Sevenseas Posted December 6, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,373 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 683 Days Won: 22 Joined: 02/28/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted December 6, 2014 You can't make comparisons like that ladykay. We are told in the NT that our bodies are vessels for the Holy Spirit. This is true. Though I do not see what that has to do with getting a tattoo. Maybe some people want to decorate their vessels. Should we also not wear make up, and ear rings? How about a nose ring? Can I have purple hair? I like purple hair. Pulling any old reference from the OT law for its 'shock' value does not really make a case IMO So why is it must to follow one part of the law and not the other? The problem you are creating is comparing what a believer should do to what the rest of the world does. Tatoos are mentionned in OT law...did I state do not get a tatoo? Well, no I didn't. I basically said look into, consider what God stated and then make a decision. I also do not advocate following one part of the law and ignoring another. In fact, my argement has always been against that way of thinking. What you should follow is actually Who you should follow. I think a person has enough information regarding what they should and should not do from scripture. I don't think it is difficult to examine one's heart in light of scripture and then decide whether or not to go ahead with any given course of action. LadyKay, on 05 Dec 2014 - 6:42 PM, said: You know why this topic gets under my skin, so to speak. It is because I do not like holier than thou people looking at people they know nothing about, and judging their spiritual life based on what they look like, what they are wearing to church, or if they have tattoos. Actually, we are to judge ourselves in light of the word of God...doing so, most often creates forgiveness for others when we acknowledge that we are also saved by grace not works, which means no one gets to boast. Sometimes (and here I am just trying to see things from another POV cause I don't much care for super spirituality myself) those who point fingers are wishing those who seem to think they can do anything they want would clean up their act. Perhaps both sides have valid points?ps: I disagree with is based on myself. I like to dress is black. But my heart it not black. I have a seen a lot of nicely, neatly dressed people who act as though they are heartless in the things they say and do to others. My fav jacket is a black leather jacket....I'm not a biker chick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevenseas Posted December 6, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,373 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 683 Days Won: 22 Joined: 02/28/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted December 6, 2014 Sorry Sevenseas, but your response to me is a bunch of malarkey. If what you were saying is true, then all those attacks you have made about husbands that ran around are wrong headed, because they did nothing wrong. If we are not under the law in the way you are saying, that means none of it, including the law that says "Thou shalt not commit adultery." If you believe that we are not under the law, then how can we sin when sin is the transgression of the law according to 1 John? Your position makes no logical sense. On the one hand, we don't have to keep the law because we are not under the law, but on the other hand, you say you don't think it is ok to sin. That is completely illogical. One other thing I want to point out is that the scriptures that come against incest are only found in the OT. That means that if we only go by the NT, a brother can marry his sister or a father can marry his daughter if he is a widower, because we can't dump the Old and New Testament into the same pot. The only reference we have to incest in the NT is regarding adultery, not in marriage. Wrong headed? Actually two heads would serve better in order to comprehend why you say you are saved by grace and yet insist that parts of the law are still valid and supercede grace. Getting a tatoo is not an immoral act and neither is wearing slacks if you are woman. However, you continue to confuse those issues and attempt to state that unless a person follows some parts of the law, they are not saved. It's confusing to say the least. I don't have that interpretation and I certainly cannot find it in the New Testament. You repeatedly refuse to acknowledge that believing the Bible teaches we are no longer under the law does not mean one is free to sin. Instead, you avow that if you believe we are saved by grace, without the works of the law, then we are believe we are free to sin. Howlever, that is a very lopsided view of what the Bible actually states. One other thing I want to point out is that the scriptures that come against incest are only found in the OT. That means that if we only go by the NT, a brother can marry his sister or a father can marry his daughter if he is a widower, because we can't dump the Old and New Testament into the same pot. The only reference we have to incest in the NT is regarding adultery, not in marriage. Well, there again we have illustrated your apparent inability to grasp what is actually being said. Is there some reason you appear to believe I just threw out the OT? or is that done on purpose to make it look like my arguement is to ignore the OT? Either way, you believe it is ok for a man to have multiple wives and I believe that it is not. so I guess you can make up your own mind about incest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyKay Posted December 6, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 12 Topic Count: 385 Topics Per Day: 0.10 Content Count: 7,692 Content Per Day: 1.92 Reputation: 4,809 Days Won: 3 Joined: 05/28/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted December 6, 2014 I am assuming that based on your question to me about what part of the law we must keep, you must think we aren't required to keep any of it, because we aren't under law but grace. I personally look at it this way. Is what I'm doing being hurtful to anyone else? For me being a Christian means you have love for your fellow man/women. While I do not think that getting a tattoo would cause harm to anyone else, so as a Christian I am okay with tattoos. But cheating on your spouse and taking from others what does not belong to you, causes harm to other people. These things are not acts of love. They are teachings from the Old Testament that also show up in the New Testament. Such as keeping the marriage bed pure. Not lying or cheating people out of what is rightfully theirs. All of these things cause harm to others and are not a sign of love. While I would not look upon someone with a tattoo and think to myself they are a not a Christian for having one, I would question someone's Christianity if they were doing things that they knew was hurting others. So I sum this tattoo thing all up with this. I do not see tattoos causing harm to other people. So I am okay with them. It is a personal choice that is between you and God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Teditis Posted December 6, 2014 Share Posted December 6, 2014 I agree... ink is merely ink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom2014 Posted December 6, 2014 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 19 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 2 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/06/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted December 6, 2014 If i didn't come to know Jesus as my Lord , i may very well have had a few tattoos. However, i no longer want to put markings on my body now . What do you think of all these tattoo reality shows? It is a lifestyle and a profession but as christians we should be seperate from it. I was very intrigued of these tattooists but felt bad that some collect crosses, rosaries and skulls and also collects some ungodly art etc. I would just love for these people to embrace Jesus and have an encounter with Him and leave those things that don't glorify Him alone. Any thoughts? I won't get tattoos, but I see not a thing wrong with people that do, unless they are getting them as an affront to themselves or others. It is in doing things to be in confrontation that we defile ourselves. In the end, the body will not see The Kingdom and it does not harm the physical form to adorn it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevenseas Posted December 6, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,373 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 683 Days Won: 22 Joined: 02/28/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted December 6, 2014 yeah Butero we have been around that block many times and you still ignore what I actually post...from THE BIBLE and try to state I say its ok to sin Same ole same ole Sevenesea's position is completely illogical and untrue. How do I know that? Because she takes a position against things like adultery, which is right out of the law of Moses, while ignoring Deuteronomy 22:5. That right there shows she does hold to part of the law of Moses, while ignoring other parts of the law of Moses. If she is saying that only those things re-stated in the NT are valid, that is still holding to part of the law, and it means she is ok with an incestuous marriage between a brother and sister, because that is not mentioned in the NT. She has to be ok with transvestites as well, as that is not mentioned either. This would be funny if you did not appear to be getting a tad desperate at trying to make it seem I might have schizophrenia of the spiritual sort I pray one day you actually understand what I write instead of trying to tell me what you think I think or possibly left out of my post and you see fit to add Writing about me in the third person may be another attempt to make it seem I cannot fathom what you write..therefore you must needs address any and all save me I find that ... well....condescending and feeble...and the same way you have posted any time I or really anyone, try to point out that we are no longer under the law and the law saves no one The law was given to point out sin. It seems to be working Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Teditis Posted December 6, 2014 Share Posted December 6, 2014 What about verse 27? You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevenseas Posted December 6, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,373 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 683 Days Won: 22 Joined: 02/28/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted December 6, 2014 oh that one we can ignore........I know because that was addressed some moons back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Teditis Posted December 6, 2014 Share Posted December 6, 2014 so is everyone in the US military sinning by doing so? Just wondering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Teditis Posted December 6, 2014 Share Posted December 6, 2014 I do see them as two separate issues... and didn't mean to sound obstinate. But cutting your hair short and to the shape of our heads would be "rounding the corners of your head", wouldn't it? Then we take the two verses together and one seems okay and the other not okay. And I wonder why... I see this as part of Levitical law... not moral law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts