Psalms 91:2:  “I will say of the LORD, [He is] my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.”

 

I mean really, are not refuge and fortress the same thing?  A refuge is a place of safety and so is a fortress.  The only difference is that when you think of a fortress you imagine a castle or walled city.  The word fortress in Hebrew comes from the root word tsur which means to bind up, to press upon, to siege, to thrust forward, to advance. It is also the word for a neck and a rock.  Some translations say a stronghold or bulwark.  The context clearly indicates that God is a place of safety.

 

Yet a refuge is also a place of safety.  I mean doesn’t  it seem a bit redundant to say that God is both a refuge and a fortress. It gets  monotonous.  Ok, poetry and a different way of expressing the same thing and all that.  But in my forty five years of studying the Old Testament I have learned that the Bible does not waste words and time on redundancy.  If there is a redundant passage it is usually for a very good reason and odds are if you pass something like this off as saying that it means the same thing you may be missing out on a deeper message.

 

Let’s look at this word refuge.  In the Hebrew the word is machaceh  which comes from a Semitic  root word  chasah which means a shelter, protection, or to go aside.  It is the same word that is used for a city of refuge.  It is also a word used for trust.  This is a little different than the word trust used at the end of the verse which is batach and means to adhere to or weld to.  This trust chasah doesn’t carry the strength of batch yet it still has the idea of a confidence or a feeling of security in something or someone.  It is related to the word chavas which means to show pity or have mercy upon someone.  It is also related to the word chasas which means to consider.  In the city of refuge a fugitive who has killed another person will find asylum and protection.  He will put his trust in the laws of the city of refuge that the victim who died by his hand will not suffer the same fate by the relatives of the slain man. The law of the land was blood for blood.  It didn’t matter if the death was an accident, if you were in any way related to that death the family the deceased had a right to hunt you down and kill in atonement for their relative’s death.  Note, I used the word atonement.  This is really the key to the whole idea here.

 

I grew up and learned in Sunday School that the six cities of refuge were a place of safety and protection.  In Bible College I learned that the cities of refuge were place of safety and protection.  I learned in seminary that the cities of refuge were a place of safety and protection. Then I studied Jewish literature and the Talmud and discovered that the cities of refuge were not necessarily a place of refuge.  Yes, someone who killed another person could find asylum and protection at the city of refuge but the city of refuge served another purpose.  It was called a place of atonement.  The fugitive was required to go through a number of things to atone for the death he caused.  The first thing was that he was put on trial to determine if the cause was accidental or premeditated. If premeditated, he was turned over the relatives of the deceased who did what they wanted to do to the old boy. If it was accidently they then determine if the was manslaughter or self-defense.  If either one of these he was kept at the city of refuge and allowed to go through a process of atonement without fear of harm from the relatives.  Once fully atoned for the death of the person he was allowed to go free with a guarantee that he would not be harmed.  If anyone should seek to harm him over this incident, they would pay with their own blood.

 

In reading the Talmud I discovered a little footnote to this matter of atonement in the city of refuge.  This brings me back to Psalms 91:2 and causes me to wonder if David, who wrote this Psalm is not referring to the coming of the Messiah Jesus whom Paul declares is our high priest. Hebrews 4:14-16.   You see according to the Talmud, if the high priest should die all the people seeking asylum for having killed someone who was living in a city of refuge would automatically receive atonement for their crime. The death of the high priest would atone for their crime.  Upon the death of the high priest all were free to leave the city of refuge unmolested.  They were declared innocent of any crime.

 

So, I do not see any redundancy in Psalms 91:2.   David is not saying the Lord is my refuge and my refuge or my fortress and my fortress.  Ancient Semitic man when they heard the word chasah did not just think of refuge, but of atonement as well.  David is saying that the Lord is his atonement and his place of protection.  His God, that word God is Elohim which is sometimes used for the word judge, a judge who is the supreme authority.   The Lord is his supreme judge and His Messiah Jesus would die for his sins and atone for them so that he will trust in his Judge to free him from his sin.

 

But , don’t despair, there is more to this Psalm which speaks of physical protection, but let’s start off with the most important protection of all and that is protection from the penalty of our sins through our high priest who died for us named Jesus.

 

 

Subscribe to our free Daily Hebrew Word Study for in-depth commentary using Biblical Hebrew!

* indicates required