So forgive the long winded texan, He is at it again:
Today, I made a blunder, when I clicked the Live Chat button.
When I entered the chatroom, what looked like a fight between a guy (name withheld) and a woman(same deal)
She set a very high bar that eliminated a huge percentange of the human male group. And she presented herself in a way that looked no different then a religious legalist.
And the guy started responding to her by listing aspects (what seemed to be from her profile) of who he wouldn't date. She took great offense and said he was insulting her.
Later the guy said lets move on, and apologized. She never acknowledged the apology.
But one thing she said, I had to comment on. She said she would never date a guy with tattoos, and I asked why... She never answered, and someone said that the bible says we shouldn't have tattoos.
To that person, I asked:
"where does the bible specifically state that no one should ever have tattoos other then Leviticus 19:28?"
(which in light of Acts Chapter 15, specifically 15:29, says what part of the mosaic law that US gentiles who follow Jesus are required to keep, exempting us from the Law of Leviticus 19:28)
They never gave a biblical answer. Now yes, we are the temple of the holy spirit, and yes, light has no fellowship with darkness.
But what about having scripture tattoo'd or where it says that God has carved the names of his people on his palms? Can the practice of tattooing be used to the glory of God with thanksgiving?
Also, the other point I raised in live chat was: What if the tattoos a person has are from their prechistian life? Is there no grace for them, but a shunning and excluding from ones list.
Where is the grace in that? If God has forgiven him or her, shouldn't he or she get a second amongst God's people?
Yes, I agree standards are good, and profitable.. but up to a certain point.. then they become a form of rejecting people shortsightedly at the cost of one's own potential gain.
Where do you fellow men stand on Tattoos and other past prechristian choices, with regard to future spouses and is there grace for the future mate?
We are all mindful of those verses. But your post did not state a position on whether the Law, or parts of it, are applicable today, and if so, to whom.
Well, I can start by saying that according to the Apostle Paul, even the laws engraved in stone and given to Moses were done away with.
Yet if we are abiding in the spirit, we would end up not breaking any of those laws.
I have to say that I perceive that the laws (all of them) are carnal and appeal to the carnal man's attempt to purge sin, and therefore can only cause us to make a good showing in the flesh, but can never bring righteousness.
Yet if we abide in the Spirit, we honor all of God's laws as he intended - even before the written law.
I think Jesus was trying to show us the difference between the carnal (superficial) and the substance (spiritual).
Jesus seems to have excused David for having eaten the shewbread, and Jesus worked on the Sabath, much to the horror of the carnal, religious of God's chosen people.
Therefore, I don't pick and choose over the laws. I only ask God to help me abide in the Spirit, because when I do, I am meeting all of God's requirements toward himself and others.
To me, the theologicans can sort out the rest, and not much of what they come up with matters much anyway.
Do you believe there's punishment for sins? Or do you believe everyone will be spared, in the end through God's love for mankind? Do you believe that a lot of what Jesus said excuses most, if not a lot of what the Lord had said in the old testament?
My beliefs aren't really important, after all. I can say that the standard Jesus spoke of was much more stringent than the old testament law required, it is an inward standard, and impossible to attain except by renewal of the mind and abidance in the Spirit. And all flesh will be judged.
The carnal law made the outside of the cup clean and gave the appearance of righteousness, yet could never treat the inside of the cup, which is the source of all sin.
Jesus spoke of the more excellent way. By regeneration, and by the Spirit, the inside of the cup is cleaned out, then the outside, there is a righteousness that is real, God-given and God-powered, and it is a righteousness that does not appeal to those who judge by appearances. (Invisble, if you will.)
There is this guy who shows up at the Pearly Gates and see�s Peter standing there. So, the guy asks Peter, �Do I just walk in?� And Peter says, �Well�no.� The guy asks Peter, �What do you mean �no�?� And Peter says, �It depends.� The guy getting worried asks, �Depends on what?� And Peter says, �Well, you know� it depends on how many points you have.� �You mean I have to have points to get in? How many points do I need?� the guy asks. And Peter replies, �One hundred.� The guy thinks about it then replies, �Ok, I worked at a Soup Kitchen, helping the poor, I did it every Saturday night for the past 15 years.� And Peter replies, �Yeah, I�ll give you a point for that.� The guy then says, �I was a pastor for 35 years, I married and buried and did preaching�� And Peter goes, �Hmm, no, I don�t know�� And the guy is like, �Oh, come on!� So Peter agrees, �Ok. I�ll give you a point for that.� And the guy starts thinking, �That�s basically my whole life�I got two points.� And right then he sees a friend of his from that same town�a nice guy, but he only showed up for church a couple times a year�and he walks right past them and in through the Pearly Gates. And the man gets upset, �PETER, are you telling me that he has 100 points?� And Peter replies, �No, he just doesn�t play this game.�
(This refers to Standards and Grace...not tattoos)
So, one sin remains visible, but think of all the other sins people committ that do not leave a visible trace on their body.
To judge someone as sinful or unworthy of anything because of a tatoo is the height of phariseeism.
Now, is physical theft worse of a sin than covetousness? Is drunkenness on wine more of a sin that spiritual drunkenness?
The spiritual sins are even worse and more insidious, and they fester unseen on the inside.
Here's my guess: most of the people who would avoid a mate because of a tatoo aren't really worried about the tatoo itself; instead, they come from a certain kind of cultural Christianity that frowns on tatoos, and therefore, they would not take a tatooed mate because they are afraid of what others in their circle would think and say.
And that is perhaps much worse of a sin (fearing man more than God, and judging by appearances) than any tatoo.
Jesus said to some of the religious folks "The prostitutes and tax collecters will enter the Kindgom before you.", and I see the spiritual import of what He was saying there.
John p.s. I have no tattoos, and that is not the point, but important to mention here in case anyone would ask or charge that I make the defense of the tatooed folks out of some kind of personal bias. I might just go out and get one though!
I tried to use the King James English for this post, but CDFF rejected it because I used the KJV word often used to describe "prostitute".
So, I will try again.
Did God command Hosea to marry a "prostitute"? If so, why? God commanded Hosea to marry that "prostitute" Gomer in order to show in the flesh, to the spiritually blind of the nation, the nature of their spiritual "prostitution.".
Even David rejoiced to receive the revelation that God did not care one whit about the blood of bulls and goats. The Prophet Isaiah received the same revelation, and the 58th chapter of the record of his revelation is a good place to see that.
Jesus echoes the same revelation to the spiritually blind in the sixth chapter of the gospel of John.
What does this have to do with standards, grace, and tatoos? Everything!
