Tattooing has allowed it ’s artists to go from being backroom Picassos to MTV celebrities.But is this art form for the Christian Visual artist?I bounced this off of our "Art Lessons from God!" Online Community to see what the thoughts were about the subject >>
You need to be a member of CCAS - Christian Comic Arts Society to add comments!
I always found tattoos to be one of the greatest works of art that someone can display on themselves. The meanings behind it are exquisite when they convey beautiful messages as well as memories. I had the pleasure to work with someone at the bookstore who had tattoos of birds of paradise flowers on his arms because they were his grandfather's favorite flowers and he had a special relationship with him.
I would like to get a tattoo of an anchor to represent my faith and have that hope that God has a plan for me. As well as tiger lilies and orchids to represent my mother and myself.
I believe that you can get a tattoo when you 1. know and understand that what your getting is permanent and it'll hurt and be expensive to take it off, 2. Know of what you want to get it of. Don't just waltz into a tattoo parlor and come out with a nautical tattoo. 3. Can be the ultimate proclamation of faith when you know for sure it'll be an impact on others
Exactly R Jay: tattoos can be beautiful and/or can have deeper meaning to the person who has it. Yes, one's body is a temple and shouldn't be "graffited" on with gang symbols or vulgar images, but personally I think a tattoo of a dove, a cross, a Bible verse, etc is perfectly fine and similar to how churches commission artists to make its buildings more expressive. In a way tattoos can be a Christian's bold statement of his/her faith, and who knows, it may spark an interesting conversation with non-believers inquiring about the tattoo's meaning.
Even if it's simply decorative (flowers, vine, butterfly, etc) I still fail to see the harm in these kinds of tattoos. I've seen decorations on churches that were just that: decorations. They had no spiritual references whatsoever, but they made the churches look lovely and made me feel happy to be there.
I agree with Kenny: it depends on what tattoo s/he is creating. It's one thing if there is a request to draw something vulgar, but I think there's no harm in a fun tattoo like a flower or one with some sentimental value: my friend's mom died of illness so she and her siblings got tattoos of their mom's portrait and "R.I.P." underneath.
Kenny Kong said:
Nothing wrong with create tattoo, but what kind of tattoo a christian artist create is the question one artist should ask himself. A art that promote evil power or the grace & love of Lord Jesus.
11I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. 12His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. 14The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. 15Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter."[a] He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.
16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:
KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. REV 19:11-16
I don't know if it's a tattoo, but it's an interesting point. My girlfriend has her life verse on her back and I think it's cool. If you have a clear conscience about it, create away.
Nothing wrong with create tattoo, but what kind of tattoo a christian artist create is the question one artist should ask himself. A art that promote evil power or the grace & love of Lord Jesus.
I have one friend that keeps asking me to design her a small tattoo... and I keep declining. I am not completely opposed to tattoos... but people need to think long and hard about WHAT they are putting on their bodies, and WHERE they are putting them. Something that looks "cool" when you are in your 20's will likely look ridiculous when you are 60, 70, or 80.
I will never personally get a tattoo. My father had MANY tattoos from his days in the Air Force when he was in his 20's. By the time he was in his 40's he regretted them and always wore long sleeves and pants to cover them up.
When I moved west five years ago, I was surprised how many people have tattoos. Back in Texas, I didn't have many friends or acquaintances with them, but now I think I am in the minority by not having any.
It's not about you and me, and has nothing to do with what we want, what we think, or how we behave. We already have an accuser. We do not need to fall into the trap of doing his job. It is about the Word of God. Which is a good thing. We can talk about that without getting personal. Let God through his Word deal with the personal stuff. Your accountability is not to me, but to Him. My accountability is not to you but to Him.
Can a Christian be unsaved?
I find these verses pretty sobering...
Consider:
Matthew 7:21-23 (King James Version)
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Are these Christians? They think they are. With there mouths they say "Lord, Lord". These guys even do miracles. They believe they are Christian to the point that they defend themselves.
So what is the difference between the accepted and the rejected. One group does the will of the Father and is accepted, and the others are workers of iniquity, and are rejected.
What is iniquity?
The Hebrew word is "anomia". Strong defines it:
1) the condition of without law a) because ignorant of it b) because of violating it
2) contempt and violation of law, iniquity, wickedness
The idea of lawlessness, is a signature principle of false teaching, as we saw already in 1 John and 2 Peter. So we can see that a person may believe one thing about their own salvation, and be very wrong.
Context is extremely important...
