A Visit to the Vatican, an old sin revisited.

[45Auto]

Several years ago, while visiting Rome, Italy, I was given an interesting tip: Exchange your money at the Vatican Bank in the Vatican City. The way it was explained to me is that usury is a sin and so the Vatican Bank will not gouge you like they do other places. In fact the exchange of my U.S. Dollars for Euros was without charge!

The point of telling you about my experience is not to tell you the best place to exchange money when in Italy, it's about an old sin that's still on the books

About this old sin. Is usury a quant old relic or is there something to learn here? From a U.S. legal standpoint, I know what usury is. From a moral standpoint, I THINK I understand it. Anyway, I went online and it appears that some folks consider usury to be a rather horrible sin:

http://www.giveshare.org/BibleStudy/050.usury.html

What do you think?

[Alpo]

Usury is generally considered to be huge amounts of interest. You may or may not consider that sinful.

But just plain interest on a loan? Interest is rent.

You need a lawn mower. I could loan you mine. Or you could go down to Rent a Center and use theirs. They charge you rent.

You need a place to live. I could let you move into my spare room. Or you could go over to the Room's to Let Apartment building and live there. They charge you rent.

You need 500 dollars. I could let you have it, or you could go down to the bank and get it from them. They charge you rent on the money.

Is it sinful or immoral for me to charge you rent to live in my house? Is it sinful or immoral for me to charge you rent to use something I own? If not, then why would it be sinful or immoral for me to charge you rent on the use of my money?

If I have an extra 500 dollars, I can spend it on me or my family, or I could invest it and hope to make some money off it, or I could just tuck it away in a sock, in case of emergencies.

But I don't. I loan it to you.

When my kids wants to go to the ball game I can't take him. I don't have the money. I loaned it to you.

When my wife wants a new dress, she can't have one. We don't have the money. I loaned it to you.

When the car breaks, we can't get it fixed. We don't have the money to pay the mechanic. I loaned it to you.

But you think it is wrong to pay me rent on the use of my money?

[ampaterry]

My opinion on it is based on these passages:

Deuteronomy 23:19-20 (KJV);
Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury: Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it.

Exodus 22:25 (NKJV);
"If you lend money to any of My people who are poor among you, you shall not be like a moneylender to him; you shall not charge him interest.

The Dueteronomy passage says not to charge usury to your brother.
The Exodus passage says not to charge interest (usury in KJV) to the poor among "my people".
That indictes to me that the "brother" in the first passage does not mean fellow believers, since the second passage only prohibits charging it to the POOR among fellow believers, so I take "brother" to mean close relatives.

So you should not charge a close relative interest, nor should you charge interest to someone who is destitute.

I have heard Dave Ramsey take it even further; If a close relative is in need, and you have the means to relieve him, don't LEND him money, just GIVE it to him.

Loans between relatives are a problem in most cases, and adding interest to them does nothing to improve the situation.

Now, that being said, on the two occasions that Judy and I have borrowed money from our parents (two disasters in our lives), we INSISTED on paying them interest.

[lonewolf204]

Terry, Thats a good explanation!

[45Auto]

Ok, so according to Exodus 22:25 (New King James Versian); If one of God's people becomes poor then interst on their credit cards and mortgage debt should be waved and only the principle collected. This is exactly the opposite of what major lenders do to people in financial trouble.

Whether we are all God's people is subject to debate in some circles. However, it appears that predatory lending is often, if not always, a sin against the will of God.

[ampaterry]

I agree; predatory lending is a sin -

I doubt that very many banks worry about that, though -

[carver]

Originally Posted by ampaterry

My opinion on it is based on these passages:

Deuteronomy 23:19-20 (KJV);
Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury: Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it.

Exodus 22:25 (NKJV);
"If you lend money to any of My people who are poor among you, you shall not be like a moneylender to him; you shall not charge him interest.

The Dueteronomy passage says not to charge usury to your brother.
The Exodus passage says not to charge interest (usury in KJV) to the poor among "my people".
That indictes to me that the "brother" in the first passage does not mean fellow believers, since the second passage only prohibits charging it to the POOR among fellow believers, so I take "brother" to mean close relatives.

So you should not charge a close relative interest, nor should you charge interest to someone who is destitute.

I have heard Dave Ramsey take it even further; If a close relative is in need, and you have the means to relieve him, don't LEND him money, just GIVE it to him.

Loans between relatives are a problem in most cases, and adding interest to them does nothing to improve the situation.

Now, that being said, on the two occasions that Judy and I have borrowed money from our parents (two disasters in our lives), we INSISTED on paying them interest.

+1 I never lend money! If I have it, and you need it, then I will give it to you. You don't have to pay me back! If you choose to do so, well and good. If you promise to pay it back, and don't, then you lied! I'm still in the clear with you because I gave you the money!

[Jim K]

Those Biblical passages resulted, almost directly, in some of the greatest tragedies of Europe, and some was the result of a mistranslation and misunderstanding of the word "usury." Following the Biblical injunction against "usury", the Church considered it a sin for Christians (which at that time meant Catholics) to loan money for interest. But Jews, of course, were not Christians, so the Church's rules did not apply to them, and they loaned money to individuals, businesses and governments (kings). The latter loans were trouble because a king, unable to pay his debts, simply had the Jews killed or expelled from the kingdom. That, of course, was accompanied by officially sanctioned "hate campaigns" against the Jews, and the ultimate result was the Holocaust. (Hitler did not invent hatred of the Jews, he simply brought centuries of hatred to its logical and brutal conclusion, and not only in Germany, but in Poland, the Balkans, and "ultra-civilized" France as well.)

