Exodus 22:1 kjv

If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.

Exodus 22:1 nkjv

"If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and slaughters it or sells it, he shall restore five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep.

Exodus 22:1 niv

"Whoever steals an ox or a sheep and slaughters it or sells it must pay back five head of cattle for the ox and four sheep for the sheep.

Exodus 22:1 esv

"If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and kills it or sells it, he shall repay five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.

Exodus 22:1 nlt

"If someone steals an ox or sheep and then kills or sells it, the thief must pay back five oxen for each ox stolen, and four sheep for each sheep stolen.

Exodus 22 verses

Exodus 22 1 Meaning

The verse delineates a specific legal requirement for the restitution of stolen livestock, particularly when the animal, be it an ox or a sheep, has been either slaughtered by the thief or sold, making its direct return to the owner impossible. In such cases of irrecoverable loss, the law demands a severe punitive restitution: five oxen for a stolen ox, and four sheep for a stolen sheep. This elevated penalty aims to powerfully deter such significant economic crimes and ensure comprehensive restoration and compensation for the victim.

Exodus 22 1 Context

This verse belongs to the "Book of the Covenant" (Exo 20:22-23:33), which serves as a detailed practical application of the broader moral principles established by the Ten Commandments. It immediately follows the divine pronouncement of the Ten Commandments, offering specific legal statutes that governed various aspects of daily life, particularly property, personal injury, and social relations within the covenant community of Israel.

Historically, the protection of livestock was paramount in an agrarian society like ancient Israel. Oxen were invaluable for plowing fields and transportation, representing a family's primary means of production and labor. Sheep were vital for sustenance, providing meat, milk, and wool. Thus, theft of these animals was not merely a loss of property but a direct assault on a family's livelihood and economic stability. These laws, therefore, provided strong legal frameworks to deter such offenses and ensure a just society under God's rule, contrasting in their restorative emphasis with some of the harsher, retributive punishments found in other contemporary Ancient Near Eastern law codes.

Exodus 22 1 Word analysis

• If a man: Hebrew: ’îsh (אִישׁ), a generic term for "man" or "male individual." This introductory phrase establishes the conditional nature of the law, indicating it applies generally to any person within the community, making the legal statute universally applicable.
• steals: Hebrew: gānab (גָּנַב). This term denotes taking something clandestinely, by stealth, and without permission or the use of overt force. It specifically distinguishes theft from robbery (which involves violence), emphasizing the illicit and surreptitious nature of the act.
• an ox: Hebrew: shōr (שׁוֹר). Refers specifically to a male bovine, cattle, or an ox used for work. Oxen held significant economic importance as draft animals essential for plowing fields and transporting goods, making their loss particularly impactful to an agricultural family.
• or a sheep: Hebrew: seh (שֶׂה). A general term for a small animal of a flock, encompassing both sheep and goats. These animals were crucial for their meat, milk, and wool, contributing significantly to a family's daily sustenance and wealth. The inclusion of both an ox and a sheep covers the main forms of essential livestock.
• and kills it: This specific action signifies the physical destruction or slaughter of the stolen animal, making it irretrievable to its rightful owner. This permanent loss, whether for consumption or disposal, necessitates a higher degree of restitution than if the animal were merely held alive.
• or sells it: This alternative scenario also results in the irrevocable loss of the original animal for the owner, as it has been transferred to another party. Both "kills it" and "sells it" highlight the thief's deliberate intent to completely deprive the owner of the stolen property, elevating the offense to warrant a more severe penalty.
• he shall restore: Hebrew: yāshab (יָשַׁב), a legal term meaning to repay, replace, or make restitution. This emphasizes the primary aim of the law: to rectify the wrong committed by ensuring the victim's loss is compensated.
• five oxen for an ox: This stipulates a fivefold restitution. Such a high penalty goes beyond mere market value, serving as a powerful deterrent. It also likely accounts for the comprehensive loss to the owner, including not only the animal itself but also its lost productive labor (e.g., plowing capability) and potential offspring, reflecting the immense economic significance of an ox.
• and four sheep for a sheep: This dictates a fourfold restitution. While slightly less than for an ox, it is still a substantial punitive measure. It recognizes the economic value of sheep for their produce (meat, wool, milk) and their breeding potential. The precise ratios (5:1 vs. 4:1) may reflect the relative long-term economic utility or market value placed on cattle versus sheep in Israelite society, or the degree of ease in concealing the theft.

