Unoffical empeg BBS

Quick Links: Empeg FAQ | Software | RioCar.Org | Hijack | BigDisk Builder | jEmplode | emphatic
Repairs: Repairs | Addons: Eutronix | Cases

Page 2 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#287649 - 03/10/2006 11:55 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: JeffS]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
Quote:
I researched all of this before really playing with any seriousness and found all of thse arguments to be lacking.

This argument really tweaks me. Christians often accuse atheists, like myself, of being amoral because of our lack of faith in God, but I find this sort of external basis for morality far more damning than my different moralistic base.

The idea that you need to research your morality (at least in this case) based on what other people have said makes me feel that, without that external impetus, you would be amoral. Now, I doubt that that is actually true, but you need to stand on your own two feet and take a position of your own, not be subservient to what everyone else says. I know that you say you found "their" arguments against gambling to be uncompelling, but why do you feel the need to know "their" opinion at all?

Don't get me wrong. There are often more far-reaching results to our actions than it initially seems, and it's worth it to look and see what those non-obvious results might be and how our moral centers would react to those, but I don't get the impression that you were researching gambling, but, rather, researching Christianity, and that speaks to me the notion that you need to be a good Christian more than you need to follow your own compass. You'd already decided that you were personally okay with gambling; you just wanted to see if other Christians had a valid argument to cast aspersions.

Now, I'm not sure what your basis for that last part might be. It might just be a desire to fit into the group. It might be that if they can cast valid aspersions, so could God, and it would prevent you from getting into heaven. There might be some other basis that I can't see, but none of them seem to be based on what you think is right.

(I know. You claim that God is inside you, and therefore it's not external, which I can understand, but if it's inside you, again, why are you looking outside for confirmation?)

I see a lot of bumper stickers out there that I can't quote verbatim, but say something along the lines of "I don't need to do anything; God will take care of me". I know that that's not a universal Christian ideal, but to me, the attitude I'm describing you as having is just another aspect of that same idea. And that attitude really pisses me off. It's certainly not the only cause of this, but I do think it's one thing that's leading to the ever-increasing lack of mutual respect in our society. If God's in control, there's no need for you to apologize when you bump into someone in an aisle, not park in handicapped spots, etc. There's no reason not to be rude. There are a lot of atheistic bases for that attitude, as well, but this is the only one I've seen with a supposedly positive written philosophy.

I know I've gone off the deep end, but when I see stuff like this -- stuff that makes me see the moralistic base of the group that claims to be the most moral group in the US -- it really sets me off.

What makes it worse is that I know you have a personal moral base. Sure, it's been influenced by Christianity; so has that of virtually every American, personally Christian or not. There's nothing that says that Christianity contains an invalid philosophy. Personally, I think that, it contains a pretty solid, if simplistic, philosophy, even if I feel that a lot of people who publically espouse to be Christians fail to follow it. But no external source, whether it be Christianity, Islam, Existentialism, Objectivism, or anything else, should be the sole guiding force for your morality. They can help you put into words how you feel, but they don't and shouldn't define what you feel.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#287650 - 03/10/2006 12:45 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: JeffS]
JeffS
carpal tunnel

Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
Ok, here is my attempte to re-create the deleted post:

The Bible does not address gambling directly. Some pople point to the casting of lots, but the examples in scripture never say anything about the morality of the practice. Some pro-gambling Christians cite the examples of God making his will known through the casting of lots as supporting gambling, but really it is just the medium of God's message at the time and says nothing about the practice of wagering on chance. There are several arguments anti-gambling Christians make, and others that I have come up with on my own (because I think about this stuff). Here are a few and my responses.

Gambling is an exchange of money for nothing of value
This is a suspect argument to begin with, because it is an economics question more than a morality one. The Bible does tell us that a man should not eat if he doesn't work, which tells us something of the way God views the work ethic. I still think this is a tenuous link at best to gambling, especially if you are not persuing it full time. But even if you are, both parties are still receiveing value when they play poker (or any other gambling activty). The value they received is "fun", or the potential for fun at the least. Most people play poker for fun, and almost all of the losing players feel like the value they are getting for their money is worth it.

True there are some addicts out there who are just trying to hit it big and get lucky. For them gambling is not fun- it's an addiction. However, I do think this is not the rule and most people play poker because it is fun. The addictive, "I'm going to get lucky and hit big" types are going to find a place to feed their addiction- if not poker then somewhere else.

It is true that poker does not benifit society much. It produces nothing of value beyond entertainment value. But then that is true of almost every entertainment we enjoy. I ceratinly do not produce anything playing computer games or going to a movie. We don't want (nor does scripture adovcate) a society of individuals who only work to produce and never take advantage of the wonderful world God has given us to enjoy.

Poker is a preditory game where the strong prey on the weak
This is true, and moreso of poker than any other form of gambling since there is so much skill invovled. This is also probably the strongest Christian argument against poker. In many ways, poker is a game that dupes less talented people into giving their money to stronger players who understand the game better. Christians are supposed to live at peace with the world and certainly not try to deceive them, so engaging in an activity that explicitly seeks to fleece others is not reallly consistent with the Christian life.

Actually, this one does bother me a little, and if I were ever to stop playing poker (other than it being illegal of course), it'd be because of this reason. Still, this is not an aspect unique to poker- it is the very nature of our economic system. A free market is economic darwinism, where the strong survive and the weak fail. Strong business succeed by making better decicions than weaker businesses and getting lucky at the right time. It is no suprise that a game like poker would evovle in a place like the United States. To indite poker in this regard would be to indite our whole system of economics, possibly rightly so.

All that being said, when I enter a poker game with others we all have the same information available. If my opponnents are a losing players, they either know it or haven't lost enough that they care. Their willingness to continue playing (usually) indicates a belief that the money they are spending is worth the enjoyment of the game. I am really not deciving anyone when I step up to the game- I AM trying to take their money, just like they are trying to take mine. If I have a skill advantage I am not hiding this fact, nor would they believe me if I told them.

Gambling is anti family values
Yeah, I know everyone's sick about hearing about "family values", but Christians believe the family is something God put together and as such it is an institution that should be honored and protected. I believe this too, though let me clarify and say that by "protected", I mean from within by the choices family members make, not externally by passing laws and such. I don't believe government passing bans on homosexual marriages, banning poker, or anything else "protects" my family. However, I do feel that it is important for me to make good decisions for my family as a husband (and some day as a father) that helps it to become all that God wants it to be. Many Christians say that gambling impeads in this indevor.

I do not find this to be the case at all. If I am wagering my house or savings on wild gambling sprees, that is certainly anti-family values. However, I am not doing that. I practice good bankroll management and have a seperate account for all of my poker winnings and buy ins. In fact, as silly as this is, learning to respect my poker bankroll has led me to be better with money in general (which just goes to show how amazingly bad I am with money). Poker can certainly be a time suck away from my wife, but so can "World of Warcraft" or any other entertainment I might engage in. Once again it all comes down to the choices I make and how I persue my hobbie.

It is true that there are a lot of things that tend to go along with gambling that are definitly anti-"Christian Family Values". Prostitution, greed, etc. The deeper I've gottn into poker, the more I've seen how many people tend to get sucked into these things. But I've also seen those who don't. Eric Lynch is an online poker player who has continually and public put his family first, and even sites spending mroe time with them as one of the reasons he decided to go pro. Sure there are a lot more cases of some guy runining his family through gambling that guys like Eric Lynch, but it's all in the approach. Guys (and gals) who self destruct at the poker table have larger issues that gambling is merely highlighting. But if they didn't find away to destroy their families at and around the poker table, they'd find elswhere to do it. To blame poker and gambling is to ignore the real issues I think.

There are more arguments, but I think they mostly fall into these categories. I don't see gambling as being inherintly sinful, but there are aspects that can lead to sin, just like anything else we do in a fallen world. I look at it as an area to be careful; there are similar issues surrounding watching movies, playing computer games, etc. The scripture advocates to live "in the world and not of it". I don't believe this means avoiding watching moves, gambling, etc. but rather being aware of the pitfalls and not accepting everything that comes my way. I must be consistently on guard and make decisions that are Godly, whether I are dealing with business entertianment, relationships, and anything else.

On the flip side of all of the above, poker is a great game that is a lot of fun to play. The randomness of the cards makes it more exciting than chess, and the skill involved makes it more interesting than blackjack. It is a simple and unique blend of mathmatics and strategy that is hard to find anywhere else. My temperment is well suited to the game and I find it extremely gratifying.

I really love poker tournaments over cash games. The rush of making a final table with big payouts is huge- I can understand why people get addicted to gambling. The cool thing about poker is that with skill you can increase the frequency of these payouts, which is not true for playing slots or other big payout games.

It is sad for me to think that I might not be able to play poker any more because it is something I enjoy very much. I enjoy going over hands, thinking about strategy, and improving my game. Taking my bankroll from $50 to over $1,000 in the past 9 months has been an amazing ride, and I hope to take it even further. Truth be told, all of those hours I could have easily put into someting else (like side work programming) and made much more, but I'd not have had near the fun doing it.

It'll be intersting to see how this all shakes down. I really think (hope?) that poker will probably be legalized and regulated in the next 10 years, and this might just be a bump in the road. It is still very dissapointing to have to possibly give up something that I've invested a lot of time in and done well at simply so Frist can make points with Christians (many who don't even care about this issue) for his presidential bid in 2008.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.

Top
#287651 - 03/10/2006 13:19 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: tfabris]
Robotic
pooh-bah

Registered: 06/04/2005
Posts: 2026
Loc: Seattle transplant
Quote:
JeffS, there's something I've been wondering, mostly unrelated to what's being discussed here. I hope you don't mind if I hijack this thread for the purpose of understanding it.
Let me preface this with a quote from an old 70's-era Galactica episode: "I do not question... merely ask enlightenment."
In other words, I'm not trying to ask this question because I disagree, or to cast aspersions. I honestly would like to learn something new. And it strikes me that you're a person who is in a position to answer honestly, because you've been very open about this topic in the past, and I respect your opinion and respect the way you stand by your values.

Wow- I'm going to use that intro for the next time we talk about Unix comands!

/truly appreciative
//didn't remember 'Battle-axe Galaxative' being so deep
///third slashie's the charm
_________________________
10101311 (20GB- backup empeg)
10101466 (2x60GB, Eutronix/GreenLights Blue) (Stolen!)

Top
#287652 - 03/10/2006 13:23 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: wfaulk]
JeffS
carpal tunnel

Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
The idea that you need to research your morality (at least in this case) based on what other people have said makes me feel that, without that external impetus, you would be amoral. Now, I doubt that that is actually true, but you need to stand on your own two feet and take a position of your own, not be subservient to what everyone else says. I know that you say you found "their" arguments against gambling to be uncompelling, but why do you feel the need to know "their" opinion at all?
I believe that I am a flawed human being, predisposed to make incorrect moral choices based on what I think and feel. I do look to what other people have to say on subjects of morality because I want to hold myself accountable and I trust that they do the same. Since Christines beleive we have all fallen short in the area of morality, we know we must work together and sharpen one another if we are going to get closer to leading the lives God desires of us.

At the same time I cannot just accept "their" opinions without subjecting it to my own reasoning and reading of scripture. At the end of the day the buck stops with me and I am accountable to God for my actions, not them.

Quote:
Don't get me wrong. There are often more far-reaching results to our actions than it initially seems, and it's worth it to look and see what those non-obvious results might be and how our moral centers would react to those, but I don't get the impression that you were researching gambling, but, rather, researching Christianity, and that speaks to me the notion that you need to be a good Christian more than you need to follow your own compass
This is true- it is far more imprtant to me to be a good Christian than to follow my own compass. This stems from my belief that I will get it wrong if left to my own devices on moral issues, but that Christiantiy in its purest form is also the pursed form of morality.

Quote:
Now, I'm not sure what your basis for that last part might be. It might just be a desire to fit into the group. It might be that if they can cast valid aspersions, so could God, and it would prevent you from getting into heaven. There might be some other basis that I can't see, but none of them seem to be based on what you think is right.

(I know. You claim that God is inside you, and therefore it's not external, which I can understand, but if it's inside you, again, why are you looking outside for confirmation?)
Christians do not make moral decisions to achieve heaven- scripture tells us this is impossible. Our goal is to live lives pleasing to God, the author of all morality. Because we are fallen into sin and do not see clearly as God does, we must strive to challenge our own internal sense of morality and attempt to adopt His. God does dwell inside of beleivers and acts as a moral guide, but as long as we are still in this world we will have to struggle witn sin and be subject to its effect- namely that we do not always see clearly what is right and what is not.

When a Christian becomes a believer, he or she is declared rightouse before God. This means that the Christian will no longer suffer the long term consequences of sin and will ultimatly exist in Heaven with God for all eternity. It does NOT mean that the believer is able to cut sin out of his or her life, therefore the short term effects of sin still remain. This declaration process something like a suspected murderer going beforing a judge and being delcared innocent. That the judge made a declaration does not change the person in anyway. If he was peaceful before the declaration, he is peaceful after. If he was a murderer before, he is a murderer stil.

Fortunatly, declarative salvation is not all that God offers. He also changes believers and makes them more Holy and moral through a growth process. Unlike the declartive part of salvation, though, this is a process that takes time, so believers must deal with their fallen nature and the effects of their sin while still in this world.

Quote:
If God's in control, there's no need for you to apologize when you bump into someone in an aisle, not park in handicapped spots, etc. There's no reason not to be rude. There are a lot of atheistic bases for that attitude, as well, but this is the only one I've seen with a supposedly positive written philosophy.
This is not true because the Christian bares responisibility for his or her own actions. Christians may be saved positionaly before god in the delcaritive sense, but still will struggle with sin. This is their responsibility, not God's, and they must deal with it so. They cannot do wrong to others and then shrug it off. By treating another person badly they have comitted a crime against that person AND against God, who expects better from them. Scripture makes this concept quite clear. If anything, becoming a Christian should make life MORE difficult and decisions have to be made with greater consideration, as now you are applying a higher standard of morality- God's.

Quote:
They can help you put into words how you feel, but they don't and shouldn't define what you feel.
No one can define what I feel. What other Christians and scripture does is help me apply what I feel in a way that is consistent with my beliefs. Often what I feel and what I believe conflict- sometimes it is my feeling that is wrong and other times my belief. I can only make decisions in these cases when I try to understand scripture and what others have to say about it.

In this particular instance, I really didn't know how I felt or believed. I'd always heard gambling dealt with as a sin within Christiantiy, so I wanted to see what the real basis for that was. What I found was a lot of people trying to appeal to the things I believe to support their viewpoint, but that their appeals lacked merit. Having looked at this, I realized that enjoying poker was not inconsistent with my beliefs as a Christian.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.

Top
#287653 - 03/10/2006 13:49 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: JeffS]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
All right. I'm not going to counter you point by point, but just let me say that I think that the problem with society at large is not that people fail to follow a strict set of externally proscribed moral guidelines, but that they fail to follow very simple moral guidelines that are inherent in each of us; that those internal mores are easy to ignore. We don't need an external set of philosophical guidelines to tell us what is right (much less an internally inconsistent set like the one you base your philosophy on). Occasionally, we need further examination of the results of our actions than are immediately obvious, and that's when external reading can be helpful: to point out those less than obvious repercussions. But you don't need someone else to tell you what's right and what's wrong. You already know that. Just pay attention and you'll be fine.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#287654 - 03/10/2006 14:07 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: JeffS]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
However, I am going to respond to one point in particular:

Quote:
I am accountable to God for my actions, not them.

...

When a Christian becomes a believer, he or she is declared rightouse before God. This means that the Christian will no longer suffer the long term consequences of sin and will ultimatly exist in Heaven with God for all eternity. It does NOT mean that the believer is able to cut sin out of his or her life


Doesn't it follow, then, in a non-Catholic point of view (what you say is distinctly opposed to the Catholic point of view, I think) that there is no real reason to avoid sin? I can believe that Jesus died for my sins, so why not go hog-wild? No reason for him to pay for something I'm not using.

I know that that's not what Christian philosophy intends. But it could certainly be read that way. While I doubt many (if any) people are using that to justify killing sprees, I can see where many people might use it to justify an "ends justify the means" argument, or a "means justify the ends" argument. If I'm not to be held accountable for the sins of, let's say, for instance, killing thousands of innocent civilians, what's to prevent me from doing so in order to remove a despot? And don't think I'm talking excusively of Bush here. I could just as easily be talking about the acts of Osama bin Laden, or the Crusaders, or the IRA, or any of a thousand human-built organizations throughout the history of the world.

The way you describe how external religion trumps internal concerns me, even from your point of view. You say that you are likely to be confused about what's right and wrong, even though God exists within you. One would assume that you would assume that that's true for all Christians, if not all people. Yet you assume that that moral compass, when interpreted by the people who wrote it down, then interpreted by your brain, then interpreted by your moral compass has more validity than the one inside you that shares one of those potential failing points and then adds a few more on top. (And, at least from my theoretical point of view, that accusation covers not just modern theological writings, but also the Bible itself.)

Like I said: it's the failure to listen to your own compass that's the problem.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#287655 - 03/10/2006 14:42 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: wfaulk]
JeffS
carpal tunnel

Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Doesn't it follow, then, in a non-Catholic point of view (what you say is distinctly opposed to the Catholic point of view, I think) that there is no real reason to avoid sin? I can believe that Jesus died for my sins, so why not go hog-wild? No reason for him to pay for something I'm not using.


Roman's 6 deals specifically with this. It doesn't really give a reason not to go hog wild, other than saying that we've been set free from sin and ought to live by our new nature. However, the growing Christian understands that life is generally better and more fullfilling when you live according to the new nature.

Quote:
Yet you assume that that moral compass, when interpreted by the people who wrote it down, then interpreted by your brain, then interpreted by your moral compass has more validity than the one inside you that shares one of those potential failing points and then adds a few more on top.
While I don't agree on the nature of scripture, your point of stacking errors is still a good question. However, I don't think it's quite accurate.

Imagine if my moral outlook on an issue were written on a piece of paper. Unfortunatly, because of sin it has become corrupted and contains errors. In fact, the errors are subtle and aren't obvious- all I know that it isn't quite right. I also know that several other people have similar pages that I can compare mine against. Theirs also contain errors, but different ones from mine. If I compare my page against a bunch of different pages from different people, odds are I'll be able to ferret out the errors and come very close to what the original page said because most of our pages will contain different errors. We can look to see what is the same and get close to the original. Adding the number of opinions reduces the distortion of the original page rather than increasing it. The reason for this is that while we're all fallen and have a dim view of truth, we are fallen in different areas and God is working on those individually, making us each stronger. Thus we can sharpen one another and point each other toward the ultimate truth. I trust this process a lot more than my own understanding of scripture and feelings alone, though those certainly are a factor as well.


Quote:
Like I said: it's the failure to listen to your own compass that's the problem.
I think that people listen to their own compasses and do very, very bad things.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.

Top
#287656 - 03/10/2006 14:52 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: JeffS]
tfabris
carpal tunnel

Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31298
Loc: Seattle, WA
Thanks, Jeff. That's exactly what I was looking for.

Bitt: That's exactly what I was hoping to avoid.

Robotic: Yeah, I always loved that quote, ever since I was a kid. Thinking back on it, I might be remembering it from Buck Rogers, but I'm pretty sure it was Galactica. There were these klingon-like warrior-types onboard one of the shuttles, and one of the underlings said that to his boss.
_________________________
Tony Fabris

Top
#287657 - 03/10/2006 15:06 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: wfaulk]
JBjorgen
carpal tunnel

Registered: 19/01/2002
Posts: 3538
Loc: Columbus, OH
Bitt, that's actually addressed in the Bible in Romans 6:

Quote:
Romans 6 NIV

What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin— because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.

Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.

In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness. For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.

What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness. When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.


_________________________
~ John

Top
#287658 - 03/10/2006 16:17 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: JeffS]
peter
carpal tunnel

Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4153
Loc: Cambridge, England
Quote:
It is true that there are a lot of things that tend to go along with gambling that are definitly anti-"Christian Family Values". Prostitution, greed, etc.

Greed "tends to" go along? Surely all gambling is greed?

Quote:
I really love poker tournaments over cash games. The rush of making a final table with big payouts is huge- I can understand why people get addicted to gambling.

That rush you get is your greed being massaged. I'm not saying that's necessarily bad -- modern civilisation couldn't continue without a certain level of greed in its captains of industry, any more than it could without a certain level of killer instinct in its armed forces -- but it's a bit weird to hear you both disparage and celebrate greed in the same post.

FWIW, it didn't initially occur to me that there was a Religious-Right angle to banning online poker. I just assumed it was due to lobbying from brick-and-mortar casinos and other US-based gambling operators who have seen their clientele leaving for more convenient and less taxed alternatives, and, like all US businesses since the days of the Pony Express that have seen their business models wiped out by technology, have purchased legislation to attempt to hold back progress.

Peter

Top
#287659 - 03/10/2006 16:28 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: peter]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
Unlike the UK, legal gambling in the US is pretty limited. It's only allowed in eleven states, and even in most of them, it's pretty limited. It's also legal in most Indian reservations, but they're as out of the way as the states for most Americans.

In particular, Frist represents Tennessee, where gambling is illegal. Nor are there any Indian reservations in Tennessee that allow gambling. So that wouldn't seem to be his reasoning. Also, he's been noted as voting and acting in a religious-right manner.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#287660 - 03/10/2006 16:33 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: JBjorgen]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
In regards to Romans 6, I'd just like to point out that it was written by (or at least attributed to) Paul, as was most of the New Testament, and that he never knew Jesus personally and, in my opinion, has no more authority than any other religious writer. I'd be inclined to argue that most of the Christianity that exists today is more Paulinism than anything else. Personally, I never respected anything that the man had to say. Regardless of that, you're still basing your philosophy on someone who has no more moral authority than you yourself do.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#287661 - 03/10/2006 16:34 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: tfabris]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
Quote:
Bitt: That's exactly what I was hoping to avoid.

I know, I'm sorry, and I tried not to respond, but I really, really, really, hate that argument.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#287662 - 03/10/2006 16:43 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: wfaulk]
JBjorgen
carpal tunnel

Registered: 19/01/2002
Posts: 3538
Loc: Columbus, OH
That's fine if you wish to believe that, but it's totally inconsistent with scripture, including Paul's personal encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus (described in a non-Pauline book), his complete acceptance by the other apostles (who DID spend their time with Jesus) and their endorsement of his writings. I know this is one of your beloved pet arguments, but it's completely ridiculous when studied scripturally and historically.

Quote:
Regardless of that, you're still basing your philosophy on someone who has no more moral authority than you yourself do.

Unless one believes that the very words of scripture were inspired and given to the authors of the Bible through the power of God. At that point, his moral authority significantly superscedes our own.

Top
#287663 - 03/10/2006 17:17 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: peter]
JeffS
carpal tunnel

Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Greed "tends to" go along? Surely all gambling is greed?
Depends on your definition of greed I guess. When I think of greed and the way it is characterized in scripture as a sin, I think of as an unhealthy desire for wealth. To desire money is not a bad thing, otherwise anyone who gets a job is being "greedy". Rather it is an excessive drive for wealth.

I like poker because it is fun to play, not because I think it'll make me rich. I dont' think that my desire to win money at poker is any more excessive than the money I hope to gain by having a job and drawing an income.

Quote:
That rush you get is your greed being massaged.
I don't think getting excited about a big cash inflow is the same thing as greed. And actually, I get a much bigger rush at the final table of a $4 tournament where I can win $200 for first place than I do end of year bonus time at my job (which is worth a lot more). A lot of the rush comes from doing well at something, and in tournament poker payouts is how you keep score.

But more important then that is how the money affects the winner. A person who is driven by greed for more wealth finds his or her significance in the wrong place. This is also one of the problems I have with capitalism- it teaches us to value our self worth on the basis of monetray value. There are plenty of miserable poker players making gobs of money because their value is in the accumulation of wealth, not things that really matter. You see them on TV all the time and it is very sad.

Quote:
but it's a bit weird to hear you both disparage and celebrate greed in the same post.
Winning money is fun, especially for a job well done. Developing an unatural drive to accumulate wealth is dangerous, and a sin. The two are different in my mind.

Quote:
FWIW, it didn't initially occur to me that there was a Religious-Right angle to banning online poker.
Make no mistake, this is THE reason this came about. B&M casionas are going to be hurting because of this legislation because if it has its intended effect, poker will suffer overall. The WSOP Main event had over 8,000 participants this year, each paying $10,000 to enter. And I think more than half of these entries were won online. Without online poker, much of this revenue will be lost for sure.

And if there were B&M supported reasons to do this, it wouldn't be coming from a Republican. I think the Democrat introduced bill in Washington to make gambling a Felony was more of an example of this, attempting to protect the interestes of the Indian reservations. Frist is almost certainly pandering to the religious right with this- no question at all.
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.

Top
#287664 - 03/10/2006 17:31 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: JBjorgen]
peter
carpal tunnel

Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4153
Loc: Cambridge, England
Quote:
That's fine if you wish to believe that, but it's totally inconsistent with scripture, including Paul's personal encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus (described in a non-Pauline book), his complete acceptance by the other apostles (who DID spend their time with Jesus) and their endorsement of his writings. I know this is one of your beloved pet arguments, but it's completely ridiculous when studied scripturally and historically.

Paul's encounter with Jesus was after the Crucifixion, and so presumably ranks with the "personal encounters" today's Christians still claim to experience. The source for his "acceptance by the other apostles" is Galatians 2:7-9, written by Paul. What's the source for their "endorsement of his writings"? Is any of it "historical" as opposed to "scriptural"?

Quote:
Unless one believes that the very words of scripture were inspired and given to the authors of the Bible through the power of God.

And that the conferences that settled the biblical canon, four hundred years later, were equally inspired, and unfalteringly kept in the good stuff and rejected the bad stuff.

Peter

Top
#287665 - 03/10/2006 17:42 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: peter]
JeffS
carpal tunnel

Registered: 14/01/2002
Posts: 2858
Loc: Atlanta, GA
LOL- Tony, you HAD to know all this was coming
_________________________
-Jeff
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.

Top
#287666 - 03/10/2006 18:57 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: peter]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
Quote:
Quote:
Unless one believes that the very words of scripture were inspired and given to the authors of the Bible through the power of God.

And that the conferences that settled the biblical canon, four hundred years later, were equally inspired, and unfalteringly kept in the good stuff and rejected the bad stuff.

Not to mention the notion that God would unfailingly let a few people in on his mind 2000 years ago and then clam up makes him something of a dick. Even if he did exist, he's not someone I'd be inclined to venerate, anyway, with a record like that.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#287667 - 03/10/2006 19:21 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: wfaulk]
tfabris
carpal tunnel

Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31298
Loc: Seattle, WA
Quote:
Not to mention the notion that God would unfailingly let a few people in on his mind 2000 years ago and then clam up...

I have some good friends who are Bahá'í. They believe that God keeps sending us messengers, once every few hundred years, to re-iterate the same message. Jesus, Krishna, Moses, Buddha, etc., were all examples of this.

I kinda appreciate the elegance and simplicity of that idea.
_________________________
Tony Fabris

Top
#287668 - 03/10/2006 19:39 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: tfabris]
Robotic
pooh-bah

Registered: 06/04/2005
Posts: 2026
Loc: Seattle transplant
Quote:
Quote:
Not to mention the notion that God would unfailingly let a few people in on his mind 2000 years ago and then clam up...

I have some good friends who are Bahá'í. They believe that God keeps sending us messengers, once every few hundred years, to re-iterate the same message. Jesus, Krishna, Moses, Buddha, etc., were all examples of this.

I kinda appreciate the elegance and simplicity of that idea.


Donald Shimoda?
_________________________
10101311 (20GB- backup empeg)
10101466 (2x60GB, Eutronix/GreenLights Blue) (Stolen!)

Top
#287669 - 03/10/2006 19:46 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: Robotic]
Roger
carpal tunnel

Registered: 18/01/2000
Posts: 5617
Loc: London, UK
_________________________
-- roger

Top
#287670 - 03/10/2006 19:57 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: Roger]
Robotic
pooh-bah

Registered: 06/04/2005
Posts: 2026
Loc: Seattle transplant
Quote:
Nah, David Icke

Whoa! Twisted!
Looks like he was seriously buzzed when he read the trilogy.


Edited by Robotic (03/10/2006 20:09)
_________________________
10101311 (20GB- backup empeg)
10101466 (2x60GB, Eutronix/GreenLights Blue) (Stolen!)

Top
#287671 - 03/10/2006 20:27 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: JeffS]
Mataglap
enthusiast

Registered: 11/06/2003
Posts: 384
Jeff-- Just wanted to say how much I respect and appreciate the way you handle yourself when these kind of conversations come up. Even though I'm over here with Bitt about most of this stuff, your posts are nice examples of civil discourse, and interesting to read.

--Nathan

Top
#287672 - 03/10/2006 21:29 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: Robotic]
webroach
old hand

Registered: 23/07/2003
Posts: 869
Loc: Colorado
Quote:
Quote:
Nah, David Icke

Whoa! Twisted!
Looks like he was seriously buzzed when he read the trilogy.


I may be speaking only for myself here, but as an athiest, Icke's claims (and those of Scientology, Unarians, etc. etc. etc.) are no more or less ridiculous to me than Christians believing in their all-powerful Sky Faerie.
_________________________
Dave

Top
#287673 - 03/10/2006 21:37 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: webroach]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
I don't know. Icke's specificity is pretty creepy. The Bible never read like a bad scifi novel. I didn't really mean that to apply to Scientology or Unarianism when I typed it, but I guess it does. Maybe that's a good watershed for creepy religions.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#287674 - 03/10/2006 21:54 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: wfaulk]
webroach
old hand

Registered: 23/07/2003
Posts: 869
Loc: Colorado
Quote:
The Bible never read like a bad scifi novel.


No, it reads like a bad fantasy novel.
_________________________
Dave

Top
#287675 - 03/10/2006 23:56 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: webroach]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Quote:
The Bible never read like a bad scifi novel.


No, it reads like a bad fantasy novel.


I'm just curious -- how do you think we got here?

Oh, the Big Bang... right. But how'd that magical mix of matter and energy that caused the Big Bang get here?

Do you see where I'm going with this? It's a paradox. A catch-22. OK, you'll say, so where did God come from then?

I'm willing to study the theories of the Big Bang and evolution. I think they're fascinating, and possibly true, but they don't answer the ultimate question: How and why does our universe even exist? To try and answer this question with the Big Bang only serves to pull a veil over your eyes, because while it may explain the creation of our universe, it does not explain the creation of itself.

Our existence certainly is a paradox. By our understanding and logic, everything that exists must have been created at some point. Although we have mathematical symbols and formulas to represent it, our minds are incapable of comprehending infinity. Everything must have a beginning and everything must have an end.

But anyways, if something created us, whether it was God, the Big Bang, or a combination of both, then either something created what created us -OR- what created us must have existed for an infinite amount of time.

The only logical explantion for the paradox of our existence is that something existed (and exists) for eternity. Something that was never created, and something that never can be destroyed.

So what is it? A dense ball of matter that eventually exploded? Or something deeper? Something that we cannot yet comprehend? Some people have their own answer to this and some refuse to face the question. But, the question still remains: why and how is it here?

Top
#287676 - 04/10/2006 00:20 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: ]
robricc
carpal tunnel

Registered: 30/10/2000
Posts: 4911
Loc: Orange County, NY USA
_________________________
-Rob Riccardelli
80GB 16MB MK2 090000736

Top
#287677 - 04/10/2006 00:58 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: ]
tfabris
carpal tunnel

Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31298
Loc: Seattle, WA
Quote:
I'm willing to study the theories of the Big Bang and evolution. I think they're fascinating, and possibly true, but they don't answer the ultimate question

Keep in mind those two things answer two completely different questions. And the latter is a more solid a theory than the former.
_________________________
Tony Fabris

Top
#287678 - 04/10/2006 01:24 Re: Online Poker Ban in US [Re: tfabris]
jimhogan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
Quote:
I kinda appreciate the elegance and simplicity of that idea.

How is this elegant or simple? If God was really elegantly omnipotent, why not a message every month? An insert in your cable bill, say.
_________________________
Jim


'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.

Top
Page 2 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >