The Lord begins speaking in Deuteronomy 19:1 in certainties, not in hypothesis. He says, "When the LORD thy God hath cut off the nations", WHEN I have given you this land, WHEN you occupy this land, WHEN you take over these cities that I, in Grace, have given you. Again the Lord emphasizes that the Israelite receives a possession which he can neither earn nor deserve - it is all a gift from God. On receiving this Gift Israel was commanded to:

FOCAL ~ Deuteronomy 19:2 "separate three cities for thee in the midst of thy land"

The Lord had previously established three cities of refuge in the Promised Land in:

SUPPORTING ~ Deuteronomy 4:41-43 "Then Moses severed three cities on this side Jordan toward the sun rising; [42]  That the slayer might flee thither, which should kill his neighbor unawares, and hated him not in times past; and that fleeing unto one of these cities he might live: [43]Namely, BEZER in the wilderness, in the plain country, of the Reubenites; and RAMOTH in Gilead, of the Gadites; and GOLAN in Bashan, of the Manassites."

As you see, these three cities were Bezer, Ramoth, and Golan, all on the east of the Jordan. These cities of refuge were set up for the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh. This was done because these tribes did not want to pass over the Jordan to inherit the land on the other side, but instead asked the Lord if they could inherit the land on the EASTERN side of the Jordan (Numbers 32.5-17). The Lord agreed, but ONLY if these tribes went across the Jordan to the WESTERN side and helped their brothers conquer the enemy and possess that land. The Lord would allow a PHYSICAL division in Israel, where the Jordan passed between Israel, but refused to allow a SPIRITUAL division in His children. They would work together, or none would inherit the land. Reuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh therefore vowed to the Lord that they would go over and conquer with their brothers, then they would return to their East Jordan land.

Again, though, this physical division of Israel made it necessary that three cities of refuge be established on the Eastern side of Jordan (as God before mandated), as well as three cities on the Western side of the Jordan.

FOCAL ~ Deuteronomy 19:3  "Thou shalt prepare thee a way, and divide the coasts of thy land, which the LORD thy God giveth thee to inherit, into three parts, that every slayer may flee thither."

The Promised Land proper (West of the Jordan) was to be divided into {Heb. shalash [shaw-lash']}, three EQUAL parts, and a city of refuge was to be assigned to each part. This was so that the person who INNOCENTLY killed another person would have an equal opportunity to find shelter from the Blood Avenger.

Why did God establish the Cities of Refuge? I guess before we answer that question, we need to understand why God allowed the nearest relative of a killed person, the Blood Avenger, to enact "and eye for an eye" on the person who killed that relative. God established the principle of Capital Punishment for the unlawful taking of a life in:

SUPPORTING ~ Genesis 9:4-6 "But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. [5]  And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. [6]  Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

God alone gives life. We may take sperm and egg and, put these two things together in a test tube and, simulating the temperature and climate of the womb bring forth life - but we did not CREATE life. God created the sperm and the egg, and even the materials that we put together to make the glass for the test tube. We can scrape the DNA out of living tissue and, in a frankensteinian method, "clone" life - yet this is not the creation of new life. God gave life to the DNA, He alone designs life. God breathed life into Adam, man, in the Garden, and life itself is a force that can only come from He who is eternal, without beginning or end - He who is LIFE, Jesus Christ. 

SUPPORTING  ~  John 1:4  "In him was life; and the life was the light of men."

Because the Lord Jesus gave us life in the Garden, because this life is a gift from Him, HE DEMANDS that no one take life unless He so orders it. Therefore He established a simple standard back in Genesis, before Israel was a nation, and that was this: IF a person took another person's life, THEN "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed". In other words, if you murdered someone, you yourself would then be, according to God, BENT as a human, TWISTED in your mind, and therefore you FORFEITED your life to the Blood Avenger. The Blood Avenger was the nearest living relative of the one who was killed, and he alone had the right to kill the killer.

However, once Israel became a nation, with larger tribes and established cities, it was very possible that the older rule of the Blood Avenger could be abused. What if someone accidentally killed someone else? The Blood Avenger would then be after someone who was, in fact, innocent of wrong doing in his heart - and God didn't want this. The Lord's Word and Will looks at the heart of man, and seeks justice based on the intent of the heart. So once Israel, the nation, began settling the Promised Land the Lord demanded that the nation establish six cities of Refuge, three on either side of the Jordan, to where a person guilty of killing another person could flee from the Blood Avenger and find justice. Easton's Bible Dictionary puts it this way: 

"AVENGER OF BLOOD (Heb. goel, from verb gaal, "to be near of kin," "to redeem"), the nearest relative of a murdered person. It was his right and duty to slay the murderer (2 Sam. 14:7, 11) if he found him outside of a city of refuge. In order that this law might be guarded against abuse, Moses appointed six cities of refuge (Ex. 21:13; Num. 35:13; Deut. 19:1,9). These were in different parts of the country, and every facility was afforded the man slayer that he might flee to the city that lay nearest him for safety. Into the city of refuge the avenger durst not follow him. This arrangement applied only to cases where the DEATH WAS NOT PREMEDITATED. The case had to be investigated by the authorities of the city, and the willful murderer was on no account to be spared. He was regarded as an impure and polluted person, and was delivered up to the "goel" (Deut. 19:11-13). If the offense was merely manslaughter, then the fugitive must remain within the city till the death of the high priest (Num. 35:25). "

FOCAL ~ Deuteronomy 19:4-7 "And this is the case of the slayer, which shall flee thither, that he may live: Whoso killeth his neighbor ignorantly, whom he hated not in time past; [5]  As when a man goeth into the wood with his neighbor to hew wood, and his hand fetcheth a stroke with the axe to cut down the tree, and the head slippeth from the helve, and lighteth upon his neighbor, that he die; he shall flee unto one of those cities, and live: [6]  Lest the avenger of the blood pursue the slayer, while his heart is hot, and overtake him, because the way is long, and slay him; whereas he was not worthy of death, inasmuch as he hated him not in time past. [7] Wherefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt separate three cities for thee."

The person who fled to the City of Refuge could NOT have been guilty of murder (premeditated or otherwise). Once a person entered the City of Refuge, the elders of that city would hold a trial to determine if the death was accidental or otherwise. If the death was actually murder, then:

FOCAL ~ Deuteronomy 19:11-13 "But if any man hate his neighbor, and lie in wait for him, and rise up against him, and smite him mortally that he die, and fleeth into one of these cities: [12]  Then the elders of his city shall send and fetch him thence, and deliver him into the hand of the avenger of blood, that he may die. [13]  Thine eye shall not pity him, but thou shalt put away the guilt of innocent blood from Israel, that it may go well with thee."

... the elders of the City, on determining this by proper trial, were to take the murderer by force and take him outside of the gates of the city so the Blood Avenger could fulfill God's Law. There was no final appeal, no higher court than that of the City of Refuge. Unlike the situation in our society where the convicted killer is held on Death Row an average of 13 years prior to sentencing, the murderer is held not one moment beyond the time necessary to determine he did, BEYOND A DOUBT, unlawfully take the life of another. Once that determination was made the murderer's life was forfeited to the Blood Avenger.

1. First, the Cities of Refuge teach us about the GREAT VALUE that God places on human life. We seem to have forgotten how precious human life is today in our society. The television shows, each year more graphic and blood splattered, teach our children that human life has no intrinsic value. We have established laws in America that have enabled abortion on demand. The site, abortionfacts.com, states:

"During the 1980s and 1990s total abortions stayed about 1,550,000 annually, slowly decreasing in the 1990s. Note that the [Alan Guttmacher Institute, a branch of Planned Parenthood] Institute reported that 10% of known abortion providers did not report. Adding 10% to its 1,550,000 equals 1,700,000. The total reported slowly decreased in the 1990s. When the unreported abortions are added (income tax evasion, cover-up for privacy, etc.), a figure of 1,800,000 may be more realistic. Live births have hovered just under 4,000,000. Therefore: Almost every third baby conceived in America is killed by abortion." 

This cheapening of human life due to abortion is reflected in the number of REPEAT abortions there are, that is, people who have more than one abortion. Repeat abortions were 20% in 1973 but rose to 44% in 1987. In the U.S., by 1995, 45%, nearly ONE HALF, of all abortions were repeats. Sexual selection, that is, keeping a male baby while aborting the "less useful" female child is heavily practiced in third world countries. In a series of 8,000 abortions done in Bombay, India, 7,999 unborn girl babies and one boy baby were killed. Though rape is the main justifying cause for "on demand" abortions, only two out of every THOUSAND reported rapes result in a pregnancy. The truth is, abortion is promoted as a convenience - not as a curative - and has led much of the world to consider life cheap, without value.

Cheapening of human life has a snowball effect, gaining momentum with each passing year. In the book  The German Euthanasia Program, (Wertham, Hayes Publishing Co., Cinn, 1977, p. 47) we read:

"[In Nazi Germany] The first gas chamber was designed by professors of psychiatry from 12 major German universities. They selected the patients and watched them die. Then they slowly reduced the "price tag" until the mental hospitals were almost empty. They were joined by some pediatricians, who began by emptying the institutions for handicapped children in 1939. By 1945, almost 300,000 "pure blood Aryan" Germans had been killed. By then these doctors had so lowered the price tag that they were killing bed wetters, children with misshapen ears, and those with learning disabilities."

It wasn't Hitler who created the Gas Chambers - it was scientists and doctors who forgot how precious, how sacred our Lord considers life. Certainly Hitler capitalized on euthanasia, for he reasoned that "if defective people can be destroyed, then why not defective races - like the Jews". What an abomination! What a spiral of evil! If one has life, he or she has it from God - and life should not be taken WITHOUT HIS CONSENT. When we begin that practice, we start down a slippery slope which will ultimately destroy us all. In the book, "Why Can't We Love Them Both?", Dr. J.C. Willke writes:

"Holland was the first modern nation to legalize euthanasia. What began as a few extraordinary cases, has now become routine. One hundred and thirty thousand people die each year in Holland, and over 20,000 are killed, directly or indirectly, by doctors. As many as half did not ask to be killed. These now include newborn infants judged to have too poor a quality of life. A judge has okayed direct euthanasia for a depressed person who was physically well. Killing has also been allowed for depressed teenagers. Hospitalized seniors are routinely visited by an organization that offers to oversee their case to prevent their doctor from killing them. When asked whether they approved of euthanasia, senior citizens, healthy and living in the economy, agreed by 50%. When the same question was asked of residents of nursing homes, only 3% approved."

Human life, given by God, is sacred - it is precious - and when we forget that, we perhaps doom ourselves to the same type of care. The Canaanites, who were to be forcibly removed from their land as it was taken over by God's People, had so devalued life that it was common to sacrifice your own children to the gods. The Lord Jesus DID NOT want that attitude to enter into Israel, thus He established the mandate of death to those who unlawfully took life in murder. He also established the standard that, if the death was accidental, the inadvertent killer was to remain safe in the city of Refuge, reaching parole only when the High Priest passed away. This way the sanctity of life was preserved among His people.

2. Second, the City of Refuge teaches us that the GOVERNMENT HAS A DUTY TO PROVIDE for the unfortunate in the equal application of justice. We are told:

SUPPORTING ~ Numbers 35:15  "These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, and for the STRANGER, and for the SOJOURNER among them: that every one that killeth any person UNAWARES may flee thither."

God considered ALL life sacred, not just the life of His children Israel, and thus made the provision of the City of Refuge on the Israelite, and on all who happened to be under the government of Israel at the time of the killing. God mentions two classes of people in this passage:

a. The STRANGER, {Heb. geyr (gare)}, which means "a temporary inhabitant, a newcomer lacking inherited rights, or of foreigners in Israel who are given rights because they have entered into covenant with Israel.

b. SOJOURNER, {Heb. towshab [to-shawb']}, someone who was just passing through, who had not lived among the Israelites. The traveler, pilgrim.

The government of Israel was to provide these six cities for ALL PEOPLE who were guilty of taking human life. ALL PEOPLE came under the same umbrella of justice, regardless as to their native land or tongue. God is no respecter of persons - if a person was passing through Israel and, murdered or inadvertently took a life, that person could flee to the nearest City of Refuge to be judged for the action. If he was guilty of murder then that person, regardless as to nationality, suffered the loss of life. If innocent of murder, that person could then live out the High Priest's life in that City - without fear of reprisal.

3. The third thing the City of Refuge teaches is the NEED TO CORRECTLY IDENTIFY THE PERPETRATORS of crime. In Numbers 35:15-29 (and I'll not read all of this lengthy section - write the reference down and read it yourself later) the Lord precisely identifies WHO will suffer death for taking a life and who will not. In this section the Lord says that those who take life with a {kliy  [kel-ee']} which means ANYTHING, furniture, a stick, a rock, anything that is used as a WEAPON. God specifies that it doesn't matter if the item used was iron (vvs 16), stone (vvs 17), or wood (vvs 18). What mattered was the INTENT, i.e., whether the killer MEANT to kill, was motivated by hatred, or whether it was just an accident. If he meant to kill then, no matter what:

SUPPORTING ~ Numbers 35:18b-19 " ... he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death. [19]  The revenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer: when he meeteth him, he shall slay him."

