Poker / Gambleing...

[GusX:]

I am searching for Biblical answers / Logical arguments    about  Poker...  

Is it gambleing,  Is it a legitimate use of money,  If so long as it is not over what you would normally spend on entertainment  is it then justified ?


Thoughts / help would be appreciated..

[ash]

If so long as it is not over what you would normally spend on entertainment is it then justified ?

Sometimes people can justify anything, any amount. I don't like poker because I see it as a lesser form of gambling - it will lead to gambling. Though, I am bias. A few relatives of mine have gotten caught in the gambling scene; so I'm very cautious when it comes to "neutral" things. We are to live holy lives, glorying God in all we do. I don't see how poker can really do that unless you get good conversation going with your friends while playing. But, then again, you could get incredibly deep conversations going over dinner or coffee...  

[Vlad!]

I don't see why it would be wrong. I spend money on movies, books, computer stuff, and other entertainment purchases. Poker is, essentially, entertainment. Like most other things, it can be either harmless or bad, depending on how you view it and whether or not you participate in excess. Gambling--and the lure of money with little or no work--has been the downfall of many people. But so have alcohol, sex, prescription drugs, and many other things that are not bad in themselves.  

[GusX:]

So..  relativism prevails...     hurra. hurra.

[bethany]

Uh...how is that relativism? And, correct me if I'm wrong, but you asked for people's opinions (logical arguments). Your most recent post makes it sound like you just wanted to hear what you already think reiterated by other people.

[oneafroboy]

Gambling is never condemned in the Bible. Ever.

I don't think gambling is a sin.

I think people need to be careful that it doesn't become an addiction or that it's not a symptom of greed. Also, one should be cautious about throwing one's money around.

Probably nightly poker games with your friends isn't going to put you into serious monetary trouble. Hitting up the slots every weekend, thinking that maybe next time you'll hit it big (so you can make up for all the money you've lost and the accumulating bills needing to be paid), could lead you down some dangerous paths.

[Josh]

Is gambling really an example of good stewardship?

[ash]

Is gambling really an example of good stewardship?

Right on.

[Vlad!]

Is gambling really an example of good stewardship?

Is it really an example of poor stewardship either, though? Like I said, it can be wrong in excess, but why should it be, in and of itself, something to totally abstain from.

And some forms of gambling are even beneficial, lest those Tenneseeans who will be receiving the state's first Hope Scholarship forget...

[oneafroboy]

Well if we want to talk about good stewardship, then let's start criticizing the American Church for its monetary priorities in general. (Not to mention its poor stance on environmental issues, which is a different kind of stewardship that Christians have seemed to have ignored.)

I agree with Vlad!. If it's a weekly monday night poker game. You'll at most lose out on 5 or 8 bucks or something. Or maybe you lose out on a bet with a buddy and have to fork over five bucks. You spend 5 bucks to watch a movie or play mini-golf, or something. I don't see how that's bad stewardship.

Now talk about putting slots in Maryland to fund education and cut deficit, and then I might have a problem...

 

[Josh]

(Not to mention its poor stance on environmental issues, which is a different kind of stewardship that Christians have seemed to have ignored.)

I couldn't agree more.

A couple of things distinguish gambling from other forms of entertainment. One, the odds are you will be spending money and getting nothing in return, which is not the case if you invest in something more worthwhile like a book or a good movie. Two, gambling is potentially addictive. That's certainly no reason to totally ban it, but one should be very careful when gambling lest they find themself too intoxicated by the allure of easy money. And also, gambling can have harmful spiritual effects-- not only does it often lead to dishonest behavior, but it can also make one a bit too focused on money and material wealth.

Of course, all of these things can also be applied to a number of other things, not just gambling, but I have to wonder what's so great about gambling that would make it worth all these risks.

[Skrappybiskit]

Well if we want to talk about good stewardship, then let's start criticizing the American Church for its monetary priorities in general.

If we really want to talk about bad stewardship, let's talk about American governmental fiscal policy...

but anyways. The few points I have that make gambling not *wrong* but risky (pardon the pun)

1. It can lead to excess. Of course, slipperly slope arguments are no arguments at all, but I think the westen world in general is proof of this one.

2. It promotes belief in chance. I.E. playing the slots isn't exactly something you do and think about God's will and guidance. Again, a weak argument.

3. It promotes an ideal of not having to work for what one gets. This, I think, is one of the most serious points against gambling.

4. It promotes greed. Hand in hand with a materialistic culture, greed makes gambling all the more enticing, and therefor dangerous.

5. It *is* a waste of money. At least with other forms of entertainment (with the notable exception of movies with Mandy Moore in them) you actually get something out of it. Not always something good, but if you choose carefully.

On the other hand, I'm not going to be the one to say that playing poker is an evil in and of itself. Though there is an element of chance to it, there's also an element of skill. Straight out gambling, not so much.

Skraps

[Josh]

1. It can lead to excess. Of course, slipperly slope arguments are no arguments at all, but I think the westen world in general is proof of this one.

A good point, and one that should be considered, although the same could be said of drinking, movie-going, or just about anything else.

. It promotes belief in chance. I.E. playing the slots isn't exactly something you do and think about God's will and guidance. Again, a weak argument.

Perhaps not as weak as you think. After all, the belief in chance is entirely unbiblical, and is therefore very, very dangerous.

3. It promotes an ideal of not having to work for what one gets. This, I think, is one of the most serious points against gambling.

Yes, although you could argue that those who desire to gamble already have issues in their heart.

. It promotes greed. Hand in hand with a materialistic culture, greed makes gambling all the more enticing, and therefor dangerous.

5. It *is* a waste of money. At least with other forms of entertainment (with the notable exception of movies with Mandy Moore in them) you actually get something out of it. Not always something good, but if you choose carefully.

