• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Tattoos

millerrod

Contributor
Dec 10, 2005
5,909
366
67
I try to live in obidence to god some days i fail
✟30,533.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Hmmmmmmm isnt there a part in the Bible where God sends an angel with an INK horn and has the angel MARK WITH INK those who are to BE SAVED. Look up the word ink in your concordance to find it. So God and the Bible being our example shows that marking with ink is of God. Well Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm !!!! makes one think if God has a problem with it or not.
The marking in Lev. is a pagan practice of cutting yourself when mourning for the dead. and had nothing to do with ink. it was spoken against because it was a know pagan practice. study dont twist to fit your beliefs.
 
Upvote 0

TheDag

I don't like titles
Jan 8, 2005
9,459
267
✟43,794.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Each aspect of the Law that was not specific to the Children of Israel following their coming out of captivity is the same law that God has written on our hearts. There are aspects concerning the pagan practices of Egypt that do not apply , there are health issues regarding certain foods that do not apply, and there are issues concerning the sacrifices and other matters of the tabenacle that do not apply. Moral issues and matters relating to the well being for Holy living do apply which includes the instruction regarding marking the skin -(tattoos ) -Lev 19:28
These matters and others concerning the life we have in Jesus are certainly written on my heart and I thank God for the complete work of Calvary that enabled that to be so. I hope you all have been similarly blessed.
So how do you determine what laws fall in each category? (ok the food laws are kinda obvious but what about the others).
 
Upvote 0

TheDag

I don't like titles
Jan 8, 2005
9,459
267
✟43,794.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Not that I disagree with your overall premise... but if you're going to use a verse as evidence, you might as well use the correct evidence ;)
But, like I said... I agree with the premise that you can't pick and choose which commandments you follow.
I will try and bear in mind those views but untill I'm convinced the source is reliable then I won't neccesarily agree. I will however for the purpose of this discussion stick to that definition. I don't mean to offend by questioning the reliability of the source you quoted so if I have please forgive me. I just like to be certain for myself that a source is reliable.

I reject the Messiah that does not perfectly follow the Torah of G-d. He is not a sinner!
But maybe the point of Jesus healing on the sabbath was included in scripture is to show us that the first responsibility is to help others and that overules other laws. Of course BJ has made the assumption that because Jesus didn't say that healing is not working which could easily be an incorrect assumption.

2) I'm fairly certain the word "only" does not occur in the original language in Hebrews 10:1. That word was put in by translators and displays a bit of their bias. that passage of Hebrews is confusing, but I wanted to point out the error.
Which verse are you talking about here? My bible does not have the word "only" in Hebrews 10:1 so I'm a little confused.

3) I'm greatly, deeply offended that you'd call G-d's Holy Scripture and intructions "not good to use to glorify G-d" and that they don't bring glory to G-d. I don't mean to be argumentative, but can you see someone looking into the eyes of the L-rd and saying "Your Scripture is meaningless to me. I don't think it glorifies you."
Where did he say God's scripture is meaningless to him? I don't believe that we should take all the OT law literally. Does that mean I can't learn from it? No I can still learn it's just that the lesson for me to learn today is different to what it was for the original receipients.


Sorry, but he isn't talking about the New Testament here. there was only 1 set of Scriptures used for teaching, rebuking, training in righteousness, and for learning the way to salvation through Messiah... and that contained the Torah... how do you reconcile the complete contradiction?
That is a matter of opinion. Sure when 2nd Timothy was written there was only one set of scriptures used. Of course different people seem to have different views of what was contained in that one set of scriptures. There is a widely accepted belief that God was speaking of all scripture as in what was currently being used and what would make it into the bible. I have seen nothing that would suggest that can't be true. Of course that doesn't mean it is true.
 
Upvote 0

Lumen

Senior Member
Oct 16, 2006
1,065
32
36
✟23,905.00
Faith
Christian
I will try and bear in mind those views but untill I'm convinced the source is reliable then I won't neccesarily agree. I will however for the purpose of this discussion stick to that definition. I don't mean to offend by questioning the reliability of the source you quoted so if I have please forgive me. I just like to be certain for myself that a source is reliable.


But maybe the point of Jesus healing on the sabbath was included in scripture is to show us that the first responsibility is to help others and that overules other laws. Of course BJ has made the assumption that because Jesus didn't say that healing is not working which could easily be an incorrect assumption.


Which verse are you talking about here? My bible does not have the word "only" in Hebrews 10:1 so I'm a little confused.


Where did he say God's scripture is meaningless to him? I don't believe that we should take all the OT law literally. Does that mean I can't learn from it? No I can still learn it's just that the lesson for me to learn today is different to what it was for the original receipients.



That is a matter of opinion. Sure when 2nd Timothy was written there was only one set of scriptures used. Of course different people seem to have different views of what was contained in that one set of scriptures. There is a widely accepted belief that God was speaking of all scripture as in what was currently being used and what would make it into the bible. I have seen nothing that would suggest that can't be true. Of course that doesn't mean it is true.

Why shouldn't we take the OT literally? How can laws mean anything except the literal meaning?

The NT is what shouldn't be taken 100% literally.

Now some of the OT laws had deeper symbolism. The meats we shouldn't eat, the mixing of the fabric, it symbolised purity.
 
Upvote 0

TasManOfGod

Untatted Saint
Sep 15, 2003
6,479
214
Tasmania
✟34,015.00
Faith
Word of Faith
First off, let me say that I am a Youth Pastor and bible school student, as well as a musician.
I have a few things to say in regards to tats.
I played Defensive End in college, and some of my D-line buddies had barbed wire tats around their left arms. I thought that was pretty cool, so I looked into getting one, except that I wanted mine to show my newfound faith in Christ (Since I had just given my life to Him at age 19)....so I decided to get a crown of thorns instead of barbed wire. One of my little cousins was with me when I decided to get it (we grew up close----she is more like a sister to me than a cousin), and she begged me not to do it. Because of her insistance, I got a temp one instead to "make sure you like it, it's permanant you know." The temp one lasted only 6 weeks.
The first week or so, I thought it was the coolest thing ever, and just knew I'd be going back to have it filled over with ink.
After about 2 weeks it got really anoying-----like a stain in your shirt you can't wash out.
Glad I didn't get the real thing: however I have never (and will never) condemn someone else who does.

Point of the story is this...........If you had a bunch of tats before you got saved, great; It is kind of like a marker to show others the roads you have walked down. Use them to identify with others, and in that way you can use them to glorify God.

But the real question is what about tats on this side of salvation?

I have read numerous people posting the Levitical law to show that we shouldn't mark our bodies. Then I read a post that some one put this in: "For one the law was never given to the gentiles and second the law is done away with."

Hmmmmm. I agree and disagree. (Stay with me till the end on this, don't get offended just yet)
1) The law was never given to the gentiles, however Paul also tells us not to use our liberty as a cloak for vice.
2) Jesus said "do not think that I came to destroy the law, but to fulfill it." He also said that Heaven and Earth would pass away, but not one jot or tittle in the law would EVER pass away.

So why is it that we always try to make the New Testament appear to be a "lowering of the bar" in regards to lifestyle? (Don't get mad at me now just because I'm telling the truth. Trust me, I got caught in this web for a few years myself.)Greasy grace is what we call it. You know, the whole "Christians aren't perfect---just forgiven" thing. Is that statement a fact? Yes. But truth is a Spirit, and the "spirit" of that statement is that Christians can live just like the rest of the world but still go to heaven if they "believe" in Jesus. True belief is evidenced by obediance and conformity to Christ, it is not merely mental assention (e.g. believing Christ was a real person, who really died a substitutionary, vicarious death, who rose bodily, etc.)
The Bible says that even the demons believe that, and tremble.
True faith is evidenced by its outworking in our lives (for faith without works is dead----B.T.W., that is a NEW TESTAMENT scripture.)
Isn't the New Testament a raising of the bar?
Let me give an example of this. In the Old Testament, you had to run a sword through someone to be considered a murderer. In the New testament, you just have to hate your brother without a cause to be considered a murderer. In the Old Testament you had to jump in bed with another woman to be considered an adulterer, but Jesus said that whoever looks upon a woman to lust after her has already commited adultery in his heart.

Am I trying to preach legalism to you? NO. Some commandments have been altered because of the cross; however the REASON they have been altered is because Christ is concerned with the motives of the heart, not just the actions themselves.
The Bible says "as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the Sons of God."
God will lead you by a few different means, but the Cheif of these are His Word, and his peace.

If you are having to ask others if it is ok, then it tells me that you don't have a peace about it in your heart. If you don't have a peace about it, then don't do it.
Obviously, the oldrooster above has no problem with having a peace about getting inked: but the oldrooster isn't you.
Paul said to "work out YOUR OWN salvation with fear and trembling". Working out your salvation with FEAR and TREMBLING, I think, means not doing things that in your own mind are questionable. If you have ANY reservations inside your heart, then you already have found the answer of whether getting a tat is right for YOU: so listen to the Holy Spirit's inner promptings. That way you'll never have to be guilty of grieving God's Holy Spirit.