If he did not mean to kill, but it was an accident, then the person was guilty of MANSLAUGHTER only. In this case he was to stay in the City of Refuge until the death of the High Priest (Numbers 35:25-28). He was, in effect, still under "House Arrest" for GOD CONSIDERS LIFE SACRED! If he left the City of Refuge before the death of the High Priest, then the Blood Avenger had every right, if he caught him, to kill him. Note this principle, though:

To God life is precious. If someone takes a life, the Lord demanded a judging to determine whether the accused forfeited his life or not - but there was no such thing in God's government as "not guilty by reason of insanity", or any other such nonsense. If you took a life you either lost your life, or remained in the City of Refuge until the death of the High Priest. There was no IN BETWEEN system with God. The perpetrator was, after careful scrutiny, identified as "guilty of murder" or "guilty of manslaughter" - and in either case, met a strict judgment from God's government.

4. The fourth thing the City of Refuge teaches us is the value of a Justice System that is EMOTIONALLY NEUTRAL. The Lord established the City of Refuge so that:

FOCAL ~ Deuteronomy 19:6  "Lest the avenger of the blood pursue the slayer, while his heart is hot, and overtake him, because the way is long, and slay him; whereas HE WAS NOT WORTHY OF DEATH, INASMUCH AS HE HATED HIM NOT IN TIME PAST."

Capital Punishment was never to be exercised as a means of PERSONAL VENGEANCE against anyone. The Bible teaches:

SUPPORTING ~ Deuteronomy 32:35  "TO ME BELONGETH VENGEANCE, and recompense; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste."

This concept, that vengeance belongs to God only, was echoes in the Psalms of David:

SUPPORTING ~ Psalms 94:1  "O LORD God, to whom vengeance belongeth; O God, to whom vengeance belongeth, shew thyself."

And in Paul's Letter to the Romans, which states:

SUPPORTING ~ Romans 12:19  "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord."

The Blood Avenger was a person filling a duty in Israel, not a grieving relative seeking recompense for himself. The Blood Avenger was part of Israel's check and balance of Law Enforcement, who's counterpart today might be recognized as our Law Enforcement officials (police, marshals, judges, wardens). God initiated the Cities of Refuge to provide a time of "cooling off" for the tribe where the alleged crime took place, for the Blood Avenger, and for the alleged murderer. The purpose of God's Blood Avenger was not to seek personal restitution for the loss of a relative's life at the hand of another, but to SEEK RESTITUTION FOR GOD for OFFENDING GOD by taking the gift of life from another. The Blood Avenger was GOD'S BLOOD AVENGER. Sin is an offense to God, and the taking of life one of the greatest abominations to God. If God's justice system degraded to the point where the Lord was taken out of the picture, then it was no longer His justice system - but a free for all! 

If Israel kept God's Justice pure, as He decreed, then He promised:

FOCAL ~ Deuteronomy 19:8-10 "And if the LORD thy God enlarge thy coast, as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, and give thee all the land which he promised to give unto thy fathers; [9]  If thou shalt keep all these commandments to do them, which I command thee this day, to love the LORD thy God, and to walk ever in his ways; then shalt thou add three cities more for thee, beside these three: [10]  That innocent blood be not shed in thy land, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance, and so blood be upon thee."

That He would increase the size of their land and increase the number of their cities beyond what He had previously promised. As long as the nation refused to allow the shedding of innocent blood they would be kept secure as one nation under God. If not, then "so blood be upon thee".

God's Law demanded that there be at least two (or more) witnesses against an accused person before the matter could ever go to trial. 

SUPPORTING ~ Numbers 35:30-32 "Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall NOT testify against any person to cause him to die. [31]  Moreover YE SHALL TAKE NO SATISFACTION for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death. [32]  And YE SHALL TAKE NO SATISFACTION for him that is fled to the city of his refuge, that he should come again to dwell in the land, until the death of the priest."

God's Law was not instituted to satisfy a personal vendetta on our part, nor was it given in order to "give us closure", as many believe the Death Penalty provides. The purpose of God's Law was to justly separate those who were twisted or warped in their conscience from the rest of normal society. This system was not to be perverted by any human idea of "getting even" - the accused could only be tried when TWO WITNESSES were present, and neither witness' testimony could conflict with the other's.

The accused was being accused of, our text says, "ANY INIQUITY", {`avon [aw-vone']}, which refers to "acting out any base emotion, contrary to God's Word". This Hebrew word is the same one that King David used in the Psalms after Nathan the Prophet came to him, and properly accused him of stealing Uriah's wife Bathsheba, and murdering that poor man. David said:

SUPPORTING ~ Psalms 51:2-3 "Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. [3]  For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me."

David succumbed to his passions and his Old Sin Nature and, as a result, was guilty of what the King James calls "iniquity", or the fruit of lust. The accused was also being accused of, our Deuteronomy text states, ANY SIN, {chatta'ah [khat-taw-aw'], which is a more general term for transgressing God's Law. So whether the action was a crime of passion, or a calculated action, in either event the accused could not be accused without at least two witnesses to the transgression. As we have seen before, this same procedure of requiring AT LEAST TWO witnesses was also levied on the Church by our Lord Jesus Christ:

SUPPORTING ~ Matthew 18:16  "But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established."

SUPPORTING ~ 1 Timothy 5:19  "Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses."

Which shows us that our God DOES NOT CHANGE. What He required for the government of Israel, He also requires for the government of His Church.

The word "false witness" in our text is {chamac [khaw-mawce']} + {`ed [ayd]}, which literally means "a witness of violence". This is an apt title for the false witness, for one who spoke falsely of another in Moses' time could have brought about the other person's death. Even in our time, the false witness is guilty of MURDERING the reputation of the person who is accused. I have heard, on a number of occasions, people speaking of "guess what brother so and so did", then they proceed to kill the person they are talking about. Many have been murdered by those who were in the wrong, who started "telephone calling" campaigns against the accused without doing as the Lord said - going to them in private first, discussing the matter with all Christian behavior. 

In the event that a single witness rose up against another, a witness of violence, and no other party rises up to stand arm in arm with this witness, then God required BOTH the accused as well as the accuser stand before the judges and priests (the lower and higher courts of Israel).

FOCAL ~ Deuteronomy 19:18-19 "And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother; [19]  Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you."

Once both were before the lower and higher courts, the judges were to make DILIGENT INQUISITION. That is, the judges were to leave NO STONE UNTURNED to find out the truth. IF it was true that the witness was indeed false, then the judges would "do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother". I find it interesting that it required TWO witnesses to punish an accused party in Israel, but only ONE witness, his own false testimony, to punish the false witness. The false witness was given the EXACT SAME PUNISHMENT that would have been given to the accused, if the accused had been found guilty.

FOCAL ~ Deuteronomy 19:20  And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you. [21]  And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot."

SUPPORTING ~ Exodus 21:23-26 "And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, [24]  Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, [25] Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. [26]  And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake."

SUPPORTING ~ Leviticus 24:18-22 "And he that killeth a beast shall make it good; beast for beast. [19]  And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbor; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him; [20]  Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. [21]  And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it: and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death. [22]  Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the LORD your God."

These verses have been misused and taken out of context by many since our Lord had it placed in the Law.  The  lex talionis, or "the law (lex) of retaliation.", is a law of equal and direct retribution, or Law of Tooth and Nail, and applies ONLY to proper application of justice WITHIN the courts of Israel. The purpose of the Law in Deuteronomy 19 was to insure that the false witness receive the EXACT SAME punishment that his evil words would have brought on the innocent accused. The quotation of lex talionis in Exodus, within context, shows that it was not to be taken literally - for when the servant's eye was lost, the master did not lose his eye, but only had to let the servant go. In all three texts the overwhelming sense of the verses is NOT mutilation or personal; vengeance, but MAKING THE PUNISHMENT FIT THE CRIME. 

The law codes of many ancient Near Eastern countries made provision for the maiming or mutilation of a criminal - such as cutting off a lip, or gouging out an eye. However, God's Law did not explicitly allow such mutilation. I could only find one instance in the Law when a person's hand was to be cut off:

SUPPORTING ~ Deuteronomy 25:11-12 "When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets: [12]  Then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her."

and that was when a woman unlawfully touched a man's genitals. Jesus used "cutting off" the hand or foot as an illustration as to how terrible hell is (Matthew 5.13; 18.8), but there was no indication that Our Lord supported self maiming. And, as we saw before, if a servant lost his eyesight because of a harsh master:

SUPPORTING ~ Exodus 21:26  "And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake."

