Original Meaning
Showing Kindness to the Poor (15:1–11)
THE YEAR FOR CANCELING debts (vv. 1–5). The section opens formally with an announcement: “At the end of every seven years you must cancel debts.” Whether “the end of seven years” means at the beginning,2 sometime within, or at the end3 of the seventh year of the seven-year cycle, Deuteronomy 31:10 associates “the time of the year of the release” with the Festival of Booths (cf. 16:13–16).4 The present passage does not link the release with this festival, though the reference to a formal proclamation at the end of verse 2 makes most sense in this festival context. The required action is specified literally as “to practice/enact release” (NIV “cancel debts”). Whereas earlier regulations on the sabbatical year focused on rest for the land,5 with characteristic humanitarian concern this text focuses on the institution’s implications for the people, particularly the poor. Here Moses highlights the spirit of the ordinance, recognizing that merely allowing the poor access to privately held lands during the sabbatical year will not solve the long-term danger of economic stratification.
Beginning with a formal heading, verses 2–3 clarify what Moses means by “enacting release” (v. 1). (1) In general terms Moses calls on creditors to release their claims on debtors.6 The Hebrew expression maššēh yād (lit., “the [secured/guaranteed] loan of the hand” reflects the ancient custom of leaving property with a creditor as collateral and a guarantee that one intends to repay the loan. The property could be some valuable possession or in extreme cases the debtor himself (cf. vv. 12–18). By this understanding the present statement means something like, “Every creditor who holds a loan-pledge shall release what has been pledged to him by his neighbor who is indebted to him.”7 If so, this does not mean the absolute cancellation of all debts, nor even the suspension of payments during the sabbatical year, but the return of all properties that a creditor is holding against loans by those indebted to him, enabling the original owner once more to enjoy the economic benefit of those properties.
(2) Moses calls on all creditors to refrain from pressuring neighbors or “fellow Israelites” to pay off the loan (v. 2). Debtors would naturally feel the release of pressure if the creditor renounced all claims to the property given as pledge, and even more so if he suspended the payment for the loan that was due in the seventh year. Just as allowing land a year to lie fallow (Ex. 23:10–11) provided it with an opportunity to rejuvenate itself, so by suspending his rights to the loan and the pledge for one year, the creditor would offer the debtor an opportunity to catch his breath and hopefully get back on his feet economically.
Moses grounds the call for release in the fact that “the LORD’s time has been proclaimed for canceling debts.” The verb “proclaim” (qârâʾ, “to call out”) suggests a formal proclamation, but the meaning of layhwh (lit., “to Yahweh”) can be interpreted several ways.8 If it means “belonging to Yahweh,” then Yahweh claims it as his own and retains the right to determine the boundaries of appropriate human activity on that day (cf. 5:14). If it means “by Yahweh,” the emphasis falls on the divine origin of the ordinance. If layhwh means “in honor of Yahweh” (NIV “the LORD’s time”), this ordinance calls for a theological perspective on all of life. By showing compassion for the poor before the watching world, Israelites will imitate the compassionate character of their God (cf. 10:17–19).
Remarkably Moses permits Israelites to keep the pressure on the foreigner (v. 3a). At the moment Moses is not concerned about foreigners’ well-being or about Israelites who make business loans.9 The focus is on Israelites, who for whatever reason have fallen into debt (e.g., perhaps because of crop failure, accident).
In verses 4–11, with keen pastoral insight Moses recognizes that it is not enough simply to announce the policy regarding the indebted poor; his people must be motivated to adopt this policy. After opening with “However” or “On the other hand,” Moses seeks to do so by describing the economic ideal (vv. 4–6) and then pleading for compassion and generosity toward the poor (vv. 7–11).
Moses’ picture of Israel’s ideal economic future sounds utopian. He opens with an announcement: “There should be no poor among you.” The book of Deuteronomy expresses great concern for widows, the fatherless, and aliens,10 but references to the “poor” as ʾebyôn occur only here (vv. 7, 9, 11, 15) and in 24:14. This expression involves individuals who through landlessness or lack of resources are economically deprived and dependent on others for relief from their poverty. The emphatic construction11 suggests that despite (or because of obedience to) the charge in verses 1–3, the Israelites may anticipate a future when this ordinance will no longer be needed. But this future is not inevitable.
