Evidence for God from Science

You and I are not Jesus.

Jesus was also called a Sabbath breaker and blasphemer

I'm simply pointing out that the Spirit of Religious adherence and the Spirit of Christ are not the same. In terms of Scripture I believe Christ is the lens by which we understand it. Prooftexting can easily lead to concepts and doctrines that sound Biblical and Spirital but which cannot in fact be found in any broad passage of Scripture.

I agree but biblical adherence and spirit of Christ are not separable either. I mean "not-prooftexting" can also lead to a lot of doctrines that are not spiritual and are just taken out of context on a general sense of acceptance.

The practice of proof-texting and systematic building of Scriptural syllogisms were introduced by John Calvin and the reformers. The entire approach is, in my opinion foreign to Christ's approach and foreign to how the Scriptures interpret themselves internally

The entire approach is, in my opinion foreign to Christ's approach and foreign to how the Scriptures interpret themselves internally

I understand your point Bart and yes, in that sense, any cherry picking verse technique would be in equal error. But mind you, It is not always wrong and even if proof-texting is thrown out of the window, the passages would be open to application, wouldn't they. I mean didn't Paul interpreted the O.T to prove his point in his master pieces like Romans and Galatians, he was the first one after Jesus who constructed a theology and he chose freely. My point, the Bible clearly says something about it, whether I string it together or not, doesn't deny the fact that it holds the message.

In terms of Scripture I believe Christ is the lens by which we understand it.

Can you please elaborate what was Christ's approach to interpret scriptures and since

you and I are not Jesus

, how do you propose we adopt it?

Btw you dont have to, but I would appreciate if you would, I'm curious

God bless

Please tell me what the lens of Jesus, since you seem to possess it (or would this be opinion of interpretation? ) says in Leviticus 19:28 that we should understand? What was he saying? Do you think Jesus would condone tattoos, be it pertaining to scripture and God or just random personal preferences of something we really really like? What should we take from this scripture in the levitical priesthood that would apply to us (royal priesthoods) when the scripture says, ..."NOR PRINT ANY MARKS UPON YOU: I AM THE LORD." Is He the LORD? Do we not hold that headship as ruler over our lives if we don't obey this command? I'm just really curious? These are questions I have concerning your posts!!! If parts of scripture are strictly adherent to a certain people age and time and absolutely does not apply to us at all even if its to learn something from it, then why is it in our scripture today; it would be absolutely needless and unnecessary? Notice "ALL SCRIPTURE" in the verse 2 Timothy 3:16

Also when you witness to people do you not pick and choose certain scriptures that would best be understood to whom it is your witnessing to so that you might further the Kingdom and lead a lost soul to the LORD; are you not then stringing those scriptures together? Why are people so circumstantial? ...."My God, My God", praise and glory to You Father; thank You for Your "Living" WORD!!!

zacchaeus wrote:Please tell me what the lens of Jesus, since you seem to possess it (or would this be opinion of interpretation? ) says in Leviticus 19:28 that we should understand? What was he saying? Do you think Jesus would condone tattoos, be it pertaining to scripture and God or just random personal preferences of something we really really like? What should we take from this scripture in the levitical priesthood that would apply to us (royal priesthoods) when the scripture says, ..."NOR PRINT ANY MARKS UPON YOU: I AM THE LORD." Is He the LORD? Do we not hold that headship as ruler over our lives if we don't obey this command? I'm just really curious? These are questions I have concerning your posts!!! If parts of scripture are strictly adherent to a certain people age and time and absolutely does not apply to us at all even if its to learn something from it, then why is it in our scripture today; it would be absolutely needless and unnecessary? Notice "ALL SCRIPTURE" in the verse 2 Timothy 3:16

Also when you witness to people do you not pick and choose certain scriptures that would best be understood to whom it is your witnessing to so that you might further the Kingdom and lead a lost soul to the LORD; are you not then stringing those scriptures together? Why are people so circumstantial? ...."My God, My God", praise and glory to You Father; thank You for Your "Living" WORD!!!

Jesus Christ himself is the Word of the God, the nexus of Human history and the focal point of all revelation from God. Scripture points toward Him. All Scripture is inspired and given by God but not all scripture is directly relevant or spoken to us as Christians this side of the cross. The Church, the body of Jesus Christ is not the Nation of Israel and the codes of the nation of Israel in many regards do not apply to us today. If you choose to keep one part of the law in any measure as a foundation to a relationship with God you are obligated to keep it all and attempting to do so you, render the finished work of Christ of no effect, in effect asserting that your own efforts and righteousness are what God desires. Gal 3:10-14

Do you keep all the laws of the Old Testament? Do you wear clothes of mixed fibers? Do you eat shellfish? Do you interact with any woman who is ceremonially unclean because she in menstruating? Should I proceed on and name the other 600 plus laws in the OT? Do you seriously wish to walk in those laws as the basis on anything having to do with a relationship and righteousness before God? Do you keep all the festivals and feasts? WHat did Paul in Galations say about this? Gal 4:8-11

John 5:36-38 “I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to finish—the very works that I am doing—testify that the Father has sent me. 37 And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, 38 nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent. 39 You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, 40 yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

The Scriptures themselves are not the "Word" of God. Jesus is. The Scriptures are inspired and important but it's quite possible to elevate them to the position of a 4th member of the Trinity and in so doing make an idol of them and miss Jesus. The Pharisees did it in Jesus' day and many still do it today, sadly even in "good" evangelical (or other types) of churches.

Look carefully at many of the warnings in Paul's epistles about ravenous wolves and false teachers. I'm not citing those verse as a weapon against anyone (although many do as if quoting them proves that someone else's teaching is false, which is a fallacy in and of itself.) Most of those Paul warned against in his fledgling gentile Christian communities were being enticed by Jewish believers who taught that Gentiles must come under the whole of Jewish custom and law, including circumcision. This issue was resolved by the early church at a council in Jerusalem and it's the reason Paul spoke of some of these ravenous wolves seeking to bring his converts under to bondage of Jewish Law in Galations as wishing they would do more than circumcize themselves but go the whole way and emasculate themselves.

Gal 5:1-12 1 It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
2 Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3 Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4 You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5 For through the Spirit we eagerly await by faith the righteousness for which we hope. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

7 You were running a good race. Who cut in on you to keep you from obeying the truth? 8 That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. 9 “A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough.” 10 I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion, whoever that may be, will have to pay the penalty. 11 Brothers and sisters, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. 12 As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

Read the book of Galatians and Colossians in whole, not piece by piece and understand the themes there before seeking to build arguments or doctrines from little pieces of Scripture. Scripture is not a body to dissect and rearrange. When we are lead by the Spirit of Christ within us and read with our eyes focused upon Christ and seek to understand how Scriptures tie together in Him, then we're operating in a different manner than just intellectual dissection. There are principle that can be pulled out. If we wish to use our freedom in part to follow some practices we're free to do that, but we're not free to impose those views upon others and seek to use them to promote ourselves as somehow more holy or righteous than others because of how we act. That is not the Gospel. The Gospel is more than the message of Christ. Christ Himself is the message and we can't receive teachings without being rooted in the teacher.

So to summarize, all Scripture is inspired but not all Scripture speaks directly to us as Christians in terms of specific directions by God. Christ fulfilled the law. We're free in Him. Many fear this freedom and seek to "help" God by setting up new codes. God has moved from using rules as a taskmaster to drive us toward HIm. He has come to indwell us by His Holy Spirit and made us alive to Him and dead to Sin and we can learn to walk in the grace and freedom without heeding the voices of sometimes well-meaning Older Brothers (sometime not so well-meaning) who wish to bring us again under a yoke of bondage.

That's how I see it and how I believe Scripture, Christ Himself and the Holy Spirit present it to us.

What a miserable life it would be otherwise attempting to take every commandment of Scripture, as spoken to us by God as if we were the original intended for it. God help us all if the Law ultimately is not fulfilled in Christ or more than a means to show us our need for Christ.

neo-x wrote:

The entire approach is, in my opinion foreign to Christ's approach and foreign to how the Scriptures interpret themselves internally

I understand your point Bart and yes, in that sense, any cherry picking verse technique would be in equal error. But mind you, It is not always wrong and even if proof-texting is thrown out of the window, the passages would be open to application, wouldn't they. I mean didn't Paul interpreted the O.T to prove his point in his master pieces like Romans and Galatians, he was the first one after Jesus who constructed a theology and he chose freely. My point, the Bible clearly says something about it, whether I string it together or not, doesn't deny the fact that it holds the message.

In terms of Scripture I believe Christ is the lens by which we understand it.

Can you please elaborate what was Christ's approach to interpret scriptures and since

you and I are not Jesus

, how do you propose we adopt it?

Btw you dont have to, but I would appreciate if you would, I'm curious

God bless

Neo, this is a tall order and I don't know how I can reduce 36 years of Christian living, learning and growth (I came to Christ when I was 12 so you can do the math .... )

My response above seeks to model it in part. I'm sometimes criticized for not being tied to Scripture by proof-texting everying I have to say. I made an exception above, not because it's difficult for me to do that, (I'm trained academically and have been through formal ordination and have also continued my training through my own reading since then ... I say that not to establish credentials, because I no longer think such credentials count for much in the Kingdon of God, but just to assure you and others that I've done that work and don't take it lightly.

Notice that I stuck primarily to one book Galatians, and I used paragraphs, not indidual verses. It's not a great stretch to say that you can prove almost anything you want by taking bits and pieces of Scripture and arranging them as you please. The source often of such exercises are found in the structure employed, as much or even more than the Scriptures themselves.

One of the best books I've read that helps to understand how to read the Scriptures is illustrated in the book, The Untold Story of the New Testament Church, by Frank Viola. I think it's an excellent work that helps to explain what Biblical Theology is as opposed to Systematic Theology, and I recommend it if you or others want to understand more of what I'm trying to say here.

Anyway, that's a short answer and in truth, it would be an almost impossible task to answer much more in depth without in turn writing a book.

Tell me if that makes sense and helps clarify or if I'm still confusing you.

blessings,

bart

Canuckster said "The Scriptures are inspired and important but it's quite possible to elevate them to the position of a 4th member of the Trinity and in so doing make an idol of them and miss Jesus."

Thanks for avoiding my questions and going on your little rant, that really pertained to nothing in my last post remotely at all. However, I'm glad you did because God is amazing enough to put in the little quote above that I will continue to borrow for future explanations in debates. Now I've never held the position of elevating scripture, but I love your above statement. I agree with it and with that being said I find those getting tattoos of certain special scriptures meaningful to them do exactly that; elevate the isolated scripture with certain emotionally attached feelings meaning something contrary to the divine purposeful meaning of the text making it in itself an idol.

To think one would be miserable trying to follow all of the "laws" when given the very power to do so and overcome, would be quite miserable... and frankly would make one sound like an unbeliever or a believer with the "spirit of doubt". This is typical to a (OSAS) stance... but, well... anyways, that is in our other little post.

We must make conscience of obeying God's precepts. We are not to pick and choose our duty, but must aim at standing complete in all the will of God. And the nearer our lives and tempers are to the precepts of God's law, the happier shall we be, and the happier shall we make all around us, and the better shall we adorn the gospel.

Zacheeus, I believe I answered your questions directly. If you believe the Scriptural exposition following (which I note that you didn't address) to be a "rant" then all I can gather is that you don't have an answer or need to think on it.

If you wish a more direct answer, I don't view having a tattoo as an absolute law applying to us today. Tattoo's, as was stated in the thread earlier, and which I hope you read, had some religious significance in that time and culture. As far as I'm concerned this falls into the category that Paul speaks of on several occassions as one of conscience, much like eating meat offered to idols which was an issue in the early church raised by some with weak consciences. Paul advocated freedom, but freedom in love toward those who might have weak consciences to avoid offending other or leading them to violate something they believed to be wrong (which really wasn't).

You never answered my direct questions above with regard to the laws you choose to follow and the one's you don't. Do you eat in strict accordance with Jewish Dietary laws? Do you wear clothes of mixed fibers? Do you ask a woman if she's on her menstrual cycle so you can avoid becoming unclean? Where do you attempt to draw the line or make a distinction in that regard?

Now in my personal opinion I really detest tatoos, especially on women, and especially right around the lower back (you know the kind I'm talking about).

But I was wondering in terms of how God sees it, if I'm reading the verse in Revelation right, doesn't Christ's second coming involve Him having the inscription "King of Kings and Lord of Lords" written on his thigh? I was wondering if this specific verse implies a figurative reading much like how most of Revelation is done, or if this has more of a literal meaning. What do you all think?

My response above seeks to model it in part. I'm sometimes criticized for not being tied to Scripture by proof-texting everying I have to say. I made an exception above, not because it's difficult for me to do that, (I'm trained academically and have been through formal ordination and have also continued my training through my own reading since then ... I say that not to establish credentials, because I no longer think such credentials count for much in the Kingdon of God, but just to assure you and others that I've done that work and don't take it lightly.

Notice that I stuck primarily to one book Galatians, and I used paragraphs, not indidual verses. It's not a great stretch to say that you can prove almost anything you want by taking bits and pieces of Scripture and arranging them as you please. The source often of such exercises are found in the structure employed, as much or even more than the Scriptures themselves.

One of the best books I've read that helps to understand how to read the Scriptures is illustrated in the book, The Untold Story of the New Testament Church, by Frank Viola. I think it's an excellent work that helps to explain what Biblical Theology is as opposed to Systematic Theology, and I recommend it if you or others want to understand more of what I'm trying to say here.

Thank you very much for the answer, i'll look into the book to see what and how are you approaching this in detail. However I must say that when you said this

The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

This is what I had said some posts back from where all this stringing verse topic started.

But you do agree, don't you? That if our acts or actions are not in faith than they are considered sin. In fact this verse comes from the para where Paul is teaching about meat offered to the idols. So a person who takes all the liberties that grace grants us, should be spiritual or careful at least. It was my original point back there.

I'd say, it pretty much tells me that at best we should not be mingling with the world that we become one of them, plain and simple. the rest is for each and everyone to decide for himself. Because to those who think that a lot of God's word doesn't apply to them because of grace, should never forget that what applies to them is the sole principle to justify one's behavior in the eyes of God and that is never subjected and it is Rom 14:23 "...everything that does not come from faith is sin." and without faith it is impossible to please God.

So if a person has piercings and tattoos, thats fine by me, how does one justify itself when they disobey a command? you have clearly stated that the command was never intended for them, fair enough. It does make sense, personally I don't think God is gonna throw someone in hell just because he had a tattoo (it is basically gonna be if we have the HS residing in us) but generally thinking if God ever forbade something, he mustn't have liked it to begin with. May be I am wrong to think like that but as earlier mentioned "drawing a line" is something that becomes very subjective between Christians, in the way you imply. I'm in no way blaming a believer for having tattoos, just saying that we should be careful when taking liberties from the scripture. most of the time our freedom becomes a cover for sin as well.

I'll tell you, in another thread on this forum, there is a debate going on " is premarital sex ok?"and a lot of people are taking liberties from the scripture, citing reasons why the biblical laws in O.T & N.T were specific for their culture and times and today it is not more convenient. I think you made a reply to one of them too. anyways hope you see what I had in mind.

God bless you

You most certainly did not answer my questions or shall I say question! You may have thought in your little response that I call a rant, considering you went way off topic from the very context of my post, assuming you were answering a question I asked. I know who the "WORD" is, and I've never elevated scripture in the way that you presume I have. Why do liberals beat around the bush and never directly answer questions, but always respond back with more questions?

You said, "If you wish a more direct answer, I don't view having a tattoo as an absolute law applying to us today."
Thank you for finally answering... and of course I wanted a direct answer otherwise I wouldn't have asked a direct question? I will note your personal opinion as to it doesn't override scripture that "YOU" don't believe tattoos to be an "absolute" law applying to us today, implying that well its still a law never the less and could apply to us today. But as you pointed out your correct we, including you, are not Jesus.

Have I condemned anyone with tattoos, absolutely not and if you recall my first post I said and I quote, "Its a personal conviction". PERIOD!!! Justifying legalism with antinomianism was hardly the case and who is to define that of which is moral law. Call it what you may but being legalistic as to strict adherence when applicable is in by no means a bad thing; its called obedience. Jesus preached obedience. Obedience is key. Thank God Jesus His Son was "obedient" to die on the cross for our sins... even though He asked Himself, Father is there another way. I always ask that question, is there another way? Can I please just get a tattoo because I want, (flesh) not (spirit), to really bad, unless of course your spirit can be tatted; I'd say impossible; and I remember the answer NO! So we like Jesus must go on being obedient. Is everyone that obedient, absolutely not as you have so strenuously made that point. Please tell me if that what the majority assumes they cannot do (dead in the Spirit, not believing in the fullness of His power given to us to do such things), change the status of morality or right from wrong. I mean look at the mass amount of killings around the WORLD and vastly growing at that, does that mean that because everyone is doing it that "murder" no longer becomes law and is no longer applicable to us today? Give me a break!!! Furthermore, if the Holy Spirit convicts you of something (i.e. tattoos), no matter whom specific text was written to because now were not talking about scripture, we are talking about the personal relationship now; then acting against that conviction which has now become a form of "law" to the individual would be a direct sin in disobedience. If you cannot see my points or any validity in them then we need no longer to discuss the matter. My responses are yet again to the original question asked and posed.

My question is can you live/survive without getting a tattoo? Do you just have to have one that is the utmost important dire need? If not, then why would you want to get one in the first place other than to appease the flesh and then justify it in your own terms? Because you want to be cool; get real!!! Will there be tattoo parlor in Heaven and people lined out the atmospheres to get one? Come on... and someone said before that if you did get one it be gone before you got to Heaven because corruptible must put on incorruptible; no SIN is in Heaven; doesn't that imply that tat must be corruptible. All I'm trying to do is to get one to think, mostly spiritually but logically as well. We are to be looking forward to the hope that is to come, not worrying about "can I get a tattoo cause I really want one, what do you think God thinks about it". We can most certainly agree that there are things one just absolutely knows God is cool with based on His Character, and then there are things like tats that we have to question what God thinks; if we have to question then we might already have the answer because after all we are spiritual beings and are "suppose" to have the mind of Christ. Would He be worrying about futile little things such as a tat? I can tell you one thing, I don't think He'd be worrying about anything.

God will send the disobedient ones to Hell, better believe that. Please never stop thinking that the Law of sowing and reaping is not in effect today and applies even to the unbeliever. So do what you want, I've done my job and that was to witness, not to change ones mind or personal convictions, but to only tell and show you why it is I'm personally convicted. There is nothing else that you could respond that could override the Holy Spirits conviction placed upon my heart... period. I've enjoyed the conversation and for that thanks, but please take into consideration that of which I've said as well. Every idol word will give an account so I think its the utmost importance. Let each man be convinced and fully persuaded in his own mind that of which he allows in his own home; with that being said what can mere man tell you about anything.

You most certainly did not answer my questions or shall I say question! You may have thought in your little response that I call a rant, considering you went way off topic from the very context of my post, assuming you were answering a question I asked. I know who the "WORD" is, and I've never elevated scripture in the way that you presume I have. Why do liberals beat around the bush and never directly answer questions, but always respond back with more questions?

I believe my answer was directly pertinent to the question at hand and I believe it was fully supported by Scripture.

You said, "If you wish a more direct answer, I don't view having a tattoo as an absolute law applying to us today."
Thank you for finally answering... and of course I wanted a direct answer otherwise I wouldn't have asked a direct question? I will note your personal opinion as to it doesn't override scripture that "YOU" don't believe tattoos to be an "absolute" law applying to us today, implying that well its still a law never the less and could apply to us today. But as you pointed out your correct we, including you, are not Jesus.

Zacheeus, are you Jewish or do you belong to an organized Church that believes that the Church today is an extension of the nation of Israel? I'm asking so I can understand better where you are coming from in your responses.

Have I condemned anyone with tattoos, absolutely not and if you recall my first post I said and I quote, "Its a personal conviction". PERIOD!!! Justifying legalism with antinomianism was hardly the case and who is to define that of which is moral law. Call it what you may but being legalistic as to strict adherence when applicable is in by no means a bad thing; its called obedience.

You have left several other questions asked of you in this area unanswered as well and I'll ask again, as you appear to appreciate a direct answer to your direct questions, I would expect that you would want to honor that as well for others.

What's your position on the the other 600+ express laws in the OT. Do you honor God by obeying all of them as well?

Jesus preached obedience. Obedience is key. Thank God Jesus His Son was "obedient" to die on the cross for our sins... even though He asked Himself, Father is there another way. I always ask that question, is there another way? Can I please just get a tattoo because I want, (flesh) not (spirit), to really bad, unless of course your spirit can be tatted; I'd say impossible; and I remember the answer NO! So we like Jesus must go on being obedient. Is everyone that obedient, absolutely not as you have so strenuously made that point. Please tell me if that what the majority assumes they cannot do (dead in the Spirit, not believing in the fullness of His power given to us to do such things), change the status of morality or right from wrong.

Jesus practiced obedience and as I'm sure we agree, was the only human to ever completely fulfill the law and it's on the basis of His obedience that we who have believed on Him and accepted his gift of grace through faith are saved. Jesus preached love. Jesus' preached obedience from a changed heart that is motivated, not by fear, guilt or shame, but by sincere love and gratitude for what God has done for us. That's what loving children do toward a loving parent.

I mean look at the mass amount of killings around the WORLD and vastly growing at that, does that mean that because everyone is doing it that "murder" no longer becomes law and is no longer applicable to us today? Give me a break!!! Furthermore, if the Holy Spirit convicts you of something (i.e. tattoos), no matter whom specific text was written to because now were not talking about scripture, we are talking about the personal relationship now; then acting against that conviction which has now become a form of "law" to the individual would be a direct sin in disobedience. If you cannot see my points or any validity in them then we need no longer to discuss the matter. My responses are yet again to the original question asked and posed.

If you want to equate murder with getting a tattoo, that's interesting, but it's really irrelevant. To make my view clearer, I see the laws of the OT as falling generally into different categories. One is ceremonial law related to the priesthood and temple system in place at that time. Jesus abolished that system by his death and resurrection on the cross and we are free from thise laws as the system they applied to is now fulfilled in Christ Jesus Himself. We're no longer approaching God from the outside; He dwells within us and we are the temples of God's Holy Spirit. Can there be some benefit from looking at the OT temple system and drawing inferences from that as to how things work for us to today? There may be, but it can easily be extended beyond what I believe is healthy in a believer's life.

The other areas of law in the OT tie to the culture and ordering of Israel as a nation (Isreal was a theocracy and there was no separation of between religious practice and civil elements as we observe in many contexts today.) Things related to civil law, fines, where capital punishment was called for etc.

There is as well, moral law that cuts across time, culture etc and ties directly into a system of values instituted by God in part as a result of the image of God we have within us as human beings. Things like murder, theft, lying etc, typically identified with the 10 commandments but not just there. Even these, Jesus reduced to the maxim of Loving God with all our heart, soul and mind, and doing unto other as we want them to do to us. Even these are revealed as ultimately a matter of heart attitude as opposed to just following a code and trying to do as well as we can.

My question is can you live/survive without getting a tattoo? Do you just have to have one that is the utmost important dire need? If not, then why would you want to get one in the first place other than to appease the flesh and then justify it in your own terms? Because you want to be cool; get real!!! Will there be tattoo parlor in Heaven and people lined out the atmospheres to get one? Come on... and someone said before that if you did get one it be gone before you got to Heaven because corruptible must put on incorruptible; no SIN is in Heaven; doesn't that imply that tat must be corruptible. All I'm trying to do is to get one to think, mostly spiritually but logically as well. We are to be looking forward to the hope that is to come, not worrying about "can I get a tattoo cause I really want one, what do you think God thinks about it". We can most certainly agree that there are things one just absolutely knows God is cool with based on His Character, and then there are things like tats that we have to question what God thinks; if we have to question then we might already have the answer because after all we are spiritual beings and are "suppose" to have the mind of Christ. Would He be worrying about futile little things such as a tat? I can tell you one thing, I don't think He'd be worrying about anything.

There are a lot of things I can live without, tattoos among them. For the record, I don't have a tattoo and at 48 and as a professional worker it's not something I intend to do, but that's a personal choice on my part. I'm completely free to do so if I wish, and I have much more important things in life to worry about that going around with a little scorecard for me or for others worrying about what I can or can't do. Thank God, Jesus freed us from that. We operate on an entirely different dynamic. Paul's comments as to the judiazers who wished to put the yoke of the law upon gentile believers still apply today.

God will send the disobedient ones to Hell, better believe that. Please never stop thinking that the Law of sowing and reaping is not in effect today and applies even to the unbeliever. So do what you want, I've done my job and that was to witness, not to change ones mind or personal convictions, but to only tell and show you why it is I'm personally convicted. There is nothing else that you could respond that could override the Holy Spirits conviction placed upon my heart... period. I've enjoyed the conversation and for that thanks, but please take into consideration that of which I've said as well. Every idol word will give an account so I think its the utmost importance. Let each man be convinced and fully persuaded in his own mind that of which he allows in his own home; with that being said what can mere man tell you about anything.

The issue of salvation is not a matter of our obedience. That is completely under grace and Jesus Christ's obedience, not ours. Many confuse what is salvation with what Jesus spoke of as the "Kingdom of God". They are not the same things. The Kingdom of God is the order that will be established upon Christ's return and it will comprise those whom He has redeemed. There will indeed be differentiations in place between believers at that time who have been faithful to God and served Him and done His will and those who haven't. Scriptures in Corinthians describe that as believers whose works will burn but they themselves will be saved. This is not speaking about salvation.

The Spirit of the Older Brother Jesus described in His parable of the Prodigal Son is alive and well in the Church today. There's always an element in our hearts and lives that wants to compare ourselves to others and make ourselves look better in God's eyes than others. I believe that's a part of the flesh that Christ calls upon us to crucify and see as dead with Him on the cross. Sadly, it's a very real temptation to instead take that element of our lives and dress it up and try to sanctify it and make it look like something that is really good. That's the heart of human religion and it's present within Christianity today just as it was at the time of Christ and Paul and grace and freedom in Christ were jealously guarded against those wolves and ravenous teachers who would follow Paul and attempt to get his converts to be circumcised and take on the old yoke of the law.

Much of this is not discernable from the outside. Obedience from a sense of legalistic self-effort can look much the same as obedience motivated by love and a grateful heart. God is in the end the only one capable of making that judgement and He doesn't need our help in the interim to to do that.

So, whether you wish to discuss things further or not, Zaccheus is entirely up to you. I don't know you and I can't know you very well except by the words you write and I'm doing my best to understand them and respond graciously. Please do not take my statements as directed personally toward you. Again, I don't know you well enough to know your heart and that's God's job anyways, not mine. But, when people begin pointing to Old Testament laws and speaking of "obedience" to them, particularly those rooted in either ceremony or the culture of that day and confusing them with absolutes such as murder, then it's reasonable for me to ask if there's some serious confusion going on there. As the result seems to be a strong emphasis on "obedience" and motivation by fear of hell (a matter that's already resolved for the believer) and you appear to wish to challenge the assertion that God's grace is sufficient to hold and sustain us and instead turn the believers life into one of fear, worried about whether we'll slip up and God will turn out to be a stern, judgmental father just waiting for us to slip up .... well, that does concern me. Not only for you, but any who might read your words and teachings and accept that picture of God and His character.

I've lived there and preached from there for years. What a miserable existence that was. How much greater is it now to walk in confidence of God's love and grace and burn the scorecard.

Rather than fearing how that might lead people to abuse their freedom (which is possible) why not look and rejoice that God makes us new creatures and we can live on that freedom and do what is right before God and according to the conscience He has given us and is building within us. Silly arguments about what we "can" and "can't" do fade next to that.

Dear DRDS you may want to check out this link.... http://www.biblebelievers.com/watkins_t ... bible.html hope that helps!!!

The Old Testament law had a purpose, this is true. At that point in time, the Messiah (Jesus) had not yet come so they were living by faith in the coming Messiah. We see that referenced many places in scripture. Some parts were just good sense for the benefit of God's people. Others were prophetic of the coming of Christ or to point man to Christ. The latter was done by establishing what God's standard for us was, and by showing how far we have strayed from God's standard. Under the law that God gave Moses, whenever a person sinned, an animal was to be sacrificed. Usually a sheep whose blood was offered as payment for sin. Jesus put an end to that old system of sacrifice when He became the ultimate sacrifice. He did away with “animal” sacrifice, but not sacrifice itself, for we are living sacrifices unto the LORD; nor did He do away with the law for the law is good; He only fulfilled it. The law doesn’t mean we don’t sin nor is it rewarding unto salvation… if anything like baptism it would be an obedience. The law points out sin, and where there is no law there is no sin, sin is transgressing against the law… but that doesn’t mean if one shouldn’t keep the law. Is there any fault in doing so. Law means a lot more than just law of Moses, even personal convictions. For not just the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; for when Gentiles, who don’t have the law, its in there very nature the nature of God to do things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law unto themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them… Rom 2:12-16

Matt 5:17-19
Gal 3:19-25

The Holy Spirit, if we follow His leading, will guide us into keeping the intent of the law.

1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
Meaning has any show of it, or looks like it, or carries in it a suspicion of it, superstition, etc. Do not drive your morality so near the bounds of evil as to lead even weak persons to believe that ye actually touch, taste, or handle it. Furthermore we shouldn’t give satan any cause or opportunity.

I suppose the clear statement from the word of God in Leviticus 19:28 does not settle anything for this generation of disobedient, carnal, worldy, tolerant, non-judgmental, Christians. Rather than obey God, they run miles and miles and miles to "justify" their open disobedience to the Word of God.

All I’m saying is before someone tattoos themselves they should ask, "Can I do this in good conscience before God?"

1 Cor. 10:31

If you have any doubts that God would approve, then to have a tattoo would be sin.

. . . whatever is not from faith is sin. Rom. 14:23
Whether of a natural, civil, moral, or evangelic kind: "whatsoever does not spring from faith", as the Arabic version renders it, cannot be excused of sin; whatever is not agreeable to the word and doctrine of faith, ought not to be done; whatever is done without faith, or not in the exercise of it, is culpable, for without faith nothing can be pleasing to God; and whatever is contrary to the persuasion of a man's own mind, is so far criminal, as it is a violation of his conscience; whatever men do, especially in a religious way, they ought to make faith of it, or to be fully persuaded of it in their own minds, or they act amiss.
Nothing more destroys the soul than pampering and pleasing the flesh, and fulfilling the lusts of it.


Its important not to fight a doubting conscience or be double minded… we should,
“Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse [your] hands, [ye] sinners; and purify [your] hearts, [ye] double minded.” James 4:8

The grace of God will correct and cure the spirit by nature in us; and where he gives grace, he gives another spirit than that of the world. The proud resist God: in their understanding they resist the truths of God; in their will they resist the laws of God; in their passions they resist the providence of God; therefore, no wonder that God resists the proud.

In Leviticus God establishes the priesthood in ot and for us today when we get saved or born again we become a peculiar people a royal priesthood a holy nation.

Its just an obedience to following after God and if you Love Him enough your going to do whatever it takes to get close to Him if that pertains to a personal conviction of an ot law. Believers often hinder their growth in grace, by not giving themselves up to the spiritual affections raised in their hearts by the Holy Spirit.

Please tell me how being personally convicted of tats in ref. to Leviticus 19:28 constitute my position of how I feel towards the rest of the 613 laws? The way I feel and believe would be that of a personal conviction as well from the HOLY SPIRIT anyways. How does keeping this ordinance or this law constitute for whether one should or shouldn’t keep the entire law, based on keeping this one? How does keeping this law even apply to whether or not one does so to initially obtain salvation? It doesn’t! We are saved by grace through faith. Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law. What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?

Zacc,

Thanks for elaborating on your position.

I agree with much of what you say. I have absolutely no problem with anyone following the dictates of their conscience and further I have no problem with even with Christians looking to the OT law with the intent of understanding what underlying benefits God may have had in mind for his people at that time and then deciding to abide by those standards to share in that temporal benefit.

The issue of tattoos here in our discussion is more representative of a principle to me than terribly important in terms of the very narrow issue itself. That ground has been well covered throughout this thread so I won't repeat it.

Where I take issue with you, and we'll have to agree to disagree I believe, is your apparent belief that salvation is a matter of performance as it relates to one's eternity with God. Further you appear to have a sense of separation or superiority toward those whom you classify as

this generation of disobedient, carnal, worldy, tolerant, non-judgmental, Christians. Rather than obey God, they run miles and miles and miles to "justify" their open disobedience to the Word of God.

If that isn't a clear statement of precisely the type of mindset that focusing upon the law as opposed to Christ's grace brings then I've never seen one.

In any event, it's apparent to me at this point that we're talking past one another and have some very different views on many foundational matters of the Christian faith. That's fine. Each of us is in the end going to account to God (whether in the context of salvation or the context of the Kingdom of God which is one of those foundational differences we clearly have.) My conscience is clear in that regard and I have no reason to believe that yours is otherwise so I'll not do you the disservice of categorizing you in terms similar to how you categorize others above.

I agree with you on your assessment that anyone getting a tattoo or making other similar decisions reasonably can ask themselves if they can do it with good conscience. The other way of examing that issue would be to start with the assumption that on an issue like that they are free in Christ to do as they wish, but they can ask themselves, does doing this bring glory to God and will it please Him. Those may result in a similar decision but the frame of mind and motivations of those two approaches can be considerably different. One is the attitude of a loving child toward a loving Father, and the other can more akin to a servant or slave toward his master. Scripture uses both analogies in different places so I understand how either one can be appropriated. It appears we're starting from different places in terms of what we're assuming both about the nature and character of God and further what it is God desires for and of His children or servants. I'm certainly not advocating antinomianism or lawlessness, but I see the relationship in different terms.

In any event unless you want to pursue this further, I'm content to leave the subject as it is, and for my part to sincerely and hope and pray that you and others reading this exchange come to know Christ in the fullness of His Grace, Love and Mercy and walk as children rather than servants motivated by guilt, shame or fear. I've walked in both and I'm grateful for where God has brought me today and content to not return to where I was before.

blessings,

bart