Proverbs 6:30-31
People do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy his appetite when he is hungry, but if he is caught, he will pay sevenfold; he will give all the goods of his house.
English Standard Version (ESV)
This page isn't yet indexed by search engines.
The text highlights that society shows a degree of pity, not outright contempt, for a thief driven by extreme hunger. This isn't to excuse the theft, but to contrast it with the deeper folly of adultery, which is presented as a far more senseless and destructive act, lacking even the excuse of desperate need.
This passage, coming after warnings about defaulting on loans and the dangers of adultery, contrasts the thief driven by hunger with the adulterer. While even a starving thief is expected to make restitution and is not entirely excused, society tends to view him with pity rather than outright contempt. This sets the stage for the much harsher judgment reserved for the adulterer, who commits a far graver offense without such dire necessity.
When someone steals out of sheer hunger, our gut reaction isn't contempt. Why does a desperate need change our perception?
Proverbs draws a sharp line between actions born of desperate necessity and those fueled by malicious intent or uncontrolled desire.
Pity for the Hungry Thief
When a thief steals only to survive, driven by gnawing hunger, society often views them with a degree of pity rather than outright scorn. It's a recognition that basic human needs, when unmet, can push people to extreme measures. The focus here is on satisfying a primal need – to stay alive.
The Greater Evil of Adultery
This contrasts sharply with adultery, which is presented as a far more serious offense. The adulterer, unlike the hungry thief, isn't driven by a life-or-death necessity. Instead, they act out of lust and a lack of self-control, often disregarding the profound harm they inflict on others. The need is not for survival, but for selfish gratification.
While a thief might be punished, they could potentially 'make it right.' But what about offenses where true restitution is impossible?
A key difference between the thief and the adulterer lies in the possibility of making amends. The thief, even after facing legal consequences, could theoretically repay what was stolen, thereby restoring what was lost.
The Thief's Debt
The text implies that a thief's actions, while wrong and subject to penalty (like the seven-fold restitution mentioned in some interpretations), primarily affect material possessions. This is damage that, in principle, can be repaired or compensated for.
The Adulterer's Unpayable Debt
Adultery, however, inflicts a wound that cannot be simply repaid. It destroys trust, breaks sacred vows, and causes deep emotional and relational devastation. The verse contrasts this with the thief, suggesting that the adulterer's offense is far more destructive, leading to a loss that is 'irreparable' and for which there is 'no redemption,' as some commentators note.
Understand the original words
gannab · Hebrew Noun
One who takes property belonging to another without permission. In biblical law, theft is a violation of the commandment to love one's neighbor and respect property, though it is viewed through different lenses depending on the necessity of the thief.
nephesh · Hebrew Noun
The physical or metaphorical desire or craving of a person. It refers to the basic human drive for sustenance or satisfaction, which, if left uncontrolled, can lead to sinful behavior.
shalam · Hebrew Verb
In biblical law and wisdom, to pay or restore something, often implying the concept of restitution for a wrong committed. The number seven is frequently associated with completeness or the intensity of the penalty required to satisfy justice.
hon · Hebrew Noun
This passage outlines the legal restitution required for theft, contrasting the thief's need for sustenance with the severe penalties, highlighting the societal expectation of repayment even out of necessity.
Leviticus 25:39-43Here we see laws regarding Hebrew servants who might be sold into servitude due to debt or poverty, illustrating a societal framework where extreme need could lead to loss of freedom, a consequence more severe than mere societal disdain.
Matthew 12:1-4In this passage, Jesus defends his disciples for plucking grain on the Sabbath, arguing that David and his men ate the showbread out of hunger, showing how extreme need can sometimes create exceptions or mitigating circumstances for otherwise forbidden actions.
1 Samuel 21:1-6This account parallels the Proverbs passage, where David and his men, driven by hunger, ate the consecrated showbread, an act typically forbidden but understood in their desperate state.
2 Corinthians 8:12Paul speaks about willingness and the measure of one's ability in giving, suggesting a principle that responsibility is often viewed in light of one's capacity, echoing the idea that the thief’s act, though wrong, stems from a lack of capacity to provide.
bensonProverbs 6:30: "Men do not despise a thief, if he steal to satisfy his soul when he is hungry;"
Proverbs 6:30-35. Men do not despise a thief — That is, abhor or reproach him, but rather pity and pardon him, who is urged by mere necessity to these practices, but the adulterer is abhorred by all. If he — The thief; be found, he shall restore seven-fold — The law ( Exodus 22:1-4 ) did not oblige the thief to restore seven-fold, but only five oxen for one, or in another case double. Some persons th…
clarkeProverbs 6:30: "Men do not despise a thief, if he steal to satisfy his soul when he is hungry;"
Men do not despise a thief if he steal - Every man pities the poor culprit who was perishing for lack of food, and stole to satisfy his hunger; yet no law clears him: he is bound to make restitution; in some cases double, in others quadruple and quintuple; and if he have not property enough to make restitution, to be sold for a bondsman; Exodus 22:1-4 ; Leviticus 25:39 .
The text highlights that society shows a degree of pity, not outright contempt, for a thief driven by extreme hunger. This isn't to excuse the theft, but to contrast it with the deeper folly of adultery, which is presented as a far more senseless and destructive act, lacking even the excuse of desperate need.
This passage, coming after warnings about defaulting on loans and the dangers of adultery, contrasts the thief driven by hunger with the adulterer. While even a starving thief is expected to make restitution and is not entirely excused, society tends to view him with pity rather than outright contempt. This sets the stage for the much harsher judgment reserved for the adulterer, who commits a far graver offense without such dire necessity.
This passage, coming after warnings about defaulting on loans and the dangers of adultery, contrasts the thief driven by hunger with the adulterer. While even a starving thief is expected to make restitution and is not entirely excused, society tends to view him with pity rather than outright contempt. This sets the stage for the much harsher judgment reserved for the adulterer, who commits a far graver offense without such dire necessity.
Get the original Greek and Hebrew, verse-by-verse context, and related passages inside the app.
Ask a follow-up
Ask Sola things like:
Live chat about Proverbs 6:30-31 is available in the Sola app.
A general term referring to material possessions, wealth, or substance. In the context of wisdom literature, it represents the fruits of one's labor or the resources God has provided to an individual.
"People do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy his appetite when he is hungry, but if he is caught, he will pay sevenfold; he will give all the goods of his house." — The text highlights that society shows a degree of pity, not outright contempt, for a thief driven by extreme hunger. This isn't to excuse the theft, but to contrast it with the deeper folly of adult…