The servant was freed because of the eye. It was not an application of the lex talionis, "an eye for an eye", as many who support self retribution claim. The purpose of this section of the Law was that the punishment was to FIT THE CRIME. If the false witness would have cost the life of the accused, then the false witness lost his life. If the false witness would have cost the accused a fine, then the witness would have to pay the same fine. If someone committed a crime that caused another to lose a cow, then a cow was returned to the victim by the guilty party. This is only exercised within the courtroom setting - not on a personal level.

Liberals have taken the lex talionis of the Scripture and equated it with the lex talionis of the heathen nations round about Israel in order to show Israel, God's Law, and the exercise of capital punishment "crude, barbaric, and evil". Yet nothing could be further from the truth. Though it is true that the pagan nations exercises lex talionis, or a Law of Vengeance for breaking the rules of society, God was careful to teach His people that Law and Order was to be approached NEUTRAL OF EMOTION and in strict accordance with HIS WORD. As we have studied before, God said:

SUPPORTING ~ Numbers 35:31-32 "Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction {kopher  [ko'-fer], atonement, redemption price} for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death. [32]  And ye shall take no satisfaction {kopher  [ko'-fer], atonement, redemption price} for him that is fled to the city of his refuge, that he should come again to dwell in the land, until the death of the priest."

You cannot "buy your way" out of the crime, but had to suffer the penalty that God imposed - regardless as to how the accused, the witnesses, or the judges felt. No atonement could be made for him, nor any commutation of his sentence, so as to save him from death if he were guilty of murder.  God's method was kindest, for the murderer was put to death immediately, with the injured parties casting the first stone. Other nations allowed things such as perpetual imprisonment, not in well lit and television provided prisons as we have in America, but in a dungeon under ground, on a stone floor, without light, and to be fed on a small portion of bread and water.  While I was stationed in England we had the opportunity to visit several ancient prisons where those guilty of murder were kept. Cells were not even big enough to stretch out in. Beds were carved out of stone, and windows - if there were such conventions - were but half inch slits in the wall well above eye level. There was no heating, no cooling - in such circumstances a man could live but a short time. Though it was not called the punishment of death, yet, from its inevitable consequences, it only differed from it by being a little longer respite than was usual where the punishment of death was awarded. God's method was all the more humane, even, than the system we employ in America today.

SUPPORTING ~ Matthew 5:38-42 "Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: [39]But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. [40]  And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. [41]  And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. [42]  Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away."

Did Jesus Christ MODIFY the Law that He gave to Israel to remove the provisions of the lex talionis in previously given? Jesus Himself said:

SUPPORTING ~ Matthew 5:17-18 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. [18]  For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

Our Lord did not come to eradicate the justice system that He had given Israel for her government. This wasn't His point. The Lord wanted His people to realize that, like most of the Law which He had given, the lex talionis of the Scripture had been intermingled with the lex talionis of the heathen nations. This intermingling had so permeated God's Law that the Pharisees had been teaching that "vengeance was that which belonged to the offended", rather than "vengeance is that which belongs to God". Hammurabi's Code, a series of 282 laws developed by the pagan king of one of the first empires (Babylonian, I believe), dates back about three thousand years before Jesus Christ came to die for our sins. This code claims that personal retribution, an eye for an eye and a life for a life, is justice. This lex talionis had gradually been mingled with the lex talionis of the Mosaic Law, until the two were seen as one in Jewish society. Jesus sought to refocus the errant Pharisees from blending the Law of God (which dealt with fair and just punishment AFTER conviction before the courts of Israel) with the Laws of the Pagans (which dealt with personal vengeance). God's people have never been called to take vengeance for the evil done to them .... God alone is the Judge, vengeance belongs to Him, to His Law, and to His Law Enforcement officials. 

SUPPORTING ~ Romans 12:19  "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord."

SUPPORTING ~ Hebrews 10:31  "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

Jesus did not deny the validity of the punishment of the Law within the courtroom - but He did deny any Pagan code which taught that personal vengeance was condoned or accepted by God.