Poll re. good tattoo artist career for a Christian woman

[Free Christian]

Try this one also. http://www.geocities.ws/mnlerner2000/let033.html

 

[evenifigoalone]

I thought the article was supposed to be about health concerns? That one's about Scripture. Which, to my perception, doesn't even fit the context of Scripture that has been discussed in this thread. Don't think anyone anywhere claimed that it was practiced and approved in certain circumstances in the OT?
Or am I just missing the point?

 

[farouk]

Free Christian:

I agree strongly and entirely about the great talking points in witness, about the glory of God seen in a beautiful Creation.

..no need of a picture needled into ones skin which causes the skin to die and the body go into repair mode.
.. If you cant see an opening for a conversation about God in all that surrounds us, well...
Here's an article on tattoo's which I reckon is ok www.prc.org put into their search engine "volume 8 number 22"

So I suppose you entirely discount the many converstations that are indeed obtained through faith based tattoos?

The link didn't work for me, either. If it's about the State (Commonwealth) of Penn.'s regulations, it's actually the state with among the lowest permissable ages for allowing minor's to be tattooed with parental permission, as it happens.

Blessings.

 

[farouk]

..Don't think anyone anywhere claimed that it was practiced and approved in certain circumstances in the OT?
Or am I just missing the point?

[MENTION=89910]questdriven[/MENTION]:

See post #336, above: actually, 19th century Biblical commentator M W Thomson did suggest this; although I'm not really convinced by the suggestion as a matter of exegesis..

The New Testament believer has Christian freedom, under grace, of course; and some Christians might argue that it can bear relation to this matter.

Blessings.

 

[Free Christian]

No I don't discount any conversations about Christ. But just because a conversation is started because someone was once, for example and not implying that tattoo's link to criminal activity, a criminal and by talking to some-one that they once were one but are now saved and use it as a witness does not in itself excuse the criminal activity in the first place. Just as starting a conversation through a tattoo may contain many commendable Christian topics and witness but does not excuse the fact that marking your body which God created, and calls His Holy Temple is wrong. Sorry the links did not work. One showed how Thomson had made a mistake in his reasoning about tattoo's, the person who did so used the original Hebrew.
It was suggested here in an earlier thread that Thomson, a biblical scholar, showed support for early tattoo'ing. That was by you Farouk wasn't it, sorry if Im mistaken maybe it was some-one else ? Just checked my link on post 331 and it worked ok?

 

[Free Christian]

Sorry the other link was my mistake. www.prca.org type vol 8 no 22 into the search there. First one on the list should be it. Sorry again.

 

[farouk]

No I don't discount any conversations about Christ. But just because a conversation is started because someone was once, for example and not implying that tattoo's link to criminal activity, a criminal and by talking to some-one that they once were one but are now saved and use it as a witness does not in itself excuse the criminal activity in the first place. Just as starting a conversation through a tattoo may contain many commendable Christian topics and witness but does not excuse the fact that marking your body which God created, and calls His Holy Temple is wrong. Sorry the links did not work. One showed how Thomson had made a mistake in his reasoning about tattoo's, the person who did so used the original Hebrew.
It was suggested here in an earlier thread that Thomson, a biblical scholar, showed support for early tattoo'ing. That was by you Farouk wasn't it, sorry if Im mistaken maybe it was some-one else ? Just checked my link on post 331 and it worked ok?

Free Christian:

Ty for your posts.

I'm wondering how this ties in with New Testament believer's Christian liberty, under grace? as against the Leviticus 19 passage which in part seems strongly suggestive of Old Testament Jews in the land under the ceremonial law (no trimming the corners of beards, etc. - how many preachers today shave?) I wonder if the matter of motive today for getting, e.g., the ref. John 3.16, a little Christian fish sign, etc. on a wrist, is a significant part of it?

(Actually, Free Christian, I suspect that you and I would think alike in a number of areas.)

Blessings.

 

[farouk]

PS: [MENTION=96343]Free Christian[/MENTION]:

<O:p</O:pI guess there are at least two aspects that are being discussed on the thread.

