After Robert Powell hit the Florida Lottery jackpot last month and took home more than $6 million, he thought of his church.
And he offered to drop his tithe, around $600,000, in the collection plate of First Baptist Orange Park.
But the church and Pastor David Tarkington politely declined and told Powell they will not accept the lottery winnings.
Many churches do not approve of the lottery and gambling but on the other hand Pastor Dr. Lorenzo Hall of the El-Beth-El Divine Holiness Church says $600,000 can do a lot of good.
I’m a bit torn on this one – while I don’t like lotteries (really just a more palatable form of gambling), isn’t the church setting a precedent here about other donations? Why should not every dollar that comes their way be similarly scrutinized? If someone made an income working at a 7-11 (which sells cigarettes) and then donated to the church, would that not also be problematic? What about an employee of the State Lottery Commission? Or pyramid marketing schemes? And on a practical basis, how would you ever be able to know the source of every dollar?
I’m curious if they would reject a tithe of the great economic incentive checks that many Americans got .Would they reject a tithe of an inheritance from a robber baron relative?
George Bernard Shaw was reputed to have said ‘We’ve already established that. We’re merely haggling over the price.’
Most taxes and fees are compulsory methods of raising revenues. Lottery winnings may be described as randomly distributed rebates of voluntary tax revenues. I would think that these winnings are better spent by even a Baptist church than frittered away at Wal-mart or worse, reacquired by the government.
I read recently of a preacher who cheerfully accepted a donation from a notorious gambler(?), saying, “That money’s been doing the devil’s work for long enough; it’s time to put it into the service of God.”
I’d say take the money, dedicate it to the Lord, and call it “plundering the Egyptians.” If the man wants to honor the Lord with his tithe, for pete’s sake, cash the check with graciousness.
Years ago, I was working with Habitat when someone objected to a donation from somewhere questionable. I don’t know if it was an original, but Millard Fuller responded, “Only thing wrong with tainted money is there taint enough of it!” I think I agree.
Somebody has got to be kidding. (Oh, I see it was a Baptist Church).
Nobody ever heard of CHURCH BINGO??? Sheesh!!!! A church I used to be a member of actually asked everybody to buy lottery tickets to see if we could get our building fund full. While nobody hit “big” a couple of folks did “hit” for a bit and the coffers gained a few thousand.
As somebody else said, the Church should not question the source of the funds. A bank robber who tithes may be a criminal, but he is a criminal who gave God his 10 percent.(GRIN-just in case people cannot understand irony.)
If the church doesn’t want your money, leave it. Find a new church.
Before you leave, ask the pastor to show you where the Bible says gambling is a sin.
Give the money to the poor or start your own community outreach organization. It would probably be put to better use.
-Vincent
Should the church not accept a tithe from a tobacco grower or brewer? How is a gambler any worse? What if the oil companies tithed their record profits…would the church accept those? It’s only money. Don’t love it, just use it for Gods glory.
Wow, I thought the pastor was standing on principle here, but everyone else posting seems to think he was stupid for rejecting the money. Of course, no church can know exactly where the money comes from that they receive, but if they truly hold that gambling is sinful and they know specifically that the money comes from gambling, then I agree they should refuse the money. That’s called standing on principle and should be respected. Of course the church can probably make better use of it than someone else, but so what? What if a prostitute offers 10 percent of her business takings, and sees nothing wrong with her business? Should the church just say, well, how you got this money isn’t important and if you want to continue to make money this way, that’s okay as long as we get our 10 percent?
Again, I guess I missed the point where the Church (Anglican) stated that gambling was a sin. I know that Baptists, Methodists etc have problems with it but I did not ever hear that Episcopalians/Anglicans (or Orthodox) not to mention our Roman brothers ever speak out in opposition.
But, recchip (#10), this is a Baptist church that rejected it, so they are acting consistent with their principles and understanding of the Bible. As Anglicans, we don’t agree, but I guess I read many of the comments here as slightly condescending. If only our own church acted more consistently on our own theology.
I think it is reasonable – and honorable – to reject the lottery winnings. I wouldn’t do it myself, however.
There are many policy aspects about the lottery that should disturb Christians. I’m not against it absolutely, but it seems to be a tax upon people who are bad at math, and inherently legitimize bad fiscal policy at the state level. The Spanish have an interesting way of going about the lottery – lots of people win, and the winnings are typically $10,000 or less: enough to help someone out in a crunch time, not enough to change one’s lifestyle.
On the other hand, sometimes casino owners seem a lot more responsible with their cash than wall street investors.
I’ve always thought lotteries were a dumb use of grocery money, and targeted at those who can least afford it, but to equate it with prostitution is a bit over the top. Probably not as expensive as fishing or golf when you add it all up. Either of those things could potentially take food out of the kids’ mouths, when practiced by the irresponsible. It’s just that buying a lottery ticket doesn’t statistically increase your odds of winning. 😉
Cindy T. – I didn’t mean to equate gambling with prostitution. I meant to use something that most could agree was not Christian behavior (prostitution) so that I could make my point that this pastor, because he believes gambling is not Christian behavior, is standing on his convictions on not accepting the money. The point is not that we think gambling is okay or doesn’t take that much money to play, etc. The point is this pastor believes gambling is unbiblical and is standing by his theology at some financial cost to him and his church and I applaud him for it. Maybe being from the South with lots of Baptist neighbors, this attitude about gambling (and liquor sales and dancing, etc.) is something I’m pretty used to – for others it might seem too strange or foreign, but I think he did the right thing according to his beliefs. (And as someone who thinks the lottery is just a tax on those least able to afford it, I wish fewer states had lotteries – but I do buy the occasional ticket.)
A principled stance. If the position and teaching of the church is anti-gambling, taking the money would undercut its consistency and whole message. Say rather like the Episcopal Church “opposing” (by General Convention resolution) abortion and then officially supporting the RCRC (by Executive Council) with no input or oversight by the GC allowed.
See?
Thank you, dwstoudmd, you said it much better than I was!
Obviously, no one in this thread has listened to Kendall preach on gambling and the lottery. A sermon he preached back in 1997 caused me to rethink my views on the lottery and gambling. Unless he has significantly changed I suspect he would have a hard time accepting lottery winnings in the collection plate.