Poll re. good tattoo artist career for a Christian woman - Part 2

[farouk]

I will not support this, did you really bother with that link. its a book on spirituality and it uses wolves to make a point. wolves and the way they work in pack is how the indian societies in general work? so why would go and support that pagan image. look I am not saying all of that is bad but its how she would take it. before It didn't bother me as I know it was her indian past and it wasn't an idol or an influence but now I cant be so sure.

hi @jasoncran :

I did pull it up and looked at the title page; great picture of the North American outdoors, evocative also of the Canadian North; but yes if you truly thought it was too identifying with paganism, then I can understand why if you decide not to go with her to the parlor.

Keep praying for her; I'm sure you do.

Blessings.

 

[jasoncran]

btw most American Indians would assume that she is into indian folklore. its common to see that at pow-wows. while I have danced with the American Indians once , never again.a pow-pow is a great way to learn about American Indians but it does have a lot of pagan influence.

monica loved the Cherokee drum area as she lived in Cherokee. jaci is 50% Cherokee.

 

[farouk]

btw most American Indians would assume that she is into indian folklore. its common to see that at pow-wows. while I have danced with the American Indians once , never again.a pow-pow is a great way to learn about American Indians but it does have a lot of pagan influence.

monica loved the Cherokee drum area as she lived in Cherokee. jaci is 50% Cherokee.

@jasoncran :

Some nature / tribal tattoo designs on their own might superficially resemble Native American / Canadian First Nations style, whether by implication pagan or not; but I've also seen designs, say, for an armband or ankle tattoo, that also evoke the crown of thorns.

I guess it varies a lot from design to design and from person to person what the identification may be; and some people are maybe more ready to tell others about the Christian testimony identification that they feel about theirs.

Blessings.

 

[jasoncran]

yes I have seen those, your avatar is as such. common here. but its well clearly different as I have seen the crown of thorns image as well with the lord.

 

[farouk]

yes I have seen those, your avatar is as such. common here. but its well clearly different as I have seen the crown of thorns image as well with the lord.

[MENTION=11841]jasoncran[/MENTION]:

So what do you think of my avatar?

Blessings.

 

[jasoncran]

lol. im used to it. It really doesn't remind me of the crown of thorns.you have mentioned that to me before. besides if you wanted me to really like it would have to be something that makes me see things from the jewish view on the bible and god. or reminds me of it.

 

[farouk]

lol. im used to it. It really doesn't remind me of the crown of thorns.you have mentioned that to me before. besides if you wanted me to really like it would have to be something that makes me see things from the jewish view on the bible and god. or reminds me of it.

@jasoncran :

Okay! Actually, I have seen designs that are more evocative of the crown of thorns than the one in my avatar, anyway.

One idea is to have a tribal armband (Celtic, etc.) interlaced with some Bible references.

Whether for tattoos or not, the tribal designs often look good simply in black, and not multicolored.

Blessings.
.........
PS: @jasoncran :

You mentioned some hesitations that you have about your wife's tattoo plans and I can appreciate this.

From another angle, I guess it would be hard for men to deny the basic fact today of the tattoo equality as now practised among men and women, in the receiving and giving of tattoos; @for_his_glory in one of her posts wrote this:

Originally Posted by for_his_glory
The gender aspect should be the same for a women or a man, but since you did say a women then I would have no problem with that of a women owning her own parlor..

From a certain standpoint now, this would be very hard to deny.

Blessings.

 

[farouk]

..the meaning of tattoos are changing. And have been for a good 25 years now.
..A tattoo has no inherent meaning, just like the style of dress has no inherent meaning. .. the "meaning" of bare legs on a woman isn't the same as it was several generations ago, no more than the "meaning" of tattoos is. Yes, some can superimpose their own "meaning" that was more commonly agreed upon 30 or so years ago, but ..............

PS:
[MENTION=4376]handy[/MENTION]: I just re-read your earlier post, above. Some helpful and interesting observations there.

