And as for thy bondman and thy handmaid whom thou shalt have -- of the nations that are round about you, of them shall ye buy bondmen and handmaids.
God has just forbidden Israel to make slaves of their own poor countrymen. Now He allows them to buy slaves from the nations around them. Two hard questions follow. Why the line between an Israelite and a foreigner? And why did God tolerate what He never called good?
The force of this verse comes from a contrast. The verses just before deal with a poor Israelite. This verse deals with the foreigner in the same household.
If through poverty he was sold to an Israelite, he was to be treated as a hired servant, and to go out free at the Jubilee... while a slave from the nations, serving the same Israelite master, stayed a slave for ever. He could never look forward to a year of Jubilee with its welcome trumpet sound. Only death, or his master's kindness in releasing him, could set him free. How favoured was the Israelite, who knew that no power could keep him in servitude after the trumpet of the Jubilee had sounded.
The reason given in the verses just before is ownership. Israel already belonged to Someone.
Israel must remember that all Israelites were God's servants whom He had redeemed from Egypt. They were never to be sold as slaves, though they could become hired servants. This was in effect a leasing agreement, just like the sale of land. No one was to treat him harshly.
Commentators are careful not to read God's permission as God's approval.
Slavery formed no part of human society at the beginning. Yet in the early times after the flood it clearly took deep root among people on earth. The law let the Israelites own slaves from the nations, and for these there was no jubilee to set them free. Still, God allowed slavery, but He never set it up — no more than He set up polygamy, which the law also permitted.
The wording of the verse is about buying. One writer presses that point against the assumption that this is the slavery of modern history.
Some of the nations round about might be willing to sell themselves into servitude. If so, the law gave them no redemption, and their service would last for life. Yes, this is a form of slavery permitted. But the person concerned accepted it in return for payment. No one forced it on them, and it was not like what was done with Africans a century or two ago.
These verses say nothing about treating such servants kindly. Another writer fills that gap from elsewhere in the law.
This passage does not say they were forbidden to rule over such slaves harshly. But Exodus 22:21 insists, "You shall not wrong a sojourner or oppress him, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt."
The permission belonged to one stage in God's ways, when Israel alone was His chosen nation. One writer then looks ahead to a day when Israel and the nations stand in a very different relation.
At that time Israel was only a nation favoured by Jehovah. The law did not stop an Israelite from buying slaves, as we see in verses 44-46... Neither the surrounding nations nor the strangers living among them could claim the holy brotherhood that Israelites had with Jehovah. And even in the day when creation will be set free from its present groaning and bondage... kings on earth will be foster fathers to the Jew, never again despised or persecuted, and queens their nursing mothers. Strangers will build up Zion's walls, and their kings will serve in that day.
The same writer lists what the law already gave to slaves in Israel, and still calls it incomplete.
The law given by Moses had done much to lessen slavery in Israel... They were not to hand an escaped slave back to his master. He was free to live where he pleased among them, and no one was to oppress him (Deuteronomy 23:15-16)... Slaves in Israel had a right to circumcision among other privileges. They shared the Sabbath rest, a gift to no one more than to them. They had their place at the yearly assemblies, joining in the feasts like others... Still, it must be fully granted that the law made nothing perfect, here as everywhere else. Because of Jewish or human hardheartedness, the law tolerated much that was far from God's mind, until He came who is the truth in grace. Christ changed all, and the slave became His freedman.
- Owned — Israel could not be sold as slaves because God already owned them; He had bought them out of Egypt.
- Unowned — the foreigner in this verse stood outside that redemption. No jubilee trumpet ever sounded for him.
- Allowed — writers insist God permitted slavery but never set it up, just as with polygamy.
- Limited — the law eased servitude. Slaves kept the Sabbath and the feasts, and no one was to oppress the stranger. Yet it made nothing perfect.
- Answered — Christ changed what the law tolerated. A day is coming when kings will serve Zion instead of selling themselves to it.
Moreover of the children of them that dwell as sojourners with you, of them may ye buy, and of their family that is with you, which they beget in your land, and they shall be your possession.
Leviticus 25 has just forbidden an Israelite to keep his poor brother as a slave. Now the law turns to foreigners living in the land. It allows what it refused between brothers: lasting ownership, passed on to the next generation. Two questions follow: why did God permit this at all, and what does it say to readers who live after Christ?
The permission was real, and the commentators do not soften it.
In the days when Israel was only a nation favoured by the LORD, the law did not stop an Israelite from buying slaves, as we see in verses 44-46. They were free to have such slaves from the nations around them, or even from the sojourners living with them. Neither group could claim Israel's own brotherhood, which was holy to the LORD. From both they could buy, make them their possession, and leave them as an inheritance to their children after them — their slaves for ever.
Notice what this verse does not say. It gives no rule here against harsh treatment. Other laws fill that gap.
However, the law allowed Israel to buy Gentile slaves and keep them for good, whether from the nations around or from Gentiles who had settled in the land (vv. 44-46). Nothing here forbids ruling over such slaves harshly. But Exodus 22:21 insists: "You shall not wrong a sojourner or oppress him, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt."
Slavery was not God's invention. The law found it already in the world and fenced it with rules. Those rules covered the children born in the land, and gave the bought servant a place at Israel's Passover meal.
Masters bought some with money and took others in war... If such a servant was circumcised, he could eat the Passover among the Israelites. Because he was bought, he belonged to the family; a hired servant could not. (So Gentiles, though outsiders, bought with the blood of Christ, have all the privilege of grace.) Any children born to them also belonged to the master (Exodus 21:4). This kind of servitude came from sin, yet the law of Moses recognised it and gave rules about it, and for the protection of the slaves.
Every fifty years the Jubilee set Israel's slaves free. Our verse names the exception: the servant bought from outside. Yet even for him, an Israelite household was no ordinary place.
Once every fifty years, in the passage we are looking at, God proclaimed liberty to every slave in the land of Israel. They were all free men again — apart from slaves bought from neighbouring nations, or captives taken in war. In the ways of God it was often to a man's eventual blessing to serve a Hebrew master. Such service brought them into an outward place of privilege. There they met kindness, there God was known, and there the dreadful practices of the pagan nations met stern rebuke. Many a captive will thank God in eternity that he was ever taken captive.
Commentators are frank: this arrangement fell short of God's own mind, and God allowed it only for a time.
The law given by Moses had done much to soften slavery in Israel. A slave who escaped to them was not to be handed back to his master. He was free to live unoppressed, where he pleased among them (Deuteronomy 23:15-16). Still, we fully admit that the law made nothing perfect, here as everywhere else. Because of Jewish, or human, hardness of heart, the law tolerated much that was far from God's mind — until He came who is the truth in grace. Christ changed all that, and the slave became His freedman.
The children of these foreigners are not shut out of the Jubilee. They share its plenty, and the Jubilee itself points ahead.
The rules for this feast said that the people of Israel were not to sow or reap, yet they should "eat their fill." The children of the strangers living in their land were to share in the special bounties of the year as well (Lev. 25:8-55). Old Testament prophecy always ties the happy age that this Jubilee pictures to the reign of the Seed of David.
- Permission — an Israelite could buy lasting servants from the nations around and from settled foreigners. They stood outside the brotherhood Israel shared before God.
- Protection — other laws fill the silence here. Israel must never wrong or oppress a sojourner, for Israel had once been sojourners in Egypt.
- Privilege — servitude came from sin, yet the law fenced it with rules that guarded the slave. The bought servant belonged to the family and could eat the Passover.
- Purchase — a master who knew God was often the making of a man. Many will thank God in eternity for the captivity that brought them near.
- Freedom — the law made nothing perfect. Christ came, and the slave became His freedman. The Jubilee He brings reaches the sojourners' children too.
And ye shall leave them as an inheritance to your children after you, to inherit them as a possession these may ye make your bondmen for ever; but as for your brethren, the children of Israel, ye shall not rule over one another with rigour.
Leviticus 25 draws a hard line through the household. An Israelite could keep a foreign slave for life and pass him on to his children. But he could never rule a fellow Israelite harshly. So two questions arise. What made the difference? And does God's permission here mean God's approval?
Everything in the verse turns on who counts as a brother. At that time Israel was a nation set apart to God. Outsiders had no share in that bond, and the law treated them differently.
While Israel was simply a nation favoured by Jehovah, the law did not stop an Israelite from buying slaves, as we see in verses 44-46. They were free to take such slaves from the nations round about them, or from the foreigners living among them. Neither group could claim the brotherhood Israel had, holy to Jehovah. From both they might buy, make them their possession, and leave them to their own children as an inheritance — their bondmen for ever.
The second half of the verse forbids harsh rule between Israelites. The reason lies in who already owned them — a poor Israelite could sell his labour, but never his person.
Israel was never to make slaves of their own people, yet if one became so poor as to sell himself to another, he would become a hired servant. He was not to be oppressed as though he were merely the property of a master. In the year of Jubilee he went free and returned to his original property, which was released at the same time. The same applied to his family. For Israel must remember that all Israelites were God's servants, whom He had redeemed from Egypt. They were never to be sold as slaves, though they could become hired servants. This was in effect a leasing agreement, as was true of the sale of land also. No harsh treatment was allowed.
Weigh the word "forever" against what an Israelite had — a release date. Two servants could work in the same house, under the same master, and face different futures.
At the Jubilee he went out free. A bondsman from the nations, serving the same Israelite master, remained a bondsman for ever. For him no year of Jubilee with its welcome trumpet sound could ever be looked for. Death, or release by the favour of his master, could alone set him free. How favoured was the Israelite, who knew that no power could keep him in servitude after the trumpet of the Jubilee had sounded.
Writers separate what the law allowed from what God set up. The law regulated some things it never approved.
Slavery formed no part of man's social order at the beginning. Yet in early times after the flood it had clearly taken deep root among men on earth. Under the law the Israelites could own slaves from the Gentiles, and for these there was no Jubilee to set them free. Still, God allowed slavery; He never set it up, any more than He set up polygamy, which the law also permitted.
Permission was not a licence to be cruel. This verse says nothing about harsh treatment of a foreign slave. Another part of the law does.
However, Israel was allowed to buy Gentile slaves and keep them permanently, whether from the nations around or from those Gentiles who settled in the land (vv. 44-46). The text here does not say that they must not rule over such slaves with harshness. But Exodus 22:21 insists, "You shall not wrong a sojourner or oppress him, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt."
Writers ask what Christianity did with the slavery it found already in place. One answer comes from Paul's short letter to Philemon.
This short letter teaches us that Christianity does not cancel human rights, and it does not necessarily change a person's social position. It gives the Christian a chance to act in grace toward someone who has wronged him. Christianity was never meant to set the world to rights. It teaches its followers how to walk in a scene that is not ordered according to the mind of God. In keeping with this, Onesimus was sent back to Philemon, but with this letter in his hand.
Later history showed why the Bible needed such a letter.
Some may be surprised that such a letter should form part of the inspired word. But it is "profitable": for fifteen hundred years slaves were widely owned by Christians. Many may never have thought of seeking their conversion, or may have been prejudiced against it. God saw the need of such a letter. The slave had become "a brother beloved."
- Brotherhood — the whole verse hinges on it. Those outside Israel's family bond with God could be held as a possession; a brother never could.
- Ownership — an Israelite was already God's servant, bought out of Egypt. A man who belongs to God cannot be sold as property to anyone else.
- Jubilee — the Israelite always had a release date coming; for the foreign slave no trumpet would ever sound. That is the weight of "forever".
- Permission — the law allowed slavery; God never set it up. And He guarded the stranger from cruelty elsewhere in the law.
- Beloved — the gospel does not first change the slave's rank. It changes what he is to his owner: he comes back a brother.