Hello Mark, thanks for taking the time to respond.

You said:

"So the question begs...

Is the Bible the literal Word of God, or a collection of books that need to be reinterpreted with modern sensibilities?"

It's the same challenge you face with reading any document: you must strive to understand what the author meant, not defaulting to the knee-jerk reaction of what you think they meant.

Our cultures are so wildly different that it takes effort to strip away our modern presuppositions and place ourselves back in their worldview, in their frame of reference, in their mindset.

We do the same thing translating one modern language into another modern language. Preserving meaning across cultures, without contaminating it by means of unwarranted assumptions, takes work.

That's all we're doing.

You said:

"Many Christians I know argue for the Bible being interpreted literally, except when it is clearly a metaphor or allegory.

So, am I to understand that 'slave' is a metaphor now? And if so, what do we make of Leviticus 25 39-40? Is that a metaphor within a metaphor?"

As I've responded to you above, "slave" isn't the correct translation in Leviticus 25.

Leviticus 25 has nothing to do with slavery.

Slavery requires the kidnapping of people -- forcing people to become slaves who do not want to become slaves. Exodus 21:16 outlaws this, punishing it with the death penalty.

Slavery requires slave traders and slave markets -- people selling people. Exodus 21:16 outlaws this, punishing the selling of people with the death penalty.

This is why Leviticus 25 says nothing about a slave trader, slave market, or making people slaves. People constantly assume it does, yet there is no mention of anything like it.

And when you study the context of the surrounding passage, you'll see why.

Leviticus 25 begins by discussing the sabbath year, a year of rest every 7 years, and the Jubilee, another year of rest every 50 years. It specifies that in these years, debts are released, people who serve others are released, and everything is restored. It is one of the guarantees baked into Israelite law that no one can be bought as a slave in perpetuity. People cannot even sell their houses in perpetuity. God simply does not allow people to be owned as property for perpetuity.

Then the passage moves onto redemption, how people can rescue others and property that has been sold. Again, a clarifies that no one is owned outright. If anyone becomes destitute and sells themselves to another, they can always be redeemed out of it. Therefore, it is not slavery.

The famous passage that everyone loves to quote about hiring servants from foreign lands, is the victim of an unfortunate translation bias.

The word rendered “slaves“ refers to any serving position, whether it is a soldier, a servant, a bond servant, a worker in a field, an administrator in a palace, or even the Messiah himself. Translators unfortunately chose to render it “slave“ despite the fact that Exodus and Deuteronomy contain provisions prohibiting the ownership of people, and despite the fact that this passage exists within a passage explaining in detail how people are never owned in perpetuity.

A better translation is “servants,” and “buy” should be rendered “hire.”

The protections of Exodus 21 applied to the situation: anyone who possesses a person or sells a person is to be put to death.

That’s why there are no slave traders or slave markets mentioned in this passage. That’s why no slave traders or slave markets appear anywhere in the narratives of Israel. They were prohibited by law.

This passage does not speak of slave traders. There is only the landowner and the people they are hiring to work for them. It indicates a direct hire, where you are paying the person to work for you. You are not purchasing someone as property. The Bible expressly forbids this in three separate books.