What you've quoted doesn't endorse anything:
- the first is simply a prohibition (or "commandment" if you will);
- the second a conditional statement (if X, then Y).
I apologise if I've misunderstood your intent, but this appears to be presented as some sort of "gotcha" or "smoking gun", when slavery was entirely normal at the time.
Being as the bible and commandments were written by men, for the benefit of (some) men (and the oppression of most others), it's not surprising that these so-called "holy" texts would protect what they valued.
- the first is simply a prohibition (or "commandment" if you will);
- the second a conditional statement (if X, then Y).
I apologise if I've misunderstood your intent, but this appears to be presented as some sort of "gotcha" or "smoking gun", when slavery was entirely normal at the time.
Being as the bible and commandments were written by men, for the benefit of (some) men (and the oppression of most others), it's not surprising that these so-called "holy" texts would protect what they valued.