Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Exodus 22:14
And if a man borrow [aught] of his neighbor, and it be hurt, or die, the owner thereof [being] not with it, he shall surely make [it] good.
14. barrow (an animal)] No object is expressed in the Heb.: it must be understood from vv. 10 13. The sequel shews that an animal is intended. ‘Borrow’ is lit. ask: so Exo 2Ki 6:5. Cf. on Exo 12:36
be hurt ] lit. broken, as v. 10.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
14, 15. Compensation for injury to a borrowed animal. If the owner is not with it, the borrower is responsible and must make restitution; if the owner is with it, it is presumed that he might have prevented any ill-usage or injury, and the borrower is not responsible. Cf. amm. 245 6 (a hired animal).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Exo 22:14-15
If a man borrow.
Borrowing
1. God in His law provideth against hurting our neighbours goods by borrowing.
2. Hurt and death may come to things borrowed without the sin of the borrower.
3. In case of the borrowers faultlessness in hurt, no restitution doth God award.
4. In case of wilful hurt and spoil the borrower by Gods law must make it good.
5. Things wilfully hurt which are borrowed by hire must be satisfied by Gods law.
6. Perishing of such in a lawful use of them, Gods law accounts satisfied by their hire (Exo 22:14-15). (G. Hughes, B. D.)
Concerning borrowing
Learn:
1. On the one hand–
(1) To be obliging. If you can do a needy neighbour a good turn by lending advice or material assistance, do so.
(2) Dont make your needy but obliged neighbour answerable for any accident that may occur through your own misfortune or fault.
2. On the other hand–
(1) Be careful not to abuse that which is in kindness lent you; or–
(2) Forget to return it, and thus render evil for good. Book-borrowers should note this. But–
(3) Rather both in principle (2Ki 6:5) and in action suffer the loss than inflict it. (J. W. Burn.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Ought, i.e. any living thing, which may be
hurt or
die, as it follows.
He shall surely make it good: this may seem hard, but all things considered is reasonable; because in doubtful cases, wherein it is not evident whether the borrower was faulty or not, as it is here, it ought to be interpreted in favour of the lender, rather than of the borrower; partly, to oblige the borrower to the greater fidelity and care in such things, which being not his own, men are commonly more careless about; partly, because the benefit being wholly the borrowers, the loss also in all reason ought to be his, and the lender ought not to suffer for his kindness, lest he should be discouraged from such actions for the future.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And if a man borrow [ought] of his neighbour,…. Any beast, as it should seem, as an ox to plough with, an ass, horse, or camel to ride on, though the Jewish writers carry it also to any kind of household stuff:
and if he be hurt or die; if any damage comes to it, or it dies while it is in the borrower’s hands, and when employed in that work for which he borrowed it; the Targum of Jonathan is,
“and the vessel should be broke, or the beast die:”
and the owner thereof being not with it; at the time of its being hurt, or of its death, and so could not be so well satisfied whether used well or not, nor how the damage and death came to it:
he shall surely make it good; pay the full price for it it is worth; which, though it may seem hard, was necessary, in order to make men careful of things they borrowed, and that lenders may not be losers for their kindness.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
If any one borrowed an animal of his neighbour (to use it for some kind of work), and it got injured and died, he was to make compensation to the owner, unless the latter were present at the time; but not if he were. “For either he would see that it could not have been averted by any human care; or if it could, seeing that he, the owner himself, was present, and did not avert it, it would only be right that he should suffer the consequence of his own neglect to afford assistance” ( Calovius). The words which follow, , cannot have any other meaning than this, “ if it was hired, it has come upon his hire, ” i.e., he has to bear the injury or loss for the money which he got for letting out the animal. The suggestion which Knobel makes with a “perhaps,” that refers to a hired labourer, to whom the word is applied in other places, and that the meaning is this, “if it is a labourer for hire, he goes into his hire, – i.e., if the hirer is a daily labourer who has nothing with which to make compensation, he is to enter into the service of the person who let him the animal, for a sufficiently long time to make up for the loss,” – is not only opposed to the grammar (the perfect for which should be used), but is also at variance with the context, “not make it good.”
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Verses 14, 15:
This is the law of borrowing. It covered anything borrowed, animate or inanimate. If the item(s) borrowed were damaged, the borrower must make restitution. But if the owner accompanied and used the borrowed item in the borrower’s service, and the item were damaged, the borrower was not liable.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
CONCERNING BORROWING.Exo. 22:14-15
This is an extension of the preceding principles. Borrowing might be for the purpose of1, obligation; or 2, trade.
I. If that which was borrowed received hurt in the absence of its owner, Exo. 22:14, the owner was to be indemnified.
II. But if, as might be the case when the loan were cattle, and the owner were present, the sum for which it was hired was understood to cover the risk of accident, and the owner bore the loss.
Learn
i. On the one hand
(1.) to be obliging. If you can do a needy neighbour a good turn by lending advice or material assistance, do so.
(2.) Dont make your needy but obliged neighbour answerable for any accident that may occur through your own misfortune or fault.
On the other hand
(1.) Be careful not to abuse that which is in kindness lent you; or
(2.) (grave though minor inability of life) forget to return it, and thus render evil for good. Book-borrowers should note this. But
(3.) rather both in principle (2Ki. 6:5) and in action suffer the loss than inflict it.J. W. Burn.
SOCIAL EVILS.Exo. 22:16-19
1. Are recognised in the Word of God, and recognised as abominable before God and man. But unfortunately they are not so recognised by Christian communities and governments. Hence their prevalence and their enormities.
2. Are dealt with delicately, but firmly, by the Word of God, Old and New Testament alike. But, from mock modesty and a strange stupidity or inhumanity, are not so dealt with, but are rather encouraged by Christian communities and governments. And the result, of course, is ruin and misery now, and to the third and fourth generation.
3. Should urge every man who takes the Bible as his law, and who loves his fellow-creature, to adopt every legitimate means, at all times, and everywhere, to bring back society and government to the spirit, at any rate, of the legislation here enforced.
I. Contrast the Mosaic precept with the Christian practice with regard to the seducer.
1. Then the penalties fell on the real criminal.
(1.) He must marry his victim; or
(2.) in case the parents should interfere, pay a fine of 50 shekels of silverthe amount of her dowry.
2. Now the penalty falls upon the victim.
(1.) It is true a feeble sentiment (anything but universal) is expressed, but nowhere legally as to the obligation of marriage. But when that obligation is not recognised, the poor creature loses all, loses reputation, position, opportunity for retrieving her character, inherits the scorn of her sex, and, driven mad with woe, sinks into a suicides grave.
(2.) While in the second case, the villain holds his head as high as ever, often escapes all penalty, and when that penalty is incurred it is the amount he spends upon his dog. Shame on our Christian society, which adds burdens to that which by itself is too heavy to be borne. Shame on our inhuman and immoral legislation, which dares to put a premium on vice and to let the oppressors go free. (See also Deu. 22:23-29).
II.
1. The Mosaic precept concerning the beast was death without mercy.
2. The Christian practice is to put a cloak over his crime or to hurry him away.
Learn
i. The awful sanctions of personal purity and chastity (1Co. 3:16-17; 1Co. 6:9-20).
ii. To expend your wrath on the right offender.
iii. Do not shun the society of the offender (Luk. 7:27; Joh. 4:18; but Gal. 6:1; Mar. 2:17; cf. Joh. 13:15).J. W. Burn.
DIVINE JUSTICE AND DIVINE COMPASSION
The strictness of the Divine justice is seen in these ancient enactments; but there is also revealed the tenderness of the Divine compassion. The law is severe on evil-doers, in order that well-doers may be encouraged and strengthened. God is just to punish the unjust and the oppressor; but He is compassionate to the weak and helpless. How tenderly He cares for the widow and the orphan. Their mournful cries touch His Divine heart. Here are combined the justice of the ruler and the tenderness of the father. We must be just, but justice must be tempered by mercy, and sweetened by compassion. Let the beautiful humaneness of our religion be always manifested.
I. Irreligion must be checked. The witch is especially mentioned because women are more addicted to these evil practices than men. She is instrumental in the promotion of radical irreligion. She invokes the aid of demoniacal powers. She nurtures all that is evil in man. She is an evil worker for the purpose of getting gain, or securing power, or carrying out her desire for revenge. Thou shalt not suffer the witch to live. Perhaps if she repents and forsakes her evil ways, pardon may be granted. It is strange that this enactment is carried out in countries where the Bible is not read. Witchcraft is very generally abhorred. We must avoid all causes which tend to the spread of irreligion.
II. Unnatural abominations promote irreligion. The beastly is opposed to the spiritual. Religion exalts humanity, while irreligion degrades it. Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.
III. False sacrifices are the outcome of irreligion. We sometimes use the word religion in a loose sense. And in this way we speak of idolaters as religious. But religion is that which binds the heart of man to the service of his Maker. That man is not religious, in the scriptural sense, at least, who offers sacrifice unto a god made by art and mans device. There are those who insist on a religious spirit, and say that forms are no matter. But a right spirit will embody itself in a right creed, and express itself in right forms of religious worship. It is ridiculous to affirm that it is of no consequence to what god we offer sacrifices, in what form we worship, so long as the heart is right. He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed. Spiritual destruction at least will be the result of erroneous creeds and immoral practices. Erroneous creeds are very often the forced product of spiritual death or decline. The pure in heart shall see God, shall see His truth, and be led into right ways.
IV. Inhumanity is opposed to true religion. Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt. Knobel says, The persons meant are the Canaanitish and non-Canaanitish strangers, who stayed as individuals among the Israelites; the Canaanites as a whole are, according to this lawgiver also, to be extirpated. No penalties are laid down now for the non-observance of this command. An appeal is simply made to the former condition of being strangers. The remembrance of our own afflictions ought to make us sympathetic with the afflicted. But in the day of our prosperity we forget the days of adversity, and have not a due consideration for those in adverse circumstances. Vex not the stranger, for thy soul was once vexed in a strange land. Oppress not the foreigner, and he will come to love thee, and to admire that religion which has taught thee compassion.
V. Gentleness towards the weak is highest manhood and noblest religion Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world. An exalted humanity abhors the conduct of him who oppresses the widow and the orphan. Their very helplessness should be their strength. If the oppressor makes them cry, their cries, though only the sighing of crushed hearts, will pierce the heavens. The oppressor will be finally crushed by means of the oppressed. It is the great law of nature and of revelation that as a man sows so shall he reap. Retribution will come sooner or later. The oppressor of widows and orphans shall be killed with the sword, and their wives shall be widows, and their children fatherless. Escape is only in seeming. The prosperity of the wicked cannot be for ever. Oppressors must be destroyed. Tyrants must feel the awful recoil of their tyranny. Let us hasten for forgiveness and for power to amend our ways to Him whose gentleness was such that He did not break the bruised reed.W. Burrows, B.A.
ILLUSTRATIONS
BY
REV. WILLIAM ADAMSON
Divine Enactments! Exo. 22:1-31.
(1) There is a world of difference between a stained glass window and a kaleidoscope. Their relative values are very different, and so is their structure. The pieces of variegated glass are flung anyhow, for the prism to arrange; whereas, those employed in the window are all arranged to give a beautiful, effective, and abiding impression. These separate enactments are not strung together haphazard. On the contrary, they are chords divinely arranged to produce harmony in the world, and give forth strains of Divine adoration in their observance.
(2) If one side of a tree grows, and the other does not, the tree acquires a crooked form. It may be fruitful, but it cannot be beautiful. God would have humanities and nationalities, theocracies and individualities, both rich in the beauties of holiness and the fruits of righteousness. The unequal growth of the Christian graces is undesirable; hence the numerous Divine precautions to make them alike fair, fragrant, and fruitful.
Stern lawgiving! yet thou dost wear
The Godheads most benignant grace;
Flowers laugh before thee on their beds;
And fragrance in thy footing treads;
Thou dost preserve the stars from wrong.
Wordsworth.
Seduction-Solatium! Exo. 22:16-17. Marriage or money are the only earthly compensations which can be made. Unhappily, Wilsons Tales of the Borders abound with instances, in which this lawstill in forcewas utterly disregarded altogether in its compensatory aspects. So far are men from any disposition of heart towards the act of restitution, that English law has to be framed and put in force to compel them to make solatium, either by matrimonial contract or pecuniary indemnity. One of the most painful of the annals of British Law Courts is that which concerns the disclosure of mans heartlessness in regard to the maiden whom he has seduced. Law, however, can only enforce compensation; and it remains for grace to suppress the inclination. St. Benedict relates that when he felt this desir upon him, he rushed from his cave, and flung himself into a thicket of briars and nettles, in which he rolled himself until the blood flowed. This expedient could only be a temporary relief; and the only efficient and permanent method of preventative is Prayer for divine grace.
Terrestrial objects, disenchanted there,
Lose all their power to dazzle or easnare;
One only object then seems worth our care
To win the race.
Elliott.
Witchcraft and Wizardry! Exo. 22:18.
(1) The Church of Rome subjected persons suspected of witchcraft to the most cruel torments; but itself is the most notorious offender in this respect. Its pretended miracles from the blood of St. Januarius to the trance of La Pucelle are a concentration of superstitious wizardry. In tens of thousands of cases the victimsoften innocentwere burned alive; while others were drowned by the test applied. Rome herself, the apocalyptic wizard clothed in scarlet, is to know the retributive penalty of this law: She shall not be suffered to live.
(2) Sad as are the evidences of superstitious wizardry in modern spiritualism of America and England, there is this sure solace, that all witchcraft is doomed sooner or later. It is Carlyle who says, that the burning of a little straw may hide the stars of the sky; but the stars are there, and will reappear. Truth is Eternal.
Truth, crushed to earth, shall rise again
The eternal years of God are hers;
But Error, wounded, writhes in pain,
And dies among her worshippers.
Bryant.
Witchcraft! Exo. 22:18. The river Dart is a bright clear stream, which takes its rise amid the wild beauty of our English Alpsthe Dartmoor range. Long years ago, a crowd was gathered. Here were the middle-aged and young farmers and labourers, with mingled fear of all witches, and hatred to witchcraft a part of their very creed. Here also were women with rancorous tongues; little children, with babes in their mothers arm, gathered as for a holiday. The squires daughter has been condemned to the test of witchcraft; if she sinks, she is guilty; if she rises and escapes, she is innocent. Arrayed in white garments, she is led towards the river through the crowd, whose cruel jests and coarse words are the first gauntlet her pure mind must run. The tender arms were grasped, and the graceful form hurled into the stream, swollen with the unusually heavy rains. Suddenly a cry was raised; the cruel crowd gave way; and a man rushed breathlessly to the rivers brink. It was the maidens lover, to whom she was shortly to be united; and having heard of the dreadful ordeal designed, he had hastened to rescue her from the witchs test. Too late! Without a word, he plunged in after her. A gleam of a white robea sudden uphang of a mans strong armwere all that the superstitious onlookers ever saw more of the maiden or her lover.
But endless is the list of human ills,
And sighs might sooner fail than cause to sigh.
Young.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(14, 15) Lending is a species of deposit; but for the benefit, not of the depositor, but of the man with whom the deposit is made. The obligation of the latter to keep intact and to return is therefore even more stringent than in the preceding case. Consequently, if the thing lent were lost or injured, however the loss was brought about, the borrower was justly called upon to make it good. The only exception was, when the lender was still in charge of what he lent, present with it, and able to keep guard over it.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Two Further Commandments ( Exo 22:14-17 ).
Both these verses begin with ‘and if’, differentiating them from the previous section. They deal with borrowing and enticement and stand on their own.
Borrowing From A Neighbour and The Enticement of a Virgin ( Exo 22:14-17 )
These two examples go together because the first deals with borrowing a beast, the second with ‘borrowing’ a daughter.
a If a man borrows some beast from his neighbour and is unable to restore it in its proper condition, he must make restitution (Exo 22:14).
b If its owner is with it or of it is hired he need not make it good, for the owner must accept responsibility for caring for what is his, and the cost of hire takes into account the risks of loss.
b If a man entice a virgin who is not betrothed and lie with her (and thus ‘borrows’ her without permission, he shall surely pay a dowry for her to be his wife. She shall be recompensed and treated as though her father had agreed to it, the appropriate dowry being paid.
a If her father utterly refuse to give her to him he shall pay silver according to the dowry of virgins. In other words he must make full restitution for what the father has lost.
Note that in ‘a’ restitution is made for loss, and the same is true in the parallel. In ‘b’ there is a contrast, for in the first ‘b’ the borrowing is by agreement whereas in the second it is not. In the second case the father was neither there nor ‘hired’ her out. Thus in the first case the loss must be borne, in the second the woman has to be taken into account and must be made an honest woman.
Exo 22:14-15
“And if a man borrow anything from his neighbour, and if it is hurt or dies its owner not being with it, he shall surely make restitution. If its owner is with it he shall not make it good. If it is a hired thing it is reckoned in its hire.”
In the case of borrowing restitution must be made for loss unless it was lost while the owner was in charge of it. But in the case of hire it is assumed that the insurance against loss is included in the hire so that no restitution is required.
