Tattoos and Cigarettes

[christiana]

quote:

It only sounds pious to those who don't think.

Now that wasnt very nice!

If we follow Rom 12:1,2 then there must obviously be great distinctive differences between the world and the christian. Are we too see how much of what they do is permissible for us; seeing how close to the edge we can live! Why do christians feel a need to 'eat' their own and declare them of a lesser 'quality' of christian if they choose to live more piously, choosing to grow ever closer to the Lord, remain separate from the world, perhaps being an intercessor. Why does that make them bait for other christians to criticize? Do you see their honest desires for such to be pharisaical or what? Hmmmm

 

[Jim Johnston]

Do you also consider it acceptable to expose ample cleaveage, fore and aft? I consider it very offensive and displeasing to the Lord, yet from what you say you might think it to concern no one but yourself, is that right?

We can provide verses which explicitly speak to the contrary.

The p[roblem with your analogy, is that you cannot provide verses for your position on this matter under discussion.

 

[Jim Johnston]

Sooo, what I'm hearing on this board is that 'anything goes' and there are no boundaries to be drawn socially regarding dress, behavior or mutilation of the body, is this correct? No limits!

I believe if you dont stand firm for something, you will soon fall for anything. Is this rigid thinking? It seems I hear that to follow the trend of the world is a good thing, to fit into the societal mode and not be a squeaky wheel. Dont stand out like a sore thumb. Dont mention that there must be discernment in all things, including what we read, how we dress, where we go, what we eat and in everything we do. Is this what is considered the christian thinking of today? I'd really like to know. Please advise.

Well, we all "stand for something." For example, we stand for justification by faith alone. That's where I'll make a stand. Not on justification by no tattoos alone.

Further, what we're telling you is that if you can't find support in the Bible, then don't bind our conscience.

I think we agree with Augustine here: "Love God and do as you please." - St. Augustine.

 

[BobVigneault]

We've argued this a few times now. One wasn't so long ago but I think we needed to delete for the safety of one of our missionaries. In that one I had linked to my blog in which I dealt somewhat with the topic of tattoos. Here is the link. I'm against the practice though there is no explicit biblical argument against it. I SURE WISH THERE WAS! Here is the link to my blog post.

I also wish I was in the tattoo removal business. The pattern of this world regarding 'tats' has already begun to swing. Tattoo removal businesses are going to clean up. (No pun intended.)

 

[Davidius]

quote:

It only sounds pious to those who don't think.

Now that wasnt very nice!

If we follow Rom 12:1,2 then there must obviously be great distinctive differences between the world and the christian. Are we too see how much of what they do is permissible for us; seeing how close to the edge we can live! Why do christians feel a need to 'eat' their own and declare them of a lesser 'quality' of christian if they choose to live more piously, choosing to grow ever closer to the Lord, remain separate from the world, perhaps being an intercessor. Why does that make them bait for other christians to criticize? Do you see their honest desires for such to be pharisaical or what? Hmmmm

You're right, there does need to be a big difference between the world and the Christian. But it is the Pharisees who take that to mean something completely external. They always have and they still do. It isn't pious to add to God's commandments. We don't become "closer to the Lord" by following rules we make up for ourselves in order to feel holier.

But as Paul M., I too do not have a problem with someone not wanting to get a tattoo or smoke. What I have a problem with is the casting of burdensome extra-biblical commandments onto the consciences of other Christians in order to make them conform to some individual's extra-biblical standard of holiness.

 

[christiana]

Thanks for all the input, I think. This has long been an issue I find troubling. Actually I think the Romans 12:1,2 and many other verses give clear boundaries for our behavior though they certainly do require discernment. 'Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus' shows where our focus should be, on Him, not on decorating our body in a pagan manner. Seems to me some just like to live on the edge and push the limits rather than to see how very much they can learn and know of Him and 'Study to show themselves approved unto God, a workman that needeth no to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth'. What, while covered in grotesque tattoos yet? I dont think so. Is our focus on ourself or Him where it should be? Seems what I see and hear here is very sad. Do you hate to do what is displeasing to Him? Are you so sure He would find those gross tattoos acceptable and glorifying to Him! I find them terribly offensive.
I'm off to call to Him and to ask for guidance, not for a tattoo, but for my heart to be one that loves the brethren! Sometimes I find that to be my biggest challenge.
Did you read the article on MOdesty by Mary Mohler? She declares boundaries clearly!!
I will always have much to learn, much to pray over, much mercy and grace needed!

 

[JBaldwin]

Bob-

I read your blog and couldn't agree more.

I also wish I was in the tattoo removal business. The pattern of this world regarding 'tats' has already begun to swing. Tattoo removal businesses are going to clean up. (No pun intended.)

By the way, my husband has a co-worker who just moved to South Carolina from California. She was a tatoo artist and said in California, there is now more money there in tatoo removal than in tatoo application.

 

[Davidius]

Are you so sure He would find those gross tattoos acceptable and glorifying to Him! I find them terribly offensive.

And this is the great error of modern Fundamentalism.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Are these your reasons for the Leviticus passage? I just want to be clear.
Paul...

I am familiar with that verse, and I must now come clean with what I forgot to add in my original post. I didn't get any of my tattoos "for the dead." Furthermore, I don't believe that Lev. 19:28 is part of what is commonly referred to as part of the moral law. It has ceremonial intentions, i.e., the setting apart of Israel from the nations around them.

Gene...

Paul is right. The Bible condemns tattooing for the dead . So, what makes tattooing sinful in the Law is idolatry. So, he's right, its part of the ceremonial law, but we need to remember that it is indexed to the moral law through the caveat "for the dead." Tattooing itself isn't idolatrous. Tattooing for the dead is idolatrous, and those around Israel were concrete exemplars of it. Is getting a tattoo today idolatry or not? If so, where is the NT argument to support it? Is it an inversion of the creation order? If it is, then is it illicit to trim the hedges of your house? Isn't that inverting the creation order too? Do those who oppose tattooing also oppose the cutting of the hair of the head along the sides on males? Do they wear clothes woven of multiple fibers? No and No. Why? Because there are not pagans around us doing these things. On the other hand, if the Secret Police were to rise up and command us to grow our hair out to worship the Lord President of the United States, we would have license to invoke that text. Why? Because then it would, be idolatrous, of course.

I will be gone tomorrow so I won't be able to discuss this till Monday. But I just want to be clear about your arguments so that I have your understanding. I am not accusing you of sin as Jamison, Fausset, and Brown are. I am collecting data. But this passage is one that has kept me from ever getting one. I am not sure about his inversion argument. I am not sure that the New Testament needs to condemn or call Tattooing an idolatrous act. Especially if the Old Covenant already does. And I am not so convinced it doesn't yet. The new Testament doesn't necessarily condemn some acts the Old Covenant does condemn. But because they aren't mentioned in the New Covenant doesn't make it okay to make void the Old Testament command. Especially if the Old Covenant does condemn an immoral act. Or does it? That seems to be a part of Gene's argument. And we can argue about whether or not this passage is a moral law argument later. It sure is surrounded by a lot of moral teaching. Like the following verse that isn't repeated in the New Testament discussing making your daughters prostitutes.

I am not a Hebrew scholar but I am not so sure that 'For the dead' is necessarily attached to the marking part. I will look into it.

 

[christiana]

quote:

It only sounds pious to those who don't think.

Now that wasnt very nice!

If we follow Rom 12:1,2 then there must obviously be great distinctive differences between the world and the christian. Are we too see how much of what they do is permissible for us; seeing how close to the edge we can live! Why do christians feel a need to 'eat' their own and declare them of a lesser 'quality' of christian if they choose to live more piously, choosing to grow ever closer to the Lord, remain separate from the world, perhaps being an intercessor. Why does that make them bait for other christians to criticize? Do you see their honest desires for such to be pharisaical or what? Hmmmm

You're right, there does need to be a big difference between the world and the Christian. But it is the Pharisees who take that to mean something completely external. They always have and they still do. It isn't pious to add to God's commandments. We don't become "closer to the Lord" by following rules we make up for ourselves in order to feel holier.

But as Paul M., I too do not have a problem with someone not wanting to get a tattoo or smoke. What I have a problem with is the casting of burdensome extra-biblical commandments onto the consciences of other Christians in order to make them conform to some individual's extra-biblical standard of holiness.

I'm not making any rules but I am observing and discerning and feel that the external reveals what has or has not occurred on the inside, whether a person a truly regenerate. I would challenge you to listen to this sermon on what the church is and who is in it, especially the part that speaks to how our life reveals to whom we belong! As it says in Romans, we are slaves to Him whom we obey. Neither the smoking nor the tattoo would serve to glorify God and thus be an adverse witness of ownership! When one truly loves God they are desperate to please Him and glorify Him in all they do. They do not see just how much they can compromise with the world and how many things they can also do that the world does that would declare them to still be unregenerate.

Listen to this sermon and see what you think: SermonAudio.com - The Function Of The Curch

 

[SRoper]

Did you read the article on MOdesty by Mary Mohler? She declares boundaries clearly!!

I have read it. I don't think anyone has a problem with boundaries, but we do have a problem with declaring our own boundaries as God's boundaries. To take the example you gave, I find myself in disagreement with Mary Mohler's standards on several points. If I remember, she forbids halter tops and strapless tops, while I don't have a problem with such attire. On the other hand, she thinks shorts and swimsuits are acceptable, but I think these tend towards indecency. Who is right?

 

[~~Susita~~]

Just a little food for thought.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're not actually inhaling the smoke when smoking a cigar, are you? Unless done by accident. I don't think there's anything wrong with smoking a cigar, if you enjoy the taste, that's fine. But smoking cigarettes is a whole different ball game, because they do damage the lungs. I firmly believe we should do our best to maintain the bodies the Lord saw fit to bless us with. That said, we were examining slides in the lab the other day (epithelial tissues), and I got to see a healthy lung vs. a smoker's lung. Pretty nasty. When you're smoking a cigarette, that's basically destroying the cells in the epithelial layer so mitosis (cell reproduction) is having to increase to keep up with what you are destroying. Cells are replicating at a much faster rate to repair the damage, and cancer is a result of too many cells. When going through chemotherapy/radiation, they are basically destroying excess cells. I thought I heard something about the epithelial layer in the stomach replacing itself every few days, so that's quite a thought. After all the other junk we eat/drink, why add more and make our bodies work harder to maintain homeostasis, folks? o.0

I'm still not too fond of the idea of injecting ink into my skin and killing off more cells in the process when we do that just by brushing up against a door (thank God for His master design of our body). It could be considered a form of mutilation since the body has to heal itself when you just decided to drag a foreign object around in your skin. That's kinda gross, in my opinion.

Here's some food for thought, kinda boring if you don't like science-related stuff. But this really freaked me out when we were talking about "desmosomes" (Prevent cells from being pulled apart when they're subjected to stress) - you can pinch a piece of skin on your arm and hang the weight of your whole arm from that pinch because of them. Here's a picture. Those are two cells and the forks are the desmosomes holding them together. http://biodidac.bio.uottawa.ca/ftp/BIODIDAC/Zoo/Cell/diagbw/cell023b.gif I just thought it was freaky because they're so tiny, yet they would support such weight. Makes me want to be more careful with the body God has given me.

 

[RamistThomist]

Revelation 19: 16

6On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:
KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

Sounds like a tatoo.

 

[Jim Johnston]

I'm still not too fond of the idea of injecting ink into my skin and killing off more cells in the process when we do that just by brushing up against a door (thank God for His master design of our body). It could be considered a form of mutilation since the body has to heal itself when you just decided to drag a foreign object around in your skin. That's kinda gross, in my opinion.
[/COLOR]

Your skin must repair itself when you pierce your ears too. And, when you work out, you tear your muscles and so they must repair themselves.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

J.G. Vos, The Bible Doctrine of the Separated Life
Brian Schwertley, Christian Liberty and Liberty of Conscience

 

[SRoper]

I'm still not too fond of the idea of injecting ink into my skin and killing off more cells in the process when we do that just by brushing up against a door (thank God for His master design of our body). It could be considered a form of mutilation since the body has to heal itself when you just decided to drag a foreign object around in your skin. That's kinda gross, in my opinion.

Having second thoughts about getting the rampant lion tattoo?

 

[~~Susita~~]

I'm still not too fond of the idea of injecting ink into my skin and killing off more cells in the process when we do that just by brushing up against a door (thank God for His master design of our body). It could be considered a form of mutilation since the body has to heal itself when you just decided to drag a foreign object around in your skin. That's kinda gross, in my opinion.

Having second thoughts about getting the rampant lion tattoo?

Never had to

 

[RamistThomist]

I'm still not too fond of the idea of injecting ink into my skin and killing off more cells in the process when we do that just by brushing up against a door (thank God for His master design of our body). It could be considered a form of mutilation since the body has to heal itself when you just decided to drag a foreign object around in your skin. That's kinda gross, in my opinion.

Having second thoughts about getting the rampant lion tattoo?

Never had to

To answer your question about the cigars. No, you don't inhale, but the back of your throat does get really warm. Your lips are in contact with the tobacco, and to some degree, your throat. Much smaller danger than cigarettes.

 

[christiana]

Revelation 19: 16

6On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:
KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

Sounds like a tatoo.

Blasphemous!!

 

[RamistThomist]

Revelation 19: 16

6On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:
KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

Sounds like a tatoo.

Blasphemous!!

I didn't make it up. Anyway, I don't think Christ cut himself for the dead, ala the prohibition in Leviticus.

But on the other hand, the name might not have been written in ink, so it's probably okay.

 

[Gesetveemet]

Are tattoos unbiblical? Displeasing to God? . . . Any thoughts?

The motive for getting a tattoo is to imitate current fashions of the world. It is also a returning to pagan practices of doing to our bodies what WE want. So yes tattoos are unbiblical and displeasing to God.

The Institutes of Biblical Law by Rousas John Rushdoony
The Sixth commandment pg. 223

Rousas John Rushdoony said: The personal application includes markings, cuttings, and tattoos of the body, for the body must be used under God’s law, and all such acts are forbidden in the law, whether for morning, as religious marks, or for ornamental or other uses (Lev. 19:28 21:5). Tattooing was practiced religiously to indicate that one adhered to or belonged to a god; it also indicated that a man was a slave, that he belonged to a lord or owner. The believer, as a free man in Christ, indicates Christ’s lordship by obedience, not by servile markings: the body is kept holy and clean unto the Lord. The persistence of a mark of slavery among men is indicative of man’s perversity.

William




.

 

[Andrew P.C.]

The motive for getting a tattoo is to imitate current fashions of the world. It is also a returning to pagan practices of doing to our bodies what WE want. So yes tattoos are unbiblical and displeasing to God.

The Institutes of Biblical Law by Rousas John Rushdoony
The Sixth commandment pg. 223

Rousas John Rushdoony said: The personal application includes markings, cuttings, and tattoos of the body, for the body must be used under God’s law, and all such acts are forbidden in the law, whether for morning, as religious marks, or for ornamental or other uses (Lev. 19:28 21:5). Tattooing was practiced religiously to indicate that one adhered to or belonged to a god; it also indicated that a man was a slave, that he belonged to a lord or owner. The believer, as a free man in Christ, indicates Christ’s lordship by obedience, not by servile markings: the body is kept holy and clean unto the Lord. The persistence of a mark of slavery among men is indicative of man’s perversity.

William




.

So, he skips over "5'They shall not make any baldness on their heads, nor shave off the edges of their beards," and ONLY applies "nor make any cuts in their flesh." Hmm.. the pick and choose method.

If you apply the last part, YOU MUST apply the first part. So, ALL bald and smoothed faced men are a bunch of sinners... what a thought.

 

[VictorBravo]

So, he skips over "5'They shall not make any baldness on their heads, nor shave off the edges of their beards," and ONLY applies "nor make any cuts in their flesh." Hmm.. the pick and choose method.

If you apply the last part, YOU MUST apply the first part. So, ALL bald and smoothed faced men are a bunch of sinners... what a thought.

Hey, leave us natural baldies out of it!

"And the man whose hair is fallen off his head, he is bald; yet is he clean." Lev 13:40

 

[Andrew P.C.]

So, he skips over "5'They shall not make any baldness on their heads, nor shave off the edges of their beards," and ONLY applies "nor make any cuts in their flesh." Hmm.. the pick and choose method.

If you apply the last part, YOU MUST apply the first part. So, ALL bald and smoothed faced men are a bunch of sinners... what a thought.

Hey, leave us natural baldies out of it!

"And the man whose hair is fallen off his head, he is bald; yet is he clean." Lev 13:40

This would be a referrence to "unnatural" baldies. Them who are balding but just go ahead and speed it up by shaving it....

 

[wsw201]

The relatively recent (recent in the context of smoking's existence) hype and propaganda from the Government against smoking is due to two primary motivating factors: Exapnsion of government conrtol and $$$$$ for the private entities producing the studies which "prove" the government's propaganda.

 

[Archlute]

If we want to avoid a debate about externals only I would ask what the motives are for the one "getting inked", for surely the motive is the greatest indicator of the suitability of the practice for the Christian in an area where there is not clear condemnation in Scripture. I would say that a desire to, if I may be free to use the language of high school, "look cool" in the eyes of the world (even by way of a Christian symbol such as a cross) is the primary, if largely unspoken, motive for anybody getting a tattoo. That doesn't sound to me like giving God his glory, nor is it a more effective avenue for witness than speaking the word of the Gospel to your inked up friends in due season. The latter is not only more effective, but it is also much more difficult.



One poster summed up the unfortunate attitude of many Christians on this issue quite well, as also that of many high schoolers, when he wrote:

And what's wrong with doing what I want to do?

The last time I checked, this was indeed an attitude conflicting with the tenor of Christian thought and life as found in the apostolic writings, and one in which we should not glory (for then we glory in our self-indulgence). Now if our regenerate souls are doing what we want to do, because we find that it is what God wants us to do out of love for Him, our neighbor, and the Gospel, then go for it. However, you would be hard pressed to convince me that the Holy Spirit is that interested in including a self-glorifying practice, such as tattooing one's body, in Paul's statement that we should "walk in the Spirit, and so not fulfill the desires of the flesh". Granted, that passage is addressing internal issues of the heart and of spiritual fruit, but can one really separate the act of tattooing from an internal motive?

Luther said that even the simple tasks of cutting of our hair and shaving our beards should be done out of love and service to our neighbor. I don't know how many of my neighbors would be highly edified if I came home with a tattoo of a cross on my left cheek (you pick which one).

 

[Dr Mike Kear]

Forgive me if I'm out of line for saying this, but is seems to me that when issues like these are discussed, the main problem is that there is one group who wants to take part of the levitical law and impose it on others while being very discriminate about how they appliy that same law to themselves. What I mean is that if we are to appeal to the law, then let's be consistent about it. We shouldn't just pick the parts that match our pet peeves and disregard the parts we don't like.

Personally, I think that believers are delivered from the levitical law and are now operating under the law of Christ. Which means I can wear a blended fabric jacket and I don't have to put my wife out of the house once a month and I don't have to stone my neighbor for not keeping sabbath, etc.

Just my opinion. I've been wrong before.

 

[RamistThomist]

I don't have to stone my neighbor for not keeping sabbath, etc.

Just my opinion. I've been wrong before.

Don't want to derail the discussion, but you wouldn't have done that as an individual Israelite. Individuals and families did not have the jurisdiction for the execution of capital crimes, save manslaughter.

 

[Dr Mike Kear]

Don't want to derail the discussion, but you wouldn't have done that as an individual Israelite. Individuals and families did not have the jurisdiction for the execution of capital crimes, save manslaughter.

True that. I just tossed out the first thing that popped into my mind. Perhaps I should have said something about the way I cut my hair (what's left of it) or how I regularly partake of filthy, filthy swine.

 

[calgal]

quote:

It only sounds pious to those who don't think.

Now that wasnt very nice!

If we follow Rom 12:1,2 then there must obviously be great distinctive differences between the world and the christian. Are we too see how much of what they do is permissible for us; seeing how close to the edge we can live! Why do christians feel a need to 'eat' their own and declare them of a lesser 'quality' of christian if they choose to live more piously, choosing to grow ever closer to the Lord, remain separate from the world, perhaps being an intercessor. Why does that make them bait for other christians to criticize? Do you see their honest desires for such to be pharisaical or what? Hmmmm

You're right, there does need to be a big difference between the world and the Christian. But it is the Pharisees who take that to mean something completely external. They always have and they still do. It isn't pious to add to God's commandments. We don't become "closer to the Lord" by following rules we make up for ourselves in order to feel holier.

But as Paul M., I too do not have a problem with someone not wanting to get a tattoo or smoke. What I have a problem with is the casting of burdensome extra-biblical commandments onto the consciences of other Christians in order to make them conform to some individual's extra-biblical standard of holiness.

Presence or absence of body art does not make someone any more or less of a Christian. It means they have a higher pain tolerance than I do.