You are right that customs change and perceptions develop. And the decades go by very quickly. For example, a 32 year old young woman who chose to wear a miniskirt in 1965 would today be aged 80. So it wouldn't be much use for reactionary-minded people to claim that if a young woman today has a skirt that hovers above the knee (as do some of my wife's skirts) it is somehow supposedly offensive to the older generation. Because it's today's older generation that were the miniskirted rockers.

Today, tattoos, too, are pretty mainstream, including for women. No one needs to get one. Or to wear above the knee skirts, etc. But if they do, it's not unusual. That being said, some Christians evidently choose to embrace the ink medium for expressing a faith related witness design in a tattoo in a modest placement.

(Hope this makes some sort of sense.)

Blessings.

 

[jasoncran]

hardly farouk , you don't really get me . I have been in sin a lot as sinner. flesh wise a tattoo women doesn't bother but would be rather attractive. why? well because of what the culture says about that. body art= god at well we know. that is the image we must avoid. when we project that we need to avoid that. not that all things we are like this topic. a part of shorts might be the same but honeslty. this is so uneeded likely to cause more issues then its worth.

if i wanted tattoos, i would use some jewish imagery as that would be me! i may also something from stargate which then you would say is sin. stargate? i would say. you would complain about the Egyptian god imagery to me then. i would say tis just a show. google apophis, and his image from stargate sg1 AND pick the one with the head dress. its straight up from the Egyptian myths!

that my friend is the point!

 

[farouk]

hardly farouk , you don't really get me . I have been in sin a lot as sinner. flesh wise a tattoo women doesn't bother but would be rather attractive. why? well because of what the culture says about that. body art= god at well we know. that is the image we must avoid. when we project that we need to avoid that. not that all things we are like this topic. a part of shorts might be the same but honeslty. this is so uneeded likely to cause more issues then its worth.

if i wanted tattoos, i would use some jewish imagery as that would be me! i may also something from stargate which then you would say is sin. stargate? i would say. you would complain about the Egyptian god imagery to me then. i would say tis just a show. google apophis, and his image from stargate sg1 AND pick the one with the head dress. its straight up from the Egyptian myths!

that my friend is the point!

[MENTION=11841]jasoncran[/MENTION]:

Thanks a lot for your thoughts; I guess I was thinking of Christian imagery or message, rather than pagan, etc.

(I realize New Testament Christianity has Jewish roots.)

Blessings.

 

[jasoncran]

that is the PROBLEM. people like shows and sports and i have seem star trek tats before on people.i know that image of Aphophis enough to get the guy who sports it out, but another say my pastor wouldn't. its still in either case a pagan image tattooed in the skin.

a shirt would have the tv show with it.a tat may not. that is the difference.

 

[farouk]

Only that one time, but I'd do it again.

[MENTION=89910]questdriven[/MENTION]:

PS:

Yes, well, it doesn't have to be done of course, but I guess it's simply part of the natural environment around the Christian hard rock scene and its music. (Whether done permanently or not.) Blessings.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

(PS: I suppose in the same vein as your comment some people could also try to argue that the many preachers' wives who happen to paint their lips, wear rings in their ears and wear high heels are supposedly trying allure people to perdition. But, frankly, few people would agree.)

So, if enough people agree or disagree with something that makes it okay? You know what the Bible says about excessive adornment. Just because the church has adopted the ways of the world in regard to women's dress (to a very limited extent) it's okay to do that with tattoos too?

The important thing to realize is the meaning of dress has changed. The meaning of tattoos has not. You're trying to compare the proverbial apples and oranges you talked about earlier in a post. But as more and more naive people endorse tattooing in the church this will change as societal norms change. Until then it's impossible to compare dress to tattoos. For now tattoos still largely communicate that which they did from the beginning in our society--an underlying value system of worldliness. Whether that's actually true one person to the next is unknown. The point I'm making is it still communicates that in our society whether we want to acknowledge it or not.

Jethro, I agree whole heartedly with everything you have written on this issue.

I waited until I was 52 to give my life to Jesus, and in those 52 years I became very much a part of the world. I was addicted to alcohol, pornography, and had acquired several large tattoos.

After surrendering my life to Jesus, He put a stop to all of it. The alcohol and porn was plainly addressed in the bible; however, tattoos not so much. After lengthy prayer, the Holy Spirit showed me Romans 12:2 and that was all it took to convince me that I would get no more tattoos. For “me” tattoos are just as much a part of the world as alcohol and porn, and I would definitely not hang out at a bar drinking with the other patroness in an attempt to better witness to them.

I don’t try to hide my tattoos because I can use them to witness to Christians about how being part of the world has scared me, and that Jesus has forgiven me for getting them.

I know many will disagree with me and I don’t intend to debate the issue because there is nothing anybody can say that will trump what the Holy Spirit has spoken to me.

In “my” opinion, tattoos are a part of the world and Christians should not get them or give them.

Be blessed.

Toby

Great testimony, in or out of a tattoo discussion.

Farouk, you can't change the fact that tattoos still represent the pride and pleasure of this world. It's part of this ridiculous 'beauty and talent search' mentality in our western society. And people have been bringing that mentality, the mentality of pride and sensuality, into the church for a while now. Tattooing is just another example of that. Just more worldly desires infiltrating the church, dumbing it down to where the world is.

You can disguise it in religion, as it often is, but it still represents the pride and sensuality of the world, especially to the world, the very people you think are going to be ministered to through the pursuit. As tandemcpl shows us, God says to NOT be conformed to the world, but so many people are very busy conforming themselves and the church to the world in some misguided hope that it will lead unbelievers to become sincere, dedicated believers, set apart for the Lord from the world. A compromised, watered down gospel will never do that. Think about why that's true.

 

[farouk]

(PS: I suppose in the same vein as your comment some people could also try to argue that the many preachers' wives who happen to paint their lips, wear rings in their ears and wear high heels are supposedly trying allure people to perdition. But, frankly, few people would agree.)

So, if enough people agree or disagree with something that makes it okay? You know what the Bible says about excessive adornment. Just because the church has adopted the ways of the world in regard to women's dress (to a very limited extent) it's okay to do that with tattoos too?

The important thing to realize is the meaning of dress has changed. The meaning of tattoos has not. You're trying to compare the proverbial apples and oranges you talked about earlier in a post. But as more and more naive people endorse tattooing in the church this will change as societal norms change. Until then it's impossible to compare dress to tattoos. For now tattoos still largely communicate that which they did from the beginning in our society--an underlying value system of worldliness. Whether that's actually true one person to the next is unknown. The point I'm making is it still communicates that in our society whether we want to acknowledge it or not.

Jethro, I agree whole heartedly with everything you have written on this issue.

I waited until I was 52 to give my life to Jesus, and in those 52 years I became very much a part of the world. I was addicted to alcohol, pornography, and had acquired several large tattoos.

After surrendering my life to Jesus, He put a stop to all of it. The alcohol and porn was plainly addressed in the bible; however, tattoos not so much. After lengthy prayer, the Holy Spirit showed me Romans 12:2 and that was all it took to convince me that I would get no more tattoos. For “me” tattoos are just as much a part of the world as alcohol and porn, and I would definitely not hang out at a bar drinking with the other patroness in an attempt to better witness to them.

I don’t try to hide my tattoos because I can use them to witness to Christians about how being part of the world has scared me, and that Jesus has forgiven me for getting them.

I know many will disagree with me and I don’t intend to debate the issue because there is nothing anybody can say that will trump what the Holy Spirit has spoken to me.

In “my” opinion, tattoos are a part of the world and Christians should not get them or give them.

Be blessed.

Toby

Great testimony, in or out of a tattoo discussion.

Farouk, you can't change the fact that tattoos still represent the pride and pleasure of this world. It's part of this ridiculous 'beauty and talent search' mentality in our western society. And people have been bringing that mentality, the mentality of the world, into the church for a while now. Tattooing is just another example of that. Just more worldly desires infiltrating the church, dumbing it down to where the world is.

You can disguise it in religion, but it's still represents the pride and sensuality of the world, especially to the world, the very people you think are going to be ministered to through the pursuit. As tandemcpl shows us, God says to NOT be conformed to the world, but so many people are very busy conforming the church to the world in some misguided hope that it will make sincere, dedicated believers out of them. A compromised, watered down gospel will never do that. Think about why that's true.

@Jethro Bodine :

Thanks for your further contribution.

The fact is that many Christians get them for the specific purpose of having faith based designs; these are also proven to be effective conversation-starters; a factor hard to ignore.

My wife is a wonderful and modest lady: she wears make up and heels and when she's not wearing pants her hemline sometimes hovers above the knee: I think your comments about tattoos could in theory be applied to any of these things if one tried hard enough, but she is still modest and so can some tattoos be.

Blessings.

PS: John's First Epistle says: '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.'

This is a good verse to remember, and I find John's First Epistle very searching.

What I find hard to do, however, is to make supposedly obligatory connections that Scripture itself does not do.

For example, it might be stated by some preachers:

'If you wish to have a tattoo of whatever design, it means you love the world and the love of the Father is not in you.'

This is, however, a non-sequitur.

It's also arbitrary.

One could say, for example:

'If you, Ma'm, wear make up, it means you love the world and the love of the Father is not in you.'

Or even:

'If your heels are above x-inches high, it means you love the world and the love of the Father is not in you.'

These are also non-sequiturs. Although those of a certain mindset may find the use of such discourse appealing at a certain level.

It's no different for tattoos of a modest nature, I guess. Particularly if the motivation is for the design to be faith based.

(Further two cents'.)

Blessings.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The fact is that many Christians get them for the specific purpose of having faith based designs; these are also proven to be effective conversation-starters; a factor hard to ignore.

So would drinking beer out of a 'Jesus Saves' beer mug at your local bar.

You can't rationalize worldliness by wrapping it in evangelism. It makes for a convenient excuse to get a tattoo, and in my example a convenient excuse to hang out in a bar drinking beer, but it isn't good for anything else.

And even if your motives are pure, all you're doing is sending the world the message that the church is really just like the world. A very popular message these days. Has been for at least twenty-five years, I think. And it's why we have, as it's been said, a church that is a mile wide but only an inch deep.

You keep looking at this from the perspective of the naive Christian instead of the perspective of the world which knows, whether they can easily acknowledge it or not, that tattoos are vehicles of pride and sensuality. So when the church puts their stamp of approval on them they are approving of what those things still very much do represent in the world, whether we the church want to believe that, or not. Not a good thing.

My wife is a wonderful and modest lady: she wears make up and heels and when she's not wearing pants her hemline sometimes hovers above the knee: I think your comments about tattoos could in theory be applied to any of these things if one tried hard enough, but she is still modest and so can some tattoos be.

Blessings.

When tattoos become like manner of dress that used to represent in society what tattoos do now your point will be valid.

And just because, for argument's sake, the church has accepted various forms of unacceptable, worldly dress (I'm not suggesting your wife is dressing inappropriately), that makes it okay to accept the worldly practice of tattooing also? Explain that reasoning to me.

This to me is just another example of how a little leaven works through the whole batch. You know in just a few years, corseting will probably be rationalized in the church. The downhill slide into the ways, and loves, of the world will continue. Do your homework on corseting, now, so that in a few years when someone wants to have a 'faith based' corset you can explain to them it has no godly origins whatsoever that would justify Christians adopting the practice in the name of evangelism.

 

[farouk]

The fact is that many Christians get them for the specific purpose of having faith based designs; these are also proven to be effective conversation-starters; a factor hard to ignore.

So would drinking beer out of a 'Jesus Saves' beer mug at your local bar.

You can't rationalize worldliness by wrapping it in evangelism. It makes for a convenient excuse to get a tattoo, and in my example a convenient excuse to hang out in a bar drinking beer, but it isn't good for anything else.

And even if your motives are pure, all you're doing is sending the world the message that the church is really just like the world. A very popular message these days. Has been for at least twenty-five years, I think. And it's why we have, as it's been said, a church that is a mile wide but only an inch deep.

You keep looking at this from the perspective of the naive Christian instead of the perspective of the world which knows, whether they can easily acknowledge it or not, that tattoos are vehicles of pride and sensuality. So when the church puts their stamp of approval on them they are approving of what those things still very much do represent in the world, whether we the church want to believe that, or not. Not a good thing.

My wife is a wonderful and modest lady: she wears make up and heels and when she's not wearing pants her hemline sometimes hovers above the knee: I think your comments about tattoos could in theory be applied to any of these things if one tried hard enough, but she is still modest and so can some tattoos be.

Blessings.

When tattoos become like manner of dress that used to represent in society what tattoos do now your point will be valid.

And just because, for argument's sake, the church has accepted various forms of unacceptable, worldly dress (I'm not suggesting your wife is dressing inappropriately), that makes it okay to accept the worldly practice of tattooing also? Explain that reasoning to me.

This to me is just another example of how a little leaven works through the whole batch. You know in just a few years, corseting will probably be rationalized in the church. The downhill slide into the ways, and loves, of the world will continue. Do your homework on corseting, now, so that in a few years when someone wants to have a 'faith based' corset you can explain to them it has no godly origins whatsoever that would justify Christians adopting the practice in the name of evangelism.

@Jethro Bodine :

Actually I never said anything about your bizarre notion of so called 'corset evangelism', and I don't think we are engaging meaningfully, which is what I was trying to do in my imperfect way. (Actually it was women in the Victorian age - more religious than today - who would often wear corsets, since you mention them.)

And my wife and I don't touch beer. Sorry; we don't seem to be communicating.

And @handy a while back reported that: At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women (no, I'm not one of them)... And believe me, it's a very conservative church...

(Presumably they, in their conservative church wouldn't follow your reasoning, either.)

And people such as [MENTION=89910]questdriven[/MENTION] are artisitcally enclined in any case, and might not follow your reasoning.

Blessings.

 

[jasoncran]

a tattoo and make up are two different things. there are women who are beautiful enough to not wear any make up.

 

[farouk]

a tattoo and make up are two different things. there are women who are beautiful enough to not wear any make up.

@jasoncran :

So what about eyeliner that she needs to apply daily, and eyeliner that she decides to have tattooed on?

( @questdriven ; @handy ; do you see a fundamental distinction?)

Looks pretty similar, I guess.

A Christian fish sign on a wrist or finger, for example, might be in similar looking black ink. (Two cents'.)

Blessings.

 

[farouk]

Okay, so someone else's view, without comment from me:

It is generally observed that the small cross tattoos are the first choice of the people who want to get tattooed for the first time in their life. The reason behind this is also simple, the tattoo can be simple at times, along with being distinct .. Selecting a small cross tattoo can reduces the element of shock to a pleasant surprise. .. Small cross tattoos for girls are the ideal choice, in my opinion. They are small and so, they sound much more intuitive and can be feminine as well. If decided, they can be a great form of personal expression. .. Always keep in mind that the tattoo is after all the ultimate expression of your faith and personality. (Source: Rutuja Jahar, buzzle.com )

 

[jasoncran]

eye liner tattooed? I would have see that.it wouldn't be well long lasting as tats fade and it would be painful