Biblical Slavery
Biblical law regulates, permits, and at times commands slavery, and it does not explicitly condemn the institution.
7 min readUpdated
The Torah describes two distinct institutions. Israelites entering servitude serve a six-year term with release in the seventh year and freedom at the Jubilee, which is closer to debt bondage than to slavery. Foreigners may be bought, held permanently, and inherited as property.
The text states the distinction itself, on the basis of ethnicity, in one passage.
The two systems
| Israelite servants | Foreign slaves | |
|---|---|---|
| Term | Six years (Exodus 21:2) | Permanent (Leviticus 25:44-46) |
| Jubilee release | Yes (Leviticus 25:40-41) | No; remain property |
| Ruthless treatment | Forbidden (Leviticus 25:43) | No equivalent provision |
| Sale | May not be sold as slaves (Leviticus 25:42) | May be bought, sold, and bequeathed |
| Inheritance | Not applicable | Passed to the owner's children "as a possession forever" |
The governing text is Leviticus 25:44-46, placed immediately after the rules protecting Israelites:
"As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you... You may bequeath them to your sons after you to inherit as a possession forever. You may make slaves of them, but over your brothers the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another ruthlessly."
Three provisions: foreigners may be purchased, they are property, and they are heritable. The closing clause states the ethnic basis directly.
Specific provisions
| Provision | Passage | Content |
|---|---|---|
| Beating | Exodus 21:20-21 | If a slave dies immediately, the owner is punished. If the slave "survives a day or two," there is no penalty, "for the slave is his money" |
| Permanent injury | Exodus 21:26-27 | A slave who loses an eye or a tooth goes free |
| Family separation | Exodus 21:4 | If the owner gave a servant a wife, she and the children remain the owner's; he "shall go out alone" |
| Voluntary permanence | Exodus 21:5-6 | A man who will not leave his family declares it and serves for life; his ear is pierced with an awl |
| Selling a daughter | Exodus 21:7-11 | Assumed and regulated. She does not go free in the seventh year as the men do; she may be redeemed and may not be resold to foreigners |
| Captive women | Deuteronomy 21:10-14 | A captured woman mourns her parents for a month, after which the captor "may go in to her." If he later has no delight in her, he must release rather than sell her |
| Fugitive slaves | Deuteronomy 23:15-16 | An escaped slave must not be returned |
| Conquered cities | Deuteronomy 20:10-11 | Cities that surrender "shall do forced labor for you" |
| Midianite campaign | Numbers 31:17-18, 31:25-47 | Male children and non-virgin women killed; virgin girls kept. The chapter then counts the captives alongside cattle, divides them between soldiers and congregation, and levies a portion as tribute |
Two of these cut in opposite directions and both should be noted. The fugitive slave provision is more protective than any surrounding legal code — the Code of Hammurabi prescribes death for sheltering a runaway. The beating provision assigns no penalty where the slave survives two days, on the stated ground that the slave is the owner's property.
The New Testament
| Passage | Content |
|---|---|
| Galatians 3:28 | "neither slave nor free... you are all one in Christ Jesus" |
| Philemon 15-16 | Paul asks that Onesimus be received "no longer as a bondservant but... as a beloved brother" |
| Colossians 3:22 | "Bondservants, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters" |
| Ephesians 6:5 | "obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling" |
| 1 Peter 2:18 | "be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust" |
| 1 Timothy 6:1-2 | Slaves with believing masters should serve them better, not worse |
No New Testament text instructs an owner to free slaves. Paul returns Onesimus to his owner rather than sheltering him, which Deuteronomy 23:15-16 would have permitted.
Common objections
"It was indentured servitude, not slavery"
Accurate for Israelites. The six-year term, the Jubilee release, and the prohibition on ruthless treatment are real, and describing that system as debt bondage rather than slavery is fair.
Every one of those provisions sits in the section governing Israelites. Leviticus 25:44-46 exists specifically to state that different rules apply to everyone else, and it uses the ordinary Hebrew word for property.
The defense describes one of the two systems and applies it to both, which removes the distinction the text draws explicitly.
"The regulations were more humane than surrounding cultures"
Often true, and it should not be brushed aside. The fugitive slave provision in Deuteronomy 23 has no parallel in the ancient Near East and runs directly against Hammurabi. The requirement to free a slave over a lost tooth has no counterpart either.
What this establishes is that the laws were not simply absorbed from surrounding practice. Someone was making deliberate choices about where to depart from the regional norm.
That capacity is what makes the absence of a prohibition notable. A code able to improve on Hammurabi, presented as divine revelation rather than human legislation, could have prohibited the institution. It regulated it.
"Slavery was economically necessary in the ancient world"
The strongest historical point available, and largely correct. Ancient economies were built on unfree labor, and a legal code from that period that ignored it would be unusable.
It explains why a human legal code of the period would accommodate slavery.
It sits less comfortably with a claim of timeless revelation, particularly in a body of law that also prohibits mixing fabrics (Leviticus 19:19), specifies where to site a latrine (Deuteronomy 23:12-13), and lists which insects may be eaten (Leviticus 11:22). Accommodation to Bronze Age economics is arguable; the difficulty is the level of detail devoted to smaller matters.
"The New Testament undermines slavery from within"
There is something to this. Galatians 3:28 and Philemon reflect a real change in how slaves were regarded within the Christian community, and Paul's request that Onesimus be received as a brother is not nothing.
The same body of texts instructs slaves to obey, including unjust masters, and instructs slaves of believing masters to serve better rather than expect release. No passage instructs an owner to free anyone.
The historical test is the nineteenth century, when both abolitionists and defenders of slavery argued from scripture, the defenders relying on these passages. The question was not settled by the text.
"The Bible describes these practices without endorsing them"
A sound distinction in narrative passages. The Bible reports many things it does not approve of.
It does not apply here. These are not narratives but legal provisions — commands specifying what may be done, to whom, and with what consequences. Leviticus 25:44-46 is permission, not description.
What the texts show
The biblical laws regulate slavery in detail and do not prohibit it. Several provisions are more protective than neighboring codes, and the fugitive slave law is more protective than any of them.
The protections are distributed unevenly. The strongest go to Israelites, while Leviticus states that foreigners may be owned permanently and inherited by the owner's children.
Laws reflecting the economic assumptions of the ancient Near East are what would be expected of legal collections produced within that society. They are harder to square with the claim that the same texts constitute a timeless moral revelation, particularly given the detail devoted to diet, fabric, and sanitation.
Related material on the conquest commands is in Conquest of Canaan and Difficult Passages.