Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Exodus 21:2
If thou buy a Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
2. If thou buy ] In the Heb. the primary cases ( vv. 2, 7, 20, 22 &c.) are introduced by ki, ‘when,’ the subordinate ones ( vv. 3a, 3b, 4, 5; 8, 9, 10, 11, &c.) by ’im, ‘if,’ or ’, ‘or if’; but the distinction is not preserved in EVV.
an Hebrew servant ] better, an Hebrew bondman (RVm.) or male slave, i.e. one of Hebrew birth, as opposed to foreigners, who did not enjoy the same privileges as Hebrew slaves, and might be slaves for life (Lev 25:44-46). The release in the seventh year, after six years of servitude, seems, like the Sabbatical Year (Exo 23:10 f.), to be suggested by the weekly sabbath closing the six days of toil.
go out free ] Cf. ammurabi’s Code, 117 (below, p. 421). The philanthropic legislator of Deuteronomy (Exo 15:13 f.) enjoins the master to bestow a handsome present upon his slave when he thus leaves him.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
2 6. Hebrew male slaves. Their term of service is fixed for six years ( v. 2). A slave is to leave his master’s service exactly as he entered it: if he entered it without a wife, he is to leave it without wife, even though he may have taken a wife in the meantime ( vv. 3a, 4). If on the other hand he was married when his master bought him, his wife may accompany him when he receives his Freedom ( v. 3b). Provision is further made for a voluntary life-service ( v. 5 f.).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
2 11. The law of slavery. Cf. Deu 15:12-18, Lev 25:39-55 (H and P), where there are other regulations on the same subject, in some respects differing remarkably from those of Ex., and springing evidently out of a different and more advanced stage of society. The present law deals only with Hebrew slaves: the case of foreign slaves is dealt with in Lev 25:44-46. The conditions of society in ancient Israel were such that slavery could not be abolished: but it was regulated, and restrictions were imposed on the power of a master over his slave (see also vv. 20 f., 26 f.). An Israelite might fall into slavery from different causes: (1) he might be sold by his parents, a case of particularly common occurrence with daughters; (2) he might be sold for theft (Exo 22:3) or insolvency (2Ki 4:1, Amo 2:6); (3) he might be obliged by poverty to sell himself (Lev 25:39). Of course, also, he might be born a slave. The later legislation of Lev 25:39-46 sought to limit slavery to foreigners.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
A Hebrew might be sold as a bondman in consequence either of debt Lev 25:39 or of the commission of theft Exo 22:3. But his servitude could not be enforced for more than six full years. Compare the marginal references.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Exo 21:2-6
If thou buy an Hebrew servant.
Slavery and sovereignty
These judgments of God are the declarations of human rights.
I. These judgments dealt with an existing institution. The circumstances under which an Hebrew might be reduced to servitude were–
1. Poverty.
2. The commission of theft.
3. The exercise of paternal authority.
II. This admitted institution does not sanction modern slavery. There is in the Divine revelation a spirit ever working to the enfranchisement of the race. More closely consider the conditions of Mosaic slavery–
III. This system asserted the slaves personal sovereignty. In modern systems, the man is a mere chattel, but in the Mosaic system the slaves manhood is declared. He is sovereign over himself, and is allowed the power of choice. The Southern slaveholder would not permit his slave to say, I will not; but the Hebrew slave is permitted to say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free.
IV. This system declared the slaves right to be a man of feeling. The man was not to be separated from the wife he had chosen prior to his days of servitude. This part of the Mosaic regulations would not harmonize with the painful scenes which took place at slave marts.
V. This system proclaimed the slaves right to freedom, and that it is the highest condition. The Hebrew slave worked on to the day of happy release. This term of service was no longer than a modern apprenticeship. The bells of the seventh year rang out the old order of slavery, and rang in the new glorious order of freedom.
VI. This system typically sets forth that the service of love is the highest, and alone enduring. He only was to serve for ever who chose continued servitude on account of love to his master, and love to his wife and his children. The service of love outstrips in dignity and surpasses in duration all other forms of service. (W. Burrows, B. A.)