Yes and yes.

[oneafroboy]

I agree with your points Skraps.

I'm not really promoting slots. I'm not condemning them out right, but I'm not promoting them. I do think they lead to problems, and often exploit people who can't afford to gamble anyway...

I'm just saying that I don't think a friendly game of poker is really that harmful.  

[Skrappybiskit]

Oh and I agree with that. I haven't ever had a problem with poker night

Skraps

[bethany]

I think there's definitely a difference between playing the slots and poker night.  Skraps/Josh, are your points addressing all gambling in general, or just gambling like slots and the lottery that are pure chance and done on one's own?

[Josh]

I think there's definitely a difference between playing the slots and poker night.  Skraps/Josh, are your points addressing all gambling in general, or just gambling like slots and the lottery that are pure chance and done on one's own?

I was specifically thinking of things like slots, although many of the points could also be applicable to poker night in some scenarios.  

[Nathan]

Interesting thoughts, all around. A few points in defense of the occasional friendly poker game:

• There's no net loss of money. Every game, somebody takes the pot. None of the money is going to Casino's or governments.
  [li]I don't really think a $20 game every week or two is going to lead someone to depend on gambling as a source of income. Even if you win every time, you still need a job.
  [li]Winning at poker is not random. Sure, there's luck involved, but it is also a game of strategy.
  [li]I don't agree that there's no lasting benefit to playing poker with friends. The lasting benefit is that of most other forms of group entertainment--relaxation, developing friendships, and the inherrent enjoyment of the activity. As someone else asked, is there really any lasting benefit to playing minigolf that doesn't equally apply to poker?
  [li]The Bible says absolutely nothing in condemnation of gambling.
  

I'm not saying everybody ought to play poker. Just that, for those of us who enjoy it and avoid excess, there's nothing really dangerous about it, as far as I can see.

As a side note, here's something rather deplorable: In Missouri, you can go blow your entire paycheck on lotto tickets and slot machines if you want, but a low stakes poker game in your living room is technically illegal (though of course this law is laughed at, and would be repealed if anyone ever tried to enforce it). Not the sort of thing that inspires confidence in government.   [_[

[Vlad!]

When I made my replies I was thinking mainly of poker and other card games that people play for money. As far as feeding your money into a slot machine, betting it on a number or color at the roulette wheel, or even betting it on a horse, sports team, or other event, well, I don't really even see how that would count as entertainment. Your stewardship argument is a good one there.

I have a slightly different feeling about the lottery. I see it as a tax on people who are bad at math (my Data Structures teacher calls it a stupidity tax, and that may be apt as well), but the proceeds go to help kids get an education. Therefore, I see it as those who are willing to waste their money donating it to help kids better themselves. That's not a wholly bad thing.  

[Skrappybiskit]

Of course the lottery player's motives play into this as well. I'm sure if they were interested in helping youth get through school, we could just take an offering or something. On the other hand, capitalizing (so to speak) on someone else's vices is immoral, unless you're trying to help them. I mean, if a socialist government is trying to give the poor a leg up (as mine claims), why is it that we have lotteries? No one in their right middle-class mind plays the lotteries for anything but shits and giggles. Lotteries are just another way of oppressing the poor without them understanding it. Maybe why they're poor in the first place.

Skraps

[oneafroboy]

Yeah, I'm pretty anti-slots. Our first Republican governer, his name would be Ehrlich, in 38 years has decided to put slots in Maryland. Slots mostly exploit the poor, and I don't care if the money's going to education, such ends do not justify the mean. Oh, and when they say "it's going to education," they mean the money is going to line the pockets of already overpaid administrators who could care less about the education of Maryland youth. (These are the same administrators that plan on cutting teacher salaries in Baltimore City...again...)

[Vlad!]

I don't know about MD, but in Tennessee (and Georgia) the lottery money provides college scholarships for those with fairly decent grades. I know it's not totally noble, but it's certainly not 'exploiting' the poor. Nobody is forced to buy a ticket. Frankly, if someone who would rather buy a lottery ticket than work an honest day's labor can help put people through college where they can better themselves and one day actually GET a job, well, I think that's a fair trade.  

[oneafroboy]

I think setting slots machines up in poor areas, where impoverish people will have easy access to them, is exploiting them. It's exploiting there social state and psychological condition (and i don't mean disease)--being in a position where money is hard to come by, the temptation to gamble for quick money is much stronger than for most of the people on this board.

The reason the government mandates safety belts in the front seats is to protect the people. Yes, it's everyone's individual choice, but a lot more people are saved because it's the law. No, the government isn't making poor people go to slots, but they'd save a lot of kids from hunger if these machines weren't in such easy reach of those living at poverty level.

Oh yeah. On the issues of lottery tickets. They do try to get people to buy tickets. It's not like it's just there. They have commercials (at least here in MD) where they target people of lower economic groups. If that's not exploitation, I don't know what is. And then they claim it's for education. But have the city schools gotten any better? No... I think scholarship money, however, is a much better idea, though, because it's more direct. I'm still not sure I like the means, however...  

[Vlad!]

The lottery does do advertising, yes...I didn't know they did commercials, but that's probably because I never watch TV. I wouldn't be surprised if the Virginia lottery used those as well. But I never said the lottery is 'just there'...I said nobody is forced to buy a ticket. I may watch a commercial for a product on TV, but they're not forcing me to buy that product.

It's really too bad that humanity is in such a state that 'the government needs to save the people from themselves' is a valid argument. I don't claim that the lottery is either a panacea for the educational system or that it works perfectly. From what I've heard, the lottery in some states (I hear the word Florida thrown around a lot) is so badly managed, they'd be better-off without it. But I don't see it as wholly evil, either, and I wanted to point out some of the merits it has.