“If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.”
King James Version (KJV)
Zev's comment on 2021-05-11 02:40:01:
Servitude is an arguable aspect when you consider the dependency of a job and the financial burden placed when its lost. This is not the same thing. When you remove that financial burden, that occupation is now a choice. There is no contractual requirement.
Don't forget, women are servants forever. In addition, you can purchase a woman from the father or guardian and force them to be your wife. The crazy part is, this still exists today in other cultures. They are not forced, but if declining means you are disowned and put on the street and a dishonor to your family... its a more difficult situation as it includes the financial burden as above, but it also includes an emotional component of losing communication to your family which cant be easily remedied.
The "great viewpoints" in this chapter was that it did provide more rights than before. If no one told them that they couldn't own a male slave for 10 years, they would have... Granted, that notion was lost at some point until slavery was abolished.
Eric's comment on 2021-01-23 20:45:19:
Yes I'm like you most when my first reaction to this chapter was that God condones slavery? But if I think of it as a Boss (Master) and employee (servants), it is more acceptable. Think about it, there was no capitalism back them. No jobs like we have today. What would people do back then for work?
Great viewpoints that others had where it kept society in check minimizing crime. Eye for an eye, etc.
Maran's comment on 2020-04-13 00:36:12:
Hebrews did not have Hebrew slaves. Hebrew Maidservants and Menservants were PAID occupations. A girl's father was paid for her service to her boss's family. In turn, they provided her room & board and meals for free. It's not much different than if I hired a live-in maid. Except of course, a live-in maid would get her wages paid to her directly, but Hebrew girls back then didn't have much to spend money on, so their wages typically went to help provide for their family who they lived with until marriage.
Anonymous's comment on 2014-01-16 13:56:02:
It's disturbing and sickening that RogerCox (or anyone) would even attempt to say that this act is ever okay. Whether it was commonplace then or not is entirely irrelevant. Owning slaves and doing the things to them that the Bible dictates is NEVER okay. In ANY context. EVER.
RogerCox's comment on 2012-11-12 17:41:14:
Ralph's comment on 2012-11-05 01:02:55:
Please correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Exodus 21:1-11 specifically about the rights and obligations concerning Hebrews purchasing Hebrew slaves? And verses 7-11 about the sale of one's own daughter into slavery? Naturally this topic is troubling to the typical 21st century lay Christian. And then specifically Exodus 21:10, "If he (your daughter's master) takes another wife, he shall not withhold her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights." What exactly does this mean? That your enslaved daughter retains the right to have sexual relations with her master after he has married another woman? And that if her master does not provide your enslaved daughter with food, clothing, and her conjugal rights (meaning sex?), then she is given her feeding without cost? This does not sound right to my 21st century lay mind. Can someone please explain this to me?