Attachment to a master
The following anecdote is furnished by an officer who went through the campaign in Egypt against the French in the time of the first Napoleon. I am glad, he says, to recall to my memory the remembrance of a deed done by a brave and faithful servant. While in Egypt, the plague broke out in the 2nd Regiment of Guards. A large tent was immediately set apart as a hospital for the stricken. It was, naturally, regarded with extreme dread by the unfortunate sufferers, who despaired of ever leaving it alive. The surgeon of the Guards, discovering that he had symptoms of the disorder about him, bravely gave himself up as an inmate of the plague tent. His servant, who was greatly attached to him, was in despair. At least, he said, let me go with you, and nurse you. His master, however, made answer that such a step was impossible, since the tent was guarded by sentinels, who had orders to admit no one without a pass. The breach of this rule was punishable with death. The man was silenced for the moment, but at nightfall, regardless of the danger of disease or detection, he crept on hands and knees past the sentinels, and slipping under the cords of the doomed tent, he presented himself at his masters bedside. Here he went through many days of patient and tender nursing of the sick man, till the plague claimed another victim, and the good surgeon died. Then the servant walked quietly out of the tent door, and went through the usual form of disinfection, after that returning to his regiment, where he was received with open arms. To have dared so much for a beloved master raised him to the rank of a hero, both among officers and men. He had shown that love for a fellow-man was stronger even than the love of life in his breast, and those who might not have been brave enough to dare such fearful risks, were noble enough to own their admiration of one who had done so. Such faithful service is registered in heaven, the writer adds. (Great Thoughts.)
Love for a master
In the latter days of Sir Walter Scott, when poverty stared him in the face, he had to announce to his servants his inability to retain them any longer. But they begged to be allowed to stay, saying they would be content with the barest fare if only they might remain in his employ. This was permitted, and they clung, to him until the last. (H. O. Mackey.)
The ear bored with an aul
We are going to use this as a type, and get some moral out of it:
1. And the first use is this. Men are by nature the slaves of sin. Some are the slaves of drunkenness, some of lasciviousness, some of covetousness, some of sloth; but there are generally times in mens lives when they have an opportunity of breaking loose. There will happen providential changes which take them away from old companions, and so give them a little hope of liberty, or there will come times of sickness, which take them away from temptation, and give them opportunities for thought. Above all, seasons will occur when conscience is set to work by the faithful preaching of the Word, and when the man pulls himself up, and questions his spirit thus:—Which shall it be? I have been a servant of the devil, but here is an opportunity of getting free. Shall I give up this sin? Shall I pray God to give me grace to break right away, and become a new man; or shall I not?
2. Our text reads us a second lesson, namely, this. In the forty-first Psalm, in the sixth verse, you will find the expression used by our Lord, or by David in prophecy personifying our Lord, Mine ear hast thou opened, or Mine ear hast thou digged. Jesus Christ is here, in all probability, speaking of Himself as being for ever, for our sakes, the willing servant of God. Will you not say, Let my ear be bored to His service, even as His ear was digged for me?
I. First, let us speak upon our choice of perpetual service.
1. The first thing is, we have the power to go free if we will.
2. We have not the remotest wish to do so.
3. We are willing to take the consequences. The boring of our ear is a special pain, but both ears are ready for the aul. The Lords service involves peculiar trials, for He has told us, Every branch that beareth fruit He purgeth it. Are we willing to take the purging?
II. Now, secondly, our reasons for it. A man ought to have a reason for so weighty a decision as this. What reasons can we give for such decided language?
1. We can give some reasons connected with Himself. The servant in our text who would not accept his liberty, said, I love my master. Can we say that? The servant in our text, who would not go free, plainly declared that he loved his wife, so that there are reasons connected not only with his Master, but with those in his Masters house, which detain each servant of Jesus in happy bondage. Some of us could not leave Jesus, not only because of what He is, but because of some that are very dear to us who are in His service. How could I leave my mothers God? Besides, let me add, there are some of us who must keep to Christ, because we have children in His family whom we could not leave–dear ones who first learned of Christ from us.
2. There are reasons also why we cannot forsake our Lord which arise out of ourselves; and the first is that reason which Peter felt to be so powerful. The Master said, Will ye also go away? Peter answered by another question. He said, Lord, to whom shall we go?
3. And why should we go? Can you find any reason why we should leave Jesus Christ? Can you imagine one?
4. And when should we leave Him if we must leave Him? Leave Him while we are young? It is then that we need Him to be the guide of our youth. Leave Him when we are in middle life? Why, then it is we want Him to help us to bear our cross, lest we sink under our daily load. Leave Him in old age? Ah, no! It is then we require Him to cheer our declining hours. Leave Him in life? How could we live without Him? Leave Him in death? How could we die without Him? No, we must cling to Him; we must follow Him whithersoever He goeth.
III. In the last place, I want to bore your ear. Do you mean to be bound for life? Christians, do you really mean it? Come, sit ye down and count the cost.
1. And, first, let them be bored with the sharp awl of the Saviours sufferings. No story wrings a Christians heart with such anguish as the griefs and woes of Christ. The bleeding Lamb enthralls me. I am His, and His for ever. That is one way of marking the ear.
2. Next, let your ear be fastened by the truth, so that you are determined to hear only the gospel. The gospel ought to monopolize the believers ear.
3. Furthermore, if you really give yourself to Christ, you must have your ear opened to hear and obey the whispers of the Spirit of God, so that you yield to His teaching, and to His teaching only. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 2. If thou buy a Hebrew servant] Calmet enumerates six different ways in which a Hebrew might lose his liberty:
1. In extreme poverty they might sell their liberty. Le 25:39: If thy brother be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee, c.
2. A father might sell his children. If a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant see Ex 21:7.
3. Insolvent debtors became the slaves of their creditors. My husband is dead – and the creditor is come to take unto him my two sons to be bondmen, 2Kg 4:1.
4. A thief, if he had not money to pay the fine laid on him by the law, was to be sold for his profit whom he had robbed. If he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft; Ex 22:3-4.
5. A Hebrew was liable to be taken prisoner in war, and so sold for a slave.
6. A Hebrew slave who had been ransomed from a Gentile by a Hebrew might be sold by him who ransomed him, to one of his own nation.
Six years he shall serve] It was an excellent provision in these laws, that no man could finally injure himself by any rash, foolish, or precipitate act. No man could make himself a servant or slave for more than seven years; and if he mortgaged the family inheritance, it must return to the family at the jubilee, which returned every fiftieth year.
It is supposed that the term six years is to be understood as referring to the sabbatical years; for let a man come into servitude at whatever part of the interim between two sabbatical years, he could not be detained in bondage beyond a sabbatical year; so that if he fell into bondage the third year after a sabbatical year, he had but three years to serve; if the fifth, but one. See Clarke on Ex 23:11, &c. Others suppose that this privilege belonged only to the year of jubilee, beyond which no man could be detained in bondage, though he had been sold only one year before.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
If thou buy an Hebrew servant; of which practice see Jer 34:14. This was allowed in two cases:
1. When a man for his crimes was condemned by the judges to be sold; of which see Exo 22:3; 2Ki 4:1; Mat 8:25.
2. When a man pressed by great poverty sold himself or his children; of which see Lev 25:39,40. The seventh year is to be numbered, either,
1. From the last sabbatical year, or year of release, which came every seventh year; and the sense of the place is, not that he shall always serve six full years, but that he shall never serve longer, and that his service shall last only till that year comes. Or rather,
2. From the beginning of his service; for,
1. It were a very improper speech to say, he shall serve six years, of one who possibly entered into his service but a month before the year of release.
2. In the law of the sabbatical year there is no mention of the release of servants, as there is of other things, Le 25; Deu 15; and in the year of jubilee, when servants are to be released, it is expressed so, as Lev 25:54,55.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
2-6. If thou buy an HebrewservantEvery Israelite was free-born; but slavery waspermitted under certain restrictions. An Hebrew might be made a slavethrough poverty, debt, or crime; but at the end of six years he wasentitled to freedom, and his wife, if she had voluntarily shared hisstate of bondage, also obtained release. Should he, however, havemarried a female slave, she and the children, after the husband’sliberation, remained the master’s property; and if, throughattachment to his family, the Hebrew chose to forfeit his privilegeand abide as he was, a formal process was gone through in a publiccourt, and a brand of servitude stamped on his ear (Ps40:6) for life, or at least till the Jubilee (De15:17).
