Coats - Exodus 22:25-27

22:25-27 - Here we get into money lending, but because this is ancient times money wasn’t really a thing as much as trade/barter. If someone who is better off lends money to someone who is poor, they are not to be charged interest. This is an interesting concept because by definition, if you have enough of something, money or otherwise, to lend it out, then you are better off than those to whom you are lending, unless of course it’s for a business thing, but that’s not what we’re talking about right now. It goes back to what King Benjamin said about how everything we have is a gift from God and so if we have more abundantly than someone else, it’s not because we earned it or because we deserve it, but because God has gifted it to us.

Therefore the inverse of this has to also be true, that someone who has less abundantly or is poor isn’t that way because they deserve it but because that’s just the lot in life that God has seen that they live in right then. And I contest that most people at some point in their lives will live hand to mouth, or at least they should, so that they know exactly what it’s like to be so poor and so dependent on the kindness of others to get by so that we all know exactly how that feels. Anyway, interest should not be charged, and while this might not make the most financial sense, having zero interest be the standard really take any opportunity away for it to get out of hand.

I think I’ve mentioned on here my cousin’s husband who is lending money to people in very desperate circumstances and charges them 30% interest and has made millions of dollars doing this and it’s absolutely disgusting and blood money. Don’t get me wrong, there’s a need for this market, but 5% should be the absolute maximum charged so that these people can still feed their families and the lender will still make over 60% annually on the interest. This law negates this as a possibility. But it’s also important to note here that this only applies to the lending of money between Israelites to each other, this is definitely not the case for any money lending going on between Israelites and gentiles, as someone pointed out to me a couple of year ago in a very interesting explanation of why a business deal was going a certain way with a Jewish realtor. Not saying I agree with that assessment, but it was the first time I had heard someone seriously use that reasoning in real life.

If someone needs to borrow something from you and the only collateral he has is his coat, then you have to return his coat to him by night fall because otherwise he’ll have to sleep in the cold because he has nothing else. This one makes more sense to me because, again, if you are in a position to lend someone something than you’re doing ok physically. If their only collateral is a coat, then they literally have almost nothing, like blood from a stone. If you have their coat as collateral, you don’t need it because you are well off enough to lend out stuff, so you would have your own coat.

When night comes and the work ceases for the day, then holding on to that man’s coat when you don’t need it but he will freeze in the night without it, the only point is cruelty, the only point is so that he will suffer with the cold. You don’t need it but he does and will suffer without it, so the only point is cruelty and punishment for being poor, which as we just discussed is almost never in anyone’s control. Usually the poorest people work the hardest, it’s a terrible system. The IM notes, “to take a neighbor’s garment in pledge for any time longer than the working hours of the day, when he does not wear it, is equivalent to making him pledge his life. This prohibition ultimately makes enslavement for debt impossible.”

God notes at the end of verse 27 that this law is because “I am gracious” which can be broken down a lot of different ways. If the terms of the loan are that collateral needs to be provided and the only collateral the man can provide is the coat, then yes strictly according to the rules, that coat can be held until the loan is repaid. However, the coat in the possession of the lender doesn’t benefit the lender at all, and makes the borrower suffer at night in the cold. So the borrower fulfilled his terms by giving the lender his coat, but the lender is not required to keep the coat at night time, and that’s the perfect example of how justice and mercy can work together in a perfect system.