Deuteronomy 19 Study Notes

19:1-12 This section echoes Ex 21:12-14; Nm 35:9-15 (see note there); Dt 4:41-43 and anticipates Jos 20:1-9.

19:1-3 The Israelites must set apart three cities of sanctuary or refuge for persons accused of manslaughter. These were to be strategically located so that they would be accessible to anyone anywhere in the land. Three cities had already been allotted east of the Jordan River (4:41-43), and there would be a need for three more in Canaan proper. In the event of population growth, three more cities would be added, making nine in all (19:8-9).

19:4-5 Homicide in the OT took many forms, ranging from killing an enemy in war, executing a criminal, and accidental death by manslaughter on one hand, to deliberate and premeditated murder on the other. The first two examples were carried out by the state and were not only permitted but commanded. The present law had to do with an act of homicide whose intentions and circumstances must be determined by a court of law.

19:6-7 Revenge for murder was not only permitted by the law but fully authorized (Nm 35:16-21). However, it was for malicious murder only and not for accidental homicide as in the present passage. Life is so precious that OT law and custom mandate that its violent destruction must be avenged, especially by the next of kin of the deceased (2Sm 14:1-11).

19:8-10 The establishment of strategically located cities of refuge would allow accused parties to find safety before unwarranted vengeance could be inflicted. They would preclude bloodshed in the land the Lord was giving them. Innocent blood defiled the land so that the land figuratively became hostile toward the guilty person and resisted his attempts to make use of it. When Cain killed Abel, Abel’s blood cried out to the Lord from the ground; it would thereafter withhold its yield from Cain (Gn 4:10-12). The soil of Israel would likewise become polluted by the blood of innocent victims (Nm 35:33-34; Dt 19:13).

19:11-12 For the murderer there could be no refuge or safety. Indeed, from very early in human history the penalty for murder was capital punishment by the state. A major stipulation of the covenant with Noah following the flood was, “Whoever sheds human blood, by humans his blood will be shed, for God made humans in his image” (Gn 9:6; cp. Dt 5:17).

19:13 This verse echoes 7:16; 13:8. No pity was to be shown the murderer. Murder was deemed to be an assault on God himself, an ultimate act of insubordination and rebellion (Gn 9:5-6).

19:14 The contextual relevance of this passage can be observed by recognizing that a common cause of hostility between persons is a failure to agree on common boundaries and to respect property rights.

19:15 To help prevent a miscarriage of justice, the law required the testimony of two or three witnesses (cp. 17:6-7).

19:16-20 Should a malicious witness turn out to be guilty of perjury, he must suffer the fate intended for the accused. Strict enforcement acts as a deterrent.

19:21 This principle is called (Lat) lex talionis, the law of retaliation. An example is the case described in vv. 16-19 where a lying witness receives the punishment the accused would have received had he been guilty. There is disagreement as to whether life for life, eye for eye, and the rest were to be taken literally or whether the principle was simply that the punishment must fit the crime. The latter seems more likely given other biblical laws that indicate that tit for tat was not always followed (Ex 22:21; Nm 35:31).