Christian tattoos okay?

[HAZARD]

Someone mentioned to me some years ago there is not one mention of Tattoo's in Scripture. I know it was and has been done and is mentioned in Scripture. In fact God commanded it be done.

"And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE; And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and 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." (Ezekiel 9:3-4).

This mark was to be put on the faithful ones for their protection when the faithless were destroyed. It showed they belonged to God.

It was an ancient custom in Egypt that a runaway slave was freed from his master if he went to the temple and declared himself up to the god of that place, recieving certain marks upon his person to denote his consecration to the diety he worshiped. Romans marked their soldiers in the hand and their slaves in the forheads. It is clear from Rev. 7:3; 9:4; 14:1 that in the future, 144,000 Jews from all tribes of Israel, except Dan, will have a mark in their foreheads as a sign for protection. It will be the name of God (Rev. 14:1). All the redeemed will be so marked in the next life (Rev. 3:12; 22:4).

The followers of the Beast will also be marked in the foreheads or hands (Rev. 13:16-17; 14:9; 20:4).

I'm not in favour of tattoo's in my life now, but we are created free moral agents and are as such free to choos what we will.

Cheers, Haz.

[Stan53]

Someone mentioned to me some years ago there is not one mention of Tattoo's in Scripture. I know it was and has been done and is mentioned in Scripture. In fact God commanded it be done.

"And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE; And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and 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." (Ezekiel 9:3-4).

This mark was to be put on the faithful ones for their protection when the faithless were destroyed. It showed they belonged to God.

It was an ancient custom in Egypt that a runaway slave was freed from his master if he went to the temple and declared himself up to the god of that place, recieving certain marks upon his person to denote his consecration to the diety he worshiped. Romans marked their soldiers in the hand and their slaves in the forheads. It is clear from Rev. 7:3; 9:4; 14:1 that in the future, 144,000 Jews from all tribes of Israel, except Dan, will have a mark in their foreheads as a sign for protection. It will be the name of God (Rev. 14:1). All the redeemed will be so marked in the next life (Rev. 3:12; 22:4).

The followers of the Beast will also be marked in the foreheads or hands (Rev. 13:16-17; 14:9; 20:4).

I'm not in favour of tattoo's in my life now, but we are created free moral agents and are as such free to choos what we will.

Cheers, Haz.

Great perspective Haz and great to put the issue in proper perspective.

[HAZARD]

Someone mentioned to me some years ago there is not one mention of Tattoo's in Scripture. I know it was and has been done and is mentioned in Scripture. In fact God commanded it be done.

"And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE; And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and 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." (Ezekiel 9:3-4).

This mark was to be put on the faithful ones for their protection when the faithless were destroyed. It showed they belonged to God.

It was an ancient custom in Egypt that a runaway slave was freed from his master if he went to the temple and declared himself up to the god of that place, recieving certain marks upon his person to denote his consecration to the diety he worshiped. Romans marked their soldiers in the hand and their slaves in the forheads. It is clear from Rev. 7:3; 9:4; 14:1 that in the future, 144,000 Jews from all tribes of Israel, except Dan, will have a mark in their foreheads as a sign for protection. It will be the name of God (Rev. 14:1). All the redeemed will be so marked in the next life (Rev. 3:12; 22:4).

The followers of the Beast will also be marked in the foreheads or hands (Rev. 13:16-17; 14:9; 20:4).

I'm not in favour of tattoo's in my life now, but we are created free moral agents and are as such free to choos what we will.

Cheers, Haz.

That was not a tattoo. It was not even a visible mark. God was telling the angel to mark those who belonged to him so they wouldn't be destroyed. It is not like they suddenly had a mark like Cain had placed upon him. It was for God to see, not other people, and there was no ink placed under their skin.

Mate, your many years of study seems to have given you more knowledge than God Himself has revealed in His Word.

He called to THE MAN, not the angel, with the INKHORN by his side, and he told him to go mark the men on their foreheads.

Here again is what God said;

And he called TO THE MAN CLOTHED WITH LINEN, which had the WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE; And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and 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." (Ezekiel 9:3-4). Fairly plain, clear and simple to understand that Scripture. You with with the inkhorn go and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men!

(Inkhorn / ink / set a mark / draw with ink / on the foreheads / we who understand and can read plain English see him marking the men with ink! on their foreheads).