While I cannot quote the entire context of any specific passage for the sake of efficient communication, understand that I do not take it lightly. Context is not just a matter of the surrounding versus, chapter, or even the testament it is in. The context of any verse in the Bible is that of One God, unchanging and eternal communicating to His creation.
So when several authors speak the same thoughts over a period of time that really means something. When we read Jesus, Paul, and Peter all expressing the same idea about lawlessness that should mean something to us.
In the mouth of two or three witnesses...
The Thorn in Paul's flesh...
You seem to indicate that the thorn is sin. (If it isn't than it doesn’t advance your position.) There is nothing in context to suggest this. Here is the full reference that you cited.
2 Corinthians 12:7-10 (King James Version)
7And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.8For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me.9And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.
Notice that Paul uses the word "infirmities" twice. This is a man that has been stoned, left for dead, survived shipwreck, and suffered much physical abuse. Consider the context. Paul has infirmities. Isn't it more likely that Paul suffers from these? There is a form of arthritis that could certainly account for a painful thorn in the flesh. Yes, it is conjecture, but it is based on local context.
The truth is that this thorn has been debated since long before you or I. Without being able to nail it down in any absolute sense to sin, I would suggest that it does not advance your position.
The whole of Romans...
Daniel, you wrote, "You can't just pick and choose. you grabbed some bits of verses from romans 6- did you not keep reading thru to romans 7? "
To that I say, Why stop at chapter 7? In chapter 8 we see the conclusion of the matter.
Romans 8:1-17 (King James Version)
Romans 8
1There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (How do those in Christ Jesus walk? Not after the flesh (see vs 5,6, and 7) but after the Spirit)
2For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me(Paul) free from the law of sin (Romans 7:23 another law) and death.( John 8:34)
3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:(Roman7:25 Thanks be to God..)
4That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Paul says here that he, as part of "us" walks not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.)
5For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
6For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. (Test yourselves 2Cr 13:5)
10And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
12Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
13For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
There is a whole lot to consider here. Is there anyway to suggest that Paul lived after the flesh? Or through the Spirit does he mortify the deeds of the body? ( I can do all things through Christ Phl 4:13)
Consider the verses from Matthew. Are these not the same thoughts?
so Robert, would you say that you are not a sinner? if i'm expected to never sin again after i was saved, then i guess i'm not saved yet- and i don't think i would want to be. Any false deity who expects his followers to be saved thru legalism when they have no capacity to do so is not a deity i would want to follow. I don't want ANY PART of a form of false religion where i'm only saved if i never sin again. That is not Christianity and it is not salvation by grace thru faith. If that is what people believe about Christianity, then no wonder many people are so hostile to it. I would be, too.
I think i will be e-mailing you- but straight up, bro- i wasn't meaning to be vague- i just didn't want to call you out in places where you obviously grabbed parts of 2 sentences and mixed them to be thought- or where you cut a paragraph in half and misrepresented my meaning. just look at where you quoted me and you'll find it.
It's obvious that you can quote scripture. just maybe try and look at whle passages and not snippets. take verses in their context. Sure, Jesus taught rightesou living, but he taught mercy and love more. And even Paul wrote of how he had a "thorn in his flesh," to teach him that God's grace was sufficient in Paul's weakness. (2 Cor 12:7-10)
plus, if you're going to quote Romans, you've got to take the whole of romans. You can't just pick and choose. you grabbed some bits of verses from romans 6- did you not keep reading thru to romans 7? This is where Paul talks even more about his serious struggles with sin "for the desire to do what is good is with me, but there is no ability to do it. for i do not do the good that i want to do, but i practice the evil that i do not want to do." those are from Romans 7:18-20. does that sound like someone who does not sin? and that is by Paul- who wrote more of the Bible than almost anyone. But check out all of 13-25, if not the entire book of Romans, or all of the Pauline epsitles, the whole NT or the Bible in general. you've just got to look at the whole of Scripture.
yes, we are told to be perfect- and we are forgiven of our sin. of course we're given a standad to live by- but God knows we won't meet that standard! That is why Christ came. If one can meet that standard, then clearly one does not need Christ. And that is pretty much as blasphemous as you can get.
I promise- i'm probably sinning in some way every moment of my life. Even when i guard my tongue, or don't read innapropriate comic books, i still have a life that is latently prideful. I'm still commiting sins of ommision when i'm not committing sins more actively.
and last, i'll cite 1 John 1:8-10
"If we say, 'We have no sin,' we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say, 'We have not sinned,' we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us."
how can you reckon your interpretation of perfectionism with that? seriously, man. i don't know where you're hearing these theologies, but you've got to look to the whole of Scripture and to Christ for who He really is.
