Day two: The Bible Permits Sex Slaves!!!

Day two: The Bible Permits Sex Slaves

Seborgarsen raises this issue:

‘The following passage describes the sickening practice of sex slavery. How can anyone think it is moral to sell your own daughter as a sex slave?”

He quotes this scripture to back up his premise (my emphasis added):

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

Then he makes this conclusion:

“So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and screws them!”

I am glad he feels passionately the immorality of selling one’s child as a sex slave. The US has reeled in horror at a recent possible such case in North Carolina where a five year old girl may have been sold into prostitution by her mother. See: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5667820n

Here is a video from CBS on modern day sex slavery: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/23/48hours/main675913.shtml 

For more examples of modern day sex slavery see:

http://www.memphisdailynews.com/editorial/Article.aspx?id=46316

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/AmericanFamily/story?id=2834852&page=1

http://www.humantrafficking.org/updates/10

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2760391/Sex-slave-sold-for-3k-on-Londons-Oxford-Street.html

These are horrifying beyond words.

And have nothing to do with the bible passage Seborgarsen quotes.

There are a couple of main reasons people may misunderstand a passage such as this. 1) They haven’t read it carefully enough to see what was actually said, and 2) they do not know/understand the historical context.

To deal with #2: the historical context would necessitate immersion into Ancient Near Eastern history beyond the scope of an article such as this. For those who would like to read a short (54 page) article addressing this issue more completely, please see: http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qnoslave.html

A few outstanding differences between societies now and in the biblical time frame gleaned from his article, follow.

1)    The difficulty of surviving meant that family units had to pull together.

2)    Slaves/servants were very much a part of the household, unlike in our era.

3)    Add those two together, and it meant one had better not anger the slaves/servants. They were an integral part of the family and needed for the survival.

4)    “Debt slavery” encompassed by far the largest share of slaves. A person could sell himself and or family members into slavery in order to work off an unmanageable debt. This automatically ended in the seventh year of the calendar whether the debt was paid off or not.

5)    Debt slavery did away with the problem of starvation and extreme poverty

6)    When a father sold his daughter into “slavery” he procured a bride price while the girl was too young to marry. She would work for the family – everyone in the family worked for the family.

1. The owner was permitted to marry her, or marry her to his son
2. If the second, he was to treat her as a daughter
3. If the first, he was to treat her as his wife – in all ways, and never demote her under any circumstances to less than a wife
4. If neither of those suited the situation, he was permitted to allow another Israelite to redeem her, ie pay the bride price for her and marry her

7)   Slave/servants could have their own property and their own slave/servants.

^“17 A thousand other men from the tribe of Benjamin were with him, including Ziba, the chief servant of the house of Saul, and Ziba’s fifteen sons and twenty servants. They rushed down to the Jordan to meet the king.” (2 Samuel 19:17”

Interestingly, the very passage Seborgarsen feels advocates sex slavery, puts restrictions into place to insure this will not happen. First as we’ve seen, the woman had the rights of a contract of marriage.  Provisions were made for her protection if the “owner” could not fulfill his obligation towards her.

Second: The woman was to have full rights of marriage. If the man took a second wife, scripture did not allow him to reduce her status in anyway. She was to retain the full rights of a wife. “If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife.” He had to provide for her physical well being, and her marital well being. The Lord knows how he created us and has/had a realistic understanding regarding sex. In the New Testament, He talks about the need for husband and wife to avoid denying sex to one another. Seems He believes women also have desires, not just men.

Add to that, children were very important in that society. A woman’s status to some degree rested on how many children she had.

To conclude: the passage our friend fears promotes sex slavery is actually the total opposite. It contains the regulations to prevent such an abomination.

More later….       

“The Bible is so full of endorsement of slavery it makes me sick”

I received a most interesting "comment" about the bible and slavery. The commenter asks a number of intriguing questions, well, after panning me for being a "cherry-picking hypocrite" :0 (To read his entire comment, go here.)

I suspect a number of people may wonder about the ideas he raised so I thought I would take the time to address them. If scripture is given a quick read through, one can get some pretty weird ideas about what the Lord wants or doesn't want. There is also the difficulty of understanding any thing written millennia ago. We need to place it in the context of history to understand what actually was happening, and in some ways, more importantly, why it was happening. That larger global issue may be more than I can handle on a website like this as it needs a good deal of scholarly references, so I will probably only touch on it at some point.

Anyway, if I am going to begin to answer some of the questions raised, the issues are involved enough, that I will break this down into a series of articles. I may only answer one question per post. Here is the first one.

Hello Seborgarsen .

You raise a number of interesting questions. These seem based on either you misunderstood what was said, or you have removed the passage from the context of time and its surrounding passages. To understand ancient writings, we have to place them in their historical context. To understand any communication, written or spoken, we have to keep the various sentences in context of the whole statement.

Then of course, some prefer to distort intentionally. They need healing for their anger. I can’t imagine a simple post would help a person in that condition.

For now, I will assume you fall into the first category. I believe people deserve a fair hearing. Because I do not know you, personally, I will not presume to judge your motives.

As your thesis you state, “the Bible is so full of endorsement of slavery it makes me sick.” If I understand what you have written correctly, you have presented what you believe are five examples that support your thesis.

I will start with the more apparently horrifying ones. But first, I want to touch on the need to understand individual statements as they are set in the whole body of a writing. More later, but for now, let’s look at two statements, one each from the Old and new Testaments that address the Lord’s view on the matter.

From the OT, Exodus 21: 16

““Kidnappers must be put to death, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves.” (NLT)

Here He states that slave-traders deserve capital punishment. Hardly an endorsement.

The NT states the same, lumping slave traders in with murderers. 1Timothy 1: 9-10

“We also know that law^[a] is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine” (NIV)

No endorsement of slavery there, either.

On to your specific questions. You ask:

1) What does the Bible say about beating slaves? It says you can beat both male and female slaves with a rod so hard that as long as they don't die right away you are cleared of any wrong doing.

You use this scripture to back up your statement:

²⁰ “If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished. ²¹ But if the slave recovers within a day or two, then the owner shall not be punished, since the slave is his property.” (Exodus 21: 20-21 NLT)

Taken that way, it sounds pretty bad.

One problem. You pulled it out of context.

The scripture you cite is from a section of law dealing with penalties and restitution for personal injury. You left out the preceding verses:

Cases of Personal Injury

¹² “Anyone who assaults and kills another person must be put to death.* ¹³ But if it was simply an accident permitted by God, I will appoint a place of refuge where the slayer can run for safety. ¹⁴ However, if someone deliberately kills another person, then the slayer must be dragged even from my altar and be put to death.

 ¹⁵ “Anyone who strikes father or mother must be put to death.

 ¹⁶ “Kidnappers must be put to death, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves.

 ¹⁷ “Anyone who dishonors^[b] father or mother must be put to death.

 ¹⁸ “Now suppose two men quarrel, and one hits the other with a stone or fist, and the injured person does not die but is confined to bed. ¹⁹ If he is later able to walk outside again, even with a crutch, the assailant will not be punished but must compensate his victim for lost wages and provide for his full recovery.**

 ²⁰ “If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished.(See verse 12*) ²¹ But if the slave recovers within a day or two, then the owner shall not be punished, since the slave is his property.”(See verse 19**) (Exodus 21: 12-21)

Nowhere in scripture does it state slaves are not people. The punishment for killing another person stated in verse 12 is death. Ironic that death is also the punishment for enslaving another person, verse 16.

The one difference between slave and free, is that one doing the injury must pay the free man for his lost wages and for it appears, the needed medical help. If he injured his own slave, he already has lost the “wages” by losing the slave’s (or servant’s) productivity. He is also the one who needs to provide medical care.

So, your statement that “the Bible says” it is okay to beat slaves is incorrect. Same penalty if the slave dies. If the slave recovers, the man already bears the cost in lost productivity. The only punishment for beating a free man who subsequently recovers, is to compensate the man for time lost at work. Both are basically the same thing.

More tomorrow…See

Day two: The Bible Permits Sex Slaves!!!