Exo 22:16
“And if a man entice a virgin who is not betrothed and lie with her, he shall surely pay a dowry for her to be his wife. And if her father utterly refuse to give her to him he shall pay silver according to the dowry of virgins.”
The unmarried daughter is seen as totally subject to her father, who takes responsibility for her welfare. If the man is seen as suitable he pays the dowry price and marries her. He seemingly has no choice in the matter. By his act he has basically chosen to marry her. But if the father objects then the man still has to pay the marriage dowry because the father will now have difficulty in marrying his daughter to someone else and thus loses the benefit of the marriage dowry.
The marriage dowry is mentioned only in Gen 34:12 and 1Sa 18:25 but was well known elsewhere. It was paid to the father at the time of betrothal.
In the case of rape the dowry is later fixed at fifty shekels of silver and the man must marry her and cannot ever divorce her (Deu 22:28-29). Where the virgin is betrothed the penalty is death (Deu 22:23-27).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
EXPOSITION
LAW OF BORROWING.The act of borrowing is connected with that of depositing, since in both cases, the property of one man is committed to the hands of another; only, in the one case, it is at the instance and for the benefit of the man into whose hands the property passes; in the other case, it is at the instance and for the benefit of the other party. This difference causes a difference of obligation. The borrower, having borrowed solely for his own advantage, must take all the risks, and in any case return the thing borrowed, or its value, unless the owner was still, in some sort, in charge of his own property. Things hired are not, however, to be regarded as borrowed. If harm come to them, the owner must suffer the loss.
Exo 22:14
And it be hurt or die.The thing borrowed might be animate or inanimate; either might be “hurt;” the former might not only be hurt, but “die.” Whatever the damage, and whatever the cause, unless in the single rare case of the owner being in charge, the law required the borrower to make good the loss to the owner. This law must have acted as a considerable check upon borrowing.
Exo 22:15
If the owner thereof be with it.By “with it,” we must understand, not merely present, but in charge of it, or at any rate so near it that he might have prevented the damage, had prevention been possible. If it be an hired thing.If anything were paid for the use of the thing, then it was not borrowed, but hired; and the owner was considered to have counted in the risk of loss or damage in fixing the amount of the hire. He was entitled therefore to no compensation Our own law does not rule this absolutely, but takes into consideration the proportion of the sum paid for hire to the value of the thing hired, and the general tacit understanding.
HOMILETICS
Exo 22:14
The duty of borrowers.
The duty of borrowers is very simple. It is to take care that that which they borrow suffers as little hurt as possible while it remains in their possession, and to return it unhurt, or else make compensation to the lender. People will not often be found to question the propriety of these rules; but in action there are not very many who conform to them. It is a common thing to take but little care of what we have borrowed; to keep it an unconscionable time; to neglect returning it until the lender has asked for it repeatedly; to keep it without scruple, if he does not happen to ask for it. Curiously enough, there are particular thingse.g; umbrellas and books, which it is supposed not to be necessary to return, and which borrowers are in the habit of withholding. Many go further, and feel under no obligation to repay even money which they have borrowed. All such conduct is, however, culpable, since it is tainted with dishonesty. Borrowers should remember
I. THAT THEY FAIL IN THEIR DUTY TO THEMSELVES IF THEY DO NOT RESTORE WHAT THEY HAVE BORROWED. Self-respect should prevent them from a line of conduct which assimilates them to thieves, and is wanting in the boldness and straightforwardness that characterise ordinary thieves.
II. THAT THEY FAIL EGREGIOUSLY IN THEIR DUTY TO THE LENDER, who has put them under a special obligation to him.
III. THAT THEY FAIL IN THEIR DUTY TO MANKIND AT LARGE, since they do their best to deter men from ever lending, and so place difficulties in the way of borrowers. We all need to borrow at times.
IV. THAT THEY FAIL IN THEIR DUTY TO GOD, who has declared in his word, that it is “the wicked” who “borroweth and payeth not again” (Psa 37:21).
HOMILIES BY J. ORR
Exo 22:1-16
Restitution.
