flee thither,.... Who through mere accident, and without design, killed a person, friend or foe, one of his own kindred, or a stranger, without any malice against him, or intention to take away his life:

and they shall be your refuge from the avenger of blood; from any of the relations of the deceased, who might be stirred up to avenge the blood of his kinsman on the slayer; see Num 35:12.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Of blood, and authorized to kill the manslayer, (Menochius) if he find him out of one of these cities. See Numbers xxxv. 6., and Deuteronomy xix. 4. Revenge was never lawful: but to prosecute offenders in the courts of justice, (Calmet) or agreeably to the law of God, can never deserve blame. (Haydock) --- If some of the saints of the old law seem to have taken delight in revenge, their expressions must be explained in a favourable sense. David, who is accused of this crime, (Calmet) repels the charge with horror, Psalm vii. 5. The evils which he denounces to his adversaries, were predictions of what they had reason to expect, Psalm lvii. 11., and Jeremias xi. 20. (Haydock) --- If some of the Jews looked upon vengeance as lawful, it cannot be a matter of surprise, when we reflect that even some, who have been taught the mild law of the gospel, think themselves bound, in some cases, to revenge an affront. (Calmet) --- So far have the maxims of the world supplanted Christianity in their breasts! How severely does Jacob rebuke his children for what they had done to the Sichemites, though they falsely thought that the affront offered to their sister, would justify them! (Genesis xxxiv.) (Haydock)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Unawares and unwittingly, Heb. through ignorance, or error, or mistake, and without knowledge; the same thing twice repeated, to cut off all the claims and expectations that wilful murderers might have of protection here; and God having declared that such should be taken even from his altar, that they might be killed, Exo 21:14; and accordingly Joab was by Solomon’s order killed even at the altar, 1Ki 2:28-31,34. It is the more strange and impudent that any Christians should make their sanctuaries give protection to such persons whom God hath so expressly excepted from it, which the papists do; and their doctors are not ashamed to defend it upon frivolous reasons.

The avenger of blood; the kinsman, who had right or power to demand or take vengeance of the slaughter.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

3. Unawares and unwittingly — The design of the city of refuge was not to screen criminals, but to afford an opportunity to all accused of so grave a charge to show the absence of a guilty intent. In order to do this the guilty must be temporarily received as well as the innocent.

Avenger of blood — The next of kin, or the Goel, as he is styled in the Hebrew, and still called in the East. In Gen_9:5, Jehovah says, “Your blood in return for the lifeblood which you have shed will I require.” He here expresses his estimate of the sacredness of human life. The avenger of blood is his agent for searching out and punishing murder. In the absence of magistrates and tribunals, one man in each family was required to act as a sheriff for the redress of his kindred and the protection of the body politic. In ancient Greece the land was regarded as defiled and accursed of the gods so long as a murderer dwelt therein unpunished.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Unawares and unwittingly. Literally, in error, in not knowing. Num_35:16-18 and Deu_19:5, give a clear explanation of what is here meant. Knobel notices that the first of these expressions is found in Lev_4:2, and the second in Deu_4:42. The latter is "superfluous," and therefore a "filling up of the Deuteronomist." The "Deuteronomist" must have been very active in his "filling up." If he were really so lynx-eyed in a matter of style, it is a wonder that he was so careless, as we are told he is, in matters of fact. To more ordinary minds it would seem as if the author, familiar with the books of Moses, was quoting Deuteronomy for the precept, and Leviticus for the nature of the offence. The avenger of blood. The Hebrew word is worthy of notice. It is Goel; that is, literally, redeemer, one who buys back at the appointed price what has fallen into other hands, as a farm, a field, a slave, or anything consecrated to God. Hence, since the duly of such redemption, on the death of the owner, devolved upon the nearest relative, it came to mean "blood relation." Thus Boaz (Rth_4:1, Rth_4:6, Rth_4:8) is called the Goel of Elimelech and his widow. In the present passage, the phrase "the redeemer (LXX agcisteuwn next of kin) of the blood" signifies the exactor of the only penalty which can satisfy justice, namely, the death of the murderer. So we are taught in Gen_9:6 Exo_21:12, 14 Lev_24:17, Lev_24:21. This duty, which in civilised society belongs to the government, in uncivilised tribes is usually left to the relatives of the murdered man. Hence the terrible blood feuds which have raged between families for generations, and which are not only to be found among savage nations, but even in countries which lay claim to civilisation. In Ireland, for instance, it is not so long ago since one of these blood feuds in the county Tipperary had acquired such formidable proportions that the authorities of the Roman Catholic Church there were compelled to resort to a mission in order to put an end to it. A man had been killed nearly a century before in an affray which commenced about the age of a colt. His relatives felt bound to avenge the murder, and their vengeance was again deemed to require fresh vengeance, until faction fights between the "Three-Year-Olds" and the "Four-Year-Olds" had grown almost into petty wars. A thrilling story written by the late Prosper Merimee turns upon the Corsican vendetta, and so true is this story to life that in the very year (1879) in which these words were written an occurrence precisely similar, save in its termination, was reported in the daily journals to have taken place in that island. The only way in which the feud could be terminated was by summoning the representatives of the two families before the authorities and exacting an oath from them that they would cease their strife. It is no small corroboration of the Divine origin of the Mosaic law that we find here a provision for mitigating the evils of this rude code, and for at least delivering the accidental homicide from the penalty of this law of retaliation. Yet for the offence of wilful murder the penalties enjoined by the Jewish law were terribly severe. A deliberate violation of the sanctity of human life was an offence for which no palliation could be pleaded. No right of sanctuary was to be granted to him who had wantonly slain a fellow creature. "No satisfaction" was to be taken for his life. (Num_35:31) "The land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, save by the blood of him that shed it" (ver. 33). Such provisions might be expected of a lawgiver who had laid down as the fundamental principle of humanity that man was created "in the image of God," after His likeness; that God had "breathed the breath of life" into him, and man had thus "become a living soul". (Gen_1:27 Gen_2:7) Such inward harmony is there between Moses" inspired revelations concerning God"s purpose in creation, and the precepts he was commanded to deliver to the children of Israel.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Unwittingly - Hebrew. Through ignorance, or error, or mistake, and without knowledge. The same thing twice repeated to cut off all the expectations that wilful murderers might have of protection here; God having declared, that such should be taken even from his altar, that they might be killed. It is strange that any Christians should make their sanctuaries give protection to such persons whom God hath so expressly excepted from it! Avenger - The nearest kinsman, who had right or power to demand, or take vengeance of the slaughter.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

avenger

Heb. "goel," Redemp. (Kinsman type). (See Scofield "Isa 59:20").

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.