Can Messianic Jews get body piercings and/or tattoos?

What kind of body piercing?

Leviticus chapter 19
Here we find instructions given by YHWH to Moses for the congregation of the children of Israel. Leviticus 19:28 is the verse which speaks about the OP.
Leviticus 19:28 "You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor imprint any marks upon you: I am the L-RD."

Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary

The word for "cuttings" in verse 28:

H8296
שׂרטת שׂרט
śereṭ śâreṭeth
seh'-ret, saw-reh'-teth
From H8295; an incision: - cutting.

H8295
שׂרט
śâraṭ
saw-rat'
A primitive root; to gash: - cut in pieces, make [cuttings] pieces.

This is "cuttings in your flesh for the dead", and the word for "dead" in this verse is "nefesh", which is anything that has/had the breath of life.

The word for "marks" in verse 28 is plural and there are two words used here (H3793 and H7085):

H3793
כּתבת
kethôbeth
keth-o'-beth
From H3789; a letter or other mark branded on the skin:

H3789
כּתב
kâthab
kaw-thab'
A primitive root; to grave; by implication to write (describe, inscribe, prescribe, subscribe): - describe, record, prescribe, subscribe, write (-ing, -ten).

H7085
קעקע
qa‛ăqa‛
kah-ak-ah'
From the same as H6970; an incision or gash

(which has something to do with "to clip off")


Sometimes when we learn the words of YHWH, we become worried about things we've done which do not line up with what is written. Nothing we've done can be undone. We have to start where we are and go forward.

An example of ear-piercing, of course this is a different context than going out and having it done, but is still an example...

Exodus 21:1 "Now these are the ordinances which you shall set before them.
21:2 If you buy a Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve; and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
21:3 If he come in by himself, he shall go out by himself; if he be married, then his wife shall go out with him.
21:4 If his master give him a wife, and she bear him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.
21:5 But if the servant shall plainly say: I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free;
21:6 then his master shall bring him unto God, and shall bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever."


Deuteronomy 15:12 "If your brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, be sold unto you, he shall serve you six years; and in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you.
15:13 And when you let him go free from you, you shall not let him go empty;
15:14 you shall furnish him liberally out of your flock, and out of your threshing-floor, and out of your winepress; of that wherewith the L-RD your G-d has blessed you, you shall give unto him.
15:15 And you shall remember that you were a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the L-RD your G-d redeemed you; therefore I command you this thing today.
15:16 And it shall be, if he say unto you: 'I will not go out from you'; because he loves you and your house, because he fares well with you;
15:17 then you shall take an awl, and thrust it through his ear and into the door, and he shall be your bondman for ever. And also unto your bondwoman you shall do likewise."

Dpiiiius said:

Ear piercings . 4g stretched lobes specifically lol

Click to expand...

That one tends to be a hot-button issue that has always caused a lot of contention within the Messianic world....be it with gaugers, tattos, or brands and other similar things.


There are many for it whereas others are against it---both groups often going off the scriptures in Leviticus 19 discussing the subject of markings in the body. The side against it tends to assume that all discussions of "make no markings or cuttings in your flesh" is absolute/indicative of all kinds, whereas others are for the thought that the context was not making markings for the dead and unto idols (as the rest of the scripture discusses)---as the practice was cutting into the body to channel the spirits of the departed---and those for it note the many places in scripture where markings were placed on others by the Lord to symbolize certain realities (with Yeshua himself described as doing so). The ones who tend to be for it also note where there does seem to be disconnection in saying no cuttings/markings of any kind are allowed when there's already acceptance of that on other levels (i.e. plastic surgery like face-lifts and any type of facial reconstruction, going to the dentist for alteration of teeth/looking good, piercings of many kinds--be it earings or nose rings, etc), alongside not doing much of the rest in Leviticus when it came to other things like not shaving the sides of ones beard.

A lot of the battles seem similar between camps in Evangelical Christianity where others are more fundamentalist and others not so much. I tend to side personally with other Messianic Jews ( like Alan Hirsch, brother of Lawrence Hirsch who grew up in South Africa and leads Messianic Jewish fellowships in Austraila and has worked with Alan Hirsch in doing so ...more shared here / here/here/here/here and here) in his views on the matter when it comes to noting that decisions are between the individual and the Lord. There was more discussed elsewhere on the subject in threads such as Tattoos and Sacred Ink: Tattoo's within Torah & Writing Messages of the Savior/Shema on Skin...and I've shared my own views elsewhere ( here , here, here, , here, here, here, here and here ).

If going from an absolute stance of all permanent markings/alterations of any kind being bad, I'd think that it'd not matter as to whether or not it's blatant in Torah. Most who go from the Torah in saying markings like gaugers or ink (as it concerns Tattoos) take the verses as absolutes for all types of markings that are permanent, regardless of whether they'e noticeable or not (as many markings are done for the person alone with others having no idea they're there).....and others have gone as far as to apply the verse on not making cuttings/markings for the dead to mean no alteration for any purposes whatsoever. Thus, for them, even that which isn't explicitly said is meant to be inferred---and thus, to get your teeth whittened/cleaned or edged up to look more polished or to get a face alteration of some sort is on the same level as a tattoo/gauge.


