Deuteronomy 23:19

Deu 23:19 Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury:

Ver. 19. Thou shalt not lend upon usury.] Heb., Upon biting usury. It must needs bite at length that licks so clean. Amalek, the licking people, I mean the nation of usurers and their factors, as cormorants, fall upon the poor borrower, and with open mouth devour him.

“Eστι τοκος προ τοκοιο, τοκος γε μεν εστι και αλλος.”

Faenus a multiplici foetu, ut τοκος α τοκτω. In the year 1235, there were spread through England certain Roman usurers, called Caursini, quasi capientes Ursi; { a} devouring bears, saith Matthew Paris. These bite to purpose. Others are more cunning and close in their conveyance; like serpents, they can sting without hissing; like dog fish, suck your blood only with licking, and in the end kill you, and cut your throats without biting. "For as much as all usury, being forbidden by the law of God, is a sin, and detestable," &c., saith the statute, 13 Eliz., cap. 8. And "Verily so many as increase themselves by usury, &c., they have their goods of the devil’s gift" (Homil. of the Church of England, vol. ii. hom. 17, p. 2). Aristotle, {b} by the dim light of nature, saw the evil of it, condemning in one page the usurer and the dicer. And Agis, General of the Athenians, so hated usury, that he made a bonfire of all the usurer’s bills and bonds in the market place, and then said that he never saw a finer fire than that in all his life. {c}

{a} Speed.

{b} Arist., Eth., lib. iv. cap. 1.

{c} Plut., in Solone.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Deu 23:19. Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother — To an Israelite. They held their estates immediately from God, who, while he distinguished them from all other people, might have ordered, had he pleased, that they should have all things in common. But instead of that, and in token of their joint interest in the good land he had given them, he only appointed them, as there was occasion, to lend to one another without interest. This, among them, would be little or no loss to the lender, because their land was so divided, their estates so settled, and there was so little merchandise among them, that it was seldom or never they had occasion to borrow any great sums, but only for the subsistence of their families, or some uncommon emergence. But they might lend to a stranger upon usury who was supposed to live by trade, and therefore got by what he borrowed: in which case it is just the lender should share in the gain. This usury, therefore, is not oppressive; for they might not oppress a stranger.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Different Theocratic Rights of Citizenship. - Deu 23:19, Deu 23:20. Of his brother (i.e., his countryman), the Israelite was not to take interest for money, food, or anything else that he lent to him; but only of strangers (non-Israelites: cf. Exo 22:24 and Lev 25:36-37).

Keil & Delitzsch — Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1861–1891) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API. (Old Testament only.)

23:19-20 The word translated interest is related to a noun meaning “bite.” Charging interest was to “put the bite” on the debtor. See also Exod 22:25; Lev 25:36-37; Neh 5:1-13; Ps 15:5.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother . . . Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury--The Israelites lived in a simple state of society, and hence they were encouraged to lend to each other in a friendly way without any hope of gain. But the case was different with foreigners, who, engaged in trade and commerce, borrowed to enlarge their capital, and might reasonably be expected to pay interest on their loans. Besides, the distinction was admirably conducive to keeping the Israelites separate from the rest of the world.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 19. Usury] See Clarke on Le 25:36.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(19, 20) Usury.—See Exo_22:25; Lev_25:35-36. Some recent writers on this law have thought that it forbids the putting out of money to interest. But it is noticeable that in both the previous passages referred to (in Exod. and Lev.) the loan is supposed to be made to a “poor man” in “real distress.” Usury in such cases means oppression; and so it is proved to be by the examples given in Neh_5:2-5; Neh_5:10-12. The connection between this exaction and modern investments is not obvious, except in a very few cases. The Mosaic law against usury does not belong to commerce with other nations; it is part of the poor law of the land of Israel.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 persons concerned in merchandise, whose gains are great, are able to do; and it is but reasonable that such persons should; but that the Israelites, when poor and in distress, might not be bowed down under their burdens, this law is made for their relief:

usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of anything that is lent upon usury; this takes in all sorts of usury, whether what is lent be money or food, or anything else, no interest was to be taken for it; See Gill on Lev 25:36; See Gill on Lev 25:37.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

i.e. So as to receive thy principal money or thing left with such increase or improvement of it, as was usual and allowed among the Gentiles. But whether all usury be unlawful to Christians is too great a question to be determined in a work of this nature. See Exo 22:25; Deu 15:3; Psa 15:5; Neh 5:2; Luk 6:34.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

