Usury : $b a scriptural, ethical and economic viewElliott, Calvin
Religion
Usury : $b a scriptural, ethical and economic view
Elliott, Calvin
Usury
This compromise was contrary to the divine command for their utter
destruction. To condone the guilt of these people, or to interfere
with their execution, was as flagrant a violation of law as that of a
modern community that seeks to protect criminals, or that interferes
with the execution of those convicted of capital crimes.
This class of strangers had no rights that Hebrews were permitted to
respect. They were not to be given any privileges. They were to be
treated as Hindoo widows are treated, "accursed of the gods and hated
of men." Debts were not to be forgiven them. The year of Jubilee did
not affect them. They remained enslaved forever. The Sabbath's rest
was only incidental, that there might be a complete cessation of all
activities.
In the fourth commandment Deut. 5:14, "thy stranger" is mentioned
after the ox, ass, and cattle, and was given rest for the same reason
the beasts are permitted to rest: "That thy man-servant and
maid-servant may rest as well as thou." They had not the rights of a
common servant or slave. The carcass of the animal that died of itself
could be given them to eat, and they could be charged usury.
Yet this clause has been seized upon by avaricious Jews as permission
to exact usury of all the nations not of Hebrew blood, ignoring the
fact that when given it was limited to those peoples under the curse
of God for their iniquities. It can not justly be made to mean that
the Hebrews have a right to treat other nations with less
righteousness than they treat their own people.
It is an unwarranted broadening to make it a permission to exact usury
from all the human race except from Hebrews.
It was chiefly the acting upon this false interpretation, classing
all Gentiles with these strangers, accursed of God, that had no rights
they were permitted to respect, that set every Gentile Christian's
hand against the Jews for fifteen hundred years.
Nothing more clearly marked the line between Christian and Hebrew
during fifteen centuries than this one thing, that the Hebrews exacted
usury or interest of the Gentiles while the Christians were unanimous
in its denunciation, and forbade its practice.
Gentile Christian apologists for the taking of usury or interest, to
overcome the force of this prohibition, are compelled to grant that
Christians may be less brotherly than Hebrews: that the borrowers
whether Christian or not are "strangers" to those who make them loans
upon increase.
CHAPTER IV.
DAVID AND SOLOMON.
Devout Hebrews during the period of the Judges obeyed the Mosaic
prohibition of usury or interest. It was also recognized as binding
and obeyed during the reigns of David and Solomon. This was a greatly
prosperous period when commerce flourished and trade was extended to
the ends of the earth.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account