Tattoos

“Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD” (Lev. 19:28).

When I was a kid, about the only people who had tattoos were sailors, bikers, ex-cons, and carnival workers. Tattooed men were somewhat rare. Tattooed women were almost unheard of. Nowadays lots of people, including women, have tattoos. Even some Bible believers get tattoos, in spite of God’s commandment to not get tattoos.

My reason for writing about tattoos is not to scold people who have tattoos. Some of my closest and dearest friends have tattoos. Tattoos do not and will not lessen my love for anyone, whether they are a Bible believer or an unbeliever. I do not judge or shun people who have tattoos. But I do tell them they should not get any more - not because I say so, but because God says so.

The commandment that forbids tattoos is not one of the weightier matters of the law, but it needs to be addressed, because many Bible believers think it is okay for God’s people to get tattoos. As a Bible teacher, I try to teach the whole counsel of God. That includes teaching about things that are not major issues when those things are being neglected by God’s people.

Another reason I am writing about this subject is to show how trying to justify getting tattoos opens the door to justifying far more serious forbidden acts.

Why do some Bible believers think it is okay for God’s people to get tattoos even though God said to not get tattoos? I have heard two explanations offered to try to justify tattoos. Neither of these explanations convinces me that it is okay for disciples of Yeshua/Jesus to get tattoos. Let’s look at the two explanations given by pro-tattoo Christians.

“WE ARE NOT UNDER THE LAW”

One explanation offered by Christians is simple and straightforward: “We are not under the law.”

In the minds of these pro-tattoo Christians, that means we do not need to obey the Old Testament laws that God gave through Moses - except for those Old Testament laws that happen to be repeated in the New Testament writings.

This misguided thinking lays a very flawed foundation for two reasons.

First, in effect it is saying that God is required to repeat Himself before we are obligated to obey Him. This line of reasoning reveals a rebellious child who says to his Father, “I don’t have to obey you unless you tell me at least twice.”

That is not the attitude a child of God should have. If our heavenly Father gives a commandent just one time, His children should obey Him.

Second, this foundation is flawed because it opens up the door to disobey lots of other Old Testament commandments. If a commandment of God can be disobeyed simply because it is not repeated specifically by name in the New Testament writings, then let’s have a séance!

“That’s necromancy, Daniel! We can’t do that!”

Why not? Communicating with the dead is forbidden only in the Old Testament, and we are not under the law. God did not mention necromancy specifically by name in the New Testament writings, so according to this flawed foundation, there would be nothing wrong with Christians practicing necromancy - or cross-dressing, or beastiality, or several other forms of sexual perversion that are listed in Leviticus but not mentioned specifically by name in the New Testament.

It is true that we are not under the law. However, it is of the utmost importance that we understand what that means, and what it does not mean. It does not mean that we are free to disobey God’s commandments without suffering any negative consequences for our disobedience.

I have written articles in the past to explain what it means to not be under the law. Briefly stated, it means we are not under the indictment of the law or under the condemnation of the law.

We are “under” an object only if that object is outside of us and above us. If we believe in Yeshua, God’s Law is neither outside us nor above us. It is inside us, written on the fleshly tablets of our heart. (See Hebrews 8:8ff and 2 Corinthians 3:3.) Through this act of God, we now have an inward desire to obey the Ten Commandments and all the other Torah commandments that are embedded and summarized in the Ten Commandments, just as the Ten Commandments are embedded and summarized in the two greatest commandments to love God and to love our neighbor.

When explaining this in person, I hold a cup of water above my head and declare that I am under the water. Then I drink the water and ask the audience if I am still under the water. I explain that it is impossible for me to be under something if it is inside me. In the same way, the new covenant does not terminate the commandments; it transfers the commandments. The new covenant puts those same commandments inside us, on the fleshly tablets of our heart.

If you want to read more about this topic, see “You Are Not Under the Law” (GOE 9-5), “The Legalist, The Liberal, & The Faithful Disciple” (GOE 10-3), and “What Was Nailed to the Cross?” (GOE 17-1). The first two of these articles are on the GOE website in the Teachings Archives. If you want a photocopy of any of these, send me a SASE with your request, and I will mail you photocopies.

“ONLY TATTOOS ‘FOR THE DEAD’ ARE FORBIDDEN”

Another pro-tattoo argument claims that the only tattoos God forbids are tattoos that are printed as an act of mourning, in memory of the dead, like the pagans did. According to this view, decorative tattoos are permissible, as long as they are not done in memory of a departed loved one.

It is true that the phrase “for the dead” (la-nephesh) is in Leviticus 19:28. However, the structure of the Hebrew text indicates that “for the dead” applies to the cutting of oneself, but not to tattooing oneself. The Hebrew text says:

v’seret/la-nephesh/lo titnu

bi-b’sarchem

u’kh-tovet/ka’ak’a/lo titnu/ba-khem

ani YHWH

and cutting/for the dead/do not do

in your flesh

and writing/marks/do not do/on you

I am YHWH

A close look at the sentence structure shows that this verse contains two separate commandments, and that “for the dead” applies to cutting but not to tattooing. This is the way that Leviticus 19:28 has historically been understood. In The Concise Book of Mitzvoth, which lists all the Torah commandments that can be observed today, not cutting oneself is listed as negative commandment #28, while not tattooing oneself is listed as negative commandment #163, as follows:

“163. It is a negative commandment to inscribe no tattooed marks in one’s flesh as Scripture says, nor shall you tattoo any marking on yourselves (Va-yikra [Lev.] 19:28). It is a tattooed marking when one incises in his flesh and fills the place of the incision with ink or other coloring matter. A person who transgresses this should be given whiplashes. It is in effect everywhere, at every time, for both man and woman” (page 251).

If you are a tattooed follower of Jesus, don’t be alarmed by that mention of whiplashes. We do not administer whiplashes to tattooed brethren at our congregation. That is rabbinic tradition. God did not prescribe any specific penalty for getting tattoos. I cannot prove it, but I suspect that maybe the Lord considers being stuck with tattoos - especially botched ones - for the rest of one’s life is punishment enough.

There is something else the pro-tattoo proponents have not considered in regards to their claim that tattoos are permissible as long as they are not for the dead. If tattoos are permissible as long as they are not for the dead, then cutting oneself is also permissible as long as it is not done for the dead.

If decorative tattooing is permissible, then by this same logic, decorative cutting and scarring of oneself is likewise permissible. Yet most Bible believers would probably disapprove of the idea of a disciple of Jesus cutting and scarring his body or face for the purpose of decoration.

One more thing the pro-tattoo proponents have not considered is this: If tattooing is permissible as long as it is not done for the dead, like the pagans did it, then what other Torah commandments can be disobeyed by this same logic?

“What are you talking about Daniel?”

I am talking about doing acts that God has forbidden, and excusing it by claiming that it is forbidden only if it is performed in the context of pagan idol worship. Acts like homosexual behavior.

“Homosexual behavior? Daniel, surely nobody believes that homosexual acts are forbidden only if they are performed in the context of pagan idol worship! There’s nobody in the world who tries to justify homosexual acts that way, is there?”

Actually, there is. Some years ago I read a column in a liberal Jewish newspaper. The author was a Jewish sodomite. He put forth this very argument to try to justify homosexual acts. He explained that the commandments that forbid various sexual acts in Leviticus chapter 18 are introduced by a warning to not follow the examples of the Egyptians or of the Canaanites, and to not walk in their ordinances. The ordinances of the Egyptians and the Canaanites revolved around their worship of their pagan gods. Therefore the forbidden sexual acts in Leviticus are forbidden only if they are done as an act of worship to a pagan god, the sodomite author said. If a homosexual act is performed to express a man’s love for another man, or a woman’s love for another woman, it is acceptable to God, as long as it is not done to honor a pagan god, the sodomite author explained.

When I read that, I thought to myself, This man has found a very clever way to twist the Scriptures and abolish the plain meaning of the text. This is very powerful deceptive wisdom from below, which is described as “earthly, sensual, devilish” in James 3:15.

Bible believers who are serious about their faith know that homosexual acts are wrong in any context, and not just in the context of pagan rituals. But if pro-tattoo brethren want to justify tattoos by saying that they are forbidden only in the context of pagan rituals, then what will they say to this Jewish sodomite author who says the very same thing about homosexual acts? Will they just tell him that homosexual behavior is a greater sin than getting a tattoo? That’s true, of course. God calls homosexual acts an abomination and prescribed the death penalty for it, while He did not call tattoos an abomination and prescribed no specific penalty for it. But just saying that one forbidden act is more serious than another forbidden act is missing the point. The point is that justifying one forbidden act, by saying it is forbidden only if done in the context of a pagan ritual, opens the door to justifying more serious forbidden acts by saying they are forbidden only if done in the context of a pagan ritual.

SUMMARY

As I stated at the beginning of this article, I am not writing about tattoos to scold or insult tattooed brethren. Some of my closest and dearest friends have tattoos. So if you have tattoos, please understand that your tattoos will not lessen my love for you. I address this subject of tattoos because it is a God-given commandment currently being ignored by many Bible believers. Apparently many preachers are not telling their people what God says about getting tattoos.

This is not one of the weightier matters of the law, but all matters of the law should be addressed when they are being ignored by God’s people. Therefore I felt a need to address it, without neglecting the weightier matters of the law, and to show how trying to justify disobedience of this God-given commandment can lead to justifying disobedience of more serious God-given commandments.

Shalom v’ahavah. Peace and love.

| DB

---

Images by Daniel Botkin. See all Daniel’s art pieces on his art website, DanielBotkin.com.