Leviticus 25:39 · Bible study
Leviticus 25:39 Commentary: Why Israel Could Not Enslave a Brother
Hebrew · 9 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Explore why God forbade permanent slavery of fellow Israelites while allowing foreign slaves, and what this reveals about identity as God's redeemed people.
Research Summary
- Meaning: God prohibits permanent, harsh enslavement of a fellow Israelite who sells himself due to poverty.
- Key words: ach (brother), mukh (grow poor), makar (sell), avad (serve/labor), eved (slave/servant).
- Main debate: How this law relates to Exodus 21:2 (six-year term) and whether the distinction from foreign slavery is ethically defensible.
- Theological theme: Israel's identity as God's redeemed servants, no Israelite can be permanently owned because God alone owns them.
- Best use: Preaching on community care, economic justice, and the implications of being a people set free by God.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
If a countryman among you becomes destitute and sells himself to you, then you must not force him into slave labor.
WEB World English Bible 2000
“‘If your brother has grown poor among you, and sells himself to you, you shall not make him to serve as a slave.
KJV King James Version 1769
And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee; thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant:
ASV American Standard Version 1901
And if thy brother be waxed poor with thee, and sell himself unto thee; thou shalt not make him to serve as a bondservant.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
`And when thy brother becometh poor with thee, and he hath been sold to thee, thou dost not lay on him servile service;
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And if thy brother grow poor beside thee, and be sold unto thee, thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant:
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
If thy brother constrained by poverty, sell himself to thee: thou shalt not oppress him with the service of bondservants.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Y cuando tu hermano empobreciere, estando contigo, y se vendiere á ti, no le harás servir como siervo:
E quando teu irmão empobrecer, estando contigo, e se vender a ti, não lhe farás servir como servo:
Si ton frère devient pauvre près de toi, et qu’ il se vende à toi, tu ne lui imposeras point le travail d’ un esclave.
Wenn dein Bruder verarmt neben dir und verkauft sich dir, so sollst du ihn nicht lassen dienen als einen Leibeigenen;
Desgelijks, wanneer uw broeder bij u zal verarmd zijn, en zich aan u verkocht zal hebben, gij zult hem niet doen dienen den dienst van een slaaf;
Se il tuo fratello ch’è presso di te è impoverito e si vende a te, non lo farai servire come uno schiavo;
Jeźliby też zubożał brat twój przy tobie, tak żeby się tobie zaprzedał, nie będziesz go dręczył służbą niewolniczą;
Когда обеднеет у тебя брат твой и продан будет тебе, то не налагай на него работы рабской:
「你的弟兄 若 在你那裡 漸漸窮乏，將自己賣 給你，不可 叫他 像奴僕 服事你。
And if your brother becomes poor and gives himself to you for money, do not make use of him like a servant who is your property;
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Leviticus 25:39
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree on the core meaning: God forbids treating a fellow Israelite as a permanent slave. Barnes notes this law supplements Exodus 21:2, serving as a periodic check on the tyranny of the rich (see Jeremiah 34:8-17). Calvin argues the master must treat the impoverished brother exactly as a hired servant, not a slave, because a shared inheritance and condition demand moderation. Gill spells out the practical difference: no base or disgraceful service like carrying shoes to the bath, but only farm or craft work. The Cambridge Bible highlights the sharp contrast with foreign slaves, who could be held permanently. Wesley sums up the prohibition as covering both duration (not forever) and manner (not with the hardest service). All point to verse 42 for the reason: 'For they are my servants.' The Israelite's ultimate master is God, not any human. This identity grounds the command, transforming what could be a merely humanitarian rule into a theological one.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Humanitarian-legal view: The verse is a straightforward protective law for the poor; it supplements Exodus 21 with an absolute ban on permanent servitude (Barnes, Calvin, Wesley).
- Redemptive-historical view: The prohibition is rooted in God's ownership of Israel; it prefigures Christ's redemption that makes all believers free (Matthew Henry, JFB).
What is clear: The text unambiguously forbids permanent, harsh enslavement of a fellow Israelite and grounds this command in God's redemption of Israel from Egypt.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Meaning of the prohibition | All agree the verse forbids treating a fellow Israelite as a permanent slave in both duration and harshness. | Some commentators (Calvin, Wesley) emphasize manner; others (Barnes, JFB) emphasize the Jubilee as the termination point, relative to Exodus 21. |
| Relationship to Exodus 21:2 | Both passages regulate servitude of Israelites; both limit oppression. | The earlier law (Exodus 21) sets a six-year maximum; Leviticus 25 appears to extend service until Jubilee. Explanations vary: one tradition harmonises by saying the six-year rule applied to ordinary cases and the Jubilee to sales near that year; another sees Leviticus 25 as a later development for land-based poverty. |
| Foreign slavery | The text explicitly permits permanent slavery of non-Israelites (vv. 44-46). | Interpreters differ sharply on the moral justification: some see it as a divinely sanctioned practice within the ancient context, while others argue it was a concession to cultural conditions that the gospel later abolishes (Galatians 3:28). |
| Theological basis | All agree that Israel's redemption from Egypt is the foundation: they belong to God. | Some traditions apply this exclusively to Israel as a national covenant; others see it as foreshadowing the universal redemption in Christ that breaks down all barriers. |
Historical & Cultural Context
Ancient Near Eastern debt slavery was common. When a man could not pay his obligations, he might sell himself or his family into servitude. The Code of Hammurabi and other law collections regulated this practice, but Israel's law introduced a unique distinction based on covenant identity.
The Hebrew term for 'brother' (ach, H0251) carries weight. It means more than a male sibling. It signals a fellow member of the covenant community, bound by shared liberation from Egypt. Verse 38 anchors the entire chapter in that exodus: 'I am Yahweh your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt.' The memory of slavery at Pharaoh's hand (Exodus 1:14, with its 'hard service') shapes the law. Israel must never replicate Egypt's oppression among themselves.
The surrounding verses (35-38) command interest-free loans and generous support before poverty reaches this point. When prevention fails, the law still protects. The impoverished Israelite does not become property like a foreign slave (Leviticus 25:44-46). Instead, he works under conditions befitting a hired laborer or temporary resident until the Year of Jubilee, when he returns to his family and ancestral land. His children go with him. The master retains no permanent claim.
Jeremiah 34:8-17 shows how seriously Israel's later kings took this law. When they broke it, God pronounced judgment through the prophet. The law was not an idealised suggestion; it was a binding covenant obligation that distinguished Israel from the nations.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for this verse. The Hebrew text is stable across manuscripts, and the major commentary traditions all work from the same reading. The only small difference appears in the English renderings of the verb 'compel' (KJV) vs 'force' (BSB), reflecting interpretation rather than a textual issue.
Reception History
The verse has been read as a cornerstone of Israelite economic justice. Early synagogue tradition, as noted by Jarchi and cited in Gill, specified that an Israelite slave could not be given degrading tasks like carrying the master's bath equipment. Calvin (1564) cited the Roman philosopher Seneca to parallel the ideal of the slave as a perpetual hired servant, showing the law's humanitarian reach. Reformation commentators uniformly saw here a divine check on human greed. In modern times, the passage features prominently in Christian ethical discussions about debt, poverty, and the difference between chattel slavery and indentured servitude. The Jubilee principle embedded in these verses has shaped Catholic social teaching on economic restoration and Protestant movements for debt forgiveness.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The reality of poverty among God's people (v. 39a). Even within the covenant community, economic distress can drive someone to sell himself. Matthew Henry notes this law assumes honest poverty, not mere laziness.
- The restriction on how we treat the poor (v. 39b). The command is twofold: no permanent slavery, no harsh servitude. Calvin calls this rule the restraint God places on the tyrannical impulses of masters. The master must view the worker as a sojourner or hired hand.
- The reason: we all belong to God (v. 42). Because God redeemed Israel from Egypt, every Israelite is His servant. To enslave a brother permanently is to steal from God what is rightfully His.
Five-point outline
- Preventing extreme poverty (vv. 35-38): interest-free loans and support.
- When prevention fails: the sale of a brother (v. 39a).
- The fundamental restriction: not as a slave (v. 39b).
- The conditions of service: as a hired servant until Jubilee (vv. 40-41).
- The theological foundation: they are God's servants (vv. 42-43).
Illustration hooks
- A family member loses their job and asks to move in. How you treat them shows the difference between hired help and family. This law makes that impulse concrete and binding.
- Church benevolence funds and deacons helping with rent: this is the modern application of the principle, temporary assistance that preserves dignity, not permanent dependency.
- The difference between an employee you can fire at will and an apprentice you are obligated to train and release with resources (Deuteronomy 15:14).
Questions your congregation is asking
- Did God really allow slavery? And if so, how is that consistent with His character?
- How does this ancient law about indentured servitude apply to my life today?
- Why were foreigners treated differently? Doesn't that seem unfair?
Leading a Discussion
This verse sits at the heart of a larger passage (Leviticus 25:35-55) that shows how God's redemption of Israel from Egypt shapes their economic life. The key word is 'brother', it defines the relationship. The law protects not just the poor, but the identity of the whole community as God's own possession.
Discussion questions
- Read Leviticus 25:35-39. What measures does God command before a person reaches the point of selling himself? What does that tell you about God's concern for human dignity?
- Verse 38 says 'I am Yahweh your God, who brought you out of Egypt.' Why is this phrase repeated so often in the chapter? How does the memory of redemption shape the law?
- The Hebrew term for 'serve' (avad, H5647) is also used for serving God. How might this word choice reinforce the ban on permanent human slavery among Israelites?
- Compare verse 39 with Exodus 21:2 and Deuteronomy 15:12. How do these laws work together to limit the time and severity of servitude?
- Why does the law distinguish between Israelite and foreign slaves (see Leviticus 25:44-46)? Is this merely a cultural concession, or does it carry theological significance?
- Jeremiah 34:8-17 describes Israel's disobedience to this law. What does God's judgment reveal about His priorities for social justice?
- How can your small group put this principle into practice today, offering temporary, dignified support rather than creating dependency?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Exodus 1:14 | and they made their lives bitter with hard service in mortar and in brick, and in all kinds of service in the field, all their service, in which they ruthlessly made them serve. |
| Exodus 21:2 | “If you buy a Hebrew servant, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free without paying anything. |
| Exodus 22:3 | If the sun has risen on him, he is guilty of bloodshed. He shall make restitution. If he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. |
| Leviticus 25:46 | You may make them an inheritance for your children after you, to hold for a possession. Of them you may take your slaves forever, but over your brothers the children of Israel you shall not rule, one over another, with harshness. |
| Deuteronomy 15:12 | If your brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, is sold to you and serves you six years, then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you. |
| Deuteronomy 15:14 | You shall furnish him liberally out of your flock, out of your threshing floor, and out of your wine press. As Yahweh your God has blessed you, you shall give to him. |
| I Kings 9:22 | But of the children of Israel Solomon made no bondservants; but they were the men of war, his servants, his princes, his captains, and rulers of his chariots and of his horsemen. |
| II Kings 4:1 | Now a certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets cried out to Elisha, saying, “Your servant my husband is dead. You know that your servant feared Yahweh. Now the creditor has come to take for himself my two children to be slaves.” |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
9 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes sees this law as working in harmony with an earlier one, adding another periodic safeguard against the rich exploiting the poor. For him, it is a regular check on economic tyranny, reinforcing the principle that wealth should not lead to permanent oppression.
Calvin's Commentaries Reformed 1564
Calvin highlights that God commands Hebrew slaves be treated as hired servants, not harshly, because of their shared inheritance as brethren. This principle of humility, which even pagan philosophers like Seneca endorsed, God enforces specifically among Israelites to restrain the tyranny that experience shows masters often exercise.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
Cambridge Bible notes a clear difference in how Israelite and foreign servants were treated under the law. An Israelite bought as a servant was not to be forced into permanent slavery but treated like a hired worker, with the Jubilee year limiting the term. Foreign slaves, however, could be held permanently as bondservants.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note emphasizes that when a fellow Israelite falls into poverty and sells himself, he must not be treated as a permanent slave. Instead, the law commands he be regarded as a hired worker or temporary resident, preserving his dignity and eventual freedom.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill draws a sharp contrast between how an Israelite sold into servitude must be treated and how a pagan slave was treated. The Israelite was not to be given any degrading or menial personal service, such as carrying things to the bath or unlacing shoes, but only honest farm or craft work. He was to be used kindly, as a brother, and set free at the year of jubilee.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB highlights that an Israelite forced by poverty to sell himself was not a permanent slave but a temporary hired servant, redeemable at any time by a relative. The ransom was calculated fairly based on remaining years until Jubilee and standard wages. The Jubilee institution was designed to protect religion, social order, and liberty.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange sees the Sabbatical and Jubilee years as the means by which the whole land and social order of Israel are kept holy to God. Because the land belongs to Jehovah alone, the Israelites are mere tenants. These institutions prevent permanent loss of inheritance and restore the original theocratic balance.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Matthew Henry's central point is that God's claim on Israel as His own redeemed servants forbids permanent ownership of one Israelite by another. Because God brought them out of Egypt, an impoverished brother must be treated as a hired worker, never as a bondslave, and must go free at the Jubilee.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley clarifies that being a bond-servant does not mean permanent slavery or the harshest, most degrading labor. The service is neither indefinite in duration nor cruel in manner. He insists the condition is far gentler than what the term might suggest.