There’s the aspect about whether Christians under grace should at least be respected as having exercised the Christian liberty to use this as a witness means; I think this is something you do question;

<O:p</O:pAnd then I guess there is the gender aspect. FYI, here, various posters have kind of asserted that if it’s going to be done at all, then it’s definitely going to be open for Christian women to do it, too. From the OP, @mygraine has discussed his and his wife’s experience; @for_his_glory is a longstanding poster on the forums, and she seems unequivocal about the gender aspect; so does @handy : she is also a frequent longstanding poster:

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, but needs to be discreet.

<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p

I don't have a problem with the idea of a Christian woman getting one on her ankle, calf, shoulder or arms... just not that big a deal to me.

<ST1:p</ST1:p
<O:p</O:p

I guess there is some real logic to what they are saying, anyway.

Blessings.
</O:p

 

[George Muller]

I heard of a practice by the voodoo folks, and I thought of this thread? Its seems they believe that by cutting the skin, they can open spiritual and demonic doors into the body of a person. I wonder if this is why the Old Testament warned against some of these things?

 

[farouk]

I heard of a practice by the voodoo folks, and I thought of this thread? Its seems they believe that by cutting the skin, they can open spiritual and demonic doors into the body of a person. I wonder if this is why the Old Testament warned against some of these things?

George Muller:

Very strange idea; and I'm sure that most Christian young men doing it before heading out to the military, homeschooling moms, or grammas, etc. that for witness purposes get e.g. a Christian fish sign inked on their wrist or foot would think it a very strange idea, too, and it probably would never occur to them to think in such a way.

On the one hand the Christian should shun any overtly pagan practices; on the other, the Christian shouldn't try to establish linkages that just aren't there in order to try to reinforce a particular point of view.

Make sense?

Blessings.

 

[George Muller]

I heard of a practice by the voodoo folks, and I thought of this thread? Its seems they believe that by cutting the skin, they can open spiritual and demonic doors into the body of a person. I wonder if this is why the Old Testament warned against some of these things?

George Muller:

Very strange idea; and I'm sure that most Christian young men doing it before heading out to the military, homeschooling moms, or grammas, etc. that for witness purposes get e.g. a Christian fish sign inked on their wrist or foot would think it a very strange idea, too, and it probably would never occur to them to think in such a way.

On the one hand the Christian should shun any overtly pagan practices; on the other, the Christian shouldn't try to establish linkages that just aren't there in order to try to reinforce a particular point of view.

Make sense?

Blessings.

Not sure of your point? You seem to want to take both sides of the issue, in a way. Like I said, I heard this thing about the cutting of the flesh as used in voodoo? It seems it should be considered in regards to what was written in the law? I think that is an honest point, not intended to reinforce a particular point of view, but that of one who desires "to test all things''

1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
23 ¶ And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[farouk]

I heard of a practice by the voodoo folks, and I thought of this thread? Its seems they believe that by cutting the skin, they can open spiritual and demonic doors into the body of a person. I wonder if this is why the Old Testament warned against some of these things?

George Muller:

Very strange idea; and I'm sure that most Christian young men doing it before heading out to the military, homeschooling moms, or grammas, etc. that for witness purposes get e.g. a Christian fish sign inked on their wrist or foot would think it a very strange idea, too, and it probably would never occur to them to think in such a way.

On the one hand the Christian should shun any overtly pagan practices; on the other, the Christian shouldn't try to establish linkages that just aren't there in order to try to reinforce a particular point of view.

Make sense?

Blessings.

Not sure of your point? You seem to want to take both sides of the issue, in a way. Like I said, I heard this thing about the cutting of the flesh as used in voodoo? It seems it should be considered in regards to what was written in the law? I think that is an honest point, not intended to reinforce a particular point of view, but that of one who desires "to test all things''

1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
23 ¶ And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

George Muller:

My point, which I thought was obvious, was that motives may vary vastly.

The fact that one person goes into a lot of blood-letting for occult purposes, does not mean that a small tattooed design by another person who doesn't even consider occultism but rather gets a Bible ref. or Christian fish sign for witness purposes, becomes supposedly occultist after all on account of someone else's rather different blood-letting activities for occultist purposes.

Another example: (this is unsound reasoning, but I'm using it as an example) "Some prostitutes wear high heels; therefore (supposedly) every little old lady in church that wears heels above a certain height should be identified with prostitutes." Frankly, this kind of argument won't work.

In my humble view (and it may be unwittingly on your part), these kinds of arguments would tend towards the guilt-manipulative.

Blessings.

 

[George Muller]

I heard of a practice by the voodoo folks, and I thought of this thread? Its seems they believe that by cutting the skin, they can open spiritual and demonic doors into the body of a person. I wonder if this is why the Old Testament warned against some of these things?

George Muller:

Very strange idea; and I'm sure that most Christian young men doing it before heading out to the military, homeschooling moms, or grammas, etc. that for witness purposes get e.g. a Christian fish sign inked on their wrist or foot would think it a very strange idea, too, and it probably would never occur to them to think in such a way.

On the one hand the Christian should shun any overtly pagan practices; on the other, the Christian shouldn't try to establish linkages that just aren't there in order to try to reinforce a particular point of view.

Make sense?

Blessings.

Not sure of your point? You seem to want to take both sides of the issue, in a way. Like I said, I heard this thing about the cutting of the flesh as used in voodoo? It seems it should be considered in regards to what was written in the law? I think that is an honest point, not intended to reinforce a particular point of view, but that of one who desires "to test all things''

1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
23 ¶ And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

George Muller:

My point, which I thought was obvious, was that motives may vary vastly.

The fact that one person goes into a lot of blood-letting for occult purposes, does not mean that a small tattooed design by another person who doesn't even consider occultism but rather gets a Bible ref. or Christian fish sign for witness purposes, becomes supposedly occultist after all on account of someone else's rather different blood-letting activities for occultist purposes.

Another example: (this is unsound reasoning, but I'm using it as an example) "Some prostitutes wear high heels; therefore (supposedly) every little old lady in church that wears heels above a certain height should be identified with prostitutes." Frankly, this kind of argument won't work.

In my humble view (and it may be unwittingly on your part), these kinds of arguments would tend towards the guilt-manipulative.

Blessings.

I think it is a valid point, if it brings guilt to some, to test an issue? Then maybe they are not as confident in their position as they should be? To attack me with the charge of "guilt-manipulation" is not fair nor does it tend to allow for an honest discussion of this issue, which you "seemed" to desire?

 

[farouk]

Not sure of your point? You seem to want to take both sides of the issue, in a way. Like I said, I heard this thing about the cutting of the flesh as used in voodoo? It seems it should be considered in regards to what was written in the law? I think that is an honest point, not intended to reinforce a particular point of view, but that of one who desires "to test all things''

1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
23 ¶ And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

George Muller:

My point, which I thought was obvious, was that motives may vary vastly.

The fact that one person goes into a lot of blood-letting for occult purposes, does not mean that a small tattooed design by another person who doesn't even consider occultism but rather gets a Bible ref. or Christian fish sign for witness purposes, becomes supposedly occultist after all on account of someone else's rather different blood-letting activities for occultist purposes.

Another example: (this is unsound reasoning, but I'm using it as an example) "Some prostitutes wear high heels; therefore (supposedly) every little old lady in church that wears heels above a certain height should be identified with prostitutes." Frankly, this kind of argument won't work.

In my humble view (and it may be unwittingly on your part), these kinds of arguments would tend towards the guilt-manipulative.

Blessings.

I think it is a valid point, if it brings guilt to some, to test an issue? Then maybe they are not as confident in their position as they should be? To attack me with the charge of "guilt-manipulation" is not fair nor does it tend to allow for an honest discussion of this issue, which you "seemed" to desire?

George Muller:

I think you know already that I was referring to the apparent nature of such arguments; I think you know already that as far as you are concerned I prefaced it with suggesting it may be unwittingly on your part; so to turn it into a supposed personal attack merely obscures the discussion.

Let's stick to the issues, friend; though I say it myself, I've made an effort not to make it personal.

To go back to the issue, Romans 14's view of Christian liberty is such that one believer under grace cannot have transposed onto him or her supposed motivations and associations which were maybe applicable in a different context under a different dispensation. The matter of motive for doing something does matter.

Where most people would not remotely associate a homeschooling mom's fish sign or Bible ref. design with pagan blood-letting (as with Elijah and the prophets of Baal, for example), then no purpose would be served in trying to create such obscure linkages, in my view. I suppose the same argument could be made to try to discredit pierced ears, but it would be a big stretch.

Blessings, Friend.

 

[George Muller]

Not sure of your point? You seem to want to take both sides of the issue, in a way. Like I said, I heard this thing about the cutting of the flesh as used in voodoo? It seems it should be considered in regards to what was written in the law? I think that is an honest point, not intended to reinforce a particular point of view, but that of one who desires "to test all things''

1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
23 ¶ And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

George Muller:

My point, which I thought was obvious, was that motives may vary vastly.

The fact that one person goes into a lot of blood-letting for occult purposes, does not mean that a small tattooed design by another person who doesn't even consider occultism but rather gets a Bible ref. or Christian fish sign for witness purposes, becomes supposedly occultist after all on account of someone else's rather different blood-letting activities for occultist purposes.

Another example: (this is unsound reasoning, but I'm using it as an example) "Some prostitutes wear high heels; therefore (supposedly) every little old lady in church that wears heels above a certain height should be identified with prostitutes." Frankly, this kind of argument won't work.

In my humble view (and it may be unwittingly on your part), these kinds of arguments would tend towards the guilt-manipulative.

Blessings.

I think it is a valid point, if it brings guilt to some, to test an issue? Then maybe they are not as confident in their position as they should be? To attack me with the charge of "guilt-manipulation" is not fair nor does it tend to allow for an honest discussion of this issue, which you "seemed" to desire?

George Muller:

I think you know already that I was referring to the apparent nature of such arguments; I think you know already that as far as you are concerned I prefaced it with suggesting it may be unwittingly on your part; so to turn it into a supposed personal attack merely obscures the discussion.

Let's stick to the issues, friend; though I say it myself, I've made an effort not to make it personal.

To go back to the issue, Romans 14's view of Christian liberty is such that one believer under grace cannot have transposed onto him or her supposed motivations and associations which were maybe applicable in a different context under a different dispensation. The matter of motive for doing something does matter.

Where most people would not remotely associate a homeschooling mom's fish sign or Bible ref. design with pagan blood-letting (as with Elijah and the prophets of Baal, for example), then no purpose would be served in trying to create such obscure linkages, in my view. I suppose the same argument could be made to try to discredit pierced ears, but it would be a big stretch.

Blessings, Friend.

My point was and is that the Old Testament had a restriction on this practice for a reason, I would suggest that it was a "spiritual" reason that very well might be seen and understood in the reason the voodoo folks practice the cutting of the flesh, now to sugar coat the whole practice of getting a tattoo and try to make it appear as some godly thing, is just not honest. Nor is it honest to condemn the issue based upon what is written in the Old Testament. But to inform those who would seek to mark themselves in this way is honest and that is what I have done.
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
23 ¶ And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[farouk]

My point was and is that the Old Testament had a restriction on this practice for a reason, I would suggest that it was a "spiritual" reason that very well might be seen and understood in the reason the voodoo folks practice the cutting of the flesh, now to sugar coat the whole practice of getting a tattoo and try to make it appear as some godly thing, is just not honest. Nor is it honest to condemn the issue based upon what is written in the Old Testament. But to inform those who would seek to mark themselves in this way is honest and that is what I have done.
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
23 ¶ And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

George Muller:

You've quoted a great New Testament passage, with great general principles, though it doesn't refer specifically to tattoos, so its application would have to be on an individual, conscientious basis, and in this realm Romans 14 Christian liberty plays a part also.

I don't understand what you mean about me being supposedly dishonest and you being supposedly and uniquely honest, when the New Testament passage you quoted doesn't specify tattoos anyway. Would, e.g., the average homeschooling mom, with a fish sign inked for witness purposes, read 1 Thessalonians 5 and say: 'Oh, it must be talking about my fish sign!' Some individuals might just be convicted in this way, but many wouldn't, so to introduce the honesty/dishonestly paradigm in way you have done, seems somewhat wide of the mark.

Blessings.

