"At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women"

[Jethro Bodine]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

...your comment does serve to underline that threads on this relevant and topical subject ARE worthwhile and that there is no need for women as well as men to feel inhibited particularly if they want to express some faith related idea (such as a Bible ref., etc) in a modest and wholesome tattoo.

No need to feel inhibited?????

I see you did not learn a thing from Romans 14...not a thing.

 

[farouk]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

No need to feel inhibited?????

I see you did not learn a thing from Romans 14...not a thing.

Jethro:

Again, you are projecting YOUR assumptions onto what you think other people's impressions ought to be.

With meat offered to idols in the example, all the meat went to the pagan temple. So, for the sake of people's consciences, it was all avoided.

If people are exercised about a faith related presentation by means of a tattoo, then other people being offended about something that is not inherently bad, presumably does not need to come into their considerations.

What you are doing, it seems, consciously or unconsciously, is projecting a thoroughgoing parallel in all or most aspects of meat offered to idols and with tattoos, and then saying that everyone must conform to that projection of yours, even if they have no awareness of how it could possibly be bad.

Blessings.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

Paul is talking about NOT letting our freedoms be a stumbling block to new believers.

...weak believers...presumably new to the faith who still connect something neither sinful or virtuous in and of itself--like eating meat sacrificed to an idol, or getting a tattoo--to a former lifestyle that was sinful.

Your assumption that sinners see tats as an indicator that it is OK to sin, is presumtuous to say the least.

...the potential is that when someone like Ms. Pole Dancer, or Ms. 'love is patient, love is kind...', featured earlier in this thread, come to the Lord they stumble in regard to their old lifestyle because the trappings of their old lifestyle, that to us are nothing, are openly embraced and practiced by us...just as the ex-pagan worshiper is potentially lead into violating his/her conscience because those of us who don't have a history of eating meat sacrificed to idols openly embrace and practice it. You do understand that's what the passage is saying, don't you?

Have you ever witnessed to a stripper?

An ex dancer. I don't know to what stage of undress she performed.

Tats would be one of her least concerns I'm sure.

In her case, maybe. I don't think she had any...at least visible one's anyway.

She was so deep into her lifestyle of lewd and promiscuous behavior that if she ever did come to the Lord the church's attitude toward the over-sexualization of women we share with the world could potentially cause her to sin against her conscience concerning those things.

All straw men aside, your FEELINGS about the subject matter are duly noted.
The bottom line is that you can't really project YOUR feelings, which some may consider prudish, onto others and have them accept it as Biblical.

My 'feelings' are based on Romans 14. It's wrong to openly endorse and flaunt anything that would cause another brother/ sister to violate their weak conscience because of a past history of sin connected with that 'anything'.

But don't worry. Tattooing is becoming so widespread that in a few years it will not be as connected with the lewd and promiscuous lifestyles of the lost that it should be a stumbling block to believers trying to escape that lifestyle. That is what happened with various other things we now accept as common and innocent, but which did not used to be.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

Jethro:

Again, you are projecting YOUR assumptions onto what you think other people's impressions ought to be.

With meat offered to idols in the example, all the meat went to the pagan temple. So, for the sake of people's consciences, it was all avoided.

If people are exercised about a faith related presentation by means of a tattoo, then other people being offended about something that is not inherently bad, presumably does not need to come into their considerations.

What you are doing, it seems, consciously or unconsciously, is projecting a thoroughgoing parallel in all or most aspects of meat offered to idols and with tattoos, and then saying that everyone must conform to that projection of yours, even if they have no awareness of how it could possibly be bad.

Blessings.

So you're plainly saying there is absolutely no consideration necessary that doing what former gangsta's and pole dancers did as part of their former, sinful lifestyles may in some way cause them to violate their conscience as Christians?

If you believe that, you simply do not understand Romans 14.

 

[farouk]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

So you're plainly saying there is absolutely no consideration necessary that doing what former gangsta's and pole dancers did as part of their former, sinful lifestyles may in some way cause them to violate their conscience as Christians?

If you believe that, you simply do not understand Romans 14.

Jethro:

Again, you are probably trying to make out that something as benign and wholesome as a Scripture ref. on a wrist has always got to be seen in the light of 'gangstas and pole dancers'. It's apples and oranges, friend.

How does a modest and unobtrusive ref. on the wrist of a Godly woman do exegetical violence to Romans 14, or offend others, believers or unbelievers. (It might involve the reproach of the Gospel, but then that is an aspect that most believers will accept as part of it.)

Blessings.

 

[farouk]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

I should have mentioned, Farouk, in that original post: the great-grandmother was in her late 80s...had had the tatts for quite a while.... and this was back in the earlier mid 1970s... in a state university town, with total population (including students) of about 12,000. The area was very conservative.

She was respected by everyone...and everyone knew her and had nothing but positive to say of her. She was a blessing to all and was a beautiful example of sharing God's love and God's word.

AirDancer:

Kind of, wholesome enhancements for a wholesome lady, right?

Blessings.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

How does a modest and unobtrusive ref. on the wrist of a Godly woman do exegetical violence to Romans 14, or offend others, believers or unbelievers.

When Ms. Pole Dancer comes to church and the Pastor's wife extends the right hand of friendship to her and she sees a tattoo on the inside of her wrist and thinks, "oh, I really don't have to stop getting the tattoos I used to get in my former lifestyle that I did for all the wrong reasons" you have provided the stumbling block for her to do something that FOR HER is still so thoroughly connected with sin that for her it is sin.

Remember, she tattooed herself to be lewd and seductive for men. And because of that reason for getting tattooed, her conscience may be polluted and won't allow her to easily think tattooing in and of itself is nothing. But the church is potentially helping her to violate her conscience by insisting it is nothing and by doing it themselves.

I did not know it was going to be such an uphill battle to point out what Romans 14 says. But I shouldn't be surprised, because as I said, Romans 14 is not a principle of scripture that I have ever seen practiced by the church (forgo one's legitimate freedoms for the sake of another). In fact, quite the opposite is happening. The church is very big on making sure no one gets in the way of enjoying the freedoms it insists it has. That aspect of the world has thoroughly invaded the church.

 

[farouk]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

When Ms. Pole Dancer comes to church and the Pastor's wife extends the right hand of friendship to her and she sees a tattoo on the inside of her wrist and thinks, "oh, I really don't have to stop getting the tattoos I used to get in my former lifestyle that I did for all the wrong reasons" you have provided the stumbling block for her to do something that FOR HER is still so thoroughly connected with sin that for her it is sin.

Remember, she tattooed herself to be lewd and seductive for men. And because of that reason for getting tattooed, her conscience may be polluted and won't allow her to easily think tattooing in and of itself is nothing. But the church is potentially helping her to violate her conscience by insisting it is nothing and by doing it themselves.

I did not know it was going to be such an uphill battle to point out what Romans 14 says. But I shouldn't be surprised, because as I said, Romans 14 is not a principle of scripture that I have ever seen practiced by the church (forgo one's legitimate freedoms for the sake of another). In fact, quite the opposite is happening. The church is very big on making sure no one gets in the way of enjoying the freedoms it insists it has. That aspect of the world has thoroughly invaded the church.

Jethro:

I would hasten to add that if there ever was a material perception of something in relation to a tattoo or its placement that did seem to have a conflicting link with something dubious, then of course Romans 14 would teach that the person should be careful and abstain.

But I am talking about something maybe as benign as a discreet Bible ref. on a wrist: tasteful, unobtrusive and constructively faith related.

That being said, to link "the Pastor's wife extends the right hand of friendship to her and she sees a tattoo on the inside of her wrist" with "tattooed herself to be lewd and seductive for men" is frankly a very unrealistic and obscure linkage, and, if said directly to a Godly woman who wore one on her wrist, would be not only rude but dishonoring.

Again, you seem to take Romans 14 as the cue to lump together linkages which may exist only in your mind.

Blessings.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

Jethro:

Again, you are probably trying to make out that something as benign and wholesome as a Scripture ref. on a wrist has always got to be seen in the light of 'gangstas and pole dancers'. It's apples and oranges, friend.

To YOU it is. But it may not be to the former gangsta or the pole dancer.

Love demands that you consider the stumbling block it may be to others. Particularly those who may still connect it with the attitudes and motives of their former sinful lifestyles--and because of that their consciences not allowing them to enjoy the freedom you openly flaunt concerning those things, but who are tempted nevertheless to indulge it because of you. Paul says you SIN against the body of Christ when you do that. And you're telling us we have no limitations or inhibitions to consider in regard to getting a tattoo? Paul says you're dead wrong.

 

[farouk]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

To YOU it is. But it may not be to the former gangsta or the pole dancer.

Love demands that you consider the stumbling block it may be to others. Particularly those who may still connect it with the attitudes and motives of their former sinful lifestyles--and because of that their consciences not allowing them to enjoy the freedom you openly flaunt concerning those things, but who are tempted nevertheless to indulge it because of you. Paul says you SIN against the body of Christ when you do that. And you're telling us we have no limitations or inhibitions to consider in regard to getting a tattoo? Paul says you're dead wrong.

Jethro:

Like I said in the previous post, I would hasten to add that if there ever was a material perception of something in relation to a tattoo or its placement that did seem to have a conflicting link with something dubious, then of course Romans 14 would teach that the person should be careful and abstain.

But, again, why link in your mind a benign wrist Bible ref. tattoo on a Godly lady with idea of placements that someone "tattooed herself to be lewd and seductive for men".

To me, trying to establishing such tenuous linkages, would seem to be no difference from saying to a Christian woman that she cannot pierce her ears 'in case' an unbelieving woman with pierced ears who comes to church thinks that she can wear rings in her ears and thereby supposedly be 'lewd and seductive for men' when she is converted. (This is nonsense and I don't believe this for one moment, but in terms of your argument if you don't make a difference between bad things that are only fictitious and bad things that are real, it's the sort of way it ends up.)

Blessings.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

But, again, why link in your mind a benign wrist Bible ref. tattoo on a Godly lady with idea of placements that someone "tattooed herself to be lewd and seductive for men".

Why do you keep looking at it in regard to why the Pastor's wife got her tattoo???? You're not 'listening'.

Her motives are probably very pure. It's how the defiled conscience of the pole dancer perceives the tattoo on the Pastor's wife's wrist. That is why the exercise of the pure conscience of the Pastor's wife has the potential to be wrong--it can cause someone with a weak conscience to sin against their conscience.

To me, trying to establishing such tenuous linkages, would seem to be no difference from saying to a Christian woman that she cannot pierce her ears 'in case' an unbelieving woman with pierced ears who comes to church thinks that she can wear rings in her ears and thereby supposedly be 'lewd and seductive for men' when she is converted. (This is nonsense and I don't believe this for one moment, but in terms of your argument if you don't make a difference between bad things that are only fictitious and bad things that are real, it's the sort of way it ends up.)

But it is different. At this point in society ear piercings no longer have the connection with lewdness, seduction, and rebellion, etc. they once did. But you'll have a hard time convincing me that this is true of tattoos yet. Joe's pic's prove that! If he had posted pictures of a woman with earrings we may not have even noticed her earrings.

Give it another 10 or 20 years for tatts to become as disconnected from sinful lifestyles and attitudes that earrings now are.

 

[handy]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

Why do you keep looking at it in regard to why the Pastor's wife got her tattoo???? You're not 'listening'.

Her motives are probably very pure. It's how the defiled conscience of the pole dancer perceives the tattoo on the Pastor's wife's wrist. That is why the exercise of the pure conscience of the Pastor's wife has the potential to be wrong--it can cause someone with a weak conscience to sin against their conscience.

I see what you're saying... but I also see farouk's point.

