Is there any real justification for Christians tolerating banking

>>2436702
If you except that economics is a science you could argue that its findings are beyond the realm of faith.

But thats going on a limb

>>2436702
For me, "usury" then *did* mean interest because the wealth that they were using was almost always tied to actual, physical things that were and could be valued. Interest in that situation, with a smaller "money" supply and a fundamentally different money supply than our modern fiat currencies, equated to financially creating something from nothing with no effort by the usurer.

In the modern age with our style of economics and our kind of money supply, usury is much more akin to predatory lending or any other kind of financial chicanery to defraud people. Shorting a stock and all the bullshit that derivatives can get you into aren't explicitly referenced as financial sin in the Bible, however in the scope of what they are able to do to people they absolutely qualify as being capable of financial sin, usury. Just lending at interest when what is lent is a fiat currency doesn't come close, by my lights.