In Old Testament terms, the term “God’s people” is synonymous with the Israelites. It defines not only their rightful ownership, but their identity. It’s who they are and who they should strive to be.
But being a part of “God’s People” in the Old Testament came with certain privileges, too—namely, the fact that you always had someone else watching out for you.
In the second half of Leviticus 25, God deals with a couple different circumstances with His people. First, it may be that you, as an Israelite, loan out money to a fellow Hebrew. If you do, you are not to charge any interest (or usury) on that debt. Just give it to them and collect the same amount when the term is over.
The same applies for someone who becomes a slave. If a fellow Hebrew falls into debt and they start working for you, your administration of them will not be harsh. It’ll be less like a slave and more like a hired man, with an eye to them as humans instead of just property.
Notice where the perspective sits on these commands, though. The directives are not given to someone who is in debt, but the one who has the power over the other person. God isn’t speaking to the debtor, in other words, but the debtee.
The reason why God speaks to this person should be obvious: As the one holding the power, the temptation is to extort the one under your charge. If someone is desperate and needs money, why not squeeze every last drop out of them that you can?
Simply put, because that’s not the way brethren are supposed to operate. As part of God’s people, you look out for each other, seeking their benefit even if it comes somewhat at your own expense.
There is a New Testament corollary to this that I think is striking. In 1 Corinthians 8, Paul talks about the tension over eating meat sacrificed to idols. There’s nothing inherently wrong with it, Paul argues, but if eating it causes his brother to stumble, then he just won’t eat it. It’s as simple as that.
But how can this dynamic be flipped? Let’s say the person doesn’t actually have much of a conscious issue with eating meat as much as he wants to simply control the power in a local church. If he can claim a conscious issue, then he holds the entire church hostage to his opinion.
That’s obviously the wrong attitude to have, but it has happened in churches that I’ve seen. One person extorts the generosity of everyone else in order to gain control.
For God’s people, generosity flows both ways. We have to be the one that extends that generosity to those less fortunate, while at the same time, extending gratitude for everyone’s patience. That’s how mercy works; it falls flat if either side tries to use it for their own gain.