Getting a tat wasn't right for me, and I don't have a full peace about it myself FOR ME.
That doesn't mean that I dis-approve of others who have them; I've seen some that were pretty "cool", and even a few that I thought were "cute" on a few different girls that I know (friends of mine....though one of them hates her tat: a small cross on her lower back, I think it's kind of cute)
I don't think you should let anyone put you under a yoke of legalistic bondage, but I also have found that I've never regreted what I didn't have to attempt to explain away.
Hope this helped.
HONOR, COURAGE, WISDOM
-Frosty
Great post I notice that that is the only one you have made since joining CF. We sure could do with some more of your wisdom
 
Upvote 0

plum

my thoughts are free
Nov 30, 2003
24,091
1,678
✟55,880.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I will try and bear in mind those views but untill I'm convinced the source is reliable then I won't neccesarily agree. I will however for the purpose of this discussion stick to that definition. I don't mean to offend by questioning the reliability of the source you quoted so if I have please forgive me. I just like to be certain for myself that a source is reliable.
Oh, well I could have just quoted the Scripture then. That's the source I care about. I just added a bit of commentary to explain. Basically, in my quote above it mentions the Scripture that says you should not mix wool and linen.


But maybe the point of Jesus healing on the sabbath was included in scripture is to show us that the first responsibility is to help others and that overules other laws. Of course BJ has made the assumption that because Jesus didn't say that healing is not working which could easily be an incorrect assumption.
Oh I agree that our Master showed us that we honor Shabbat by caring for others. Showing love or saving lives does not constitute breaking the Torah, however. It never did. The Pharisees had forgotten the most important aspect of Shabbat and had made it into a bunch of rules and restrictions that weren't glorifying the original intent. I think we'd agree that Yeshua set the record straight about what G-d wanted on Shabbat. But in doing so, he could not have actually broken a commandment of Torah. It would be illogical to break a Torah command (which is straight from G-d) to say what G-d wants. That's what I'm getting at :)


Which verse are you talking about here? My bible does not have the word "only" in Hebrews 10:1 so I'm a little confused.
The gentleman I quoted used the word "only" when quoting Hebrews 10:1. My point was that it was inserted by translators. Sometimes the word "mere" is used instead of "only". I'm glad your Scriptures does not have that problem. Some translations don't have it, and I prefer that if they add a word to the document, it always be marked in italics. That clues you in to what liberties the translators took to flesh out the text. It helps when doing a serious verse study.

Where did he say God's scripture is meaningless to him? I don't believe that we should take all the OT law literally. Does that mean I can't learn from it? No I can still learn it's just that the lesson for me to learn today is different to what it was for the original receipients.
I may have misunderstood the way he phrased the admonition of not using G-d's Torah to glorify G-d. But I was responding to the impression I got. :)
All I encourage is to value what our Master valued, loved what he loved, and to be as much like him as possible. He took it seriously (aka literally) and I think that if there is no reason to not read it literally, we shouldn't assume we need to. We're not under the curse of not following the law anymore. We have the mercy and grace of G-d so that we can freely obey Him without fear. Messiah makes up the difference :)
However, I certainly respect those who do not come to the same conclusions I have come to in my walk. We are each on unique journeys, but I imagine that as we seek to find the narrow path, we will come closer together.

That is a matter of opinion. Sure when 2nd Timothy was written there was only one set of scriptures used. Of course different people seem to have different views of what was contained in that one set of scriptures. There is a widely accepted belief that God was speaking of all scripture as in what was currently being used and what would make it into the bible. I have seen nothing that would suggest that can't be true. Of course that doesn't mean it is true.
I agree that G-d inspired all the Scriptures we have today. But that doesn't make the Scriptures he was talking about at that moment less important, does it?
We can't ignore that 2 Timothy is most likely talking about the Tanakh at that time. There were no other Scriptures that they would have had since childhood (see the whole context for that reference). I just think that we can't value 1/3 of the book over the rest. It's one book, no divisions.

I'm sorry for continuing to derail this thread. I realized we have gone off one a bunny trail!

Shalom, all
 
Upvote 0

TheDag

I don't like titles
Jan 8, 2005
9,459
267
✟43,794.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Oh I agree that our Master showed us that we honor Shabbat by caring for others. Showing love or saving lives does not constitute breaking the Torah, however. It never did. The Pharisees had forgotten the most important aspect of Shabbat and had made it into a bunch of rules and restrictions that weren't glorifying the original intent. I think we'd agree that Yeshua set the record straight about what G-d wanted on Shabbat. But in doing so, he could not have actually broken a commandment of Torah. It would be illogical to break a Torah command (which is straight from G-d) to say what G-d wants. That's what I'm getting at
Ok I got the wrong impression sorry.

The gentleman I quoted used the word "only" when quoting Hebrews 10:1. My point was that it was inserted by translators. Sometimes the word "mere" is used instead of "only". I'm glad your Scriptures does not have that problem. Some translations don't have it, and I prefer that if they add a word to the document, it always be marked in italics. That clues you in to what liberties the translators took to flesh out the text. It helps when doing a serious verse study.
Ok that makes more sense. I didn't notice that he used the word only. Maybe I should wear my glasses while on CF!

I agree that G-d inspired all the Scriptures we have today. But that doesn't make the Scriptures he was talking about at that moment less important, does it?
We can't ignore that 2 Timothy is most likely talking about the Tanakh at that time. There were no other Scriptures that they would have had since childhood (see the whole context for that reference). I just think that we can't value 1/3 of the book over the rest. It's one book, no divisions.
Ok I'm a litle confused. I was under the impression that you were saying that the passage in Timothy only meant the scriptures that were in existence at the time Timothy was written and not the New Testament. Did I get the wrong impression?
 
Upvote 0

TheDag

I don't like titles
Jan 8, 2005
9,459
267
✟43,794.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Hi Lumen,
I am assuming you aren't a messianic jew otherwise it would show in you profile. If I am mistaken then please let me know

Why shouldn't we take the OT literally? How can laws mean anything except the literal meaning?
So why were those laws written? What was the purpose of them? To whom were they written? What was the cultural context in which they were written? Even in society today not all laws are meant to be taken literally. How do you reconcile Pauls instructions on non-kosher foods and the OT instructions? I certainly respect the view of those who believe we shouldn't eat non-kosher foods and if I am sharing a meal with such a person like eirene then I would not eat non-kosher foods.

The NT is what shouldn't be taken 100% literally.
I don't take the OT 100% literally and I don't take the NT 100% literally either. That does not mean I don't take parts literally.
 
Upvote 0

plum

my thoughts are free
Nov 30, 2003
24,091
1,678
✟55,880.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Ok I got the wrong impression sorry.
Ok that makes more sense. I didn't notice that he used the word only. Maybe I should wear my glasses while on CF!
Not a problem at all! I'm glad I could clear it up a wee bit :)


Ok I'm a litle confused. I was under the impression that you were saying that the passage in Timothy only meant the scriptures that were in existence at the time Timothy was written and not the New Testament. Did I get the wrong impression?
Well I'm not a scholar by profession by any means, and am always in the learning process. But my understanding at this time is that the passage in 2Tim was talking of the Tanakh at that time. But since the Word of G-d is living and active and G-d has revealed Himself to us over periods of time (continuing revelation as we see in the Scriptures)... I don't feel uncomfortable saying that G-d inspired 2 Timothy and that it not only applies in the historical context, but applies to us today.
Also, if I may point to a post where I rfecently pondered the Scriptural status of the writings of the time (such as Shaul/Paul's letters...) you may see how I have come to see the latter third of the Bible as authoritative as well.. maybe not. I could just be doing guesswork here... ;)
here's the link to my post: http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=28955340&postcount=54


Just one thing (back on topic)... am I the only person who wishes to submit to Torah and who also doesn't think tattoos are bad? I bet that sounds like a contradiction, but I don't see it that way. I just wonder if I'm alone in the world :D



and with that, brothers and sisters, I must be out of this thread. PM me if you'd like to correspond further!
 
Upvote 0

Splayd

Just some guy
Apr 19, 2006
2,547
1,033
54
✟8,071.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Just one thing (back on topic)... am I the only person who wishes to submit to Torah and who also doesn't think tattoos are bad? I bet that sounds like a contradiction, but I don't see it that way. I just wonder if I'm alone in the world :D
Hey Sis! I'm a tattooed Torah lover :thumbsup:
 
  • Like
Reactions: plum
Upvote 0

herev

CL--you are missed!
Jun 8, 2004
13,619
935
61
✟51,100.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If just one like your daughter could be saved from getting the same through Godly fellowship on CF, it is worth what it takes to speak in support of God's will on tattoos.
this should more accurately read:
If just one like your daughter could be saved from getting the same through Godly fellowship on CF, it is wroth what it takes to speak in support of what I think God's will is on tattoos.
you have debated well with those on this forum tas. So have they. But as you can see from their posts and arguments, you are not the sole keeper of what is and what is not God's will on the matter. others (like myself) disagree and we feel quite strongly that we have not gone outside God's will when we got a tattoo.
I fail to understand why you would bump up a 4 month dead thread that has basicly been in support of tattoos. Will there soon be a complaint about the pro-tattoos of the site?
 
