Question

Answer

It would appear that you are referring to Ex. 21:7, rather than Ex. 20.

Using the traditional commentaries, including Rashi and Ibn Ezra (11th century), it was possible for a man living thousands of years ago in ancient Israel to place his minor daughter with a household, intending that the purchase-money paid to the father was a bride price; she would marry the master of the house or his son. It was not a sale into slavery or even into indentured servitude but rather service in a new house-hold.

She cannot be abused in any fashion. When she is betrothed to his son or to himself, she is protected as a daughter or a wife. She can leave that house and her role as a woman in the house after six years, or in the Jubilee or when she reaches her majority. She can't be "sold" to another like property - although the authorities differ on the exact meaning of "foreign," whether to another Israelite or not.

These laws refer to a historical period that was long ago, thousands of years ago when Judaism uniquely came forward to distinguish between human beings and property. It would take a great deal of space and time to explain these differences, but Jewish law is perceived today by scholars to have been a major advance over the legal codes of the nations surrounding ancient Israel. Not only were human beings protected, Judaism protected in law all socio-economic levels of humanity, while other legal codes would put the value of property above that of human life depending upon socio-economic status.

Most importantly, Jewish law continued to evolve and interpret the will of God to protect each human being more and more, adult or child, parent or child, as the centuries passed.

For this reason, I can understand how in one context of antiquity a law provided for a father to arrange a marriage and collect a bride-price that looks like a sale, nonetheless the young girl was protected also under those ancient laws and even more and more afterwards through the centuries.

I would urge you to read the Encyclopedia Judaica in the library on "bride-price" and related articles ( Huppah (marriage ceremony); Matrimony; Wedding; Bride and Bridegroom) , from which the following is taken:

"Generally, prior to the consummation of the marriage a betrothal was entered into; under this arrangement the bride-price (mohar) was established (Gen. 34:12; Ex. 22:16; I Sam. 18:25), accompanied by a gift (mattan; Gen. 34:12). A time limit was set by which the payments were to be completed and the marriage put into effect (I Sam. 18:17–19, 26:27). The engagement was a legal transaction in the fullest sense. An engaged man was exempt from military service (Deut. 20:7). The legal status of a betrothed virgin was such that she was prohibited to other men. If someone besides her fiancM had intercourse with her, she was held guilty of adultery. If the act took place in town, where she could have cried for help, the woman was equally guilty; but if it happened in the country she was exonerated by the benefit of the doubt—perhaps she did cry out and was not heard (Deut. 22:23–27)."

Best wishes on your studies and I am sure that with this perspective you'll be encouraged to see the wisdom of an evolving legal and religious system that respected human dignity of every man, woman and child.