Prayer Tents Bible References - Prayer Tents

DEBT, INTEREST, LOANS

The practice of making of loans at interest was a widespread phenomenon in biblical times. The first extant legal source regulating interest rates is the Laws of Eshnunna (ca. 1800 b.c.e.) in Babylonia where interest rates were limited to 20 percent for money and 33.3 percent for grain. These (by modern standards) exorbitant figures are not untypical for OT times generally.

Two common terms for “interest” on debt in the OT are Heb. nešeḵ (lit., “bite”) and m/tarbîṯ (“increase”). The exact meanings are uncertain, but nešeḵ may refer to interest “bitten off” beforehand (so NRSV); e.g., someone taking out a 100-unit loan might receive 80 units but owe 100. Heb. m/tarbîṯ may refer to regular payments of interest subsequent to the loan. Alternatively, nešeḵ may refer to interest on money, while m/tarbîṯ to interest on produce paid at the harvest.

Default could result in any collateral (a pledge or surety) being seized by the creditor (Neh. 5:3-5). If this did not cover the amount, the debtors or their children might be sold into slavery (2 Kgs. 4:1; cf. Exod. 22:3b[MT 2]; Matt. 18:25) or in later periods put into prison (Matt. 18:30; Luke 12:57-59; 1 Macc. 13:15). Debtors could temporarily avoid arrest by taking sanctuary in the temple (1 Macc. 10:43).

The Pentateuch seeks to protect the poor Israelites from economic exploitation ensuing from loans to them at interest (Exod. 22:25[24]; Lev. 25:35-38). Deut. 23:19-20(20-21) appears to narrow the earlier commands, condemning interest-taking altogether (except from foreigners), not just from the poor. On this basis, medieval Christianity, talmudic Judaism, and Islam broadly condemned all interest-taking, though legal fictions needed to be devised to avoid the practical difficulties created by this literalistic application. Against this approach, the exception made for interest from foreigners indicates that the Pentateuch does not regard all interest-taking as evil.

Calvin and the Protestant movement generally assimilated Deut. 23:19-20(20-21) to the other passages, limiting the prohibition of interest-taking to loans to the poor. Moreover, Neh. 5:1-13 suggests that all of these “laws” served as moral admonitions rather than enforced statues: hence, Nehemiah the governor cajoled rather than commanded rich Israelites to stop taking interest from poor Israelites despite Ezra’s having made (assuming the priority of Ezra) the Mosaic law the law of the land (cf. Ezra 7:25-26). Interest-taking, though “legal,” is discouraged by the Torah.

The Sabbatical Year (Deut. 15:1-3; 31:10) and Year of Jubilee (Lev. 25:39-55) prescribed a remission of debts (again excepting foreigners) which may mean a year’s suspension of repayment rather than complete cancellation, though scholars still debate the matter. This regulation, practiced sporadically at best in OT times, was reintroduced by Nehemiah (Neh. 10:31). Creditors were admonished to respect the dignity and property rights of debtors by not barging into the house to seize a debtor’s pledge (Deut. 24:10-11). Out of compassion, creditors are encouraged not to seize as pledge a person’s only cloak to keep him warm or his millstone essential for preparing bread-flour (Exod. 22:26-27[25-26]; Deut. 24:6, 12-13).

Failure to address the needs of debtors could spawn civil unrest: A core element of David’s first 400 followers were defaulting debtors who felt disenfranchised by Saul’s administration (1 Sam. 22:2).

Proverbs condemns the exploitation of the poor via interest-taking (Prov. 28:8), but extols one who lends without interest as lending to God who will reward (19:17). Proverbs recommends avoiding debts: a borrower is the slave of the lender (22:7), and may well have his bed taken out from under him if he cannot pay (vv. 26-27). To guarantee a loan for someone, especially strangers, is asking for trouble (11:15; 17:18; 22:26), and anyone who becomes a co-signer of risky debts to foreigners or loose women can expect prudent lenders to demand collateral upfront before completing commercial dealings with them (20:16; 27:13).

Lending without interest is a virtue and blessing bestowed by the righteous (Ps. 15:5; 37:26; 112:5; Ezek. 18:7-8, 17). The wicked do the opposite and deserve death or exile (Ezek. 18:13; 22:12). Elisha, showing practical concern, performs a miracle to help a poor widow pay her debts and avoid reduction to slavery by a creditor (2 Kgs. 4:1-7).

In the NT Jesus expands on the OT moral admonitions, requiring his disciples to lend to whoever asks, not just those who can be expected to pay them back, including enemies (Matt. 5:42; Luke 6:34-35). Paul illustrates this spirit of generosity by accepting the debts of the runaway, now converted slave Onesimus (Phlm. 18).

Commercial language is used frequently in the parables: the man who hid his talent is condemned for not at least investing the money in a bank where it would receive interest (Matt. 25:27; Luke 19:23), thus illustrating that disciples must not be passive but must take risks now in view of the kingdom to come. The Unjust Steward who uses his authority to forgive debts to win friends before his impending dismissal (Luke 16:1-8) illustrates the need for the prudent use of material wealth in the present age with eternal rewards in mind. The Unmerciful Servant (Matt. 18:23-35) underscores that just as the servant was unwilling to forgive others their debts, so Jesus’ Father would be unwilling to forgive anyone his sins who does not forgive his brother from the heart. The parable of the Two Debtors (Luke 7:41-43) shows that sinners forgiven many sins, just as debtors who are forgiven great debts, are more appreciative than those forgiven but a little.

The language of finance undergirds the NT’s description of forgiveness. Gk. aphíēmi, “forgive, send away,” is also the term used for forgiveness of debts. Matthew’s version of the Lord’s Prayer reads lit., “and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors” (Matt. 6:12 NRSV), the term “debt” reflecting contemporary Aramaic idiom where “debt” in the Targums is the regular translation for “sin.” Luke’s version substitutes “sins” for “debts”; thus, Luke interprets “debt” for his gentile audience as metaphorical for sin (Luke 11:4). In Jesus’ day, where tithes, tribute, and taxes demanded as much as one half to two thirds of a peasant’s produce, and where indebtedness was correspondingly common, Jesus’ language represents concrete, vivid imagery and would have brought to mind both literal and figurative application.

Col. 2:13-14 probably also uses financial language to describe forgiveness. There forgiveness of sins is compared with the canceling of a “written code,” i.e., probably a “certificate of debt” or “debt-bond.” This bond is the IOU owed by sinners to God for violations of God’s commandments (the Law), a debt that sinners are unable to pay. Like an IOU, there is a penalty clause for failure to pay, in this case death (cf. Rom. 6:23). But this debt-bond, with its penalties, has been nullified by being transferred to and paid for at Jesus’ cross.

Bibliography. J. S. Kloppenborg, “Alms, Debt, and Divorce: Jesus’ Ethics in the Mediterranean Context,” Toronto Journal of Theology 6 (1990): 182-200; S. E. Loewenstamm, “Fqn and oybro/m,” JBL 88 (1969): 78-80; R. P. Maloney, “Usury and Restrictions on Interest-Taking in the Ancient Near East,” CBQ 26 (1974): 1-20; P. T. O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon. WBC 44 (Waco, 1982), 124-25; A. Rugy, “Prohibition of Interest and Islam,” Hamdard Islamicus 12/3 (1989): 95-98; J. R. Sutherland, “The Debate Concerning Usury in the Christian Church,” Crux 22/2 (1986): 3-9; “Usury: God’s Forgotten Doctrine,” Crux 18/1 (1982): 9-14; C. J. H. Wright, God’s People in God’s Land (Grand Rapids, 1990), 167-73; D. Wright, “The Ethical Use of the Old Testament in Luther and Calvin,” SJT 36 (1983): 463-85.

Joe M. Sprinkle

Prayer Tents Bible References - Prayer Tents

DEBT, INTEREST, LOANS

Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (2000)