The cross is a pagan symbol, therefore not of christian origin, and it doesn't matter whether the tat is a cross, tick or dash, true christians would not need to mark themselves permanently with ink to prove their faith to God or anyone else.
|
The cross is a pagan symbol, therefore not of christian origin, and it doesn't matter whether the tat is a cross, tick or dash, true christians would not need to mark themselves permanently with ink to prove their faith to God or anyone else.
This is the funniest thing I have read all week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moparbyfar
Spread the smiles dwashbur! :D
Look Snippy,Quote:
Originally Posted by snippy07
In the first place I do not think you should ask anybody here or elsewhere whether God will forgive you for committing a sin. Nobody, not even the Church's highest hyerarchies, can anticipate or advance what God may, will or want to do. At the very best, we can imagine that according to God's Commandments we may be punished or rewarded for our acts and behavior over here.
Other than that, is a very high presumption for anyone to affirm that God WILL do or WILL not do that.
As for your tattoo, in my church (Roman Catholic), tatooing is not considered, to the best of my knowledge a sin, but nevertheless, to tattoo your arm with a cross does look like a lack of respect for the cross.
If you wish to carry the symbol of the Cross with you, why don't you buy yourself a chain with a hanging Cross in it, and put it around your nexk? I, for one, wear one.
Gromitt 82
Insofar the symbol of the Cross was already used in ancient Babilon, and that crosses in different shapes and sizes have been used by a number of civilizations, whether in Asian or in Precolombine Mesoamerican cultures, it is correct to consider crosses a pagan symbol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moparbyfar
However, our colleague is not referring to any of said symbols but, clearly, to the Christian symbol of the Cross, where Jesus Christ was crucified.
In this respect, therefore, the Cross is not a pagan symbol, but a Christian one.
On the other hand, I agree with you that we Christians do not need to mark ourselves in any way with crosses or any other symbols. Another primitive Christian sign is a fish (ictus) and I do not think anybody may think of tattooing him/herself with a fish as a symbol of his/her faith.
By the same token, if he/her likes to do it, let him/her do it and be happy about it.
I think it is not worse than the present fad of piercing all parts of the body to hang all kinds of custom jewelry or gimmicks...
Gromitt82
Why?Quote:
Originally Posted by gromitt82
Because, as I said, at least for the Catholic world, it represents the symbol of the redemption of Mankind through the crucifixion of Christ. And I daresay that this is important enough to deserve a certain amount of respect and devotion.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Of course, you can do whatever you want and no Catholics will threaten your life if you choose to tattoo a cross in your arm or elsewhere in your body. Be my guest!
That is one of the differences between Christianity and other religions, as Islam, for one.
We, Catholics can be molested, insulted, provoked and offended without any risk of violent reaction on our side.
To a certain extent, it seems we like to turn the other cheek when someone strikes us...
Gromitt82
Um, if you read the original post, respect and devotion are the whole idea behind getting the tattoo. Yes, it's a symbol of redemption through Christ. So why shouldn't this person wear it proudly on their arm? You have not answered the question. All you've done is show your own prejudice.Quote:
Originally Posted by gromitt82
I think I have! Whether I have shown my own prejudice or not, is simply a matter of opinion. You believe so and I do not.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Muslims and Jews are not allowed to show any identification of God. In fact, Jews cannot even write the name of GOD...
We, Catholics, are too lenient about that. In many protestants churches you want see anything but the naked Cross without Christ.
I think it deserves a respect and in my opinion a taattoo is not the best sample of respect.
Still, if you think the contrary, be my guest!
Gromitt82
My question was, WHY it not respectful? You haven't answered that. "It's just my opinion" is not an answer; I would hope your opinion is based on something more than a whim.Quote:
Originally Posted by gromitt82
Furthermore, you said
This is not expressed as an opinion, but as a statement of fact. I asked why and you retreated into "it's just my opinion." I'm asking the basis of that opinion.Quote:
to tattoo your arm with a cross does look like a lack of respect for the cross.
Granted, you did answer the original question to the effect that the RCC doesn't consider it a sin. Thank you for that.
On a side note, you keep making a big deal of the fact that you're Catholic. I think you'll find that most folks here couldn't care less. I for one don't care if you're Catholic, Lutheran, Metho-Presy-Bapti-Cost, or Joe's Church and Vacuum Cleaner Repair. The question remains the same: why do you consider a cross tattoo on the arm disrespectful? Doesn't it all come down to the attitude and motivation of the wearer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
OK, since you seem to like arguing, let’s argue.
It is a sheer waste of time but, at least, I will practice my English, which I cannot do as often as I do with other languages.
In the first place, I am not making a big deal of my faith. I have just stated I belong to the RCC for when I participate in a forum where there may be other colleagues belonging to all kind of Christian denominations, I may as well be precise about mine.
It seems to me, however, that it is you WHO MAKE A BIG DEAL OF THE FACT THAT YOU ARE AN ATHEIST, by the way you point out (most inconsiderately I would add), that you could not care less about a number of Christian denominations, including Joe’s Church and Vacuum Cleaner Repair.
In my opinion, this attitude tends to show:
a) Your educational level leaves a lot to be desired
b) You are probably an atheist
c) If not, you must be a Muslim
d) In both cases, I wonder what you are doing in a Christian forum like this.
Continuing with the argument of the tattoo, I will only add that I consider it disrespectful for exactly the same reason that I would consider disrespectful to tattoo in any part of my body a picture of my mother.
It is just a matter of good taste and respect as far as I am concerned.
Obviously, you do not share this opinion.
For me respect, reflects an attitude of deference, admiration or esteem and this stance forces me to reject the tattoo of a Cross or my mother’s picture, in my arm.
On the other hand, in good taste, for me, implies the acceptance of generally esthetic standards in manners and conduct.
I know you may find it difficult to understand this reasoning, as unfortunately, in modern times, both respect and good manners and taste have been degraded to great extent.
But I belong in the group of “folks” who were brought up and educated in a different way to what seems to be in fashion now-a-days.
