Numbers 35:24

Then the congregation shall judge between the slayer and the revenger of blood according to these judgments:

Then the congregation {H5712} shall judge {H8199} between the slayer {H5221} and the revenger {H1350} of blood {H1818} according to these judgments {H4941}:

Then the community is to judge between the one who struck him and the next-of-kin avenger in accordance with these rules;

then the congregation must judge between the slayer and the avenger of blood according to these ordinances.

then the congregation shall judge between the smiter and the avenger of blood according to these ordinances;

Commentary

Numbers 35:24 is a pivotal verse within the detailed instructions concerning the Cities of Refuge, outlining the judicial process for cases of homicide in ancient Israel. It underscores the community's responsibility to administer justice fairly and according to divine law.

Context

This verse is part of a larger section in Numbers 35 (verses 9-34) that establishes the laws for the Cities of Refuge. These were six designated cities (three on each side of the Jordan River) where a person who had accidentally killed someone could flee for safety from the "revenger of blood." The purpose was to prevent immediate retaliation and ensure a fair trial, distinguishing between intentional murder and unintentional manslaughter. The preceding verses detail who qualifies for refuge and the role of witnesses, leading up to the communal judgment described here.

Key Themes

  • Due Process and Fair Trial: The verse emphasizes that judgment must be rendered by the "congregation" (the community's elders or appointed judges), not by mob rule or arbitrary vengeance. This ensured a structured and lawful process, reflecting God's desire for justice.
  • Distinction Between Intent: A core principle of the Cities of Refuge system, highlighted by this judgment process, was to discern between intentional killing (murder) and unintentional killing (manslaughter). The former was punishable by death, while the latter allowed the slayer to remain in the City of Refuge until the death of the high priest. This legal nuance is critical for understanding Israelite law.
  • Community Responsibility for Justice: The "congregation" bearing the responsibility to judge illustrates the communal nature of justice in ancient Israel. The well-being and moral integrity of the entire community depended on its adherence to God's righteous judgments (Deuteronomy 16:20).
  • Protection for the Accused: While the "revenger of blood" had a legitimate role, the Cities of Refuge and the communal judgment process served as a safeguard, offering protection to the accused until their case could be properly heard and decided.

Linguistic Insights

  • "Congregation" (Hebrew: 'edah - ืขึตื“ึธื”): This term refers to the assembly or community, often specifically to the elders or appointed leaders who would represent the people in legal and administrative matters. It signifies a formal, representative body.
  • "Slayer" (Hebrew: rotzeach - ืจึนืฆึตื—ึท): While this word often translates to "murderer," in the context of the Cities of Refuge, it refers to the one who has taken a life, whose intent (whether accidental or deliberate) is yet to be determined by the court.
  • "Revenger of blood" (Hebrew: goel haddam - ื’ึนึผืึตืœ ื”ึทื“ึธึผื): This literally means "redeemer of blood" or "kinsman avenger." This was typically the nearest male relative of the deceased, who had the right and duty to avenge the death. The law regulated this ancient practice to prevent uncontrolled blood feuds, ensuring it only applied to intentional murder and only after a proper trial. Numbers 35:19 mentions his role.
  • "Judgments" (Hebrew: mishpatim - ืžึดืฉึฐืืคึธึผื˜ึดื™ื): This term refers to the divine ordinances, statutes, or legal decisions that were established by God. It emphasizes that the judgment was not arbitrary but based on clear, revealed law.

Practical Application

Numbers 35:24 provides timeless principles relevant to justice and community today:

  • Importance of Due Process: Modern legal systems can draw parallels to the ancient Israelite emphasis on fair trials, evidence, and impartial judgment. The principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty, and that intent matters, has deep biblical roots.
  • Community Accountability: The verse reminds us that upholding justice is not solely the responsibility of a few officials but a communal duty. A healthy society requires its members to participate in and support righteous governance and legal processes.
  • God's Concern for Justice: This passage highlights God's meticulous concern for justice, not just for the victim, but also for the accused, ensuring protection against wrongful retribution. It reflects His character as a just and righteous judge.
  • Spiritual Refuge: The concept of a "City of Refuge" where one could find safety from the avenger points metaphorically to Christ. Just as the slayer found refuge in the designated cities, believers find ultimate refuge and salvation in Jesus Christ from the condemnation of sin and the ultimate avenger (death and judgment).
Note: If the commentary doesnโ€™t appear instantly, please allow 2โ€“5 seconds for it to load. It is generated by Gemini 2.5 Flash using a prompt focused on Biblical fidelity over bias. While the insights have been consistently reliable, we encourage prayerful discernment through the Holy Spirit.

Please note that only the commentary section is AI-generated โ€” the main Scripture and cross-references are stored on the site and are from trusted and verified sources.

Cross-References

  • Joshua 20:6 (5 votes)

    And he shall dwell in that city, until he stand before the congregation for judgment, [and] until the death of the high priest that shall be in those days: then shall the slayer return, and come unto his own city, and unto his own house, unto the city from whence he fled.
  • Numbers 35:12 (4 votes)

    And they shall be unto you cities for refuge from the avenger; that the manslayer die not, until he stand before the congregation in judgment.