matty
Advanced Member
Posts: 103
|
Post by matty on Jun 11, 2010 10:34:01 GMT -8
Not sure where I should put this but it's a topic I want to talk about. Although why I'm bringing it to mind isn't such a big deal in America as here as far as I'm aware.
So, the world cup has come around once more, as well as the joviality and patriosm it brings it also brings out the bookies in high numbers. They want your money, they want your money in high numbers, in every match. They want you to bet on the underdog. They want you to bet on the score line.
Those of you who are clever will understand that all bets are wagered against you and for that reason you would be stupid to bet and shouldn't.
However what I want to look at in this discussion is people's moral positions on gambling. Is it okay to take part in the odd sweepstake or is any form of gambling a strict no-no.
Also will you be gambling in any form over this world cup? If so how do you justify it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jun 11, 2010 20:23:08 GMT -8
Before making a decision on gambling, I think it's important to identify just what might be morally questionable about it in the first place.
I don't think gambling in and of itself is evil or wrong. However, there are three aspects to gambling which can cause it to cross into evil, imo.
The first is the addictive nature of gambling, which can become a snare.
The second is taking inordinate risks/ wasting God-given resources.
The last is the most subtle (and perhaps the most debatable): the idea of getting something for nothing, which on a large scale is a moral pitfall, imo.
Gambling for small amounts of money doesn't necessarily involve these things, though I suppose it could lead to them.
|
|
matty
Advanced Member
Posts: 103
|
Post by matty on Jun 12, 2010 12:19:15 GMT -8
The last is the most subtle (and perhaps the most debatable): the idea of getting something for nothing, which on a large scale is a moral pitfall, imo. In gambling you don't get something nothing, you pay for the bonus. Anyway I don't see getting something for nothing, and working on your basis you wouldn't accept a 2-for-1 offer in a supermarket as your getting the second thing for nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jun 12, 2010 20:08:09 GMT -8
Well, that's why I said "on a large scale". I admit, that last criteria is pretty vague, but maybe here's another way of saying it.
There's a general biblical principle that we should work hard to support ourselves if possible (2 Thess. 3:10). Hard work, when not excessive, is good for the soul. So I think we should beware of "shortcuts" to financial success. This iisn't a hard and fast rule, just a caution.
|
|
matty
Advanced Member
Posts: 103
|
Post by matty on Jun 14, 2010 11:13:19 GMT -8
I too agree that working hard for our living is the right thing to do, and don't personally consider gambling to fall under that definition. Although, I know its off topic but it's just a thought do you think the bible then disagree with a benifit system, like the one used in the u.k as being against the biblical work ethic.
|
|
|
|
Post by robin on Jun 14, 2010 13:22:38 GMT -8
So you are opposed to welfare.  |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jun 15, 2010 19:38:33 GMT -8
Well, I think what Paul was getting at was, "if you can work but refuse to, you don't deserve to eat". He wasn't referring to genuinely disabled people, the elderly, or children.
|
|
|
|
Post by robin on Jun 16, 2010 9:09:12 GMT -8
Well, I think what Paul was getting at was, "if you can work but refuse to, you don't deserve to eat". He wasn't referring to genuinely disabled people, the elderly, or children. I know. I was just trying to give you a hard time. By the way, I agree, but Charity should come from the church, or given on a personal level. Not through the government's confiscation of wealth. This is not the thread for this conversation, and I don't think we need to beat a dead horse. |
|
