Jump to content
The World News Media

Why does Jehovah God forbid tattoos?


James Thomas Rook Jr.

Recommended Posts

  • Member
3 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

You are very close to the correct answer .. the question is NOT "what" ..... but "WHY?"

As already stated, the only answer to your question Why....does Jehovah God forbid tattoos? is : Jehovah God does not forbid tattoos.  

The question could have been asked: 

"Why did Jehovah forbid the Jewish nation to tattoo themslves?" Or "Does Jehovah God forbid Christians to have tattoos? If Yes, Why?"

Different, more informative answers may then have ensued.

Another variation could have been Why....doesn't Jehovah God forbid tattoos? To which a JTR type response such as "Because He couldn't care less about tattoos" might have been suggested. 

As it is, those questions were not asked, and as the question that was asked is basically invalid, the answer given.....remains as: Jehovah God does not forbid tattoos.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 3.3k
  • Replies 39
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Now that wasn't so difficult actually was it? I'll overlook the offensive bluster. I know you are capable of an entirely rational response (as in the first quote) when you are in a better frame

When you get old and fat and it stretches into something unsightly.

@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 you

Posted Images

  • Member

With outdoor temps in the 90s, I was at the swimming hole yesterday. A lot of young people were there. Tattooed have never offended me, but the kids do look like walking billboards these days. 

I once knew a young woman of artistic bent who was heavily tattooed, including her neck and face. She came to regret it because people formed an instant impression of her different from what she wanted to project.

I refuse to even wear a tee shirt with printing on it, though I may one day have one printed up with an image I like a lot.

image.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
6 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

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/

I got your original answer :) but others evidently didn't :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Answer dutifully noted and appreciated. Now it is time to expand upon it with addendums, footnotes, and JTRisms. Time for anyone who has a lick of common sense to leave the room.

In a mellow mood, I once strolled into a tattoo parlor and asked the artist whether, when a tattooist is doing intimate areas of the body, they 'get off' on it. Or is it just art?

"It's art!" he responded angrily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

@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.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

The Watchtower "discourages" the use of tattoos, as it is left to one's own conscience and decision.

Now that wasn't so difficult actually was it?

3 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

This is from, a fool that just quoted me, being the first to start insulting. You're a silly fool! mate,

I'll overlook the offensive bluster. I know you are capable of an entirely rational response (as in the first quote) when you are in a better frame of mind.

You should try and get a handle on what stresses you out so much 'though. It can't be healthy! Are you holding a grudge or something??

Anyway, take it easy mate!  :)

 

PS. Could you like my comment please. I've just noticed my reputation figure stands at 666 and I don't like liking my own posts!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 6/17/2017 at 3:35 PM, Melinda Mills said:

Make your own decision based on your faith and what you know about the God YOU serve.

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
    • I'm not bothered by being singled out, as you seem to be accustomed to defending and protecting yourselves, but it's a good idea to keep your dog on a leash. Speaking of which, in a different thread, TTH mentioned that it would be great if everyone here shared their life stories. As both of you are the librarians here, I kindly ask you to minimize any signs of intimidation or insincerity. It is you people who need to be "banned" here. However, it is quite evident that you hold a negative influence, which God recognizes, therefore you are banned from your own conscience in His eyes.
    • One issue with historian Flavius Josephus is that he suggests that the Royal Captain of the (Guard) can also be regarded as General Nebuzaradan. A confusion arises from Josephus' account of the captives mentioned in Jeremiah, as he claims that they were taken from Egypt instead of Babylon. Since Nebuchadnezzar was occupied in Rilah, he directed his generals to lay siege to Jerusalem. This could potentially account for the numerous dispatches that Nebuchadnezzar would have sent to the west, but the considerable distance to Borsippa still poses a challenge. As a result, the Babylonians managed to gain control of regions such as Aram (Syria), Ammon, and Moab. The only territories that remained were the coastal cities, where the Egyptians held sway. King Josiah decided to form an alliance with Babylon instead of being under Egyptian rule. So, that part of the territory was covered until King Josiah was defeated.  It's interesting how they started back then in 4129, but still end up with the same conclusion with Zedekiah's Defeat 3522 607 B.C. 3419 607 B.C. even though their AM is different.  
    • In the era of the Bible Students within the Watchtower, there were numerous beginnings. It is essential to bear in mind that each congregation functioned autonomously, granting the Elders the freedom to assert their own assertions and interpretations. Most people embraced the principles that Pastor Russell was trying to convey. You could argue that what you are experiencing now, they also experienced back then. The key difference is that unity was interpreted differently. Back then it had value where today there is none. To address your inquiry, while I cannot recall the exact details, it is believed to have been either 4129 or 4126. Some groups, however, adopted Ussher's 4004. It is worth mentioning that they have now discarded it and revised it to either 3954 or 3958, although I personally find little interest in this matter. I believe I encountered this information in the book titled "The Time is at Hand," though it may also be referenced in their convention report. Regardless, this is part of their compelling study series 3. Please take a moment to review and confirm the date. I am currently focused on Riblah. The Bible Students who firmly believe that Israel is the prophetic sign of Armageddon have made noteworthy adjustments to their chronology. They have included significant dates such as 1947/8 and 1967/8, as well as more recent dates. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that, according to their calculations, 2024 holds immense importance. The ongoing tension of Iran targeting Israel directly from its own territory amplifies the gravity of the situation. If their trajectory continues, the subsequent captivating event will occur in 2029, rather than as previously speculated, in 2034 by some.
  • Members

    • chan

      chan 0

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • BTK59

      BTK59 181

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Many Miles

      Many Miles 703

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Mickelle

      Mickelle 1

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TrueTomHarley

      TrueTomHarley 9,545

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.3k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,679
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.