the Quran answers this.

They ask you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) concerning alcoholic drink and gambling. Say: "In them is a great sin, and (some) benefit for men, but the sin of them is greater than their benefit.

you have a very closed mind, i'd urge you to think deeply before you make such statements. The addictions and repercussions of gambling on society is not positive, all gamblers could devote their time to thing much more worthwhile to benefit society as a whole.

Do you have a verse or passage from the Qur'an where I can read about the good deeds outweighing the bad deeds?

google "islam scales" and click on any of the first several links for both passages and analysis.

Would it still be haram, if i staked a person 50% for his tournament.. Im not helping him, just giving him money (investing) ?

Thanks RollWave, that was easy to find...

Sura 23:103 - Then those whose scales are heavy, they are the successful. But those whose balance is light, will be those who have lost their souls, in Hell will they abide.

So I imagine that late-life converts are freaking out about doing good deeds...

Edit: I guess why the OP is asking this makes more sense now, since he may be piling bad deeds on himself.

edit: That was an interesting website. More often then not, it seems when you spin the wheel a low # of times with a smaller bet(on a 1000 budget) you will be a winner.

I ran the following,


Basic stake 10
Initial fund 1000
Number of games 5
Roulette wheel type American

You survived

Main stats
Final fund £ 1020
Games played 6
Wins 2
Losses 4

Yeah, but you only spun the wheel 5 times, so you could not have lost more than £310. With a fund of 1000, you won't do well. Try playing more games, and try pressing the "play roulette!" button several times to see different results.

That might be the churches view. But if you go by the ccc i dont know if it would hold up.


"They become morally unacceptable when they deprive someone of what is necessary to provide for his needs and those of others. "

At a casino or online you cant really know if you are depriving someone of their needs.


Home games or games with millionaires should be safe though.

Sure, sorry, I didn't mean to badger you, I wasn't trying to be 'right', just to show you that you made an argument. I just find that kind of thing (analysis of argument) interesting. Blame the people who post here, they suggested that I do a a course on Logic. So I did and it was very interesting.

Just lol. How do you get from me finding something 'difficult to comprehend' to me having a 'very closed mind'? Perhaps you might try finding out what I actually believe before being so quick with your opinions, ask some questions.

Are you a Muslim?

I think you've had your answer. If you're a 'true' Muslim, there's no question that you shouldn't be playing poker let alone encouraging someone else to do it.

If your beliefs aren't that strong then great, go for it.

No worries, I was going to ask if you had your debating-cap on from the "pope" thread, and that's why you were looking at everything through that lens, but I see you had your logic-cap on.

I remember taking a logic course back in college, and everywhere I went I was deconstructing arguments, I vividly remember me spotting things in every conversation, like a man out of control. I need a brush up obviously.

A Muslim in Saudi Arabia may agree with you Boosh, that doesn't mean a Muslim elsewhere will agree with you.

Both Christians and Muslims play the game of poker, I have seen it myself. Its not a proven fact that a Muslim, or a Christian for that matter, should not play the game of poker for money.

When it comes to the study of Islam, one cant rely on the folks from one place, such as Saudi Arabia. Instead, one most have an open mind. For example, we have in this very thread, a video of an influential Muslim saying stuff that we would not necessarily see from a cleric in Saudi Arabia.

Perfectly true. Which one of them is the 'true' Muslim? Perhaps you could have asked me what I meant by that.

Oh well then, why didn't you say that before? That proves that... er.. actually, I'm not sure what it proves, that some Muslims play poker? The thread was started by a Muslim who plays poker, we already know that happens, so you haven't really added anything to the debate there. (Also, I have a friend who's a Muslim and a terrible poker player, although I'm not saying that there's a connection between the two)

The Qu'ran is quite clear on the matter.

"[Quran 2:219-220] They ask you about intoxicants and gambling: say, "In them there is a gross sin, and some benefits for the people. But their sinfulness far outweighs their benefit."

Doesn't sound like approval to me. Does it to you?

If a Muslim can't rely on the Qu'ran for guidance, on what can they rely? Are you saying that the Qu'ran is subject to interpretive differences and can't necessarily be relied on for objective, consistent, moral guidance?

Kid,

You are wrong. However, I am not interested in discussing further.

Yawn, thekid is the resident pseudo-expert on Islam around here. He actually argued with me about whether or not misogyny is more prevalent in Islamic culture then christian...lol. As far as the OP goes, your guiding or teaching (whichever term u want to use) someone in a gambling related direction, strictly speaking it's definitely Haram I'd imagine. But I'm confused as to why someone who already has clearly played this game a ton really cares? Do you really live the rest of your life under the guidelines of strict Islamic law?

The idea that teaching someone who already plays poker how to play poker is a sin and for no reason in particular his future sins will now be yours is just absurd

I'm so glad i'm an atheist and don't have to deal with these stupid rules.

Being atheist doesn't exempt you from a responsibility should you encourage or somehow facilitate the 'bad' behaviour of others. Would I be right in assuming that you wouldn't encourage or help someone to leave a baby out in the cold to die? You'd be following a moral 'rule' then. You only think the 'no gambling' rule is stupid because you happen not to agree with it. Other societies might consider you stupid for not leaving the baby out in the cold to die.

I would consider Robert Spener of SIOA and other Anti Islam "experts" to be pseduo experts of Islam. Im no expert on religion, just another poster with an opinion.


I was talking about modern day Rape statistics in the United States compared to certain Muslim majority countries.

My view was that certain Muslim majority countries are safer for women then certain western countries, possibly the USA included. And I wont be arguing this any further with you itt, seeing that you brought up a point from months ago, and you also took my views out of context.

I will gladly respond to you, just take it to the other Islam threads, or create a separate thread.

Two thoughts here.

First, there's a big difference between "I helped a guy leave a baby in the cold to die, therefore I am responsible for that action" and "I helped a guy learn a skill he used for sinful behavior, therefore I am responsible for his future sins."

Second, I also think there's a significant difference between "I believe this is morally wrong because I find the action to be repugnant" and "I believe this is morally wrong because God says it is wrong."

Clearly some actions fall into both categories (God says murder is wrong and most people also find the action to be repugnant, independent of what God says about it) but as someone who grew up extremely religious and no longer is, I find it to be a massive relief to be able to follow my own internal moral compass (avoiding that which I find repugnant) and ignoring rules and restrictions that are purely religious such as rules related to sexuality and "thought sins" like lust, greed, pride, etc.

Christian fundamentalists often talk of "Freedom in Christ," and typically when they do they mean that they were once plagued by guilt for sins they had committed and now they feel free because they were forgiven.

I had the exact opposite experience, where I felt extremely hemmed in by my desire to live a life pleasing to God. Once I abandoned my religion, I felt utterly liberated - I could now say what I wanted to say, think like I wanted to think, **** like I wanted to ****, write like I wanted to write, etc. - and be true to myself, without worrying about whether or not such actions were acceptable to God.

Yes there is, but what about the two arguments themselves, are either of them correct?

Sure. Does it matter though? If you're Islamic and Allah says, through Mohammed, that gambling is wrong, it doesn't really matter whether or not you agree, right? It's a sin. (Strains of the petshoboys went through my ind as I typed that, for he first time ever on this forum, how bizarre)

I think intent matters. If I teach you how to play poker I'm not sinning, it's the act of playing that's sinful. But I know that you will then use what I showed you to commit a sin. Do I therefore not share some of the responsibility for that?

On the other hand, the Marine Corps can't take the blame for Kennedy's murder simply because they taught Oswald how to shoot. Their intent wasn't that he use that skill to commit murder.

Sorry, I missed a quote when I wrote my post before this one, I was answering in the context of

echoing the sentiment: I'm much happier with my life now that I don't have to deal with the "extra layer" of thinking, "I don't think there's anything wrong with X, but what does God think about it?"

You could have chosen the more popular but less intellectually rigorous route of concluding that God is pretty much in agreement with your own personal views on any given matter, so kudos to you.

The fact that many people seem to separate their own views and "God's views" has always bothered me. Watching people go through the mental gymnastics of say, being against gay marriage but okay with divorce (although the Bible condemns both) or vehemently against lust while giving gluttony a pass (the Bible condemns both) is really common.

The other thing that stumped me (and still does) is that you have a group of people who claim to have the divinely inspired word of God, and then barely if ever read it. They claim to have knowledge of how to attain eternal life, but hardly ever talk about it. They claim prayer is a direct line to God, but spend a comically tiny amount of time in prayer. How the hell is a 2+2 message board, reruns of Desperate Housewives, or the summer Steam sale even competing for your attention, when you have that?

I've heard a ton of different explanations/excuses, and never really found any satisfactory. It's one thing I really respect about Buddhist monks, Catholic nuns, and active Jehovah's Witnesses: When they believe they have access to the divine, it radically changes their life. Not just figuratively or spiritually, but literally and completely. Those are the people who really believe they have knowledge of the divine.

The guy sitting in a church pew looking at his watch anxious about getting home to catch the football game? Ehhh.... not so much.

The Bible does contain some advice which I believe is absolutely true: In this case (paraphrasing of course): actions speak louder than words and you will know a person by the fruit of their efforts.

It's true that Christians are not perfect, but that is to be expected, we all share the same selfish nature.

It's also a bit like being married. When you are a newly wed, and in the honeymoon stage, you are constantly gaga over your spouse, planning dates and being romantic, but after decades of marriage, your initial passion transforms into a comfortable and familiar dependence and admiration. It's the same for Christians. It's not an excuse, I'm guilty of having less passion, but it's human nature.