What the Bible really says about slavery

 If you were to do a Google image search for “slavery Bible,” you'd get hundreds of images showing mostly dark skinned people chained, whipped, and tortured. Completely absent from the criticisms are Scripture references supporting the things the critics portray. There is no passage in the Bible, for example, that talks about putting slaves in chains. Why, then, are there so many pictures of blacks in chains with Bible verses written beneath them? Whether it's done out of ignorance or intentional deceit, it doesn't matter.  It’s a dishonest criticism.

When we hear the word, slavery, we immediately think about the subjugation of blacks in the South. It's a highly, emotionally charged word which is the impression critics want us to have. It's an unfortunate consequence of translation that words of different languages seldom have exactly the same semantic range of meaning. It's nearly unavoidable that when we substitute an English word for a Hebrew or Greek word, we interpret the text according to our understanding of the English word. In English, slavery sounds like a terrible thing which makes this criticism seem to have merit.

This is not a trivial point. This criticism's entire weight rests upon the negative connotation implied by the word, slavery. Critics routinely beat this drum by using disparaging language. It's a type of straw man argument - the argument by outrage - where the skeptic simply uses loaded words to describe the thing he’s criticizing.  It would be like a politician who might describe his opponent’s plan for Social Security reform as, “wanting to kill old people!”  The problem for the critic here is that the slavery mentioned in the Bible doesn’t remotely resemble slavery as the typical, modern reader understands it.

Some examples of the differences between the kind of servitude described in the Bible and the cruel slavery seen in other parts of the world are these:

• People could not be kidnapped and sold into slavery against their will. Exodus 21:16. 

• Slaves who ran away could not be forced to return to their masters. Deuteronomy 23:15-16.

• Slaves were required to be given a Sabbath day of no work, just like free men. Exodus 20:10. 

• If a master kills a slave, he is guilty of murder. Exodus 21:20.

• If a master permanently injures a slave, such as knocking out a tooth, he must free the slave. Exodus 21:26-27.

Nowhere in the Bible are masters commanded or even allowed to chain, torture, and kill their servants. Nowhere! Yet that is exactly the false impression critics want to portray when they show dark skinned people in chains.

When the Bible talks about “slaves,” it is primarily talking about 2 groups of people. First, a tiny minority of slaves were prisoners taken in war. War was a grim reality at the time of the Old Testament and conquered kingdoms meant defeated populations that needed to be dealt with. If you defeat an enemy, you can't simply pack up and go home or else you'll be fighting the same enemy again sometime later. The Law gave instructions in dealing with enemy prisoners that was more practical than internment camps and more humane than summary execution. This doesn't mean that God condones war or slavery. Just like Jesus said about the law allowing divorce (Matthew 19:8), laws dealing with captured prisoners were merely allowances made for people living in a fallen world. It doesn't reflect God's perfect will.

The more common type of slavery mentioned in the is what we might call indentured servitude. In biblical times (both the Old and New Testaments), there were no such things as government welfare or bankruptcy. Out of economic necessity, a person could pledge his future labor in exchange for things like forgiveness of debt, a lump sum of money, and food and shelter. Slaves in the ancient world were a socioeconomic class. They were chronically poor or indebted people who voluntarily entered indentured servitude because they could either not take care of themselves or they could not repay their debts.

Usually, entering into this kind of servitude was a lifelong commitment. If the master died, the slave would continue in the service of the master's family. This was also true of foreign slaves living in Israel. Jews, on the other hand, were required to forgive the debts of other Jews every 7 years (Deuteronomy 15:1-2) which also meant the debts owed by servants.  This was really the only difference between Jewish and non-Jewish slaves.  But even a freed Jewish slave could choose to remain in his master’s employ and serve him for the rest of his life.

In general, the Bible tries to make the arrangement more professional and less like slavery as we typically understand it. Colossians 4:1 commands masters to treat their slaves “justly and fairly.”  God ultimately does not distinguish between slave and master – both are equal in His eyes (Galatians 3:28).  In his letter, Paul tells Philemon to receive Onesimus, not as a slave but as a brother (Philemon 1:16).  Paul even refers to himself as a “slave” to Christ (Greek, doulos δοῦλος, [Strong’s 1401], Romans 1:1, et al). Indeed, Christ Himself gave us the parable of the unprofitable servant, Luke 17:7-10. He has forgiven my debt, paid the penalty for my sins, and given me eternal life. He is my Lord. I owe Him all I have and could serve Him my entire life and still never repay all He has done for me.

When asked to cite specific verses where the mistreatment of slaves is allowed, critics really can only resort to one verse, Exodus 21:20-21:

 

“And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.  Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.”

 

The verse is cited to make it sound like it's OK to beat a slave as long as he doesn't die immediately; if he dies later, it's fine. This is another example of taking a passage out of context. The passage isn't talking about murder but about what happens if you injure a man but he doesn't die. In verses 18-19, the two verses immediately prior to the above verses, the Bible proscribes exactly the same punishment for fights between free men. The only difference is that if you strike a free man and he doesn't die immediately, but only remains in bed for a while, he must be compensated for the time he was injured. A slave that is struck but doesn't die immediately doesn't have to be compensated for the time he was injured because his work belongs to his master anyway!

In spite of all the things I’ve shared already in this post, I still understand that the idea of permanent servitude still will sound strange to a lot of modern readers. I've tried comparing it to something like being a squire or vassal – words that are less emotionally charged – but even these types of service don't exist anymore. It's just hard for some people to think of a being a “slave” as anything less than repulsive. They can't imagine being a slave as being a kind of job. They can't imagine a person wanting to be a slave. It might help if you think of the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32).  A man's son asked his father for his inheritance now. He took the money and went into a foreign land where he squandered it all. When the money was gone, he began to starve and considered returning to his father as a slave. Read the boy's thoughts (Luke 15:14-19):

 

“And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want. And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine. And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him. And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants.”