This would be like saying a Christian woman should never wear shoes with heels, because some fallen women wear stilettos to seduce men and by seeing a Christian woman in heels, she'll (supposedly) think that it's OK for her to continue using stilettos for that purpose. Or that a Christian woman should never wear a skirt, because some women wear short tight skirts to be lewd and by seeing a Christian woman in a skirt, (not a super short, tight one, just a skirt) then she'll think that it's OK to be lewd...

But it is different. At this point in society ear piercings no longer have the connection with lewdness, seduction, and rebellion, etc. they once did. But you'll have a hard time convincing me that this is true of tattoos yet. Give it another 10 or 20 years.

You keep sort of flipping back and forth as to whether this is an issue because of older Christians or young, fallen women...

I think it's pretty clear that almost all of the younger generation today do not view tattoos as lewd, seductive or rebellious.... unless someone is specifically making the point to be so... just as someone can dress lewdly, or behave lewdly.

About the only people that would view the tatts as symbolic of what you are saying are older generation Christians. I would assume that's the purpose of the next 10 to 20 years... so we old folks will either go on to glory or become so blind and confused we won't comprehend anymore. ;)

As for the young folks getting tatts to be lewd, seductive or rebellious, they will do so anyway... a Christian not getting a tattoo isn't going to stop that. And, if they repent, are washed anew and come to church, they will know the difference between the pastor's wife little tattoo of "God's Love" on her wrist and the type of tattoo they have on their bum... just like they would know the difference between the type of heels the pastor's wife is wearing with her skirt, and the stilettos and micro mini she has in her closet back home.

 

[farouk]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

Why do you keep looking at it in regard to why the Pastor's wife got her tattoo???? You're not 'listening'.

Her motives are probably very pure. It's how the defiled conscience of the pole dancer perceives the tattoo on the Pastor's wife's wrist. That is why the exercise of the pure conscience of the Pastor's wife has the potential to be wrong--it can cause someone with a weak conscience to sin against their conscience.




But it is different. At this point in society ear piercings no longer have the connection with lewdness, seduction, and rebellion, etc. they once did. But you'll have a hard time convincing me that this is true of tattoos yet. Joe's pic's prove that! If he had posted pictures of a woman with earrings we may not have even noticed her earrings.

Give it another 10 or 20 years for tatts to become as disconnected from sinful lifestyles and attitudes that earrings now are.

Jethro:

I'm kind of struggling here. You seem to admit that the hypothetical pastor's wife with the Bible ref. on her wrist has a pure conscience about it, and it can be assumed that having it put there was because she wanted it to do some good.

And then you say it's all conscientiously wrong anyway, because of what the other person supposedly would think. I'm reminded of the analogy of a prosecutor who says to a jury that a particular witness's testimony is untrustworthy because she is too honest to receive a construction that the plea-bargaining prosecutor is trying to promote.

Anyway, thanks for your ongoing contributions but I'm struggling a bit.

(Re. Joe's picture that the mod. deleted, I felt a view of the crack in someone's posterior wasn't necessary or helpful to any discussion, frankly.)

But back to our hypothetical lady with a Bible verse on her wrist, who may be a pastor's wife, youngish grandmother, or whoever: why would a Bible ref. wrist tattoo be indicative of a bad lifestyle even now? never mind in 10 or 20 years' time? I think of the responses, above, to the poll about the women of a certain age at handy's conservative church; I think of the person referred to from the tattooists' association who estimates that 60% of clients today are women; I think of mygraine's comments, earlier, who says that a majority of parlors in his area are owned by women, and of these a majority are Christian women. So why, today, would a Bible ref. on a wrist be regarded as something negative about the person wearing it? (unless it's a case of the reproach of the Gospel). Never mind about 10 years' time; I think there is ample evidence of the situation you admit for the future being so today, really.

Blessings.

handy:

I'm sure your analogy with stilettos is apt, also! (Just think of all the church floors that have been damaged by 'forests' of them, and we are reminded of how widespread they are ) Blessings.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

I see what you're saying... but I also see farouk's point.

This would be like saying a Christian woman should never wear shoes with heels, because some fallen women wear stilettos to seduce men and by seeing a Christian woman in heels, she'll (supposedly) think that it's OK for her to continue using stilettos for that purpose.

No, it is not like saying that. High heels, like earrings, are no longer immediately connected with the seductive, immoral lifestyles of loose women. But it would be impossible to suggest that the extent of tattooing the pole dancer had in the pics Joe posted is no more suggestive of anything than high heels and earrings are now. In your mind, just imagine your 60 year old children's Sunday school teacher going out this week and doing that and you'll know how true that is.

Or that a Christian woman should never wear a skirt, because some women wear short tight skirts to be lewd and by seeing a Christian woman in a skirt, (not a super short, tight one, just a skirt) then she'll think that it's OK to be lewd...

Same thing. Skirts are like earrings and high heels these days.

You keep sort of flipping back and forth as to whether this is an issue because of older Christians or young, fallen women...

It's both. We're not talking about just one set of circumstances here.

I think it's pretty clear that almost all of the younger generation today do not view tattoos as lewd, seductive or rebellious.... unless someone is specifically making the point to be so... just as someone can dress lewdly, or behave lewdly.

Obviously it is the young people who have less stigma attached to tattooing. But that is the very thing that can make it dangerous for them when they see Mrs. Pastor's innocent little 'John 3:16' (or whatever, lol) tattoo on her wrist. Think about it.

About the only people that would view the tatts as symbolic of what you are saying are older generation Christians.

Exclusively symbolic of that, yes, I agree. That means we have to be sensitive to tattooed 40 and 50 year old's who come to the Lord. Think about it.

I would assume that's the purpose of the next 10 to 20 years... so we old folks will either go on to glory or become so blind and confused we won't comprehend anymore. ;)

Well, I'm half way there, but until me and a lot of other Christians my age die off Christians have the spiritual obligation to not give occasion to us to offend in this area. It's impossible to argue against that. Though not the explicit message of Romans 14, this is also governed by that passage. IOW, someone's tattoos in the church don't cause me to stumble in regard to getting a tattoo. The potential damage the tattooed Christian can do to people who see tattoos like I do is just as real and dangerous.

As for the young folks getting tatts to be lewd, seductive or rebellious, they will do so anyway... a Christian not getting a tattoo isn't going to stop that.

Right. That's what the world does. It's when they come to the Lord that we have to be conscious about how what we approve of (the types and extents of tattooing were going to have) will affect them in regard to drawing their own lines and limitations about continuing in the things of their old lifestyle. It's amazing how the human mind can rationalize things at just the littlest of promptings of what other people approve of.

And, if they repent, are washed anew and come to church, they will know the difference between the pastor's wife little tattoo of "God's Love" on her wrist and the type of tattoo they have on their bum...

They may well know the difference, but what they may not be capable of honoring until they mature is their own conscience in regard to where the line is between the two. We have an obligation to them to do what we can to not cause them to violate their conscience in that regard and make help them make good decisions about it.

...just like they would know the difference between the type of heels the pastor's wife is wearing with her skirt, and the stilettos and micro mini she has in her closet back home.

But as I said, this is not a good example since heels and earrings and skirts are now the nothing you and others would like to think tattooing is, but surely is not (yet).

 

[reba]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

Lev 19:28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.

Yes i eat shell fish and my husband does not have a beard... I think what bothers me about tatts, they are (almost) for ever. I have tried and tried to get past thinking 'old fashion' i cant... Admitting to something else dumb, tatts on a female bother me more then on a guy.

There is not a scripture that says dont wear high heels, as for short skirts we are told to be modest.

I do not believe to tatt or not to tatt is a salvation issue..... maybe now i can leave this alone.....:eeeekkk

 

[tandemcpl]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

Give it another 10 or 20 years for tatts to become as disconnected from sinful lifestyles and attitudes that earrings now are.

Good morning Jethro,
<O:p</O:p
From where I sit, the time has already come where tattoos are no longer associated with a sinful lifestyle.
<O:p</O:p
I think that today, many people get tattoos to permanently honor a loved one or to remember a significant emotional event in their life. For our 30<SUP>th</SUP> anniversary, my wife and I got each other tattoos. The tattoo I got is honoring my wife and the one she got has our children’s names on it.
<O:p</O:p
Be blessed.
<O:p</O:p
Toby
<O:p</O:p
Oh, by the way, both of us are in our mid to late 50’s :yes

 

[handy]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

Jethro,

Perhaps you're not fully understanding my connection with the clothes and tattoos...

A skirt is not seductive. A micro mini skirt of sequined Lycra is.
Heels are not seductive. 5" tall stilettos are.
A tattoo of a butterfly on an ankle isn't seductive. The tattoos on the pole dancer are.

There are differences... Certain high heels, certain styles of clothing, even certain earrings worn a certain way most certainly can be seductive, today...right now. So can certain tattoos.

John 3:16 inked around a wrist isn't, though.

A tattoo of a butterfly on an ankle isn't "immediately connected with the seductive, immoral lifestyles of loose women."

When I first met Nina, the woman with the butterfly tattoo, I didn't immediately think, "Wow, she must either be or have been quite the immoral woman." Nor was I spurred to jump to conclusions abut the other woman, whose name escapes me now, but who has a tattoo of a rosebud on her shoulder. When I first met Ron, one of the men with a tattoo on his arm, I didn't immediately jump to any conclusions regarding him either... or Lyle, or my nephew Corey when my niece first introduced us....

Well, I'm half way there, but until me and a lot of other Christians my age die off Christians have the spiritual obligation to not give occasion to us to offend in this area. It's impossible to argue against that. Though not the explicit message of Romans 14, this is also governed by that passage. (IOW, someone's tattoos in the church don't cause me to stumble in regard to getting a tattoo).

I don't think that Romans 14 teaches that no Christian has the freedom to do anything that is clearly a matter of conscious until an entire generation of Christians "die off"... that is putting an unsupportable interpretation on the passage and an undue burden on our brothers and sisters. As was mentioned by someone earlier in this thread, the Church did not wait until the entire generation of first Jewish converts died off before allowing gentiles to go without circumcision and that was considered a far, far worse sin that having a tatt today is.

One part of Romans 14 and other passages that does need to be stressed is that, in matters of conscious, if a person doesn't have freedom in the area, that person should refrain.

Let's not turn the church into having the same mindset schools have today... if Johnny can't eat peanuts then no one in the entire school district can have them. Let's instead practice and teach Romans 14 for what it is... a lesson that we Christians are a pretty free lot, but we do need to be mindful of others and help them not to sin.

 

[joethemechanic]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

I'm 50 and I can remember a time when any tattoo on a woman meant she was a party girl. Even in the 80's and into the 90's it was a pretty good indication that she liked to "party"

And no one has mentioned this yet, but what about the spread of disease factor? I mean really, tattoos and piercings are really quite invasive. Should a good Christian be throwing caution to the wind as far as risking the spread of disease?

 

[24Fanatic]

Any reputable tattoo shop has extremely stringent rules and guidelines they have to adhere to regarding cleanliness and biological waste. Some that I've been to are cleaner than hospitals I've seen. Piercing studios are the same way. The spread of disease is a non argument with regards to tattoos and piercing, unless you have a habit of going to back alley underground shops or someone's garage to have such work done.


Sent from my iPhone to the interwebs and straight to your brain using Tapatalk

 

[farouk]

Re: "At our church, there are several with tatts, including several middle aged women

Lev 19:28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.

Yes i eat shell fish and my husband does not have a beard... I think what bothers me about tatts, they are (almost) for ever. I have tried and tried to get past thinking 'old fashion' i cant... Admitting to something else dumb, tatts on a female bother me more then on a guy.

There is not a scripture that says dont wear high heels, as for short skirts we are told to be modest.

I do not believe to tatt or not to tatt is a salvation issue..... maybe now i can leave this alone.....:eeeekkk

reba:

Interesting observation.

So, like, when women do it more than when guys do, it bothers you because of doctrinal reasons? or more for reasons of subjective taste?

Blessings.