Gambling in the Bible?

Carded · #1 07-05-2007, 03:30 PM

How many of you consider this gambling?

Parts from Genesis 30 and 31

Jacob’s proposition: “Don't give me anything," Jacob replied. "But if you will do this one thing for me, I will go on tending your flocks and watching over them: 32 Let me go through all your flocks today and remove from them every speckled or spotted sheep, every dark-colored lamb and every spotted or speckled goat. They will be my wages. 33 And my honesty will testify for me in the future, whenever you check on the wages you have paid me. Any goat in my possession that is not speckled or spotted, or any lamb that is not dark-colored, will be considered stolen."
37 Jacob, however, took fresh-cut branches from poplar, almond and plane trees and made white stripes on them by peeling the bark and exposing the white inner wood of the branches. 38 Then he placed the peeled branches in all the watering troughs, so that they would be directly in front of the flocks when they came to drink. When the flocks were in heat and came to drink, 39 they mated in front of the branches. And they bore young that were streaked or speckled or spotted. 40 Jacob set apart the young of the flock by themselves, but made the rest face the streaked and dark-colored animals that belonged to Laban. Thus he made separate flocks for himself and did not put them with Laban's animals. 41 Whenever the stronger females were in heat, Jacob would place the branches in the troughs in front of the animals so they would mate near the branches, 42 but if the animals were weak, he would not place them there. So the weak animals went to Laban and the strong ones to Jacob. 43 In this way the man grew exceedingly prosperous and came to own large flocks, and maidservants and menservants, and camels and donkeys.”
1 Jacob heard that Laban's sons were saying, "Jacob has taken everything our father owned and has gained all this wealth from what belonged to our father." 2 And Jacob noticed that Laban's attitude toward him was not what it had been.

Seems to me the agreement was gambling for the following reasons:
1) No more livestock were created from the deal, only how they would distribute.
2) Whether an animal is born spotted or not is basis on genetic chances.

kerowo · #2 07-05-2007, 04:35 PM

1. Why does this matter?
2. When the author thinks having critters breed in front of striped branches produces spotted offspring your points are obviously wrong. The author isn't showing this as a gambling but as someone being outsmarted by someone else.

Carded · #3 07-05-2007, 05:39 PM

I don't see your point. Gambling is about one person outsmarting someone else.

The two ways to get the best of it are either manipulating your chances to win or manipulating the expected return by the bettting structure.

Duke · #4 07-05-2007, 05:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see your point. Gambling is about one person outsmarting someone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently his point should have been that you lack an understanding of what gambling is.

Carded · #5 07-05-2007, 06:19 PM

So tell me duke, What is gambling? Also, why can not gambling included one person outsmarting another?

I would really like to know why outsmarting someone absolutely proves the action in question is not gambling.

T50_Omaha8 · #6 07-05-2007, 07:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I would really like to know why outsmarting someone absolutely proves the action in question is not gambling.

[/ QUOTE ] It doesn't prove the action in question is not gambling. It also doesn't prove the action in question IS gambling

We have a term for these things: unrelated.

Duke · #7 07-05-2007, 07:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So tell me duke, What is gambling? Also, why can not gambling included one person outsmarting another?

I would really like to know why outsmarting someone absolutely proves the action in question is not gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

TSO is on the money with them being unrelated. It's quite possible to have people gambling where nobody is outsmarting the other at all.

kerowo · #8 07-05-2007, 07:37 PM

For instance, no one is gambling with you in this thread.

Carded · #9 07-05-2007, 09:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would really like to know why outsmarting someone absolutely proves the action in question is not gambling.

[/ QUOTE ] It doesn't prove the action in question is not gambling. It also doesn't prove the action in question IS gambling

We have a term for these things: unrelated.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly what I thought, unrelated. So i stand by my previous statement, "I see no point."

onlinebeginner · #10 07-05-2007, 09:31 PM

ever play dice against someone... nobody is outsmarting anyone