 

[George Muller]

I think it is a valid point, if it brings guilt to some, to test an issue? Then maybe they are not as confident in their position as they should be? To attack me with the charge of "guilt-manipulation" is not fair nor does it tend to allow for an honest discussion of this issue, which you "seemed" to desire?

George Muller:

I think you know already that I was referring to the apparent nature of such arguments; I think you know already that as far as you are concerned I prefaced it with suggesting it may be unwittingly on your part; so to turn it into a supposed personal attack merely obscures the discussion.

Let's stick to the issues, friend; though I say it myself, I've made an effort not to make it personal.

To go back to the issue, Romans 14's view of Christian liberty is such that one believer under grace cannot have transposed onto him or her supposed motivations and associations which were maybe applicable in a different context under a different dispensation. The matter of motive for doing something does matter.

Where most people would not remotely associate a homeschooling mom's fish sign or Bible ref. design with pagan blood-letting (as with Elijah and the prophets of Baal, for example), then no purpose would be served in trying to create such obscure linkages, in my view. I suppose the same argument could be made to try to discredit pierced ears, but it would be a big stretch.

Blessings, Friend.

My point was and is that the Old Testament had a restriction on this practice for a reason, I would suggest that it was a "spiritual" reason that very well might be seen and understood in the reason the voodoo folks practice the cutting of the flesh, now to sugar coat the whole practice of getting a tattoo and try to make it appear as some godly thing, is just not honest. Nor is it honest to condemn the issue based upon what is written in the Old Testament. But to inform those who would seek to mark themselves in this way is honest and that is what I have done.
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
23 ¶ And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

George Muller:

You've quoted a great New Testament passage, with great general principles, though it doesn't refer specifically to tattoos, so its application would have to be on an individual, conscientious basis, and in this realm Romans 14 Christian liberty plays a part also.

I don't understand what you mean about me being supposedly dishonest and you being supposedly and uniquely honest, when the New Testament passage you quoted doesn't specify tattoos anyway. Would, e.g., the average homeschooling mom, with a fish sign inked for witness purposes, read 1 Thessalonians 5 and say: 'Oh, it must be talking about my fish sign!' Some individuals might just be convicted in this way, but many wouldn't, so to introduce the honesty/dishonestly paradigm in way you have done, seems somewhat wide of the mark.

Blessings.

Well I have made my point, I see you do not really want an discussion on this issue that might bring a word of caution to those who seek to be ''marked'' in the flesh as a "christian" I think a life lived in the power of Gods Spirit is what a witness should be. The need to "mark" ones flesh as a "christian" is just not biblical nor is it wise. You have your thread, I will not return to hear how we can win the world by tattoos?

 

[farouk]

Well I have made my point, I see you do not really want an discussion on this issue that might bring a word of caution to those who seek to be ''marked'' in the flesh as a "christian" I think a life lived in the power of Gods Spirit is what a witness should be. The need to "mark" ones flesh as a "christian" is just not biblical nor is it wise. You have your thread, I will not return to hear how we can win the world by tattoos?

George Muller:

Again, you are going after my supposed motives and saying I don't want a discussion. Wrong again. I suppose you don't like it when people try to respond, with dispensational considerations in view, to the points you made?

A close reading of my comments would see me saying that I'm not advocating tattoos, period. I'm rather suggesting that motive is a big aspect when it comes to faith based designs and that condemning people out of hand because of supposed linkages that are very tenuous would not be wise.

Here's an interesting quote I saw; this from Michelle Gallo-Kohlas :

“’Most of my clients are in the older bracket,’ Gallo-Kohlas told The Huffington Post. ‘We see a lot of women in their sixties and seventies getting their first tattoos.’ Gallo-Kohlas recalls a woman in her sixties who got a tattoo because everyone in the golf clique at her gated community had one. It seemed like the thing to do in order to fit in.’<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
(source: huffingtonpost.com )<O:p</O:p
<O:p</O:p
My actual comment about this very widespread practice would be that just because others do it, is not necessarily a reason to do it. But, again, motive would seem to be a big aspect: if someone does it (Bible ref. or Christian fish sign etc. on an arm, ankle or wrist) with the specific witness motive, it really ought to be left to the individual as a matter of conscience; and, again, Romans 14 would seem to apply. (Maybe a Christian woman in the community mentioned in the quote, wanting to have an extra talking point with other women there, might be motivated to do it? I don’t know.)
<O:p</O:p<O:p</O:p
Blessings, Friend.

