The Question of Gambling Came Up

One of my favorite internet columns to read is written by Keith Drury. In his most recent column, he addressed the issue of gambling. The article can be found at this URL:

http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/gambling.htm

Much of what the column asks is along the lines of what should and should not be considered gambling, and what the church's stance should be on gambling and such.

As usual, Keith's column generated a number of responses. These responses can be seen by following the links on his column at the above-mentioned URL. I felt that I should comment--as much (if not more) because of the comments that preceded mine as for the article. Here is what I said:

Scenario 1: John Doe goes out and gambles away his paycheck without leaving funds to provide for his family's meals, thereby harming himself and his family. Since gambling led to this problem, all gambling should be considered wrong.

Scenario 2: John Doe goes out and buys a hunting rifle, and one day in a fit of rage, shoots the members of his family and himself. Since the purchase of a hunting rifle led to this, all owning of hunting rifles should be considered wrong.

Scenario 3: John Doe goes out and buys a chocolate cake, and he and his family become such lovers of chocolate cake, they eat it every day and become obese. Since the purchase of a chocolate cake led to this, all chocolate cakes should be considered wrong.

Scenario 4: John Doe goes out and buys coffee, and shares coffee with his family. His family really comes to enjoy drinking coffee, and they all become addicted to caffeine. Since the purchase of coffee led to this, all coffee should be considered wrong.

There is a major commonality in all of those scenarios: none of the things in them said to be "wrong" is mentioned as wrong in Scripture, but by extending out the scenario, these things can be used in such a way so as to violate Scriptural principles.

I am Nazarene (which in doctrine is very close to Wesleyan), and we have a prohibition in our Manual against gambling. However, there is no such prohibition against hunting rifles, chocolate cake, or coffee (I assume the same is true for Wesleyans).

Perhaps the problem is that the more secular our society becomes, the more laws we feel we need.

The Pharisees and teachers of the Law turned the Scriptural commands (including the 10 Commandments) into hundreds of codes and regulations. Jesus came along and, instead of complicating matters, boiled it all down to two things: the first is to love God with all one's heart, soul, mind, and strength, and the the second is to love one's neighbor as one's self.

Romans 14 tells us that we should not pass judgment on "disputable matters (NIV translation), and that to one's own master one stands or falls. So why do often we feel it necessary to add rules to what Scripture says, and in effect judge the people who do not follow the rules with which we happen to agree?

By the way, on the entire gambling issue, I say this from the personal perspective of being someone who does not play "games of chance" but whose retirement investments and such have taken a beating over this past year.

I thought I would post this here as well, and let more people see not just my comments, but also read Keith's original column and the comments it generated.

So, in "borrowing" a line from Keith Drury, let me ask,

"So, what do you think?"