Crush Liberalism

11 Comments »

1. The Roman soldiers cast lots for Jesus’ robe but I think it was more a statement about how the world (i.e. Rome) didn’t think of Jesus as special rather than a condemnation of gambling.

   I look at gambling like I do alcohol which is also vilified by some churches. It’s neither good or evil but it can be abused to the point that it negatively affects the user and others.

   The odds are stacked against one winning so statistically speaking it isn’t a wise investment, but hey, if your bills are paid, your family is fed, and you would rather spend your money on a lottery ticket than invest or put it into savings for a rainy day then go for it.

   If I were a pastor I wouldn’t have a problem using the money because again, the money itself isn’t the problem. If it can be used for good then why not use it?

   Here’s a link on the topic that provides some scriptural references to money that have been used to attempt to answer the question.
   http://www.gotquestions.org/gambling-sin.html

   Comment by Double D | August 15, 2008

2. I’m not claiming to be an expert, but the most common comment (kneejerk reaction) is Jesus’ robe was divided when he was crucified and roman soldiers cast lots to see who got some. Romans…evil…dice to get Jesus robe…ergo gambling is evil.

   However there are instances in the bible with references to gambling which do not condemn it. One of these…if casting lots is good enough to determine who of the 2 (either Joseph or Mathias) was to replace Judas as one of the 12 discipiles, than it is not necessarrily a bad thing to me (Bingo anyone…?).

   Comment by DJ | August 15, 2008

3. I can see both sides of this. On the one hand most churches (synagogues,mosques etc) either are or are claiming to be WAY underfunded. Refusing 600k is depriving the congregation of things that they may need. On the other hand if the pastor thinks that is money gained by sinful measures I can understand denying the money.
   I hate to be a fence sitter but congratulations to both of them, to the lottery winner for even offering it and to the pastor for sticking to his beliefs. Me, I’d have taken the money. If the guy was a gambling addict its 600k he wont be gambling away feeding his addiction. If he just plays it for the heck of it its still 600k.

   Comment by WMD_Maker | August 15, 2008

4. I was ambiguous in my post. I’m with WMD…I’d take the money for the same reasons. That 600K will go a long way toward benefitting the congregation.

   Comment by DJ | August 15, 2008

5. This is less about Biblical prohibitions than dogmatic prohibitions, Crush. The Baptist Church’s dogma is against the vices that tend to disrupt and ruin families. This is why they are against drinking (Jesus used wine at the last supper which kinda proves that it isn’t against the will of God to imbibe in moderation), gambling, and others. Though I disagree with his choice, I cannot help but respect the Pastor at this church for remaining true to his tenets. Seriously, the temptation to receive that amount of money would be difficult to resist.

   Man adds a lot to the requirements of Scripture. These dogmatic additions define both our denominational differences and lead to a lot of division. The latter in and of itself is against Scriptural direction to be unified.

   By the way, the Pastor might just have wanted to avoid the headache. I was a member of a church where a very rich member died heirless and left his fortune to the church. We were able to do many great things with the millions, but it is a never-ending headache and it robbed many members of blessings because they felt they no longer needed to tithe in accordance with Scriptural mandates. Sad, really.

   Comment by Submariner | August 15, 2008

6. Submariner said it well.

   On a slightly different note, isn’t it wrong to have a welfare state and allow gambling? I for sure, as a taxpayer, don’t want to foot the bill for someone has a gambling problem and puts himself on welfare…

   Don’t get me wrong, I have no problems with people gambling. But when there’s no personal responsibility anymore…

   Comment by Random | August 15, 2008

7. The only problem I have with State-sponsored gambling is that the government is the bookie…they lie about jackpots (only paying 33%-40% of the “jackpot” if you take the lump sum rather than payments(I guess they actually think they would have earned interest on the money rather than waste it), classic BULLSHIT that politicians pull all the time.) and then they turn around and shit all over you by taxing the hell out of it, all winnings should be tax-free as the government didn’t take any risk by gambling.

   OK back to the topic, I don’t think there are any references in the scriptures other than those mentioned, but I do have to give props to both the pastor and the parishioner (just as someone else here did).

   Comment by Ludwig Van Beethoven | August 15, 2008

8. And, let’s not forget, nothing is stopping this guy from going out and giving $600K to another religiously-affiliated charity. I don’t think the local rescue mission or Salvation Army shelter would turn away a truck-load of cash just because it came from lotto winnings.
   As for the larger theological question, the Urim and Thummim carried in the high priest’s breastplate (Exodus 28:29-30) may have been cast as lots to determine God’s will. Proverbs 16:33 says “The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord.” There are numerous Biblical prohibitions on divination, and I think the church’s historical aversion to gambling has been based at least in part on the idea that throwing dice for money is somehow akin to invoking ungodly powers to change the future.
   Finally, if the lotto winner can’t make up his mind what to do, may I suggest a hearty donation to the newly-formed “PabloD Institute for the Advancement of PabloD”?

   Comment by PabloD | August 16, 2008

9. First of all, the tithe is a private matter and should never be revealed to the members of the church,even the pastor should not be looking at how much each person is tithing. This is a protective stance, that will guard the members and the pastors heart from going into the comparison game, or like the one person commented that when the church received a inheritance, it allowed some to slack in their tithing.

   I think the pastor was foolish.. It reminds me of the ‘joke’ that describes a man on the roof of a flooded area.. calling out to God to save him, to help him, and he ignores 3 people/ways that were there to help him, saying, God is going to save me…then he drowned and said.. GOD!!! Why didnt you save me? God says…I sent you this, that and then…but you didnt take the help I offered you thru those people!

   Be wise and balanced in the Lord,
   Dawn in Atlanta

   Comment by Dawn | October 13, 2008

10. I came across this post while looking for a different story I had heard about a Pastor who was going to have to close his mission due to lack of funds and had just turned down a tremendous amount of money from someone who’d won the lottery, because the pastor’s main outreach was for gambling addicts. I remember at the time thinking, huh, must have been a hard decision to close your doors to helping people as opposed to taking the gift and continuing. I understand the irony of the situation, however, the thought does cross one’s mind about the greater good etc. Just today I was studying and came accross the story in Gen 14:14-24 where Abraham wins battles against a bunch of kings. Tradition said that he was to pay 10% tribute of the spoils to the “Gods” and also to recieve tribute as well. When offered the tribute from Sodom, he refused the great wealth that it would have added to his own. The reasoning was that the ungodly people of Sodom could say “look what we have done for you” instead of seeing a man of God and saying “look what God has done for Abraham”. It may be more appropriate to question why the person who wanted to give the money made it know a/who he was and b/where the money came from. If a person were truely giving from their heart and for the purpose of futhering our Father’s kingdom, then the donation could have been made anonymously. “Gambling” by definition is to stake or risk money, or anything of value, on the outcome of something involving chance. That particular word is not in the Bible, but the number of other words not in the Bible could fill volumes. Clearly, the teaching against the defined action is present in the text.

    Comment by Windwisprd | January 5, 2009

11. Seems First Baptist Church of Orange Park won’t take tainted money but it will take tainted pastors. Early December 2008 their Youth Pastor, Ryan Rouse, was arrested for shoplifting at Walmart. To compound the situation he didn’t tell his wife or the head pastor of the arrest. The church found out when a church member saw the public announcement in the paper and informed the pastor. The personnel committee decided to let him continue to lead the youth with some additional supervision.

    Comment by ProblemInTheTemple | February 2, 2009

« Previous | Next »

Site info

Crush Liberalism
Theme: Andreas04 by Andreas Viklund. Blog at WordPress.com.