As it turns out, for many Americans, getting their teeth whittened and straighten (including the use of braces ) and altered permanately is actually a fetish. And for more, one can investigate the resource entitled What Is America's Fetish This Week? Great White Teeth | Kotaku .... People would be shocked to see how much celebrities go out of the way to ensure that they have straight /white teeth...and enjoy flashing them off for others in a manner that's no different than someone getting a tattoo to show off to others or make a statement. It's all very similar to other places around the world with people who will go OUT of their way to ensure that others notice their teeth (in the same way that many go out of the way in the West)----and for a good video on such:





People do things for the sake of beauty and for those doing things such as markings to make themselves look good or symbolize something, it does seem to easily be on the same level as with other things.


Of course, apart from gauges (if forbidden under the intepretation of Leviticus 19 as forbidding all physical markings), there's the issue of piercings. Noses are something that others are HIGHLY attracted to and tempted to check out....and though that may be odd for some people, it was a very big deal in the Eastern culture that scriptures developed in. Examples of such would be Genesis 24:21-23, Genesis 24:29-31 , Genesis 24:46-48 , Isaiah 3:20-22 and Ezekiel 16:11-13 /Ezekiel 16. Many have very large nose rings while others have small ones. There are many in the Body of Messiah saying that any kind of BODY Piercing is of the Devil/worldly. Its similar to the tattoo issue in that many condemn it based upon it being an issue of popularity today. Concerning body piercing goes, the practice is mentioned or alluded to several times in the Bible.

For example, the piercing of the ear of a bought servant was performed to bear witness that the servant has chosen to serve, until death, his master:
An allusion to body piercing is made in Isaiah 3:18-24 where it states that there will be nose jewels removed...and moreover, another example of where a person's ear is (likely) pierced is in the book of Ezekiel. When God made a covenant with Israel he considered it like entering into a marriage covenant. As a gift to her (Israel) God said:
The wearing of earrings and the piercing needed to wear them (and body piercing in general) are not prohibited in scripture..including things such as Nose rings ( Genesis 24:21-23, Genesis 24:29-31 , etc )---and there doesn't seem to be anything indicating that the earings always were small or smaller than gauges. They could have been as big as gauges.

It's the case in our times that others feel that nose rings being worn today are not only "immodest"---but a matter of somehow trying to bring attention to themselves. I find that odd in light of scripture:



We actually had it at our fellowship where a lady came in with many tatoos and piercings all over her.....and though others were shocked by it, one of the main rabbis of my fellowship noted why people shouldn't be surprised by that when seeing what the scriptures say on the issue. Many of the friends/family I've had would seem very beautiful when it came to the piercings they had on themselves---and to them, it was a matter of artwork unto the Lord. However, they often had many battles to deal with from others who said women should never do such.

It is interesting to consider whether or not Yeshua would've ever felt that such people were somehow "ugly"......for I think he'd not be repulsed by many with piercings today. And for an excellent article on such, one can go here or here to Body Piercing in Jewish Law - My Jewish Learning

While you have come to the Lord in whatever state you are in, I wouldn't advise continuing in a course of defacing the temple of God which you are.

1 Corinthians 3:17 If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for God’s temple is sacred, and you together are that temple.... 6:19 Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;

Click to expand...

But then, the Holy Spirit within you will be guiding you into all truth, ask Him because I get the clear impression God isn't into us decorating our bodies this way or He would have instructed us how He would like it done. Personally, all I see is that this extra destroys the natural beauty... But there are not many verses of scripture on the subject and if you are looking for the arguments, you will not find much but the concensus of different organizations. Just remember to cleanse yourself of all unrighteousness in your walk with Him to be like Him and His Image.

There is Sephardic tradition of applying henna on a bride before her wedding.

I agree with both EasyG and Visionary.

There is a way to adorn a body and a way to destroy a body.

The Alterna-Rebbe video (Punk Torah) stated it well. Some piercings can be hazardous to health and should be avoided. (Blood and heart issues)

Rebekah's nose ring is an example of positive mention in the Torah... keeping it in context, though, this was an adornment for a bride.

Other bridal adornment - application of henna, does not involve cutting into the skin or branding (scarring), it is not permanent and does not destroy the body.

Here is an example of an Israeli awl, to show that it could have been a large hole left behind after nailing an ear to a post. Lessing Photo Archive - Copper awl set in bone handle
In this instance, I do not agree with the Punk Torah video. He states that a slave who has his ear pierced through with an awl could be viewed as a man who prefers to serve man rather than G-d. I see the scriptures that were quoted in Exodus and Deuteronomy as pictures of those who choose to be bondservants of YHWH, it is as if we have our ears nailed to the doorpost when we choose to serve our Master forever.

sevengreenbeans said:

There is Sephardic tradition of applying henna on a bride before her wedding.

Click to expand...

What you noted with Henna is also something that is found in other Jewish circles outside of the Sephardic. As noted before, henna is also valued within Indian Jewish communities. More specifically, the issue of Henna has long been apart of Jewish culture when it comes to beauty and design...especially if studying the Jews who live in India. For some resources on such:

• India - Henna by Sienna
• The Henna Page - Kurdish Jewish Henna Traditions
• The Jews of India: a story of three communities - Page 148
• The Henna Page - Henna Traditions of Jewish Brides in Kurdistan

Already interesting to consider the many ways in which many are simply unaware/ignorant of what life is like for those who are Indian Jewish---and some of it was discussed more in-depth elsewhere in #12 and the thread entitled "Cochin & Hindu Hebrews: Are most Messianic Jews familar with Indian Jewish Believers?" ( ) . To see how many apart of things within Indian culture were often mistreated by other Jews in Judaism because of their practices is amazing enough.....but that's another issue .

Dpiiiius said:

As for tattoos I just about think the same thing, but I'm not 100% sure lol . Mainly because God never said he would tattoo someone like he said he would put jewelry on them . But yes, I do believe the tattooing discussed in the Torah has to do with pagan rituals and is not the same as today's tattooing practices .

Click to expand...

On the issue of Tattooing, there are actually several mentions of scripture where the Lord directly said he would mark/tattoo his people. For some quick examples:

• Revelations 3 where the Lord said He'd mark His people/write His name on them
• Isaiah 44:5 with HaShem saying He'd tattoo/mark His own people
• Ezekiel 9:4-7 with Him commanding the prophet to mark those who grieved over abominations
• Song of Songs, where the lover makes clear their companion has been placed as seal upon their heart and a seal upon their arm.
• Cain in Genesis 4, who was marked by the Lord..

Messianic Jewish apologist, Dr.Michael Brown, sought to cover the issue in-depth on his website when it came to Tattoos/Evangelism amongst those who have Tattoo's ...and there was some good discussion on the matter. As said best by another on the matter from his ministry site:
__________________


With Tattoos, Torah never forbid marking of onself as an end in/of itself , seeing the multiple instances where the Lord Himself commanded it of His people and did so to them. Moreover, the markings within the Torah that were condemned were of a specific kind (unto the dead/spirits of the afterlife) as opposed to all physical markings in general. The discussion has occurred many times before, though it tends to be the case that many of the scriptures where Tattoos/markings were demonstrated in the lives of Biblical characters (including Yeshua) are often ignored outright.

If you do one, do it to the glory of the Lord--as its your body and it should reflect him when it comes to one's choices, just as it is with how one takes care of their feet, eyes, or other body parts (even down to make-up).

If interested, here are some other places where the subject of marking/alterations to the body have come up in detail by other Messianics :

Dpiiiius said:

Thank you for this post ! See bro I already knew this, I actually read the scripture where God says he will personally put jewelry in Israel before .

That's why I'm saying, even God sees it as adornment, a form of beauty in fact . This is PLAIN scripture lol : Ezekiel 16:10-12 .

I understand why people say our body is a temple for God and we shouldn't destroy it . I understand it completely . But I can't stand when people say your are destroying your body by wearing jewelry . Putting it simply, you're decorating it .

Click to expand...

What you note on Ezekiel 16 is something that is often ignored when it comes to how the Lord adornes his people. In Ezekiel 16, the Lord gives an extended discourse in which Jerusalem is understood as God's adulterous wife - with it being symbolic of His people Israel/Judah (which Judah was a part ...as noted in Psalm 122 and 1 Chronicles 21:14-16 , Psalm 135:20-21 Psalm 116:18-19 I Kings 12-13/2 Kings 19:30-32 and Matthew 23:36-38 as well as many other places where Jerusalem was used as symbolism for the people of God). Although the language is symbolic and poetic, the literal ramifications are what give it basis since the Lord would not be putting emphasis on placing jewelry on His people as a way of beautifying them without it FIRST being established that jewelry itself is something that was being done to brides by their grooms to beautify them. If it was something that is always ugly, there'd be blanant inconsistency in talking about how the Lord went out of his way to make His bride beautiful.

For more on Ezekiel 16, Jerusalem is seen as the orphan. Jerusalem had its origin in the Land of the Canaanites, ancient Syro-Palestine, which is roughly equivalent to Lebanon and Israel today. Jerusalmem was under Jebusite (or Canaanite) control before David conquered it. Amorite culture is generally associated with Syria and the Transjordan while Hittites are associated with ancient Anatolia (but sometimes Hittites lived in Syro-Palestine...an example being Uriah the Hittite in II Samuel 11:3). In biblical traditions, Amorites and Hittites are generally the pre-Israelites population. Tese three ethnolinguistic categories -- Canaanite, Amorite and Hittite - define Jerusalem's origin as different from that of Israel, which traced its lineage through Abraham to Nahor (Genesis 11:22-26). Jerusalem is a "foreigner".....

God discovered the foundling and admonishes her to remain alive....and God assisted the child at the very instance. IN Ezekiel 16:8-14, on the image of covering with a garmet in order to symbolize intent to marry (as Ruth 3:9 echoes standard covenant language like Exodus 6:7), God performs various ministrations on behalf of his new wife. They involve cleansing, clothing and jewelry..as well as special food. Jerusalem, understood now as an adulterous wife, commits various sinful acts (and Hosea 2 and Jeremiah 2-3 also liken Israel to an unfaithful wife). God's sentence - as seen in Ezekiel 16:27-29, includes punishment by the daughters of the Philistines, but mention of whoring with Assyria and Babylon (Chaldea) continues the tone of indictment. The order of foreign nations parallels a sketch of Israelite history: slavery in Egypt, conflict with Philistia, and confrontation with the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Bablyonian empires. ....and God ends up punishing Jerusalem by using foreign nations with whom she has committed adultery.

The jewelry aspect of the conversation is highly fascinating in light of the fact that there are many debates throughout the Body of Christ on what constitutes as "proper adornment" of jewelry. SOme say that if you dye your hair, that's being immodest...and in other places (as is the case in many black churches), you're expected to wear a hat and no jeans.

With modesty, is there a set standard to how it looks---in light of what Paul noted in I Timothy 2 and what the scriptures say about.
There are many solid ministries I've enjoyed studying/following over the years that've written much on the subject of modesty-one of them being the ministry of Boundless Webzine, as seen here- and here---and for others, here. And yet, I often feel as if each of them may have a bias as to what modesty is...and then telling others what's absolute when there never seemed to be an absolute to begin with.

Dpiiiius said:

?

Click to expand...

xDenax said:

What kind of body piercing?

Click to expand...

Do you just scour the front page of the forum looking for threads with 'Jew' in the title? This was specifically asked to the MJ's in this forum and yet, here you are again being one of the first to post a reply.

In answer to the OP's question, anyone can do what ever they want so they 'can'. Now the question should be, should they? And the answer is, if they believe that the Torah is G-ds instructions for us to follow even today, then no we shouldn't be doing as the nations do.

Tattoo's , body piercings, they all involve blood and is connected to heathen practices.

Dpiiiius said:

Thank you for this post ! See bro I already knew this, I actually read the scripture where God says he will personally put jewelry in Israel before .

That's why I'm saying, even God sees it as adornment, a form of beauty in fact . This is PLAIN scripture lol : Ezekiel 16:10-12 .

Click to expand...

Yes, and it is plain that this chapter is speaking about Jerusalem, not Israel, not people. It is poetic language.

Dpiiiius said:

I understand why people say our body is a temple for God and we shouldn't destroy it . I understand it completely . But I can't stand when people say your are destroying your body by wearing jewelry . Putting it simply, you're decorating it .

Click to expand...

You can decorate it, without permanently scarring it. A bracelet can be put on or taken off.

One that thinks of getting a tattoo should ask themselves. Would I wear the same shirt and pants I did when I was 5 years old, 10, 20, 30? Because it will be like doing so for the rest of your life. Imagine having to wear that same shirt, every day for the rest of your life?

Dpiiiius said:

As for tattoos I just about think the same thing, but I'm not 100% sure lol . Mainly because God never said he would tattoo someone like he said he would put jewelry on them . But yes, I do believe the tattooing discussed in the Torah has to do with pagan rituals and is not the same as today's tattooing practices .

Click to expand...

Repackaging to look godly is only deceiving. And you are wrong about 'what G-d said'.

In the same book, Ezekiel you will find:

Marking the pius and upright:

And the L-RD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof. And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite : let not your eye spare , neither have ye pity : 6 Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house.

Click to expand...

Now you may say that you aren't going to have your tattoo in your head, but what about the name?

Revelation 3 - Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

Click to expand...

As for me, I am saving all my flesh for this special mark which is three names. It doesn't say where it will be so all of my flesh must remain unmarked so there is room for it and it will not be obscured by previous marks.

As far as Jews, many were tattooed for death in WWII against their will. Those few that survived had to carry that mark of death with them their whole lives. The Germans did not just exterminate 6,000,000 Jews, but all those that did survive still had the mark of death put upon them.

The couple things that come to mind (some already mentioned) is

1) A servant could choose to stay with his master and to seal it he got his ear pierced.

2) Rebecca was given the gift of a nose ring

3) Circumcision IS a definite cut of the skin, cant deny that one.

I'm not against pierced ears, but the motivation behind piercings is key. I personally dont like the kind of earrings that stretch out the skin a lot and I wonder the reasoning behind it. Is it merely just the way it looks?

Dpiiiius said:

Easy G , you've helped me understand things so much better . This understanding was somewhat in my mind, I just couldn't fully articulate it because I wasn't fully knowledgeable yet . Thanks a lot bro

Click to expand...

Glad to be of assistance...and thankful that things are connecting for ya.

For the sake of giving more clarity on the issue so that things connect more, on the foundational text of Leviticus 19:28, the context of tattoos/marks seemed to be explictly in regards for the dead. According to John Gills Commentary:
Claiming marks in general as a forbidden thing doesn't go with the rest of the Biblical text when it comes to the issue of marks already made by the Lord. Outside of the issue of circumcision, which is a permanent marking/physical alteration to one's flesh, God already placed marks in differing ways. One can consider Genesis 4:14-16 with the mark He placed upon Cain to spare Him. Away from human habitation and the protection of his kin, Cain was vulnerable to violence/murder..and God granted him mercy by applying a visible mark on Cain similar to the brand that identifies the owner of a slave.

For another:
With Ezekiel 9:5-7, God commands the scribe to place a mark on those who sigh and groan over all the abominations. The Hebrew word translated mark is a vocalization of the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet, taw, which would have been written as an X. One might think that the individuals so designated were to be spared (much like it was with the protective markings of Passover in Exodus 12:23), but the remainder of the vision does not explictly report that any individuals were marked and spared.

As said best by John Gill's Commentary on the Bible when it comes to the letter:
For another:
The word, “write” was correctly understood to mean mark or tattoo and as the 6th century Greek historian, Procopius, noted on this place in Isaiah, “Many Christians imitated the practice by marking their wrist or their arm with the sign of the cross or with the name of Christ.”

As mentioned earlier, as it concerns the issue of "mark his arm/hand" in scripture, it was customary for slaves to be marked with owner's name.

For more information, Professor Aaron Demsky of Bar-Ilan University, in an article in the Encyclopaedia Judaica ("Writing"), suggested that non-idolatrous tattooing may have been permitted in biblical times. He cites the following biblical references such as Isaiah stating"One shall say, 'I am the Lord's,' and another shall use the name of Jacob, and another shall mark his arm 'of the Lord' and adopt the name of Israel" (Isaiah 44:5)--and alongside that, the other scripture that states, "See, I have engraved You on the palms of my hands…" (Isaiah 49:16). There was also one in Job stating" ...is a sign on every man's hand that all men may know His doings" (Job 37:7). While these verses may be purely metaphoric, Demsky suggests they could be taken literally as instances of tattooing that were acceptable in biblical times. He goes on to add that A. Cowley (in his 1923 book Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C.) showed that in Elephantine [a city in Hellenistic Egypt], slaves of Jews were marked with the names of their owners as was the general practice.

There are some excellent articles on such--and for more, one can go online/investigate the article entitled What Role Does Levitical Law Play In The Life Of Believers? Should Believers Get Tatoo’s? (Question And Answer Response )- ParadoxParables"

The other scripture which also stands out is the following:
The BEAUTIFUL poetic story of Song of Solomon describes two godly lovers learning to come together after a season of courtship. And on the issue, its interesting to see what the woman asks for her husband to do. The phrase "set me as a seal upon your heart...upon your arm" may have the sense of "impress me as a seal onto your heart and arm." In this case, the idea is that she be indelibly stamped onto his heart (that is, onto his emotions and inner commitment) and onto his arm (meaning, as with God's commandments in Deuteronomy 6:6-8, onto his actions). And, considering the identification imagery, she may have been asking that the man be completely identified with her...and that in observing him, all would see a man wholly devoted to her (her name being figuratively tattooed on his arm, as we might think of it today). Moreover, there may be a sense here of a mark of ownership that the man would willingly belong, and be seen as belonging, to her (in this apparent recommitment to marriage with its mutual possession).

Outside of that, there's the reality of Jesus having language written on his body:
Outside of that, there's also the issue of what Revelation 3:12 says when it comes to scripture on Jesus writing physical language upon his people:
Revelation 3:12 is a very SIGNIFICANT scripture that also comes to mind when it describes Jesus writing physical language upon his people...just as Jesus Himself has language written upon Him in Revelation 19:15. I think that is interesting when considering the contrast between how many times the people of the world were marked for the anti-Christ/wearing what he had before...as that's what seems to occur in Revelation 13:15-17, /Revelation 14:8-10, Revelation 15:1-3, Revelation 16:1-3, Revelation 19:19-21, and Revelation 20:3-5 when it comes to recieving the "mark of the beast"--and with that, at times the scriptures in Leviticus are used in association. But the TANAK already shows instances where marking was done by the Lord as well...with Him writing HIS Name upon them/marking them..

Dpiiiius said:

Easy G , you've helped me understand things so much better . This understanding was somewhat in my mind, I just couldn't fully articulate it because I wasn't fully knowledgeable yet . Thanks a lot bro

Click to expand...

Again, glad to know that you felt helped in your understanding of things.

