I posted this:
Money is a representative proxy for man's ability to reason, labor, produce and create. Money therefore is a fungible representation of human life.
Personal property is also a proxy for human capacity. Humans exchange their labor and productivity either for direct payment with other commodities, or, most commonly, for money, which they then turn into either consumable commodities OR personal property.
This is why the coveting and/or stealing of another person's personal property and/or money is specifically prohibited in Seventh and Tenth Commandments. If you steal a man's property or money, you are stealing the part of his life, labor and capacity that the property or money represents. If you covet another man's property, you are begrudging him the right to be compensated for his labor and/or creativity, and thus his sovereignty and human dignity.
Money and property are therefore interchangeable concepts.
If a person purchases a tract of land and agrees to let it to a tenant for a year, the landowner is paid for the TIME VALUE of the productivity of the land for the year in which the tenant has possession and use of the land, and the landowner necessarily surrendered by virtue of the lease.
Money has time value just as the land has time value. If a man lends another man money for a year, which is simply a different, more fungible form of property, upon returning the money to the lender after one year of possessing and using the money and reaping the productivity of the money, why shouldn't the lender be paid a fair rent on the money in exactly the same way that a landowner is paid a fair rent on his land?
To deny interest on money, which is a proxy for human capacity and productivity, is to deny that human life has any time value. To deny that human life has any time value is to deny that human life has any value at all, since all human life exists traversing through time at the precise rate of one second per second. Hence, wages are paid as a function of TIME, per hour, per month or per year. - Ann Barnhart
Me: I'll have to chew on this a while.
L.J.: Yep, good stuff and yet, God forbid the Israelites to charge one another interest.....
Me: Explain.
K.M.: Interesting perspective and yes....food for thought. As for interest - my understanding of that scripture is specific and pertains to certain loans/people lent to which, I believe, should be taken in consideration of context as well as all other passages having to do with believer-to-believer behavior. Just a thought...
M.F.: Fascinating. This makes sense with what The Lord was teaching me last year in regards to "spending" my time working for money or "spending" that same time being with my wife. I was seeing it to mean that my time is more valuable than money, for I don't get any time back if I spend it, but this shows that instead, there is so much more represented by money - a symbol of the time spent. Makes sense as to why Jesus spoke about money so much. It's required that we steward it well, for it is symbolic of the investment of our lives. Where our treasure is, so too is our heart...
L.J.: I agree, K.M.. Context is very important and the context there is very clear, "Do not charge your brother interest, whether on money or food or anything else that may earn interest. 20 You may charge a foreigner interest, but not a brother Israelite, so that the Lord your God may bless you in everything you put your hand to in the land you are entering to possess." Deuteronomy 23:19-20. It does indeed refer to a "brother" and not a foreigner. I think it still lines up contextually with New Testament revelation as well since there is much made in the new covenant about caring for one another in the Kingdom. However, on a deeper point to which Rich referred in an earlier post (see, I do read them, Rich) Compulsion to give by an outside force is not God's design, or desire. Personal responsibility born from intimate relationship is the ONLY solid basis for charity. big subject, lots of nuance, and limited venue on FB :)
Me: Translated "usury," excessive or illegally high interest.
L.J.: So, in the context of what you know about the character of God revealed in Exodus 33-34, 1 Corinthians 13, etc.,....as well as the multiple other places where God delineates just and kind treatment of the foreigner and alien, It is here in Deuteronomy that it is acceptable to charge them illegally high, excessive interest?? Hmmmm. (you know I love you man) :)
Me: Is it acceptable to charge a foreigner any amount of interest at all while charging your brother no interest? Same question, isn't it? And I love you too, dude...
L.J.: I agree..... The law is tricky whenever it gets in the mix. I love the thinking of Ann Barnhart though. Solid, logical, and pretty tough to refute in a real legitimate manner..... All theological discussion aside ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment