What do you think of Tattoos?

[Riccardo]

Your body is the temple of God. I don't think placing graffiti on it is such a good idea

[((Michael))]

On 7/5/2016 at 10:27 AM, GoldenEagle said:

Hiya Davida!  

Yes, it's really open to interpretation. Only God knows. Is it possible it's on His robe? Yes. Is it possible it's a tattoo? Yes. We do agree that Jesus will return as King of Kings and Lord of Lords!  

Essential to the faith: Jesus will return.

Non-essential to the faith: Will Jesus have a tattoo or a name on his robe?

God bless,
GE

If you are saying that scripture is open for interpretation, what is your interpretation on it? Are you "truthfully" saying Christ might have been endorsing tattoos? If we don't know for sure, then maybe shouldn't twist those scriptures for the sake of debate. Should we judge a person with tatoos as condemned? I wouldn't, I don't think it's my place to do so. But I see Revelations 22:3-5 and Isaiah 44:5 being quoted in such a way as to imply God is endorsing tatoos in both of those passages. Does the scripture say specifically that tattoos are a sin? I'm not sure. But The bible doesn't have to list every possible sin for it to be sin, James tells us that.

James 4:17 "  ¹⁷ Therefore, to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin.

The "right thing" could be a number of things.

Possibly, somebody out there is riding the fence on tattoos and may come across this forum and see those 2 passages being quoted to imply getting a tattoo is ok with the Almighty. Just something to think about. 

 

Edited July 10, 2016 by ((Michael))

[Openly Curious]

I agree 

[post]

12 hours ago, Riccardo said:

Your body is the temple of God. I don't think placing graffiti on it is such a good idea

Solomon's temple was decorated within and without with pictures of cherubim, palm trees and open flowers. 
according to the design that the Lord Himself gave to David. 

i wouldn't call that "graffiti" -- sort of a wrong connotation there -- but don't go away with the idea that the temple was unadorned. 

Edited July 10, 2016 by post

[post]

Just now, post said:

Solomon's temple was decorated within and without with pictures of cherubim, palm trees and open flowers. 
according to the design that the Lord Himself gave to David. 

i wouldn't call that "graffiti" -- sort of a wrong connotation there -- but don't go away with the idea that the temple was unadorned. 

in fact, i was reading Ezekiel 40 → today, about the figurative temple ((which some think is a sort of millineum temple to be built, except in it are sin & guilt offerings, so there's the one small issue of blasphemous, abominable sacrifice going on right in front of the Lord sitting on His throne for 1,000 years . . ? but that's another subject  . . )) 

anyhow, in there, the temple is described as having engravings of palm trees on all the gates, and part of the temple grounds, a building for occupancy behind the main temple, decorated with rows of alternating cherubim and palm trees. the cherubim are described as having two faces, one a lion, and one a man - looking on either side to the palm trees interspersed between them. ((Ezekiel 41:15-20)) 

i thought, this would be an interesting tattoo, to have a ring of cherubim and palm trees as described in the scripture, around ones leg or arm. just as the body is the temple, reflecting how the scripture describes the adornment of the temple. i wouldn't consider that blasphemous, personally, but honoring God, actually -- though i know ((evidenced from this thread, easily)) there are those who would be utterly mollified and probably feel like cutting off all fellowship with a believer who did such a thing. 

((not that i'm on my way to the tattoo parlor or anything. just read this and found it interesting))

another interesting thing is that in Ezekiel, though the motifs of palm trees and cherubim are repeated, i don't see the images of open flowers, as is described in the building and plans for the 1st temple ((in re: 1 Kings 6:29, etc)), nor the pomegranate, which was written to be woven into the ephod, and adorned the top of the pillars, etc. 
i wonder why is that? 
maybe in Ezekiel's vision, simply not all the details are given, since it is primarily concerned with the measurement and overall layout -- or maybe there is a significance to them being absent that hasn't been revealed to my thinking yet. 


 

[post]

some people here seem to have a prejudice about things i say
((maybe that's in my head, but maybe it's not - so i said "seem")) 

so maybe it's wise again to reiterate: i am not trying to encourage anyone to get a tattoo. 
so if you're accusing me in your heart, plz just stop, k? 
i'm just making some observations and musing. 

[Riccardo]

Hello Post,  As for Solomon's temple I also don't think thats its graffiti, but until  God gives us the designs & go ahead for tattoos, I think its best to restrain.   

[Guest shiloh357]

On ‎7‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 2:06 PM, post said:

in fact, i was reading Ezekiel 40 → today, about the figurative temple ((which some think is a sort of millineum temple to be built, except in it are sin & guilt offerings, so there's the one small issue of blasphemous, abominable sacrifice going on right in front of the Lord sitting on His throne for 1,000 years . . ? but that's another subject  . . ))  
 

Actually, the Temple in Ezekiel is going to be a literal temple structure in the future, during the millennium.  I have started a thread defending that view in the Study Group Forum.  There is no basis for making it "figurative."

[post]

22 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

Actually, the Temple in Ezekiel is going to be a literal temple structure in the future, during the millennium.  I have started a thread defending that view in the Study Group Forum.  There is no basis for making it "figurative."

with sin & guilt offerings. abominable, blasphemous sacrifices. right at the feet of the Lord sitting on the throne. for 1,000 years. who never bats an eye at them. 

riiiiight

[Guest shiloh357]

50 minutes ago, post said:

with sin & guilt offerings. abominable, blasphemous sacrifices. right at the feet of the Lord sitting on the throne. for 1,000 years. who never bats an eye at them. 

riiiiight

I will explain why those are not blasphemous in the thread in the Study Group forum.  Come join me there and we'll hash it out.