The 4th exception to killing???

[Grey Wanderer]

We all know that killing in certain instances is permissible.
"life for life" and "a time to kill, a time to heal"

And as far as I've read, there are 3 exceptions: Self defense, war and state sanctioned executions.

However, I have never, ever in my 30 years of living heard or read a lesson on Numbers 35

'19The avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death; when he meets him, he shall put him to death. 20 If anyone with malice aforethought shoves another or throws something at him intentionally so that he dies 21 or if in hostility he hits him with his fist so that he dies, that person shall be put to death; he is a murderer. The avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death when he meets him.'

And then on verse 29 it clearly says:
‘These are to be legal requirements for you throughout the generations to come, wherever you live.'


Obviously killing someone under these circumstances by any citizen is illegal by man's law. Well, most places anyways. But as far as God's law, this seems to be permitted and almost instructed as an obligation and/or duty.



Thoughts?

 

[Harry3142]

You have quoted 4 verses of a passage that contains 29 (Numbers 35:6-34). I suggest that you read further.

 

[Saint Andrew]

who is the people God is talking to do you know. i do

 

[OllieFranz]

It is not just any citizen. It is someone designated "the Avenger of Blood." This, then is a state-approved assassin, and so covered in your third exception. In today's society, cold-blooded assassination is frowned on and the descendents of the "Avenger of Blood," military-trained snipers, need to be able to claim the self-defense/defense of others exception as well as the state-sanctioned execution exception.

Note: Even in Biblical times, there was a check on the Avenger's authorization in the establishment of the cities of refuge also mentioned in Numbers 35.

Then ye shall appoint you cities to be cities of refuge for you; that the slayer may flee thither, which killeth any person at unawares. 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. And of these cities which ye shall give six cities shall ye have for refuge.
Numbers 35:11-13 (Emphasis mine)
​

 

[Grey Wanderer]

You have quoted 4 verses of a passage that contains 29 (Numbers 35:6-34). I suggest that you read further.

I didn't find anything that contradicted the killing being restricted unless the criminal was fast enough to make it to the cities? Where's the hangup?

 

[Grey Wanderer]

who is the people God is talking to do you know. i do

Yep. The same people he read the 10 Commandments to. Which we still abide by.

 

[Grey Wanderer]

It is not just any citizen. It is someone designated "the Avenger of Blood." This, then is a state-approved assassin, and so covered in your third exception. In today's society, cold-blooded assassination is frowned on and the descendents of the "Avenger of Blood," military-trained snipers, need to be able to claim the self-defense/defense of others exception as well as the state-sanctioned execution exception.

Note: Even in Biblical times, there was a check on the Avenger's authorization in the establishment of the cities of refuge also mentioned in Numbers 35.

Then ye shall appoint you cities to be cities of refuge for you; that the slayer may flee thither, which killeth any person at unawares. 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. And of these cities which ye shall give six cities shall ye have for refuge.
Numbers 35:11-13 (Emphasis mine)
​

I believe you are mistaken, good sir. The Avenger of Blood was considered the next of kin. Closest relative of the victim.

And yes, there was "check", but unless they were fast enough to make it to one of the cities, adios amigo.

Either way, despite the stipulations, which virtually every law has, the exception still exists outside of the previously mentioned 3, therefore making it a 4th.

 

[Slaol121]

I found a decent explanation online:

Under the Law of Moses, Yahweh allowed for one instance of justifiable murder. A victim’s family could take vengeance on the perpetrator who killed their relative. In fact, many Gentile nations and tribes believed in this means of carrying out justice from the inception of man.

According to the Dictionary of the Bible by James Hastings: “The practice of blood-revenge is one of the most widely spread customs of human society, and is by no means confined to the Semitic races, although it is still found in full vigor among the Arabs. By the Bedouin of Sinaitic peninsula, for instance, the vendetta is kept up to the fifth generation ... (p. 550).” As these tribes became modern nations, the court systems took over the function of justice from these nations and did not leave it to the individual victim’s family or the elders of the tribes.

The intent of this article is to show the spiritual reality of the Israelite’s version of family revenge and how it is carried out under the New Covenant.

What is the 'Blood of the Avenger'?
The Law of Moses said that a willful murderer must be killed by the victim’s closest next of kin. The avenger didn’t need permission from a jury nor did he have to wait for a trial. He could kill the murderer on the spot.

The next of kin executing this vengeance was called the “redeemer of blood.” In Hebrew the avenger was called “go’el haddam”. Now Moses wrote: “The revenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer: when he meeteth him, he shall slay him (Num. 35:19).”

Yahweh’s purpose behind this vengeance on a murderer reflected His vengeance on evil should it occur within Israel. There was supposed to be swift retribution within Israel to eradicate evil. This was done to bring about a reverence of Yahweh and to prevent the wrath of Yahweh from descending upon the whole body of Israel which is holy (Deut. 23:14).

Did Abel’s murder show that the ‘Blood of the Avenger' was in effect from man's inception?
Cain’s murder of his brother Abel shows that the ‘Blood of the Avenger’ was in effect before the giving of the Law to Moses and the Israelites at Mt. Sinai (Gn. 4:1-8). When Yahweh asked Cain where was his brother, Cain stated: “I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper (Gn. 4:9-10)?” Yahweh replied: “... the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground.” Here we have Abel’s blood crying from the ground for vengeance and everyone knows that blood can’t cry. Abel’s blood symbolically represents Abel’s soul crying out to Yahweh for justice.

Yahweh cursed Cain who stated his punishment was greater than he could bear. Cain stated: “Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me (Gn. 4:14).”

He knew that his brothers and sisters would take vengeance on him for killing Abel. To prevent this Yahweh placed a mark on Cain. “And Yahweh (the Lord) said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold ... (Gn. 4:15).” ...

...How was the ‘Blood of the Avenger’ fulfilled with the Messiah?
The Messiah in His ministry spoke about the vengeance of Yahweh in a parable. He states: “Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not Elohim (God), neither regarded man: And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary. And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not Elohim (God), nor regard man; Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me. And Yahweh (the Lord) said, Hear what the unjust judge saith. And shall not Elohim (God) avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth (Luke 18:2-8)?”



Taken from: plim.org/bloodavenger.html

​

 

[Grey Wanderer]

Thanks for that Slaol.

Very informative.

 

[Grey Wanderer]

So far, it seems that this 4th exception still stands.

Harry, Andrew? Did you guys have further info on your posts?

I mean it looked like you had a start, but it seemed like they were just opening statements for a more in depth presentation.

Please finish! You guys really left me hangin here!

 

[solarwave]

My reply is to read all the other crazy laws in the Bible too.

I disagree with the state killing criminals anyway.

 

[Grey Wanderer]

My reply is to read all the other crazy laws in the Bible too.

I disagree with the state killing criminals anyway.

Totally shocked, from your last statement.


So, in other words, it would probably be best to judge which laws to sustain according to their reading on the crazy meter? I would think so, but I also keep in mind that the bible wasn't made for 21st century mindsets.........so that one's a little more murky to me.

 

[solarwave]

Totally shocked, from your last statement.

So, in other words, it would probably be best to judge which laws to sustain according to their reading on the crazy meter? I would think so, but I also keep in mind that the bible wasn't made for 21st century mindsets.........so that one's a little more murky to me.

Well the crazy meter wouldn't be my judge for it.... I just wasn't being totally serious in my answer.

There are just some/many Bible laws we can't use today.

 

[Slaol121]

I think the main message is that God demands justice for murder.

At one point in history, God handed the sword of justice to the family members (the Blood Avenger), whereas now the sword of justice has been handed to governments.

Same principle, different application.

 

[Grey Wanderer]

I think the main message is that God demands justice for murder.

At one point in history, God handed the sword of justice to the family members (the Blood Avenger), whereas now the sword of justice has been handed to governments.

Same principle, different application.

Yeah. And they're doing a knock out job too.

In the U.S. it costs approximately $45k a year PER inmate. Even if they do go to death row, it costs hundreds of millions to process 1 person.

Don't people die by accident, FOR FREE every day?

 

[Walter Kovacs]

Is the question whether or not that law is still required to be upheld by Christians today? Because that would be a no...and hopefully most wouldn't become Avengers of Blood, which actually sounds like a superhero team.

 

[Grey Wanderer]

Is the question whether or not that law is still required to be upheld by Christians today? Because that would be a no...and hopefully most wouldn't become Avengers of Blood, which actually sounds like a superhero team.

What's you're reasoning behind why it would be voided it out? You have to give scriptural evidence too. Not just a conclusion that was simply created from a mortal mind.

Awesome username by the way. One of my favorite people.

 

[Walter Kovacs]

Awesome username by the way.

Glad somebody gets it

What's you're reasoning behind what voided it out?

It falls into the more ritual/tribal part of the Mosaic law, which Christians are no longer bound to follow because of Christ and the New Covenant. The same with ritual sacrifice, ritual cleansing, unclean food, etc. It's no longer needed by virtue of Christ.


Or rather, that's my initial reason, I'm certainly no expert on ancient Judaism and the Mosaic law, but from my somewhat educated position I'd say that's the reason.

 

[Grey Wanderer]

Glad somebody gets it

Oh absolutely. Right when I first saw your name my eyes went "weeee"!

It falls into the more ritual/tribal part of the Mosaic law, which Christians are no longer bound to follow because of Christ and the New Covenant. The same with ritual sacrifice, ritual cleansing, unclean food, etc. It's no longer needed by virtue of Christ.


Or rather, that's my initial reason, I'm certainly no expert on ancient Judaism and the Mosaic law, but from my somewhat educated position I'd say that's the reason.

Hmmm......see my understanding (or confusion, whichever you want to call it) was Christ's comments on not changing the laws that were established before him, but to fulfill them. Then he noted on a few "adjustments" so to speak, but the most relative one was letting people beat you up and steal your stuff. However, to me, he still never voided out or even commented on appropriate responses to murder.

Unless I missed something......

 

[Walter Kovacs]

*edit* I'm adding my reply to this post here.

Hmmm......see my understanding (or confusion, whichever you want to call it) was Christ's comments on not changing the laws that were established before him, but to fulfill them. Then he noted on a few "adjustments" so to speak, but the most relative one was letting people beat you up and steal your stuff. However, to me, he still never voided out or even commented on appropriate responses to murder.

Christ does address murder though:

1 John 3:15
"Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him."


Here, Jesus takes it from being strictly to an action to being a matter of the heart and really ups the ante for the Law, in my mind.

The "fulfillment" is referring to the Levitical/ritual law that I mentioned; the permanent aspects of the Law (those dealing with God's nature i.e. morality) are expounded upon, while the the more ritual/national Hebrew Law is fulfilled by Christ.

Matthew 5:16-18
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

The Law isn't GONE, it is just fulfilled.

Matthew 26:27-28
Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

Here is the declaration of the new covenant by Christ, the statement that the old Law has been fulfilled; the symbolism here is really immense and the article I linked to at the bottom goes into a lot of detail here.


The shift from the "eye for an eye" method of reribution happens here:

Matthew 5:37-39
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."


From here on out, the Law is totally dependant on LOVE, and not retribution.

To illustrate my point:

Romans 13:8-10

"Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. 9 For this, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; love therefore is the fulfillment of the law."

Paul hangs the ENTIRE law on love here and elsewhere, and he knew the Law better than anyone; the shift is quite visible here.


Hopefully these give a little more clarity and context to my position; that there was a fundamental shift from the old Mosaic law to the new covenant of Christ. I'll add some more later, for now, I await Grey Wanderer's reply

P.S. one more resource I found helpful:

Good Question…does the NT contradict the Hebrew Bible in its discussions of the 'passing away' of the Mosaic Law - you may get somehting out of that.