Personally, whenever others speak against tattoos of all kinds, I find it a bit hypocritical since the same people doing so are often getting dental work done to make themselves have a better smile (or being for things like plastic surgery ) - both of which have permanent impact. And thus, unless they're willing to stop both of those, they show themselves to be hypocrities who have no real business talking about how the Lord looks down upon others for doing so. I think people are decieving themselves when it comes to claiming that the Lord never marked/utilized tattoos for differing purposes in showing who His people are...and IMHO, they decieve themselves when tyring to claim that Jewish culture was always focused on being against Jewish culture at all points.

If interested, there is actually a documentary discussing the issue in-depth on what other Jews feel on the matter entitled "Tattoo Jew". The film "Tattoo Jew" is documentary about Jewish people getting Jewish-themed tattoos as expressions of individuality and pride..and showing people who feel more connected to their roots by displaying a modern Jewish identity permanently etched in ink upon their skin.This project explores the intersection between traditional Jewish culture and the current popularity of tattoos. For more info:
At one point, there's a segment on how one Jewish woman shared her perspective on Tattoos...for in her mind, its not just about what the language means--but its also about the physical existence of the language on her body.


The ministry of "Sacred Ink" was one organization that I thought had many solid/beautiful points to consider on the issue.....as seen here.---and for another one to consider, one can investigate the ministry entitled Are Hebrew Tattoos Kosher?. In 2007, when a church was giving out tattoos in their service, Hillel covered the issues for Jewish student life, presenting a mixed take on it. For more, if interested, there is a resource one can go online/investgate under the name of "Jews & Tattoos: What's a Rabbi to Do? - Hillel" ( //www.hillel.org/about/news/2007/jan/tattooed_22jan2007.htm ).


In going further on the issue, there are Jewish neighborhoods that are very aggressive toward those with Tattoos just as there are Gentile neighborhoods which do the same...and by converse, there are both Jewish and Gentile neighborhoods that never had issue with it nor felt that it was against the Torah to do so. Even for those that may vehemently dislike tattoos themselves/not be for getting one, they were simply for having all of the facts before making a judgement on whether or not a "tattoo" is something that should be endorsed. There are many people who have been very knowledgable in creating ways for having intelligent dialouge on the issue. In example, I'm reminded of a man known as Ami James (born Omi James, April 6, 1972). He is an Israeli-born tattoo artist..and his father, an American, converted to Judaism three years prior to moving to Israel, where he joined the Israeli army and met James' mother. James lived in both Israel and Egypt as a child, and spent much of his childhood without his father who left the family when James was four years old. Suffering from severe ADD, James explains in many of this talks that he was drawn into art and tattooing from a young age as his father had tattoos and was also a painter.

• "Oy!Chicago -Tattoos, Taboos and Shi Tzus"( )

• "Life as an E: Halloween Boos and Jewish Tattoos"

• 
  
• "Skin Deep - Hey, Mom, the Rabbi Approved My Tattoo - NYTimes.com" (

Also, concerning the series I was telling you about where Jewish tattoo artist (Ami James) shared with others on isues in the Jewish community, , one can go to the following to see the actual series:

• Tattoos & Taboos with Ami James of Miami Ink on Vimeo

• "Tattoos to self-portraits, series explores the Jewish body - WashingtonJewishWeek"

For the tattoo-bearing and the tattoo-curious, the synagouge "Sixth & I" presented a conversation on the controversial topic of Jews getting inked. In light of the controversy as well as the prevalence of tattoos today, two tattooed Jews deeply involved in the world of body discuss their work as well as the myths, trends, and antipathy associated with Jewish body modification. The series showed Ami James, an Israeli-born tattoo artist and star of the reality TV show Miami Ink, speaking with Todd Weinberger, Creative Director of Inked magazine, about cultural assumptions and attitudes within the Jewish community regarding tattoos and the way they reconcile their tattooed bodies with their Jewish identities, heritage, and beliefs. It was highly informative...

Moreover, for those within Judaism that are in camps believing that Judaism should adapt with the times and that the Torah isn't static but rather fluid/changing--as is the case with Reformed Judaism---its fascinating to see what occurs whenever those camps come against the camps in Judaism that are traditional.

JRSut1000 said:

The couple things that come to mind (some already mentioned) is

1) A servant could choose to stay with his master and to seal it he got his ear pierced.

2) Rebecca was given the gift of a nose ring

3) Circumcision IS a definite cut of the skin, cant deny that one.

I'm not against pierced ears, but the motivation behind piercings is key. I personally dont like the kind of earrings that stretch out the skin a lot and I wonder the reasoning behind it. Is it merely just the way it looks?

Click to expand...

The kind of earings that make your ears stretch very long are an eye-sore, IMHO. And I do think those can do damage...but as it concerns other types of piercings, it really is about personal choice.

Some say that piercings and Tats are about being apart of a crowd - even if its the 'non-conformist' crowd. However, those saying so must examine things in light of the many who could care less about doing what anyone else is doing and have their focus on God. To say its about the "crowd" would be no more logical than saying others get circumcised because of the crowd--as it concerns people doing so for religious or health reasons just as others do within Judaism.....and of course, a host of other things can be thrown in such as hair coloring/dye, piercings, dress, the kind of car one drives and many other things.

It wouldn't matter if Tattoos/piercings were NOT popular, as they were still being done in differing times/places on the basis of principle rather than pop opinion---and for those convicted that it is a beautiful thing/something one has freedom to do in expressing their beliefs or what they stand for, they do what they need to do.

Also, as it concerns Circumcision being a definate cut of the skin - it doesn't really do much for anyone to claim "Well, the Lord COMMANDED that one!!!" since the reality of the matter is that circumcision was already practiced amongst the other nations LONG before it was introduced to Abraham by the Lord.

3) Circumcision IS a definite cut of the skin, cant deny that one.

Click to expand...

There are many whp have said that it doesn't matter because it was commanded by God...but that's really a cop-out way of getting past the reality that one cannot claim God is against all marks/cuttings in the flesh and yet claim circumcision is praised by the Lord.

Circumcision Being a command would still leave open the concept that it was not mutiliation to the Body that the Lord was truly concerned about---but specifically, it was on the purposes BEHIND circumcision that mattered. As the other nations did circumcision at the same time as Abraham was commanded, it doesn't seem to be logical to claim that it was unique except that it was done as an act of worship for God.

The history of circumcision BEFORE Abraham is significant, especially when considering the spirtual purposes it was done for apart from the Lord. ...and plenty of scholars have noted the vast history of circumcision that has been around in the Middle East long before Genesis 17. Whereas it was a rite of obligation amongst Jews., the practice has a long history in the ancient Middle East and is closely related to the rituals dedicated to ancient gods and goddesses of fertility. In example, the ancient Mesopotamians had festivals where the testicles of a young boy was cut off and dedicated to the fertility goddess.and for more, one can go online/invesitigate the following:

• "History of Circumcision "
• "History of Circumcision - CIRP"
• ": Culture of IRAN |:: The History of Circumcision in Iran"
• "Chronology of the foreskin and circumcision - History of Circumcision"

Also, on the history of where circumcision was practiced amongst the nations, one can go to Religious Traditions and Circumcision and The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1-17 - Page 469. I don't think there's any reason reason for anyone to argue against or deny the fact that being apart of Israel/inheriting had circumcision as one of the deals one had to keep in being in Covenant with God...but I do think its noteworthy when the subject of circumcision is taken to mean salvation since circumcision was already being practiced amongst the other nations long before God told his people to do such.

On where it was noted how other nations outside of Israel practiced circumcison---including those who were enemies of Israel--one can go to Jer 9:25-26 and Ezekiel 32:29. Jeremiah 9:25-26 is the most descriptive in discussing other nations that were only circumcised in the flesh. Circumcision went back to the time of Abraham and was practiced by pagan nations, but not as a sign of a covenant with God.

Some did so for health reasons, whereas others had their own symbolisms to go with the act. In Jeremiah's day, by the time he arrived on the scene, the Israelities had forgotten the spiritual significance of circumcision even though they continued to do the physical ritual.


Again...Jeremiah 9:25-26 speaks on the issue and circumcision went back to the time of Abraham. For the people of Israel it was a symbol of their covenant relationship to God (Genesis 17:9-14). However, circumcision was also practiced by pagan nations LONG before Israel/Abraham were in existence---and some notable examples of that would be places like Egypt, who did it for the purposes of cosmetic design as well as for health purposes. The other nations didn't do circumcision as a sign of covenant with God--and by Jeremiah's time, the Israelities had forgotten the spiritual significance of circumcision even though they continued to do the physical mark.

The issue of circumcision is NOT about whether it was commanded, as that's clear from the text. What is an issue is making a false claim that the practice of it was in any way unique/first of its kind----and in connection with that, what is of focus is which focus becomes the foundation for a worldview to be built upon. If one makes a stance that GOd is against all forms of fleshly marking/incisions, then there's glarring inconsistency when considering the times God allowed it


There was far more to being with God's people than being circumcised---for it was an outward sign of an inward reality...

Romans 4:10-11
​

It is a sign of the covenant, the covenant that was already established... as stated here: "a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised".

Why did God require circumcision? It was a sign of obediance to him in all that matters. As a sign of belonging to his covenant people...once circumcised, there was no turning back. The man would be identified as a Jew forever...and as a symbol of "cutting off" the old life of sin, purifying one's heart and dedicating oneself to God. It was more than any other practice the way God's people seperated from their pagan neighbors......in Abraham's day. And this was essential to develop the pure worship of God.

Although other cultures used circumcision as a sign of entry into adulthood, only Israel used it as a sign of following God....though the practice in/of itself never gave one righteousness---as seen in Romans 4:3, Romans 2:24-26, and Jeremiah 9:24-26. For rituals did not earn any reward with Abraham. It was by faith alone.....as Genesis 12:1-14 tells of God's call to Abram when he was 75 yrs old....and the circumcision ceremony was introduced when he was 99years old. The outward symbols demonstrated inward trust/faith and as reminders of our faith--but by themselves, they could never bring justification. Nonetheless, to be considered apart of Israel in the OT, it was a BIG deal, (i.e., Exodus 12:43-45 , Leviticus 12:2-4, etc).


As it concerns the practice of circumcision, much of its importance can be seen clearly when studying the context of what occurred with Moses when he failed to circumcise his children, as seen in Exodus 4:25-27. To the best of my understanding, Moses was the most humble man on the earth ( Numbers 12:2-4, Hebrews 11:23-25, etc )..yet God was about to kill Moses had he not circumcised his son......and he may not have been too familar with God's laws, especially the requirements of God's covenant with Israel in Genesis 17 that had not been carried out for over 400years. And Moses could not actively function as deliverer of God's people until he had fulfilled the conditions of God's covenant....and one of those conditions was circumcision. Before they could go any further, Moses and his family had to fulfill God's commands completely. For under the OT, failing to circumcise your son was to remove yourself and your family from God's blesings.....and Moses QUICKLY learned that disobeying God was even more dangerous than tangling with an Egyptian Pharoah.

Exodus 2:23-25 makes clear that the Lord remembered his covenant promises....and his people were called to remember the conditions of the covenant. Moses was held responsible for the provisions of the covenant with Abraham that required him to circumcise his sons. And failure to be circumcised may have led to some severe form of punishment, Numbers 9:6-14 . Had it not been for Moses's wife coming through, the man would have died. And to say it was not a part of the requirement to be considered Israel, one would perhaps have to diminish the significance of the threat Moses had.

Much of the issue of circumcision also goes back to Joshua 5, where God required Joshua to circumcise all male before entering the land. For its interesting to see how those males were already citizens of Israel. However, the ones who entered the land were those who were children of the older Israelities who never entered in.

Illegal immigrants entering the U.S.A can give birth to children in the states, effectively making them "U.S Citizens".. even though they may not have all of the full benefits of the country at their disposal due to their background...and the things they must work through. Likewise, by "accident of birth" those males in Joshua 5 were already counted among the Hebrew Children, but in order to enter the Land as legitimate citizens of Israel, they HAD TO BE circumcized according to the LAW of Moses. Even though the children of the older generation of Israelities had fought in many battles during their time in the wilderness (Numbers 20-36, Deuteronomy 2-4, etc), its possible that many of the young men had never been circumcised. Joshua 5:5 makes clear that all of those men of military age died in the desert after leaving Egypt....and whereas all the people coming out of Egypt had been circumcised, those born in the desert during the journey from Egypt had not. Its also possible that the new/second generation also had children who were uncircumcisd at this time.

But their circumcision had nothing to do with their being noted as apart of God's people.

For another example, the first covenant community was Abraham's household. It did not include only his immediate family but also slaves and strangers. They were all members of the household BEFORE they were circumcised. Gen. 17:14 says: " And the uncircumcised male child, who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be CUT OFF FROM HIS PEOPLE; he has broken my covenant." For in Genesis 17:1 (also seen in Acts 7:7-9 ), God was making a covenant, or contract, between Himself and Abraham. The terms were simple: Abraham would obey God and circumcise all the males in his household----and interestingly, those also who were NON-Jewish as well...including servants like Eleazer of Damascus ( Genesis 15:1-3, Genesis 15 ).......which is an Arab nation the last I checked...and of course, with Ishmael--the father of the Arab Nations ( Genesis 16 , Genesis 17:19-21 , Genesis 21, Genesis 25:8-10, Genesis 25, Genesis 28:8-10, Genesis 36:2-4, 1 Chronicles 1:27-29, 1 Chronicles 1 Romans 9:7, Galatians 4:21-31)--him being circumcised as well..Genesis 17:22-24 Genesis 17
In order for a person be be CUT off from his people, it seems logical to conclude that he needs first to be a part of the people...and the.slaves and strangers in Abraham household were all member of Abraham's people BEFORE they were circumcised. IMHO, Circumcision did not play a role for them to be part of the household.

As explained earlier, in Joshua 5, all the uncircumcised people in the covenant community at the time (the children of Israel) were members of the people. Requiring circumcision in order to enter the Land had nothing to do with them already being members of the covenant community. The circumcision was to fulfill the requirement as a a sign of the covenant, not to become citizens of Israel....or demonstrate faith in the Lord. For even those outside of the Covenant Community demonstrated faith in the Lord on many occassions....like Jethro or Melchizedek and the Roman Centurion of Matthew 8.

Thankfully, it was never the case that those who wanted to be apart of the community of God/believers had to be circumcised in all cases...and even more thankful in light of what Christ has done in the NT. For after the Cross of Christ, circumcision takes on an entirely different revelation: