"To Ink or Not to Ink?"
“To Ink or Not to Ink?”
Many Christians today ask about tattoos and piercings and how or not, these apply to one’s spiritual walk? Many on the political and social conservative ‘right’ decry the advent of a new rebellion running rampant within society as evidenced by the voluminous and multitudinous number of tattooed and pierced bodies within our midst. Religion’s fundamentalist tenants of biblical thought and rendition grasped firmly in hand are unabashedly towed fragrantly to the front lines of the discussion. Regarded as an apostate activity by many, the use and display of these upon the 'body temple’ proponants lends a clamor for automatic denunciation of said offenders. To those in the Christian community contemplating or asking about a first “tat” or inquiring as to new or additional inkings or piercings, it is in the book of Leviticus, always heralded with staunch aplomb by those 'in the know' wherein God prescribes to Moses the laws of sins transgression. It is there they find the quoted passage, “Do not put tattoo marks on yourselves.”(Leviticus 19:28)
As with most of what God has for us as listeners and hearers of His word, this directive has a two-fold meaning and interpretation. First, as creations of God our bodies hold a God given soul connection between us and Him. It is by this conceptual reasoning that our human body is often described or inferred to as ‘a temple.’ The second is more discreet as it refers to God’s desire that we have no idols, which we then place before Him, as the primary desire of our hearts and being. Those things we idolize are often evidenced by our wish to extoll or parade their prominent importance to us and the profound emotional attachments that they may represent to our (inner) being (soul). These types of expressions by the believer become an affront to God by both their exhibition and their aesthetic placement.
It’s important to remember that prior to the renowned monotheism of Abraham, mankind struggled with the natural elements of his world within the framework and illumination of mythological gods and their powers through which he was able to better understand and explain his inherent smallness and weakness in or against their omnipotent presence. By Old Testament standards and perhaps deemed Avant garde of the primitive or spiritually void, any devotionally displayed image which may represent idolatry is thought to therefore further reinforce and relegate God’s presence and existence to a non-preferential status. Without a personal and reciprocal relationship bond with the monotheistic God, it was necessary for man to acknowledge and honor a multitude of providential powers who appeared and were believed to be in control of his uncontrollable world. Resplendent glory to one’s gods was expressed through many visible concrete modeling behaviors, tattooing and piercings being but two examples.
For believers within the Christian faith, as fundamental as the Leviticus directive against tattooing is we also find in the Book of John a codicil in Christ’s own words, which helps us to better comprehend God’s love and acceptance of who we are; tattooed, pierced, or not. Jesus said, “If I had not come and spoken to them they (the hearers of His words) would not be guilty of sin.” (John 15:22) This statement, while not relieving the listener of responsibility allows for forgiveness by the steps of repentance. And in so doing, sets the stage for future redemption by sidestepping past ignorance fueled actions.
Having now heard the words of Christ himself coupled with our declared desire and choice to follow His model of behavior as Spiritual Christians, we are now held truly accountable for our actions. Those transgressions we may commit after hearing our New Testament instructions and teachings of Christ place us in a position to carry any burdens (‘our daily cross’) as the result of our new personal choices. As hearers and listeners of God’s Word we now know more clearly what it is God would have us do. (John 15:22b) for “Now we have no excuses (borne of ignorance) for our sins.”
Prior to hearing Jesus’ statements and becoming observant followers of His examples and teachings, we are often ignorant in the ways on our journey and the pathway back to God the Father. As self-proclaimed followers of Christ any new sinful actions now hold us more accountable than did our previous past actions. (John 15:24; “If I had not done among them what no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin.”) Our prior sinful nature is forgivable; but only if we acknowledge and repent (actually change our new and future actions).
Jesus by His very nature is our example of the difference between our well practiced disobedience and more right(eous) behavior. For the believer of Jesus, he has spoken and shown us by His ways. Having heard and seen the differences, we (should) now know and better understand our own possible responses regarding new behavior questions and situations. The Lord God is more concerned that we have His love and a personal relationship with Him “tattooed upon our hearts” as shown by our new “Christ-like” responses to daily life, than He is to inks or penetrations which might adorne our skin.
Faced with new challenges, questions and decisions resulting in a query of “Should I?” upon hearing Jesus describe the difference between what may have taken place cloaked in the shadows of our past ignorance, versus what we might now do in the light of our changed and present understanding, Jesus sums it up for us this way; “Simply let your Yes be Yes, and your No be No. Anything beyond this comes from the evil one.”
meet my new friend.”
There is a well-known and oft used idiom which says, “A leopard can’t change its spots.”
After listening to both sides of the political aisle exchange banter regarding the ‘now’ all important question of immigration leading up to the 2014 and 2016 elections, one observation becomes clearer. Exactly what will Republican Party devoteés do? How will those currently in elected office and those running for office on right wing conservative platforms appease their extreme conservative base, which they have courted and kowtowed to year after year, in answering questions of immigration, illegal aliens and undocumented workers?
For years Republican members of congress have opposed virtually every immigration measure and policy effort. For years they have attempted every conceivable manner by which to shut down or block border crossings, throw out or deport those here illegally, and withhold or cut any possible funding whenever possible to dismantle support for social safety net programs which might be accessed by or benefit illegal aliens. These efforts have been proffered and accomplished with the express approval and vitriol consent of a Republican Party base made up of (primarily) white constituents. Enforcement actions agains immigrant populations were most often aimed squarely at the uneducated, poverty stricken, and non-white groups. (Those “huddled masses” eloquently referred to in the inscription on the Statue of Liberty, penned by Emma Lazarus in her sonnet ‘The New Colossus’.)
A vociferous and vocal Republican Party, as exhibited by those who recently ran in their election primaries to become the party’s candidate for President, each took painstaking and deliberate efforts to make promises regarding illegal immigrants and undocumented workers. You might recall as each candidate, sans Mr. Huntsman, responded to immigration questions with responses and plans, which more than once aroused hoots and hollers of support in voicing reviled denigration of those who stand in the crosshairs of immigration’s legislative snipers. Among the policy plans proposed were measures which might actually cripple the economic recession further, in order to make immigration unappealing to those wanting or waiting to come to this country, while exacerbating economic hardships to force others to leave voluntarily (self-deportation). Additionally, they supported efforts that persons along the borders should be dealt with harshly and decisively in order to bar further entrance into this country. We were told these types of policy efforts would relieve the continuing burden on the U.S. economy by undocumented workers here illegally.
If responses from the political right over the past few years were a cogent indication of Republican immigration policy plans, it may be difficult to now believe on its face value their neo turn-around stance on immigration. It is obvious that this current embracing of potential new laws regarding immigration reform is merely about getting votes. Both sides, Republicans and Democrats see the writing on the wall. The white majority in this country is fast in decline and it is only a matter of time until people of color are in the majority of America’s political and economic strength.
The Republicans in their inimitable way have dug themselves into an immigration policies hole which is fairly deep. It will be interesting to watch and learn in the months leading up to the next election cycle what proclamations will be touted and how the Republican right will address and answer their split constituencies. On one hand, what will they say and promise to their existing white base about holding a hard line on immigrants, undocumented workers, and illegals? While at the same time attempting to garner ever increasing new non-white voter blocs by making promises in direct opposition to their traditional conservative base prescriptions for immigration?
What will it take to change the appeal of the Republican right on immigration as well as other social issues? My guess it will take a new generation of Republican politicians and elected officials. The days of ‘old white men in power’ is slowly and progressively passing from the America governance landscape. The real question is not how, but how long will this change take? And without real change to centrist or moderate Republican leadership, is the Republican Party destined to become nationally irrelevant? In the interim will its hard-liners fight against all odds, and all comers to hold power? Will the GOP morph into a regional party or evolve into a political splinter group?
The political fire storms leading up to the 2014 and 2016 elections as politicians try to spin out of both sides of their mouths will be if nothing else, telling and entertaining. As adept as lawmakers are at their shell games, only the future will reveal if any of them are prepared to come bearing truths and policies which are good for the people of this country. Which politicians will choose to represent the people’s needs, instead of more self-serving aspirations, or lobbyist legislation at the behest of their moneyed masters; the uber-wealthy, Wall Street, and corporations.
Undoubtedly Republican congressional double-speak on immigration will remain as divisive and coerced as ever until the current generation of GOP right wingers and Tea Party activists fade into the political sunset finally relinquishing their stranglehold on the party of Lincoln. Until then, how will they walk the line between Constitutional guarantees for white, as well as
In the Hawaiian language, "Mana'o" (ma na o) is the word used to describe 'thoughts, ideas, and opinions'.
All works of literature posted herein are copyrighted and may not be used or reproduced in part or in whole, either in print or electronically without written
permission of the author and publisher.
Please be advised that works by Branch Isole are written for adults, containing adult material and language, some of which is sexual in nature. All works are
intended for mature audiences.