 

[George Muller]

Well I have made my point, I see you do not really want an discussion on this issue that might bring a word of caution to those who seek to be ''marked'' in the flesh as a "christian" I think a life lived in the power of Gods Spirit is what a witness should be. The need to "mark" ones flesh as a "christian" is just not biblical nor is it wise. You have your thread, I will not return to hear how we can win the world by tattoos?

George Muller:

Again, you are going after my supposed motives and saying I don't want a discussion. Wrong again. I suppose you don't like it when people try to respond, with dispensational considerations in view, to the points you made?

A close reading of my comments would see me saying that I'm not advocating tattoos, period. I'm rather suggesting that motive is a big aspect when it comes to faith based designs and that condemning people out of hand because of supposed linkages that are very tenuous would not be wise.

Here's an interesting quote I saw; this from Michelle Gallo-Kohlas :

“’Most of my clients are in the older bracket,’ Gallo-Kohlas told The Huffington Post. ‘We see a lot of women in their sixties and seventies getting their first tattoos.’ Gallo-Kohlas recalls a woman in her sixties who got a tattoo because everyone in the golf clique at her gated community had one. It seemed like the thing to do in order to fit in.’<o:p</o

<o:p</o(source: huffingtonpost.com )<o:p</o

<o:p</oMy actual comment about this very widespread practice would be that just because others do it, is not necessarily a reason to do it. But, again, motive would seem to be a big aspect: if someone does it (Bible ref. or Christian fish sign etc. on an arm, ankle or wrist) with the specific witness motive, it really ought to be left to the individual as a matter of conscience; and, again, Romans 14 would seem to apply. (Maybe a Christian woman in the community mentioned in the quote, wanting to have an extra talking point with other women there, might be motivated to do it? I don’t know.)
<o:p</o<o:p</o
Blessings, Friend.

I accept that you look at this issue in the terms you have descibed, I believe there are deeper spiritual issues one should consider, the Lord does not ask us to think in the natural realm, look not at the things which are seen but the things which are not seen. I think if most believers went to the Lord in prayer about this issue? They would get a big NO from the Lord? Even if we convince ourselfs with the thoughts that its OK and it can be some sort of witness, it still is an attempt to be seen as something in the flesh and not to live from the Spirit. Now I say this based upon my own personal experience in life and in ministry, there is a spiritual element to getting a tattoo, I do not understand it all but it is related to the shedding of blood and the marking of the body. Like I have said before on this thread, one should pray before one decides to get "marked". If one has a real relationship with the Lord, they will be able to discern His Will. Giving 100 reasons why getting a tattoo is ok is not seeking His will nor is it helpful to direct one into a Spirit led life, in my opinion. Also many blessings to you.

 

[farouk]

I accept that you look at this issue in the terms you have descibed, I believe there are deeper spiritual issues one should consider, the Lord does not ask us to think in the natural realm, look not at the things which are seen but the things which are not seen. I think if most believers went to the Lord in prayer about this issue? They would get a big NO from the Lord? Even if we convince ourselfs with the thoughts that its OK and it can be some sort of witness, it still is an attempt to be seen as something in the flesh and not to live from the Spirit. Now I say this based upon my own personal experience in life and in ministry, there is a spiritual element to getting a tattoo, I do not understand it all but it is related to the shedding of blood and the marking of the body. Like I have said before on this thread, one should pray before one decides to get "marked". If one has a real relationship with the Lord, they will be able to discern His Will. Giving 100 reasons why getting a tattoo is ok is not seeking His will nor is it helpful to direct one into a Spirit led life, in my opinion. Also many blessings to you.

George Muller:

Well, thank-you, Friend; I appreciate your thoughts. What I would I guess say is that I actually would agree that there may be sometimes deep-seated spiritual issues in view. Included in these deep-seated spiritual issues with some people may even be a strong motive to use a Bible ref., or Christian fish sign etc., design in witness and I guess where Paul speaks of individual Christians needing to be fully persuaded in his or her own mind, this would have some relevance, too.

Blessings, Friend.