Is it wrong or right? Should a Christian create a tattoo or tattoo themseves? If you're questioning, ask Jesus - if He gives you the go ahead, go to town. If He says "no", then don't. I'm pretty sure you're going to get an answer.
My issues (and some others have already mentioned the same)
1. God initially said no. But again, as pointed out context is everything.
2. It's on you forever. FOREVER. So, I especially don't understand girls who get tattoo's in awkward places - they do realize when they're 80 that image is still going to be there and look rather silly? And same goes for the guys.
3. They become an identifying marker. This could be a very bad thing depending on where you are and what your political climate may or may not be.
Also - in North America, the view of Tattoo's has shifted to be more mainstream - That is not necessarily the case in the rest of the world. Out there, in the rest of the world, in certain places, tattoo's still mean things, and still have stigma's attached. They may or may not, become a hindrance. Keep in mind if you wish to travel.
Replies
I would like to get a tattoo of an anchor to represent my faith and have that hope that God has a plan for me. As well as tiger lilies and orchids to represent my mother and myself.
I believe that you can get a tattoo when you 1. know and understand that what your getting is permanent and it'll hurt and be expensive to take it off, 2. Know of what you want to get it of. Don't just waltz into a tattoo parlor and come out with a nautical tattoo. 3. Can be the ultimate proclamation of faith when you know for sure it'll be an impact on others
Even if it's simply decorative (flowers, vine, butterfly, etc) I still fail to see the harm in these kinds of tattoos. I've seen decorations on churches that were just that: decorations. They had no spiritual references whatsoever, but they made the churches look lovely and made me feel happy to be there.
How many of you would say its OK to go to your local church and paint graffiti all over the walls?
We are the church not built with human hands, and yet we are becoming increasingly desensitized to defacing Gods own handy work.
If you wouldn't go do it to the walls and steeple of your local congregation, why do it to the body God clothed you in?
I am sure some will speak of murals and all that, but honestly how many tatoos are of that sort of thing?
Kenny Kong said:
11I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. 12His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. 14The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. 15Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter."[a] He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.
16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:
KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. REV 19:11-16
I don't know if it's a tattoo, but it's an interesting point. My girlfriend has her life verse on her back and I think it's cool. If you have a clear conscience about it, create away.
I will never personally get a tattoo. My father had MANY tattoos from his days in the Air Force when he was in his 20's. By the time he was in his 40's he regretted them and always wore long sleeves and pants to cover them up.
When I moved west five years ago, I was surprised how many people have tattoos. Back in Texas, I didn't have many friends or acquaintances with them, but now I think I am in the minority by not having any.
It's not about you and me, and has nothing to do with what we want, what we think, or how we behave. We already have an accuser. We do not need to fall into the trap of doing his job. It is about the Word of God. Which is a good thing. We can talk about that without getting personal. Let God through his Word deal with the personal stuff. Your accountability is not to me, but to Him. My accountability is not to you but to Him.
Can a Christian be unsaved?
I find these verses pretty sobering...
Consider:
Matthew 7:21-23 (King James Version)
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Are these Christians? They think they are. With there mouths they say "Lord, Lord". These guys even do miracles. They believe they are Christian to the point that they defend themselves.
So what is the difference between the accepted and the rejected. One group does the will of the Father and is accepted, and the others are workers of iniquity, and are rejected.
What is iniquity?
The Hebrew word is "anomia". Strong defines it:
1) the condition of without law a) because ignorant of it b) because of violating it
2) contempt and violation of law, iniquity, wickedness
The idea of lawlessness, is a signature principle of false teaching, as we saw already in 1 John and 2 Peter. So we can see that a person may believe one thing about their own salvation, and be very wrong.
Context is extremely important...
While I cannot quote the entire context of any specific passage for the sake of efficient communication, understand that I do not take it lightly. Context is not just a matter of the surrounding versus, chapter, or even the testament it is in. The context of any verse in the Bible is that of One God, unchanging and eternal communicating to His creation.
So when several authors speak the same thoughts over a period of time that really means something. When we read Jesus, Paul, and Peter all expressing the same idea about lawlessness that should mean something to us.
In the mouth of two or three witnesses...
The Thorn in Paul's flesh...
You seem to indicate that the thorn is sin. (If it isn't than it doesn’t advance your position.) There is nothing in context to suggest this. Here is the full reference that you cited.
2 Corinthians 12:7-10 (King James Version)
7And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.8For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me.9And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.
Notice that Paul uses the word "infirmities" twice. This is a man that has been stoned, left for dead, survived shipwreck, and suffered much physical abuse. Consider the context. Paul has infirmities. Isn't it more likely that Paul suffers from these? There is a form of arthritis that could certainly account for a painful thorn in the flesh. Yes, it is conjecture, but it is based on local context.
The truth is that this thorn has been debated since long before you or I. Without being able to nail it down in any absolute sense to sin, I would suggest that it does not advance your position.
The whole of Romans...
Daniel, you wrote, "You can't just pick and choose. you grabbed some bits of verses from romans 6- did you not keep reading thru to romans 7? "
To that I say, Why stop at chapter 7? In chapter 8 we see the conclusion of the matter.
Romans 8:1-17 (King James Version)
Romans 8
1There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (How do those in Christ Jesus walk? Not after the flesh (see vs 5,6, and 7) but after the Spirit)
2For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me(Paul) free from the law of sin (Romans 7:23 another law) and death.( John 8:34)
3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:(Roman7:25 Thanks be to God..)
4That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Paul says here that he, as part of "us" walks not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.)
5For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
6For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. (Test yourselves 2Cr 13:5)
10And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
12Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
13For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
There is a whole lot to consider here. Is there anyway to suggest that Paul lived after the flesh? Or through the Spirit does he mortify the deeds of the body? ( I can do all things through Christ Phl 4:13)
Consider the verses from Matthew. Are these not the same thoughts?
God Bless,
Robert
I think i will be e-mailing you- but straight up, bro- i wasn't meaning to be vague- i just didn't want to call you out in places where you obviously grabbed parts of 2 sentences and mixed them to be thought- or where you cut a paragraph in half and misrepresented my meaning. just look at where you quoted me and you'll find it.
It's obvious that you can quote scripture. just maybe try and look at whle passages and not snippets. take verses in their context. Sure, Jesus taught rightesou living, but he taught mercy and love more. And even Paul wrote of how he had a "thorn in his flesh," to teach him that God's grace was sufficient in Paul's weakness. (2 Cor 12:7-10)
plus, if you're going to quote Romans, you've got to take the whole of romans. You can't just pick and choose. you grabbed some bits of verses from romans 6- did you not keep reading thru to romans 7? This is where Paul talks even more about his serious struggles with sin "for the desire to do what is good is with me, but there is no ability to do it. for i do not do the good that i want to do, but i practice the evil that i do not want to do." those are from Romans 7:18-20. does that sound like someone who does not sin? and that is by Paul- who wrote more of the Bible than almost anyone. But check out all of 13-25, if not the entire book of Romans, or all of the Pauline epsitles, the whole NT or the Bible in general. you've just got to look at the whole of Scripture.
yes, we are told to be perfect- and we are forgiven of our sin. of course we're given a standad to live by- but God knows we won't meet that standard! That is why Christ came. If one can meet that standard, then clearly one does not need Christ. And that is pretty much as blasphemous as you can get.
I promise- i'm probably sinning in some way every moment of my life. Even when i guard my tongue, or don't read innapropriate comic books, i still have a life that is latently prideful. I'm still commiting sins of ommision when i'm not committing sins more actively.
and last, i'll cite 1 John 1:8-10
"If we say, 'We have no sin,' we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say, 'We have not sinned,' we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us."
how can you reckon your interpretation of perfectionism with that? seriously, man. i don't know where you're hearing these theologies, but you've got to look to the whole of Scripture and to Christ for who He really is.
Is it wrong or right? Should a Christian create a tattoo or tattoo themseves? If you're questioning, ask Jesus - if He gives you the go ahead, go to town. If He says "no", then don't. I'm pretty sure you're going to get an answer.
My issues (and some others have already mentioned the same)
1. God initially said no. But again, as pointed out context is everything.
2. It's on you forever. FOREVER. So, I especially don't understand girls who get tattoo's in awkward places - they do realize when they're 80 that image is still going to be there and look rather silly? And same goes for the guys.
3. They become an identifying marker. This could be a very bad thing depending on where you are and what your political climate may or may not be.
Also - in North America, the view of Tattoo's has shifted to be more mainstream - That is not necessarily the case in the rest of the world. Out there, in the rest of the world, in certain places, tattoo's still mean things, and still have stigma's attached. They may or may not, become a hindrance. Keep in mind if you wish to travel.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 6 Next