In line with one of my recent posts on tattoos, I wanted to pose these questions for all who are interested to opine:
What makes a tattoo “redeem-able” ? Or do they need to be redeemed at all? Can or should a Christian get a tattoo for any reason, or just for “gospel purposes” ? Where does “motive” stop and “content” begin?
If we’re gonna ink, we’d better think…
What say you?
‘BH
 | David Kjos on Praying for Hospital Babi… |
 | Geniose on Praying for Hospital Babi… |
 | wickle on Praying for Hospital Babi… |
Moore to the Point Voddie Baucham Denny Burk Albert Mohler
" ... Silence in the face of evil is evil itself. God will not hold us guiltless, not to speak is to speak, not to act is to act." - Dietrich Boenhoffer
" ... Silence in the face of evil is evil itself. God will not hold us guiltless, not to speak is to speak, not to act is to act." - Dietrich Boenhoffer
20 Comments
October 12, 2008 at 10:53 pm
Bro Hank,
Been a while, but I still read your blog!
I considered the tattoo thing recently and this was my conclusion. I am free to chose, and that freedom is all I really ever desired. So for now I say no.
–trav
October 13, 2008 at 10:33 am
Trav-
It’s good to hear from you stranger. I thought about you the other day when I flew out to Minneapolis for the Desiring God ‘08 conference. I think you might have been the first person to really introduce me to Piper. Crazy, I know…
For Travis and Everyone else:
On your “freedom to chose”: what do you think about freedom vs. servanthood vs. sacrifice? Do these things order and guide our freedoms? Or are we free to do anything, for any reason, at anytime – if not expressly prohibited in Scripture? How did Christ and the NT authors use (or not use) their “freedoms” and exhort us to do the same?
October 13, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Brosef,
I agree we need to think. I don’t know that the Christian should ever do anything and purposefully not think about it.
As far as freedoms go, I think Paul sets us straight when he discusses food offered to idols. Our freedom is such that we are freed in order to serve people by the power of the Holy Spirit, not serve our own ends.
Tattoos, I think, can serve a purpose…a God-glorifying purpose. I think especially so if you are planning to reach a certain culture that communicates ideas by tattooing. It could be an avenue to talk about Jesus.
Anyway…my two cents.
October 14, 2008 at 1:36 pm
You ask: “can/should a Christian get a tattoo for ‘gospel purposes’?” Brandon thinks a tattoo might be useful in evangelizing the culture that communicates ideas via tattoos. I don’t have any simple answers, but this post and Brandon’s comment do raise several questions for me, some of which might simply be rhetorical. But you’ll be the judge.
With respect to evangelism, should we not recognize the important distinction between engaging a culture, and embracing/adopting the behavior or habits of that culture?
Depending on your answer to that one, while tattoos seem to be more and more accepted (although I stand by the points I made in my comment at your first article) would it then not be justifiable to embrace/adopt some of the more radical forms of self-mutilation, the objective being, more effective ministry to the culture that communicates through spliting their tongues, or creating huge holes in their ear lobes?
In order to be effective in ministering the gospel to an adulterer, (or an alcholic, or drug abuser, or larcenous executive, spousal abuser or pedophile…) do we also need to share in an experience of their behavior?
For the sake of conversation, let’s accept Brandon’s proposition and say that it could be advisable to get a tattoo for the benefit of evangelizing that culture. How do you then reconcile the logical possibility that you may have closed off effective ministery to those who question the judgment and credibility of anyone who would permanently mark themselves (irrespective of the message) with a tattoo?
Has the gospel become so ineffective that simply taking it out into the world is not sufficient? Do we have to share in all of the world’s folly in order to talk to sinners about Jesus?
Sorry for the rant…just an old guy who sincerely hopes the generation following him will, as you say Hank, THINK before they ink.
October 14, 2008 at 5:43 pm
@ Brandon and Chuck-
I think you both bring up the obvious: some people will see tattoos as a means of communicating truth contextually, some will see it as culturally compromising – thereby subverting the gospel purpose of it in the first place.
In defense of Brandon’s proposition, I wouldn’t be as quick to claim the “slippery slope” of alcoholism, adultery, etc, as you have Chuck. Those things are explicit sins, very clearly spelled out in both the Old and the New Testament. Tattooing on the other hand, other than their prohibition in the ceremonial laws of the OT (which I do think should convey something more to us than just, “God wanted Israel to look different”), are not explicitly condemned. However, and this is a very big HOWEVER, the absence of a clear prohibition has absolutely no positive force as to whether it is wise or Christian to get a tattoo.
To answer your question Chuck:
I do think that distinction should be noted, but I don’t feel like it is ultimately as stark as you are arguing for. There is nothing wrong with adopting the behavior and habits of a culture — as long as they those habits do not subvert the Gospel; and in fact, isn’t that exactly what set the Evangelical movement apart from the Fundamentalists? It’s the same truth, just different context. I see nothing wrong with wearing a cowboy hat and boots to share the gospel at a cattle auction.
And secondly, I think one of the things that sets this apart from many other similar questions is the 1) permanence of tattoos, and 2) their placement on the body. There are many things that can open up avenues for talking about Jesus — and I’d venture to say there is probably never a time that a tattoo is absolutely necessary to do so. So, just because we are “free” to, does it mean we “should”?
Does it seem like I’m understanding what y’all are saying?
‘BH
October 14, 2008 at 9:37 pm
Hank:
Yes, you are understanding.
A couple of thoughts. With respect to Brandon’s assertion that tattoos can serve a “God-glorifying purpose,” to the extent that they are obtained for the sole, expressed purpose of evangelizing, then I suppose a case could be made that a tattoo is God-glorifying (not withstanding my comments at your other post about what I think could be construed as an intentional defiling of our body, which is not our own). While it would be nearly impossible to prove objectively, my gut tells me that few tattoos are obtained for that sole purpose. My hunch is that people get a tattoo, for some assortment of stated reasons (read, rationalizations). And some of those stated reasons, MIGHT even include a rationalization that it will be helpful in declaring, communicating and sharing their faith.
However, it is my contention that tattoos are also sought for unstated reasons. And I would contend that even among Christians, some of those unstated reasons are rooted in SELF-glorification. The conversation in their head goes something along the lines of “Look at me, look how committed I am to the Lord, look how sold out I am to Christ, I’m marked for the Lamb!” By the very fact that a person chooses to get a tattoo on an exposed part of the body, which inarguably draws attention to that person, this seems to fall very close to the piety and righteousness that Jesus spoke of in Matt. 6 regarding the religious leaders of His day who sought to have their righteousness “seen by men.”
How I wish that clearer heads would prevail, and a God-glorifying lifestyle, conduct and witness would be recognized for its effectiveness, and not gimmicks, like ink.
I wish I had stronger arguments against tattoos for your generation which I love dearly. My kids (both sans ink) are of your generation, and my heart breaks for young people who are making a lifetime commitment to something that seems so much like a fad. And a fad which has so little upside benefit for the many years you all have left in your lives. An former pastor of mine used to say that tattoos are “a long term memorial to short term foolishness.” That says it very well for me.
October 14, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Chuck,
These are very good things to think about (Hank, your post accomplished it’s goal already!). Permanence is a big deal. Also, self-glorification is a an even bigger deal. And I would actually agree with you there: many tattoos are probably some form of narcissism. Our culture is a “look-at-me!” culture. So we must be wary of that.
As for engaging culture, my comment was highly theoretical. I am not familiar with a culture where it would be a MUST to get a tattoo. However, I still think it’s viable, even though it’s theoretical.
As for self-mortification, I just don’t see it as that. I don’t think it’s harmful to us.
As for fads, tattoos have been around for eons in various cultures. So I’m not so sure it’s a passing fad like trucker hats were.
As for the clearly articulated SPOKEN gospel: there is no substitute. A holy life and a mouth that preaches the gospel is what I desire. Ways to engage the culture are secondary.
I would be careful, though, relegating all those with tats to a lower level of clear-headedness. On an issue such as this, it sounds too much like an age/preference/cultural difference than it does a hard-and-fast, universal truth. We need to take time to sit and converse with those who have tattoos to see why they got them, before we dismiss them as having obscured thoughts.
I will add one more thing: Another area we need to think about with tattoos is cost. They are not cheap. And we need to ask ourselves where our priorities lie. Should we be spending big bucks on ink when we know people who are barely making ends meet, struggling to keep their kids fed? Should we spend money on ink when our church is below budget? Our freedom in Christian liberty is never license to do what is permissible. Permissibility is not the point. Glorifying Jesus is the point.
October 15, 2008 at 9:50 am
While I think all of you have given us food for thoigh, I have yet to see one of you use scripture to base your views on. What about: Leviticus 19:28 – “Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.” (KJV)
or
1 Corinthians 6:19-20 – “Do 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.” (NIV)
Any thoughts?
October 15, 2008 at 9:51 am
Please excuse my spelling errors. :-/
October 15, 2008 at 10:42 am
Yeah Genoise,
I think, though, Hank already mentioned the one from Leviticus when he mentioned the forbidding of tattoos in the OT ceremonial laws. That’s why I didn’t mention it. As for why I don’t think that’s valid for what we’re speaking of, is because, from what I’ve heard and read on it, it was directly relating to pagan worship. There are a lot of OT ceremonial laws that we do not practice any longer. So we need to be careful in using that text to prohibit tats.
As for the 1 Corinthians passage, if you look at it in context, it’s speaking to sexual immorality: “Shall I then take the members of the body of Christ and make them members of a prostitute?” So, directly, he’s addressing that issue. And it looks like that was all that was on the apostle’s mind. Can we make the argument that there are other things prohibited indirectly? Probably, because the principle taught is that we are not our own. So, in anything we do, we are not our own. In tattooing, we are not our own. But that merely brings us back to what we are already discussing; that is, can we indeed ink to the glory of God? (On a side note: if we are to follow that principle, then we also need to be willing to admit that we should never eat anything that is remotely unhealthy, either. For it would do our body harm.)
There is another issue that could be brought up with this if we are talking about these principles and putting things on our bodies: make-up. What are the principles for make-up? How is ink different from make-up besides permanence? In fact, many women have permanent make-up (i.e. make-up tattoos).
These are all things to consider. But, I think what they highlight are cultural differences. There are things we do in our culture that other Christians in other very different cultures probably think, “Heaven forbid!” And yet they’re not wrong. In our thinking about all this, we’ve got to be careful that we don’t slip into a worldview that interprets everything through the lens of the culture we have been raised in.
October 15, 2008 at 10:49 am
Also, I’m declaring a moratorium for myself on using the word culture. I’ve written it like 15 times and it’s starting to wear on me.
Hank, give me some feedback on where you plant your flag on all this. It’s always fun to see some good ol’ Hank-style conviction.
October 15, 2008 at 1:49 pm
One more thing…
I probably won’t respond anymore to this thread, as I’m behind in studies and am probably sinning against my wife by spending time typing up long responses. So, no offense to anyone if I don’t answer any questions about anything I’ve said.
Hank, thanks for the interesting topic. We should get coffee soon…haven’t seen you in a while.
October 15, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Indeed Brandon, I’d like to catch some coffee! Too bad Quills shut down.
I’ll shoot you an email so maybe we can schedule something next week.
And I’ve give a lil bit o’ my conviction in another tattoo post coming soon!
@ Gen -
And just to add to what Brandon said about the Corinthians verse, I think it is important (not only for this conversation, but anytime we talk about physical/spiritual issues) to keep our understanding of the “body” clear and defined. As orthodox Christians, we affirmed that man is one “unified being”, a “body-soul composite”, as Dr. Robert George notes. We are not to understand our bodies, as the old blues song suggests, as “just a suitcase for my soul”. That is why Christians, and rightly so, have historically put such an emphasis on the resurrection of the body – not just the ascension of the soul.
When this understanding is applied to our “bodies” being the “temple of the Holy Spirit”, we come to understand that Paul is not saying that our fleshly structure of bones and meat are like an empty temple that the Holy Spirit then moves all his stuff in to live. Nor is he saying that the Holy Spirit just takes over that “soulish” part of us, that is the “inner man”. Rather, Paul says that “all” of us, every molecule to makes up our biology, and every aspect of our souls – has been made the temple of the Holy Spirit. “We”, in our entirety, have been bought with a price — so then we must glorify God, again, in our entirety, or in Paul’s words – in our “bodies”.
Rather than solve the tattoo question however, this just makes it deeper and wider. But I do think it helps clarify why Paul linked sexual immorality with the Holy Spirit.
October 15, 2008 at 4:21 pm
@ Brandon
You said: “We need to take time to sit and converse with those who have tattoos to see why they got them, before we dismiss them as having obscured thoughts.”
I have done just that. I’ll grant you the sample is small. But the sample included all Christians, who have a heart for ministry as it relates to spending a summer discipling kids. It is surprising how many of our counselors at camp have tattoos. We do not forbid tattoos, although we do require that they declare them on their applications along with all piercings. We do this for obvious reasons, children will invariably see them on the staff at the river and in bath houses and cabins. We need to be aware, so that when we hear from parents, and we do, we know what the truth of the matter is ,versus some child’s representation of whatever they may think they have seen.
This past summer, I had about a spur of the moment 45 minute conversation with a group of about 8 girls cousellors, during training week. Some have tattoos, some do not. They actually started the conversation, and I simply asked the group to tell me about their tattoos if they had them and what motivated them to get them. And I also wanted to know what the others thought about tattoos, particularly the ones who said they wanted tattoos. When they asked my opinion, I gave none, as I really wanted to simply get their thoughts, unbiased and not in response to anything I said. Hopefully you recall my interactive style with the staff. I was not trying to press an agenda, I just wanted to hear from them.
I must say that about the only real answer I ever got was something to the effect of “I just wanted one.” Others who did not have tattoos, but who were not opposed to them said that they thought they were cool, or “looked cute.” This particular answer was as it related to this girl’s ideal tattoo, that being a flower on the top of her foot that she thought would look good when wearing flip-flops.
I have had similar conversations with guys, and their reasons were equally unsatisfying, usually landing in the area of “they are cool”, or they “look good” or “I always wanted one and as soon as I was old enough to get one, I did.”
Their reasons seem sort of impulsive to me. you can be a judge as to whether these are clear-headed or not, or reflective of obscured thought, to use your of your well stated terms. For the sake of charity, I am perfectly willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume the decisions to get inked were carefully conceived and diliberated, and not entered into hastily, or under the influence of something like alcohol or drugs. And I because I never heard it as a reason, I will not blame peer pressure.
Still, I haven’t hear a really compelling reason to get a tattoo for either ministry or vanity.
October 15, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Woops, too many distractions as I was commenting above. Forgive the obvious typos, repeated words, and so forth and so on.
November 2, 2008 at 8:45 pm
[...] Source: lawngospel [...]
November 30, 2008 at 10:25 am
I have 2 tattoos, and I am looking to add more. One tattoo is suprisingly a cross. My roommate from college designed it. It was more a tribute to him than from the representation of the cross. He and I had a long history together and after college, we knew that we would never see each other again. He was a dear friend.
My second tattoo is a blue sun. Inside of it is a quotation which reads “from pain comes purpose.” Again, I got this tattoo soley for myself to help me get through difficult times, and in addition to that to remind me of the hard times. Good and bad times shape us as people and I do not want to ever block out the painful memories of the past.
My parents, and grandparents are all against tattoos. They are devout Christians and see my tattoos as sins against my body. They have argued they were selfish acts because they were solely designed and made for me in order to get through struggles when they felt I should have turned to God instead. I do not understand their view point, but then again, I still question my own faith.
January 31, 2009 at 8:26 pm
[...] (i.e.: edifying)? Back in October I found myself engaged in a friendly blog-comment-debate at another site on the subject of body art. The discussion thread dealt with the evangelical usefulness of [...]
February 8, 2009 at 12:24 am
I have never gotten a clear answer on tattoos being completely forbidden or not. I have three, the first not thought out all. After military life a jobless married life, and two kids I have put lots of thought into my others. My first was a small tribal swirl, later i realized i sort of looked like a rose so I added on to it with a tribal style stem. The reason is I was always taught that no matter how bad the winter is a rose will still bloom after. The second piece is a cross drawn by a good artist with a banner that reads “Faith Will Guide You”. It means I know where my faith lays as long as I keep it I can keep going. The third is a cattle skull with revolvers and barbed wire, I have plans to add on to it with some other texas style art. As a kid I had the oppurtunity to grow up in many parts of the country(even though I’ve lived in about ten towns in east tx). I don’t think I would be the person I am today if I had not grown up here. I surely wounldn’t have this wonderful wife and these two wonderful kids.
BTW: My entire family except for a few black sheep are against tattoos, but they don’t give me a hard time because they aren’t tats of naked women, demons, and so on.
April 12, 2009 at 8:24 pm
who cares. a tattoo is a tattoo. your not going to hell if you have a tattoo. geez. people focus so much on the appearance of people rather than just listen to what they have to say. This blog is stupid.