5. _Restrictive Laws._

But lest oppression should trample upon the rights of the laboring

classes, and aim at their enslavement,--which actually happened

afterward, and was one of the principal items of God's indictment (Jer.

22:3; 34:8-22) against the Jews prior to their destruction by

Nebuchadnezzar,--three special enactments were made to prevent such

iniquity, and break up any attempt at chattel slavery in the nation.

_First. The law against kidnaping._--Ex. 21:16, "He that stealeth a man

and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put

to death." Thus the one great means of obtaining slaves is forbidden. He

who (no matter where) seizes a human being, (no matter whom,) and

reduces him to involuntary servitude, shall die; for he seeks to take

away the rights and privileges of freedom, all that goes to make up

life; seeks to make property of man, to extinguish the man in the

chattel.

"But," it is said, "this only refers to stealing slaves." Mark the

logic: a man could seize and enslave another with impunity; but if,

afterward, the father, brother, or friend of the enslaved should attempt

to rescue him, he must die! Glorious argument for slaveholders and

slave-catchers! It is also said this refers to Hebrews, not strangers.

Let God answer. Lev. 24:22, "Ye shall have one manner of law, as well

for the stranger as for one of your own country; for I am the Lord your

God." This is his interpretation of the breadth of the law given in the

preceding verse, "He that killeth a man, he shall be put to death." The

law, therefore, is unrestricted and universal; Hebrew or heathen, he

that killeth a _man_ and he that stealeth a _man_ shall alike die; thus

putting slavery and murder on the same footing, as equally criminal.

Now, if God sanctioned slavery, why did he make such an inconsistent law

as this forbidding it?

_Second. The law concerning fugitives._--Deut. 23:15, 16, "Thou shalt

not deliver to 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."

There is no equivocation here; "_thou shalt not deliver_ unto his

master." It is imperative; they were to receive him among them as a

citizen, and, if need be, protect him from his master; mark, not a

"heathen" or "Hebrew," servant, but the "servant," heathen or Hebrew,

whoever should fly from the ill treatment or injustice of a hard master.

Compare for a moment the Hebrew and American fugitive laws. The Hebrew

says, "Thou _shalt not_ deliver to his master the servant that is

escaped." The American says, "Thou _shalt_ deliver him up to his master,

or be fined one thousand dollars, and suffer six months' imprisonment."

The Hebrew says, "He shall _dwell_ with thee ... thou shalt _not

oppress_ him." The American law says, "The commissioner who tries the

case shall get five dollars if he fails, and ten if he succeeds in

'delivering to his master' the fugitive, on the simple affidavit of the

former that he is his slave."

What are the deductions from this law of Moses? The return of stray

_property_ is expressly commanded in Deut. 22:1-3; the return of

_servants_ is expressly forbidden here; the servant could leave a hard

master at any time, and the state could not compel him to return: it did

not recognize the condition of forced, but only voluntary servitude, and

thus rendered the existence of chattelism impossible.

_The third great protective law was that of the Jubilee._--Lev.

25:10-55, "And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim LIBERTY

throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof; it shall be a

jubilee unto you, and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and

ye shall return every man to his family." ... Here the expression is

emphatic, no reservations are made, no restrictions allowed. As the

sound of #YOVAL, YOVAL#, Yov[=a]l, Yov[=a]l, sounded through the land,

and was echoed back from hill and village, from hamlet and town, the cry

was taken up, and borne along by the laboring thousands of Israel, many

of whom had been toiling under contract for years, by the unfortunate

debtor, and those whom poverty had compelled to part with "the old house

at home," all returned, all were free. "Liberty, liberty!"

It is vain to assume that the benefits of the Jubilee were restricted to

a particular class. To what class? Not the six years' servants; they

were freed in the seventh. Not to debtors; there _was no law_ compelling

them to serve at all; therefore they could only serve voluntarily to pay

their debts. Not to thieves; they could only be compelled to make

restitution of the thing stolen, or its value; that paid, they were

free. The only other classes to whom the law could apply were "all the

inhabitants of the land" who served the longest time, the Hebrew "for

ever" servants, and the heathen servants, thus preventing the

possibility of the rise and growth of a servile class, the curse of any

country. In this way only can we account for the fact that Jewish

history never mentions the existence of a large servile class, or a

servile insurrection in Israel, so common and disastrous an occurrence

in the history of ancient slaveholding communities.

Some object here, that the term "inhabitants" implies "all the Hebrews,"

and excludes the strangers, Canaanites, &c.; but by admitting that "all

the Hebrews" were freed at the Jubilee, they admit that those who, in

Ex. 21:6, are servants "for ever," are also freed, and thus to serve

"for ever" only implies till the Jubilee. If, then, "for ever" means

only till the Jubilee in one case, it means no more in the other. And if

we show that the strangers and Canaanites _were_ considered "inhabitants

of the land," then the Jubilee referred to Hebrew and stranger alike,

and both were free. In Ex. 34:12, 15, "Take heed to thyself, lest thou

make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest;"

and Lev. 18:25; Num. 33:52-55, Moses calls the heathen "the inhabitants

of the land;" and as he was likely to understand the meaning of the term

pretty well, he either refers in the Jubilee law to Hebrews, Canaanites,

and all, or he meant Canaanites and heathen alone, which is still more

decisive. Again, in 2 Sam. 11:2-27; 23:39, we find one of these

strangers, Uriah the _Hittite_, not only an "inhabitant" of Jerusalem,

but one of David's best officers, and his wife becoming queen of Israel

and mother of Solomon; and in 2 Sam. 24:18-25, another, Araunah the

Jebusite is a householder, and more, is praised as acting like a king

toward king David, who bought property of him whereon to build an altar;

and yet, forsooth, they were not inhabitants!

But, as if to prevent equivocation, Moses defines the phrase "all the

inhabitants;" "Ye shall return _every man_ to his possession, and ye

shall return _every man_ to his family." Not every Hebrew, but every

_man_, the same generic term as in the law against killing or stealing

"a man;" it is unqualified and universal. Thus with one blow this noble

law strikes down the two principal sources of social oppression--monopoly

of land and monopoly of labor. All who had by poverty been compelled

to part with the old farm and homestead received it back; all claims of

service against any person, however mean and humble, were canceled; and

the land and its inhabitants were again free as God had made them.

These accumulated arguments, each separately weighty and forcible, but

collectively insurmountable, we think prove conclusively that the form

of servitude among the Israelites was not chattel slavery, and that

there is no sanction or authority for it in the Mosaic laws and

regulations.

Thus in Jewish history we see the Israelites groaning under Egyptian

bondage, and God's arm outstretched to rescue them when fugitives, and

punish their pursuers--a warning to all such thereafter; we see laws

enacted to prevent the existence of chattelism among them, by

restricting the master's power, and securing the servant's freedom at

regular intervals, and the opposite doctrine of equality among men

asserted; we see the Israelites disobeying these commands, and adopting,

with the idolatry of their neighbors, their slavery also, and God's

fiery wrath denounced on them for it by Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel,

and fulfilled by Nebuchadnezzar in the destruction and captivity of the

state.

Is Slavery Sanctioned by the Bible? · 第 7 / 10 题