Deposit

Holman Bible Dictionary

Matthew 25:27 Exodus 22:7 Exodus 22:7-13 Leviticus 6:2-7

Vine's Expository Dictionary of NT Words

       Commit

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

dē̇ -poz´it ( παραθήκη , parathḗkē , 1 Timothy 6:20; 2 Timothy 1:12 , 2 Timothy 1:14 the Revised Version, margin, paraphrased in both the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) into "that which is committed" (see Commend )): The noun was used in the classical Greek, just as its English equivalents, for "that which is placed with another for safe keeping," a charge committed to another's hands, consisting often of money or property; compare Exodus 22:7; Leviticus 6:2 . This practice was common in days when there were no banks. (1) In 1 Timothy 6:20; also 2 Timothy 1:14 , the reference is to a deposit which God makes with man, and for which man is to give a reckoning. The context shows that this deposit is the Christian faith, "the pattern of sound words" ( 2 Timothy 1:13 ), that which is contrasted with the "oppositions of the knowledge which is falsely so called" ( 1 Timothy 6:20 ). "Keep the talent of the Christian faith safe and undiminished" (Vincentius Lirenensis). (2) In 2 Timothy 1:12 , the deposit is one which man makes with God. The key to the meaning of this expression is found probably in Psalm 31:5 : "Into thy hand I commend my spirit: Thou hast redeemed me," i.e. "All that I am, with all my interests, have been entrusted to Thy safe keeping, and, therefore, I have no anxieties with respect to the future. The day of reckoning, 'that day,' will show how faithful are the hands that hold this trust."

Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature

( פַּקָּדוֹן, pikkadon', something placed in trust; "store," Genesis 41:36; "delivered," Leviticus 6:2; Leviticus 6:4; Sept. παραθήκη [so in 2 Timothy 1, 12], or παρακαταθήκη [see Grinfield, N.T. Hellenisticum, p. 1146]; Vulg. depositum). The arrangement by which one man kept at another's request the property of the latter until demanded back ( Exodus 22:7), was one common to all the nations of antiquity (Sir W. Jones, Law of Bailments, in his Works, 8:448); and the dishonest dealing with such trusts is marked by profane writers with extreme reprobation (Herod. 6:86; Juvenal, 13:199, etc.; Joseph. Ant. 4:8, 38; War, 4:8, 5, 7), a view which is likewise taken by Clemens Alex. (Strom. 6:749), Chrysostom (Orat. lxiv, p. 640), and others (see Rawlinson, Herod. 4:477, note). Even our Savior seems ( Luke 16:12) to allude to conduct in such cases as a test of honesty. In later times, when no banking system was as yet devised, shrines were often used for the custody of treasure ( 2 Maccabees 3:10; 2 Maccabees 3:12; 2 Maccabees 3:15; Xenoph. Anab. v. 3, 7; Cicero, Legy. 2:16; Plutarch, Lys. c. 18). Among an agricultural people, the exigencies of war and other causes of absence must often have rendered a temporary deposit, especially as regards animals, an owner's only course of safety. (See Trespass).

Nor was the custody of such property burdensome, for the use of it was no doubt, so far as that was consistent with its unimpaired restoration, allowed to the depository, which office also no one was compelled to accept. The articles specified by the Mosaic law are, (1) "money or stuff;" and (2) "an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast." The first case was viewed as only liable to loss by theft (probably for loss by accidental fire, etc. no compensation could be claimed), and the thief, if found, was to pay double, i.e. probably to compensate the owner's loss, and the unjust suspicion thrown on the depositary (comp. Goschen, Vorles. ib. Civilrecht, II, 2:315). If no theft could be proved, the depositary was to swear before the judges that he had not appropriated the article, and then was quit (comp. Schweppe, Romans Privatrecht, p. 373). In the second, if the beast were to "die, or be hurt, or driven away, no man seeing it" — accidents to which beasts at pasture were easily liable (comp. שָׁבָה, 1 Chronicles 5:21) — the depositary was to purge himself by a similar oath. (Such oaths are probably alluded to in Hebrews 6:16, as "an end of all strife"). In case, however, the animal were stolen, the depositary was liable to restitution, which probably was necessary to prevent collusive theft (Kalisch, Exod. p. 419). (See Damages).

If it were torn by a wild beast, some proof was easily producible, and, in that case, no restitution was due ( Exodus 22:7-13). The Jewish commentators make various distinctions on this enactment (see Rosenm ü ller, in loc.). In case of a false oath so taken, the perjured person, besides making restitution, was to "add the fifth part more thereto," to compensate the one injured, and to "bring a ram for a trespass-offering unto the Lord" ( Leviticus 6:5-6). In the book of Tobit (5:3) a written acknowledgment of a deposit is mentioned (i. 14 [17]; 4:20 [21]). This, however, merely facilitated the proof of the fact of the original deposit, leaving the law untouched. The Mishna ( Baba Mezia, c. 3; Shebuoth, v. 1) shows that the law of the oath of purgation in such cases continued in force among the later Jews (Michaelis, Mos. Recht, ch. 162). See Smith's Dict. of Class. Antiq. s.v. Depositum. The Roman law of deposit is stated in Justinian's Institutes, 3, tit. 14:3; comp. iv, tit. 6:17, 23. (See Sandars, p. 429, 540, 543; Vinnius, p. 815, 819.) A deposit, in Athenian law, was likewise called παρσκαταθήκη (Demosthenes, pro Photm. Orator. Attic. Bekker, Oxon. 6:1042). Comp. the Λόγος τραπεζιτικός of Isocrates ( Or. Attici, Bekker, Oxon. 2:515-533) (See Pledge).