Adverse Credit Remortgage | UK Lottery | Buy Anything On eBay | Xbox Mod Chip | Loans
Not Your Granny’s Presbyterians [Archive] - FreeConservatives

PDA

View Full Version : Not Your Granny’s Presbyterians


FMeekins
11-25-2004, 11:49 AM
<html><body>

<p>Among Christian denominations, Presbyterians have a reputation for sobriety and decorum. However, as denominations and churches try to out do one another in the rush to appear the most “authentic” and “with it”, that noble reputation might be coming to an end.

<p>On the website of <A HREF="http://www.covenantseminary.edu/resource">Covenant Theological Seminary </A> of the Presbyterian Church in America is a section where websurfers can listen to audio files addressing a wide variety of issues and topics. Finding one on tattooing, I thought I’d hear a rational discourse against this popular form of personal disfigurement since Presbyterians are renowned for their skill at argumentation.

<p>Much to my surprise, the lecturer, Margie Haack of <A HREF="http://www.ransomfellowship.org/A_Staff.html">RansomFellowship.org </A> , gave an <A HREF="http://www.covenantseminary.edu/resource/Haack_WhyDoYouTattoo.m3u">exposition on tattoos </A> literally making them of little more consequence than applying makeup up or toning one’s muscles. Haack deceptively lumps all of these under the politically correct banner of “body modification“.

<p>While doing a satisfactory job explicating the various emotional traumas tempting individuals to do something like this to their bodies, her message is woefully inadequate in extolling the shortcomings and dangers of these ghastly scribblings. No where does she even suggest tattoos might be something questionable yet eraseable (at least in the metaphysical sense) under Christ’s redeeming blood.

<p>In fact, the only guilt trip was laid on those daring to retain the traditional Judeo-Christian reluctance to the practice. Throughout, Haack criticizes Christians leery of those branded in this fashion, likening the attitude to racial prejudice. But the last time I checked, the individual has no choice over their race; getting tattooed is a matter of personal volition.

<p>Might most Christians raised properly or later schooled in correct deportment pull back from individuals exhibiting these markings since there might be something wrong with tattooing? After all, most of those with an affinity for this form of decoration aren’t exactly known for their reputations as upstanding members of the community.

<p>Haack attributes these pangs of conscience to misguided middle class values. Interesting, isn’t it, how these attacks on decency always boil down to this argument.

<p>Haack further undermines traditional Biblical teachings on this issue by equating Scriptural injunctions against the practice in question with other Old Testament legal provisions no longer observed under the dispensation or covenant of grace of the New Testament such as dietary restrictions against pork, garments of mixed fabric, and other hygienic or ceremonial matters. While some rules such as those dealing with diet have been rescinded elsewhere in the Bible, ceremonial ones fulfilled by Christ’s coming, and others specified for the particular cultural and historical setting of ancient Israel, many still serve as moral principles and commands conductive to personal health and well being.

<p>For example, nothing much is going to happen to you if you occasionally enjoy some pork or shellfish. However, it only takes one ***** of a dirty tattoo needle to get hepatitis (ask Pamela Anderson) or AIDS.

<p>When that happens, I suppose all the pro-tattoo clergy, academics, and otherwise unproductive intellectuals will turn around and lecture all of the unenlightened clods of the middle class why it is now our Christian obligation to put more into the collection plate or have taken out in taxes to alleviate suffering that could have been prevented in the first place.

<p>Interestingly, Mrs. Haack goes on to create the impression that somehow Christians are spiritually superior if they deface themselves with this religious graffiti. Haack justifies tattoos all in the name of Jesus since some early and medieval Christians had them.

<p>While we must study the past or be doomed to repeat it, that does not mean it is the end all in terms of doctrine and practice. After all, if everything had been peachy keen from day one onward, there wouldn’t have been much need for a Reformation, would there?

<p>Haack also provides example of cotemporary Christians who have exhibited their “spirituality” through being tattooed. Specifically, she mentions Jeremy Huggins whom she is careful to point out is a graduate of Covenant Seminary and whom mentions in his own <A HREF="http://www.covenantseminary.edu/resource/Huggins_Blogging.m3u">lecture about blogging archived on Covenant Seminary’s </A> webpage his enjoyment of smoking and whiskey. My haven’t we come along way; I remember back in my Christian school days you played it down if you liked “The Simpsons” for fear of running afoul of authorities.

<p>It is revealed that Huggins has a Hebrew word emblazoned across his chest and a <A HREF="http://junkmail.chattablogs.com/archives/016438.html">Greek phrase </A> etched into his back to remind him of his reliance upon God. If that’s what it takes to jog his memory, his faith must be pretty weak.

<p>If these inscriptions are on sections of his anatomy not normally gawked at by the church going public, then why are we even being told about them? Could be it that those like Rev. Huggins feel guilty about what they have done to themselves, and instead of seeking forgiveness, they try to drown out the shame with applause and accolades from today’s doctrinally fickle congregations?

<p>Since these human billboards advertise their intense religious devotion, it won’t be long until those with tattoos come to be seen as more dedicated to their God than those not decorated in this manner. Eventually in much the same manner as Christians who did not care to view “The Passion” were pressed for a reason as to why they did not want to see the movie, those without tattoos will be hounded by taunts such as “Jesus was scarred for you. Don’t you love him enough to be scarred for him?”

<p>Interestingly, this unsightly body vandalism in a sense serves as a roadmap to certain questionable trends underway within the Presbyterian Church in America. This denomination, once noted for its sticktoitiveness to propriety now, from the attitudes conveyed on their flagship seminary’s website, would rather Christian young people drink, smoke, and turn their bodies into human sketchpads than read Left Behind novels.

<p>Much of the ministry within this denomination is targeted at the highly educated. While that is commendable since this segment is often overlooked in terms of witness, maybe Presbyterians need to worry more about winning approval of the Lord rather than that of slovenly college professors and students.

<p>I ask you what would you rather your children do? Are you going to be so pleased with you own sense of tolerance when your daughter or son comes home having put your broadmindedness into practice?

<p>Furthermore, why should I listen to some preacher prattle on about the “evils” of some young adult activities such as dating (as is the case in the now pervasive Josh Harris <i>I Kissed Dating Goodbye</i> syndrome) or as to why I ought to drop more into the collection plate when the pastor looks like a cheesy roadside advertisement for his own lack of self-discipline especially if he does not readily display a sense of repentance over such an obvious shortcoming?

<p>It has been said youth is fleeting; the indiscretions of it are not. As such, you should not do much of anything you would not want to catch your granny or grampy doing since, try as we might to put the passage of time out of our minds, one day each of us will be one of those elderly souls that have to dispense advice to the young whether they want to hear it or not.

<p>Copyright 2004 by Frederick Meekins

</body></html>

ronin9
11-29-2004, 02:30 PM
i went to a christian school.i have tattoos.i like them.did you ever see the motorcycle club 'bikers for christ'?those guys are covered in tattoos.the tattoos are mostly crosses,and jesus stuff.i don't have any of those.but,i don't have any earrings,piercings,brandings or any of that stuff.just tattoos.i love them.:solder:

HomeschoolrsRUs
11-30-2004, 11:20 PM
<SUP>JN 14:6</SUP> Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (NIV)


JN 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. (KJV)


In neither of these versions of verse do I read any mention of tattoos, earrings, or other adornments. There is but ONE requirement for salvation.


There is a lost and dying world out there full of people with tatoos, tongue bolts, ear-bones, belly-button, eyebrow, and nose rings. Should they be left and condemned to die because they did those things BEFORE they became a Christian? No.

Jesus went out unto where the sinners were ... no He did not adopt their lifestyles, but he DID minister to them. I know a good Christian man with a large tatoo of a semi-naked lady on his arm obtained considerably prior to his salvation experience. He has inquired as to cost and feasibility of removal, both were considered almost impossible.


When one receives salvation, a new creature is born. The new creature, while maybe not immediately or within a time-frame WE think proprer, will begin to seek to do things pleasing unto the Father and will turn away from those things which He disapproves. That is when the heart begins to seek His Wisdom and counsel.


We should not beat the sinner over the head with his sin ... will that really get his attention and make him DESIRE to do what is right? Or as a rebellious child (of God) will he continue along the wrong path out of spite because of the action? I would say chances are greater on the second one than the first.