Interestingly, non-Jewish Italian bankers, in the very heart of Catholicism, seem to have loaned money for interest with no religious restraints. The Italians are known for being practical people and not given to excess; they are also known as practitioners of the kickback, so maybe that is how the Church got some of its money.

(I am, for what it is worth, a Catholic, and learned Church history at a Catholic university.)

Jim

[45Auto]

I am sad to say that in our times, sins involving greed, avarice, taking advantage of the unfortunate, etc, etc, are ignored or downplayed to insignificance.

[Bobitis]

Originally Posted by 45Auto

I am sad to say that in our times, sins involving greed, avarice, taking advantage of the unfortunate, etc, etc, are ignored or downplayed to insignificance.

And now days, the poor, downtrodden, and unfortunate, are feeding off the system. So who are the unfortunate now? The users, or the contributors?

Pot meet kettle.

Welcome to class warfare. Brought to you by the rich and the poor. The middle class need not apply. You are slaves to all the rest.

[ampaterry]

Bob, you are right.
Although we have many species on the Endangered list, Leeches are in no danger whatsoever of extinction.

I'm not sure I would call them downtrodden and unfortunate though, since MOST are there by choice. My wife worked for years in a mission down in the public housing area, so saying MOST is based upon solid evidence.

That housing was declared to be in a flood zone, so they made plans to move it to another area. A series of public meetings was held regarding that move, and we attended several of them. The spokesman for the residents was a gal in her 20's who gave the appearance of having a decent education. In one of her presentations she mentioned that she had a Bachelors degree. Someone asked her why she was living in public housing and on welfare instead of using her degree to get a job.
She replied that her job was being a full time mother to her son, and when he was grown she would seek work.
I thought that was considerate of her, only planning on being in the public slop trough for 20 years or so - -

oops -
Thread drift alert - - - -

Sorry -

[carver]

Romans 13:8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

I think there is another part of the problem, and that is the debt we are willing to aquire, with interest. It's not just our Government, I believe that these men, and women who run our Country are a reflection of the Nation that they Govern. You simply can't charge a man interest that doesn't owe you money!

[45Auto]

Contempt for the poor does not explain why it's acceptable for lenders to take advantage of middle class Americans with shady lending practices, hidden fees, and jacked up interest charges when someone become sick and laid off from work.

When an American becomes seriously ill he will often loose his job. Health insurance companys have many ways to limit or even cancel coverage. The family will soon deplete savings and go into debt.

After working for 12 years in a hospital finance dept. and 20 years in law I have seen the consequences of corporate avarice. The real death panels are run by large health insurance companies.

[tcox4freedom]

Originally Posted by carver

+1 I never lend money! If I have it, and you need it, then I will give it to you. You don't have to pay me back! If you choose to do so, well and good. If you promise to pay it back, and don't, then you lied! I'm still in the clear with you because I gave you the money!

That's exactly the way I feel as well. If I can afford to, I give it away; I don't lend.

This attitude will save hurt feelings on my part and possibly a relationship. If the person I give money to decides to pay me back, then he will be "blessed". If not, there are no hurt feelings on my part.


However, giving to others (out of my need), has sometimes led to financial struggles of my own. So, I thankful that God has given me wisdom and disernment in more recent years.

-

[HunterAlpha1]

Proverbs 22:7
"The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender."

there are few instances in which you MUST go into debt. sell your house and live at a campground, sell a car, your boat, your mahogany dining room set, your fine china, etc. unless you want to call some greedy money grubber wearing a fancy suit sitting in an air conditioned office your master you should not for any reason borrow money from a bank. and if you have, you must do whatever you have to to get out of debt. tighten your belt, cut off your cable and DSL and cancel that trip to Vegas. but no matter how deeply you're in debt, you CAN get out and have financial freedom!

[ampaterry]

Right on, HunterAlpha1!!
It's called living BELOW your means, and is a very unique concept in todays world.

Now if we could just get GOVERNMENT to follow that advice - -

[carver]

Originally Posted by 45Auto

Contempt for the poor does not explain why it's acceptable for lenders to take advantage of middle class Americans with shady lending practices, hidden fees, and jacked up interest charges when someone become sick and laid off from work.

When an American becomes seriously ill he will often loose his job. Health insurance companys have many ways to limit or even cancel coverage. The family will soon deplete savings and go into debt.

After working for 12 years in a hospital finance dept. and 20 years in law I have seen the consequences of corporate avarice. The real death panels are run by large health insurance companies.

I agree, but I think there is more to the equation. I don't think it's contempt for the poor that is acceptable. The way I see it is more of an example of man's fallen nature. We have the ability to cheat, lie, steal, and just take advantage of any situation involving our fellow man, and it's the greed, and avarice, that drive the banks, and other lending institutions. It's just who we are! We also have the ability to be honest in our dealings with our fellows. An honest man would not take advantage of his fellow man, but a dishonest man will find a way to cheat, and steel, from his brother at any opportunity!