That the Bengals are a team of troublemakers and shady characters is no secret; their run-ins with the law were a punchline 6 arrests ago. Add to it this season’s off field drama with WR Chad Johnson begging out of town, and it becomes obvious that the Bengals still have a ways to go before their reputation as a good program is restored. (then again, was it ever “stored” in the first place?)
Some might see their selection of Lynch as a move in the right direction, a change in philosophy emphasizing character over talent. But with 24 career interceptions and some game-changing plays under his belt, chances are the Bengals were thinking about winning games, and not winning souls, when they handed in their card for the 177th pick. That Lynch is a good character guy is an added bonus.
I can see it printed in the team’s media guide already: Corey Lynch - Special Teams/Safety/Missionary
“Isn’t the God that helps a player hit a mammoth home run the same God that helps him strike out the next time up on three nasty sliders? Why aren’t there any baseball players who point to the sky after they whiff on three pitches, or pop out to the mound, or ground into a rally-killing double play? How about pointing after a successful sacrifice? Surely, God has a special place in His heart for the sacrifice.”
Everybody getting buckled in and ready for 4 days of college basketball goodness? I am…sort of. I’m going on a date with my wife tonight, and I’m sure we’ll watch LOST when we get home…meaning the only bball I might enjoy today might be following the early games on my computer at work and watching the late games after I find out just how Michael got onto that freighter.
Tomorrow? We’re playing poker up the street at my brother-in-law’s, so I’ll have on eye on the games while I lose my $10 buy-in.
No matter how much or how little coverage you take in this weekend, one thing you’re sure to see is Clark Kellogg, CBS’ Studio Analyst who works alongside of Seth Davis and Greg Gumbel. If you’re interested in learning a little more about Clark, and I know you were, here’s a few links to peruse while your Elite Eight teams start dropping like flies.
In the comments to last month’s post on a strange exchange at the World Series of Poker, Linda wanted to know my thoughts on whether it’s okay for Christians to play poker. I’ll share them below, but before I do, keep in mind 5 things:
I’m not even sure poker is a sport. But they show it on the four-letter network, so why not?
Yes, I THINK I’m right. If I thought I was wrong, I would change my opinion.
No, I don’t KNOW I’m right.
I try to use the Bible for my definitions of right, wrong, and sin. If you think the Bible is crap, you’ll think my opinion is crap.
This is only my opinion, feel free to disagree.
Having said all that, here’s my stance on Poker, fleshed out in Q&A style with fictional veteran reporter Quentin Query:
QQ:Did you see U23D yet?
PFB: Yes I did, and it was unbelievable. But please, stick to the topic.
QQ:Sorry, so is it a sin for a Christian to play poker?
PFB: In every instance? No. But it might be in some cases. Just like it might be a sin for a Christian to have a beer, a cigarette, or a third cheeseburger in some instances. Unless the Bible speaks specifically against something (which in this case it doesn’t), I believe a Christian must discern based on Biblical principles and the Holy Spirit within them. Contrary to what some Christians want you to believe, there really aren’t hundreds of laws to follow in Christianity, Jesus’ life and death fulfilled the law (Matt 5:17) so we don’t have to. Instead, He gives us His Spirit and freedom, not to do whatever we want (Romans 6:1-2), but to enjoy freedom (gal 5:1) and to serve Him, not as slaves, but as friends (John 15:15).
QQ:Poker, beer, and cigarettes? Doesn’t sound like a typical small group gathering to me.
PFB: In my opinion, poker, alcohol, and cigarettes are not inherently evil in and of themselves. I find nowhere in the Bible where those specific things are called out as being evil and off-limits for followers of Jesus.
QQ:So you’re saying it’s ok for Christians to be addicted to cigarettes, alcohol, and gambling?
PFB: Did I say that? No. The Bible speaks clearly against drunkenness (Gal 5:21). It also warns Christians against being greedy (1 Tim 6:10) . It talks about not being “enslaved by anything” despite “things being lawful” (1 Cor 6:12). It also talks about physical discipline with regards to your body being important (1 Tim 4:8).
QQ:So make up your mind then, are these things okay or not?
PFB: I believe they are okay in moderation, as long as your spouse is okay with it (providing you are married, of course) and your own conscience is okay with it. (I didn’t mention the Bible here, but as I said before, if something is addressed specifically in the Bible, then that trumps everything else.) I’m not saying this is a definitive list of how to decide if something is okay for you (in case i left anything out) but it if the Bible, the people you are accountable to , and your conscience are okay with it, then I think you’re in a good place.
QQ: So let’s get back to Poker. If Poker is okay, but only in moderation, how can it be okay to make a living doing it?
PFB: Let’s take Daniel Negreanu, who is a professional poker player and a Christian. Poker is Daniel’s job. If I believed that poker was inherently wrong, then I would believe that as a Christian he needs a new job.
For example, I believe pornography is inherently evil, so i think any Christian working in the porn industry needs to find a new job. (I’m not talking about the XXX church guys, who make a living ministering to the porn industry, I’m talking about actors/directors/producers/etc.)
But since I don’t believe Poker is evil (because I don’t believe the Bible speaks against it, as I said earlier), I think one must use their brain and their conscience to decide if it’s right for them.
Compare playing poker for a living to a “normal job” like being an engineer. Neither are inherently evil, but both can be abused and can become a source for our sinfulness. If the engineer alienates his family because he puts 80 hours a week into the job to make more money, to me that is sinful. If the engineer obsesses about the job during every waking moment, and it becomes more important to him than loving people and loving God, to me that is sinful. I think those same things can be said for Poker.
Now, is it easier for greed to sneak in if you’re job is Poker? I think so. Income isn’t fixed for poker players. They win money by playing well and catching breaks. So I think poker, as a career path, might not be a wise choice for a lot of people. But I don’t think it is absolutely a sinful career path.
Daniel Negreanu is a smart guy with an innate ability to calculate odds, analyze numbers, and read other people. He couples these talents with preparation and hard work, and has been able to be successful in it. There are many who are not successful.
QQ:Yeah and when he wins, other people are losing money. Sometimes a lot of money. Isn’t that wrong?
PFB: Why would it be wrong for him to better at his job than his competitors? When you get a promotion over another guy in the office, is that wrong? When your company’s bid gets accepted over another company’s, is that wrong? When you sell something on eBay for more than you bought it for, is that wrong? Almost every transaction in every workplace involves people spending time, energy, and money for something in return. Some ventures are riskier than others.
Some will argue that poker is based mostly on luck, but it’s not. Luck plays a role, of course, but it is a game of odds. Skill absolutely comes into play. And I can make an argument that luck plays just as much of a role in every other job out there.
QQ:Well, forget about the professional for a minute. What about the guy who spends $100 a month playing in his weekly poker game?
PFB: Again, if you believe that there is nothing inherently wrong with poker, than he’s in the same boat as the golf nut who spends $100 a month on greens fees, the woman who spends $100 a month on her scrap-booking hobby, and the tech geek who spends $100 a month on the latest gadget.
Each one of these folks can be sinning if their hobbies go against the authority/accountability in their lives or their consciences. If they begin to love golf, gadgets, or poker more than they love God and other people (which, granted, isn’t easy to quantify) than they can be in sin as well.
QQ:You keep saying Poker isn’t evil. Doesn’t the Bible say that gambling is a sin?
PFB: Does it? I don’t think so. The Bible never mentions the word “gambling”. There are plenty of websites that try to tell you why gambling is a sin. But their arguments, to me, hold little water. Read here, here, and here to see if you agree (the last link makes the best arguments of the three, but I still don’t buy their arguments). They all talk about loving money, stealing money, greed, deception, addictions, and other things which I agree are wrong, but these things are not hardwired to gambling.
I play poker a few times a year for the same reason I go to the movies a few times a year. It’s fun. I don’t do it because I love money, or because I want to steal from others, or because I am addicted, or because I want to be deceitful. I do it because I know that for the $20 buy-in I am going to get a few hours of fun time hanging out with friends, playing cards. To me, it’s more of a “gamble” to spend $15 on a popcorn, soda, and ticket to a movie that might not be any good.
QQ:Yeah, but there are a lot people who do it for those wrong reasons: greed, addiction, lust for more.
PFB: Yeah, and there are a lot of people who weigh over 350 pounds because they eat for the same reason that some people play poker: greed, lust for more, addiction. Does that make eating inherently evil too? Should we all stop eating? What about the folks who are obsessive about running because they are prideful about the way they look or because they want others to think they are the best at it and worship their accomplishments? Just because they’ve made running into something spiritually unhealthy, does that mean running is evil? No. I hope you see the error in that logic.
QQ:I guess I see your point, but if so many Christians have a problem with it, shouldn’t that be a flag that it’s wrong?
PFB: Yeah, I think that’s fair. But I’m not going to accept that something is right or wrong just based on popular opinion. Everything is worth looking at closely. We should all be discerning things taught from our pulpits and spoken in the pews. Poker definitely has a stigma to it in Christian circles, but that doesn’t make it wrong.
QQ:Well, that’s all the tape we have for this interview. Do you feel like you’ve made a thoroughly convincing, impenetrable argument that it’s okay for some folks to play poker?
PFB: Not really. But I think what I’m saying makes sense, and I think it jives with the Bible. I’d be interested in other folks’ thoughts about this subject. I’m not trying to justify poker because i love to play. Like I said, I only play a few times a year and I’d give it up in a second if I felt it was wrong or if my wife asked me to. I just hate to see Christians creating their own laws and then thinking they’ve earned righteousness or favor with God because they keep them. Like one of my favorite musicians Derek Webb says:
“What’s the use of trading, a law you could never keep - For one you can, but will not get you anything.”
Opinions, thoughts, criticisms, and insults are welcomed in the comments section…
I got an email from MCBias the other day asking me if I had seen the Charles Barkley video yet (click over and watch it if you haven’t yet - it’s a political interview Barkley is doing on TV in which he rails against conservatives and has harsh words for Christians). I told MCBias I hadn’t seen it yet, and after watching it I asked him what he had thought of it. This is the exchange that followed:
PFB: I’m watching the video now. What were your thoughts on it?
MCB: My initial reaction to the video was disinterest. I read its description as Barkley calling conservatives “fake Christians”, and to me personally, that didn’t seem to be that inflammatory. At times, it does seem like conservative politicians wave the flag and Bible around election time, and then desert those constituencies later on. I thought that was all Barkley meant by that statement. But then, I watched the entire video when I had more time, and I was a little angry. Sure, Chuck looks awkward and somewhat pitiable on that broadcast. But I’m sure it would come as a shock to historical saints if “not judging” is the pinnacle of morality! All Christians should vote Libertarian by Chuck’s logic. What did you think about what Barkley said when you watched the video? Was it truly offensive, or do you think he just spoke without thinking?
PFB: Maybe I was just really confused, but it seemed to me like he was calling out two separate groups. Was he calling out non-Christian conservatives for pretending to be Christians or was he calling out Christian conservatives for being hypocrites? Or both? I guess that’s why I wasn’t very offended by it, because I was more confused than anything else.
As far as Christians being hypocrites, yes they are. We all are. I don’t think any of us live up to the standard of morality, ethics, and holiness that we’d like to. The problem has always been that Christians (and most folks, for that matter) find it easier to point the finger at someone else than at themselves. Personally, I’m trying to get better at that.
On the other hand, if Charles is ticked off at the way some conservatives and Christians have tried to marry the Republican party with Jesus, then I’ll join in with him on that. I think it’s an affront to Jesus to say that He would have voted along Republican party lines, or any party lines, for that matter.
I don’t think Charles spoke without thinking, I’m just not sure what, exactly, he was thinking. Do you think it will hurt his public perception (and eventually his chances of running for office) or will people just chalk it up to Charles being Charles?
MCB: I have to agree with you that I too was confused at first as to what he really was saying. I believe he was calling out Christian conservatives for being hypocrites. At first, I agreed with his statements; certainly Christians should not be both “judge and jury”, and Christians can’t be hypocrites the way we have been at times. I agree!
But the end of his comments ruined for me. Saying that Christians are the most hypocritical people in this country? That we’re not forgiving at all? And he certainly doesn’t understand the full meaning of that judging verse. Christians can say that the actions of another person are sinful; there are some common standards of sin that we can agree on. Without that, we can have no law in society or religion, because there are no common standards that we can agree on. Now, of course, it’s a matter of vigorous debate if those standards exist in reproductive processes or sexuality, and if so what those standards are. But he sounded too much like he resisted any common standards whatsoever. Plus, I thought that the “they can’t do anything to me, I don’t work for them” line showed that Charles’ brand of “not judging” is not based on a concern for the feelings of others, but more out of a desire for independence from outside interference.
I think it will hurt his political chances, because it’s too easy to lift the “conservatives are fake Christians” soundbite and use it in negative attack ads. I think that Charles does have some good things to say, but that he unfortunately doesn’t have an “off” button once he has said those good things. Then he keeps on speaking and reveals himself to be just as biased as those he is trying to correct. What do you think the proper Christian response is to this type of critique from outsiders?
PFB: Whatever our response is to something like this, it has to be in love. If we put up a blog post about it, let’s not rip Chaz a new one and call him names. Let’s argue our points with humility and sincerity. Let’s see if there is any truth to what he said, and see if we can apply it to ourselves.
Same goes for conversations you might have with friends or co-workers over the comments. It’s a great opportunity to show that following Jesus is about admitting our inadequacies, which reinforces our need for Jesus. Yes, we should defend ourselves when other people speak things that aren’t true, but truth without love is just a lot of noise. There is some truth in what Charles was saying, but i think he took it way too far.
If you were offended by it, forgive him and move on. If you want to counter his points, do so with the right attitude.
What about you, and final thoughts?
MCB: I think that Christians need to take criticism well, because you never know if God can be using someone else to speak to you. Before Charles went too far, he had good points about avoiding hypocrisy and not being judge and jury. Also, it’s not loving your neighbor if you ignore him. However, sometimes Christians can be a little too eager to absorb criticism from people whose only goal is to stir up trouble. The tough part is identifying the motives of the person challenging us; the words themselves mean little in some ways compared to the heart attitude.
In the end, watching other blogs cover this story, I think I learned a little about the hearts and beliefs of my fellow bloggers, ha. That teasing aside, this was good practice in our constant need to filter the good out of our encounters with those who don’t agree with us, while ignoring/forgiving the evil or offensive part of the interaction.
I stumbled onto this today and couldn’t believe I had never heard of it.
It’s an organization called “In the Zone”, whose mission (”To help men discover and maximize their Godly potential.”) lines up with just about every other Christian Men’s organization ever formed. While there “Who We Are” page mentions nothing about sports, most of the folks who are involved have some sort of sports background. In fact, their banner image on their website has rotating quotes from Roger Staubach, Lou Holtz, Mike Ditka (picture circa 1985), Mark Richt, Loren Roberts, Tom Osborne, and Spencer Tillman.
Founded by Dr. Joe Pettigrew and Kyle Rote Jr. (who was an outstanding soccer player and now owns a successful sports agency), In the Zone held 5 Events in the Southern U.S. in 2007, but has yet to schedule any dates for 2008. They are partners with teh Fellowship of Christian Athletes, among others.
I found the organization through this article, which lists sports personalities that were expected to appear at some of the events held last year. Among them were NFL players Mike Minter and Patrick Ramsey, ESPN personalities Chris Mortenson and Mike Gottfried, and Illinois football coach Ron Zook. The article quotes Mortenson as saying:
“When I first heard about In The Zone, I wasn’t sure I wanted to hear more - commitments scare me. I’m glad I got over the fear – there’s no question God quickened my heart and opened my eyes to a great opportunity. We get to talk about our real Christian life in a sports-like setting? That’s too good to be true for a guy like me. Sign me up.”
Raise your hand if you had any idea that Chris Mortenson was a Christian. Yeah, I had no idea either.
If you’ve ever been to one of these events, or know anything about the organization, I’d love to hear more about it. One thing’s for sure though, they need a new video on their front page. Those NFL clips are over ten years old. The Buccaneers in those Orange uniforms? Yikes.
Here’s an interesting read for you while you’re trying to make sense of what happened on LOST last Thursday. It’s an article from the archives, published in February 2005 on msnbc.com, that talks about the role of Christianity in collegiate and professional sports. Some stats I found interesting…
“The figure commonly cited by those who work with them is that about a third of the players in the major American team sports are born-again or evangelical Christians — a little more in the NFL, a little less in the NBA and significantly more in NASCAR. Grant Teaff, the former head of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes who is now executive director of the American Football Coaches Association, has said as many as two-thirds of college football coaches are devout Christians.”
The article also talks about athiests in sports who feel like they can’t be open about their views because of the generally pro-God culture in locker rooms. I think the same thing applies to the rest of the world though. Most people, in general, have a negative connotation with the word “athiest”.
But back to the numbers, one-third of all athletes seems a bit high to me. Only because the number is nowhere near one-third at any job I’ve ever worked at. What do you think? Is this number high or is there a reason that many athletes are spiritual?
So there’s this thing going down today in Washington D.C., and if all you listen to is sports talk radio, you would think this is a huge deal…the story of the year, perhaps. Well, thankfully it’s not, despite how much the talking heads (cough*Mike & Mike*cough) have been talking about it.
You all know the story by now, so there’s no need to retell it. Bottom line is this: Despite some evidence that says otherwise, Roger Clemens is sticking with his story that he never used HGH or steroids.
The interesting angle here, in my opinion, is the position Andy Pettitte is in. One of his best friends has been accused of doing something unethical and illegal, and under oath he had a choice to make. Tell the truth and dime out his friend, or lie for the sake of his buddy. It was clear from the beginning what stance Pettitte was going to take, because similar claims were made against him in the Mitchell Report, and he admitted they were true days later. If he wasn’t going to lie to save his own skin, he wasn’t going to lie to save someone else’s.
It’s common knowledge that Pettitte is a Christian, and while that doesn’t carry a lot of weight with the media, it does make me wonder. What was Pettitte’s main motivation for telling the truth? Fear of God or fear of perjury? I’m guessing it was an equal mix of both that made the decision an easy one to make. (note that I said easy to make, not easy to follow through with). Pettitte knew he had to be truthful with Congress, even if one of his best friends asked him to lie.
I know there’s a chance that Roger is telling the truth, but personally, I don’t believe him (your mileage opinion may vary). Assuming that he is lying, and that Pettitte is sure of it, what a crappy position for Pettitte to be in. How do you think you’d handle being in Pettitte’s position? Would the threat or perjury make it an easy decision? Could you ever feel okay about lying to cover up a friend’s past transgressions if there was no real victim to the crime?
So let’s sit back and see how things play out. If the evidence shows that Clemens is telling the truth, he gets my sincere apology. If it shows Clemens is lying, well, no surprise there. And if, like I think is going to happen, there is no strong evidence either way, well then this really wasn’t such a big deal after all, was it?
Giving away up to 33% of what he makes to his church and other causes.
In the comments to last month’s post on a strange exchange at the World Series of Poker, Linda wanted to know my thoughts on whether it’s okay for Christians to play poker. I’ll share them below, but before I do, keep in mind 5 things:
QQ: Did you see U23D yet?
QQ: So you’re saying it’s ok for Christians to be addicted to cigarettes, alcohol, and gambling?
PFB: Let’s take Daniel Negreanu, who is a professional poker player and a Christian. Poker is Daniel’s job. If I believed that poker was inherently wrong, then I would believe that as a Christian he needs a new job.
PFB: Again, if you believe that there is nothing inherently wrong with poker, than he’s in the same boat as the golf nut who spends $100 a month on greens fees, the woman who spends $100 a month on her scrap-booking hobby, and the tech geek who spends $100 a month on the latest gadget.
QQ: I guess I see your point, but if so many Christians have a problem with it, shouldn’t that be a flag that it’s wrong?
MCB: My initial reaction to the video was disinterest. I read its description as Barkley calling conservatives “fake Christians”, and to me personally, that didn’t seem to be that inflammatory. At times, it does seem like conservative politicians wave the flag and Bible around election time, and then desert those constituencies later on. I thought that was all Barkley meant by that statement. But then, I watched the entire video when I had more time, and I was a little angry. Sure, Chuck looks awkward and somewhat pitiable on that broadcast. But I’m sure it would come as a shock to historical saints if “not judging” is the pinnacle of morality! All Christians should vote Libertarian by Chuck’s logic. What did you think about what Barkley said when you watched the video? Was it truly offensive, or do you think he just spoke without thinking?
I stumbled onto this today and couldn’t believe I had never heard of it.
Here’s an interesting read for you
So there’s this thing going down today in Washington D.C., and if all you listen to is sports talk radio, you would think this is a huge deal…the story of the year, perhaps. Well, thankfully it’s not, despite how much the talking heads (cough*Mike & Mike*cough) have been talking about it.