Cordially,
Gromitt82
Asking a legitimate question about the basis of your preference constitutes liking to argue. Oooookay.Quote:
Originally Posted by gromitt82
You mentioned it no less than five times in three posts. If that's not making a big deal of your Catholicism, I don't want to know what is.Quote:
In the first place, I am not making a big deal of my faith. I have just stated I belong to the RCC for when I participate in a forum where there may be other colleagues belonging to all kind of Christian denominations, I may as well be precise about mine.
Wow. Just... wow.Quote:
It seems to me, however, that it is you WHO MAKE A BIG DEAL OF THE FACT THAT YOU ARE AN ATHEIST,
Okay, let me spell this out for you:Quote:
by the way you point out (most inconsiderately I would add), that you could not care less about a number of Christian denominations, including Joe’s Church and Vacuum Cleaner Repair.
J O K E
It's called pushing something to its ultimate absurdity for the sake of humor. If you don't get that, it's not my fault. I find it astonishing that cracking a dumb joke makes me an atheist. I could squawk to the moderators about such blatant abuse, but I choose to laugh instead.
Go read my profile before you make such ludicrous accusations.Quote:
In my opinion, this attitude tends to show:
a) Your educational level leaves a lot to be desired
b) You are probably an atheist
c) If not, you must be a Muslim
d) In both cases, I wonder what you are doing in a Christian forum like this.
Then you must have a pretty low opinion of your mother. I know plenty of people who have done just that as a way to honor and remember their mothers. You are telling them all, with a handful of keystrokes, that their tributes to their mothers are actually disrespectful. Why don't you go spit in their faces while you're at it? If you don't want to do it, fine. But your attitude says you pass judgment on everybody else based on your own narrow-minded opinion. You do not have the right to do that, because you don't know what you're talking about.Quote:
Continuing with the argument of the tattoo, I will only add that I consider it disrespectful for exactly the same reason that I would consider disrespectful to tattoo in any part of my body a picture of my mother.
I agree that good taste and respect are good things. I do not agree that your opinion is the baseline against which all such matters are to be judged. Earlier you suggested wearing a cross around someone's neck. There is no qualitative difference between that and having a picture of a cross on one's arm. It's displaying an image of a cross. Once again, you are displaying your own baseless prejudice, nothing more.Quote:
It is just a matter of good taste and respect as far as I am concerned.
Obviously, you do not share this opinion.
For you, that's fine. But you do not have the right to judge anyone else's attitude toward the cross or the Lord who died on it based on your own knee-jerk opinion. For that matter, you do not have the right to judge my friend who has a picture of his dead mother on his arm. It's a mark of very high respect to be willing to place such an image where it can always be seen and the person or event can always be brought to mind. If you don't want to do it, then don't. But don't tell someone else they're being disrespectful, because you have no idea what's in their heart. You don't even have an idea what's in my easily-accessible profile, which is why you keep making such wrong-headed comments.Quote:
For me respect, reflects an attitude of deference, admiration or esteem and this stance forces me to reject the tattoo of a Cross or my mother’s picture, in my arm.
"generally esthetic" is a meaningless phrase. If you mean, generally-accepted standards of good taste and conduct, then you're the one who's wrong, because attitudes toward things like tattoos have changed drastically. The generally-accepted view is much more lenient and accepting than yours is, so you are the one who's out of touch with the accepted norms.Quote:
On the other hand, in good taste, for me, implies the acceptance of generally esthetic standards in manners and conduct.
I would be very interested to know how old you think I am. How you or I was brought up has nothing to do with it. What counts is who we are now and how we relate to the world around us. That seems to be something you're not very good at, at least if the above comments about me are any indication.Quote:
I know you may find it difficult to understand this reasoning, as unfortunately, in modern times, both respect and good manners and taste have been degraded to great extent.
But I belong in the group of “folks” who were brought up and educated in a different way to what seems to be in fashion now-a-days.
http://camerafraud.files.wordpress.c...-it-wrong2.jpg
My dear and angry friend,
Let us go on with our interesting debate:
“Asking a legitimate question about the basis of your preference constitutes liking to argue. Oooookay.”
To avoid unnecessary discussions, I shall simply copy forwith the Dictionary Thesaurus definition of “to argue”
v.tr.
1. To put forth reasons for or against; debate: "It is time to stop arguing tax-rate reductions and to enact them" (Paul Craig Roberts).
2. To attempt to prove by reasoning; maintain or contend: The speaker argued that more immigrants should be admitted to the country.
3. To give evidence of; indicate: "Similarities cannot always be used to argue descent" (Isaac Asimov).
4. To persuade or influence (another), as by presenting reasons: argued the clerk into lowering the price.
v.intr.
1. To put forth reasons for or against something: argued for dismissal of the case; argued against an immediate counterattack.
2. To engage in a quarrel; dispute.
No further comments needed.
No supplementary clarification re. my Catholicism, which you seem so much to resent...
“I find it astonishing that cracking a dumb joke makes me an atheist. I could squawk to the moderators about such blatant abuse, but I choose to laugh instead”
When someone says he couldn't care less about Catholicism and a other Christian denominations, as you did in your past answer the other day, I think it is legitimate to wonder what kind of faith that person has, if any! On the other hand, “cracking a dumb joke about ANY religion” is not only a lack of respect for that religion, whichever, but also an abuse. Yet, I will follow your example and I will laugh instead, for laughing is very healthy.
Go read my profile before you make such ludicrous accusations
As a matter of principle, I do not read the profiles appearing in this type of forums or other social networks. I have been able to determine that some people just write down a number of assets which are only intended to satisfy their ego and impress others, which, of course, I am not saying it is your case…
On the other hand, saying that someone may be an Atheist or a Muslim is not ludicrously accusing him/her of anything, but just pointing out a possibility which, in my opinion, may be as insulting as if you would accuse me of being a Catholic. Alternatively, if you are a Christian, I do not understand how you dare “crack dumb jokes” regarding Catholics and pretend they are just for kicks…!
Then you must have a pretty low opinion of your mother. I know plenty of people who have done just that as a way to honor and remember their mothers. You are telling them all, with a handful of keystrokes, that their tributes to their mothers are actually disrespectful. Why don't you go spit in their faces while you're at it? If you don't want to do it, fine. But your attitude says you pass judgment on everybody else based on your own narrow-minded opinion. You do not have the right to do that, because you don't know what you're talking about.
Here again you distort what I am saying, and you do it purposely, to try to put in my lips words I have not said. In English, this is also called slandering, but perhaps you are unacquainted with the word and its implications. I am not denying the right your many friends or acquaintances have to tattoo crosses, pictures of their mothers or whatever they want to tattoo on their bodies. They are perfectly entitled to do that if they so wish. There are many persons too who are in favor of homosexual marriages (New York have recently approved a law in this respect) and there are thousands, all over the world, that proclaim their pro-abortion attitude. But it does not follow that I have to agree with them or that I cannot express what I think of these people.
I do not agree with either of them as I do not agree with the kind of tattoos we are talking about. I think I clearly say that “it is just a matter of good taste and respect as far as I am concerned” and I am as allowed to say so as you are to say the contrary.
I think that you, out of a certain amount of conceit, also tend to pretend that your opinion is the right one while other points of view are definitely wrong. When you say that “There is no qualitative difference between wearing a cross around someone's neck. And having a picture of a cross on one's arm.” You should add something like “in my opinion”, otherwise, you are asserting that only what you say is right…
But you do not have the right to judge anyone else's attitude toward the cross or the Lord who died on it based on your own knee-jerk opinion. For that matter, you do not have the right to judge my friend who has a picture of his dead mother on his arm.
I repeat I am not judging anyone else's attitude towards the cross or anything else, for what matters.
I think, using your own line, that this certainly is your “knee-jerk” opinion.
I said before I do not agree with either abortation or homosexual marriages. Unfortunately, both are legal in my country and in many States of yours. But I still say, along with thousands of others all over the world, that I DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS FASHION. However, I DO NOT JUDGE THOSE WHO ARE IN FAVOR. There will be Someone Else Who will, eventually, judge them all right! SO why should I?
Nevertheless, you seem to believe you are entitled to not only judge my opinions but to transform them into value judgements I have never expressed. Slightly unfair, is not it?
BTW, I do not see why you have so much interest in boasting about your “easily-accesible profile”. Using the same words you used the other day, I could not care less. I'm 85 years, doctorate in Economics (emeritus) by the Sorbonne, in Paris; AB in Humanities and Theology, by the Eberhard Karls University, in Tübingen (Baden-Würtemberg), plus some other minor degrees that do not matter now. Can communicate in 6 languages, but I do not think it necessary to advertise it anywhere, like others obviously like to do.
“generally esthetic" is a meaningless phrase. If you mean, generally-accepted standards of good taste and conduct, then you're the one who's wrong, because attitudes toward things like tattoos have changed drastically. The generally-accepted view is much more lenient and accepting than yours is, so you are the one who's out of touch with the accepted norms.
If you think that “generally esthetic” is a meaningless phrase, I salute you for your English knowledge while advising you to contact the Merriam Webster directors because the definition is theirs. As for your statements that it is I who is wrong “, …because attitudes toward things like tattoos have changed drastically…” I am afraid you are a little bit too optimistic.
We are a bit more than 6 billion people in this beautiful world of ours and I have considerable doubts that the majority of this population has changed “drastically” their attitudes towards tattooing… I think you are somewhat influenced by the Hollywood series LA Ink…
I would be very interested to know how old you think I am. How you or I was brought up has nothing to do with it. What counts is who we are now and how we relate to the world around us. That seems to be something you're not very good at, at least if the above comments about me are any indication.
Last but not least, I do not know how old you are, though I have the feeling you are younger than I am, which is not difficult, bearing in mind my age and your apparent intolerance.
We old people are rather tolerant with our neighbors.
Furthermore, and contrary to what you opinate, how we have been brought up has a lot to do with what we may be now. Who we are now, depends to a large extent, upon the education we have received and upon our family background.
Reputed educational psychologists, such as the Swiss Jean William Fritz Piaget, has sustained and his colleagues still do, more than ever, “that most people understand and accept the fundamental role education plays in supporting our growth, conditioning our adult behavior and controlling our regeneration as a nation”
Cordially yours,
Gromitt 82
Quoting Dwashbur
My dear and angry friend,
Let us go on with our interesting debate:
“Asking a legitimate question about the basis of your preference constitutes liking to argue. Oooookay.”
To avoid unnecessary discussions, I shall simply copy forwith the Dictionary Thesaurus definition of “to argue”
v.tr.
1. To put forth reasons for or against; debate: "It is time to stop arguing tax-rate reductions and to enact them" (Paul Craig Roberts).
2. To attempt to prove by reasoning; maintain or contend: The speaker argued that more immigrants should be admitted to the country.
3. To give evidence of; indicate: "Similarities cannot always be used to argue descent" (Isaac Asimov).
4. To persuade or influence (another), as by presenting reasons: argued the clerk into lowering the price.
v.intr.
1. To put forth reasons for or against something: argued for dismissal of the case; argued against an immediate counterattack.
2. To engage in a quarrel; dispute.
No further comments needed.
No supplementary clarification re. my Catholicism, which you seem so much to resent...
“I find it astonishing that cracking a dumb joke makes me an atheist. I could squawk to the moderators about such blatant abuse, but I choose to laugh instead”
When someone says he couldn't care less about Catholicism and a other Christian denominations, as you did in your past answer the other day, I think it is legitimate to wonder what kind of faith that person has, if any! On the other hand, “cracking a dumb joke about ANY religion” is not only a lack of respect for that religion, whichever, but also an abuse. Yet, I will follow your example and I will laugh instead, for laughing is very healthy.
Go read my profile before you make such ludicrous accusations
As a matter of principle, I do not read the profiles appearing in this type of forums or other social networks. I have been able to determine that some people just write down a number of assets which are only intended to satisfy their ego and impress others, which, of course, I am not saying it is your case…
On the other hand, saying that someone may be an Atheist or a Muslim is not ludicrously accusing him/her of anything, but just pointing out a possibility which, in my opinion, may be as insulting as if you would accuse me of being a Catholic. Alternatively, if you are a Christian, I do not understand how you dare “crack dumb jokes” regarding Catholics and pretend they are just for kicks…!
Then you must have a pretty low opinion of your mother. I know plenty of people who have done just that as a way to honor and remember their mothers. You are telling them all, with a handful of keystrokes, that their tributes to their mothers are actually disrespectful. Why don't you go spit in their faces while you're at it? If you don't want to do it, fine. But your attitude says you pass judgment on everybody else based on your own narrow-minded opinion. You do not have the right to do that, because you don't know what you're talking about.
Here again you distort what I am saying, and you do it purposely, to try to put in my lips words I have not said. In English, this is also called slandering, but perhaps you are unacquainted with the word and its implications. I am not denying the right your many friends or acquaintances have to tattoo crosses, pictures of their mothers or whatever they want to tattoo on their bodies. They are perfectly entitled to do that if they so wish. There are many persons too who are in favor of homosexual marriages (New York have recently approved a law in this respect) and there are thousands, all over the world, that proclaim their pro-abortion attitude. But it does not follow that I have to agree with them or that I cannot express what I think of these people.
I do not agree with either of them as I do not agree with the kind of tattoos we are talking about. I think I clearly say that “it is just a matter of good taste and respect as far as I am concerned” and I am as allowed to say so as you are to say the contrary.
I think that you, out of a certain amount of conceit, also tend to pretend that your opinion is the right one while other points of view are definitely wrong. When you say that “There is no qualitative difference between wearing a cross around someone's neck. And having a picture of a cross on one's arm.” You should add something like “in my opinion”, otherwise, you are asserting that only what you say is right…
But you do not have the right to judge anyone else's attitude toward the cross or the Lord who died on it based on your own knee-jerk opinion. For that matter, you do not have the right to judge my friend who has a picture of his dead mother on his arm.
I repeat I am not judging anyone else's attitude towards the cross or anything else, for what matters.
I think, using your own line, that this certainly is your “knee-jerk” opinion.
I said before I do not agree with either abortation or homosexual marriages. Unfortunately, both are legal in my country and in many States of yours. But I still say, along with thousands of others all over the world, that I DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS FASHION. However, I DO NOT JUDGE THOSE WHO ARE IN FAVOR. There will be Someone Else Who will, eventually, judge them all right! SO why should I?
Nevertheless, you seem to believe you are entitled to not only judge my opinions but to transform them into value judgements I have never expressed. Slightly unfair, is not it?
BTW, I do not see why you have so much interest in boasting about your “easily-accesible profile”. Using the same words you used the other day, I could not care less. I'm 85 years, doctorate in Economics (emeritus) by the Sorbonne, in Paris; AB in Humanities and Theology, by the Eberhard Karls University, in Tübingen (Baden-Würtemberg), plus some other minor degrees that do not matter now. Can communicate in 6 languages, but I do not think it necessary to advertise it anywhere, like others obviously like to do.
“generally esthetic" is a meaningless phrase. If you mean, generally-accepted standards of good taste and conduct, then you're the one who's wrong, because attitudes toward things like tattoos have changed drastically. The generally-accepted view is much more lenient and accepting than yours is, so you are the one who's out of touch with the accepted norms.
If you think that “generally esthetic” is a meaningless phrase, I salute you for your English knowledge while advising you to contact the Merriam Webster directors because the definition is theirs. As for your statements that it is I who is wrong “, …because attitudes toward things like tattoos have changed drastically…” I am afraid you are a little bit too optimistic.
We are a bit more than 6 billion people in this beautiful world of ours and I have considerable doubts that the majority of this population has changed “drastically” their attitudes towards tattooing… I think you are somewhat influenced by the Hollywood series LA Ink…
I would be very interested to know how old you think I am. How you or I was brought up has nothing to do with it. What counts is who we are now and how we relate to the world around us. That seems to be something you're not very good at, at least if the above comments about me are any indication.
Last but not least, I do not know how old you are, though I have the feeling you are younger than I am, which is not difficult, bearing in mind my age and your apparent intolerance.
We old people are rather tolerant with our neighbors.
Furthermore, and contrary to what you opinate, how we have been brought up has a lot to do with what we may be now. Who we are now, depends to a large extent, upon the education we have received and upon our family background.
Reputed educational psychologists, such as the Swiss Jean William Fritz Piaget, has sustained and his colleagues still do, more than ever, “that most people understand and accept the fundamental role education plays in supporting our growth, conditioning our adult behavior and controlling our regeneration as a nation”
Cordially yours,
Gromitt 82
I don't know where you get the notion that I'm angry. I'm amused.Quote:
Originally Posted by gromitt82
Nice waste of bandwidth. You know what I meant. And your comments implied "argue" in a negative sense. Quit dodging the ramifications of your own words.Quote:
Let us go on with our interesting debate:
“Asking a legitimate question about the basis of your preference constitutes liking to argue. Oooookay.”
To avoid unnecessary discussions, I shall simply copy forwith the Dictionary Thesaurus definition of “to argue”
[snip]
The arrogance of this statement defies description. Some of the best jokes I know about Catholicism come from my Catholic friends. It's a shame you can't enjoy your faith in such a way; you must be a very unhappy person.Quote:
“I find it astonishing that cracking a dumb joke makes me an atheist. I could squawk to the moderators about such blatant abuse, but I choose to laugh instead”
When someone says he couldn't care less about Catholicism and a other Christian denominations, as you did in your past answer the other day, I think it is legitimate to wonder what kind of faith that person has, if any!
Considering that the above makes no sense at all, I won't bother trying to comment.Quote:
On the other hand, “cracking a dumb joke about ANY religion” is not only a lack of respect for that religion, whichever, but also an abuse. Yet, I will follow your example and I will laugh instead, for laughing is very healthy.
Do you have any idea what you just said? "I don't bother finding out about people because they're going to lie anyway, so I just draw my own assumptions based on..." apparently, nothing. Are you for real?Quote:
Go read my profile before you make such ludicrous accusations
As a matter of principle, I do not read the profiles appearing in this type of forums or other social networks. I have been able to determine that some people just write down a number of assets which are only intended to satisfy their ego and impress others, which, of course, I am not saying it is your case…
You are still making no sense. It's all right for you to accuse me of being an atheist or a Muslim because you don't like the fact that I use humor to get my point across; but it's wrong for me to call you a Catholic even though you referred to yourself that way five times in three posts? I have no idea what you just said, and I seriously doubt whether you do, either.Quote:
On the other hand, saying that someone may be an Atheist or a Muslim is not ludicrously accusing him/her of anything, but just pointing out a possibility which, in my opinion, may be as insulting as if you would accuse me of being a Catholic. Alternatively, if you are a Christian, I do not understand how you dare “crack dumb jokes” regarding Catholics and pretend they are just for kicks…!
You're the one slandering people, because you set yourself up in judgment over them and their motives. But I've noticed a lot of projection going on in your posts; maybe you should look that word up in a psychology book.Quote:
Then you must have a pretty low opinion of your mother. I know plenty of people who have done just that as a way to honor and remember their mothers. You are telling them all, with a handful of keystrokes, that their tributes to their mothers are actually disrespectful. Why don't you go spit in their faces while you're at it? If you don't want to do it, fine. But your attitude says you pass judgment on everybody else based on your own narrow-minded opinion. You do not have the right to do that, because you don't know what you're talking about.
Here again you distort what I am saying, and you do it purposely, to try to put in my lips words I have not said. In English, this is also called slandering, but perhaps you are unacquainted with the word and its implications.
You don't deny their right, but you do declare them to have no taste or respect. No matter how much you try to polish it, that's what you're saying. You are saying "My opinion is the baseline against which all good taste and respect are to be judged, and these people have been found lacking."Quote:
I am not denying the right your many friends or acquaintances have to tattoo crosses, pictures of their mothers or whatever they want to tattoo on their bodies. They are perfectly entitled to do that if they so wish. There are many persons too who are in favor of homosexual marriages (New York have recently approved a law in this respect) and there are thousands, all over the world, that proclaim their pro-abortion attitude. But it does not follow that I have to agree with them or that I cannot express what I think of these people.
I do not agree with either of them as I do not agree with the kind of tattoos we are talking about. I think I clearly say that “it is just a matter of good taste and respect as far as I am concerned” and I am as allowed to say so as you are to say the contrary.
There's that projection again. Either one is displaying a cross. You have not shown otherwise. Unless you can do so, I will accept your apology and your admission that you were wrong.Quote:
I think that you, out of a certain amount of conceit, also tend to pretend that your opinion is the right one while other points of view are definitely wrong. When you say that “There is no qualitative difference between wearing a cross around someone's neck. And having a picture of a cross on one's arm.” You should add something like “in my opinion”, otherwise, you are asserting that only what you say is right…
Declaring their use of a tattoo of the cross to be in bad taste and disrespectful isn't judging. Uh-huh. Get your dictionary out again. That's exactly what it is.Quote:
But you do not have the right to judge anyone else's attitude toward the cross or the Lord who died on it based on your own knee-jerk opinion. For that matter, you do not have the right to judge my friend who has a picture of his dead mother on his arm.
I repeat I am not judging anyone else's attitude towards the cross or anything else, for what matters.
You just equated your opinion with God's. You also equated getting a tattoo of the Cross with abortion and homosexual marriages. But you're not judging. Oh, sure.Quote:
I think, using your own line, that this certainly is your “knee-jerk” opinion.
I said before I do not agree with either abortation or homosexual marriages. Unfortunately, both are legal in my country and in many States of yours. But I still say, along with thousands of others all over the world, that I DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS FASHION. However, I DO NOT JUDGE THOSE WHO ARE IN FAVOR. There will be Someone Else Who will, eventually, judge them all right! SO why should I?
Nevertheless, you seem to believe you are entitled to not only judge my opinions but to transform them into value judgements I have never expressed. Slightly unfair, is not it?
I can see why you don't talk about those things in a Christianity forum, because for discussing Christianity they have no bearing. My degrees do. I told you to check my profile because you attacked my beliefs, my education, and my age, while knowing nothing at all about me. I suggested that you find out something about me before you make such accusations. Apparently, asking you to understand what you're talking about constitutes "boasting." So be it. I'm boasting: understand what you're talking about before you attempt to abuse me any further.Quote:
BTW, I do not see why you have so much interest in boasting about your “easily-accesible profile”. Using the same words you used the other day, I could not care less. I'm 85 years, doctorate in Economics (emeritus) by the Sorbonne, in Paris; AB in Humanities and Theology, by the Eberhard Karls University, in Tübingen (Baden-Würtemberg), plus some other minor degrees that do not matter now. Can communicate in 6 languages, but I do not think it necessary to advertise it anywhere, like others obviously like to do.
[snip]
Once again, you spout off without knowledge. I know nothing at all about the "Hollywood series" you mention, because I don't watch television. Again, I suggest you understand what you're talking about before you say something.Quote:
I think you are somewhat influenced by the Hollywood series LA Ink…
Surely you jest. You're the one being intolerant of current attitudes toward tattoing. Again I suggest you look up the psychological meaning of "projection."Quote:
I would be very interested to know how old you think I am. How you or I was brought up has nothing to do with it. What counts is who we are now and how we relate to the world around us. That seems to be something you're not very good at, at least if the above comments about me are any indication.
Last but not least, I do not know how old you are, though I have the feeling you are younger than I am, which is not difficult, bearing in mind my age and your apparent intolerance.
We old people are rather tolerant with our neighbors.
"opinate"??Quote:
Furthermore, and contrary to what you opinate,
This is getting nowhere. Feel free to have the last word; I'm sure it will be reasonably incomprehensible.
To Grommit and DW -
I've now spent 20-30 precious minutes of my life reading the stuff each of you has posted.
Clearly, there's a bit of a language problem here, but, more importantly, you happen to be two of the best posters on this board.
It's interesting to follow how something as insignificant and basically silly as a tattoo can lead to such flame - even among co-religionists, (Christian).
From one who has often been a point of controversy here, I hope the two of you can just stop arguing, shake hands, and find those important areas where you agree.
You each bring a lot to the table and the thoughtful ones here are the better for your contributions.
Athos,
Thanks for the kind words. I've already stated my intention to bow out of that particular discussion with grommit. It's clearly getting off the actual topic.
Annnnnyway...
Is a cross tattoo a sin? I don't think so...
People wear cross'es as jewellery don't they? A lot of christains wear cross necklaces as a symbol they are christian. People wear tattoo as a symbol. I know a guy in my church that has a cross on this forearm and I've seen it several times - no one has said anything to him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
• Συγχαρητήρια
My dear DLW,
First of all, let me tell you I have finally consulted your profile and I have been very pleasantly surprised by your credentials.
In the first place, I salute in you a linguistic scholar, as I think I am too, but, in your case, of a much higher level. While there are thousands that speak and/or are fluent in some modern languages, as I may be, I do not think there are so many who are conversant in Biblical languages as Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic, as you are!
Holy mackerel!
As you no doubt know, in the cloister of the Church of the Pater Noster, in the Mount of Olives, in Jerusalem, the Lord’s Prayer appears written in some 60 languages, amongst them, in the original Aramaic Jesus used with his disciples.
Each time I have gone to Israel I have bemoaned that I could not read the Lord’s Prayer in either one of the 3 Biblical languages appearing there… especially, in Aramaic.
As a lover of languages, I must say I envy you with all my heart for this rather extraordinary feat. Now I can understand why you can surely boast of belonging into a very rare category of people.
One of my best friends –Mosen Deig, former bishop of Solsona- who died some 7 years ago, could read Aramaic –although he was not an expert- and he had always told me it was a beautiful language.
It had to be. It was chosen by Jesus…!
I was helping my friend, to the best of my possibilities -which are not many- in his arduous task of translating into Catalan, Saint Thomas Aquinas’ “Summa Theologica”.
A pity, we could not finish that challenge because of his premature death…!
But stop my being carried away by divagations nobody is interested in…
What I wanted to tell you is how pleased I am to see that we are both on the same boat, i.e. we are both Christians… Not only, you are undoubtedly a better one than I am (not difficult, anyway), for, at least, you are a learned person who is spending his life by digging into the origins of our Religion, which is a most praiseworthy mission.
Consequently, as of now, I quit our previous debate which no longer interests me.
I am sure you will agree with me that it is a sheer waste of time for us to get involved into some silly question like “tattooing”… when we both have other better things to do!
You have your ideas about tattoos and I have mine. And that is it!
Besides, It may well be that I am all wet, for I happen to be wrong more often than not. II do not care admitting it, though.
Man was created imperfect, and I am a good instance of that…
On the other hand, as I said before, I am sure you have much better things to do than going on with our meaningless quarrel.
As far as I am concerned, and if nothing else, I must pay attention to another job where I am involved since a few years ago.
The “Romanitische Abteilung” of the German Fribourg University, has been working on a project which investigates the origins of the Catalan and Spanish languages. As you know, both are Romanesque languages with a common denominator, i.e. their Latin origin. The point lies, however, in determining whether Catalan influenced old Spanish (Castillian), way back in the 9th Century or if it was the other way round. I am helping from the Catalan side, this language being my mother language. This has no consequential significance except for some Catalan politicians. Thus, why some of us are keen on trying to prove whether this is true or not.
Consequently, and not wanting any more discussions over inconsequential matters, I present you my sincere apologies for whatever disturbance I may have caused you.
Best regards, and as I have tried to write you at the beginning in my almost non existing Greek, Congratulations!
Gromitt82
Dear Athos (are you a relative of Aramis or Portos?)Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Thank you for your fine piece of wisdom! It is obvious to me now I have let myself being involved into a silly debate as you point out. However, one of my many faults, defects or flaws is that I tend to dislike being defeated in any intellectual debate of sorts.
However, the danger of further debating on this subject is gone. Common sense -which happens to be less common than most people think- has come back aided by the fact I have been able to trace down some of the credentials my previous opponent has.
With the result I have sent him a thread which you may see, if you wish, right here.
I am sorry for the valuable minutes you have lost trying to understand how 2 perfectly normal people have been able to waste so much time on something "silly" as tattoos!
Gromitt82
Χαίρε, αδελφέQuote:
Originally Posted by gromitt82
(greetings, brother!)
I agree we're both Christians, but don't bet the farm on that last part!Quote:
we are both Christians… Not only, you are undoubtedly a better one than I am
Yes, my "Athos" refers to the 3 Musketeers. Some time ago, one of the more erudite members here thought it referred to Mt. Athos - the peninsula jutting out into the Aegean Sea and inhabited by Orthodox monks.Quote:
Originally Posted by gromitt82
A good friend of mine who was a Trappist monk, Basil Pennington - now deceased - spent a year on Mt. Athos and wrote an interesting book about his experience.
As an educated European from Spain, you may be aware of Basil who was translated into many languages. If not, Mt. Athos would not be unfamiliar to you.
I note that Catalan is your original language. Thomas Merton was born in a Catalan-speaking area of France just north of the Pyrenees.
I hope that you will continue to post here from time to time. Like many internet boards, intelligence is a prized, sometimes rare, commodity.
I trust that you and Dwashbur, another excellent contributor here, will not now flame on who is the most humble. :)
Σας ευχαριστώ πολύ, Dave,Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
What matters, I think, is that we are both on the same boat and even it may have different decks or stateroom classes, we are ALL hoping to arrive one day to the same Harbor
It is undoubtedly there where our many questions will at last be answered and where we should ALL be speaking the same language, hopefully Aramaic!
Regards
Claude
PS: How do you write "thank you very much" in Aramaic?
Well, probably said member was more knowledgeable in Geography than in Literature. I am sure that in Spain, most of those who know the names of the 3 Musketeers (who, as you know, were actually 4) is because they have seen the movie where Gene Kelly was playing the role of D’Artagnan, but few have actually read the splendid novel of Alexandre Dumas, Sr. and its sequels: “twenty years after” and “the Vicomte of Bragelonne”.Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
As for Mt. Athos, or the “Holy Mountain”, as many Greeks like to commonly refer to it, unfortunately I have never been there, even though I have been close to it, on my way to Thessaloniki (the administrative capital of Macedonia and Thrace). Problem is that I was always on business and could not spare the time to visit some of the monasteries.
I have always been very interested in the Orthodox branch of Christianity. I hope the Pope will not read this but I would say that a little bit more true “ecumenism “on our side would not hurt anybody and would most probably please our “Big Boss”…
But, alas! The high dignitaries of our RC Church are not necessarily exempt of a fair amount of arrogance…!
My wife’s cousin, the Archbishop of Tarragona, Dr. Joseph Pont I Gol (1907-1995) gave me a little book written by Dom. Basil Pennington, titled “Daily we follow Him: Learning Discipleship from Peter” and advised me to read it, which I have not yet. Not only, I am ashamed to say, that a few years ago, at a Book Fair, in Barcelona, a bought another book by him “La oración centrante” (Centering Prayer), which is sleeping, next to the other, somewhere in my library. It is a shame to see the amount of books I have I will never read because my eyes are getting more tired, every year!
When I was “young and handsome” I had to travel all over the world to earn a living, so I read mostly on planes and in hotel rooms. I kept buying books, though, for I always thought that a good book is a “man’s most loyal friend”.
Spare time was, obviously, devoted to my wife and sons, whom I could not see as much as I wanted. When I retired, I started to devour books but then I became involved in other tasks such as helping another bishop, friend of mine, to translate St. Thomas Aquinas, or investigating the origin of my language. So, here I am, losing sight but still surrounded by hundreds of loyal friends… and by my wife, the same one, after 61 years of happy marriage.
Re. rapist monk Thomas Merton I became acquainted with his well gained reputation, during our yearly visits to Prades, where he was born.
In the mid fifties, while General Franco was ruling in Spain, one of the world’s most famous cellists, Pau Casals, was an ardent supporter of the Republican government in the exile. Casals had vowed never to return to Spain until our democracy could not be restored. So he settled in the town of Prades (Prada de Conflent, in French) because if was so close to the Catalonia he loved, and because he, like many Catalans supporters of its utopian independence, Prades is also part of North Catalonia, which stretches all over the Roussillon (Dept. of Pyrenees Orientales).
During the month of August, Casals used to organize periodical concerts in Prades, which were attended by thousands (us, for instance) and were a true joy to listen to (especially, when he played J.S.Bach)...
And this is why I became acquainted with Fr. Thomas Merton.
I may only add, that since Casals passed away in Puerto Rico (his mother was a Portoricain) almost every year, in summer time, Prades celebrates the Pau Casals festival, which, reputed cellists like Matislaw Rostropovich (1927-2007), use to also attend.
Prades is a beautiful part of the French side of the Pyrenees, close to another interesting little town, the mysterious Rennes-le-Chateau, whose history I may refer some other time to.
Best regards
Gromitt82
I suppose we could start such a banter, just to irritate you :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Athos
I don't think it is a sin I think it is a sin to damage your vody and get other things but to repersent your religion is a different thing
Lord have Mercy on our souls
Jesus Christ was crucified and the Crucifixion was a tool used thousands of years so I am not sure why is the cross a simple to Christianity unless we believe in King Constantine’s dream more than three hundred years on the Crucifixion, however; it is not the question
If you a human like us, then we all are sinner, after all, we just humans. Now; a tattoo today is a sign of culture in some places and not necessary a bad thing and even when God asked the Jews not to mark themselves at the time of the killings which God send his angels to do on his behalf; he asked them to mark their houses with blood (a Scurfy). Now I am not sure why something beautiful like that could be a sin when it do not harm your body which is the reason why it was not a likely thing back in the time, because today there is since and medical treatments so no longer tattoos hurt our bodies. I would understand it back then where people were hurt when did that and infection and even maybe death happen, but today? No!
A tattoo of a cross is your choice but I hope it is something you see beautiful not a sign of religious because a sign of religious is more than a cross; it is what we do, not what we say….
Be blessed
Sam
Ok, look. What does it matter?
I hope you all realize that all sins are the same to Gods eyes.
What if I told you yes? What would you do?
If you would just not get them,
Explain why you lied the last time if you knew it was wrong?
Everyone sins AT LEAST 1 time in their life (except Jesus).
So if you know that you repented and God forgave you,
Why would you care if it's a sin? Wouldn't God
Forgive you anyway?
I'm not saying you have to get tattoos. It's graffiti on the temple of God.
That's like saying "Is lying a sin?"
If somebody said yes, would you never lie for the rest of your life? I doubt it for 99% of you, unless you're Abraham Lincoln or somebody that never lied.
I am also Baptist. Before I got mine I read some of the verses people have quoted on here. If I based my decision on these verses I would not shave since the verse before Leviticus 19:28 (19:27) says "Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard". I believe there is also a verse that says not to mix what you plant in your crops or materials you make your clothes out of. It boils down to personal conviction. Between you and God. A lot of people, Pastors and others, pull out 1 verse to back up their personal beliefs. They don't like tattoo's or body piercings so they find something to back that up. Also, I hope whoever is saying a tattoo is a sin does not have any body piercings, including earrings. It is between you and God. Nobody else. Anyone else is just passing on their personal feelings as truths. Probably the same people saying electric guitars and drums have no place in a church...
Unbelievable that people still mix law with Grace. It is embarrassing at best. Having said that... we are to be in this world not OF this world. As long as I don't look like I belong to this present world in how I speak, what I listen to... or what I chose to look like as a Christian it is all good. We are called to be salt and light. I would no more wear long dresses and covering on my head to make someone thirsty for Christ than I would put a tattoo of a snake down my arms. I want people to see Christ... not self. BOTH are self. But that's just me.Quote:
Originally Posted by bear04
I will be making my first post on here even though I am sure that the OP has already maade the choice on whether or not to get the tattoo. I only want to point out one thing that has never been talked about in any conversation that I have looked at on if getting a tattoo is a sin. In Leviticus 19:28 the verse states that A person should not put marks on them for those that are dead. Well JESUS IS RISEN! (I put that in caps because it is the most important thing in my sinful life.) Is Jesus has risen then he Defeated death so therefore IMO getting a tattoo to honor Jesus victory at Calvary is not in violation of Leviticus 19:28. This is just strictly my opinion as I am not God nor do I even deserve interperting his word.(I only will because I am filled with the Holy Spirt to Guide me). I just want to add this to Remind people that Jesus DEFEATED death so I feel that it is OK.
With Love, Forgivness, and Peace
nicholsjj
The original manuscript has the word torrah in it over fifty times torrah can mean rules or instructions, pretty much I believe the bible is a guideline to a better life, but some people take it so hardcore that a war starts over religion yet again. To answer the question no I think its fine to get a tattoo of a cross for god gave you the power of free will, your not going to hell just cause you got a tattoo, and if people judge you at your church remember the bible says those who judge shall be judged
A tattoo marks the skin, not the soul. Mine is a reminder of God's grace to me a sinner. And in the world when people ask me what it means I tell them the truth. Yes a cross hangs upside down on my chest, but it is for the reminder I am not worthy to bare His mark, and the cool part is when I see it on my chest it is upright a constant reminder of His love and mercy. The broken angel wing represents sin and desire and it leading to death, the full wing wrapping around me represent God's protection. The feathers have bible verses in them and the sword is on fire because His word is living.
If I could take a picture and post it on here I would.
Much love to my brothers and sisters, and remember God chose all the people not just the ones with clean skin and pure hearts. True repentance is key, as He told us "go and sin no more"
Read text in context, leviticus was moses teaching the israelites laws from god, its not relevant to present times.
If you think it is then you should try and follow other leviticus verses which say you shouldn't trim sides of your beard or wear clothes with two types of material example cotton and polyester on same clothes.
I'm baptist and I have a tattoo and its I know its fine to have it because of READING TEXT IN CONTEXT
It's true Leviticus 19 says not to mark yourself. If you believe in following the letter of the law, you cannot get a tattoo. 6 verses after God tell us not to eat meat that isn't kosher.
I'm guessing somewhere along the line, our astute christian ancestors realized bacon was just too tasty to continue following that foney bologna old jewish "custom".
The moral of my story is - if you wear cotton blends and eat pork, you're already going to hell. Might as well show Jesus and everyone else how much you love him while you're doing it with your cross tattoo.
I agree we are NOT under the law any longer. I am really really big on getting that. Having said that, we are in this world not of this world. Sometimes there are things even the sinful world looks down upon. Marking your bodies happens to be one of them for some people. Non Christians can think them ungodly and wrong. We are FREE in Christ Jesus... but sometimes it just isn't the best thing to do for a testimony. Is it a sin? NO. Is it STILL considered wrong.. by the world itself? Sometimes, yes it is. Whatsoever is done without faith is sin.(Romans) If someone doesn't have a conscience about it... for that person it is OK. For the ones that cannot do it in good faith... don't. All things are lawful for the Christian, all things are not expedient. Not my words... but the Apostle Paul.Quote:
Originally Posted by anillaK7
Well said.Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
At that time in history (Leviticus), "marking" your body was a pagan practice. Their tattoos were VERY different than how we tattoo today. Not only was it pagan, it was not safe. That aside, we cannot live our lives against tattoos because it used to represent paganism. The wedding ring is originally pagan. The church steeple is from pagan origin. Almost all our holidays were originally pagan, including church buildings as well. Now, Christmas isn't viewed as pagan at all... we use it as a time to remember Christ's sacrifice. The church buildings aren't associated with other dieties; we worship the Lord there, and pray for His blessing. The wedding ring is perhaps one of the most sacred vows, often made in a church, before God. And God Himself said that marriage between a man and a woman is a beautiful thing... does it become un-beautiful because we have a piece of metal on our fingers? No. He said "make a joyful noise unto the Lord", he did not say "be perfect at singing; only sing hymns from Luther's timeframe." We are IN this world, not of it, so why do I hear all these Christians caring so much that the non-believers will look down on them? Don't they already?
If you are getting that tattoo to honour God, then it is to honour God, NOT because of what the world will think.
If you are getting that tattoo (or not) because of what the world will think, then it is not to honour God, but to appease the very people we should be making a ministry to.
I play Christian death metal. BOTH Christians AND non-Christians look down on it and me because of it, but I am spreading the Word of God the best I know how. Do you know why it doesn't get me down that Christians and non-believers look down on me? Because I am doing it for the Lord, not for man.
Look inside yourself; do you go to a church to worship God, or to practice Paganism? Why do you celebrate Christmas? Why do you wear that wedding band? Why are you getting that cross tattoo?
There are three categories:
1. Doing something that honours God.
2. Doing something that is neutral.
3. Doing something that is sinful.
Live your life accordingly and for God, not what people think of you. God warns about just going through the motions anyway.
Hi there. I attend church regularly and love the Lord and have wanted a tattoo for of the cross for over 20 years. However because the church has frowned on it I don't have one.
What a poor witness to let friends know we would love a tattoo but the church wouldn't like it.
Good people and bad people have tattoos. For me its about motive and we are accountable to God for our actions.
At 61 Im now going to have a tattoo of the cross and guess what? My relationship with God hasn't changed.
You say we are not under the Law. Why did Jesus say that one dotting of a I or one crossing of a t would not be taken from the Law until ALL be fulfilled.Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
People in Old Testament times kept a physical Law and when one would sin they would have to atone for that sin by a sacrifice. They had to physically show repentance.
Jesus was the last sacrifice and it was one time and for all. You are still under the Laws of God but they are now kept in the spirit. When one is broken go to Christ in prayer and He will take care of it, no physical sacrifice.
Do you Kill, steel, commit adultery, theses are still the Laws of God and they are not done away.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:34 AM. |