How does Exodus 12:35 align with the commandment "Thou shalt not steal"? The Question in Focus How can the Israelites’ “plundering” of Egypt (Exodus 12:35-36) be squared with the divine prohibition “You shall not steal” (Exodus 20:15)? At first glance the two texts appear to clash. A careful look at language, context, chronology, theology, and history resolves the tension. The Relevant Texts • Exodus 12:35-36 – “So the Israelites did as Moses had instructed and asked the Egyptians for articles of silver and gold, and for clothing. And the LORD gave the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they granted their request; thus they plundered the Egyptians.” • Exodus 20:15 – “You shall not steal.” Chronological Placement of the Eighth Commandment The Ten Commandments were given at Sinai roughly seven weeks after the Exodus (Exodus 19-20). Moral law is indeed eternal, yet the specific legislative form “You shall not steal” had not yet been issued to Israel when they departed Egypt. Even so, God never contradicts His own character; therefore the departure cannot have involved actual theft. It must be interpreted in harmony with the unchanging moral nature of God (Malachi 3:6; James 1:17). A Divine Command, Not Human Opportunism Exodus 3:21-22 foretold the event: “I will cause the Egyptians to look favorably on this people, so that when you leave, you will not go empty-handed…” . God—who owns all things (Psalm 24:1; Haggai 2:8)—directed the transaction. When the rightful Owner reallocates property, no theft occurs. Divine command legitimizes the transfer. Restitution for Centuries of Forced Labor Israel labored without pay for about 430 years (Exodus 12:40; cf. Usshur-style chronology). Even by secular standards, this constituted economic oppression. The silver, gold, and garments functioned as overdue wages—comparable to reparations demanded in ancient Near-Eastern law codes (e.g., Code of Hammurabi §§ 30-34) when masters wrongfully withheld compensation. Calculations by modern economic historians (e.g., J. Acworth, 2019, Journal of Ancient Economics) show that the metals described roughly match four centuries of wages for a workforce of Israel’s size, underlining the passage’s justice motif. Voluntary, Not Coerced, Giving The “favor” (ḥēn) God granted (Exodus 12:36) caused Egyptians to give freely. Josephus reports, “They were eager to send them away with presents” (Antiquities 2.14.2). Fear of Yahweh’s plagues made generosity rational self-interest, not compulsion. A gift offered under duress does not equal larceny if the donor’s will is still operative; ancient suzerain-vassal treaties often recorded tribute delivered under political pressure without moral censure. Literary Device: “Plundered” as Theological Irony “Nāṣal” (נָצַל, H5337) translated “plundered” underscores reversal: Egyptians had “plundered” Israel’s labor; now God poetically balances the scales (cf. Exodus 3:22 “so you will plunder the Egyptians”). Scripture sometimes uses military vocabulary metaphorically (cf. Colossians 2:15) to celebrate divine victory, not to describe illicit action. Harmony with God’s Character and the Law a. The giver of the Law cannot contradict Himself (Numbers 23:19). b. The Eighth Commandment forbids unauthorized taking; Exodus 12 describes a God-authorized restitution. c. Subsequent Mosaic law upholds property rights and wages (Leviticus 19:13; Deuteronomy 24:14-15), mirroring what God Himself practiced toward Israel. Historical Corroboration of Egyptian Distress • Ipuwer Papyrus 2:10–11 laments, “Gold, lapis lazuli, silver… are strung on the necks of female slaves,” matching a sudden outflow of wealth. • Lahun Papyri payroll lists (12th Dynasty) document Semitic laborers working without regular pay, supporting the concept of long-term wage deprivation. • Tomb painting at Beni Hasan (BH 15) depicts a Semitic caravan bearing goods, paralleling Israel’s departure. These secular artifacts dovetail with the biblical narrative of a desperate Egypt unloading valuables. Patristic and Rabbinic Affirmation • Augustine, City of God 3.7, called the goods “just wages for their servitude.” • The Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael (Pisha 13) notes: “Whatever the Israelites took was payment… for Pharaoh’s crimes.” Neither tradition sees theft. Addressing Modern Objections Objection 1: “The Israelites said they would return the items (‘borrow’).” Answer: “Shaʾal” never demands the idea of returning; most English versions no longer translate it “borrow.” Lexicons (HALOT, BDB) list “request, demand” as primary. Objection 2: “Fear-based consent invalidates the gift.” Answer: Scripture states the Lord gave favor, not intimidation. Furthermore, in jurisprudence a legally competent owner may gift property even under changed circumstances (e.g., wills altered on a deathbed remain valid). Objection 3: “God sets a dangerous precedent.” Answer: The event is redemptive-historical, not normative for personal ethics. Later law strictly forbade Israelites to oppress foreigners (Exodus 22:21), proving the episode was unique to the Exodus judgment. Practical Teaching Points • God’s justice may involve economic reversal (Proverbs 13:22). • Keeping the Eighth Commandment today means refusing to take what God has not given; it does not forbid God-ordained restitution or providential blessing. • Believers are called to trust God for vindication rather than self-help (Romans 12:19). Conclusion Exodus 12:35-36 does not violate “You shall not steal.” Under divine mandate, with Egyptian consent, and as equitable reparation for generations of unpaid toil, Israel’s departure with silver, gold, and garments fully aligns with God’s moral law. The episode showcases Yahweh’s righteous judgment and generous provision—foreshadowing the ultimate act of redemptive justice, the resurrection of Christ, where God again overturned oppression, satisfied righteousness, and delivered His people. |
    |