19, 20. Not lend upon usury — Not to a brother Israelite. Compare Exo_22:25, and Lev_25:36-37. The Israelite was to exact nothing for the use of money, food, or any thing, provided it was loaned to his own countryman; but from non-Israelites he might.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 19-25. Certain civil rights and duties are here prescribed.

Vers. 19, 20. An Israelite might lend on interest money, or victuals, or other property, to a foreigner, but of one of his own people he was not to take interest for a loan (cf. Exo_22:24; Lev_25:36, Lev_25:37)

Vers. 19, 20. The opposite working of like principles.

The difference here permitted between lending to brethren and to strangers resembles that allowed in Deu_15:1-6. (see Homily thereon)

Vers. 19, 20. Usury lawful and unlawful.

From all conduct the element of selfishness is to be eliminated. All forms of honorable commerce are permitted, because, while the end is gain, it is not solely gain; seller and buyer both obtain advantage.

I OUR CONDUCT IS TO BE REGULATED BY RELATIONSHIP. Kindly feeling is due unto all men. We should honor man as man. Yet the conduct which is commendable to a stranger is not commendable to a father. According to the degree of propinquity should be the degree of affection. A brother has claims upon us which a stranger has not. Our stock of affection is limited; we are to bestow it on most suitable objects. Our capacity for doing good is measurable; we must expend it with care,

II MONEY GAIN IS NOT THE BUSINESS OF LIFE. There are occupations nobler than money-getting. Contentment is better than gold. The culture of the mind is better. The discipline of the moral powers is better. Brotherly kindness is better. The diffusion of knowledge is better. Earthly prosperity is to be hailed especially as a condition for doing good. To have, and yet to refuse to help, is a sin. That man"s gold is a curse.

III YET MONEY GAIN, WITHIN PROPER LIMITS, IS WISE AND HONORABLE. Properly viewed, moderate usury is but a species of commerce. If with my loan of a thousand pounds a shrewd merchant makes a gain of a hundred pounds in addition, it is just that I should receive a part thereof, as the earning of my loan. If one has money capital and another has skill and a third has time, it is simply equitable that the temporal earnings of the partnership should be divided, in some proportion, among all. If I obtain fair usury for the use of my money from honest traders, have power to help impoverished brethren to an extent I could not otherwise. God had not intended that the Hebrews should be a commercial nation, Their business was to be witness-bearers to the world of heavenly truth. D.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother - To an Israelite. They held their estates immediately from God, who while he distinguished them from all other people, might have ordered, had he pleased, that they should have all things in common. But instead of that, and in token of their joint interest in the good land he had given them, he only appointed them, as there was occasion, to lend to one another without interest. This among them would be little or no loss to the lender, because their land was so divided, their estates so settled, and there was so little a merchandise among them, that it was seldom or never they had occasion to borrow any great sums, but only for the subsistence of their family, or some uncommon emergence. But they might lend to a stranger upon usury, who was supposed to live by trade, and therefore got by what he borrowed: in which case 'tis just, the lender should share in the gain. This usury therefore is not oppressive: for they might not oppress a stranger.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

General Information:

Moses speaks to the Israelites as if they were one man, so the words "you" and "your" here are singular. (See: Forms of You)

You must not lend on interest to your fellow Israelite

"If you lend something to your fellow Israelite, you must not make him pay you back more than he borrowed"

lend on interest

to lend to somebody and force that person to pay back more than was lent

interest of money ... anything that is lent on interest

"you must not charge interest when you lend somebody money, food, or anything else"

all that you put your hand to

This is an idiom. AT: "all that you do" (See: Idiom)

translationWords

Israel

alien

bless

possess

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

אתנן זונה [THOU SHALT NOT BRING] THE PROSTITUTION HIRE OF A WHORE [… INTO THE HOUSE OF THE LORD, THY GOD FOR ANY VOW] — This means, if he (the paramour) gave her a lamb as the hire of her prostitution it is unfitted for sacrifice (Sifrei Devarim 261:1; Temurah 29a).

ומחיר כלב [THOU SHALT NOT BRING …] THE PRICE OF A DOG [INTO THE HOUSE OF THE LORD …], if one has exchanged a lamb for a dog (Sifrei Devarim 261:2; Temurah 30a).

גם שניהם FOR EVEN BOTH THESE ARE [ABOMINATION UNTO THE LORD, THY GOD] — The words גם שניהם taken as גם שנוייהם are intended to include in the prohibition the things into which they (whatever is given as hire) are changed, as, e.g., if he gave the woman wheat and she made it into flour (Temurah 30b).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

THOU SHALT NOT BRING THE HIRE OF A HARLOT, [OR THE PRICE OF A DOG, INTO THE HOUSE OF THE ETERNAL THY G-D FOR ANY VOW]. Harlots are wont to do good deeds with their hire, thinking thereby to atone for their sins, as our Rabbis mentioned in their proverb, “She commits illicit sexual intercourse for apples and she divides them among the sick.” Therefore the Torah prohibited a harlot’s gift to be brought for any vow, for now they sin more and more. Similarly the matter of the price of the dog is that hunters using dogs and watchmen of walls raise brazen dogs that harm the public, and the owners vow [to contribute] their value [to a cause which they consider sacred], as an atonement for their soul. Such is still the custom among men who ride to the hunts that they place the waxen image of their dogs before an idol that they may be successful with them. And the commentators [as mentioned by Ibn Ezra] have said [that the reason for the prohibition is] because they [i.e., these payments] came about in a contemptible manner.

GAM SHNEIHEM’ (‘EVEN THEY BOTH’) [ARE AN ABOMINATION TO THE ETERNAL THY G-D]. “Even they both — this includes the products into which they have been processed, such as wheat which she made into flour.” This is Rashi’s language. But in the Gemara the Rabbis have said that the School of Shammai forbid it and the School of Hillel permit it. Instead, the verse [in accordance with the teaching of the School of Hillel] is to be interpreted as follows: “They [are forbidden] but not their young; they [are forbidden] but not the products into which they have been processed.” And the purport of the expression gam shneihem is that since one of them is indeed a great abomination — namely, the hire of a harlot, since the harlotry was committed for it — [while the price of a dog might be considered less of an abomination] the verse states that “even both of these” [including the price of a dog] G-d will reject. Similarly, He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the righteous, ‘even they both’ are an abomination to the Eternal; the verse attaches the smaller offense [i.e., he that justifies the wicked] to the bigger one [he that condemns the righteous]. So also, then they shall both of them die, as I have explained [there, that the man is the greater sinner of the two, and therefore the verse states that even she is also to die].Or it may be that the purport [of the expression gam shneihem] is that since he had already warned against the disqualifications of the offering through blemishes, and stated concerning them, Thou shalt not sacrifice unto the Eternal thy G-d an ox, or a sheep, wherein is a blemish, even any evil thing; for that is an abomination unto the Eternal thy G-d, he supplemented here saying that the hire of the harlot and the price of the dog — although in themselves perfect — that they too are the abomination of the Eternal like those [blemished offerings]. This is the correct interpretation. So also, The hearing ear, and the seeing eye, the Eternal hath made even both of them, the verse alludes to man in general and states that G-d created man and also made these characteristics in him. Similarly, Diverse weights, and diverse measures, both of them alike are an abomination to the Eternal, Verse 10. the verse intimates to whoever robs, extorts, and exploits in any manner which are greater abominations than these [false weights and measures], although it does not mention them, [and declares that even diverse weights and diverse measures are an abomination to G-d].

Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Tanakh — English translation: “Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.