| Author | Message | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 2167 Registered: 11-2002 |
My law/rule loving kin have severasl favorite texts, none of which are proclaiming Jesus as our Saviour, the Messiah, The Chosen One. One favorite text is, "the dead know nothing". That's as far as they get with that passage. Another favorite of theirs is, "the body is the temple of the Lord" which they use and throw in anyones face about everything they think is unhealthy from getting too much sun causing one to be exposed to sunrays that can lead to skin cancer to eating too much sugar and anything and everything else that they are obsessing on at the moment that might cause the temple of the Lord to be treated with less than 100% respect. Now, i understand that text to mean that as Christians we have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and we are leading our lives in tune and in harmony with Gods wishes and in His grace (Wow, I am sounding more Lutheran all the time.). That one text influences the SDA's position on the state of the dead since they believe their physical body is all there is. However, my SDA and other law/rule loving kin say it is a great sin or great abomadation to have a tattoo. Now I don't want to get into if tattoos are ugly or if they may or may mot be regretted later on in life. I want to stick with Bible, you know, the Word of God. I think trying gtto say tattoos are a sin is really corney, really looney. I w3as told there is a text in the OT that says so. I can't find it and it is my guessing that if there is such a text that it was ment for whoever the passage was speeking to and about and does not apply to Christians. The SDA's I am closest to have a list of partial texts taken out of context that they use freely to prove they are right about most any subject. Anyway, what is the true scoop on tattoos? Will folks with tattoos end up in the eternal lake of fire? I wrote that last question in jest but still what sayy you about the SDA's understanding of the text, "the body is the temple of the Lord" and how can they possibly get that text to mean most anything they want it to mean at the momest? And, the current moment is tattoos because one of my favorite tv programs is Miami Ink. Thaank-you. | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 86 Registered: 6-2005 |
Personally - I would not get a tattoo because of the increased risk of hepatitis that seems to be associated with getting a tattoo. But I am quite sure that there is nothing other than a possible social stigma associated with them - certainly nothing to worry about from God. (IMHO) | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 87 Registered: 6-2005 |
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hepatitis/c/tattoo.htm | ||
| Lisa_boyldavis Registered user Username: Lisa_boyldavis Post Number: 183 Registered: 3-2005 |
Essential or Nonessential, those two words have come to mean a great deal to me since God had lead my family and I out of a legalistic cultic church. What does the Bible Say: "Dear Friends, if your conscience does not condemn us, then we can approach God with confidence, and obtain from him whatever we ask, because we are keeping his commands and doing what he approves. This is his command: to give our allegiance to his Son Jesus Christ and love one another as he commanded. When we keep his commands we dwell in him and he dwells in us. And this is how we can make sure that he dwells within us: we know it from the Spirit he has given us." I John 3: 21-24 The question than becomes, does getting a tattoo love those around me? Is it a way to love ìmeî. The conclusion will probably be different for different people. Pray and ask God and He will give you wisdom. Lisa B-D | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 88 Registered: 6-2005 |
Love others as you would love yourself - so - doing things that "love me" aren't bad either. I was trying on working in a "mowing the yard" is a way to love myself so I should not do it - the the spousal over-unit vetoed THAT logic! <grin> | ||
| Violet Registered user Username: Violet Post Number: 346 Registered: 2-2001 |
The text you are looking for is 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. Even just reading this verse by itsself you can see it is referrencing "for the dead". This means to me they were following traditions brought out of Egypt. This text is embedded in a whole chapter of thou shalt nots including not to hold a hired mans wages overnight. This chapter, in my opinion, would have to be taken in the context of the day. As I would personally hate to process payroll everyday. With this said, my teenager would love to have a tattoo and I told her that even though we have liberty in Christ we live in middle America and she will eventually work in corporate America. In other words its a cultural issue not Biblical. I believe it is not so much what we do with our bodies as much as what our bodies can do for Christ. | ||
| Patriar Registered user Username: Patriar Post Number: 240 Registered: 3-2005 |
Bill: I think keeping your wife happy is a good way to 'love yourself'. ;) Patria | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 2169 Registered: 11-2002 |
Violet, Thanks for answering my question just in the way it was asked. Yes, I had assumed it wasn't like my rule-loving kin tell me it means. As far as making marks on the skin for honoring the dead what about if the person being honored isn't dead yet and one got the tattoo for honor of that person and the person later died? Would the tattoo be retroactivelly honoring the dead? I just think my SDA kin are cornballs on just about every topic that comes up in a discussion. But anyway, do any of you others hear over and over the text, "Your body is the temple of the Lord" and the SDA's use that text for all sorts of farout "health" practices? Now, oh happy me, i can go get me a hybiscus and a plumeria tattoo. | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 90 Registered: 6-2005 |
Patriar - <grin> Very selfish of me - but you know what they say - if mama ain't happy ain't nobody happy. | ||
| Violet Registered user Username: Violet Post Number: 348 Registered: 2-2001 |
Susan_2, I hope you did not read my post to justify getting a tattoo. We clearly have to assess our motives, and if we are doing something to "show them I can do it" type attitude that is not being done in love and that would not be appropriate. On the other hand if you can see a way that it would glorify God then I would so go for it. | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 469 Registered: 5-2002 |
Might I suggest (tongue-in-cheek, of course) a tattoo of the "3 Angels" icon? Perhaps on your right hand, or on your forehead... Hmm...Ellen White had nothing to say about tattoos. | ||
| Violet Registered user Username: Violet Post Number: 349 Registered: 2-2001 |
Freeatlast--you are soooo bad! | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 470 Registered: 5-2002 |
Seriously though, I was sort of shocked when I did a word search on the White Estate webpage for both "tattoo" and "tattoos" and found her to have been completely silent on the matter. Strange for someone who had at least a little something to say on virtually every topic of everyday life... Oh yeah, I'm bad... I'm nationwide... Certainly by SDA standards, at least. And mama definitely AIN'T happy! ;>) | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 91 Registered: 6-2005 |
Regarding things EGW did not say anything about - I used to hear frequently the following comment: "What would Ellen White have said about..." (fill in the blank here). Often about things that were not extant in her time. One of the things that I think has held this church back is that they are stuck in an 1844 paradigm. They can only see the view as this lady saw it at that time. She had MANY great ideas/stolen ideas that helped a lot (witness Loma Linda) some real good stuff. But there was detritus and unfortunately while the MAJOR/OBVIOUS detritus has been methodically purged from the writings over time the bad theology and works took over and stayed. The church should (doubtful will) get on with life and do what they are supposed to do: the great comission. Then love your neighbor as youself! Proclaim Jesus! (Oh - sorry - you caught me preaching to the choir again!) Bill | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 2175 Registered: 11-2002 |
I think I'll pass on the three angels. However it is becomming more and more common for the youth who attend the Lutheran church to have the seal of Martin Luther tattood on them, usually the upper arm area near the shoulder and usually it's the boys. It's a pretty cool looking seal so it makes a good tattoo. You can see a picture of it in a back issue of The Lutheran magazine. I have one son who has his entire arm sleeved and it looks really cool. When I lived in Hawaii it was my guessing that at least a third of the women and way more men have tattoos. I don't look at it as 'because I can". I look at it more like a pernament piece of jewlery, that's why I'd never want something ugly. I like pretty. i don't like ugly. Do you watch Maimi Ink? I love that program. Also, do the SDA's in your life use the text, "your body is the temple of the Lord" for justifing most any wacky position on health they are currently obsessing on? | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3611 Registered: 12-2003  |
If Ellen had never claimed she got her "views" [I just received a note asking to delete the writer's name from the Proclamation mailing list...the person said they don't agree with our "views", so that word is in my mind!] from God, we could easily dismiss her and the way her writings have been used. Unfortunately, she claimed she spoke for God and that either all she wrote or none of it was from God. Because the church has honored her writings as "inspired" in the same way the Bible writings were inspired, we have to take a more black or white stand about her material. She can't be seen as merely a culturally biased writer who might have explained things in ways we wouldn't today. We have to evaluate her writings as those of a prophet and decide whether or not we can endorse her. Colleen | ||
| Violet Registered user Username: Violet Post Number: 351 Registered: 2-2001 |
Susan_2 Yes, that text was one of the major bashing texts used to disallow drinking. That was until I asked how it was different than the fat elder's wife snarfing down browies at potluck. I Corinthians 6:12-20 NIV 12"Everything is permissible for me"óbut not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"óbut I will not be mastered by anything. 13"Food for the stomach and the stomach for food"óbut God will destroy them both. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. 15Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! 16Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh."[b] 17But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit. 18Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. 19Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body. This passage that referres to the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit speaks directly of sexual immorality. It would take a leap to make it say anything else. Will welcome other take on this... | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 92 Registered: 6-2005 |
Colleen... Because she claimed to be from God and said things from God does not make that true. Misguided, sick, and possibly many other words characterize her behavior, but we do not need to claim that she was from or of the devil - merely a misguided over zealous person. MANY people from that era went on the "tour" saying that they spoke from or heard from God. They made money and got attention that they so desperately needed. The church also benefitted from this attention and money - I think that they (the church hierarchy) are in the throes of a horrible dilemma right now - the only place that the church is growing is in hispanic areas - certainly not North America. These areas hold EGW even more dear than the church does. They cannot easily deny or own up to the truth without losing a lot of support and doing a "Worldwide Church of God" repeat. My only point here (I think) is that we do not need to demonize this lady. She was wrong and misguided - but many others in her day were as well and MUCH of what she did MANY others then did as well. Bill | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 2178 Registered: 11-2002 |
"the fat elders wife snarfing down brownies". You sure have a way wirh words. I like your style. LOL | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2406 Registered: 3-2004  |
I laaughed out loud when I read, "the fat elders wife snarfing down brownies" also. That is a good one. If EGW had never claimed that God inspired her, showed her or told her in some way, I would not be so down on her and could treat her as just another author. But she did the above. I am glad I am not her judge. Diana |