We have to mark again in this chapter with how even a hand the law of Moses holds the scales of justice. The cases ruled by the principle of restitution are the following:
I. THEFT (Exo 22:1-5). The illustrations in the law relate to thefts of cattle. But the principles embodied apply to thefts generally (cf. Exo 22:7). Note
1. The law which punishes the theft, protects the thief’s life. It refuses, indeed, to be responsible for him in the event of his being smitten in the night-time, while engaged in the act of housebreaking (Exo 22:2)large rights of self-defence being in this case necessary for the protection of the community. The thief might be killed under a misapprehension of his purpose; or by a blow struck at random in the darkness, and under the influence of panic; or in justifiable self-defence, in a scuffle arising from the attempt to detain him. In other circumstances, the law will not allow the thief’s life to be taken (Exo 22:3). All the ends of justice are served by his being compelled to make restitution. Blood is not to be spilt needlessly. The killing of a thief after sunrise is to be dealt with as murder. We infer from this that theft ought not to be made a capital offence. English law, at the beginning of this century, was, in this respect, far behind the law of Moses.
2. Theft is to be dealt with on the principle of restitution.
(1) It calls for more than simple restitution. At most the restitution of the simple equivalent brings matters back to the position in which they were before the criminal act was committed. That position ought never to have been disturbed; and punishment is still due to the wrongdoer for having disturbed it. Hence the law that if the stolen animal is found in the thief’s hand alive, he shall restore double (Exo 22:4); if he has gone the length of killing or selling it, he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep (Exo 22:1).
(2) Penalty is proportioned to offence. Both as respects the value of the things stolen, and as respects the lengths to which criminality has proceeded.
3. If direct restitution is impossible, the thief shall be compelled to make restitution by his labour”He shall be sold for his theft” (Exo 22:3). It would be an improvement in the administration of justice if this principle were more frequently acted on. The imprisoned thief might be made to work out an equivalent for his theft; and this, in addition to the hardships of his imprisonment, might be accepted as legal restitution.
II. DAMAGE (Exo 22:5, Exo 22:6). The damage done, in the one case to a field or vineyard, by allowing a beast to stray into it, and feed upon the produce; in the other, by setting fire to thorn hedges, and injuring the corn-stacks, or standing corn, is supposed to be unintentional. Yet, as arising from preventible causesfrom carelessness and neglectthe owner of the beast, or the person who kindled the fire, is held responsible. He must make good the damage from the best of his own possessions. We are held fully responsible for the consequences of neglect (cf. Heb 2:3).
III. DISHONEST RETENTION OF PROPERTY (Exo 22:7-14). Cases of this kind involved judicial investigation.
1. If the charge of dishonest retention was made out, the fraudulent party was to restore double (Exo 22:9).
2. If an ox, ass, sheep, or any beast, entrusted. to another to keep, died, was hurt, or was driven away, “no man seeing it,” the person responsible for its safety could clear himself by an oath from the suspicion of having unlawfully “put his hand” to it (Exo 22:11). In this case, he was not required to make good the loss.
3. If, however, the animal was stolen from his premises, under circumstances which implied a want of proper care, he was required to make restitution (Exo 22:12).
4. If the animal was alleged to have been torn to pieces, the trustee was required to prove this by producing the mangled remains (Exo 22:13).
IV. Loss OF WHAT IS BORROWED (Exo 22:14, Exo 22:15).
1. If the owner is not with his property, the borrower is bound to make good loss by injury or death.
2. If the owner is with it, the borrower is not held responsible.
3. If the article or beast be lent on hire, the hire is regarded as covering the risk.J.O.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Exo 22:14 And if a man borrow [ought] of his neighbour, and it be hurt, or die, the owner thereof [being] not with it, he shall surely make [it] good.
Ver. 14. And if a man borrow. ] God hath so ordered human condition, that one man must be beholden to another.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
borrow: Deu 15:2, Deu 23:19, Deu 23:20, Neh 5:4, Psa 37:21, Mat 5:42, Luk 6:35
make it good: Exo 22:11, Exo 21:34, Lev 24:18
Reciprocal: 2Ki 6:5 – for it was borrowed
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Exo 22:14-15. If a man (suppose) lent his team to his neighbour, if the owner were with it, or were to receive profit for the loan of it, whatever harm befell the cattle the owner must stand to the loss of it; but if the owner were so kind to the borrower as to lend it him gratis, and put such a confidence in him as to trust it from under his own eye, then, if any harm happened, the borrower must make it good. We may learn hence to be very careful not to abuse any thing that is lent to us; it is not only unjust, but base and disingenuous: we should much rather choose to lose ourselves, than that any should sustain loss by their kindness to us.