Does the Bible Condone Slavery, Part 1

In this series of columns, we will be examining problem passages and subjects in the Bible that have been targeted by skeptics to discredit the Christian faith and to discourage believers and potential believers. 

One of those subjects is slavery. Critics assert that the Scriptures, at the very least, allow the practice of slavery. At worst, they endorse it. For example, popular atheist Sam Harris argues that the Old Testament is evil because it treats slaves as “farm equipment.” i A similar critique by blogger Michael Pahl offers the following thoughts on slavery: 

There are at least seven passages in the Bible where God is depicted as directly permitting or endorsing slavery. Two of these are in the Law of Moses: God permitted the Israelites to take slaves from conquered peoples permanently, and the Israelites could sell themselves into slavery temporarily to pay off debts (Exodus 21:2-11; Leviticus 25:44-46). The other five passages are in the New Testament, where slavery as a social institution is endorsed, and slaves are called to obey their masters “in everything” (Ephesians 6:5-9; Colossians 3:22-4:1; 1 Timothy 6:1-2; Titus 2:9-10; 1 Peter 2:18-20). 

These passages are all pretty straightforward. One could even say that the Bible is clear on this: the institution of slavery is permitted by God, endorsed by God, and owning slaves can even be a sign of God’s blessing. This has, in fact, been the Christian view through history: it’s only in the last 150-200 years that the tide of Christian opinion has shifted on slavery. ii 

Before we respond to those claims, we need to define some key terms in this discussion. When we talk about the “Biblical Law,” keep in mind that it consists of three types. First, there is the moral law, which defines what is right and just in our behavior. This law is immutable because it is rooted in God’s holy nature. What is “right” is not simply determined by God’s will, but by His very being. “Be holy, for I am holy” is one of God’s most basic commands, both in the Old and New Testaments. iii 

Second, there is the cultic law, which governs our worship of God. In the Old Testament, the Hebrew cultic law involved animal sacrifices, sacred rites and days of worship, and dietary regulations. These were designed to teach and reinforce the concepts of holiness and devotion to God. In the New Testament, Christ fulfilled the Old Testament cultic law by His sacrifice on the cross and replaced it with new teaching on holiness and a new worship ceremony focused on the Lord’s Supper.iv. 

Third, there is the civil law. In the Old Testament, because Israel constituted a nation, it required laws governing property rights, civil rights and obligations, and criminal offenses. Most of these laws are spelled out by Moses in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. However, by the New Testament era, Israel no longer existed as an independent nation but had become the Roman province of Judea. Thus, the New Testament church had to fulfill the Great Commission while living under Roman laws, which sometimes worked to Christianity’s benefit but often did not because it allowed or even required behavior at odds with the biblical moral law. 

As we examine the Old Testament laws concerning slavery, it will be instructive to compare them to Babylon’s Code of Hammurabi (c. 1750 BC), the oldest and most influential legal code in the ancient Near East. 

First, let’s consider Michael Pahl’s claim that “Israelites could sell themselves into slavery temporarily to pay off debts.” In fact, the Mosaic Law is specific that Israelites in such a situation were not to be treated as slaves: 

If a countryman of yours becomes so poor about you that he sells himself to you, you shall not subject him to a slave’s service. He shall be with you as a hired worker, as if he were a foreign resident; he shall serve with you up to the year of jubilee. He shall then leave you, he and his sons with him, and shall go back to his family, so that he may return to the property of his forefathers. For they are My servants whom I brought out from the land of Egypt; they are not to be sold in a slave sale. You shall not rule over him with severity, but are to revere your God.v 

This arrangement was akin to Indentured Servitude, where a worker agrees to work for a set period of years in exchange for certain benefits. In colonial America, poor Europeans would agree to work as an indentured servant for four to seven years in return for passage to the New World and room and board. In fact, both Exodus 21:2 and Deuteronomy 15:12 say that a Hebrew servant must be freed after six years of service, and the debt is cancelled. Additionally, Deuteronomy 15:13-14 requires the master to furnish him with food, wine, and livestock as he departs. 

By comparison, Hammurabi’s Code #117 specifies, “If any one fail to meet a claim for debt, and sell himself, his wife, his son, and daughter for money or give them away to forced labor: they shall work for three years in the house of the man who bought them, or the proprietor, and in the fourth year they shall be set free.” At first glance, this looks more generous than the Mosaic Law. However, Hammurabi’s Code #118 allows the buyer to sublet or even sell off the slave and his family at will. Leviticus 25:42 forbids such a sale. 

Besides the six-year limit of service, the Mosaic Law included other safeguards for the poor to reduce the need for servitude. Poor Hebrews were not to be charged interest for loans or an upcharge on food.vi Also, they were guaranteed the right to glean the fields at harvest time to feed themselves and their families, thus staving off servitude. vii For those who did enter servitude, they or a relative had the “right of redemption” to pay off the debt at any time and be released early. viii 

Second, philosopher Paul Copan notes that, “For the first time in the ANE [Ancient Near East], legislation [the Mosaic Law] required treating servants (“slaves”) as persons, not property.ix Copan offers three examples in support of his claim. 

One, the Mosaic Law offered slaves protection against harm by their masters. Exodus 21:20 says if a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and kills him/her, he shall “suffer vengeance.” That is, he will receive the death penalty, the same as if he had killed a free man (Exodus 21:12). Moreover, if a master strikes his slave and causes him to lose an eye or a tooth, the slave must be set free (Exodus 21:26-27). Additionally, servants were covered by the sabbath regulations (Exodus 20:8-11), which prohibited the Hebrews, their children, their servants, and their foreign laborers from working on the sabbath. This provided slaves with a day of rest each week. 

By contrast, Hammurabi’s Code #116 says if a slave is imprisoned over a debt and dies from mistreatment, the merchant who had him imprisoned must only pay a fine. Additionally, code #282 allows a master to cut off his slave’s ear for disobeying a command! 

Two, the Mosaic Law contained the strongest possible condemnation of forced slavery: “He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him [into slavery] or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death” (Exodus 21:16).x On the other hand, Hammurabi’s Code #14 deals only with the kidnapping of a child, likely to enslave him: “If any one steal the minor son of another, he shall be put to death.” Any Hebrew entering indentured servitude had to do so voluntarily. 

Three, Deuteronomy 23:15-16 commanded the Israelites to harbor runaway slaves from foreign countries: “You shall not hand over to his master a slave who has escaped from his master to you. He shall live with you in your midst, in the place which he shall choose in one of your towns where it pleases him; you shall not mistreat him.” Leviticus 19:33-34 adds that a foreigner (“a stranger”) who resides in Israel was to be treated as a native, because the Hebrews were once the aliens in Egypt and were enslaved there. 

What about runaway Hebrew servants in Israel? As we have indicated, there was little incentive for this to happen, as they were treated humanely, they could buy their way out of service, and they were free to go after six years. 

Hammurabi’s Code, however, required the death penalty for anyone aiding a runaway slave. Code #16 says, “If anyone receives into his house a runaway slave or female slave of the court, or of a freedman, and does not bring it out at the public proclamation of the major domus, the master of the house shall be put to death.” Code #17 offers a reward of two shekels of silver to anyone who finds and returns a runaway slave. There is no comparison between Moses and Hammurabi on this issue. 

Next, we must deal with Pahl’s charge that “God permitted the Israelites to take slaves from conquered peoples permanently.” Leviticus 25:44-46 says: 

As for your male and female slaves, whom you may have, you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. You may also acquire them from the sons of the foreign residents who reside among you, and from their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. You may also pass them on as an inheritance to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. 

Keep in mind, as we discussed earlier, that kidnapping a person for forced slavery was forbidden. Therefore, any foreign slave acquired normally had to have been enslaved to pay a debt, as we discussed earlier. Unlike Hebrew indentured servants, who were set free after six years, foreign slaves served as long as the debt was unpaid. 

The one exception to this scenario was during the conquest of Canaan. When the Hebrews approached a city outside of Canaan to capture it, if the city surrendered, its citizens became servants of Israel. If they resisted, however, the men were to be killed, and the women and children were then incorporated into the Hebrew nation.xi Apparently, this was a temporary situation which ended when the conquest was completed. 

Finally, we should note that c. 588 BC, the prophet Jeremiah announced God’s judgment against King Zedekiah and the people of Judah because they had failed to release their servants as the law commanded, and Zedekiah and his officials had promised (Jeremiah 34). Consequently, God declared that He would deliver Jerusalem into the hands of the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar. This event demonstrates how seriously God took His laws concerning servitude. 

To Be Continued