Shiwiii

lol, superstitious much?

YES!
I love this answer, not because I have tattoo's ( I don't) but because when it boils down to it EVERYTHING you do or do not do is between you and God. Each should make up his/her own mind on the things they choose in life and not let "man" decide for you. 

@AllenSmith. Sorry, can't quote you. It's just too lengthy to dissect!
You are rattled, and, as you loose your command of language when that happens, I just do not really follow the syntax of your 90 word sentence. Take a step back and chill out, mate, and maybe some sense, which you are quite capable, of will ensue. 
Meanwhile, stop mixing the media with the message. An idol can be portrayed in any media but this does not taint the media itself necessarily, although the media itself can be idolised. 
And just keep your insulting rhetoric to either yourself, or those who want to lock horns with you on obscurity. I much prefer it when you reason clearly, which you do on occasion. 
If you are prepared to engage sensibly I will respond. Otherwise, don't waste your breath and bandwidth.
 

Maybe my earlier answer wasn't clearly stated.
No. He does not.
If anyone wants to explore the matter further and to get some guidance on how appropriate the modern (secular) fashion for tattoos would be for Christians then try:
https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/bible-say-about-tattoos/
 https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/family/teenagers/ask/should-i-get-a-tattoo/

(Romans 14:19-23) “19 So, then, let us pursue the things making for peace and the things that build one another up. 20 Stop tearing down the work of God just for the sake of food. True, all things are clean, but it is detrimental for a man to eat when it will cause stumbling. 21 It is best not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything over which your brother stumbles. 22 The faith that you have, keep it to yourself before God. Happy is the man who does not judge himself by what he approves. 23 But if he has doubts, he is already condemned if he eats, because he does not eat based on faith. Indeed, everything that is not based on faith is sin.”
 
(1 Corinthians 6:12) 12 All things are lawful for me, but not all things are advantageous. All things are lawful for me, but I will not let myself be controlled by anything.
 
Why do we wish a tattoo?
It can cause stumbling.
Do we wish to conform to the world?
(Romans 12:1, 2) Therefore, I appeal to you by the compassions of God, brothers, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, a sacred service with your power of reason. 2 And stop being molded by this system of things, but be transformed by making your mind over, so that you may prove to yourselves the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Why has it become popular?
Why did only certain persons of questionable repute wear tattoos decades ago?
Is it something required? Or would it make people think twice about your judgement? Would you get the job wearing one?
How do we know we or a significant other would like it years down the road?
What does it say of the world of today? (Think about degradation and the slippery slope.)
====
What do we think of God’s creation? God’s art? Do we agree with God or the Psalmist?
(Genesis 1:31) After that God saw everything he had made, and look! it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day.
(Psalm 139:14) I praise you because in an awe-inspiring way I am wonderfully made. Your works are wonderful, I know this very well.
Graffiti is usually cleaned off; true art stays and becomes more valuable.
Why can’t we be thankful Jehovah told us something he does not like?
Do we think Jehovah likes murder, adultery, incest, stealing, war, etc. because we are no longer under the Mosaic Law?
He said he cleansed foods that were not permitted for Israel under the Law but he has not cleansed any of these things.
Do we have to ask others or are we convinced?
(Romans 14:22 22 The faith that you have, keep it to yourself before God. Happy is the man who does not judge himself by what he approves.
Make your own decision based on your faith and what you know about the God YOU serve.

Ok, AllenSmith ... I give up.
You have worn me down to the nub with many words . yadda yadda yadda yadda.
The question remains ....
WHY ? .... does Jehovah God forbid tattoos?
 
Going through what you wrote is like finding a specific four-leaf clover on a golf course.
Your short answer AND your long answer were not ANSWERS .. they were additional QUESTIONS !!
 

Hello Mr Joyce,
 
Your response from the viewpoint of the Watchtower Society has to now be “no” (another flip flop), although they do agree that Stephen did; but in so answering they make some interesting claims that are not altogether true.
 
First they make a statement that:
“Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament makes this honest admission: ‘The word God is not in the original, and should not have been in the translation. It is in none of the ancient [manuscripts] or versions.'”
 
True, but not the whole truth, because the full quote from Barnes is as follows:
“The word God is not in the original, and should not have been in the translation. It is in none of the ancient mss. or versions. It should have been rendered, “They stoned Stephen, invoking, or calling upon, and saying, Lord Jesus,” etc. That is, he was engaged “in prayer” to the Lord Jesus. The word is used to express “prayer” in the following, among other places: 2Co_1:23, “I call God to witness”; 1Pe_1:17, “And if ye call on the Father,” etc.; Act_2:21, “whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord,” etc.; Act_9:14; Act_22:16; Rom_10:12-14. This was, therefore, an act of worship; a solemn invocation of the Lord Jesus, in the most interesting circumstances in which a man can be placed – in his dying moments. And this shows that it is right to worship the Lord Jesus, and to pray to him.” (emphasis mine)
 
If they accept Barnes on the fact that God should not be in the text they should also accept Barnes when he informs us that Stephen is praying to the Lord Jesus and that Scripture indicates we can do it too. But no, they simply take the first part and ignore the rest. They then talk about the Greek word used:

“Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words explains that in this setting the original Greek word, epikaleo, means: ‘To call upon, invoke; … to appeal to a authority.”
 
But words have been missed out from the Vine’s quote which put a different light on the issue:
 
“in the Middle Voice, to call upon for oneself (i.e., on one’s behalf), Acts 7:59”
 
Clearly Stephen called upon, invoked, prayed to the Lord Jesus. The Society, albeit seemingly reluctantly admit this was happening but want to show that you cannot do it today.
 
“Does Stephen’s brief utterance set a precedent for praying to Jesus? Not at all. For one thing, Stephen clearly distinguished Jesus from Jehovah, for the account says that he saw Jesus “standing at God’s right hand.'”
 
What this has to do with praying to Jesus I am not sure. We Christians make a distinction between  God the Son and God the Father but we can still pray to Jesus in His own right.
 
Next they say:
“Also, these circumstances were exceptional. The only other case of such an utterance being directed to Jesus is that of the apostle John, who similarly addressed Jesus directly when he saw Him in vision. – Revelation 22:16,20”
 
No clear reason is given as to why, if Stephen prayed to Jesus and it was accepted, and John prayed to Jesus and it was accepted, you and I cannot pray to Jesus and it will be accepted!
 
They end the article with this:
“Although Christians today direct, all their prayers to Jehovah God, they too have unshakable faith that Jesus is “the resurrection and the life.”
 
This refers back to an earlier paragraph where they stated:
“He therefore asked Jesus to safeguard his spirit, or life force, until the day when Jesus would raise him to immortal life in the heavens.”
 
Not according to other parts of the New Testament where the same Greek word, δέχομαι, is used.
 
"whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time." (Acts 3:21)
 
Heaven actually received Him and Jesus was in heaven.
 
"So when He came to Galilee, the Galileans received Him, having seen all the things that He did in Jerusalem at the feast; for they themselves also went to the feast." (John 4:45)
 
The Galileans actually received Jesus and He was in Galilee.
 
"Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet." (Matt 10:14)
 
They were literally received into the home and stayed there.
 
"By faith Rahab the harlot did not perish along with those who were disobedient, after she had welcomed (literally received) the spies in peace." (Heb 11:31)
 
Rahab actually received the spies into her home.
 
"They went on stoning Stephen as he called on the Lord and said, 'Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!'" (Acts 7:59)
 
Stephen was asking Jesus to actually receive his spirit and so he would be with Jesus in heaven; nothing to do with safeguarding for a future day.
 
There is nothing to stop us praying to Jesus, indeed the teaching is that we should be praying just as Stephen did. <><

Just a quick FYI and for your additional research due to it being off topic.
Bible Students also bought Liberty Bonds from the government during WWI and Watchtower officially approved of it, although it emphasized it was a conscience matter for individual BSs. This position contributed to the 'Stand Fasts' splinter group being formed 
Sources:
https://ia601406.us.archive.org/23/items/WatchtowerLibrary/magazines/w/w1918_E.pdf - See May 15, p. 152-153 [R6257] and June 1, top of p. 168-169 [R6268].
Prior view of breaking neutrality:
w64 2/1 p. 80 par. 8 The Comely Feet of the Messengers 
"Because of not then properly understanding a Christian’s strict neutrality toward political conflicts of earth and not understanding the matter of relative subjection to the earthly “higher powers,” the remnant was brought into bondage to Great Babylon."
Present view (links with @HollyW's earlier WT quote):
w16 November pp. 26-30
"Not everything the Bible Students did during the period between 1914 and 1919 was in harmony with Scriptural principles. Although they were sincere, the brothers did not always have a proper view of subjection to the secular governments. (Rom. 13:1) Therefore, as a group, they were not always neutral with regard to the war effort. For example, when the president of the United States decreed that May 30, 1918, would be set aside as a day of prayer for peace, The Watch Tower urged the Bible Students to join in the observance. Some brothers purchased bonds to provide financial assistance to the war effort, and a few even went into the trenches with guns and bayonets. However, it would be a mistake to conclude that the Bible Students were first taken into captivity to Babylon the Great because they needed correction and discipline. On the contrary, they understood their obligation to separate themselves from false religion, and during World War I, the break with that world empire was almost complete. - Read Luke 12:47, 48." - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2016844
 

So I have a question HollyW, does this quote from the watchtower reveal that the watchtower itself aligned with the US during the war? I thought they had nothing to do with war? Can anyone else reconcile this? I mean the expression below indicates that they did and approved of the outcome based upon their understanding of the Bible and God:
"Let there be praise and thanks-giving to God for the promised glorious outcome of the war, the breaking of the shackles of autocracy, the freeing of the captives (Isaiah 61:1) and the making of the world safe for the common people--blessings all assured by the Word of God to the people of this country and of the whole world of mankind."
Which side was YOUR God on? We see in the quote from HollyW that they supported the US in the war, but there is also a letter written to Hitler aligning themselves with him? 

The winning side, of course.  During WWI whose side did your church pray for?
"In accordance with the resolution of Congress of April 2nd, and with the proclamation of the president of the United States of May 11, it is suggested that the Lord's people everywhere make May 30th a day of prayer and supplication. ... As says the spirit through the Apostle Paul: "I exhort, therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour." (I Timothy 2:1-3) Let there be praise and thanks-giving to God for the promised glorious outcome of the war, the breaking of the shackles of autocracy, the freeing of the captives (Isaiah 61:1) and the making of the world safe for the common people--blessings all assured by the Word of God to the people of this country and of the whole world of mankind." Watchtower 1918 Jun 1 p.174

I tried exactly what you propose, only to have the subject changed. On top of that, there cannot be an intellectual conversation when one chooses to dismiss a point without hearing it out. 

Give it up with the jw.borg thing man, if you don't know or can't explain it yourself, then don't even bother. 
Again, does a King announce himself? No
Who is the King? Jesus
Would Jesus announce Himself? No, no need to as God's trumpet and the voice of an archangel will do it for Him. 

But what DID John write? He wrote that the Jews understood that Jesus claim was that God was His father, and in the minds of the Jews it made Jesus claim a claim of divinity. no way around that one Bruceq. 

So you also believe that Jesus is a trumpet? I could see that, i mean from your way of thinking.
 
Does a King announce himself?

And isn't this the whole reason WHY the Jews were going to stone Jesus?(John 10:31-39) The claims Jesus made about Himself, through the eyes of the Jews, made Himself equal to the God of the Jews. 

Kinda like "coming with the voice of an archangel" and the WT looks for an archangel? 

Bruce, you're the one who is running away.  I shared scripture with you and you failed to even reason on it.  You throw up this really lame argument because you've got nothing else to offer.  As I've already stated, a discussion with someone who can't bring himself to reason on the scriptures is pointless.  You stick your fingers in your ears and chant your so-familiar-refrain so that you can ignore what the Bible really teaches. 
I'll be waiting for you to reason on the scripture I posted.  Until then, well, getting to know you has been an experience I could have done without.

my statement still stands. You just refuse to answer in your own words and opinion. 
classic answer to any question by one who cannot develop a response on their own; point to someone/something else so that no responsibility needs to be taken by the one pointing.
 

Don't you see what you're doing?  Jews do not believe Jesus is the Messiah either so you've built your argument on sand and can't seem to dig yourself out.  If you ever find yourself able to reason on the scriptures, maybe then we can resume our discussion.  In the meantime, I hope your day goes well for you.

classic answer to any question by one who cannot develop a response on their own; point to someone/something else so that no responsibility needs to be taken by the one pointing. 
 
Did God approve of war? Throughout the OT there is plenty of war, wars instructed by God Himself. Why would Jesus command the disciples to gain a sword? To look cool? Defense? 
 
Dying for the lack of picking up arms does not make one a martyr. 

But the writers were Jews who became Christians.  The Jews you speak of who reject the Trinity also don't accept Christ as Messiah, so how wise would it be to allow them to form opinions for us.

Hi Ann, I'm coming into this discussion a bit late (to say the least) so someone may have pointed this out already, in reply to what I bolded in your post, did you know the WTS has expressed the view that if you read just the Bible, without any WTS publications, you will believe in the Trinity?

Sure they did.  The sort of Bible reading they are referring to is described in their sentence just prior to that one: "to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home".  And they sure didn't describe it the way you did, did they.

No because they are fundamentally flawed with the false prophecy of 1914.  They retain that as the time the end was meant to come then again in 1918 then 1925 then 1975.  The mansion Beth Sarim built for Abraham, Isaac and Jacob's return, which Rutherford spent time in was sold after he died.  No end of system and resurrection occurred. They are flawed from the outset as spokes persons for Jehovah.  
Deut 18:22 "When the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word is not fulfilled or does not come true, then Jehovah did not speak that word. The prophet spoke it presumptuously. You should not fear him."
How is Jesus head of that congregation from 1919 when all these things were happening?
John 14:26 "But the [d]Helper (Comforter, Advocate, Intercessor—Counselor, Strengthener, Standby), the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name [in My place, to represent Me and act on My behalf], He will teach you all things. And He will help you remember everything that I have told you."
The Holy Spirit does not teach things and then flip flop and make adjustments, especially false prophecies.

“A coward dies a thousand times before his death, but the valiant taste of death but once. ..."
Among sane, rational people, the following Meme applies, always.