Age for your first tattoo?
- Thread starter faroukfarouk
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
What about Isaiah 49.16: "I have graven thee upon the palms of my hand". Is God really contradicting Leviticus 19 here? surely not; there is also the question of the pagan necromancy context of Leviticus 19.
And what about Ezekiel 16.12, where the Lord seems to give pierced jewelry to Zion? Again, it can hardly be regarded as contradicting Leviticus 19.
Blessings.
And what about Ezekiel 16.12, where the Lord seems to give pierced jewelry to Zion? Again, it can hardly be regarded as contradicting Leviticus 19.
Blessings.
Yes, but I don't have a beard, so *shrugs* 
I don't say to people, Go get a tattoo. But if Christians with Romans 14 liberty are motivated to use a faith based design in witness, e.g., Bible ref., Christian fish sign <><, etc., then I would find it hard to criticize them.
Blessings.
M
Jesus said He didn't come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. In a way we as christians are bound by the law, apart from things like food laws and circumcision. The rule of the thumb here is, I think, if the NT doesn't explicitly mention a different interpretation of a law we're still to take the OT commandments literally. So tattoos are a nono.
We shouldn’t become like the unbelieving world to win the world.
Romans 12:1-2 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
1 John 2:15-17 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
1 John 2:15-17 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
Those are great verses; and widely and generally applicable. Specifically they do not mention tattoos, and thus presumably Romans 14 comes into play: Let everyone be fully persuaded in his or her own mind. Christian liberty means people under grace choosing to serve the Lord in ways which are not heretical or immoral.
Blessings.
Blessings.
But the New Testament believer is not under the law; Hebrews 7 says the law has been changed.
'For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.'
'For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.' (Hebrews 7.12;18-19)
So we can't put people back under the law. Now if under grace, we have a conscience against doing something, then this is fine: we have a conscience before the Lord, although we shouldn't project our conscience onto someone else. Some Christians might positively have a conscience in favor of using certain means as a witness tool.
(You can see I'm not Reformed, but Dispensational in thinking.)
Again I would observe that Isaiah 49.16 and Ezekiel 16.12 cannot be regarded as being contradictory to Leviticus 19.
Blessings.
'For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.'
'For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.' (Hebrews 7.12;18-19)
So we can't put people back under the law. Now if under grace, we have a conscience against doing something, then this is fine: we have a conscience before the Lord, although we shouldn't project our conscience onto someone else. Some Christians might positively have a conscience in favor of using certain means as a witness tool.
(You can see I'm not Reformed, but Dispensational in thinking.)
Again I would observe that Isaiah 49.16 and Ezekiel 16.12 cannot be regarded as being contradictory to Leviticus 19.
Blessings.
Hi MarkMulder:
The other thought I have is this: sometimes people of a very conservative outlook (which can be good in many ways; it's good to develop cautious instincts in a desire to be God-honoring) can look at something in Scripture and try to reinforce it in ways that are maybe not warranted.
For example, alcohol abuse is bad and there are plenty of Scriptures about it. In North America, because of the cultural legacy of Prohibition, there are some Christians who find it hard to cope with the passage in John about the Lord at Cana when He turned the water into wine. So some people, with a view to reinforcing anti-alcohol sentiment, will say, Oh maybe it wasn't real wine. Liberals then come along and say, smiling, Well, we're now glad you guys agree with us after all when we say it wasn't a real miracle!
This is an example of how well-meaning Christians can take a good principle but apply it beyond where it should go.
Another example is hair issues: some very conservative Christians will try to tell wives and daughters never to cut their hair at all. Whereas the Bible itself nowhere seems to say this.
Another example might well relate to the whole very large subject of what we call tattoos today. It's interesting that in Isaiah 49.16 the Amplified Bible says for 'I have graven thee': 'tattooed'. Bottom line: we should maybe define further the context and concept of a tattoo and the circumstances in which it was acquired, before condemning it out of hand: in Leviticus 19, pagan necromancy rites are mentioned in the same sentence (and in the New Testament pagan necromancy associations are similarly critcized).
But then if a young Christian man or woman leaving home wants to be a clear witness, although s/he lacks a certain confidence maybe, and wants to get something like a Christian fish sign <>< tattooed as an expected conversation-starter (I'm not arguing in favor of it, just using it as a possible and reasonable example), it would be hard to find linkages with pagan necromancy. Some zealous Christians might still wish to tell the young person — despite his or her motives — "Hey, you've become a pagan necromancer because of Lev. 19!"...but in fact it would be hard to justify taking the argument to such lengths.
You see my general point here?
Blessings.
The other thought I have is this: sometimes people of a very conservative outlook (which can be good in many ways; it's good to develop cautious instincts in a desire to be God-honoring) can look at something in Scripture and try to reinforce it in ways that are maybe not warranted.
For example, alcohol abuse is bad and there are plenty of Scriptures about it. In North America, because of the cultural legacy of Prohibition, there are some Christians who find it hard to cope with the passage in John about the Lord at Cana when He turned the water into wine. So some people, with a view to reinforcing anti-alcohol sentiment, will say, Oh maybe it wasn't real wine. Liberals then come along and say, smiling, Well, we're now glad you guys agree with us after all when we say it wasn't a real miracle!
This is an example of how well-meaning Christians can take a good principle but apply it beyond where it should go.
Another example is hair issues: some very conservative Christians will try to tell wives and daughters never to cut their hair at all. Whereas the Bible itself nowhere seems to say this.
Another example might well relate to the whole very large subject of what we call tattoos today. It's interesting that in Isaiah 49.16 the Amplified Bible says for 'I have graven thee': 'tattooed'. Bottom line: we should maybe define further the context and concept of a tattoo and the circumstances in which it was acquired, before condemning it out of hand: in Leviticus 19, pagan necromancy rites are mentioned in the same sentence (and in the New Testament pagan necromancy associations are similarly critcized).
But then if a young Christian man or woman leaving home wants to be a clear witness, although s/he lacks a certain confidence maybe, and wants to get something like a Christian fish sign <>< tattooed as an expected conversation-starter (I'm not arguing in favor of it, just using it as a possible and reasonable example), it would be hard to find linkages with pagan necromancy. Some zealous Christians might still wish to tell the young person — despite his or her motives — "Hey, you've become a pagan necromancer because of Lev. 19!"...but in fact it would be hard to justify taking the argument to such lengths.
You see my general point here?
Blessings.
Last edited: