Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Tattoos pS

Expand Messages
  • Susan Nye Ferrell
    This discussion, which I find an enjoyable example of working out our faith in practice and attempting with God s help to limit ourselves to the word vs the
    Message 1 of 4 , Mar 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      This discussion, which I find an enjoyable example of working out our faith in practice and attempting with God's help to limit ourselves to the word vs the traditions of men, reminds me of the ongoing (well at least in my mind) discussion I've had with my friends in Ulster regarding hair color and permanents (for the males on the list who may not be "in the know" this is the use of chemicals to create curls which last, contrary to the name, a few weeks)
         The Ulster friends (and many of my FPCOS friends) feel that permanents, are ok because it deals with only the arrangement of hair, whereas hair color and dye, are a rejection of the "hoary hairs" God gives the aged, and vanity to boot.
          Susan
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 11:57 AM
      Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Tattoos

      I have a kind of funny experience that relates to this.
        When we were visiting the church which has registered a call to Glenn. One of the dear ladies (younger than me actually) and one of the 18 year olds (not her own) "cornered me" in one of those "ah ha, we'll settle this question and get to learn more about the candidates wife" in one fell swoop.
           The "lady" I think, knowing "how conservative" I am, probably thought she had a shoe in support for her anti-tattoo position. The young girl, thinking I was fairly hip compared to some, probably thought I would give her support.
          So, the question comes, what about "girl" getting tattoo? I say with all the appropriate disclaimers that I'm no expert, and this is only based on my limited understanding of the matter BUT...pretty much what has been said on this list so far answer wise. Mentioned that yes, there are cultural negatives, the reality that that image will age and change and warp and fade and what is thought beautiful now by the girl might be a real bane in years to come...BUT I wouldn't tell her it was a sin or give her a biblical proof text saying it was one.
         She breathes a sigh, smiles at the "lady" in mini victory and we start walking to our cars. I ask in passing, what were you wanting to have done and where? OH, a cherubim she says, it's all I've ever wanted and I've been planning that particular design for years.....
       
                AH HA....Susan gets to please everyone without the usual sinful man pleasing at the core...NO dear girl you cannot HAVE a cherubim. The lady smiles thinking I've come to my anti-tattoo senses, when I explain graven images, now they ARE another thing all together!
          So as for now, our young congregant, is still without mark for she has not come up with a substitute. What impressed me about the girl in question, is she seemed seriously concerned that she not violate the 2nd commandment and not have a graven image.
      She "got" what I was saying, which I have seen older and betters in the churches of my childhood, not "get" at all..
            Susan
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 8:22 AM
      Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Tattoos


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Dan Fraas" <fraasrd@...>
      >
      > I once knew a guy who got "Sola Fide" tatooed on his arm

      I have joked about a Blue Banner on my chest, over my heart.  The biggest
      problem is that it would be obscured 90% by fur.
      I put tattoos in the same category as non-reconstructive plastic surgery.
      It may well be a symptom of a sinful heart and bears looking into, but is
      not in se sinful.  Other body "art" such as piercings and scarification
      would also be in this group.

      Larry



      --
      No virus found in this outgoing message.
      Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
      Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 3/1/2005



    • J. Parnell McCarter
      ... of the hoary hairs God gives the aged, and vanity to boot Yes, you are right that hair coloring and tattoos would be frowned upon by the FPCS. IMO the
      Message 2 of 4 , Mar 2, 2005
      • 0 Attachment

        >…many of my FPCOS friends) feel that … hair color and dye, are a rejection of the "hoary hairs" God gives the aged, and vanity to boot

         

        Yes, you are right that hair coloring and tattoos would be frowned upon by the FPCS.  IMO the Picts got rid of their body Pict(ures) for good reason as they became more conformed to scripture. These were the standard positions of the historic Church of Scotland, as well as other reformed churches like the church in Geneva , etc.

         

        Furthermore, I remember reading in the magazine of the Free Church of Scotland Cont'g in the last few years an article addressing matters of attire, written I believe by someone in the Reformed Pres Church of Ireland (if memory serves me).  The position stated there was:

         

        - anti-hair coloring

         

        - anti-earrings

         

        - etc.

         

        I think it is a well-founded position to be:

         

        - anti-tattoos

         

        - anti-jewelry

         

        - anti-hair dying

         

        Some of these matters are addressed in an article at

         

        http://www.puritans.net/news/attire040604.htm  

         

        - Parnell McCarter

         

      • Cheryl
        What do you make of the chapter 16 of Ezekiel wherein God likens Jerusalem to an abandoned infant that he took in and adorned with not only earrings, but also
        Message 3 of 4 , Mar 3, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          What do you make of the chapter 16 of Ezekiel wherein God likens Jerusalem to an abandoned infant that he took in and adorned with not only earrings, but also noserings, necklaces, bracelets, rings, and a crown?  The clothing described is also not in the nature of sackcloth.
           
          Would it be your position that God forbids all adornment or anything that would be designed to enhance or maintain attractiveness?
           
          Yours and His,
          Cheryl
           
           
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 6:11 PM
          Subject: RE: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Tattoos pS

          many of my FPCOS friends) feel that … hair color and dye, are a rejection of the "hoary hairs" God gives the aged, and vanity to boot

           

          Yes, you are right that hair coloring and tattoos would be frowned upon by the FPCS.  IMO the Picts got rid of their body Pict(ures) for good reason as they became more conformed to scripture. These were the standard positions of the historic Church of Scotland, as well as other reformed churches like the church in Geneva , etc.

           

          Furthermore, I remember reading in the magazine of the Free Church of Scotland Cont'g in the last few years an article addressing matters of attire, written I believe by someone in the Reformed Pres Church of Ireland (if memory serves me).  The position stated there was:

           

          - anti-hair coloring

           

          - anti-earrings

           

          - etc.

           

          I think it is a well-founded position to be:

           

          - anti-tattoos

           

          - anti-jewelry

           

          - anti-hair dying

           

          Some of these matters are addressed in an article at

           

          http://www.puritans.net/news/attire040604.htm  

           

          - Parnell McCarter

           


        • jparnellm@usxchange.net
          Cheryl, it seems to me that scripture analogizes the bride to the Bride of Christ. Just as the Bride of Christ is no longer outwardly adorned in the way she
          Message 4 of 4 , Mar 3, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Cheryl, it seems to me that scripture analogizes the bride to the Bride of
            Christ. Just as the Bride of Christ is no longer outwardly adorned in the way
            she was in the Mosaic economy (no more golden candlesticks, no more musical
            instruments, etc), so a man's wife is no longer outwardly adorned as she was
            allowed to be in the Mosaic economy.

            Why? These outward adornments were always simply signs and symbols of the
            spiritual graces. Now that the graces are more manifest in the NT, the signs
            pass away. The spiritual graces are so much more exceedingly precious, that
            next to jewelry, etc., it is like placing the Hope Diamond next to a Cracker
            Jack ring in a public display.

            Simple and plain is the NT principle regarding outward adornment, both for the
            woman and the Woman.

            Regarding Eze 16, Zion's true adornments are her spiritual graces, of which
            rings, etc. were but types and shadows and signs.

            The article at http://www.puritans.net/news/attire040604.htm goes into more
            detail.

            Regarding your second question, I think we should distinguish decency and order
            and even attractiveness (so long as scripturally defined) from adornments like
            jewelry. I qualify with the term "as scripturally defined", because most
            moderns deem marks of age like grey hairs and wrinkles as "unattractive", so
            they get face lifts, etc. But this is not God's perspective on "attractive".

            Hope that helps convey what I am seeking to communicate.

            - Parnell McCarter





            Quoting Cheryl <cherylgrenon@...>:

            > What do you make of the chapter 16 of Ezekiel wherein God likens Jerusalem to
            > an abandoned infant that he took in and adorned with not only earrings, but
            > also noserings, necklaces, bracelets, rings, and a crown? The clothing
            > described is also not in the nature of sackcloth.
            >
            > Would it be your position that God forbids all adornment or anything that
            > would be designed to enhance or maintain attractiveness?
            >
            > Yours and His,
            > Cheryl
            >
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: J. Parnell McCarter
            > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 6:11 PM
            > Subject: RE: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Tattoos pS
            >
            >
            > >.many of my FPCOS friends) feel that . hair color and dye, are a rejection
            > of the "hoary hairs" God gives the aged, and vanity to boot
            >
            >
            >
            > Yes, you are right that hair coloring and tattoos would be frowned upon by
            > the FPCS. IMO the Picts got rid of their body Pict(ures) for good reason as
            > they became more conformed to scripture. These were the standard positions of
            > the historic Church of Scotland, as well as other reformed churches like the
            > church in Geneva, etc.
            >
            >
            >
            > Furthermore, I remember reading in the magazine of the Free Church of
            > Scotland Cont'g in the last few years an article addressing matters of
            > attire, written I believe by someone in the Reformed Pres Church of Ireland
            > (if memory serves me). The position stated there was:
            >
            >
            >
            > - anti-hair coloring
            >
            >
            >
            > - anti-earrings
            >
            >
            >
            > - etc.
            >
            >
            >
            > I think it is a well-founded position to be:
            >
            >
            >
            > - anti-tattoos
            >
            >
            >
            > - anti-jewelry
            >
            >
            >
            > - anti-hair dying
            >
            >
            >
            > Some of these matters are addressed in an article at
            >
            >
            >
            > http://www.puritans.net/news/attire040604.htm
            >
            >
            >
            > - Parnell McCarter
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            > ADVERTISEMENT
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/covenantedreformationclub/
            >
            > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > covenantedreformationclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
            >
            >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.