What does the Bible say about gambling? Is gambling a sin?

Be the first to give an answer to this question. Write an answer in the comment section below. Please provide your name and if you have a website or blog, be sure to include the URL in your answer. You may optionally include an email address. Answers will be reviewed.

Other pages in this section

About this site

What does "having faithful children" of an elder mean?

What does "having faithful children" (Titus 1:6)" TARGET="_blank">Titus 1:6) involve?

1 Timothy and Titus give us God's spiritual and moral standard for elders. The requirements in Ephesus and Crete are similar, yet the circumstances differ. In Ephesus, elders already existed (Acts 20:17)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:17). Timothy was to teach how to add to their number. The man aspiring to the work (1 Timothy 3:1)" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 3:1) must evaluate himself by the necessary qualifications Paul lists; he must also have the respect of the believers, being "above reproach" and superintending his own home well.

Titus, with spiritual discernment, was to appoint elders, who must be blameless. As in I Timothy 3:4-5," TARGET="_blank">I Timothy 3:4-5, his home life will indicate much about his character and suitability to be a leader in the assembly. The phrase "faithful children" in this context (Titus 1:6)" TARGET="_blank">Titus 1:6) probably means that they are believers. The word may "pista" mean either mean trustworthy or believing. In any case, they are to be of good reputation, "not accused of riot or unruly." This contrasts with the Cretians who are "always liars, evil beasts, gluttons" (Titus 1:12)." TARGET="_blank">Titus 1:12).

If the assembly disciplined his child, an elder would not necessarily be disqualified on that basis. The circumstances would have a bearing. If the elder's child is no longer in the home, then he is not directly under the "rule" of the parent. The elder should examine himself in the fear of God; by prayer and the counsel of other godly elders, he could expect wisdom from God (James 1:5)" TARGET="_blank">James 1:5) to make the best decision.

J. Abernathy

Other pages in this section

About this site

Can a brother be told not to participate in the meetings of an assembly?

Can you give any Scripture for the “silencing” of a brother? For what “crime” is he to be “silenced”? and who is to do it?

This is an important enquiry. I suppose the questioner does not mean literally a “crime,” for surely no one guilty of a serious moral offence against the law could be allowed to preach or teach, even if he were allowed for the time being to remain in the assembly, which could hardly ever be the case. But I suppose what is meant is some brother, against whom, perhaps, no real accusation can be made, but who has been requested not to minister the Word.

Now, of course, we cannot judge of any particular case without knowing the details. I believe in general that no one would be silenced, unless there were good reasons—some manifest lack of gift, some recognised inability to edify the saints, some habit of too lengthy and unprofitable ministry, which had wearied hearers, or some clear moral defect. Sometimes a man may insist on reading and commenting on long chapters of the Bible, or always the same chapter, as we have known in one case, or always the same disputed doctrine, which in an unruly way he persists to inflict upon the saints.

Perhaps Paul refers to some such men in Titus 1:10" TARGET="_blank">Titus 1:10 as ”unruly and vain-talkers and deceivers . . . ,“ and then adds, “WHOSE MOUTHS MUST BE STOPPED.” It is not necessary to fill every line of this indictment, to deserve the form of discipline here prescribed. A man would seem to fall within it, who is known as an unprofit able talker, or as pushing some doubtful or controversial teaching. I do not think this silencing ought to be done by an individual acting on his own responsibility. It is a case where “two are better,” and they should act only as representatives of the assembly.

The phrase, “the liberty of the Spirit,” is sometimes quoted to show that the Spirit gives liberty to anyone who likes to teach, but in their context the words only refer to seeing Christ without a veil. Certainly the Spirit does not give liberty to those whom He has not qualified to speak. However, it does not always follow that the one silenced will never again be able to minister, for sometimes it may be that a young man may have been too quick to come forward into this service, and may develop a true gift later. I know of one such case, where the one silenced (and he submitted himself humbly to the ruling of his elders) became afterwards universally recognised as a true minister of the Word.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Should church put you on a guilt trip?

Some have suggested that gospel teaching should not convey at sin makes men guilty, but that sin is shameful. Is this right?

Sin is shameful, but it is far more. It is rebellion against divine sovereignty. It offends the very character of God. It ultimately violates God's righteous law, which was given "that every mouth may be stopped and ALL THE WORLD may become GUILTY BEFORE GOD" (Romans 3:19)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 3:19). Guilt is very real and stems from breaking God's law.

