Exodus 22:25 · Bible study
Exodus 22:25 Commentary: God’s Law on Lending to the Poor
Hebrew · 10 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Exodus 22:25 prohibits charging interest on loans to poor fellow Israelites, rooted in God’s character as gracious and protective of the vulnerable.
Research Summary
- Meaning: Do not charge interest on loans to fellow Israelites who are poor; treat them with compassion, not as profit opportunities.
- Key words: “Usurer/usury” (Hebrew neshech = bite), “creditor” (one who exerts pressure), “poor” (those in need).
- Main debate: Whether the prohibition is absolute and permanent, or limited to charitable loans within the covenant community.
- Theological theme: God’s gracious character (v.27) is the foundation for economic justice among His people; holiness includes how we handle money.
- Best use: A guide for Christians to examine lending practices, especially toward the vulnerable, and to prioritize mercy over profit.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
If you lend money to one of My people among you who is poor, you must not act as a creditor to him; you are not to charge him interest.
WEB World English Bible 2000
“If you lend money to any of my people with you who is poor, you shall not be to him as a creditor. You shall not charge him interest.
KJV King James Version 1769
If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
If thou lend money to any of my people with thee that is poor, thou shalt not be to him as a creditor; neither shall ye lay upon him interest.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
`If thou dost lend My poor people with thee money, thou art not to him as a usurer; thou dost not lay on him usury;
Darby Darby Bible 1890
— If thou lend money to my people, the poor with thee, thou shalt not be to him as a usurer: ye shall charge him no interest.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor, that dwelleth with thee, thou shalt not be hard upon them as an extortioner, nor oppress them with usuries.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Si dieres á mi pueblo dinero emprestado, al pobre que está contigo, no te portarás con él como logrero, ni le impondrás usura.
Se deres a meu povo dinheiro emprestado, ao pobre que está contigo, não te portarás com ele como agiota, nem lhe imporás juros.
Si tu prêtes de l’argent à mon peuple, au pauvre qui est avec toi, tu ne seras point à son égard comme un créancier, tu n’exigeras de lui point d’intérêt.
[22:24] Wenn du Geld leihst einem aus meinem Volk, der arm ist bei dir, sollst du ihn nicht zu Schaden bringen und keinen Wucher an ihm treiben.
Indien gij Mijn volk, dat bij u arm is, geld leent, zo zult gij tegen hetzelve niet zijn, als een woekeraar; gij zult op hetzelve geen woeker leggen.
Se tu presti del danaro a qualcuno del mio popolo, al povero ch’è teco, non lo tratterai da usuraio; non gl’imporrai interesse.
Jeźlibyś pieniędzy pożyczył ludowi memu ubogiemu, który mieszka z tobą, nie bądziesz mu jako lichwiarz, nie obciążycie go lichwą.
Если дашь деньги взаймы бедному из народа Моего, то не притесняй его и не налагай на него роста.
「 我民 中有貧窮人 與你同住，你若 借 錢 給他，不 可 如放債的 向他 取 利。
If you let any of the poor among my people have the use of your money, do not be a hard creditor to him, and do not take interest.
Verse in Context
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that this verse prohibits charging interest on loans made to poor fellow Israelites. The Hebrew word for usury, neshech, means “bite”, a metaphor for interest that, like a serpent’s bite, starts small but slowly consumes the borrower’s substance (Clarke). The Cambridge Bible notes that this prohibition applies specifically to loans for relief of poverty, not to commercial loans that enable business growth. Calvin emphasizes that the verse targets compassion for the needy, not a blanket ban on all lending at interest. Matthew Henry agrees: the law protects those who borrow from necessity. The consensus holds that the heart of the command is to prevent exploitation of the vulnerable, not to outlaw all forms of lending that involve reasonable compensation for capital used productively.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Broad/absolute prohibition: The verse gives no exception, and later biblical texts (Psalm 15:5, Ezekiel 18) condemn all interest-taking. Early church tradition largely read it this way.
- Limited to charitable loans to the poor: The verse explicitly says “to any of my people with you who is poor”; Deuteronomy 23:20 permits interest with foreigners; the surrounding context deals with poverty and pledges.
- Only against excessive/harsh interest: The Hebrew term <em>neshech</em> (‘bite’) suggests a particular kind of usury; Clarke notes it may be ‘compound interest’ or ‘unlawful interest’ beyond a fair rate.
