Exodus 22:7
“If a man gives to his neighbor money or goods to keep safe, and it is stolen from the man’s house, then, if the thief is found, he shall pay double.
English Standard Version (ESV)
This page isn't yet indexed by search engines.
This verse reveals a crucial distinction: if the thief is caught, the person responsible for the safe-keeping pays double; but if the thief isn't found, the verse implies a different, more lenient outcome (detailed in verse 8), suggesting the burden shifts based on whether negligence can be proven, not just the loss itself. This highlights how ancient justice systems considered the discoverability of the perpetrator when assigning responsibility.
This section of Exodus is laying down laws for practical matters concerning property and responsibility, particularly when items are entrusted to others. Following laws about damage caused by animals and accidental fires, this passage addresses what happens when someone receives goods for safekeeping and they are stolen. The principle here is about ensuring fairness and accountability when trust is placed in a neighbor.
When you entrust something valuable to someone else, what level of responsibility do they hold? This verse sheds light on the ancient understanding of safeguarding another's property.
This passage deals with the responsibility of a 'bailee' – someone who holds property for another. When someone gave money or goods ('stuff,' which could mean anything from household items to tools) to a neighbor for safekeeping, that neighbor took on a significant role.
A Sacred Trust
The practice was common in ancient times, where formal banks or storage facilities didn't exist. Entrusting items was a sign of deep personal trust. The commentators highlight that this wasn't just about physical security; it was a matter of honor and moral obligation. Ancient societies, like the Bedouin today, viewed these deposits as sacred trusts.
Beyond Mere Possession
The law here distinguishes between mere possession and responsible guardianship. The custodian wasn't just holding the item; they were entrusted with its care. This principle is foundational for understanding accountability when we are responsible for things or people that don't strictly belong to us.
Ask a follow-up
Ask Sola things like:
Live chat about Exodus 22:7 is available in the Sola app.
When theft occurred from a custodian's care, the consequences were significant. Why 'double,' and what does it tell us about God's justice?
The core of this verse is the penalty: 'if the thief is found, he shall pay double.' This wasn't just a simple replacement of the stolen item.
Restitution and Deterrence
The 'double payment' served multiple purposes. Primarily, it was a form of restitution. If the custodian was found to be negligent or complicit (though the verse focuses on the thief being found), they had to repay the value of the item twice. This compensated the owner for their loss and the breach of trust.
Beyond Simple Negligence
This penalty also acted as a strong deterrent. It signaled that serious consequences awaited those who failed to protect what was entrusted to them. The commentaries suggest that if the custodian themselves was the thief or was grossly negligent, the penalty reflected a higher degree of fault than simple accident. The emphasis on finding the thief implies a legal process where responsibility was established, and the punishment fit the crime, especially when trust was betrayed.
Understand the original words
rea · Hebrew Noun
One living nearby, with whom one is to be in covenant relationship. The biblical law mandates love and honesty toward one's neighbor as a reflection of one's relationship with God.
This passage deals with the principles of surety and responsibility, similar to the accountability of a bailee in Exodus 22:7. It warns against rashly entering into agreements that could lead to financial loss if one fails to fulfill their obligations.
Luke 19:11-27The parable of the minas illustrates the principle of accountability for entrusted resources. Just as the master held his servants responsible for the money they were given, Exodus 22:7 emphasizes responsibility for entrusted goods.
2 Samuel 12:1-6This passage shows Nathan the prophet confronting David with a parable about a man who stole a neighbor's lamb. The judgment David passes on this man mirrors the concept of double restitution found in Exodus 22:7, highlighting the seriousness of theft and unjust gain.
Amos 3:9-10Amos condemns those who hoard wealth through oppression and violence, describing them as those who 'store up violence and destruction.' This echoes the spirit of Exodus 22:7, which seeks to establish justice and accountability for stolen or damaged property, preventing exploitation.
gillExodus 22:7: "If a man shall deliver unto his neighbour money or stuff to keep, and it be stolen out of the man's house; if the thief be found, let him pay double."
If a man shall deliver unto his neighbour money or stock to keep,.... Without any reward for keeping it, as the Targum of Jonathan; and so other Jewish writers (p) understand this passage of such as keep a deposit freely, having nothing for it; whether it be money or goods, gold, silver, jewels, raiment, household stuff or any kind…
bensonExodus 22:7: "If a man shall deliver unto his neighbour money or stuff to keep, and it be stolen out of the man's house; if the thief be found, let him pay double."
Exodus 22:7-13 . If a man deliver goods, suppose to a carrier to be conveyed, or to a warehouse-keeper to be preserved, or cattle to a farmer to be fed, upon a valuable consideration, and a special confidence reposed in the person they are lodged with, in case these goods be stolen or lost, perish or be damaged, if it appear that it…
This verse reveals a crucial distinction: if the thief is caught, the person responsible for the safe-keeping pays double; but if the thief isn't found, the verse implies a different, more lenient outcome (detailed in verse 8), suggesting the burden shifts based on whether negligence can be proven, not just the loss itself. This highlights how ancient justice systems considered the discoverability of the perpetrator when assigning responsibility.
This section of Exodus is laying down laws for practical matters concerning property and responsibility, particularly when items are entrusted to others. Following laws about damage caused by animals and accidental fires, this passage addresses what happens when someone receives goods for safekeeping and they are stolen. The principle here is about ensuring fairness and accountability when trust is placed in a neighbor.
This section of Exodus is laying down laws for practical matters concerning property and responsibility, particularly when items are entrusted to others. Following laws about damage caused by animals and accidental fires, this passage addresses what happens when someone receives goods for safekeeping and they are stolen. The principle here is about ensuring fairness and accountability when trust is placed in a neighbor.
"“If a man gives to his neighbor money or goods to keep safe, and it is stolen from the man’s house, then, if the thief is found, he shall pay double." — This verse reveals a crucial distinction: if the thief is caught, the person responsible for the safe-keeping pays double; but if the thief isn't found, the verse implies a different, more lenient…
Get the original Greek and Hebrew, verse-by-verse context, and related passages inside the app.