Ex21:7-36. LAWS FORMAIDSERVANTS.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
If thou buy an Hebrew servant,…. Who sells himself either through poverty, or rather is sold because of his theft, see Ex 22:3 and so the Targum of Jonathan paraphrases it,
“when ye shall buy for his theft, a servant, a son of an Israelite;”
agreeably to which Aben Ezra observes, this servant is a servant that is sold for his theft; and he says, it is a tradition with them, that a male is sold for his theft, but not a female; and the persons who had the selling of such were the civil magistrates, the Sanhedrim, or court of judicature; so Jarchi, on the text, says, “if thou buy”, c. that is, of the hand of the sanhedrim who sells him for his theft:
six years he shall serve and no longer; and the Jewish doctors say d, if his master dies within the six years he must serve his son, but not his daughter, nor his brother, nor any other heirs:
and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing; without paying any money for his freedom, as it is explained Ex 21:11, nay, on the other hand, his master was not to send him away empty, but furnish him liberally out of his flock, floor, and wine press, since his six years’ servitude was worth double that of an hired servant, De 15:13, and his freedom was to take place as soon as the six years were ended, and the seventh began, in which the Jewish writers agree: the Targum of Jonathan is, at the entrance of the seventh; and Aben Ezra’s explanation is, at the beginning of the seventh year of his being sold; and Maimonides e observes the same. Now as this servant, in the state of servitude, was an emblem of that state of bondage to sin, Satan, and the law, which man is brought into by his theft, his robbing God of his glory by the transgression of his precepts; so likewise, in his being made free, he was an emblem of that liberty wherewith Christ, the Son of God, makes his people free from the said bondage, and who are free indeed, and made so freely without money, and without price, of pure free grace, without any merit or desert of theirs; and which freedom is attended with many bountiful and liberal blessings of grace.
d Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Kiddushin, c. 1. sect. 2. e Hilchot Abadim, c. 2. sect. 2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The Hebrew servant was to obtain his freedom without paying compensation, after six years of service. According to Deu 15:12, this rule applied to the Hebrew maid-servant as well. The predicate limits the rule to Israelitish servants, in distinction from slaves of foreign extraction, to whom this law did not apply (cf. Deu 15:12, “thy brother”).
(Note: Saalschtz is quite wrong in his supposition, that relates not to Israelites, but to relations of the Israelites who had come over to them from their original native land. (See my Archologie, 112, Note 2.))
An Israelite might buy his own countryman, either when he was sold by a court of justice on account of theft (Exo 22:1), or when he was poor and sold himself (Lev 25:39). The emancipation in the seventh year of service was intimately connected with the sabbatical year, though we are not to understand it as taking place in that particular year. “He shall go out free,” sc., from his master’s house, i.e., be set at liberty. : without compensation. In Deuteronomy the master is also commanded not to let him go out empty, but to load him ( to put upon his neck) from his flock, his threshing-floor, and his wine-press (i.e., with corn and wine); that is to say, to give him as much as he could carry away with him. The motive for this command is drawn from their recollection of their own deliverance by Jehovah from the bondage of Egypt. And in Exo 21:18 an additional reason is supplied, to incline the heart of the master to this emancipation, viz., that “he has served thee for six years the double of a labourer’s wages,” – that is to say, “he has served and worked so much, that it would have cost twice as much, if it had been necessary to hire a labourer in his place” ( Schultz), – and “Jehovah thy God hath blessed thee in all that thou doest,” sc., through his service.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
(2) If thou buy an Hebrew servant.Ancient society was founded upon slavery. The ultimate elements of the household, says Aristotle, are the master and his slave, the husband and his wife, the father and his children (Pol. i. 2, 1). In any consideration of the rights of persons, those of the slave class naturally presented themselves first of all, since they were the most liable to infraction. Slaves might be either natives or foreigners. A Hebrew could become a slave(1) through crime (Exo. 22:3); (2) through indebtedness (Lev. 25:39); (3) through his fathers right to sell him (Neh. 5:5). Foreign slaves might be either prisoners taken in war, or persons bought of their owners (Lev. 25:45). The rights of Hebrew slaves are here specially considered.
Six years shall he serve.The Hebrew was not to be retained in slavery for a longer space than six years. If a jubilee year occurred before the end of the six years, then he regained his freedom earlier (Lev. 25:39-41); but in no case could he be retained more than six years in the slave condition, except by his own consent, formally given (Exo. 21:5). This law was an enormous advance upon anything previously known in the slave legislation of the most civilised country, and stamps the Mosaic code at once as sympathising with the slave, and bent on ameliorating his lot. It has been thought strange by some that slavery was not now abrogated; but even Christianity, fifteen hundred years later, did not venture on so complete a social revolution.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
2. Buy a Hebrew servant In the time of Moses slavery existed among all the nations, and commonly in most oppressive forms . The Israelites themselves had just escaped a bondage of serfdom in Egypt . The Hebrew patriarchs had owned many slaves who inter-married and begat children, and these were regarded as the property of the patriarchal chieftain . Comp . Gen 14:14. The Mosaic legislation was adapted to mitigate the evils of the system, and provided for universal emancipation . Lev 25:10. This verse shows that a Hebrew might be bought and sold, but under definite restrictions. It appears, (1.) That a Hebrew might sell himself, voluntarily, for a term of years not exceeding six, (except in the case specified in Exo 21:6.) (2.) He might, on account of poverty, feel obliged to sell himself (Lev 25:39) even to a foreigner .
