Loading…
Faithlife Study Bible
Restore columns
Exit Fullscreen

21:1–22:17 This part of the covenant code is structured as case law, discussing possible scenarios and their legal consequences. The scenarios are structured as if-then statements and cover a wide range of topics including slavery, assault, capital crimes, and offenses related to property.

The passage in vv. 2–11 gives instructions on the treatment of Hebrew slaves. Although other ancient Near Eastern legal codes discuss slavery, Israelite law shows a unique sensitivity toward slaves; for example, it recognizes the humanity of the Hebrew slave. Israelite law refers to a slave as a brother (Lev 25:39–42; Deut 15:12; Jer 34:9, 14, 17) who has a right to the Sabbath rest and freedom from labor on other holidays (Exod 20:10; 23:12; Deut 5:14; 16:11–12, 14). Hebrew slaves could participate in the Passover (Gen 17:13, 27; Exod 12:44–45). The law forbids extradition of a fugitive slave, and a slave who escaped was allowed to live where he or she pleased under the protection of the law (Deut 23:15–16).

Slaves And Slavery JE:DRHRLCJPETPD12V

Slave EDB

21:1 before them The entire population—not just specialists or priests—was expected to know the law.

21:2 you buy The Hebrew term used here, qanah, broadly means “acquire”—a more appropriate translation than “buy.” Hebrews could find themselves in slavery through a variety of circumstances, including extreme poverty or debt. The status of “slave” also encompassed a broad range of duties and occupations.

Slavery in the ancient Near East did not specifically require forced labor (compare Gen 24:2). The common denominator, regardless of task, was lack of freedom and independence. People suffering from terrible poverty could sell themselves into slavery, but it was apparently more common that such a situation fell to a person in overwhelming debt (e.g., 2 Kgs 4:1; Amos 2:6–7; Neh 5:4–5).

Slavery NIDBV15

in the seventh Hebrew servitude was limited to six years, though Lev 25:40 specifies that the term could be shorter if a Sabbatical Year occurred before six years had elapsed. Beyond these terms, the slave owed his master nothing.

21:3 his wife will go out with him A slave’s master incurred responsibility for the slave’s wife and children during his term of servitude.

21:4 will belong to her master This phrase might refer to a practice known in other ancient Near Eastern cultures in which a slave’s master could use him as a means to produce “house born” slaves (see Gen 14:14; 17:13; Lev 22:11).

21:5 I will not go out free If there was an emotional bond, a slave at the end of his term could appeal to remain in his master’s service instead of receiving his freedom.

21:6 to God The Hebrew word used here is ha'elohim, which is often used in reference to the God of Israel (e.g., Gen 6:9; 17:18; Exod 2:23; 18:19).

However, the occurrences of ha'elohim in this legal section are sometimes interpreted as references to human judges—following the interpretations of ancient Bible translations in Greek, Syriac, and Aramaic (compare 22:8–9; note on 22:8). Ancient Jewish interpretation understood ha'elohim as a reference to human judges (Targum Onqelos v. 6; Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael in Tractate Nezikin, 2.55). The Septuagint (the Greek translation of the ot) reads to kritērion tou theou (“the court of judgment of God”). Whether the reference is to God or His human representatives, the effect is the same: The master must bring the slave to the sanctuary in order for the slave to publicly affirm his decision to remain in his master’s service.

Before God Exodus (JPS)

door or to the doorpost Might refer to the door of the tabernacle, but more likely indicates the Israelite master’s door. According to rabbinic tradition, the piercing should be done in private, not publicly at the sanctuary (Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Tractate Nezikin, 2.55).

21:7 a slave woman The Hebrew text here uses the feminine noun amah (which may be rendered “maid”) and marks a transition to a different category of slave. In this situation, a man facing devastating debt or poverty could sell his daughter in a transaction that presupposed her marriage to the purchaser.

This situation is found in comparative ancient Near Eastern laws (e.g., Nuzi). In many cases, the act would place an impoverished daughter in a wealthy home. The legal descriptions that follow this verse protect the girl from sexual exploitation and resemble the treatment of a free woman.

21:8 he will allow her to be redeemed The master must allow the girl’s relatives to buy her back. On the redemption of persons sold into slavery, see Lev 25:47–49.

he has dealt treacherously with her This points to the positive intent of the law: to rescue the girl from poverty.

21:9 according to the regulations for daughters The girl would receive all the legal protections of a blood daughter—including protection from sexual violation within the household.

21:10 her right of cohabitation If the woman is neglected, she must be released. The first wife cannot be impoverished merely because the subsequent wife is favored.

21:12 Whoever strikes someone and he dies Describes premeditated murder (see Exod 21:14; 20:13; compare Lev 24:17, 21).

will surely be put to death Deuteronomy 17:6 and Exod 19:15 require at least two witnesses for capital offenses. This illustrates the principle of lex talionis, the idea that punishment must be meted out in exact equivalence to the crime (e.g., eye for an eye in v. 24).

Retaliation, or Lex Talionis JE:DRHRLCJPETPD12V

Lex Talionis NIDBV15

21:13 he may flee Foreshadows the establishment of Levitical cities of refuge (see Num 35; Deut 19). In cases of accidental manslaughter, someone could find refuge in these cities from the victim’s family members seeking blood vengeance. In the absence of a central authority in ancient Israel, households and extended families would administer justice outlined in the Israelite law code.