In verses 4b–5 Moses identifies two preconditions to the realization of the ideal. (1) Yahweh must show favor toward his people by delivering the land of Canaan into the hands of the Israelites as their grant (NIV “inheritance”)12 and possession, and then by blessing his people in the land.13 (2) Israel must adhere scrupulously to the will of Yahweh (v. 5). Moses’ demand for total obedience is as emphatic as his declaration of Yahweh’s blessing,14 yielding the following logic:
If you obey Yahweh scrupulously, he will bless you richly.
If he blesses you richly, there will be no poor among you.
In verse 6 Moses’ attention shifts from personal economics to corporate implications of Yahweh’s blessing. For rhetorical effect he repeats the divine blessing formula, adding “as he has promised,” a reference to a previous ordinance outside the book.15 Moses summarizes the evidence of Yahweh’s blessing for Israel as a nation with four statements declaring Israel’s economic and political hegemony over the rest of the world, cast in symmetrical and chiastic parallelism (vv. 6b, 6c):
You will lend to many nations, but you will borrow from none.
You will rule over many nations, but none will rule over you.
Instructions on how to treat the poor (vv. 7–8). In verses 7–11 Moses moves from describing the ideal future to the reality that awaits the people once they cross the Jordan. Here we witness Moses’ pastoral and rhetorical strategy as clearly as anywhere in the book.16 (1) Having presented the ideal in verses 4–6, he begins where the people are in the real historical context. (2) Moses appeals to Israel’s sense of family. Four of the seven occurrences of “brother” in this chapter occur in these verses (vv. 7a, 7b, 9, 11). (3) Moses addresses the fundamental sinfulness of the people. But here he is not interested in the personal sin that might underlie the poor person’s indebtedness, but the propensity of the rich to sin against their poor brothers (v. 9). (4) Moses addresses both the interior and the exterior dimension of ethics. When he speaks of the “heart”/“mind” of the rich, his concern is their disposition toward the poor; when he speaks of the “hand,” his concern is their action. (5) Moses punctuates his comments with direct speech—first a hypothetical comment by the addressee (v. 9), and then a quotation of divine speech (v. 11). Based on the syntax and the flow of ideas, this paragraph divides into three parts arranged in an ABA pattern as follows: instructions on how to treat the poor (vv. 7–8); a warning, signaled by “be careful” (v. 9); more instructions on how to treat the poor (vv. 10–11).
On the surface the opening clause of verse 7 appears to contradict verse 4. However, the contradiction evaporates when we recognize that the earlier statement represents an ideal, whereas this statement recognizes the realities of life. Moses clarifies what he means by the poor “among you” with three expressions reflecting an expanding scope. “Your brothers” refers fundamentally to the members of a household, but as we have seen, in Deuteronomy it applies to all Israel, which is perceived as an extended kinship group. As elsewhere in this book, “your towns” is strictly speaking “your gates” (cf. 3:5), while “the land” refers to the entire territory that Yahweh had delivered to the Israelites. With this statement Moses reiterates that Israelites are responsible for each other’s well-being.
Verse 7b specifies the required disposition toward the poor: Israelites are to be softhearted and openhanded. This demand is expressed with two negative statements. The first (“do not be hardhearted”) uses a word that in 2:30 had been used of Sihon’s hardened disposition toward Israel. The second (“do not be . . . tightfisted”) speaks of clenching what one holds in the hand—in particular, the article the debtor has deposited as security for his debt. This interpretation is confirmed by verse 8, which appeals for a compassionate disposition, freely opening one’s hands to those in need and generously lending to one another.
Warnings against hardheartedness and tightfistedness (v. 9). The imperative in verse 9, “Be careful not . . . ,” signals the climax of this paragraph.17 The text identifies three pathological dispositions that plague those who are economically well-off. (1) The first malady is a twisted mind. The characterization of tightfistedness as a “wicked thought” in one’s heart places a lack of compassion toward the poor in the same category as plots to lead people into apostasy (cf. 13:13[14]). Moses concretizes the “mean-spirited” notion with a hypothetical quotation by this Scrooge: “The seventh year, the year for canceling debts, is near.” The thinking is, the closer the year of release, the less the creditor has to gain from the debtor’s indebtedness. The antidote to such twisted thinking is a generous heart concerned about the well-being of the poor rather than one’s own advantage. Loans were to be granted freely for the benefit of the poor, not the creditor, who has no need to capitalize on the plight of his brother.
(2) The second malady is an evil eye (NIV “ill will”). Deuteronomy recognizes that there is a time and a place for the eye to express no pity but hostility,18 but when faced by a countryman in poverty, the eye is to be compassionate.19
(3) The third pathology is tightfisted hands. Admittedly, “hand” does not appear until verse 10, but the statement “so that you . . . give him nothing,” the association of the hard heart with closed hands in verse 7, and the plea for open hands in verse 8 all suggest that here Moses is thinking of open hands that give liberally to the poor what they need. The verb “to give” contrasts the stinginess of potential Scrooges with the generosity of Yahweh, who has given the land as an undeserved grant to the Israelites (v. 7).
The ending of verse 9 describes the consequences of such stinginess; it will force the impoverished to take their appeal directly to Yahweh and rouse him to declare a verdict on mean-spirited and tightfisted creditors (cf. Ps. 69:33[34]). As Moses declared in 10:18–19, Yahweh executes justice on behalf of the fatherless, the widow, and the alien (10:18–19), and in so doing he provides a model for human conduct. The verdict, “you will be found guilty of sin,” contrasts with 6:25, where Moses announces the effect of wholehearted obedience: “That will be our righteousness” (cf. 24:10–15).
Further instructions on how to treat the poor (vv. 10–11). Verses 10 and 11 go on the offensive, describing the disposition and actions that should characterize the rich and adding the consequences of such conduct. Reversing the subjects dealt with in verse 9, Moses again calls on the rich to be generous toward the poor and to give without regret. Whereas in verse 9 Moses had spoken of eyes as “evil” (rāʿâ), here he applies the corresponding verb (rʿh) to the “heart.” Since elsewhere a heart that is evil is “sad,” Moses is speaking of giving “generously” and “without a grudging heart” (1 Sam. 1:8; Neh. 2:2).20 In so doing he attempts to get his audience beyond the letter of the law to its spirit: concern for the well-being of a brother alone should motivate generous and free-spirited giving.
In verse 10b Moses declares the consequences of cheerful generosity toward the poor. The promise that Yahweh will bless the creditor “in all your work” and “in everything you put your hand to” takes the wind out of the sails of those who regret the nearness of the year of release, who seek to capitalize on the articles the poor have deposited as security, or who demand quick return on their loans. Yahweh will reward those who are kind and generous to the needy.
In verse 11 Moses ends this paragraph with another realistic reminder that the poor will always be around. Although the utopia he described in verses 4–6 may never be achieved, it is an ideal for which to strive. He ends this paragraph strengthening his earlier appeal (v. 8) by reminding those with means to care for “your brothers . . . the poor and needy in your land.”
Bridging Contexts
HISTORY OF GOD’S PEOPLE on these commands. In Deuteronomy 15:1–11 Moses has caught the spirit of life within the covenant community. Israel’s ethic is not grounded in a system of laws written on tablets of stone, but on living relationships that exist between them and Yahweh their God on the one hand, and between individuals within the covenant community on the other. Pleading pastorally for a willing application of the first and foremost commandment, Moses calls the people to demonstrate their love for Yahweh by loving their neighbors. The sage of Israel would put it another way:
He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker,
but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. (Prov. 14:31)
He who mocks the poor shows contempt for their Maker;
whoever gloats over disaster will not go unpunished. (Prov. 17:5)
It is difficult to assess the extent to which Moses’ instructions regarding debtors and slaves in verses 12–18 were fulfilled in the history of Israel. The Elijah-Elisha narratives are set within the broader context of a general polemic against the worship of Baal. In the heart of these narratives, the case of the prophetic apprentice’s widow and her sons illustrates how the abandonment of Yahweh in favor of other gods resulted in the breakdown of the social values espoused here in Deuteronomy (2 Kings 4:1–7). Whether or not the creditor was within his legal rights, this episode demonstrates that Israel’s spiritual recidivism was accompanied by loss of moral integrity; because the community had failed to take care of this widow and her fatherless children, the creditor was coming to claim the boys as debt-servants.41
Later prophets repeatedly railed against those with economic and political power for their exploitation of the poor.42 In the eighth century Amos cites tightfistedness and hardheartedness as the supreme evil in the northern kingdom of Israel:
This is what the LORD says:
“For three sins of Israel,
even for four, I will not turn back └my wrath┘.
They sell the righteous for silver,
and the needy for a pair of sandals.
They trample on the heads of the poor
as upon the dust of the ground
and deny justice to the oppressed.
Father and son use the same girl
and so profane my holy name.
They lie down beside every altar
on garments taken in pledge.
In the house of their god
they drink wine taken as fines.” (Amos 2:6–8)
A century later Jeremiah denounces the people of Judah for violating the policies outlined by Moses in this text (Jer. 34:12–22). The oracle acknowledges that after a history of failure to observe the year of release for debt-servants, the prophet’s generation had implemented the actions called for here. However, “your fathers . . . did not listen to me or pay attention to me,” because they changed their minds and reclaimed the freed persons as their debt-servants. Consequently, instead of the blessing that Moses promised to those who are generous, openhanded, and softhearted, Jeremiah pronounces on them the full weight of the curses of Deuteronomy 28.
Responding to those who would condemn the woman for pouring out her ointment on Jesus’ head, in Mark 14:7 the Savior expresses his own realism regarding the community, reminding his own disciples that “the poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want.” At the same time, Moses’ declaration of the ideal in Deuteronomy 15:4 points to a future when all wrongs will be righted. The NIV renders the verse, “There should be no poor among you,” but it could just as well be rendered indicatively as a promise: “There will be no poor among you” (ESV, NRSV), for when Yahweh lavishes his blessing on his people in the ultimate grant that he gives them, the utopian ideal will be reality.
John envisions the fulfillment of this covenantal ideal in the holy city, the new Jerusalem:
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” (Rev 21:3–4; cf. 7:14–21)
Contemporary Significance
THE SPIRIT OF CHARITY. In Deuteronomy 15:1–11 Moses presents his people with a vision of the community of faith and the spirit of charity that should characterize God’s people in every age. The softheartedness and openhandedness called for here are clearly reflected in 1 John 3:17–18: “But if anyone has material possession and sees his brother in need yet has no pity on him, how can the love God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.” This spirit of compassion must begin in the household of faith (Gal. 6:10), but then extend to all economically marginalized, including those trapped in the ghettoes of our cities and the “hollers” of Appalachia, legal immigrants and undocumented aliens fleeing desperate situations for a better life,43 and the elderly who are often abandoned by their families. There is no better opportunity for Christians to distinguish themselves from the self-indulgent Canaanites of this land than through their generosity and charity toward the poor. To paraphrase 1 John 4:19, “We are covenantally committed to others and seek their well-being through concrete acts of ‘love,’ because the Lord was first covenantally committed to us and sought our well-being through concrete acts of ‘love.’ ”
Although Christians for the most part do not live in the land of Palestine and are not “brothers” in an ethnic sense, the relevance of the principles arising from Deuteronomy 15:1–11 and 12–18 are obvious to all who have eyes that see the reality of a world fractured by alienation and ears that hear the divine response to this pervasive dysfunction.44 On the one hand, this passage proves that the institution of servitude need not be oppressive by definition. All owners of servants should treat their subjects as brothers or sisters, by virtue of their common humanity as descendants of Adam and their common nobility as images of God (Gen. 5; Job 31:15; Ps. 8; Prov. 14:31; 17:5). On the other hand, members of the household of faith and children of God have special motivation for compassion toward the poor and needy. We the redeemed remember that God in his grace has rescued us from the bondage of sin and adopted us as his sons, lavishing on us his provision in accordance with our needs. Knowing not only the pain of deprivation and slavery but also the grace of redemption, we look at the world through the eyes of our heavenly Father and are inspired to treat others as he has treated us.
The implications of this fact are profound and varied. (1) The poor and marginalized should not need to defend their rights or beg for charity from the well-to-do and the powerful. Concern for social justice is a barometer of the health of the church.
(2) God’s people will be gracious toward those who are indebted to them, being more concerned about the satisfaction of the needs of the poor than the defense of their own rights to private property. Openhanded generosity and softhearted compassion toward the poor and needy are the duty especially of those with the means to help.
(3) Godly persons in economical and social positions of power will treat those for whom they are responsible with compassion, so that even those who are formally inferior recognize that their lot in life is “good” (tôb).
(4) Although we recognize the social and economic problems of the world outside the church to be symptomatic of a deeper spiritual problem that can be resolved only through the miraculous and gracious redemption wrought through Christ, God’s people will support all efforts to break down walls of alienation and oppression. In so doing, they will not only be obeying the commands of the Lord, but they will also be declaring to the world how exceptionally righteous are his ways (Deut. 4:7–8).
(5) The rich and powerful should never pride themselves in their accomplishments but rejoice in God’s favor, knowing that the blessing of the Lord is not a right but an expression of his generosity and his fidelity to his promise to bless those who represent him well.
(6) Worship provides a context in which economic and social barriers may and should be torn down. The powerful must guarantee equal rights for all for access to the presence of God and need to take the initiative to invite the poor and needy to the Lord’s table.
For these and many other reasons, Christians should be at the forefront of movements that seek both the common good and the well-being of the underprivileged and socially defenseless, like Sir William Wilberforce (1759–1833), who led the charge against slavery in Britain. In a post-slavery world they will do the same by generously providing the poor with economic resources, safeguarding their justice, and protecting them from exploitation and abuse. In short, like Boaz, as the “wings” of the Lord they offer security to the vulnerable (cf. Ruth 2:12).
Original Meaning
Showing Kindness to Debt-Slaves (15:12–18)
MOSES CONTINUES HIS DISCUSSION of obligations of Israelites who are self-sufficient toward those who are economically dependent with instructions of debt-servitude.21 These instructions build on Exodus 21:2–11 and Leviticus 25:39–46, but as pastor, Moses adapts the discussion in anticipation of the people’s imminent entrance into the Promised Land. The focus shifts from the debt-servant’s rights to the master’s responsibilities, and the text is more paraenetic in tone.
Verses 12–18 must be interpreted not only in the light of antecedent biblical documents but also in the light of related customs as attested in writings from the ancient Near East.22 The institution of slavery was widespread in the ancient world. Although Israelites would gain possession of non-Israelite slaves who were captives of war (Num. 31:7–12; Deut. 21:10–14) or through purchase in the slave trade, Israelite indentured servants usually landed in this state through indebtedness or destitution.23 Having sold their property to pay off a debt or having given it as security for a loan, they became a part of a creditor’s household, as a debt-servant or hireling.24 Even if creditors were within their legal rights to take on debt-servants, both Leviticus 25:39–46 and Deuteronomy 15:12–18 deny them the moral right to do so.25 By placing boundaries around the conduct of creditors, Moses seeks to prevent future abuses of indentured Israelites’ rights. His instructions divide into three major parts, with a parenthetical interlude in verse 17b: principles governing the treatment of indentured Israelites (vv. 12–15); principles governing exceptional cases (vv. 16–17a); a concluding appeal (v. 18).
