Thread: Tattoos?
View Single Post
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 04-13-2008, 11:40 AM
TimV's Avatar
TimV TimV is offline.
Puritanboard Junior
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oceano, CA, USA
Posts: 1,677
Thanks: 300
Thanked 426 Times in 275 Posts
Well, not to beat a horse that's either alive or dead, but again for the sake of someone considering doing it,
Quote:
It doesn't matter if it is print or tatto, it states the purpose of the print or tattoo in the text as "for the dead"
I suppose that in some English translations the text could be ambiguous. In others, like the Septuagint it's "and in addition to not cutting yourself for the dead, don't get any tattoos"
Quote:
19:28 And ye shall not make cuttings in your body for a dead body, and ye shall not inscribe on yourselves any marks.
Quote:
modern tattoes are not for the dead, only New Guinea digit removals. Therfore modern tattoes cannot be condemned on the basis of this OT passage
Still, Jews for 3,500 years and Christians for 2000 years have thought that they were condemned. Which of course doesn't make them right, but it does give one pause.
__________________
Tim Vaughan, 48 years old, member Redeemer OPC, Santa Maria CA.