Upvote 0

live4grace

Senior Member
Feb 19, 2005
790
71
Massachusetts
Visit site
✟24,717.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How do yall fell about tatoos. I have a friend of mine who just got one, and is still trying to prove to him selve that thier aint nothing wrong with them. Please give me book chapter verse where it talks about body markings.
Just a really quick comment that will be ignored among the avalanche of opinion, but the fact is I have known no one who got a tattoo who didn't regret it later. At the very least they got tired of the art work and at most they wanted to get rid of the whole thing.
 
Upvote 0

TasManOfGod

Untatted Saint
Sep 15, 2003
6,479
214
Tasmania
✟34,015.00
Faith
Word of Faith
this should more accurately read:
If just one like your daughter could be saved from getting the same through Godly fellowship on CF, it is wroth what it takes to speak in support of what I think God's will is on tattoos.
If you think that referring to God's will on the matter of tattoos is worthy of wroth -so be it -that is your perogative
you have debated well with those on this forum tas. So have they. But as you can see from their posts and arguments, you are not the sole keeper of what is and what is not God's will on the matter. others (like myself) disagree and we feel quite strongly that we have not gone outside God's will when we got a tattoo.
Perhaps your tattoo is not an indication of God's will on the matter either.
I fail to understand why you would bump up a 4 month dead thread that has basicly been in support of tattoos. Will there soon be a complaint about the pro-tattoos of the site?
I will not comment on what has been posted previous to me posting on this thread for various reasons -none of which I want to discuss here.
 
Upvote 0

TasManOfGod

Untatted Saint
Sep 15, 2003
6,479
214
Tasmania
✟34,015.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Just a really quick comment that will be ignored among the avalanche of opinion, but the fact is I have known no one who got a tatoo who didn't regret it later. At the very least they got tired of the art work and at most they wanted to get rid of the whole thing.
Your comment hasn't been ignored by me . I consider that it holds a lot of wisdom for those thinking about getting tattooed for life
 
Upvote 0

herev

CL--you are missed!
Jun 8, 2004
13,619
935
61
✟51,100.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If you think that referring to God's will on the matter of tattoos is worthy of wroth -so be it -that is your perogative
I, like many others, simply interpret that one verse in the levitical law differently than you. I make no judgment on you for your interpretation, but when you present your interpretation so strongly as a matter of fact, you are being unfair to those seeking "Chrstian advice"
Perhaps your tattoo is not an indication of God's will on the matter either.
agreed, I've not made that assertion
I will not comment on what has been posted previous to me posting on this thread for various reasons -none of which I want to discuss here.
as you wish
 
Upvote 0

herev

CL--you are missed!
Jun 8, 2004
13,619
935
61
✟51,100.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Just a really quick comment that will be ignored among the avalanche of opinion, but the fact is I have known no one who got a tattoo who didn't regret it later. At the very least they got tired of the art work and at most they wanted to get rid of the whole thing.
and this is a valid point. I won't know until I draw my last breath if I can say, "I'll never regret mine." My grandfather regretted his, but the picture and the location made it uncomfortable for him later in life. I specifically chose mine to ensure that this doesn't happen. Unless I were to somehow disavow my faith in Christ, I can't IMAGINE it happening, but you never know.
This is worthy advice that young people should consider:thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

Dasdream

Noone's perfect, so why are we judging each other
Jul 18, 2006
4,726
48
41
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟27,646.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
and the advice is what? Put it in a place that won't bother you?

I think this says it all
Leviticus 19:28

28. Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord.

finding excuses like 12volt_man did is just wrong. people are always trying to find "exceptions to the Bible, thinking that "that's not what God meant" So far I have sen people say that they think (although they talk as if they know) that Smoking is ok, drinking is ok, tatooes are ok, piercings are ok and drugs are ok. lol Imagine if I wore tatooes and piercings and smoked and took drugs. What makes me different from the rest of the world? Nothing! God aska that we not be like the world. What do you think he is referring to? he is referring to this stuff! What else is there? hey how about we go to crack houses and bars and make those people Deacons of our church?
 
Upvote 0