An atheist riffs on the Bible (New International Version): Exodus 21

Regular paragraphs are the verses as written in the Bible.
Indented italicized paragraphs feature my comments on the previous paragraph.
Note that I might appear especially nitpicky and I know that some of these verses are not taken literally by everybody; I'm just having some fun basically.
Why the New International Version or NIV? Why not? The Bible has already been translated countless times before and I can't read or speak the original languages in which it was written, which is why it is stupid in the first place to assume that a divine being would communicate with us through a book.

New International Version

Exodus 21

¹ "These are the laws you are to set before them:

Well you can never have too many laws (if only he would explain why each law is made instead of just giving them). I hope these are good.

Hebrew Servants

² "If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. ³ If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. ⁴ If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.

"If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years.": how about don't buy a Hebrew servant. Not if, but don't. "If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free. "If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.": wow that's evil! I'm beginning to notice a loophole here, we'll see if it gets worse. But seriously, how about don't own a servant?

⁵ "But if the servant declares, 'I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,' ⁶ then his master must take him before the judges. ^[a] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.

Yep, more evil again! What if the servant loves his wife and children, but not his master? That's an incredibly huge loophole that anyone who'd buy a servant would exploit, unless he has some kind of moral, but then again if he believes God is okay with that he might believe it's moral to exploit.

⁷ "If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as menservants do. ⁸ If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, ^[b] he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. ⁹ If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. ¹⁰ If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. ¹¹ If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money.

"If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as menservants do.": great, that's God speaking directly by the way, not some human making laws. God is telling you how to sell your daughter as a slave if you want and the conditions for her liberty are not the same as men, of course. "If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, he must let her be redeemed.": of course, she's still only property to be bought. "If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter.": I can just imagine the poor girl, who has no say in this, being sold by her father to a stranger, sleeping with him and not satisfying him, then that guy gives her to his son whom she'll also have to sleep with against her will, and she can't do anything about it. I understand humans are evil sometimes, but that's God speaking now. "If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money.": polygamy! Cool! Except for that whole providing stuff to your first wife thing... but here it's said you can forget to do those things and just kick her out of the house, with no money, so that's good for you! It's absolutely horrible for her, but who cares, she's a woman! And a slave!

Personal Injuries

¹² "Anyone who strikes a man and kills him shall surely be put to death. ¹³ However, if he does not do it intentionally, but God lets it happen, he is to flee to a place I will designate. ¹⁴ But if a man schemes and kills another man deliberately, take him away from my altar and put him to death.

So does that cover self-defense, because there's surely a short while where I'm deliberately planning to kill the person attacking me in that situation. So I see the Ten Commandments were not enough. We needed more laws and precisions (and some might say there are still not enough. If only God would give a reason as to why some things shouldn't be done, we could make laws rationally and not rely on a book. Well that's what I do, so at least I'm rational.) Anyway, as for this one, I'm against the death penalty at least in most cases, but let me not explain that, just like God would. (Hey, what about Cain?)

¹⁵ "Anyone who attacks ^[c] his father or his mother must be put to death.

If the word is supposed to be "kills" instead of "attacks", then this law is useless (unless it means that killing your parents isn't protected either if it's not intentional, which would be evil). But anyway, just attacking your parents (might be cursing too) is not necessarily reason enough for death. You might have this alcoholic father or meth addicted mother who hit you and give you crap all day. You might be defending yourself or just try to show that you can punish them too so they'd better stop or something like that. I have the chance of living with wonderful parents, but this is just not the case for everybody.

¹⁶ "Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.

"Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.": so basically if I do a crime and I'm not caught, then I'm not in trouble. (I thought God was everywhere anyway.) But seriously, stealing a human to sell him as a slave is bad. Why not make the whole slavery thing bad from the beginning?

¹⁷ "Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.

Well now we have it, just cursing your parents is enough to be put to death. I thought it was somewhere in this book too. That's fucking evil! I don't know if they mean some kind of magic cursing or just saying something bad about a parent, but anyway the first one doesn't exist and the second one might be warranted. Nobody should be put to death for something he said, not counting that I don't like death penalty anyway.

¹⁸ "If men quarrel and one hits the other with a stone or with his fist ^[d] and he does not die but is confined to bed, ¹⁹ the one who struck the blow will not be held responsible if the other gets up and walks around outside with his staff; however, he must pay the injured man for the loss of his time and see that he is completely healed.

So basically, there's a loophole again in one of God's law. In fact this whole law is a loophole. I could smash someone's head open, maybe nearly kill him, do some permanent damage to his brain or outside appearance, but as long as it doesn't kill him (he might be comatose for a while for all I know), I just have to pay some money. Of course, that might be a lot of money, but I prefer the law that says that I should not get into a fight and smash someone's head open risking getting in prison or something like that. (For all intents and purpose, I'll say that if you start hitting your opponent with a rock, maybe murder is intended.)

²⁰ "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, ²¹ but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

That's evil once again and there's another loophole. Punished how by the way? And sometimes it's just hard to establish that an action is a direct result of something you know. There are loopholes there too. And what if the slave gets up in three days? What if I caused him some internal bleeding that would kill him a bit later?

²² "If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely ^[e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. ²³ But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, ²⁴ eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, ²⁵ burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

I hate that eye for eye philosophy, but anyway that's just a very strange law. I don't know how to comment it, except to say that the book doesn't seem to be all that against abortion.

²⁶ "If a man hits a manservant or maidservant in the eye and destroys it, he must let the servant go free to compensate for the eye. ²⁷ And if he knocks out the tooth of a manservant or maidservant, he must let the servant go free to compensate for the tooth.

Oh come one! I can just about kill my own slave and I can't destroy his eye or knock out his tooth? I guess I'll just stick to raping my maidservants then instead of beating my slave, it seems less dangerous that I might lose them.

²⁸ "If a bull gores a man or a woman to death, the bull must be stoned to death, and its meat must not be eaten. But the owner of the bull will not be held responsible. ²⁹ If, however, the bull has had the habit of goring and the owner has been warned but has not kept it penned up and it kills a man or woman, the bull must be stoned and the owner also must be put to death. ³⁰ However, if payment is demanded of him, he may redeem his life by paying whatever is demanded. ³¹ This law also applies if the bull gores a son or daughter. ³² If the bull gores a male or female slave, the owner must pay thirty shekels ^[f] of silver to the master of the slave, and the bull must be stoned.

I think I can speak for everyone here when I say: "What?" I just mean what the fuck is up with that law? We really need it? No common sense at all? Oh well... Since we're going as far as to tell people what to do with bulls, why not give them useful laws like don't own a slave?

³³ "If a man uncovers a pit or digs one and fails to cover it and an ox or a donkey falls into it, ³⁴ the owner of the pit must pay for the loss; he must pay its owner, and the dead animal will be his.

And here I was complaining that the last law seemed a bit specific to me, making me wonder why more useful laws are not given. What about this one eh?

³⁵ "If a man's bull injures the bull of another and it dies, they are to sell the live one and divide both the money and the dead animal equally. ³⁶ However, if it was known that the bull had the habit of goring, yet the owner did not keep it penned up, the owner must pay, animal for animal, and the dead animal will be his.

OK, enough with the bulls...

Footnotes:

a. Exodus 21:6 Or before God
b. Exodus 21:8 Or master so that he does not choose her
c. Exodus 21:15 Or kills
d. Exodus 21:18 Or with a tool
e. Exodus 21:22 Or she has a miscarriage
f. Exodus 21:32 That is, about 12 ounces (about 0.3 kilogram)