The alternative would be starvation. In such a case, what would YOU prefer: to starve to death on the street, or to become somebody's slave for seven years. Remember, the prospective slave had the option, by simply going hungry rather than borrowing the money to feed himself, knowing the consequences if he did not pay up.
The other main avenue for becoming a slave was to be on the losing side in a war. Once again, if you were in such a position, what would be your preference: to be a slave, or to be killed? Remember, those were generally the only choices.
The alternative would be starvation. In such a case, what would YOU prefer: to starve to death on the street, or to become somebody’s slave for seven years.
Personally I’d rather starve to death because I believe my freedom is worth dieing for. Your mileage may vary.
Seems to me some here are confusing slavery with employment or a contractual commitment. Slavery is one person OWNING another as they own any other piece of property. Irrespective of how well they’re obliged to treat that piece of property, the slave is DEHUMANIZED. Joining the military is NOT slavery, it’s a commitment that you sign up for. A sergeant does not ‘own his’ platoon, a slave owner OWNS HIS SLAVES.
I’ll bet those who think slavery is OK see themselves as the owner and not the owned. Personally I’d rather be dead than a slave.
“If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.” Ex. 21:2
This was modeled after the Sabbath rest, and so you did not serve 7 years but 6. Of course if the master gave you wife, then she remained, with any kids you had together. Otherwise you left with what came with, and far more, but no debt.
So you get permanent employment for that time, in which you serve “as a yearly hired servant...and shall not rule with rigour over him in thy sight. Lv 25:53
“And if sold to a sojourner or stranger then one of his brethren may redeem him.” Lv. 25:47-52
“And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty:
Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him.” Deu 15:13,14
>The alternative would be starvation.<
No, the idea was to preserve Israel, and charity was exhorted, and oppression of the poor forbidden, (Ex. 23:9 Lev 25:14 Dt. 24:14) and affliction of strangers widow, or fatherless child. was severely dealt with. (Exo 22:23-24); Or you could create a gov. supported welfare state, with its attendant and perpetuating problems. Or socialism (is there a difference?). Which for you?
And a bad masters were not encouraged, as
Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee: He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him. Deu 23:15
>going hungry rather than borrowing the money to feed himself, knowing the consequences if he did not pay up.<
Yes, borrowing money was not encouraged, as perhaps our present situation might confirm, though interest could not be charged”
Exo 22:25 If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury.
So a non-welfare means of sustaining oneself was enabled, in which you worked to pay off your debt, and were given a free “stimulus package” - not a loan - to get you going.
And outside of the tithes you gave, no taxes! I think it worked rather well, better than what we see today. And the worse is yet to come.
What did Jesus teach? And if the Bible says slavery is okay, then why do we not have it to this day? Instead of putting all these people into jails, feeding them at taxpayer's expense, why not distribute them as slaves to housholds that could use and exra pair of hands for the duration of their snetences?
Surely, slavery must be morally right and good—if the Bible says it is! So, why have Christians abolished it (along wiht another Biblical classic—polygamy)?!