We often times read the Bible and affirm what it has to say. It's full of powerful sayings. But what do these passages mean in the context of our globalized 21st Century world?
You might mind some of the pictures offensive - I find some of the pictures offensive. I'm doing this so that we can ask ourselves, Why am I offended by this? Do we hold onto these things so tightly we don't allow the scripture to challenge it?
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Luke 6:34
And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' lend to 'sinners,' expecting to be repaid in full.
A "financial institution" is just a legal name to isolate the owners from business losses. The fact is that it is still individuals lending money at interest.
but it doesnt have any bearing on the righteousness or unrighteousness of the individuals. i dont believe bankers cannot be Christians and live a holy righteous God glorifying life in their job.
steve. perhaps i am not being clear. i do not believe there is anything wrong with being a christian and a banker. being a banker does not mean you are sinful. there is nothing inherently wrong or incompatible with the profession of banking and being a christian. that is in my opinion at least.
Please explain how the above verse states lending is sin. It says that it is not a credit toward you. In other words, you cannot lend money on a contract basis and justify that as Christian charity, brotherly love, or any other virtuous thing that marks a believer as set apart from the world. It is business, not charity, but business is not sin.
i never said there was a difference. i dont see the point of challenging or critiquing a christian credit union if it is not sinful. business is business. if they think theyre being gracious and practicing charity then theyre wrong, but thats an assumption you cannot make without knowing them. Maybe I'm confused about what you are saying with this post?
There is no difference. This isn't the only verse in the bible that talks about lending at interest. It's universally condemned.
But you're somehow splitting "business" from an individual. I already explained how that is a false division.
Certainly when Jesus said this there was no such thing as a corporation, or a limited liability company. By using post-enlightenment ideas about division of labor, and the corporation to distance an individual from moral obligations is just wrong.
I'll accept that Christians should not loan at interest to other Christians. Thats as far as I'm going to go with your "universally condemned" charge. A person guilty of sin in a corporate world is guilty of sin personally. Steve, stop putting words in my mouth. I have never, nor will I ever, say otherwise. Banking is not inherently sinful. Also, when you say this "I didn't say anything about sin." and then I ask you to clarify your main point, and your answer is about sin (which is what I have been assuming this entire time), seems a little inconsistent. I don't know. Maybe you argue and think on a totally different wave length than I do.
ive never associated christian financial institutions as trying to be gain righteousness, so i just dont get how this applies.
ReplyDeleteA "financial institution" is just a legal name to isolate the owners from business losses. The fact is that it is still individuals lending money at interest.
ReplyDeletebut it doesnt have any bearing on the righteousness or unrighteousness of the individuals. i dont believe bankers cannot be Christians and live a holy righteous God glorifying life in their job.
ReplyDeleteYou don't believe what one does in business has anything to do with their righteousness?
ReplyDeletei dont believe being a banker necessitates unrighteousness. i do believe being dishonest in any profession is sin.
ReplyDeleteI'll just repost the original article here:
ReplyDeletehttp://21stcenturypicturebible.blogspot.com/2010/09/luke-634.html
This has nothing to do with dishonesty.
steve. perhaps i am not being clear. i do not believe there is anything wrong with being a christian and a banker. being a banker does not mean you are sinful. there is nothing inherently wrong or incompatible with the profession of banking and being a christian. that is in my opinion at least.
ReplyDeletePlease explain how lending and expecting repayment is different than the above verse.
ReplyDeletePlease explain how the above verse states lending is sin. It says that it is not a credit toward you. In other words, you cannot lend money on a contract basis and justify that as Christian charity, brotherly love, or any other virtuous thing that marks a believer as set apart from the world. It is business, not charity, but business is not sin.
ReplyDeleteI didn't say anything about sin. I just said explain how lending and expecting payment is different than lending and expecting payment.
ReplyDeletei never said there was a difference. i dont see the point of challenging or critiquing a christian credit union if it is not sinful. business is business. if they think theyre being gracious and practicing charity then theyre wrong, but thats an assumption you cannot make without knowing them. Maybe I'm confused about what you are saying with this post?
ReplyDeleteThere is no difference. This isn't the only verse in the bible that talks about lending at interest. It's universally condemned.
ReplyDeleteBut you're somehow splitting "business" from an individual. I already explained how that is a false division.
Certainly when Jesus said this there was no such thing as a corporation, or a limited liability company. By using post-enlightenment ideas about division of labor, and the corporation to distance an individual from moral obligations is just wrong.
I'll accept that Christians should not loan at interest to other Christians. Thats as far as I'm going to go with your "universally condemned" charge. A person guilty of sin in a corporate world is guilty of sin personally. Steve, stop putting words in my mouth. I have never, nor will I ever, say otherwise. Banking is not inherently sinful. Also, when you say this "I didn't say anything about sin." and then I ask you to clarify your main point, and your answer is about sin (which is what I have been assuming this entire time), seems a little inconsistent. I don't know. Maybe you argue and think on a totally different wave length than I do.
ReplyDelete