The Genetic fallacy

So the last blog post really got a lot of attention. Which was surprising because I tried not to let people either pro or anti tattoos get off the hook too easily. In my nerdy ways, it's weird for me that more Christians would want to read about tattoos than they would about an article on something like atonement theology. Nevertheless, it was great to get feedback and support from so many people.

There was something that I realized a few days later however which I failed to address in the original post, and that was the argument that people make regarding the pagan origin of tattoos. Actually, this goes way beyond tattoos. Many of my friends do not celebrate Christmas or Easter because of their pagan origins. The Pastor of a church I used to attend condemned Christian rock (or maybe he was just against heavy rock music?) because of it's pagan origins (though you could argue that rock music has it's roots in African American Gospel music but I'm getting off topic). The point I am making though is that we condemn many things because of their origins, regardless of who or how they are currently used or understood.

There is actually a name for this kind of reasoning and it is called the genetic fallacy. The genetic fallacy seeks to build a conclusion based solely on somethings origin. The big problem with this though is that we tend to use it only when it is convenient for us, ignoring how factors outside of its origin come in to play.

For example, and I am borrowing a quote from Robin Schumacher here. No Christian would say that it's wrong for woman to wear pantyhose. However, the history of pantyhose can be traced back to prostitutes in Italy hundreds of years ago. They were an identifying mark meant to tell others who these woman were and what they practiced. So to wear pantyhose a few hundred years ago in Italy was probably not something Christians would want to do lest they be misidentified and associated with immoral behavior.

A closer look at the origins of our modern church practices reveals several pagan influences have infiltrated our meetings (read Pagan Christianity for further investigation). Everything from pulpits, to religious attire, to buildings and on and on has roots outside of the early church. Yet I think the majority of the church today would argue that some of this "borrowing" has benefited our meetings regardless of those origins.

Now don't get me wrong, origins are important and can be a deciding factor in whether we do or do not do something. For example, swastikas still carry the same message today that they did in the last century. No sensible Christian would wear something with the symbol on, yet you are probably safe driving a VW Beetle around town which also has a Nazi heritage. So the rule of thumb here would be to exercise cultural sensitivity and common sense rather than make a blanket rule for everything. Sometimes it's tricky, do we lock our doors and stay home on Christmas or do we use the opportunity to hand out some sandwiches to the homeless and share Jesus with them while maybe avoiding certain elements of the holiday? Do we allow for certain variances in church meetings or do we discard anything that can't be traced back to the NT?These are things we should all prayerfully consider item by item and tradition by tradition.

In all things, be loving, be truthful, be edifying.

Christians and tattoos

Tattoos have been quite popular within Christian circles for a while now. Yet for every person with a cross or bible verse on their body there is another person out there who is willing to declare them “not really saved” because "real Christians would not get tattooed". So who is right? Is it a grey area? Here are some things that I think people on both sides of the fence need to consider. Oh, and to keep it simple, I am referring here only to Christian tattoos, not tribal tattoos, piercings, body mutilation and so on.

A Brief History

We know from Roman historians like Virgil, Seneca, and Galenus, that many slaves were tattooed around the time Jesus walked the earth. Tattoos, along with pierced ears, were marks of slaves or of a persons devotion to their god. This was common back then and even Paul may have been drawing a parallel on this in Galatians 6:17 when he refers to bearing the marks of Jesus on his body. He was obviously referring to the scars and bruises that he carried as opposed to actual tattoos but the connection is still there. Regardless, it did not take long for Christians, particularly in Egypt and Ethiopia, to start showing their devotion to Jesus with tattoos.

In the fourth century A.D., the Montanists, a Christian sect relying heavily on the Book of Revelation, began tattooing themselves as "slaves of God" (Rev. 7:2-3). It is documented that a monk who lived in the late fifth century had a tattoo on his thigh that read: "Manim, the disciple of Jesus Christ." The historian Procopius of Caesarea, who lived during the first half of the sixth century, reported that many Christians were tattooed, on their arms, with a cross or the name of Christ. When Constantine was in power in the fourth century, he had a law passed that Christians should not tattoo their faces (other places on the body were okay) because he considered the face to be the image of God, so it was clearly something that was popular at that time. The council of Calcuth mentioned two types of tattooing: one of pagan superstition, which doesn't aid any Christian, and another for the sake of God.

Tattoos within early Christianity were not about fashion, the Ethiopians were known for tattooing a cross on their foreheads, temples and wrists. This was to give strength to the faithful and make it impossible under persecution to deny their faith. Some scholars believe the Coptic (Egyptian) Christians learned this practice from them and they have actually continued the tradition to this very day. For centuries now they have tattooed a little cross on their wrists. These tattoos are not about teenage rebellion or trendiness, but about showing ones dedication to their King. For the Copts’, it may bring about persecution, with Egypt being a Muslim land where they are in the minority, but it also serves to protect their children from extremists who sometimes kidnap their children and force them to convert to Islam, including forced marriages of young Christian girls to Muslim men. Read more about it here.




But what about…

Leviticus 19:28  “You shall not tattoo any marks on you…” 

I am sure you have heard this one; but an honest reading of the text should include the entire sentence.

You should not shave the sides of your head or the corners of your beard, don’t make cuttings in your flesh or tattoo any marks on yourself (paraphrased).

Even though I would not agree with someone who was opposed to tattoos based on this verse alone, I would totally respect anyone who prohibited tattoos but also spoke out against ear rings and beard trimming. At least that would be a consistent argument to make. But for now, let’s just say that this verse, even though it is the only direct reference to tattoos in the bible, is perhaps not the best one to bring up in an argument.

1 Corinthians 6:19 “…your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit…”

There are 2 considerations to make here, the first being the preceding verse, “every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.” The context here is regarding sexual immorality, the other thing to consider is that most institutionalized Christians still consider their buildings to be the “house of the Lord”, these temples are usually decorated with crosses and banners containing proclamations and scriptures, much like tattoos do. Is it possible to glorify God with your body (verse 20) like we do with our places of worship? And what about the use of make-up? It’s not permanent (at least not always) but it is permanently being applied anyway…I’m not convinced the temple argument is so clear cut either for those opposed to tattooing.

What did Jesus say?

Although silent regarding tattoos, Jesus does give us some insights in conversations with the Pharisees on what he may have thought. For the sake of space, I am not going to write them out here, but read Mathew 15:10-20 and Mathew 23:25-28. In South Africa, we have a saying, “Buitekant blink, binnekant stink”, which basically translates as “shiny on the outside and rotten on the inside”. This is pretty much what Jesus is saying in the scriptures referenced. He seemed far more concerned with the inner man than someone who had only an outward appearances of holiness.

A word of caution

Do I think it is a sin to get a tattoo? No, but there is a disclaimer that goes along with that. And if you are considering getting one (or more), please think, pray and check your motives first. If you want a tattoo because it’s cool and you are looking for more awesomeness points and attention, reconsider. Art is not sinful, but pride is.

Another thing is that tattoos are expensive, we are called to be faithful stewards of the things that God has loaned us and that includes our money. Do you need a sleeve more than your out of work neighbor needs some bread? Probably not. But if that verse or cross on your arm is going to help you witness or encourage you or others then I am all for it.

Conclusion

All things are lawful for us but not necessarily profitable for us. If you want to get inked, consider what has already been said above. To the other group who can look past shaving and ear rings but not the other part of Leviticus 19:28, please consider Paul’s words to the Galatians in chapter 6:13. I love the way Eugene Peterson says it in the Message,

“These people who are attempting to force the way of circumcision on you, they only have one motive. they want an easy way to look good before others, lacking the faith to live by a faith that shares Christ’s suffering and death. All their talk about the law is gas. They themselves don’t keep the law. And they are highly selective in the laws they do observe. They only want you to be circumcised so they can boast of their success in recruiting you to their side. That is contemptible.”

I recently befriended someone who has eye brow tattoos because his immune system attacks his hair which has left him totally bald. I am sure it has not always being easy for him living with his disease, what would the way of love be in responding to this? To condemn him for his eye brow tattoos? Of course not. Let's be careful about the broadness of the brush we use when we make declarations and judgments on others.

I don’t really care about tattoos personally; I think they look cool on other people and that’s enough. There is no doubt that people sometimes end up with stupid tattoos because they took the decision lightly. But it maddens me to see freedom in Christ preached only so that we can afterwards tie people up again in bondage through conformance to our own religious standards. Let's show more concern for the inner man than the outward appearance, starting with ourselves.