The Prohibition on Charging Interest
The Torah forbade Israelites from charging interest on loans to fellow Israelites. This was meant to protect the poor from falling into permanent debt. Charging interest to foreigners was allowed. Jesus's parables about interest and investment assume a Gentile commercial context where lending at interest was normal.
Exodus 22:25, Leviticus 25:35-37, and Deuteronomy 23:19-20 all prohibit Israelites from charging neshek (interest, literally 'biting') on loans to fellow Israelites. The Leviticus passage is most explicit: 'Do not take interest or any profit from them, but fear your God, so that they may continue to live among you. You must not lend them money at interest or sell them food at a profit.' The context is specifically poverty-driven loans - a fellow Israelite who has become poor and needs help. The prohibition covered not just monetary interest but any profit from food or other commodity loans.
The rationale is explicitly covenantal: 'I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt' (Leviticus 25:38). Israel's rescue from debt-slavery in Egypt should make Israelites reluctant to trap their neighbors in debt-slavery through interest. The prohibition prevented the structural poverty trap where a poor family borrowed in desperation, paid interest they could never fully cover, eventually sold their land, and finally sold themselves into slavery - the cascade that Nehemiah 5 documents actually happening in post-exilic Judah.
Deuteronomy 23:20 permits charging interest to foreigners: 'You may charge a foreigner interest, but not a fellow Israelite.' This created a two-tier system: Israelite-to-Israelite lending was a social service; commercial lending with interest operated in international trade contexts. In practice, the Mishnah (Bava Metzia 5:1-6) found this distinction difficult to maintain as the economy monetized, and elaborate legal discussions addressed permitted arrangements that functioned economically like loans at interest without technically violating the letter of the law.
Jesus's Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:27) and Parable of the Ten Minas (Luke 19:23) both reference banking with interest as the minimum acceptable use of entrusted resources - 'You should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.' These references assume a Greco-Roman commercial context where banking and interest were normal and legitimate, not a specifically Israelite context governed by the Torah's prohibition.
Archaeological Evidence
Debt documentation from ancient Near Eastern sites shows both the prevalence of lending and the regulations governing it. Old Babylonian tablets from Nippur record loan contracts with interest rates (typically 20% per annum for silver, 33% for grain). The Elephantine papyri document Jewish loans in Egypt, some with interest. The Samaria ostraca's commodity deliveries may reflect interest payments in kind.
Dead Sea Scrolls Evidence
The Damascus Document (CD 13:15-16) addresses financial dealings within and outside the community, prohibiting exploitation of the poor. 4Q251 (Halakhah A) contains property and loan regulations. The community's communal economy (1QS 1:11-13) eliminated the need for loans between members, addressing the usury problem through structural communal sharing rather than regulatory restriction.
Parallel Cultures
Interest on loans was regulated (not prohibited) in most ancient Near Eastern legal codes. Hammurabi §89-92 set maximum interest rates and specified protections for debtors. In contrast to Israelite law's prohibition on interest between fellow Israelites (though allowing it with foreigners, Deuteronomy 23:20), Mesopotamian law regulated but normalized interest-bearing loans. Greek cities regulated interest through various legal mechanisms. Roman law prohibited *usura* (excessive interest) at various periods.
Scholarly Sources
Marvin Chaney's work on Israelite economic justice in *Social Scientific Criticism* provides analysis. Gary Anderson's *Charity: The Place of the Poor in the Biblical Tradition* (2013) addresses the usury prohibition's social welfare dimensions. Jeffrey Tigay's *Deuteronomy* covers the Deuteronomy 23 text. Ze'ev Falk's *Hebrew Law in Biblical Times* provides comparative analysis.
Modern Misconceptions
A common error reads the Israelite usury prohibition as an absolute ban on all lending for interest. The prohibition specifically applied to lending to fellow Israelites in need (the poor who required survival loans) and explicitly permitted interest from foreigners (Deuteronomy 23:20). The prohibition was a covenant solidarity measure protecting the poor within the community from being reduced to debt slavery by interest accumulation.
- ISBE: Usury; Interest
- Matthews, Manners and Customs of the Bible, pp.339-342
- Freeman, Manners and Customs of the Bible, pp.451-454
References
- Orr, J. (ed.) (1915) The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Chicago: Howard-Severance Company. [Public Domain]
- Josephus, F. (c.94) The Works of Flavius Josephus (trans. W. Whiston). [Public Domain]
- Philo of Alexandria (c.40) The Works of Philo (trans. C.D. Yonge). [Public Domain]
- Category
- ⚖️ Trade & Economy
- Period
- JudgesMonarchyDivided-kingdomSecond TempleNew Testament
- Region
- CanaanJudahIsraelRome
- Bible Passages
- 5 verses
Read the full International Standard Bible Encyclopedia article on this topic.
Read ISBE Article