Lev 25:47. (3 . ) One might sell his daughter to be a maidservant, (Exo 21:7,) or one might be sold for theft, (Exo 22:3. ) (4 . ) Captives taken in war might become the possession of the conquerors, (Deu 20:14; Deu 21:10-14; Num 31:1; Num 31:8,) and, (5 . ) Hebrews might purchase bond-servants of the heathen, and treat them with greater rigour than was allowable with any of their own brethren .
Lev 25:44-46. But stealing and selling men were punishable with death, (Exo 21:16,) and the rendition of fugitive slaves was strictly forbidden. Deu 23:15-16. The Mosaic law does not authorize the involuntary sale of any one except for crime .
In the seventh he shall go out free Furnished also with liberal gifts . Compare Deu 15:13-14. This humane provision made it impossible for any Hebrew to become involved in unwilling bondage. Such a provision adopted by any slaveholding people would speedily abolish all holding of human beings in unjust bondage.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Regulations With Regard to Slaves and Violence To Fellowmen ( Exo 21:2-27 ).
It is always difficult to appreciate the ancient mind and its working, but there is a case here for seeing a chiastic pattern in Exo 21:2-27, especially in the light of clearer examples elsewhere. We may analyse it as follows:
a Dealings with a Hebrew slave (Exo 21:2-6).
b Dealings with a daughter sold with a view to marriage and childbearing, if buyer does not marry her he must compensate (Exo 21:7-11).
c Manslayers to die but a way of escape if innocent (Exo 21:12-13).
d If a man slays with guile he is to be put to death (Exo 21:14).
e He who smites father and mother to be put to death (Exo 21:15).
f Kidnappers to be put to death (Exo 21:16).
e He who curses father and mother to be put to death (Exo 21:17).
d If one who contends smites another and he does not die he must pay costs (Exo 21:18-19).
c Slayers of servants by beating to be punished, but escape if there is delay in dying (Exo 21:20-21).
b Striving which hurts a woman and affects childbearing to be punished, but if the wife dies he shall die (Exo 21:22-25).
a Dealings in respect to injury to slaves (Exo 21:26-27).
Thus ‘a’ and its parallel contrast dealings with slaves, ‘b’ and its parallel contrast dealings with women affected by a man’s behaviour, punishment depending on result, ‘c’ and its parallel contrast manslayers of nativeborn and slave but with a possible way of escape depending on circumstances, ‘d’ and its parallel simply contrast a manslayer with a possible manslayer, ‘e’ and its parallel contrast behaviour towards father and mother. The build up of it all around ‘f’ brings out the heinousness of kidnapping in ancient eyes.
These laws probably expand on those already established by Moses (Exo 15:25). As time went by expansion would always be necessary.
Regulations Concerning Hebrew Bondmen and Bondwomen ( Exo 21:2-11 ).
It must be seen as quite remarkable that this coverage of the detail of the ‘judgments’ of the Law from Exodus 21-23, begins with these regulations concerning Hebrew bondmen, even prior to those dealing with the fact of the taking of human life. It demonstrates God’s care for the weak and vulnerable, but probably arises because of the mention of menservants and maidservants in the fourth ‘word’ concerning the Sabbath. ‘Hebrews’, if we associate them with the Habiru, had no protector, only God. They were a no-people. And thus His people must have His attitude towards them, for God is the God of the under-privileged. God is saying here, ‘before we consider the details of My commandments regulating your behaviour to each other, let us consider these who are a no-people without protection. Because you are my people you must care for the weak, and vulnerable, and helpless’. They were not only not to make them work on the Sabbath, they must grant them a Sabbath at the end of their term of service.
Alternately we might see that the emphasis here is on the problem of a wife married to such a person while serving in an Israelite household, the question being as to what her position is. The answer given here is quite clear. She must not be taken outside the covenant. If the Hebrew man goes out he goes out by himself, unless he brought his wife with him. If he wishes to retain a wife whom he has wed in an Israelite household he must himself remain within the covenant.
This passage may be analysed as follows:
a If a Hebrew bondman is bought he serves for six years and in the seventh goes out free for nothing (Exo 20:2)
b If he come in by himself he goes out by himself. If he be married (when he comes in) then his wife shall go out with him (Exo 20:3).
c If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons and daughters, the wife and children shall be her master’s and he goes out by himself (Exo 20:4).
b If the bondman plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife and my children, I will not go out free’ (Exo 20:5).
a Then he is brought to God and his ear pierced and nailed to the door or doorpost and he will serve him for ever (Exo 20:6).
Note that in ‘a’ the bondman goes out free for nothing, in the parallel he binds himself to his master and does not go out because he loves master, wife and children. In ‘b’ his wife whom he brought with him goes out with him, but in the parallel he remains for the love of his wife whom he has married while in the Israelite household. It may be argued that the central point is ‘c’, that a wife given to him while he is in an Israelite household may not go out with him, for that would be for her to be lost to the covenant.
Exo 21:2-4
“If you buy a Hebrew bondman he shall serve for six years and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he come in by himself he shall go out by himself. If he be married then his wife shall go out with him. If his master give him a wife and she bear him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s and he shall go out by himself.”
At first these provisions seem a little harsh. But further consideration reveals their logic. Firstly we must consider what is probably meant by a Hebrew bondman.
Early Israel never thought of themselves as ‘Hebrews’. That came much later. They were called Hebrews by outsiders and would refer to themselves as Hebrews when speaking to outsiders, but it was not a name they ordinarily applied to themselves (see Gen 14:13; Gen 39:14; Gen 39:17; Gen 41:12; Exo 1:15 to Exo 2:13). Abram was ‘the Hebrew’ to the people who composed the covenant described in Genesis 14. Joseph was a Hebrew in Potiphar’s house and to the chief butler. The children of Israel were Hebrews to Pharaoh. But in all cases the description related to outsiders. It is not a name that Yahweh would apply to them or that they would apply to themselves in internal affairs.
But the reason foreigners saw them as ‘Hebrews’ was because they saw them as landless and stateless like the Habiru. These Habiru had a long history but in all cases they were landless and stateless (although at some stage some settled down just as Israel did). They could be mercenaries, slaves, shepherds, miners etc. but they stood out as belonging to no country. This was why Israel were seen as Habiru by others, (although it is possible that much later they themselves then took the name and altered it to ‘Hebrew’ in their writings to connect back to their ancestor Eber, making it respectable, although there is a slight difference etymologically).
This being so the Hebrew bondman who is in mind is such a person, a landless and stateless person who has been bought into regulated bondage by an Israelite. He is a person of no status. It is quite probable that there were many such ‘Hebrew’ bondmen among the children of Israel, for they had been in Egypt where such bondmen would be available, and poverty would have brought others to that situation.
There were a variety of different forms of service in Israel (and among their neighbours). Putting it at its most simple these included hired servants, debt slaves who had to work of a debt by a period of service, and people who entered into a bond to perform service for a certain period in return for an initial payment or a guarantee of a livelihood or some other basis of obligation (bondsmen). The Habiru often survived in this way so that ‘a Hebrew bondman’ probably means that this man was taken on as a Habiru. Then there were foreign slaves who were purchased or captured. Their position was permanent. And so on. Lev 25:39-41 says that no Israelite must be enslaved by another Israelite. He may be purchased but he must be treated as though he were a hired servant and released in the year of yubile. There the idea was of a semi-permanent ‘slavery’ situation, but somewhat ameliorated because the person was an Israelite. That is different from here for this is a recognised seven year contract.
Note first that here the Hebrew bondman can only be bound for six years (in a seven year contract). Apart from a captive in war no outsider was to be ‘enslaved’ for more than six years. We are told later that this is because the children of Israel had been slaves in Egypt and should therefore remember and be merciful as they have received mercy (Deu 15:12). Then he is to go out free for nothing, and is to be well provided for (Deu 15:13-14). If he brought his wife with him she is a ‘Hebrew’ woman and can therefore go out with him. But if he is married to someone (who is probably not ‘a Hebrew’), whom he has received from his master, then he goes out alone. He cannot take his wife and children outside the covenant community to share his statelessness. They belong to Yahweh and must therefore remain within the community. They remain with their master, to be released in due course depending on their status.
