>Lend a man $20,000 so he can start a business to support his family
>Because I'm giving up $20,000 for several years until he can get his business off the ground, we agree that I should be compensated for my contribution
>So he pays me $21,000 when he pays off the loan
>This is an immensely evil sin according to many religions and you deserve to burn in Hell for this
Why?
Probably because desperate dumb people often get screwed, despite all the benefits it provides
Also back then you'd become a slave instead of just bankrupt
But slavery itself isn't even considered a sin.
It's not considered a sin only if you love thy slave as thyself. It is written.
They say if you love something you should let it go lmao
What if the slave loves me back and wants to stay? For example I baptize my slaves, feed them well, and look after them. And I only sell them as family units whenever they want to leave to fellow Christians of good repute.
It is in the New Testament. Especially the idea that you can be born a slave.
Because the availability of credit destabilizes the social order.
In the absence of credit, a son will follow in his father's line of work, and can neither rise or fall in the socioeconomic hierarchy to a meaningful degree. When credit is available, people will be tempted to take out loans to start new business ventures, leading some of the poor to rapidly rise to wealth, while others who were previously well-off become bankrupted by debt.
It's only a sin if the interest rates are abusive
That wasn't the understanding for most of history.
The economic systems and circumstances were radically different. Charging interest is fine within the capitalist system because money serves purposes other than simply buying in this system. So it is morally licit to do it.
The interest rate should be moderate, however.
It hasn't changed. Even way back then there could still be profitable ventures using loans to build businesses.
Not in feudal societies in which people only had a few crops for survival
Moral theology doesn't work that way, you can't simply close cases like that. The principles remain the same, but the application of these principles to different situations will produce different outcomes. Even secular law works that way, ask any lawyer about it
Medieval society still had mines, lumber mills, trade ships, merchants, etc.
Yes it was. Christians banked all the time. The first chartered bank in human history was also Christians.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discretionary_deposit
israeli dominance only began with Rothchilds taking advantage of English peasants during the Napoleanic wars.
It's a sin if there's interest at all, even it it's 1 penny for a Billion Dollars
Why?
>My job consists of giving people OTHER PEOPLE's money
>There have to be poor people so I have customers (1)
>For me to be good at my job, I have to extract as much money as possible out of my customers (2)
>The service I provide can be provided by a rich family member, unless that rich family member has his money in MY bank (3)
That's not even counting the big stuff, once bankers do get good at their job
>Now I can lend to an entire government, and force them to make laws favoring me, the money-lender
>My job is to play with money and israeliteelry. If I don't do it, nobody else will!
>There have to be poor people so I have customers (1)
So? There has to be poor people so that you can have feudalism too.
>For me to be good at my job, I have to extract as much money as possible out of my customers (2)
That's literally every single business and even government in the world.
>The service I provide can be provided by a rich family member
An extremely snobbish position to take, not everyone has a wealthy family member.
>An extremely snobbish position to take, not everyone has a wealthy family member.
I don't have any family members, Plato
Fuck you
>That's literally every single business and even government in the world.
And you see no problem with this?
I mean I'd like it if communism could work but it doesn't have a very great track record.
>1.00 was worth one loaf of bread back then, now 1.50 is the price for one loaf.
Why?
Oy vey what do you mean I can't charge $1.50 for this bread that yesterday was $1? $1.75 is too low a price, if I charge $2 I'm barely breaking even, $2.50 is the lowest I can go, did I say $2.50 sorry goy I meant $3.00 yes you can buy 2 for $7 we are always pleased to sell (rubs hands).
Usury is not the act of lending, it's the act of charging excessively high rates for your lending.
Loan sharking is a sin. Mortages are not.
That is not the historical understanding of usury.
The New Testament never says that slavery is a sin.
People should live within their means. Borrowing money you don't have is not a good thing, enabling this homosexualry is even worse.