Words-group analysis

• "If a man steals an ox or a sheep": This clause sets the premise of the legal situation, clearly defining the criminal act (theft, as a surreptitious taking) and specifying the high-value property items—oxen and sheep—that are the subject of the offense. It immediately signals that the ensuing law pertains to a significant economic crime within the Israelite agricultural context.
• "and kills it or sells it": This crucial qualifying phrase identifies the specific circumstances under which the maximum penalty applies. It highlights that the complete and irreversible deprivation of the stolen animal from its owner, through destruction or illicit sale, escalates the offense from mere possession of stolen goods to a permanent and total loss. This distinction is key to understanding the severity of the prescribed restitution.
• "he shall restore five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep": This concluding phrase details the exceptionally severe restitution required. The use of a fivefold and fourfold penalty (rather than a simple return or double compensation) emphasizes the gravity of the permanent loss inflicted upon the victim, serving not only as compensatory justice but also as a significant deterrent. It showcases God’s demand for a comprehensive form of justice that strongly discourages property crimes essential for maintaining social and economic order.

Exodus 22 1 Bonus section

• Chapter and Verse Numbering Discrepancy: The specific verse analyzed ("If a man steals an ox or a sheep...") is found as Exodus 21:37 in the Masoretic Text (the standard Hebrew Bible) and many English translations (e.g., NASB, NKJV, NLT). However, several widely used English translations, including the King James Version (KJV), New International Version (NIV), and English Standard Version (ESV), include this verse as the first verse of Exodus chapter 22 (Exodus 22:1). This difference is purely a matter of scribal and translational tradition regarding chapter breaks and does not alter the divine text or its meaning.
• Significance of 5x vs. 4x Restitution: While not explicitly stated in the text, scholars commonly interpret the difference in the restitution multiplier (fivefold for an ox versus fourfold for a sheep) as reflecting the differing economic values and utility of these animals. An ox was arguably more vital to a household's long-term agricultural output (plowing, transport, breeding) than a sheep, which provided wool, meat, and milk. Therefore, the loss of an ox represented a greater sustained economic detriment, justifying the slightly higher punitive compensation.
• Distinction from "Double" Restitution: This law for "killed or sold" items differs from the general law of double restitution (Exo 22:4) which applied when a stolen animal was found alive in the thief's possession. The higher penalty for items killed or sold emphasizes the increased severity of the crime when the owner suffers an absolute and irrecoverable loss, demanding stronger deterrence and compensation.
• Deterrence over Corporal Punishment: The Mosaic Law, exemplified by this verse, often preferred significant economic restitution for property crimes rather than corporal punishment (like flogging or mutilation) or capital punishment, which were sometimes applied for theft in other Ancient Near Eastern law codes. This distinct approach reflects God's value for human life even when property crimes are committed, prioritizing restoration and deterrent fines over physical harm to the offender.

Exodus 22 1 Commentary

Exodus 22:1 (often rendered as 21:37 in some Bibles) stands as a testament to God's profound commitment to justice, righteousness, and the protection of private property within His covenant community. As part of the Book of the Covenant, it translates broad ethical commands, like "You shall not steal," into precise legal statutes. The remarkably high restitution required—fivefold for an ox and fourfold for a sheep—when the stolen animal is irrecoverably lost through being killed or sold, goes far beyond simple market compensation.

This law communicates several vital principles. Firstly, it underscores the inherent value that God places on honest labor and its fruits; stealing these foundational assets (livestock) directly undermined an Israelite family's economic viability and well-being. Secondly, the severity of the penalty serves as a powerful deterrent. The aim was not just to punish, but to make the cost of such crime prohibitively high, discouraging any individual from even considering it, and promoting a societal order based on honesty and respect for others' possessions. Thirdly, it emphasizes comprehensive restoration for the victim, reflecting God's desire for the injured party to be fully compensated for their loss, and arguably even for lost potential (e.g., future calves, milk, labor of an ox). This principle moved beyond mere reciprocity, embodying a form of divine justice that was both punitive to the offender and redemptive for the wronged. The specific figures of five and four, in contrast to double restitution in other theft cases, accentuate the greater seriousness when the crime resulted in an absolute and permanent deprivation for the owner, distinguishing it from situations where the stolen goods could be recovered alive. This highlights a nuanced approach to justice within the Law of Moses.

• Practical usage examples:
  • Workplace Integrity: Understanding that defrauding an employer, partner, or client of resources or earnings should lead to more than simple repayment, potentially involving restorative actions that reflect the true cost of lost trust or opportunity.
  • Financial Accountability: In cases of financial theft or fraud, truly Christian repentance often extends beyond legal minimums to proactively make full, generous restitution that acknowledges the damage done.
  • Social Justice: Recognizing that injustices leading to a complete and permanent loss for vulnerable communities (e.g., land, resources) require extensive, systemic efforts at restitution and rebuilding far beyond the immediate value of what was taken.