I'm getting my first tattoo

[PinkSweetart]

Hey guys, I have an idea. Let's not respond to the legalists in this thread. I was looking for artistic opinions, and I'm not really interested in playing dodgeball with stone throwers.

I'm not an artist so my opinion wont matter, but I think that's a neato idea for a tatt. Sounds like it'll be a unique one, too.

I hope it doesn't hurt too bad. I feel like your wrist would hurt because of the veins, but who knows. Good luck!

 

[Sophrosyne]

Personally I am a non tatoo person. I try and convince people that tatoos are typically often too much like advertising on your skin as to who you are and too often people are not persuaded by ads but by actions. I could have gotten a few of those fish stickers for my car today for free but decided that too many have them such that they don't really mean that much just like wearing a cross now has not much meaning to me I have to hear and see how people act to be sure they are not just trying to appear "holier" by symbols.

 

[TheUnforeseen]

You can have no relationship with Him unless you keep His rules.

Joh 14:15 ¶ If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Joh 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

Agreed, also to add to this.

Matthew 7:17-20 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

Faith can be likened to the seed of a tree. Faith will allow the tree to grow, but it is by actions that the tree bears good or bad fruit. How is good and bad discerned? Only by the commandments of God.

The law of the Torah and the Gospels are not separated, but continued.

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

The Torah is the Word of God, and Yeshua is the living Word of God. The Torah was given in writing [John 1 states that the Word was in the beginning with God] and was then fulfilled and continued by when it became flesh.

I don't know why people presume that they are 2 separate things, when indeed they were given from the same source [i.e. God].

Observe how Avraham was first called by God, he got his faith then and there [without the law], but it was through obedience to God through the laws he was given that was the seal of righteousness. One cannot have faith without obeying what God wants at the same time and you cannot pick and choose what you think right or wrong. God knows best.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Life Stages Forum for the discussion of different life stages in life. For debate please go to the Society or Theology sections of the board.

 

[ChurchOfGod]

Great idea for a tat! And meaning is everything, so it's a very good choice!
GB



igg.me/p/294368/x/1887897

 

[Sketcher]

The Messiah stated the law was a requirement in order to achieve life.

Mt 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

1Jo 5:2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.

and

Mt 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you who practice lawlessness.

You can have no relationship with Him unless you keep His rules.

Joh 14:15 ¶ If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Joh 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

Spoiler: Acts 15:1-29

Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers: “Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. 3 The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the brothers very glad. 4 When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.

5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses.”

6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

12 The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13 When they finished, James spoke up: “Brothers, listen to me. 14 Simon[a] has described to us how God at first showed his concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for himself. 15 The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:

16 “‘After this I will return
and rebuild David’s fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17 that the remnant of men may seek the Lord,
and all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things’
18 that have been known for ages.[c]

19 “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21 For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”

22 Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers. 23 With them they sent the following letter:

The apostles and elders, your brothers,

To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:

Greetings.

24 We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25 So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.

Farewell.

 

[Sketcher]

...shortly after Christmas. I've decided on this, on my inner right wrist, facing so that it will be right-side-up from the perspective of someone who is shaking my hand.

How far up on the wrist will it be? Will you be able to cover it up with a cuffed shirt if you need to?

 

[Nilloc]

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

"It was said, 'WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE'; but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
(Mat 5:31-32 NASB)

Oops, there goes a jot of the law.

"Again, you have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FALSE VOWS, BUT SHALL FULFILL YOUR VOWS TO THE LORD.' "But I say to you, make no oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God,
(Mat 5:33-34 NASB)

There goes a tittle.

And there's still more:

"You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
(Mat 5:38-39 NASB)

"But go and learn what this means: 'I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
(Mat 9:13 NASB)

A woman who had had a hemorrhage for twelve years, and had endured much at the hands of many physicians, and had spent all that she had and was not helped at all, but rather had grown worse-- after hearing about Jesus, she came up in the crowd behind Him and touched His cloak. For she thought, "If I just touch His garments, I will get well." Immediately the flow of her blood was dried up; and she felt in her body that she was healed of her affliction.
(Mar 5:25-29 NASB)

And He *said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.) And He was saying, "That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man.
(Mar 7:18-20 NASB)

But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."
(Joh 8:7 NASB)

You can't just take a few verses from the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount and use that as a way to dismiss everything else. You have to read the entire sermon--and indeed, all of the Gospels-- to see that Jesus didn't interpret the law legalistically. The law is about love (Matt. 7:12, Mark 12:28-34) and when it came to things that Jesus didn't see as loving, he didn't hesitate to disregard the law on those (as the above passages demonstrate). To use the later Pauline phrase, Jesus followed the spirit of the law, rather than the letter.

I hope those that insist on following all of the Mosaic law would have followed Exodus 21:20-21 had you lived in the 1800's. To be consistent, you wouldn't have any objection to those slaves masters in the South that beat there slaves and it took a few days for them to die, correct?

 

[TheUnforeseen]

"It was said, 'WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE'; but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
(Mat 5:31-32 NASB)

Oops, there goes a jot of the law.

"Again, you have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FALSE VOWS, BUT SHALL FULFILL YOUR VOWS TO THE LORD.' "But I say to you, make no oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God,
(Mat 5:33-34 NASB)

There goes a tittle.

And there's still more:

"You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
(Mat 5:38-39 NASB)

"But go and learn what this means: 'I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
(Mat 9:13 NASB)

A woman who had had a hemorrhage for twelve years, and had endured much at the hands of many physicians, and had spent all that she had and was not helped at all, but rather had grown worse-- after hearing about Jesus, she came up in the crowd behind Him and touched His cloak. For she thought, "If I just touch His garments, I will get well." Immediately the flow of her blood was dried up; and she felt in her body that she was healed of her affliction.
(Mar 5:25-29 NASB)

And He *said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.) And He was saying, "That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man.
(Mar 7:18-20 NASB)

But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."
(Joh 8:7 NASB)

You can't just take a few verses from the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount and use that as a way to dismiss everything else. You have to read the entire sermon--and indeed, all of the Gospels-- to see that Jesus didn't interpret the law legalistically. The law is about love (Matt. 7:12, Mark 12:28-34) and when it came to things that Jesus didn't see as loving, he didn't hesitate to disregard the law on those (as the above passages demonstrate). To use the later Pauline phrase, Jesus followed the spirit of the law, rather than the letter.

Yeshua in the sense of 'But I say to you' is not disregarding the original laws. He is taking them a step further and explaining them with more detail with fulfillment.

All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments - Mattai 22:40

Observe the following picture of how the laws can be arranged -

 

[TheUnforeseen]

I hope those that insist on following all of the Mosaic law would have followed Exodus 21:20-21 had you lived in the 1800's. To be consistent, you wouldn't have any objection to those slaves masters in the South that beat there slaves and it took a few days for them to die, correct?

That said, I suppose you are a sympathiser for and condone sexual immorality, gay rights, adultery, thievery etc, ?

Yeshua is about repentance. Not about accepting and defending sin.

 

[Nilloc]

Yeshua in the sense of 'But I say to you' is not disregarding the original laws. He is taking them a step further and explaining them with more detail with fulfillment.

No he isn't. The Torah permitted some things and he told people not to follow them. In the case of his healing of the woman I quoted, it's a direct reversal of what the law said. Jesus should have been made unclean when the woman touched him according to the law, but the opposite happened and he made her clean. It's a symbolic action (as Jesus and the prophets often did) that illustrates one of Jesus's teachings against legalism. Furthermore, making all foods clean doesn't sound like taking the Torah a step further. More like completely changing it.

That said, I suppose you are a sympathiser for and condone sexual immorality, gay rights, adultery, thievery etc, ?

Yeshua is about repentance. Not about accepting and defending sin.

Um, is that suppose to be an answer to my question? Let's try this again: would a slave owner who beat his slave and it took the slave a few days to die be justified? I'll answer your question after you answer mine.

 

[trentlogain2]

i'm going to sum up this trainwreck of a thread. someone came in stating how they were excited to get a tattoo, and then some legalists came in and said it was sin.

this sums up how i feel after watching this foolishness:

 

[twnsrkr]

No he isn't. The Torah permitted some things and he told people not to follow them. In the case of his healing of the woman I quoted, it's a direct reversal of what the law said. Jesus should have been made unclean when the woman touched him according to the law, but the opposite happened and he made her clean. It's a symbolic action (as Jesus and the prophets often did) that illustrates one of Jesus's teachings against legalism. Furthermore, making all foods clean doesn't sound like taking the Torah a step further. More like completely changing it.

Well if you christians would actually study the story, you'd find that Peter gave us the interpretation of his vision. And it wasn't that they could all party out on pork.

Ac 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Um, is that suppose to be an answer to my question? Let's try this again: would a slave owner who beat his slave and it took the slave a few days to die be justified? I'll answer your question after you answer mine.

What I hear you saying is that your greater than God. His ways are fallible cause you don't agree with them.

 

[Nilloc]

Well if you christians would actually study the story, you'd find that Peter gave us the interpretation of his vision. And it wasn't that they could all party out on pork.

Ac 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

I wasn't talking about Peter's vision; I didn't even mention it. I was referring to Mark 7, which I quoted above. Here it is again:

And He *said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.) And He was saying, "That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man.
(Mar 7:18-20 NASB)

What I hear you saying is that your greater than God. His ways are fallible cause you don't agree with them.

Why is this such a hard question for people to answer? Notice how both times someone responded to my question, it wasn't an actual answer, but an ad homenem. So, for a third time: would a slave owner who beat his slave and it took the slave a few days to die be justified in this killing? Yes or no?

 

[twnsrkr]

I wasn't talking about Peter's vision; I didn't even mention it. I was referring to Mark 7, which I quoted above. Here it is again:

And He *said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.) And He was saying, "That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man.
(Mar 7:18-20 NASB)

Why is this such a hard question for people to answer? Notice how both times someone responded to my question, it wasn't an actual answer, but an ad homenem. So, for a third time: would a slave owner who beat his slave and it took the slave a few days to die be justified in this killing? Yes or no?

The law states that if the slave dies immediately the master would be tried as a murderer. It then states that if the slave survives a day or two after the event, that master will not be prosecuted as a murderer, but will consequently suffer the financial loss of the slaves death. So, the killing is not justified, just not punishable by death in that instance.

 

[Nilloc]

The law states that if the slave dies immediately the master would be tried as a murderer. It then states that if the slave survives a day or two after the event, that master will not be prosecuted as a murderer, but will consequently suffer the financial loss of the slaves death. So, the killing is not justified, just not punishable by death in that instance.

Sure it makes it justified. It pretty much means you can kill your slaves, as long as you don't hurt them enough that they die immediately. Murder was supposed to be punished by death in the law. Evidently, it wasn't murder as long as it was a slave and took a few days. How does financial loss measure up to death? Why not just punish the master for murder? Sounds like it was a way to let masters off the hook for beating their slaves, as beating wouldn't necessarily result in immediate death.

 

[twnsrkr]

And as for the Messiah talking about all foods being clean. He's not talking about unclean food, because there is no unclean food. There are clean and unclean animals. And there is food. Only clean things were considered food to begin with.

But, he was talking about the ritualistic belief that dirty hands make food unclean. Which the law doesn't state.

 

[twnsrkr]

Sure it makes it justified. It pretty much means you can kill your slaves, as long as you don't hurt them enough that they die immediately. Murder was supposed to be punished by death in the law. Evidently, it wasn't murder as long as it was a slave and took a few days. How does financial loss measure up to death? Why not just punish the master for murder? Sounds like it was a way to let masters off the hook for beating their slaves, as beating wouldn't necessarily result in immediate death.

Thats a nice paragraph of your opinion once again. He designed it in a perfect form. You not understanding its justice doesn't detract from its sovereignty.

 

[Nilloc]

And as for the Messiah talking about all foods being clean. He's not talking about unclean food, because there is no unclean food. There are clean and unclean animals. And there is food. Only clean things were considered food to begin with.

If unclean animals wouldn't have counted as food, why would places like Lev. 11:4ff command not to eat it? Or would they have been eating something that wasn't food? What exactly would they have called bacon if not food?

But, he was talking about the ritualistic belief that dirty hands make food unclean. Which the law doesn't state.

Jesus says it isn't what goes into man that makes him dirty, but what comes from the heart. That covers not only food touched with dirty hands, but any thing you consume or touch (like other example of Jesus overturning purity I mentioned). If eating pork made you unclean, the entire logic of what Jesus is saying collapses. Jesus whole teaching was intended to be subversive to the idea of external purity. Here's a good summary:

A Portrait of Jesus | Jesus as Social Prophet

Thats a nice paragraph of your opinion once again.

A pargraph using logic and showing that that partcular commandment lacks any.

He designed it in a perfect form.

There was no "he" who designed the entirety of the Torah. The Mosaic law was developed over time by multiple people.

You not understanding its justice doesn't detract from its sovereignty.

Am I misunderstanding the logic of it, because you didn't actually question me on that? Shouldn't law and morality be consistent? Murder is supposed to be punished by death. Killing a slave is murder. Therefore, killing a slave should be met with death. Don't blame me for the Pentateuch's author(s) being inconsistent. Also, since you say the Mosaic law is a perfect system, it's good to know you have no problem with slavery.

 

[MissProverbs31]

Blind post - Congrats! I have one on my foot that says "Walk by faith"
Also, to the haters; judge lest you be judged.