Avenger of Blood JE:DRHRLCJPETPD12V

21:14 from my altar to die A murderer was not protected from justice, even in the sanctuary. See 1 Kgs 1:50–53; 2:28–34 for two such attempts.

21:15 whoever strikes his father or his mother Compare Exod 21:17; the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the ot) places these two verses side by side. The Hebrew verb used here likely implies a severe injury that warrants the death penalty.

21:16 whoever kidnaps someone Associated with the slave trade. The situation is portrayed in Gen 37, where Joseph’s brothers sell him into slavery. The law code of Hammurabi contains a similar law, though it prescribes the death penalty only if the victim is a young son of a free man. Exodus does not make this distinction.

21:17 one who curses his father or his mother Refers to humiliating someone or treating a person with contempt, a more serious offense than the mere utterance of a word in anger. It is essentially the opposite of the command to honor parents from Exod 20:12. Ancient Near Eastern cultures considered curses to be a literal means of inflicting physical harm or death, especially if the name of a deity is invoked (see 1 Sam 17:43; 2 Kgs 2:24). Hence the death penalty was the punishment.

21:19 his full recovery If a verbal conflict develops into a fight, the aggressor is required to compensate the victim for loss of income and medical expense. If the victim dies, the death would not be viewed as accidental, making the perpetrator subject to the preceding laws (see Exod 21:12).

21:20 he will surely be avenged Since the act that led to the slave’s death was not accidental, his master would be subject to the death penalty (v. 12). The slave thus was viewed as a human being and, in this scenario, was treated the same as a free man.

21:22–25 This passage addresses a potential scenario of injury to a bystander when others are fighting. In the scenario, the injured bystander is a pregnant woman who was hit when two men were fighting. The blow caused the woman to give birth prematurely. The wording of the case leaves a great deal of ambiguity over whether the penalties for causing injury relate to the health of the woman, the survival of the infant, or both. Later rabbinic debate on the implications of this scenario used the references to harm for both the death of the infant (see b. Baba Qamma 48b) or the death of the mother (see b. Sanhedrin 74a; 79a).

Exodus 21:22–25 WBC Vol. 3

21:24 eye in place of eye Illustrates the principle of lex talionis, the idea that punishment must be meted out in exact equivalence to the crime (see Lev 24:17–22; Deut 19:18–19).

Lex Talionis NIDBV15

Retaliation, or Lex Talionis JE:DRHRLCJPETPD12V

21:26 in place of his eye This example and the following one (Exod 21:27) are not strictly cases of lex talionis (see note on v. 12). Otherwise, the penalty would be the owner’s loss of an eye or tooth rather than release from slavery as compensation for the loss. These verses also reveal that the law for bodily injury was different for slaves than for free citizens; the slave goes free but is not expressly granted the right of retaliation.

21:28–32 This passage presents the rules governing an ox who gores a human. The rules concerning an ox who gores another ox are listed in vv. 35–36. In the case of an ox goring a human, the ox is killed (v. 28); in the case if it goring another ox, it is kept alive and the dead body (presumably the meat) is either shared or traded for the surviving ox (vv. 35–36). The cases are treated separately because the first relates to the bodily injury of a human being while the second relates to property damage.

21:28 will not be eaten The ox is not slaughtered for consumption; it is put to death in the same manner as a murderer. The ox is destroyed not only to prevent further tragedy, but also to remind the community that the loss of innocent human life is an offense to God.

innocent Since the ox had no prior history of violence, the owner does not incur blame for its behavior.

21:29 the owner also will be put to death will be put to death The owner bears responsibility due to his negligence. Refusing to take action against an ox with a history of violence was considered premeditated negligence, a capital offense.

21:30 the redemption money for his life While the man is held culpable for the behavior of his ox and subject to capital punishment, the law recognized that he was not precisely a murderer; he did not send his ox against the victim. As such, his life could be ransomed. Ransom payment was not allowed for a murderer, though (Num 35:31).

is set on him The victim’s family apparently could demand a ransom payment instead of the death penalty.

21:31 this regulation The ox’s owner probably would not have held another person’s children as enemies, thereby justifying an opportunity for his life to be spared by redemption.

21:32 thirty shekels of silver A price is set in addition to the death penalty for the ox. The fact that the ox is killed shows that the slave had the same value as a free person. The extra money was to compensate for the loss of the slave’s labor, which might have been intended to pay off a debt (compare Exod 21:2).

21:33–22:15 This section is concerned with restitution and property laws. The laws of vv. 33–36 focus on proportional compensation for property loss, in this case, the loss of an ox or donkey. Since work animals, such as donkeys and oxen, were the means of livelihood and agricultural production for the majority of people, they are the most commonly mentioned possession in this passage. The laws of 22:1–4 address the loss of these animals by theft. Other regulations include protections for agricultural goods (22:5–6) and belongings lent for either safekeeping or use (22:7–15).

Crimes EDB

FSB

About Faithlife Study Bible

Faithlife Study Bible (FSB) is your guide to the ancient world of the Old and New Testaments, with study notes and articles that draw from a wide range of academic research. FSB helps you learn how to think about interpretation methods and issues so that you can gain a deeper understanding of the text.

Copyright

Copyright 2012 Logos Bible Software.

Support Info

fsb

Table of Contents