Borrowing Money in the Bible: Biblical Teachings and Principles
The Mosaic law established a distinctive framework for lending and borrowing within ancient Israel, one that prioritized communal welfare over commercial profit. When an Israelite needed to borrow, the law required that what he asked be freely lent to him, and no interest was to be charged, though interest might be taken from a foreigner [1]. This prohibition appears in multiple legal texts: "If you lend money to any of my people with you who is poor, you shall not be to him as a creditor; neither shall you charge him interest" [6]. The law extended this principle broadly, forbidding usury not only in cases of extreme poverty but from any Hebrew, "of whatever rank" [2].
The Rationale Behind Interest-Free Lending
The prohibition against charging interest to fellow Israelites rested on theological and social foundations. Abraham Ibn Ezra explains that the conditional phrasing "if thou lend money" assumes the lender has sufficient wealth to help the poor, making lending an obligation when one possesses the means [12]. The poor are grouped with the stranger, the orphan, and the widow—those without social defenses—and God identifies them as "My people" [12]. This language signals divine concern for the vulnerable and establishes lending as an act of covenant faithfulness rather than commercial transaction.
The law made provision for the preservation of family estates through the year of jubilee, and since Israelites were chiefly employed in husbandry rather than commerce, borrowing typically arose from necessity rather than business expansion [14]. In such an agrarian economy, charging interest on survival loans would compound the distress of those already struggling. Matthew Henry notes that the law's strictness applied particularly to loans made for necessity, as illustrated in Nehemiah's confrontation with creditors who were enslaving their fellow Jews [10].
Lending to Foreigners and the Sabbatical Release
The law distinguished between Israelites and foreigners in lending practices. While interest could not be charged to a fellow Hebrew, "to a stranger, whom yet they might not oppress, they were allowed to lend upon usury" [10]. This distinction appears explicitly: creditors "might take interest from strangers" [4]. The rationale reflects the covenant structure of Israel's economic life—foreigners stood outside the kinship obligations that bound Israelites to one another.
At the end of seven years, all debts between Hebrews were remitted in the sabbatical year [1]. Creditors were "prohibited from exacting debts from brethren during sabbatical year," though they "might take interest from strangers" and could exact loans from foreigners even after the seventh year [4]. This periodic debt forgiveness prevented the permanent impoverishment of families and maintained economic mobility within the covenant community.
Regulations on Pledges and Collateral
The law imposed strict limits on how creditors could secure loans. Creditors "might demand pledges" and "security of others," as well as "mortgages on property" [4]. However, they were required "to return before sunset, garments taken in pledge" [4], ensuring that a poor person would not spend the night without basic covering. They were "prohibited from taking millstones in pledge" [4]—the tools necessary for daily bread production—and from "violently selecting pledges" [4]. The creditor could not enter the borrower's house to seize collateral; rather, "the debtor was to bring the pledge out to the creditor" [4], preserving the borrower's dignity and preventing aggressive collection practices.
The Growth of Commercial Lending
As Israel's economy developed and commerce increased, "the practice of usury, and so also of suretiship, grew up" [2]. This shift appears in the biblical narrative itself. Nehemiah confronted a crisis where creditors were charging interest and taking children as slaves: "I likewise, my brothers and my servants, lend them money and grain. Please let us stop this usury" [8]. Nehemiah and his associates had been making loans without burdening people, and his example demonstrated how to give financial help without pushing people further into debt [11]. The exaction of interest from a Hebrew, even in this later commercial period, "appears to have been regarded" as a violation of covenant obligation [2].
Moral Obligations of Borrowers
The law addressed not only lenders but borrowers. Psalm 37 contrasts the wicked and the righteous in their approach to debt: "The wicked borrow, and don't pay back, but the righteous give generously" [5]. To borrow and never repay represents "a behavior of a crooked lifestyle," while generous givers "freely share what they freely receive from the Lord" [13]. This principle establishes that borrowing creates a genuine obligation, even when the law protects borrowers from exploitation.
New Testament Extension
Jesus radicalized the lending ethic in the Sermon on the Mount: "Give to him who asks you, and don't turn away him who desires to borrow from you" [7]. The law of Moses had prohibited charging interest to prevent exploitation of the poor, but Jesus instructed his followers to "lend without expecting to be repaid" [9]. This teaching moves beyond regulated lending to sacrificial generosity, calling disciples to "do good even to those who do evil" and thereby "act as children of the Most High" who "is kind to all people" [9].
The Exodus "Borrowing" Controversy
One passage requires linguistic clarification. The Israelites are said to have "borrowed" from the Egyptians at the Exodus, but "the word (sha'al) so rendered here means simply and always to 'request' or 'demand'" [3]. The Hebrew possessed another word properly translated "borrow," but that term does not appear in Exodus 12:35 [3]. The parting was final, and the Egyptians "were so anxious to get the Israelites away out of their land that 'they let them have what they asked'" [3]. This was not borrowing in the technical sense but a transfer of wealth from oppressors to the oppressed.
The biblical framework thus treats borrowing and lending as covenant activities governed by justice, mercy, and communal solidarity rather than mere market logic. The law protected borrowers from exploitation while holding them accountable to repay, and it called lenders to prioritize the welfare of their neighbors over financial gain.
Sources
- Easton's Bible Dictionary “Easton's Bible Dictionary: Loan — The Mosaic law required that when an Israelite needed to borrow, what he asked was to be freely lent to him, and no interest was to be charged, although interest might be taken of a foreigner (Ex. 22:25; Deut. 23:19, 20; Lev. 25:35-38). At the end of seven years all debts were remitted. Of a foreigner the loan might, however, be exacted. At a later period of the Hebrew commonwealth, when commerce increased, the practice of exacting usury or interest on loans, and of suretiship in the commercial sense, grew up. Yet the exaction of it from a Hebrew was regarded ”
- Smith's Bible Dictionary “Smith's Bible Dictionary: Loan — The law strictly forbade any interest to be taken for a loan to any poor person, and at first, as it seems, even in the case of a foreigner; but this prohibition was afterward limited to Hebrews only, from whom, of whatever rank, not only was no usury on any pretence to be exacted, but relief to the poor by way of loan was enjoined, and excuses for evading this duty were forbidden. (Exodus 22:25; Leviticus 25:35,37) As commerce increased, the practice of usury, and so also of suretyship, grew up; but the exaction of it from a Hebrew appears to have been regarde”
- Easton's Bible Dictionary “Easton's Bible Dictionary: Borrow — The Israelites "borrowed" from the Egyptians (Ex. 12:35, R.V., "asked") in accordance with a divine command (3:22; 11:2). But the word (sha'al) so rendered here means simply and always to "request" or "demand." The Hebrew had another word which is properly translated "borrow" in Deut. 28:12; Ps. 37:21. It was well known that the parting was final. The Egyptians were so anxious to get the Israelites away out of their land that "they let them have what they asked" (Ex. 12:36, R.V.), or literally "made them to ask," urged them to take whatever they desired and ”
- Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: Creditors — Defined -- Phm 1:18. Might demand Pledges. -- De 24:10,11; Pr 22:27. Security of others. -- Pr 6:1; 22:26. Mortgages on property. -- Ne 5:3. Bills or promissory notes. -- Lu 16:6,7. To return before sunset, garments taken in pledge -- Ex 22:26,27; De 24:12,13; Eze 18:7,12. Prohibited from Taking millstones in pledge. -- De 24:6. Violently selecting pledges. -- De 24:10. Exacting usury from brethren. -- Ex 22:25; Le 25:36,37. Exacting debts from brethren during sabbatical year. -- De 15:2,3. Might take interest from strangers -- De 23:20. Sometimes entirel”
- Psalms “The wicked borrow, and don’t pay back, but the righteous give generously. -- Psalms 37:21”
- Exodus ““If you lend money to any of my people with you who is poor, you shall not be to him as a creditor; neither shall you charge him interest. -- Exodus 22:25”
- Matthew “Give to him who asks you, and don’t turn away him who desires to borrow from you. -- Matthew 5:42”
- Nehemiah “I likewise, my brothers and my servants, lend them money and grain. Please let us stop this usury. -- Nehemiah 5:10”
- Luke (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Luke 6:34: 6:34-36 The law of Moses prohibited charging interest on loans to other Israelites in order to prevent exploitation of the poor (Exod 22:25; Lev 25:35-37; Deut 23:20). Jesus further instructed his followers to lend . . . without expecting to be repaid. By doing good even to those who do evil, we act as children of the Most High and imitate our Father in heaven, who is kind to all people (cp. Rom 5:8).”
- Exodus (Nonconformist/Puritan) “Matthew Henry on Exodus 22:25: Here is, I. A law against extortion in lending. 1. They must not receive use for money from any that borrowed for necessity (Exo 22:25), as in that case, Neh 5:5, Neh 5:7. And such provision the law made for the preservation of estates to their families by the year of jubilee that a people who had little concern in trade could not be supposed to borrow money but for necessity, and therefore it is generally forbidden among themselves; but to a stranger, whom yet they might not oppress, they were allowed to lend upon usury: this law, therefore, in the strictness of”
- Nehemiah (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Nehemiah 5:10: 5:10 I myself . . . have been lending: Nehemiah and his associates were evidently making loans without burdening people. Nehemiah’s example was the solution: to give financial help without pushing people further into debt by charging interest (see Deut 15:7-11).”
- Sefaria (Jewish (Rationalist)) “Abraham Ibn Ezra on Exodus 22:24: IF THOU LEND MONEY. If the Lord gave you enough wealth so that you are able to lend to the poor. 57 If thou lend implies that lending money to the poor is not an obligation. However, it is clear from Deut. 15:7-11 that one is obligated to lend money to the poor. Hence I.E. points out that one is obligated to lend money only if one has money to lend. This section 58 Verses 21-23. is mentioned here because the poor are like the stranger, the orphan, and the widow. 59 In that they are defenseless. God calls the poor My people because the pious do not seek to acqu”
- Psalms (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Psalms 37:21: 37:21 To borrow and never repay is a behavior of a crooked lifestyle. • Generous givers freely share what they freely receive from the Lord (see 111:5; 112:5).”
- Deuteronomy (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Deuteronomy 23:19: Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother,.... One of the same nation and religion, and who is in poor and necessitous circumstances, and wants either food for himself and family, or money to carry on his husbandry, till such times as the fruits of his ground will bring him in a sufficiency for his support, and the payment of what he borrows, and which is to be lent him without any interest: as the Jews were chiefly employed in husbandry, and not merchandise, they had but little occasion to borrow, and when they did could not afford to pay interest, as perso”