CHRIST'S MESSAGE NEVER CHANGES ... but there ARE different ways to deliver the message, most especially now. The "church' must begin to use all the resources at its disposal ... be sure the "king of the airwaves," ole' satan himself, will certainly be taking advantage of them.


Guess I'm more worried about their destination instead of their ornamentation -- my bad?

DeclinetoState
12-02-2004, 04:18 PM
"You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am the Lord." Leviticus 19:28 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn5)

Pro tattoo site: http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn5:

First, by researching references to Leviticus 19:28 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn5), we find it refers to a heathen practice meant to invoke the attention of pagan gods - and usually by means of cutting oneself to "prove" one’s sincerity (see also Leviticus 21:5 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn6), Jeremiah 16:6 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn8), and Deuteronomy 14:1 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn7)). It was an attempt to make oneself worthy to approach some graven image of a god through self-abasement. God rightly admonished His chosen people not to follow the pagan rituals of such false "religions".

...


But if one wants to live by the law - the Old Covenant - then one must keep all of it (James 2:10 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn22)). Transgressing any part of the law means we are guilty of transgressing all of it. According to Levitical law, we may not eat the meat of rabbits or pigs (Leviticus 11:6-7 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn1)), nor lobsters, crabs, prawns, oysters or clams (Leviticus 11:10-12 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn2)). Hybrid breeding of livestock and mixing linen and wool in fabrics is prohibited (Leviticus 19:19 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn3)). Shaving the sides of your head (being clean shaven) or disfiguring the edges of your beard (trimming) are also forbidden (Leviticus 19:27 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn4)). So - if you’ve ever eaten a pork sandwich, dined on Maine lobster, trimmed your beard or worn a wool blend suit - or have gotten a tattoo - you’re guilty under the law!

Thank God that He has provided a better way for us to be reconciled to Him! A New Covenant! Romans 5:1-2 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn13) says we are justified by faith, given right standing with God through the Lord Jesus Christ (see also Romans 5:8-11 (http://xtat.org/tattoosbible.php#fn14)). The entire 5th chapter of Galatians deals with this issue - contrasting the law and liberty, the lusts of the flesh and the fruits of the Spirit. Anti-tattoo site: http://www.jesusisthelight.net/TATTOO.htm:

Throughout the bible, the Lord condemned all heathen practices, and true followers of the Lord hated the heathen practices. I REPEAT: THESE PRACTICES WERE HATED. THEY WERE NOT ADOPTED.

FMeekins
12-04-2004, 07:16 AM
<SUP>JN 14:6</SUP> Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (NIV)


JN 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. (KJV)


In neither of these versions of verse do I read any mention of tattoos, earrings, or other adornments. There is but ONE requirement for salvation.


There is a lost and dying world out there full of people with tatoos, tongue bolts, ear-bones, belly-button, eyebrow, and nose rings. Should they be left and condemned to die because they did those things BEFORE they became a Christian? No.

Jesus went out unto where the sinners were ... no He did not adopt their lifestyles, but he DID minister to them. I know a good Christian man with a large tatoo of a semi-naked lady on his arm obtained considerably prior to his salvation experience. He has inquired as to cost and feasibility of removal, both were considered almost impossible.


When one receives salvation, a new creature is born. The new creature, while maybe not immediately or within a time-frame WE think proprer, will begin to seek to do things pleasing unto the Father and will turn away from those things which He disapproves. That is when the heart begins to seek His Wisdom and counsel.


We should not beat the sinner over the head with his sin ... will that really get his attention and make him DESIRE to do what is right? Or as a rebellious child (of God) will he continue along the wrong path out of spite because of the action? I would say chances are greater on the second one than the first.

CHRIST'S MESSAGE NEVER CHANGES ... but there ARE different ways to deliver the message, most especially now. The "church' must begin to use all the resources at its disposal ... be sure the "king of the airwaves," ole' satan himself, will certainly be taking advantage of them.


Guess I'm more worried about their destination instead of their ornamentation -- my bad?


But the lecture I was referencing made it acceptable for post-conversion Christians to go out and get them. Plus, I said in my column it is something foregiveable. However, in order to be foregiven, we first have to admit we have done something wrong.