Why were foreign slaves permanently purchased by Israelites?

Leviticus 25 states that foreigners could be bought as slaves (v.44), and they are considered “inherited property” (v.46). How can this be just?

A number of responses can be made:

First, this is an example of case law—not moral law. As we’ve argued elsewhere (see “Tips for Interpreting Old Testament Law”), these sorts of laws are concessions—not commands. Consider a few examples:

God doesn’t approve of stealing (Ex. 20:15), but he created a case law in case somebody steals. God doesn’t approve of fighting, selling your daughter, or polygamy, but he created a case law in case somebody does. This is because of their “hardness of heart” (Mt. 19:8).

Second, this is not chattel slavery. Foreign servants or slaves were not property. The OT refers to taking care of foreigners 36 times. Earlier, Leviticus states, “The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt” (Lev. 19:34).

Third, indentured servitude was due to destitution and poverty, but it was avoidable. There were several steps an Israelite could take to avoid indentured servitude. First, Israelites could mortgage their land (Lev. 25:25-28). Second, they could take an interest-free loan (Lev. 25:35-38). Third, they could sell themselves as an indentured servant (Lev. 25:41). Finally, if a servant didn’t like his circumstances, he could run away under the protection of the law (Deut. 23:15-16; 1 Sam. 25:10).

Why does it refer to buying and selling slaves?

Indentured servants had a tangible monetary value. Even today, we use the language of sports owners who “buy” or “sell” players to other teams and organizations. Thus, Copan writes, “In like manner, the Old Testament used contractual language for persons—whether individual Israelites, the Israelite nation, or non-Israelites—for example, ‘that [or ‘he’] is his silver’ (Exod. 21:21), ‘acquire’ (qanah) (Ruth 4:5), ‘possession’ (ahuzzah) (Lev. 25:45), or ‘sells himself’ (makar) (Lev. 25:39; cf. Exod. 21:7).”^[1]

Indeed, the same language is used for both Israelites and non-Israelites. Both Israelites and non-Israelites are called “foreigners” and “aliens” (Lev. 25:23, 45) and “servants/slaves” (Deut. 15:17; Lev. 25:44). Both are “acquired” by others (Lev. 25:44, 50). Boaz “acquired” Ruth to be his wife (Ruth 4:5) and Eve “acquired” a son (Gen. 4:1). Both could become rich (Lev. 25:26, 47, 49), and both could be “permanently” sold to a family (Ex. 21:5-6; Lev. 25:46).

Why was slavery called “permanent” (‘olam)?

This Hebrew term sometimes refers to “eternal,” but other times it only refers to a “long span of time.” Context determines the meaning. Citing examples from Egyptian slavery, Egyptologist James Hoffmeier states that permanent segregation of foreigners was an impossibility.^[2] Within a generation or two, foreigners would intermarry and have children (see Ruth 1-4; 1 Chron. 2:34-35). Since these people looked so similar to the Israelites, perpetual slavery would be an impossibility. Copan writes, “The modern idea of one generation after another of slaves—their children, grandchildren, and beyond—just didn’t exist in the ancient Near East.”^[3]

Why was it with “severity” (perek)?

This “severity” refers to keeping an Israelite as an indentured servant beyond six years. After all, the context is the “year of Jubilee.” Thus, the “severity” does not refer to physically harming a foreigner or alien. God told the Israelites to be kind to foreigners and aliens 36 times. Indeed, they would be judged if they disobeyed (Deut. 24:14; 27:19). Instead, this refers to the jubilee year, and foreigners couldn’t receive land that wasn’t theirs.

For more on this subject, see “The Bible and Slavery.”

^[1] Paul Copan, Is God a Vindictive Bully? (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2022), 177.

[2] James K. Hoffmeier, “Egyptian Religious Influences on the Early Hebrews,” in Did I Not Bring Israel Out of Egypt? Biblical, Archaeological, and Egyptological Perspectives on the Exodus Narratives, ed. James K. Hoffmeier, Alan R. Millard, and Gary A. Rendsberg (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2016), 3–35.

^[3] Paul Copan, Is God a Vindictive Bully? (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2022), 179.