It is significant in this regard that at Nuzi we learn that Hapiru there similarly entered into limited servitude, a servitude similarly limited to seven years, after which their obligation ended. Israel was to be more generous. Theirs was also to be a seven year contract but they were to give him the seventh year free so that his obligation finished after six years, thus taking into account the principles of the Sabbath year. So the seven year contract for Hapiru/Habiru seems to be a general custom of the time. As Deuteronomy points out this was double the normal length of service for an Israelite (Deu 15:18). Three years are the years of a hired servant (Isa 16:14).
The principle that the wife remained behind was merciful for two reasons. Firstly such a wife may find the life of a ‘Hebrew’ hard to bear, and secondly if she went she might be removed from Yahweh’s mercy in the covenant. This was a possibility that could not be allowed.
But the Hebrew slave was faced with an alternative. If he loved his wife and wanted to remain with her there was a course of action he could take. He could become an ‘ebed ‘olam (a perpetual henchman), regularly someone of value and importance. Such slaves were known from elsewhere and are mentioned at Ugarit. This might also especially appeal to an older person without family, or someone who might find it difficult to build a life on the ‘outside’. They would have a place for life in a satisfactory environment, loving and being loved.
Exo 21:5-6
“But if the bondman shall say plainly, ‘I love my master, my wife and my children. I will not go out free’. Then his master shall bring him to God, and will bring him to the door or to the door post, and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall serve him for ever.”
In order to keep a wife obtained within the covenant community the Hebrew must become a member of the covenant community for ever. Thus he must declare his love for his master, his wife and his children. The love for the master may be to him a secondary matter in real terms if he loved his wife but to the Law it was important that the idea be maintained. It must not be seen as forced on him, for he has the choice. Then his ear is pierced to the tent pole or door post and he becomes a bondman for ever.
“Then his master shall bring him to God.” Possibly a priest had to be called in (at this time probably a head of family) to oversee the ceremony so that all was done in his presence as representing God.
The piercing of the ear would result in the shedding of blood, and the blood sealed the covenant. Furthermore he is brought to the door. This would at this stage be the door of the tent. Later when they received the land of promise it would be a door with door posts. And the awl is then passed through the ear and into the tent pole or door post (Deu 15:17). This might be seen as symbolising his permanent attachment to this home. But from then on he is a bondman for ever.
If this seems harsh we must remember that such a person may have nowhere to go, and he would thus be exchanging an uncertain future for a certain future with a good master. That it is conceived of as a possible choice demonstrates that such a life was not necessarily one of continuing harshness. Such a slave could well be beloved. But no genuine Israelite would wish to be a bondman for ever, for at the year of yubile (soon to be established – Lev 25:13) his family land would be returned to him, which argues against this referring to an Israelite.
While this seems to be a form of slavery it is so by choice. The initial contract was a normal commercial contract and his keep and any benefits he obtained were his wages, and the contract gave him security.
However, we must point out that many commentators see this Hebrew bondman as being an Israelite in bondage for his keep, although it is difficult to see in this case why there should be this unusual mention of ‘Hebrew’. Why not an Israelite bondman? In this case the provision regarding wife and children is purely a commercial one. They do not go out with him because they still belong to their master. And in this case also he can choose to become a permanent bondman.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Exo 21:2. If thou buy an Hebrew servant, &c. The laws respecting male and female Hebrew servants, or slaves, are here delivered first; no doubt, to impress the just feelings of humanity towards them. Tertullian elegantly calls these laws the precepts of humanity; a just denomination, if we consider the dispensation under which they were decreed. Perpetual slavery is absolutely forbidden. Six years was the utmost term of slavery: to which they were sold, sometimes as malefactors by the judges, ch. Exo 22:3 sometimes as insolvent debtors to their creditors, 2Ki 4:1. Mat 18:25 and sometimes, through extreme poverty, persons sold themselves, Lev 25:39.; in which last case parents also might sell their children. No such slave was to serve longer than six years; on the seventh, or on the year of jubilee, (of which more will be said hereafter,) he was to go out free.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Oh! that this precept was duly considered in its whole extent, by those who deal in human traffic. Observe, how the Lord himself interposeth by it to induce mercy. Deu_15:12; Deu_15:18 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Exo 21:2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