[HAZARD]

Someone mentioned to me some years ago there is not one mention of Tattoo's in Scripture. I know it was and has been done and is mentioned in Scripture. In fact God commanded it be done.

"And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE; And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and 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." (Ezekiel 9:3-4).

This mark was to be put on the faithful ones for their protection when the faithless were destroyed. It showed they belonged to God.

It was an ancient custom in Egypt that a runaway slave was freed from his master if he went to the temple and declared himself up to the god of that place, recieving certain marks upon his person to denote his consecration to the diety he worshiped. Romans marked their soldiers in the hand and their slaves in the forheads. It is clear from Rev. 7:3; 9:4; 14:1 that in the future, 144,000 Jews from all tribes of Israel, except Dan, will have a mark in their foreheads as a sign for protection. It will be the name of God (Rev. 14:1). All the redeemed will be so marked in the next life (Rev. 3:12; 22:4).

The followers of the Beast will also be marked in the foreheads or hands (Rev. 13:16-17; 14:9; 20:4).

I'm not in favour of tattoo's in my life now, but we are created free moral agents and are as such free to choos what we will.

Cheers, Haz.

Great perspective Haz and great to put the issue in proper perspective.

Thank you Stan53. Like I said, I dont particularly or personally like tattoo's but if someone wants or likes them, they can color themselves from head to toe for all I worry??

[Stan53]

Someone mentioned to me some years ago there is not one mention of Tattoo's in Scripture. I know it was and has been done and is mentioned in Scripture. In fact God commanded it be done.

"And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE; And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and 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." (Ezekiel 9:3-4).

This mark was to be put on the faithful ones for their protection when the faithless were destroyed. It showed they belonged to God.

It was an ancient custom in Egypt that a runaway slave was freed from his master if he went to the temple and declared himself up to the god of that place, recieving certain marks upon his person to denote his consecration to the diety he worshiped. Romans marked their soldiers in the hand and their slaves in the forheads. It is clear from Rev. 7:3; 9:4; 14:1 that in the future, 144,000 Jews from all tribes of Israel, except Dan, will have a mark in their foreheads as a sign for protection. It will be the name of God (Rev. 14:1). All the redeemed will be so marked in the next life (Rev. 3:12; 22:4).

The followers of the Beast will also be marked in the foreheads or hands (Rev. 13:16-17; 14:9; 20:4).

I'm not in favour of tattoo's in my life now, but we are created free moral agents and are as such free to choos what we will.

Cheers, Haz.

That was not a tattoo. It was not even a visible mark. God was telling the angel to mark those who belonged to him so they wouldn't be destroyed. It is not like they suddenly had a mark like Cain had placed upon him. It was for God to see, not other people, and there was no ink placed under their skin.

Really? How do you come up with such an assertion? Hax deliberately highlighted WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE. Now why do you imagine God would have it written that way by Ezekiel and it not be literal? Their is no allegory or metaphore in this scripture.

I'd like to see at leats one scripture that supports your first two assertions above. It may not have been a tattoo in the connotation of the word we are debating, but what exactly would be the difference, it is still a mark.

Do you really expect to have your cake AND eat it too?

[Stan53]

As the OP seems to have decided what to do, I'll no longer be following this thread.

[gdemoss]

Graffiti on the temple of God? Wish I never did and now I keep my shame covered up.

Gary

[Guest Butero]

Someone mentioned to me some years ago there is not one mention of Tattoo's in Scripture. I know it was and has been done and is mentioned in Scripture. In fact God commanded it be done.

"And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE; And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and 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." (Ezekiel 9:3-4).

This mark was to be put on the faithful ones for their protection when the faithless were destroyed. It showed they belonged to God.

It was an ancient custom in Egypt that a runaway slave was freed from his master if he went to the temple and declared himself up to the god of that place, recieving certain marks upon his person to denote his consecration to the diety he worshiped. Romans marked their soldiers in the hand and their slaves in the forheads. It is clear from Rev. 7:3; 9:4; 14:1 that in the future, 144,000 Jews from all tribes of Israel, except Dan, will have a mark in their foreheads as a sign for protection. It will be the name of God (Rev. 14:1). All the redeemed will be so marked in the next life (Rev. 3:12; 22:4).

The followers of the Beast will also be marked in the foreheads or hands (Rev. 13:16-17; 14:9; 20:4).

I'm not in favour of tattoo's in my life now, but we are created free moral agents and are as such free to choos what we will.

Cheers, Haz.

That was not a tattoo. It was not even a visible mark. God was telling the angel to mark those who belonged to him so they wouldn't be destroyed. It is not like they suddenly had a mark like Cain had placed upon him. It was for God to see, not other people, and there was no ink placed under their skin.

Really? How do you come up with such an assertion? Hax deliberately highlighted WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE. Now why do you imagine God would have it written that way by Ezekiel and it not be literal? Their is no allegory or metaphore in this scripture.

I'd like to see at leats one scripture that supports your first two assertions above. It may not have been a tattoo in the connotation of the word we are debating, but what exactly would be the difference, it is still a mark.

Do you really expect to have your cake AND eat it too?

I already explained my position. I have read that passage many times, and never saw it as a literal mark anyone else could see but God. Again, is the earth an actual footstool? That is what the Bible says. Sometimes it is just a matter of common sense, and there is no way I believe God had an angel put a tattoo on anyone's head.

[HAZARD]

Someone mentioned to me some years ago there is not one mention of Tattoo's in Scripture. I know it was and has been done and is mentioned in Scripture. In fact God commanded it be done.

"And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE; And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and 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." (Ezekiel 9:3-4).

This mark was to be put on the faithful ones for their protection when the faithless were destroyed. It showed they belonged to God.

It was an ancient custom in Egypt that a runaway slave was freed from his master if he went to the temple and declared himself up to the god of that place, recieving certain marks upon his person to denote his consecration to the diety he worshiped. Romans marked their soldiers in the hand and their slaves in the forheads. It is clear from Rev. 7:3; 9:4; 14:1 that in the future, 144,000 Jews from all tribes of Israel, except Dan, will have a mark in their foreheads as a sign for protection. It will be the name of God (Rev. 14:1). All the redeemed will be so marked in the next life (Rev. 3:12; 22:4).

The followers of the Beast will also be marked in the foreheads or hands (Rev. 13:16-17; 14:9; 20:4).

I'm not in favour of tattoo's in my life now, but we are created free moral agents and are as such free to choos what we will.

Cheers, Haz.

That was not a tattoo. It was not even a visible mark. God was telling the angel to mark those who belonged to him so they wouldn't be destroyed. It is not like they suddenly had a mark like Cain had placed upon him. It was for God to see, not other people, and there was no ink placed under their skin.

Mate, you can ignore God's Word if you like, doesnt bother me in the slightest.

He called to THE MAN, not the angel, with the INKHORN by his side, and he told him to go mark the men on their foreheads.

Here again is what God said;

And he called TO THE MAN CLOTHED WITH LINEN, which had the WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE; And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and 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." (Ezekiel 9:3-4). Fairly plain, clear and simple to understand that Scripture. You with with the inkhorn go and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men! (Inkhorn / set a mark / we who underatand and can read plain English see him marking the men with ink!on their foreheads).

I have read that passage repeatedly, and never once did I believe that was a literal mark. I just told that to someone else, and they laughed at the notion it was a tattoo. Some tattoo apologists have claimed Jesus had a tattoo, which is ludicrous, and this is just as absurd to me. I am not ignoring anything. I don't believe it was a literal mark. The only one that could see it was God. It was a spiritual mark. There are a lot of things going on in the spiritual rhelm we cannot see, like there are angels that encamp around us. We don't see them, but they exist. This mark was not literal. It is not like these people went around with a tattoo on their head the rest of their life. If you believe that, more power to you, but I do not!

By the way, the Bible says the earth is God's footstool. Does that mean it is a literal footstool, rather than the planet we dwell on?

"I just told that to someone else, and they laughed at the notion it was a tattoo."

.

I enjoy a good laugh as well, but I rarely laugh about the Scritpures and what they teach.

Here is the true method of bible interpertation. The chief fundamental principle is to gather from the Scriptures themselves the precise meaning the writers intended to convey. Correct interpretation applies to the Bible the same principles, rules, garmmatical process, and exercise of common sense and reason that we apply to other books. In doing this, one must take the Bible as literal when it is at all possible. When a statement is found that it cannot possibly be literal, as Jesus being a "door" or a woman being clothed with the sun and standing on the moon and on her head a crown of twelve stars, or of land animals coming out of the sea, and other statements which are obviously not literal, then we know the language is figurative. In such cases we must get the literal truth conveyed by the figurative language, and the truth intended to be conveyed will be as literal as if it were expressed in literal language without the use of such figures. After all, figurative language expresses literal truth as much as if such figures were not used. In a general sense, the true method of Bible interpretation embraces the following ideas.

1. The primary meaning of words in their common use in a particular age in which they are used, and the importance of synonyms.

2. The grammatical construction and idiomatic perculairities of the languages of the Bible,and the meaning of the context, both immediate and remote.

3. Comparrison of parallel passages on the same subject.

4. The purpose or object of each writer in each particular book.

5. The historical background of each writer and the circumstances under which he wrote.

6. The general plan of the entire Bible, and its moral and spiritual teachings.

7. The agreement of Scripture in its several parts, and its prophecies and their fulfillment.

8. The manners and customs of the particular age and landof each writer.

9. Understanding of how to interpret prophecy, poetry, allegories, symbols, parables, figures of speech, types, and all other forms of human expression.

10. The different classes of people and institutions dealt with in Scripture, and the application of the different principles and rules of interpretation.

When all these facts are kept in mind, and all Scriptures interpreted in harmony with all these principles, there cannot possibly be any misunderstanding of any part of the Bible. Remember this: Take the Bible literally whenever it is at all possible. When the language cannot be taken literally, then we know it is figurative. The we get the literal truth conveyed by the figurative language as if it were expressed in literal language without the use of figures.

Literally speaking, THE WRITERS INKHORN BY HIS SIDE. It was customary in the east for writers to put onto a girdle around their waist the case containing their writing impliments. The inkhorn consisted of two parts: a receptacle for the pens, and a box for the ink. It was made out of ebony, hard wood, brass, copper or silver and of beautiful workmanship. It was about 10 in. long, one and a half inches wide and half an inch deep. The hollow shaft contained pens of reed and a penknife and had a lid (v 2).

[HAZARD]

For those who insist that the Mosaic Laws apply here, I suggest you read Deut 22:8, and all the other ones in that chapter.

I'm sure common sense will prevail for most of us when it comes to this issue.

I have read the entire Bible through more than 13 times. I know what it says. This thread is about tattoos, so I don't want to get off topic, but I could give you a quick explaination.

There are three types of laws. 1. Laws dealing with God's standard of holiness. They still apply. 2. Laws dealing with Israel's separation from the idol worshipping gentile nations. They no longer apply because the Jews and Gentiles are one through faith in Christ. 3. The laws dealing with how to perform the animal sacrfices and the office of the Levitical Priesthood in general. They were never intended to continue past Calvary. When it comes to the penalties, they were exclusive to Israel. The law of the land was the law of Moses, and enforcement required punishments. The moral codes never ended, but the punishments are decided by individual nations. In other words, Thou Shalt Not Kill will always be a moral law of God, but each nation decides how to punish offenders. We could go law by law, and I can tell you what category they belong in, and why they apply or don't apply today if you wish, but this isn't the best place to do so, since the topic is tattoos. For instance, we could discuss garments made of more than one material verses cross dressing?

You seem to think the amount of times you have read the Bible means something...well it doesn't. I have been a Christian for over 40 years. Care to guess how many times I've read the Bible? It really doesn't provide any credulity to your assertions unless they are PROPERLY exegeted.

Why are you going OFF topic again? The fact is the verse about tattoos is NOT applicable, based on what you just posted.

Well frankly Stan, I don't care how many times you have read the Bible, or how long you have been a Christian. You haven't exactly wowed me with your understanding. I look at you as a typical false teacher. You think you are some authority, and I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about? I look at you with the same disdain you look at others with who don't agree with you.

By the way Stan, why don't you tell me how many times you read the Bible straight through? I am not good at guessing. In addition to that, I was only speaking in terms of straight through, not number of times total.

Come on now, lets not attack one another. Its not about who's right or wrong? Its about understanding what was done and why. By the way, mate, notice, not every one had the mark applied, only some.