Thoughts on questions on Exodus 21:7-11

A later post than usual! This took some time to research and plus I fell asleep on the keyboards after a long weekend of ministry! So here it is.

Last week I wrote a post on Exodus 21:1-6 concerning the passage as a way of addressing questions people might have.  It was quite well received I thought I have another post on the next passage: Exodus 21:7-11.

Here’s the passage:

Now if a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do. 8 If she is displeasing in the eyes of her master who designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He does not have authority to sell her to a foreign people, because of his unfairness to her. 9 And if he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters. 10 If he takes to himself another woman, he may not reduce her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights. 11 But if he will not do these three things for her, then she shall go free for nothing, without payment of money.

Why are there female servants?  Why would someone sell their daughters?  Why is it the female servants can’t be freed as male slaves?  Why are there all these rules?

Here’s my thoughts:

1. Concerning the questions of why is there a mention of slavery of the Bible and how slavery in the Bible is more indentured servitude than the concept of slavery in American Antebellum South see my earlier post Thoughts on questions on Exodus 21:1-6.  I’ll be using the term servant, indentured servant, and slave interchangeably in talking about the Biblical data.  If there are male slaves in Exodus 21:1-6, here for Exodus 21:7-11 we see there are female slaves.
2. Note here the nature of these laws are case laws;  the “If” in verse 7 is important.  This here is not telling people they must have slave nor they must be a slave, nor is it saying it is ideal to be a slave of a human master but what we have here are case laws in situations that can be difficult; specifically its about when there are slaves what are the regulations God has for the protection of the slave.
3. There are many example of case laws concerning difficult situations as seen in legal codes outside the Bible.  Think of case laws concerning divorce and matters after a divorce.  These laws aren’t telling people to divorce but there needs to be something in place to figure out about life after divorce.
4. In verse 7 we see the scenario where “a man sells his daughter as a female slave.”  Why would someone sell their family member let alone a daughter to be a slave in the first place?  This might be a situation of grave financial distress.  In a society that is heavily agricultural back then we can imagine if a husband gets injured he puts his family in peril with survival.  He might be having her be a slave to ensure she eats.  He might have her be an indentured servant to have a better life and chance for a better future (Garrett, Exodus, 498).  Of course not every family would be a good host for the girl so there needs to be discernment and wisdom on the part of the girl’s own family of which family their daughter will go out to work for.  It might be hard for many in the West to imagine anything worst than indentured servanthood but for those that have been overseas in far flung part of the world there’s places where survival is very difficult and food is scarce and people are desperate.  (Of course such a situation is still difficult).  Economically I think if it wasn’t for the fact that we have global economies where men can work overseas for years to provide for their family we might see a lot more indentured servanthood breaking up families with members including kids going off everywhere; but then some might ask if today’s overseas contract of people working for years might be a form of indentured servanthood.  If so, certain case laws might need to be in place to protect the worker and we need to be careful of having the vision of the intellectual annointed removing people’s means of providing for their family without any solutions offered, just because it offend our Western values (something those who are woke often commit).
5. As covered in my post on Exodus 21:1-6, the general spirit of the Old Testament encourages freedom from slavery, there’s many ways to be freed and this spirit continues on in the New Testament where Paul said “Were you called as a slave? Do not let it concern you. But if you are also able to become free, take advantage of that” (1 Corinthians 7:21).  So why would Exodus 21:7b state in regards to the female slave “she is not to go free as the male slaves do.”  It is to protect her from being thrown out without any shelter and any family protective structure.
6. Exodus 21:7-11 should be understood as laws to protect the female servant from abuse and neglect from the employer’s obligation to her (Ryken, Exodus, 702).  Three specific scenarios are given (Ryken, Exodus, 703).
7. Verse 8 protects the servant from being sold off to foreigners since the master “does not have authority to sell her to a foreign people.”  There’s a limit to what the master can do.  Human trafficking is prohibited here.  The first half of verse 8 states that if the master is not satisfied with the female servant he must let her redeemed and there’s mechanism for how a servant can be redeemed in the Old Testament that we mentioned earlier in the previous post on Exodus 21:1-6.
8. Verse 9 deals with a scenario that’s the opposite of verse 8, where the master wants her to marry his son because that’s how pleased he is with her.  Here normal protocols of sons marrying daughters apply, even if she is servant.  Just because she works for a specific family does not mean she does not  have the regular process of her family and his family discuss marriage matters.  Nor is she automatically made into a wife just because she’s a servant of the family.
9. Verse 10 protects the servant-turn-wife in the circumstances when she is married but it turns out there are marriage difficulties.   This unhappy circumstances is “If he takes to himself another woman” (v.10a).  Again this is stating the circumstances, it is not approving the act on the husband’s part.  Whether the marriage goes well or goes badly the husband have obligations towards her for verse 10b states “he may not reduce her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights.“
10. These three area mentioned boil down to his obligation to her with regards to survival.  And the obligation should not be low quality provisions; literally the word food in verse 10 in the Hebrew is “meats” (Ryken, Exodus, 703).  Bread is the usual term in Hebrew to convey “food.”  In an ancient agricultural society that doesn’t necessarily eat meat as frequently as we do today in the West, it shows that this isn’t just low quality provisions he’s to give her.
11. Notice it says “her conjugal rights” and not “his conjugal rights.”  This shows the importance of physical intimacy in marriage and consideration of the wife’s angle.
12. What if the husband fail at those obligations? Verse 11 states “she shall go free for nothing, without payment of money.”  The husband and his family cannot invoke the card of her being formerly a slave and therefore she’s obligated to stay and work for them.  This is where the normal protocols of marriage is important mentioned in verse 9.  In the instance where she has the right to leave her husband under the conditions of verse 10 and 11, since there is the normal customs of marriage back then, she can go back to her family who have the dowry from the husband and thereby she can survive.  Recall that back then there was less industries than there are now and in a heavily agricultural society there’s few jobs a widow can do so dowry was an important custom back then to protect the woman.
13. This discussion should not be done in a vacuum.  A nonbeliever reading this and judging over God’s Word must give an account of morality that does not originate from the God of the BIble, if God Himself is rejected as the basis of morality.  See my Atheism and the problem of Morality on the problem.

Advertisement