What is clear: All sides agree that exploiting the poor by charging interest that deepens their poverty is contrary to God’s character and His command to care for the vulnerable.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Scope of the prohibition (absolute vs. limited) | All traditions agree the verse forbids exploiting the poor through interest on loans within Israel. | Some Christians see this as a binding moral law for all times (the early church largely condemned all usury); others view it as a civil law for Israel that permits commercial interest today (Calvin, Wesley, Cambridge Bible). |
| Definition of usury/interest | The Hebrew word <em>neshech</em> conveys a ‘bite’, interest that consumes the borrower’s substance. | Some see any interest as usury (based on the broader biblical ethic), while others distinguish between reasonable interest and exploitative rates (Clarke, modern economic thought). |
| Applicability to non-Israelites | Deuteronomy 23:20 allows charging interest to foreigners, showing the prohibition was not universal in the Old Testament. | Christians debate whether the ‘foreigner’ exception points to a general principle or is specific to Israel’s theocratic context. |
| Modern economic practices | All Christians affirm that exploiting the poor through lending is wrong. | Some believe this verse condemns all lending at interest (e.g., for mortgages, business loans); others find a distinction between charitable loans and commercial loans, allowing the latter. |
Historical & Cultural Context
In ancient Israel, loans were almost always taken for survival, to buy food, pay debts, or avoid slavery (see II Kings 4:1; Nehemiah 5:2-5). There was no modern economy where people borrowed to start a business or expand a farm. When a family member fell into poverty, the community was expected to step in. Lending at interest to a poor brother would turn their need into profit for the lender, a bite that kept them trapped.
The law sits inside a broader covenant framework: God had rescued Israel from Egyptian slavery (v.21), and they were to reflect His character by not oppressing one another. Taking a poor person’s only garment as collateral was forbidden (vv.26-27); interest on loans was similarly forbidden (Leviticus 25:35-37). Deuteronomy 23:19-20 allows charging interest to a foreigner but not to a brother, this distinction shows that the prohibition was about communal solidarity, not an abstract rule against all interest.
Ancient Greek and Roman thinkers (Plato, Aristotle) also condemned lending at interest, viewing it as unnatural gain from money’s use rather than from productive labor. The early church largely followed this same line, seeing interest as incompatible with Christian charity. The historical context clarifies that this command targeted situations where the borrower had no way to repay without further harm.
Textual Notes
The supplied commentary sources note no significant textual variants for this verse. The verse appears uniformly in the Masoretic Text and ancient versions without variation.
Reception History
The early church fathers (Ambrose, Basil, Chrysostom) applied this verse to all lending, condemning interest as contrary to Christian charity. The medieval church continued this view, forbidding clergy from taking interest and restricting lay lending. During the Reformation, Calvin and others argued that the prohibition targeted loans to the needy, not commercial lending, a distinction that shaped modern Protestant ethics. Wesley’s Notes follow this line, seeing the law as “peculiar to the Jewish state” in its strictness, while retaining the equity of mercy. Today, many churches apply the verse primarily to predatory lending and to the spirit of generosity within Christian community.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- God cares for the vulnerable. The verse sits amid laws protecting aliens, widows, orphans and the poor (vv.21-27). Lending rules are part of a larger ethic of compassion.
- Interest can be a bite. The Hebrew word neshech pictures something that devours slowly. When the profit motive meets human desperation, what starts as a favor can become a trap.
- Community means mutual support, not exploitation. The law expects believers to treat family members in need as partners, not customers. This is not a ban on all lending, but a call to love through provision.
Five-point outline
- The command is specific. It applies to lending to “my people” who are “poor”, fellow covenant members in need.
- The motive behind the command. God says elsewhere “I am gracious” (v.27). His people mirror His grace in their financial dealings.
- The method. No interest, no harsh creditor behavior. Even pledged items must be returned before nightfall if they are needed for sleep (vv.26-27).
- The prophets upheld it. Ezekiel condemns taking interest (18:8,13,17); Psalm 15:5 describes the righteous person as one who does not lend at interest.
- The modern application. Many Christians distinguish between charitable loans to the needy (where interest exploits) and commercial loans that enable business. That distinction rests on the verse’s own context: the borrower is poor.
Illustration hooks
- A church benevolence fund that gives no-interest loans to families facing a crisis, mirroring the command directly.
- The contrast between a payday lender charging 400% APR and a credit union providing affordable small loans.
- A person who lends money to a friend and expects nothing back, even if repayment takes years, reflecting the heart of this law.
Questions your congregation is asking
- “Is it a sin to charge interest on a home mortgage or a business loan today?”
- “If I lend a family member money, should I expect any interest or repayment at all?”
- “How does this relate to Jesus’ command to lend expecting nothing in return (Luke 6:34-35)?”
Leading a Discussion
This law protects the poor from being exploited by those who have resources. It sets a tone for how God’s people handle money when someone else is in need. Read Exodus 22:25-27 together, then discuss.
Discussion questions
- What does this verse reveal about God’s character and His heart for the poor?
- Why do you think the law singles out lending to “the poor” as a special case?
- In what ways might a creditor act “as a creditor” in a harsh or demeaning way, even if no interest is charged?
- How does the surrounding context (vv.21-24, 26-27) shape our understanding of this command?
- What is the difference between a charitable loan to a person in crisis and a commercial loan for a business venture? Should the moral calculus differ?
- How does Jesus’ teaching in Luke 6:34-35 (“lend, expecting nothing back”) challenge or deepen this Old Testament command?
- What are practical ways our small group or church could apply this principle today, especially when we know someone in financial distress?
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Leviticus 25:35 | “‘If your brother has become poor, and his hand can’t support himself among you, then you shall uphold him. He shall live with you like an alien and a temporary resident. |
| Leviticus 25:37 | You shall not lend him your money at interest, nor give him your food for profit. |
| Deuteronomy 23:19 | You shall not lend on interest to your brother: interest of money, interest of food, interest of anything that is lent on interest. |
| Deuteronomy 23:20 | You may charge a foreigner interest; but you shall not charge your brother interest, that Yahweh your God may bless you in all that you put your hand to, in the land where you go in to possess it. |
| II Kings 4:1 | Now a certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets cried out to Elisha, saying, “Your servant my husband is dead. You know that your servant feared Yahweh. Now the creditor has come to take for himself my two children to be slaves.” |
| II Kings 4:7 | Then she came and told the man of God. He said, “Go, sell the oil, and pay your debt; and you and your sons live on the rest.” |
| Nehemiah 5:2 | For there were some who said, “We, our sons and our daughters, are many. Let us get grain, that we may eat and live.” |
| Nehemiah 5:5 | Yet now our flesh is as the flesh of our brothers, our children as their children. Behold, we bring our sons and our daughters into bondage to be servants, and some of our daughters have been brought into bondage. It is also not in our power to help it, because other men have our fields and our vineyards.” |
Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
10 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke highlights the Hebrew word for usury, neshech, which literally means to bite like a serpent — a small, imperceptible wound that spreads poison until it destroys. He distinguishes this from simple interest, arguing the law forbids only accumulated, compound usury that gradually devours another person's wealth.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
See the notes at Lev 25:35-43 ; compare Deu 23:19 .
Calvin's Commentaries Reformed 1564
Calvin insists that lending to the poor without hope of repayment is the genuine test of charity, not lending to the rich for profit or compensation. He stresses that God draws attention to poverty and distress to move our hearts to compassion, making the loan itself an act of mercy.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator distinguishes between ancient charitable loans to the poor, where interest exploited a neighbor's need, and modern commercial loans that help a borrower increase capital. The biblical prohibition applied to the former kind, not to reasonable interest on business loans, which is a different economic situation entirely.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note draws a key distinction: the command against usury applies specifically to loans made to the poor among God's people. It does not forbid all lending with interest, but forbids charging any interest that would oppress a needy borrower.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill observes that Jewish tradition restricts this command to lending among Israelites, not to Gentiles. He further notes the prohibition against usury extends beyond the lender to include the scribe, witnesses, surety, and even the borrower himself.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch notes that the command to return a poor man's cloak before sunset is grounded in stark practical necessity: in the East, that outer garment serves as his only blanket for sleep. They then point out that God follows these rules by directly addressing the heart, targeting selfishness and covetousness as the root sin behind all such oppression.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange sees these laws not as a criminal code but as a training system for a people learning to live in freedom. He points out that they begin with emancipation regulations, and every major provision indirectly protects and points toward the rights of personal liberty within the theocracy.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry notes that this law forbids charging interest when someone borrows out of urgent need, not in all lending. The poor who borrow for survival are not to be treated as business opportunities; compassion, not profit, governs such loans.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley argues that the Old Testament ban on charging interest was specific to Israel's unique situation, where borrowing meant dire need. Its lasting principle is mercy: lenders should share in borrowers' losses, not just profits. He compares lawful interest to rent, while insisting that a poor man's pledged cloak must be returned by sunset.