Principles governing the treatment of indentured Israelites (vv. 12–15). The situation addressed here involves one Israelite falling into hands of another through an economic transaction. Normally the verb mâkar (to sell”) involves handing something over in exchange for payment, but in a derived sense here it means simply to deliver something/someone into the power of another.26 In contrast to Exodus 21:2, here the poor person apparently sells himself/herself.27
As in verses 1–11, Moses identifies the impoverished person as “your brother,” treating creditor and indentured servant as kin. He highlights the ethnic factor by referring to the indebted person as “a fellow Hebrew, a man or a woman.” In the Old Testament Israelites generally use “Hebrews” as a self-designation, in contrast to outsiders.28 Here Moses is obviously dealing with inner-Israelite social and economic relations, not the disposition of Israelites toward foreigners within or outside their community. That he should mention both male and female servants highlights the need for identical compassion toward both genders.
Moses here instructs the Israelites on how those with means were to treat indentured countrymen. He permits them to use the services of indentured Israelites for six years. The six-year period envisioned here differs from the release ordinance of verses 1–11, which had linked the time of release to the national sabbatical year (cf. v. 9). The present ordinance seems to base the timing of the indentured servant’s release on the date when he was pressed into service: “in the seventh year.”29 This guarantees independent Israelites seven years’ service by anyone who indentures himself/herself—but the creditors may not demand more time. Indeed, here Moses transforms an impoverished person’s legal right (Ex. 21:2) into a creditor’s moral obligation—he must release the debt-servant, granting him independence as a fully free citizen of Israel.30 Verses 13–14 charge those whom the impoverished person has served to help “jumpstart” their economic independence by liberally loading them with meat, grain, and wine in proportion to the blessing of Yahweh.
According to verse 15 the memory of Israel’s slavery in Egypt and Yahweh’s undeserved redemption should keep the creditor’s heart soft toward his impoverished brother or sister (cf. 10:17–19).31 Since the verb “redeem” (pâdâ) is naturally at home in contexts of slavery (cf. Ex. 21:8),32 here the word strengthens the analogy between the liberation of Israel from Egyptian bondage and the liberation of the debt-servant. This link is reinforced by verse 13, which recalls Yahweh’s own provision for the Israelites as they left Egypt. Just as the Israelites had left with the Egyptians’ goods in their possession (cf. Ex. 3:21–22),33 so creditors must ensure that when debt-servants leave, they have been lavishly provided for.
Principles governing an exceptional case (vv. 16–17a). In verses 16–17 Moses contemplates the possibility of an Israelite preferring permanent servitude to economic independence. He personalizes the situation by casting the resolve as a direct quotation from the debt-servant.34 The text does not specify circumstances that might motivate him to reject freedom, but it focuses on the relationship that had developed between creditor and servant. Because the servant fared so well in the household of his creditor, he developed a genuine love (ʾāhēb) for those whom he served. Therefore he rejects the offer of freedom, preferring to cast his lot with the creditor and his family for the rest of his life.
Verse 17 summarizes the juridical procedure by which a debt-servant’s decision to remain would be legally established: the master is to pierce his ear with an awl and pin his lobe to the door. Although Exodus 21:6 does not prescribe pinning the ear to the door, based on the reference to God in that text, some argue this ceremony was to be performed at the sanctuary.35 This would have been difficult logistically, unless the sanctuary was a local shrine. Therefore, it seems preferable to interpret “to God” in the earlier text as a reference to a divinely legitimated legal authority, perhaps with particular jurisdiction in cases involving families.36 Perhaps the ritual officials so designated would come to the home of the creditor, representing God, who was a divine witness to the proceeding. The pierced ear served as a badge declaring the slave’s commitment to his master and presumably the master’s commitment to him;37 he was his slave for life.38 Whether the master could or would ever have negotiated a separation is unknown, but hereafter neither party could legally break this contract without the consent of the other.39
The concluding appeal (v. 18). Following a reminder that the policies for treating servants were to be the same for men and women (v. 17b), Moses concludes the discussion on debt servitude by returning to normal cases, in which indentured servants would accept their freedom. In verses 7 and 10 Moses had warned creditors not to be hardhearted or tightfisted in their treatment of their debtors. Now he admonishes them not to “consider it a hardship” or to feel cheated for needing to grant manumission to debt-servants when the sixth year comes to an end. Instead, they should be grateful for the contribution the debt-servants had made to the domestic economy.
The NIV’s reading “worth twice [mišneh] as much as that of a hired hand” suggests landowners could get twice as much out of slaves as out of a hired person, presumably because they can force them to work harder or because they are available around the clock. However, here mišneh means “equivalent to,”40 in which case the master should gladly release the indentured servant, knowing he has had the benefit of his work without cost for six years. As in verses 4, 6, and 10, Moses ends with a motive clause: the reward for this gracious disposition toward persons who are granted their freedom will be the blessing of Yahweh on all that the creditor sets his hands to do.
Bridging Contexts
HISTORY OF GOD’S PEOPLE on these commands. In Deuteronomy 15:1–11 Moses has caught the spirit of life within the covenant community. Israel’s ethic is not grounded in a system of laws written on tablets of stone, but on living relationships that exist between them and Yahweh their God on the one hand, and between individuals within the covenant community on the other. Pleading pastorally for a willing application of the first and foremost commandment, Moses calls the people to demonstrate their love for Yahweh by loving their neighbors. The sage of Israel would put it another way:
He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker,
but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. (Prov. 14:31)
He who mocks the poor shows contempt for their Maker;
whoever gloats over disaster will not go unpunished. (Prov. 17:5)
It is difficult to assess the extent to which Moses’ instructions regarding debtors and slaves in verses 12–18 were fulfilled in the history of Israel. The Elijah-Elisha narratives are set within the broader context of a general polemic against the worship of Baal. In the heart of these narratives, the case of the prophetic apprentice’s widow and her sons illustrates how the abandonment of Yahweh in favor of other gods resulted in the breakdown of the social values espoused here in Deuteronomy (2 Kings 4:1–7). Whether or not the creditor was within his legal rights, this episode demonstrates that Israel’s spiritual recidivism was accompanied by loss of moral integrity; because the community had failed to take care of this widow and her fatherless children, the creditor was coming to claim the boys as debt-servants.41
Later prophets repeatedly railed against those with economic and political power for their exploitation of the poor.42 In the eighth century Amos cites tightfistedness and hardheartedness as the supreme evil in the northern kingdom of Israel:
This is what the LORD says:
“For three sins of Israel,
even for four, I will not turn back └my wrath┘.
They sell the righteous for silver,
and the needy for a pair of sandals.
They trample on the heads of the poor
as upon the dust of the ground
and deny justice to the oppressed.
Father and son use the same girl
and so profane my holy name.
They lie down beside every altar
on garments taken in pledge.
In the house of their god
they drink wine taken as fines.” (Amos 2:6–8)
A century later Jeremiah denounces the people of Judah for violating the policies outlined by Moses in this text (Jer. 34:12–22). The oracle acknowledges that after a history of failure to observe the year of release for debt-servants, the prophet’s generation had implemented the actions called for here. However, “your fathers . . . did not listen to me or pay attention to me,” because they changed their minds and reclaimed the freed persons as their debt-servants. Consequently, instead of the blessing that Moses promised to those who are generous, openhanded, and softhearted, Jeremiah pronounces on them the full weight of the curses of Deuteronomy 28.
Responding to those who would condemn the woman for pouring out her ointment on Jesus’ head, in Mark 14:7 the Savior expresses his own realism regarding the community, reminding his own disciples that “the poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want.” At the same time, Moses’ declaration of the ideal in Deuteronomy 15:4 points to a future when all wrongs will be righted. The NIV renders the verse, “There should be no poor among you,” but it could just as well be rendered indicatively as a promise: “There will be no poor among you” (ESV, NRSV), for when Yahweh lavishes his blessing on his people in the ultimate grant that he gives them, the utopian ideal will be reality.
John envisions the fulfillment of this covenantal ideal in the holy city, the new Jerusalem:
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” (Rev 21:3–4; cf. 7:14–21)
Contemporary Significance
THE SPIRIT OF CHARITY. In Deuteronomy 15:1–11 Moses presents his people with a vision of the community of faith and the spirit of charity that should characterize God’s people in every age. The softheartedness and openhandedness called for here are clearly reflected in 1 John 3:17–18: “But if anyone has material possession and sees his brother in need yet has no pity on him, how can the love God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.” This spirit of compassion must begin in the household of faith (Gal. 6:10), but then extend to all economically marginalized, including those trapped in the ghettoes of our cities and the “hollers” of Appalachia, legal immigrants and undocumented aliens fleeing desperate situations for a better life,43 and the elderly who are often abandoned by their families. There is no better opportunity for Christians to distinguish themselves from the self-indulgent Canaanites of this land than through their generosity and charity toward the poor. To paraphrase 1 John 4:19, “We are covenantally committed to others and seek their well-being through concrete acts of ‘love,’ because the Lord was first covenantally committed to us and sought our well-being through concrete acts of ‘love.’ ”
Although Christians for the most part do not live in the land of Palestine and are not “brothers” in an ethnic sense, the relevance of the principles arising from Deuteronomy 15:1–11 and 12–18 are obvious to all who have eyes that see the reality of a world fractured by alienation and ears that hear the divine response to this pervasive dysfunction.44 On the one hand, this passage proves that the institution of servitude need not be oppressive by definition. All owners of servants should treat their subjects as brothers or sisters, by virtue of their common humanity as descendants of Adam and their common nobility as images of God (Gen. 5; Job 31:15; Ps. 8; Prov. 14:31; 17:5). On the other hand, members of the household of faith and children of God have special motivation for compassion toward the poor and needy. We the redeemed remember that God in his grace has rescued us from the bondage of sin and adopted us as his sons, lavishing on us his provision in accordance with our needs. Knowing not only the pain of deprivation and slavery but also the grace of redemption, we look at the world through the eyes of our heavenly Father and are inspired to treat others as he has treated us.
The implications of this fact are profound and varied. (1) The poor and marginalized should not need to defend their rights or beg for charity from the well-to-do and the powerful. Concern for social justice is a barometer of the health of the church.
(2) God’s people will be gracious toward those who are indebted to them, being more concerned about the satisfaction of the needs of the poor than the defense of their own rights to private property. Openhanded generosity and softhearted compassion toward the poor and needy are the duty especially of those with the means to help.
(3) Godly persons in economical and social positions of power will treat those for whom they are responsible with compassion, so that even those who are formally inferior recognize that their lot in life is “good” (tôb).
(4) Although we recognize the social and economic problems of the world outside the church to be symptomatic of a deeper spiritual problem that can be resolved only through the miraculous and gracious redemption wrought through Christ, God’s people will support all efforts to break down walls of alienation and oppression. In so doing, they will not only be obeying the commands of the Lord, but they will also be declaring to the world how exceptionally righteous are his ways (Deut. 4:7–8).
(5) The rich and powerful should never pride themselves in their accomplishments but rejoice in God’s favor, knowing that the blessing of the Lord is not a right but an expression of his generosity and his fidelity to his promise to bless those who represent him well.
(6) Worship provides a context in which economic and social barriers may and should be torn down. The powerful must guarantee equal rights for all for access to the presence of God and need to take the initiative to invite the poor and needy to the Lord’s table.
For these and many other reasons, Christians should be at the forefront of movements that seek both the common good and the well-being of the underprivileged and socially defenseless, like Sir William Wilberforce (1759–1833), who led the charge against slavery in Britain. In a post-slavery world they will do the same by generously providing the poor with economic resources, safeguarding their justice, and protecting them from exploitation and abuse. In short, like Boaz, as the “wings” of the Lord they offer security to the vulnerable (cf. Ruth 2:12).