Ver. 2. In the seventh year. ] No longer might they serve, because they were God’s servants; Lev 25:42 whose privilege, see in Isa 65:13-14 Christ’s “freemen.” 1Co 7:22
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
an Hebrew: Exo 12:44, Exo 22:3, Gen 27:28, Gen 27:36, Lev 25:39-41, Lev 25:44, 2Ki 4:1, Neh 5:1-5, Neh 5:8, Mat 18:25, 1Co 6:20
and in the: Lev 25:40-43, Lev 25:45, Deu 15:1, Deu 15:12-15, Deu 15:18, Deu 31:10, Jer 34:8-17
Reciprocal: Gen 17:13 – bought Exo 21:7 – go out Exo 21:11 – General Lev 25:54 – then Deu 15:13 – General Rom 7:14 – sold
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Exo 21:2. If thou buy a Hebrew servant Either sold by himself or his parents through poverty, or by the judges for his crimes, yet even such a one was to continue in slavery but seven years at the most. See the texts referred to in the margin.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Exo 21:2-11 E. The Laws of Slavery.In the 19th cent. slaves were bought and sold as chattels in Liverpool. Here we see one of the stages towards the abolition of slavery, i.e. regulation, then the only practicable course. Hebrews might become slaves through sale by parents, or forced sale for theft or insolvency, or through poverty (p. 110). Later stages of law are reflected in Deu 15:12-18* and Lev 25:39-55*. A male slave by six years service earned the right to rest from servitude in the seventh year, his wife accompanying him only if he were already married (Exo 21:3 f.), but if he could say, in the terms of a customary oath, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free (Exo 21:5), then he could become a slave for life. The ratifying ceremony was the boring of the ear, the symbol of obedience, to the door or doorpost (Exo 21:6), obviously that of the home in which he was to serve. That being so, the bringing of him unto God will not mean to the sanctuary but to the home-altar, the threshold (Exo 12:22*), or (so Kautzsch, HDB, vol. 5, p. 642) to the teraphim (p. 101) or household image of Yahweh (cf. 1Sa 19:13; 1Sa 19:16). A female slave had no such right (Exo 21:7); but if she did not suit the man who had designed her for himself (i.e. as his concubine), her relatives might redeem her, or she might be sold to another Israelite (Exo 21:8); and if he bought her for his son, she should have a daughters rights (Exo 21:9). If she were supplanted by another concubine he must maintain her allowance of flesh food and of clothing and her conjugal rights, or free her (Exo 21:10 f.). Driver also discusses a slightly different view (CB, p. 214).
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
21:2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for {a} nothing.
(a) Paying no money for his freedom.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Slavery 21:2-6
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
The ancients practiced slavery widely in the Near East. These laws protected slaves in Israel better than the laws of other nations protected slaves in those countries. [Note: See Robert Gnuse, "Jubilee Legislation in Leviticus: Israel’s Vision of Social Reform," Biblical Theology Bulletin 15:2 (April 1985):44.]
We should read Exo 21:4 with the following condition added at the end of the verse: unless he pays a ransom for them. This was possible as is clear from the instructions regarding the redemption of people that follow.
Why did God permit slavery at all? Slavery as a social institution becomes evil when others disregard the human rights of slaves. God protected the rights of slaves in Israel. Likewise the apostle Paul did not urge Philemon to set his slave Onesimus free but to treat him as a brother (Phm 1:15-17). As amended by the Torah, slavery became indentured servitude in Israel for all practical purposes, similar to household servanthood in Victorian England. Mosaic law provided that male slaves in Israel should normally serve as slaves no more than a few years and then go free. In other nations, slaves often remained enslaved for life.
"We can then conclude that Exo 21:2-4 owes nothing to non-Biblical law. Rather it is a statement of belief about the true nature of Israelite society: it should be made up of free men. Economic necessities may lead an Israelite to renounce his true heritage, but his destiny is not in the end to be subject to purely financial considerations. Exo 21:2 is no ordinary humanitarian provision, but expresses Israel’s fundamental understanding of its true identity. No matter how far reality failed to match the ideal, that ideal must be reaffirmed in successive legislation. So, in gradually worsening economic conditions both Deuteronomy (Exo 15:1-18) and the Holiness Code (Lev 25:39-43) reiterate it. It is the male Israelite’s right to release (Exo 21:2-4) which explains why the laws of slavery (Exo 21:2-11) head that legislation which sought to come to terms with Israel’s new found statehood with all its consequent economic problems under the united monarchy." [Note: Anthony Phillips, "The Laws of Slavery: Exodus 21:2-11," Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 30 (October 1984):62.]
Presumably female as well as male slaves could experience redemption from their condition at any time.