Questions Wanted RE: Tattoos, Piercings, etc.

ViaCrucis said:

This is what Scripture says.

You can keep trying to justify your position against the Word of God, but it is not built on the foundation of Holy Scripture but on human traditions.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Yep.

BornAgainChristian1 said:

Obviously you're not interested in the fact God changed that rule n Acts 10? That NT is a tricky thing isn't it?

Click to expand...

No, God did not CHANGE the rules of the Sinai Covenant. Jesus said truly that not a jot of them will be stricken from the Law (of Moses) until the end of the world. Jesus changed NOTHING - regarding food, regarding anything at all - with regards to the Law of Moses, the Covenant with the Hebrews. That remained completely intact, and the New Testament will tell you nothing about it.

What Jesus DID do was bring a NEW Covenant, and THIS TIME it was not for a single nation, and the promise was not a farm in a piece of land. THIS TIME it was only for individuals who chose to follow Jesus by listening to him and keeping HIS commandments, NOT the commandments given in the Mosaic Covenant on Mount Sinai. Follow Jesus and do what HE said, and you get a room in the City of God after the end of the world, resurrection and judgment.

There are two different rules, two different contracts. Jesus didn't modify the old rule, the Mosaic Covenant. He didn't touch it. It stood, as revealed, forever. And nobody but lineal descendants of the people at Sinai were ever under that contract. You and I are not such people, and we never did, and never will, get anything from it even if we follow it all. We will not get a farm in Israel. It's just like the Aaronic priesthood. To be a priest, you had to be a direct lineal descendant of Aaron. If Aaron's line died out, no new priests could be made without a direct divine intervention and revelation. So if God wiped out the Aaronic priesthood, he was ENDING the Aaronic line and making it IMPOSSIBLE to fulfill a fundamental and necessary part of the Law of Sinai.

Whenever Jesus or the Apostles speak of "The Law", the law to which they refer is the Law of Moses.

There is ALSO a "Law of Jesus", which are Jesus' commandments. THAT is the NEW Covenant, which is in no sense an extension of the Old. People under the Old Covenant could get the benefit of the New - and the promise of a room in Heaven, but they could never get that by simply practicing the Old - the Old promised nothing like that. They had to follow the New. And the New contains many aspects that, were the person to do them, would violate the old - such as eating pork or any other food. Which means that the Jew who followed Jesus and exercised the liberty under the New Covenant, and gained the promise of life after death in the City of God, lost his promise of a farm in Israel by breaking aspects of the Mosaic covenant.

And once the Sanhedrin decided that Jesus was a blasphemer, a false prophet who performed miracles by the power of Satan, the Jew was faced with a choice: he could follow Christ and be a Christian, but a disobedient Jew who was no longer truly keeping the Sinai Covenant (because he was defying the judgment of God's appointed judges), OR he could obey the Sinai Covenant - which would include the judgments of the Sanhedrin - and therefore not follow Christ. The Sanhedrin put the Jews in the position of having to choose between their farm and a room in the City of God after death. God did not put them to that choice, men did.

But having made the choice, God then removed the ability to get the farm, by removing the Temple and the Aaronic priesthood from the earth. Now you can't follow the whole Law of Moses even if you want to. You can follow the Law of Jesus and still have your room in the City of God at the end. And the Sabbath is not part of that law.

BornAgainChristian1 said:

Still attempting to justify what we're instructed to do no matter if it's sin or not as long as you believe God "will use it".

Click to expand...

So does the not trimming beards in the previous verse in Leviticus also apply to New Testament believers under grace?

faroukfarouk said:

So does the not trimming beards in the previous verse in Leviticus also apply to New Testament believers under grace?

Click to expand...

Or not wearing clothes that are made of two different kinds of threads.

Or not having intercourse with your wife during her period or for several days afterwards, until she is baptized in a pool (shower does not cut it).

Or not sitting on anything that she sits on when she has per period.

Or not sowing fields with two kinds of grain.

Or not doing work for a year every seven years. And for two years in a row in the 49th and 50th year.

Or letting anybody walk through one's property to pick up fallen fruit.

Or not charging interest on money.

Or not refusing the request of a loan to one who asks it.

Or forgiving all debts owed every seven years.

Or never eating shellfish, or catfish, or pork, or any grocery store meat (the blood has not been all drained out of it).

Or doing no work, nor employing anybody to do work, from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset.

These are examples of what is in the Law of Moses. Do all of it, and if you're a circumcised descendant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob or a circumcised descendant of the folks standing there at Mt. Sinai when God gave the Law to Moses, and also if the rest of the society does their part, and the rituals of worship are kept, then you'll get a farm in Israel.

If you're interested in going to "Heaven" after you die and are resurrected and judged, then you need to learn a completely different law, given under a different covenant to different people.

BornAgainChristian1 said:

Obviously you're not interested in the fact God changed that rule n Acts 10? That NT is a tricky thing isn't it?

Click to expand...

How does the vision which Peter receives that tells him that Gentiles are to be included in the apostolic and evangelical mission of the Church have anything to do with God changing anything?

-CryptoLutheran

Vicomte13 said:

Or not wearing clothes that are made of two different kinds of threads.

Or not having intercourse with your wife during her period or for several days afterwards, until she is baptized in a pool (shower does not cut it).

Or not sitting on anything that she sits on when she has per period.

Or not sowing fields with two kinds of grain.

Or not doing work for a year every seven years. And for two years in a row in the 49th and 50th year.

Or letting anybody walk through one's property to pick up fallen fruit.

Or not charging interest on money.

Or not refusing the request of a loan to one who asks it.

Or forgiving all debts owed every seven years.

Or never eating shellfish, or catfish, or pork, or any grocery store meat (the blood has not been all drained out of it).

Or doing no work, nor employing anybody to do work, from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset.

These are examples of what is in the Law of Moses. Do all of it, and if you're a circumcised descendant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob or a circumcised descendant of the folks standing there at Mt. Sinai when God gave the Law to Moses, and also if the rest of the society does their part, and the rituals of worship are kept, then you'll get a farm in Israel.

If you're interested in going to "Heaven" after you die and are resurrected and judged, then you need to learn a completely different law, given under a different covenant to different people.

Click to expand...

This really is the crux of it all. Either we live under the law or we do not. We cannot parse it out. We cannot state the we only believe in following a part of the law but not all,of it.

Jesus did state that the law would not pass away until,all is fulfilled. But the writings of the apostles are clear as to the idea we do not have to follow the law as believers. HOWEVER that does not mean we have been given the right to,do,whatever we want. The apostles and Jesus were also clear in that there still are things that we must do and not do and a certain way we should live as believers. Sin is still around and it is clear in the words of Jesus and the Apostles that we should live a righteous life.

Jesus said if you live me you will,keep,my commandments.

If you lust after a woman you have committed adultery,with her in your heart.

Galations 5 outlines things that we should not do and if we practice such things we will,not inherit the kingdom of God.

But as others have stated we are NOT found to the OT law. The OT law is still there as it shows us the way of sin. But as believers we are not bound to,obey it.

But that doesn't mean we are free to do whatever we want either.

Tattoos was something in the law. It is not repeated as a sin in the New Covenant. Therefore it falls in the category of Paul's teaching in meat offered to idols. Of you are convicted of it. Don't do,it. But if others are not then don't judge them for it. And if you think it's ok do NOT look down on others that think it is wrong because it is wrong for them and you can't judge their Christianity.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Vicomte13 said:

No, God did not CHANGE the rules of the Sinai Covenant. Jesus said truly that not a jot of them will be stricken from the Law (of Moses) until the end of the world. Jesus changed NOTHING - regarding food, regarding anything at all - with regards to the Law of Moses, the Covenant with the Hebrews. That remained completely intact, and the New Testament will tell you nothing about it.

What Jesus DID do was bring a NEW Covenant, and THIS TIME it was not for a single nation, and the promise was not a farm in a piece of land. THIS TIME it was only for individuals who chose to follow Jesus by listening to him and keeping HIS commandments, NOT the commandments given in the Mosaic Covenant on Mount Sinai. Follow Jesus and do what HE said, and you get a room in the City of God after the end of the world, resurrection and judgment.

There are two different rules, two different contracts. Jesus didn't modify the old rule, the Mosaic Covenant. He didn't touch it. It stood, as revealed, forever. And nobody but lineal descendants of the people at Sinai were ever under that contract. You and I are not such people, and we never did, and never will, get anything from it even if we follow it all. We will not get a farm in Israel. It's just like the Aaronic priesthood. To be a priest, you had to be a direct lineal descendant of Aaron. If Aaron's line died out, no new priests could be made without a direct divine intervention and revelation. So if God wiped out the Aaronic priesthood, he was ENDING the Aaronic line and making it IMPOSSIBLE to fulfill a fundamental and necessary part of the Law of Sinai.

Whenever Jesus or the Apostles speak of "The Law", the law to which they refer is the Law of Moses.

There is ALSO a "Law of Jesus", which are Jesus' commandments. THAT is the NEW Covenant, which is in no sense an extension of the Old. People under the Old Covenant could get the benefit of the New - and the promise of a room in Heaven, but they could never get that by simply practicing the Old - the Old promised nothing like that. They had to follow the New. And the New contains many aspects that, were the person to do them, would violate the old - such as eating pork or any other food. Which means that the Jew who followed Jesus and exercised the liberty under the New Covenant, and gained the promise of life after death in the City of God, lost his promise of a farm in Israel by breaking aspects of the Mosaic covenant.

And once the Sanhedrin decided that Jesus was a blasphemer, a false prophet who performed miracles by the power of Satan, the Jew was faced with a choice: he could follow Christ and be a Christian, but a disobedient Jew who was no longer truly keeping the Sinai Covenant (because he was defying the judgment of God's appointed judges), OR he could obey the Sinai Covenant - which would include the judgments of the Sanhedrin - and therefore not follow Christ. The Sanhedrin put the Jews in the position of having to choose between their farm and a room in the City of God after death. God did not put them to that choice, men did.

But having made the choice, God then removed the ability to get the farm, by removing the Temple and the Aaronic priesthood from the earth. Now you can't follow the whole Law of Moses even if you want to. You can follow the Law of Jesus and still have your room in the City of God at the end. And the Sabbath is not part of that law.

Click to expand...

Sorry but Acts 10 proves your opinion in error.

faroukfarouk said:

So does the not trimming beards in the previous verse in Leviticus also apply to New Testament believers under grace?

Click to expand...

Yes if it honors a Pagan practice as tattoo's most certainly do.

ViaCrucis said:

How does the vision which Peter receives that tells him that Gentiles are to be included in the apostolic and evangelical mission of the Church have anything to do with God changing anything?

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Because that isn't what your claim was. Stop moving the goal posts.

rjs330 said:

This really is the crux of it all. Either we live under the law or we do not. We cannot parse it out. We cannot state the we only believe in following a part of the law but not all,of it.

Jesus did state that the law would not pass away until,all is fulfilled. But the writings of the apostles are clear as to the idea we do not have to follow the law as believers.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that it really is the crux. I agree that that we cannot parse the law. I agree that Jesus did stated that not a letter of the Law would pass away until it was all completed.

The thing I've tried - so far without success - to get people to focus upon is the fact - not the speculation, the actual written fact, that there are TWO sets of laws at work, and that only ONE set of those laws applies to Christians.

"The Law" when Jews such as Jesus or Paul, Peter or the Apostles refer to it, is a translation of a Greek word which is a translation of the Hebrew word "Torah". It does not refer to all laws, all rules, all regulations everywhere. It refers to a very specific body of rules, given as a contract by God at a specific place (Mount Sinai) to a specific people (Hebrews who were there). On its own terms it only applied to them and their descendants, and it only ever did.

On its own written terms the only thing that the Law EVER promised was that the people under the contract, the lineal, circumcised descendants of Jacob who were standing at Mt. Sinai would receive and securely hold a family farm in the land of Canaan, and only for as long as they obeyed The Law.

That is IT. That is ALL that "The Law" EVER promised, or EVER stood for.

Now, Christians all the way back have been misunderstanding this fact - which is a written fact - the Torah SAYS what its terms are, who it applies to, and what they get.

Complete obedience to the law, PERFECT obedience, never, ever promised eternal life. It did not before Jesus, and it did not after Jesus either. Jesus completed The Law, for the Jews, by demonstrating what it was pointing towards. However, Jesus said he did not destroy The Law or change The Law, that it would never be changed until the end of the world.

What THAT means is that The Law NEVER became something that had to do with eternal life, or Heaven, or anything other than its original terms: Jews, only, who follow it all, in this life, only, get a physical farm in the land of Canaan, only, in this life, only. There is no covenant that says that if one follows the whole law of Moses, one is saved and goes to Heaven. SCRIPTURE NEVER SAYS THAT. NOT EVER. It doesn't even SUGGEST it.

The Law, properly stated, is ONLY the Law of Moses, and the Law of Moses never promised ANYTHING regarding life after death. The Law of Moses only EVER applied to Jews, in THIS life, and it only EVER promised a FARM - a plot of farmland - in a specific land - Israel - during THIS life only. And only if it were all followed. Nothing more and nothing less.

So, when Christians talk about picking and choosing in "The Law", they may as well be talking about choosing which of the laws of the Japanese Empire they are going to obey. If they're not also Japanese, the laws of the Japanese Empire have NOTHING TO DO WITH the laws that Christians are to obey.

What furthers the confusion is that the early Christians, almost everybody that Jesus and the Apostles addressed, was ALSO a Jew, and so The Law - of Moses - actually MEANT something TO THEM. But it NEVER MEANT ANYTHING to a Gentile, neither before Jesus nor afterwards. The Ten Commandments are included in this. The Ten Commandments given at Mt. Sinai never ever applied to anybody but Jews. They did not apply to Christians, and Jesus did not bring the Ten Commandments to Christians.

Rather, some of the laws that God gave all of mankind BEFORE Sinai - the law against murder given to Noah - that still applies (NOT because it's one of the Ten Commandments, because the Ten Commandments apply to nobody but Jews - God included that general law in the Ten Commandments, but its authority over US is because God gave it to the world).
If a law is in the Torah - The Law - it doesn't apply to us at all, never did, and never will. THat was a contract made between Hebrews and God, and we're not parties to it. NONE of it applies to us. It's not a matter of picking and choosing. NONE of it makes any difference. Your neighbor has a contract with his bank, a mortgage on his house. Those terms and conditions are between him and the bank. If YOU fully do everything required under his mortgage, follow all of its restrictions, etc., you get NOTHING, because it's not YOUR mortgage. It's his. You never have had, do not have, and never WILL have any rights under, or duties under, your neighbor's mortgage. That contract binds HIM, but it has NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU.

That that's "The Law". It's a contract between Israelites and God. NONE OF IT ever applied to Christians, unless they were Jews.

Most of the Christians in the New Testament WERE Jews, and sorting out for themselves that the Law of Moses had NOTHING TO DO with being a Christian was hard for them, for it meant effectively apostasy from their cultural covenant. Many tried to straddle the two worlds, and insisted that Christians who were Gentiles had to become Jews, meaning that Christians were under The Law.

But Jesus never said anything remotely like that.

So, the first big concepts are that "The Law" when called that, in the New Testament, MEANS the Law of Moses, and that the Law of Moses is COMPLETELY INAPPLICABLE to anybody who is not a party to the contract. Gentiles are not. They don't become parties by becoming Christians. It only applies to Jews. And even if JEWS follow The Law (which is The Law of Moses) perfectly, that does not have ANYTHING TO DO with life after death and final judgment. Those things are not part of The Law, and Jesus didn't graft them onto The Law. Quite the opposite: he said that The Law would not change AT ALL until the end of the world.

Jesus' New Covenant is COMPLETELY NEW. It is not something grafted onto the Law of Moses. That's the whole point of Jesus' parable of the old and new wineskins. Christianity is new wine, and it is placed in new wineskins. It is only related to the Law of Moses because the Law of Moses mentally prepared the Jews to be the standard bearer for the New Covenant.

I keep harping on this point because it is so important. The New Testament recounts JEWS struggling with what to do with the old Law, the Law of Moses, and coming to different conclusions, referring back to that law for inspiration, but finding new things and issues. It shows us how the Apostles, who were all Jews, came to the realization that The Law was dead as far as Gentiles were concerned. But even the Apostles, being Jews, were not particularly skilled lawyers. They grasped that things were different under the New Covenant, but none of them ever spoke out in the Scriptures the REASON why Gentiles did not need to follow The Law: because they were never subject to it in the first place!

This would have been hard for a Jew to admit, because the whole Jewish world was structured around that law, and the Jews had grafted on top of that law their own traditions of life after death and resurrection, but unless one includes books such as Enoch and the Maccabbees in the Old Testament, one cannot find Old Testament Scriptural promises of eternal life that have any clarity. Certainly one cannot find any such things in the Torah ("The Law").

And this brings us to the second major point, "The Law" in the New Testament, that we are freed from, is specifically the Law of Moses, the Torah. We are NOT freed from LAW as a general principle. For Jesus also gives an extensive body of law under the New Covenant, law that must be obeyed on pain of hellfire. Forget the farm in Israel - what's at stake under the law of the New Covenant is eternal life.

There is "The Law", which is the Torah, the Law of Moses, and it does NOT apply to Gentiles (and never did). THIS is the law that is called "The Law" by the New Testament figures. But there is ANOTHER Law in the New Testament, the Law of Jesus. It consists of his precepts and the stern warnings he gives about hellfire for certain acts of commission and omission. Those laws are different from The Law, but they are much more important, powerful and impressive than the mere old "Law", of Moses, for the Law of Moses only ever applied to maybe 1% of the world's population and not to anybody else. The law of Jesus applies to EVERYBODY, whether they believe it or not. THAT law IS mandatory. If one breaks IT, one faces damnation unless forgiven.

So, when I see these efforts to muck around in the Law of Moses, I try to set the record straight based on the Scriptures themselves. It clears so much freight when one realizes that the Old Testament does NOT provide law for the Christian. It clears away some really dangerous delusions when a Christian realizes that he IS under law - the Law of Christ - just not under "THE Law", which is the Law of Moses.

BornAgainChristian1 said:

Sorry but Acts 10 proves your opinion in error.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but the Torah itself, in Exodus and Deuteronomy, the terms of the convenant, say what I am saying. Your tradition is not based on Scripture.

So let's stop talking to each other now, because there is no resolution to this. We read the same text, and we read two very different things.

BornAgainChristian1 said:

Yes if it honors a Pagan practice as tattoo's most certainly do.

Click to expand...

So you have a bushy beard as a supposed legal obligation, then.

Runswithdogs said:

...mines not gonna be black

Click to expand...

Some ppl do prefer colour, yes. Others think that the swirling black lines of a tribal design are so effective that they stick with black.

I jus' have a colouful personality I guess

Runswithdogs said:

I jus' have a colouful personality I guess

Click to expand...

And it really sounds like you'll enjoy being tattooed.

Vicomte13 said:

Sorry, but the Torah itself, in Exodus and Deuteronomy, the terms of the convenant, say what I am saying. Your tradition is not based on Scripture.

So let's stop talking to each other now, because there is no resolution to this. We read the same text, and we read two very different things.

Click to expand...

Read Hebrews Chapters 6 thru 8 and your know you're quoting and EXPIRED Covenant. BTW I wasn't expressing tradition that's your claim however I did indeed quote scripture to back up my claims.

BornAgainChristian1 said:

Read Hebrews Chapters 6 thru 8 and your know you're quoting and EXPIRED Covenant.

Click to expand...

You have a problem with your approach. But there's no purpose served discussing it any further. Peace.

faroukfarouk said:

So you have a bushy beard as a supposed legal obligation, then.

Click to expand...

I have a neatly trimmed beard that supports no pagan traditions as I have no tattoo's because I have nothing to do with pagan traditions.

Vicomte13 said:

You have a problem with your approach. But there's no purpose served discussing it any further. Peace.

Click to expand...

I have no problem with my approach but you seem to have a rather large one when someone won't agree with you.

BornAgainChristian1 said:

I have a neatly trimmed beard that supports no pagan traditions as I have no tattoo's because I have nothing to do with pagan traditions.

Click to expand...

Leaving aside what you or I might choose to call pagan traditions, maybe you don't after all, as someone who is not an Old Testament Jew in the land under the law, see that Leviticus 19.27 applies to you?

'Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.'