Some object because this puts people on a "guilt trip." To soft pedal the reality of guilt is no kindness to the lost. Guilt is NEVER relived by denial. Evading guilt is a serious mistake; guilt is the central issue between man and his Creator. In salvation God removes guilt. None can know guilt removed without facing and acknowledging it. Let the preacher clearly declare the problem of guilt and then the remedy, "Being justified (CLEARED of all guilt!) freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Romans 3:24)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 3:24).

J. Slabaugh

Other pages in this section

About this site

When was Peter saved?

PETER’S CONVERSION AND CALL

When was Peter saved? Was it when Andrew brought him to the Lord Jesus, or was it when the Lord called him on the shores of the sea of Galilee to become a fisher of men?

The mission of John the Baptist was, amongst other things, to “make ready a people prepared for the Lord” (Luke 1:15)," TARGET="_blank">Luke 1:15), and, no doubt, Peter, Andrew and the rest of the apostles were all disciples of John, having been baptized by him with the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, waiting for the One that was to come. Accordingly, when these prepared ones came in contact with the Lord, they were ready to receive Him as Messiah. In John i, when Andrew brought Peter to the Lord, He did not call him to repentance or faith, for he did already in a manner believe on Him, but gave Him his new name, anticipating the moment when He would build him as a living stone into His Church. This was only the prelude to the scene on the sea of Galilee.

Thus Peter was called by John to repentance and faith in the one coming after him; then by the Lord to a place in His Church, and later to His service. We apply the word “saved” to everyone who has received Christ as personal Saviour, though the word carries with it more than forgiveness, namely, deliverance to and from. Peter could not receive Christ in above sense till the Lord was revealed to Israel, but no doubt all the true disciples of John, though they did not form part of the Church till Pentecost, were saved persons; they were of the people of God, His own, in a very real sense. In this sense Peter was a saved person before he was introduced to the Lord by Andrew, for he had been already introduced to Him by John the Baptist and had doubtless believed on Him as the One “who should come after him” (Acts 19:4)," TARGET="_blank">Acts 19:4), as indeed did the Old Testament saints in a minor degree. The Lord knew him by name and was now calling him out of the Jewish fold, to belong to His flock.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

How do we know that we have God

How do we know that we have God’s full revelation to us?

Hebrews 1:1-2" TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 1:1-2 informs us that God’s revelation through various instruments and in varying parts has been fulfilled and finalized in the coming of His Son.

If anything further remains to be written, it must stem from His personal teachings and must have his personal authority. Before going back to heaven, the Lord previews the Spirit-inspired writing of the gospels - and Acts, their sequel (John 14:26)," TARGET="_blank">John 14:26), the epistles which amplify His teachings (16:13a), and the Revelation (16:13b). Significantly, this final book includes a curse on anyone who adds to that book (Rev. 22:18)." TARGET="_blank">Rev. 22:18).

Although not all agree with this interpretation, Paul clearly states that the gifts of knowledge and prophecy will become outdated by the coming of "that which is perfect," or complete (1Co. 13:9, 10)." TARGET="_blank">1Co. 13:9, 10). The gifts of the New Testament apostles and prophets (12:8-10a, including "discerning of spirits" and 28) were initial and were unnecessary when the writing of the Word of God had been completed.

In contrast to the existing 66 books of the Bible, recognized as canonical within the first century of their writing, the apocryphal books affixed to the Old Testament were added by the Council of Trent in 1545. Their addition was part of an attempt to combat the Protestant emphasis on the teaching of God’s Word. Other attempts to add to the Scriptures are equally distinct from the inspired volume.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

What does Nebuchadnezzar's dream mean in Daniel 2?

What is the meaning of the image in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (Daniel 2:31-45)" TARGET="_blank">Daniel 2:31-45)?

King Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem and therefore considered that his gods had overcome the God of Israel, Jehovah (Daniel 1:2)." TARGET="_blank">Daniel 1:2). God gave him a dream of future events (2:28). Demonstrating that He could reveal the unknown, God revealed to Daniel both the dream, that only the king knew, and also its interpretation. Thus the Lord affirmed to Nebuchadnezzar that He knew and controlled the future and that He had given the king his kingdom (verse 37). This dream also helped God’s people because it informed them of the course, extent, and conclusion of the troublesome "times of the Gentiles," the period when Jerusalem is under Gentile control (Luke 21:24)." TARGET="_blank">Luke 21:24).

The dream centered around an image composed of four metals: a head of gold, arms of silver, torso of brass, and legs of iron (verses 3 1-33). Daniel interpreted these as four kingdoms, beginning with the Babylonian empire (verses 37-40). In keeping with the revelations in Daniel 7, 8,9," TARGET="_blank">Daniel 7, 8,9, and 11, the other three kingdoms are Medo-Persian, Grecian, and Roman. Viewed from head to feet, the image had metals of decreasing value, a reflection of the increasingly less autocratic structure of the successive kingdoms. The "iron kingdom" is a divided kingdom (verse 41) because at the image’s feet the iron was mixed with clay, an unstable combination. Since the kingdoms are sequential, this suggests that the Roman kingdom is viewed in one form, iron, and a later form, iron and clay. Between these two forms is most of the present Church age.

Daniel draws attention to the toes of the image and their instability (verses 42, 43). When he then refers to "these kings" (verse 44), Daniel seems to be interpreting the toes as kings, 10 in number. In the days of this 10-king confederacy of the revived Roman Empire, a stone "cut out without hands" struck and destroyed the image in the king’s dream and became a great mountain (verses 34, 35). Thus, as Daniel’s subsequent visions reveal, the revived Roman kingdom, over which "the Beast" will reign (Revelation 13:1, 2; 17:11-14)," TARGET="_blank">Revelation 13:1, 2; 17:11-14), will end when our Lord, the Stone rejected, yet exalted (Matthew 21:42, 44)," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 21:42, 44), will destroy Gentile power and establish His everlasting kingdom.

D.Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Can I present the gospel without mentioning sin?

Wont preaching about sin offend unbelievers?

The Lords gentle, precise, respectful manner in asking for the husband of the Samaritan woman is instructive. He aimed for an immediate response. His patient dealings with the rich, young ruler aimed at an eventual response. The ruler was not prepared to acknowledge his need, so the Lord Jesus planted seeds of truth intended to produce conviction. Since the ruler did not love his neighbor as himself, he needed to face his guilt in breaking Gods law. The listeners need and degree of understanding determined the approach. Peter didnt decry idolatry in Jerusalem; Paul didnt decry the guilt of crucifying the Messiah in Athens.

Preaching about sin was and is essential. Such truth confronts human thought, but its presentation need not be confrontational or offensive. Some who listened to apostolic preaching were uncomfortable and offended (Acts 2:37; 4:1-3; 7:54)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 2:37; 4:1-3; 7:54). The content of the message, not the manner of its presentation, was the reason. Preaching in the power of the Spirit of Christ will convict. It will be sensitive to the needs of the listeners, handling confrontational truths in the manner most likely to be effective. Preaching the gospel is a service. Servants honor those whom they serve (Romans 12:10, 11;" TARGET="_blank">Romans 12:10, 11; Philippians 2:3)." TARGET="_blank">Philippians 2:3).

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

At what point must one be put away from the assembly as a covetous person or a railer (1 Corinthians

At what point must one be put away from the assembly as a covetous person or a railer (1 Corinthians 5:11)" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5:11)?

Verse 11 lists 6 people who must be removed from the assembly. Four of those are repeated from verse 10. Those four, including one who is covetous, are persons who have violated the clear statement of Gods moral law. In all four cases, one violation makes them transgressors of the law, therefore guilty. While God judges thoughts (see Matthew 5:22, 28)," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 5:22, 28), men can only deal with actions. When one called a brother exhibits covetousness by doing something which is, in itself, morally wrong, he must be removed from the assembly.

A railer and a drunkard complete the list in 1 Corinthians 5:11." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5:11. The determination of these is more subjective, not always involving clear violations of Gods moral law. An actions circumstances or the frequency with which it occurs deserve consideration. Elders, who are spiritual, impartial, and sufficiently informed, guide the assemblys decision to put away a railer or drunkard.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

We can't have children, but my friends are hinting that it is time. What should I do?

How can a couple who is unable to bear children respond to well-intended hints that it is time for them to be parents?

Those who cannot have children will know how devastating such a comment can be. The example of the Lord and the statements of Scripture teach us to respond to evil with blessing, not responding in kind (1Pe 3:9)." TARGET="_blank">1Pe 3:9). This person probably meant well and was attempting to express interest, encouragement, maybe even confidence. Depending on the Lord to give help, the couple could simply express appreciation for the concern expressed and ask for the help of that person in prayer. The Lord will know how to answer the prayer in ways the person praying may not understand.

For the benefit of the well-intentioned individual who thrust a knife into the heart of this couple, many passages, if heeded, would have sealed his lips. One will do. Christians are to consider the effect of their words on others and to limit their communications to what is beneficial ("good"), strengthening ("edification"), and enabling ("ministering grace to the hearers," Eph 4: 29)." TARGET="_blank">Eph 4: 29). None of us is perfect (James 3:2)," TARGET="_blank">James 3:2), but Christian grace will increase our sensitivity to others.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu