1

While Jesus may not be outraged over tongue piercing or toothbrush sharing he is surely disappointed by those who flout the common sense notions of how to live well; His followers should be too.

The word "contraception" comes to mind.

2

Mumon-
I think the word "prophylaxis" might be more apt.

3

Contraception comes to mind only in the frightening place known as the mind of Mumon.

4

See, now this is why I love reading your stuff so much.

Hippies, tongue rods, and saving grace, all in a dozen paragraphs or so.

That rocks.

5

Both sides have a valid point; and both sides are wrong. The merits and flaws of each position are obscured by shoehorning the issue into a legalistic framework, pitting law against grace. The underlying assumption is that all behavior can be furcated into these two branches. So divided, we can then determine what actions are Biblically acceptable and what are scripturally verboten.

This is simplistic, you are ignoring tradition. Here I highly recommend Burke's Thoughts on the French Revolution (link available upon request). He observed that many traditions have been built up upon many generations of hard experience. Many of them have great wisdom to them even if most people could not articulate what that wisdom is (who can name the diseases that can be caused by not changing bed sheets?).

He mounted a good defense of tradition (and prejudices). He did not see them as laws, however. He understood that they can and should change. His argument, though, was that they should be given great respect so changing them must be done slowly.

Anyway, I find Medved to be inspidly stupid and another example of a third rate intellectual trying to squeeze a few more bucks out of 'intellectual conservatism'. Here's a piece of the argument Joe linked to:

On this particular program, Medved was seeking to stir up his audience with outrage over the currently popular trend of tongue-piercing. (No other kinds of piercing came in for his review, which I found quite odd.) His interest was created by articles in journals of dentistry describing the various terrible results that can come from tongue piercing: broken teeth, bizarre growths, infections and so on. Medved regaled the audience with lurid quotes of the nastiness and pain of tongue piercing, assured us there was much worse to be read that he was avoiding, and capped it all with his best version of being stunned at a source telling him that 10.6% of all university students have their tongue pierced. (I find that statistic to be quite suspect, and would advise anyone to be cautious about believing it.)

You'd think that for someone who started out as someone who is supposed to be an expert on culture he would be a bit more in tune with the fact that different cultures exist and just because some of them may seem 'yucky' doesn't mean they are wrong or bad. Instead he comes off as the type of backwater hick who can't get over that some countries don't speak English.

No doubt you could fine at least a few medical journal articles detailing the problems that could happen with, say, circumsicision. Or how about just people with poor diets?

6

What I don't get is the emphasis on tongue piercing (nobody at my house will get a piercing anywhere around the mouth, but it's because of the "ick" factor, not because of "Law")

If piercing is wrong, then all of it is wrong. If you're going to single out one type of piercing, you have to define whether you're singling it out because that piercing site is wrong and not other, or because you just don't happen to like that particular site.

As far as being at risk for diseases, if a parlor is clean (the one I know best takes the piercing equipment out of an autoclave while the customer watches), then the customer is not going to be sharing needles or anything else that would put them at risk.

While Jesus may not be outraged over tongue piercing or toothbrush sharing he is surely disappointed by those who flout the common sense notions of how to live well

there was a Christian leader (popular in some circles) that recently said (in so many words): "We can't say that the Bible says that consuming alcohol is wrong, but we're going to have a rule against it anyway."

Either it's wrong or it's not.

7

I'm 25 and got my ears pierced for the first time a few weeks ago. The elders at my church have asked me to remove the studs, because they feel that they need to draw the line somewhere. Piercings are out. They don't think it is sinful, but they don't think it's wise, either, because -- what next? It's a step on the path to all-out worldliness. What's your take on this, Joe?

8

The elders at my church have asked me to remove the studs, because they feel that they need to draw the line somewhere. Piercings are out. They don't think it is sinful, but they don't think it's wise, either, because -- what next? It's a step on the path to all-out worldliness. What's your take on this, Joe?

Well you didn't ask me, but when's that ever stopped me from offering my $0.02. If you have a real problem with this, it's probably time to find a new church. There is no Biblical mandate against piercing, so this is a case of the Pastor and church leadership trying to impose their personal preferences on you and the rest of the flock, I personally don't like this and think it is un-Biblical. The Gospels are pretty clear that Jesus was against legalism and this seems to be a pretty clear example of it. God Bless.

9

God says repeatedly that he offers blessing by following his Torah (instructions) and curses (a bad translation of the Hebrew) for not following it. Yeshua (Jesus) echo's this sentiment several times in the NT.

The sooner modern day followers of the Messiah realize that the Torah is a blessing to them (as it was to Jesus, Peter and Paul who all followed God's instructions their whole lives) and stop viewing any discussion or observance of Torah as legalism, the sooner they can experience the blessings.

Torah is only legalism when we use it to create a pecking order among ourselves as to who is the best observer of it. That doesn't make Torah bad but rather our practice of it bad.

The Hippies in your post were following the "grace" God gave us to ignore his instructions and experienced the "curses" that, one would hope, cause them to see that God's Torah was full of blessing when followed.

We do have absolute grace to ignore our heavenly father's instructions but the consequences of eating pork and shellfish, not practicing hygiene, living in a moldy house, etc. still exist and we will suffer under their "curse" no matter how badly we want to avoid legalism.

10

Joe says: "While Jesus may not be outraged over tongue piercing or toothbrush sharing he is surely disappointed by those who flout the common sense notions of how to live well; His followers should be too."

Preach it, brother!

If Jesus stood for anything, it was common sense! So many of his key teachings revolve around the notion of using common sense to deal with everyday problems, especially health concerns. Jesus constantly urged his followers to avoid risky behavior. He wanted to make sure they all lived long, healthy lives.

Foremost among Jesus' priorities was the emphasis on dental and oral hygiene. We are not told explicitly, but surely he brushed his teeth daily with a good, flouridized toothpaste. As he was filled with wisdom, we can infer that he also flossed. I don't think I'm going too far to suggest that he probably used some type of alcohol-based mouthwash (though he definitely didn't swallow).

He also urged hygienic habits at the dinner table. The Pharisees observed the ceremonial washing of their hands and eating utensils before eating. Jesus thought this was really stupid. “"Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")” (Mark 7:18-19)

Ok, maybe that’s not the best example, but his wise disciples can see that Jesus didn’t really mean that you shouldn’t wash your hands before eating or wash dishes in hot water with soap or cook your meat fully or eat food that has fallen on a filthy floor.

Speaking of food, Jesus also taught the importance of a balanced diet. He taught that man cannot live by bread alone. This was the introduction of the low-carb diet. He also encouraged people to eat his flesh and blood (high protein). He insisted that his followers eat lots of green, leafy vegetables and plenty of fruit. Above all, he taught the importance of fiber. Also, he wanted people to eat small portions. No one could ever call him a glutton.

We all know the famous miracle, where Jesus turned regular water into pure, sparkling bottled water. As I recall, he never touched a drop of alcohol. NO one ever called him a drunkard. In an age of polluted water, he explained to his followers how to dig wells and obtain clean water.

Jesus also emphasized the avoidance of disease by not touching contagious people (except lepers), staying far away from all barnyard animals (such as might be found in a stable), and introducing hygienic outdoor toilets.

Of course, exercise was also important to Jesus. He walked practically everywhere. Only occasionally did he ride a donkey (or was it two?) through the streets of Jerusalem. Was is less known is his teaching regarding cardio exercises and weight training. Remember he did carry his own cross.

Being the health conscious Messiah that he was, Jesus told his followers to always continue learning more about nutrition and health. He urged his followers to study science and medicine so that they might one day cure cancer. Eschewing faith-based medicine, Jesus was the first to suggest double-blind controlled studies.

There was so much more to his common-sense teaching that we can’t go into right now. In the future, we will examine Jesus’ teachings on reducing taxes (supply side economics), investing in the stock market, stopping illegal immigration, school vouchers, and the wisdom of pre-emptive strikes.

11

Joe says: "While Jesus may not be outraged over tongue piercing or toothbrush sharing he is surely disappointed by those who flout the common sense notions of how to live well; His followers should be too."

Preach it, brother!

If Jesus stood for anything, it was common sense! So many of his key teachings revolve around the notion of using common sense to deal with everyday problems, especially health concerns. Jesus constantly urged his followers to avoid risky behavior. He wanted to make sure they all lived long, healthy lives.

Foremost among Jesus' priorities was the emphasis on dental and oral hygiene. We are not told explicitly, but surely he brushed his teeth daily with a good, flouridized toothpaste. As he was filled with wisdom, we can infer that he also flossed. I don't think I'm going too far to suggest that he probably used some type of alcohol-based mouthwash (though he definitely didn't swallow).

He also urged hygienic habits at the dinner table. The Pharisees observed the ceremonial washing of their hands and eating utensils before eating. Jesus thought this was really stupid. “"Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")” (Mark 7:18-19)

Ok, maybe that’s not the best example, but his wise disciples can see that Jesus didn’t really mean that you shouldn’t wash your hands before eating or wash dishes in hot water with soap or cook your meat fully or eat food that has fallen on a filthy floor.

Speaking of food, Jesus also taught the importance of a balanced diet. He taught that man cannot live by bread alone. This was the introduction of the low-carb diet. He also encouraged people to eat his flesh and blood (high protein). He insisted that his followers eat lots of green, leafy vegetables and plenty of fruit. Above all, he taught the importance of fiber. Also, he wanted people to eat small portions. No one could ever call him a glutton.

We all know the famous miracle, where Jesus turned regular water into pure, sparkling bottled water. As I recall, he never touched a drop of alcohol. NO one ever called him a drunkard. In an age of polluted water, he explained to his followers how to dig wells and obtain clean water.

Jesus also emphasized the avoidance of disease by not touching contagious people (except lepers), staying far away from all barnyard animals (such as might be found in a stable), and introducing hygienic outdoor toilets.

Of course, exercise was also important to Jesus. He walked practically everywhere. Only occasionally did he ride a donkey (or was it two?) through the streets of Jerusalem. Was is less known is his teaching regarding cardio exercises and weight training. Remember he did carry his own cross.

Being the health conscious Messiah that he was, Jesus told his followers to always continue learning more about nutrition and health. He urged his followers to study science and medicine so that they might one day cure cancer. Eschewing faith-based medicine, Jesus was the first to suggest double-blind controlled studies.

There was so much more to his common-sense teaching that we can’t go into right now. In the future, we will examine Jesus’ teachings on reducing taxes (supply side economics), investing in the stock market, stopping illegal immigration, school vouchers, and the wisdom of pre-emptive strikes.

12

ex-preacher:

He got plenty of exercise, too! But you're wrong about the no alchohol thing; Jesus understood well that a glass of wine a day is good for you; and Paul even mentioned that. But good wine; not that stuff you have to drink out of a paper bag.

But seriously- there's a point here, and a good one- all of this is projecting one's own psyche onto something denoted as "Jesus," which kind of goes to the notion of a god we invent. You know, sort of like idolatry.

But in regards to my other comment above, if folks think good hygeine is something Jesus would endorse, I'm sure he had no problem with contraception. Preventing disease you know.

13

sorry for the double post

14

Torah is only legalism when we use it to create a pecking order among ourselves as to who is the best observer of it. That doesn't make Torah bad but rather our practice of it bad.

Right. Kind of like "there's no law against it, but we're going to tell everybody that they shouldn't do it anyway."

15

Can common sense prevail on which piercings are acceptable and which are not? Maybe this applies primarily to Christians, maybe not.

1. Socially accepted practices should be considered. Does the society practice ear piercing, or does it expand to all piercings? So far, I don't think American society has endorsed tongue/nipple/genetalia piercing as normal. Earrings are okay, but use of the ears as a pin cushion seems less acceptable.

2. Piercings with a high chance of infection might wisely be avoided, if we apply Joe's suggestion of using wisdom. See tongue/nipple/genitalia above. The issue has much less to do with the cleanliness of the parlor than the bacterial population of the pierced area, and the difficulty of maintaining hygiene. Ears are pretty easy to keep clean.

3. Circumcision has an increased chance of infection, but for Jews, it is essential. Social practices prevail. For non-Jews, the American practice of circumcision appears to be declining.

4. Poor diets: I think Joe talked about that one with regard to gluttony (which I wish he hadn't). On a more serious note, many people who are commonly the victims of poor diet are either ignorant or poor, or both. This is not quite the same thing as voluntarily driving a spike in your tongue.

5. It appears that most of the less acceptable forms of piercing (tongue/nipple/genitalia) have an overtly sexual message. If your purpose in life is promiscuity, then you have very large issues, and piercing is simply an indication of those issues.

6. The issue of alcohol is a difficult one, but I don't see it in the context of piercing. There is more damage done to society by alcohol that all other central nervous system depressants combined. However, used in moderation (like don't get drunk every weekend), it is at best harmless and at most beneficial. True, there is no Biblical prohibition of drinking moderately, but there is a lot of Biblical prohibition of drunkenness. I don't see getting a hole drilled in your tongue as a moderate use of piercing.

When I was in college, a professor discussed the views of drinking. He said that all Christians believed that the abuse of alcohol was wrong. Baptists (his favorite target) believed that one tiny drop was abuse. He said that Catholics, his particular faith, thought that as long as you could lay on the floor without holding on, you were okay. Both Baptists and Catholics: true story but ;-)

As far as the elders of a particular church asking for the removal of earrings, hmmm. I don't agree, but that is their belief. Jews require women to sit on one side of the synagogue and men on the other. Catholics (used to, at least) prefer women to have their heads covered in church. If you are a Jew or a Catholic, or if your association with that particular congregation is important to you, maybe you should follow those things that are important to the congregation. If not, find another church.

16

Mumon -

contraception prevents "conception" (i.e., creating children); it doesn't mean "prevents disease". I think of all forms of contraception, only condoms do any thing to prevent the spread of STD's. (Don't mean to insult your intelligence, but you DID say it twice).

Perhaps Jesus might have recommended abstinence until marriage to prevent the spread of disease?

17

1. Socially accepted practices should be considered. So if "society" thinks it's appropriate, it's ok? Stop and think about that one. In many parts of society, smoking pot is ok. Most of today's society winks at a lot of things that the Bible says are not "ok".

Do you really want society to be the judge of what is right and wrong (good/bad)?

2. Piercings with a high chance of infection might wisely be avoided, if we apply Joe's suggestion of using wisdom. Or just take care of them. I had one ear that kept getting infected. The body piercing with the highest rate of infection is (drumroll) bellybuttons. My daughter has a piercing that is in one of the areas that has a higher rate of infection - she has never had a problem.

3. Circumcision has an increased chance of infection, but for Jews, it is essential. Social practices prevail. "Social practices" or sincerely held religious beliefs?

Again, "social practices" make a poor yardstick for right and wrong.

4. Poor diets...This is not quite the same thing as voluntarily driving a spike in your tongue. Why? Why would a voluntary diet of cocacola and krispy Kremes not be in the same league?

In the long run, which would cause more damage?

5. It appears that most of the less acceptable forms of piercing (tongue/nipple/genitalia) have an overtly sexual message. Then, is it the action (piercing), or the abuse of the action (something that could be pleasing to both parties within a marriage context) that is wrong?

Use of alchol - acceptable. Misuse, not acceptable. Maybe the same with piercings?

6. The issue of alcohol is a difficult one, but I don't see it in the context of piercing.

The context is in making laws/rules where the Bible doesn't.

18

He got plenty of exercise, too! But you're wrong about the no alchohol thing; Jesus understood well that a glass of wine a day is good for you; and Paul even mentioned that. But good wine; not that stuff you have to drink out of a paper bag.

Sadly this may not be correct Mumom. Nearly all of the studies that say moderate drinkers are healthier suffer from the error of including previous drinkers who now abstain in their samples of nondrinkers.

I don't think anyone has shown, though, that a glass of good wine a day is bad for you so cheers!

I think Scott has some good points but Ellen is more correct in the long run. These are matters of personal taste. To the degree that piercing has health problems they are mostly no serious and of primary concern to the person who has been pierced. If the piercing enthusiast is willing to spend the extra time and energy keeping a piercing healthy isn't that his business? We all have habits, hobbies and preferences that cost us time, energy and money that other people find better spend elsewhere.

Culture does matter, though. I think it's pretty silly to expect to build a church on 'pure religion' divorced of any culture at all. Services with people in swimsuits, therefore, might be perfect for a religious group on the shores of California or Florida but don't really fit in with more conservative communities. I think cultural preferences should not be elevated to laws or serious moral principles but I do think they should generally be respected for the usefulness they have.

19

Thanks, Joe. You're wrong and I'm right, of course :-) but I'll take the free publicity from the big dog!!

This comment thread is amazing. The ELDERS SAID TAKE THEM OUT. Sheesh wowsa. Come to my church. Please.

20

Boonton This is simplistic, you are ignoring tradition. Here I highly recommend Burke's Thoughts on the French Revolution

Boonton recommending that I read Burke? Did we pass over into Bizzaro world or something? ; )

Ellen If piercing is wrong, then all of it is wrong. If you're going to single out one type of piercing, you have to define whether you're singling it out because that piercing site is wrong and not other, or because you just don't happen to like that particular site.

I sort of thought that saying that tongue piercing could expose one to HIV, hepatitis B and C, Herpes Simplex virus, Epstein-Barr virus, candida, speech impediments, breathing problems, and broken teeth was a justification for concluding why that location was unwise (a term that, in this case, I prefer to “wrong”). To my knowledge, few people get hepatitis or broken teeth from ear piercing so I think there is less risks involved. Other piercing sites may or may not be risky whcih also would make them more or less foolish or wise.

Either it's wrong or it's not.

That’s the type of legalistic thinking I was suggesting we avoid. Now I may be wrong, but I think there is a continuum between or parallel to “right” and “wrong” that includes “wise” and “foolish.”

Joy It's a step on the path to all-out worldliness. What's your take on this, Joe?

Although I’m sympathetic to slippery-slope arguments, I think that is a bit of a stretch. I don’t think that getting one’s ear’s pierced is necessarily going to lead to exotic and potentially risky piercings in other parts of the body.

I personally feel that excessive concerns about “worldliness” can lead to a dead legalism that is not only contrary to the message of Jesus but outright counterproductive in advancing the Kingdom. Some cultural norms may be right or wrong, foolish or wise, but others are simply neutral. For example, I could care less if some guy has fuscia hair. I may find aesthetically displeasing but it's just a matter of taste.

Of course if having fuscia-colored hair would so turn people off that it impeded your communication of the gospel and the love of Christ then it might then fall into the category of “unwise.”

iMonk Thanks, Joe. You're wrong and I'm right, of course :-)

Your position and mine probably aren’t so far apart. I feared that I was almost setting up a stawman because you don't advocate a “grace abounds, consequences be damned” position. But the discussion at BHT was the impetus for the post and I couldn’t find another example that took a more anti-legalism position. So in the absence of a more extreme example I had to make do with semi-twisting your view. ; )

21

Joe, "HIV, hepatitis B and C, Herpes Simplex virus, Epstein-Barr virus, candida" have been a "reason" to say that everything from ear piercings to tattoos are "dangerous". Broken teeth - if the piercing is well placed, shouldn't be an issue. Speech imediments would be a factor if a person has jewelry that is not the right size (at worst, it would be a temporary as talking with a Hall's in your mouth. I've never heard of bad breath, except as a hygeine factor. If you take care of your piercing, it shouldn't be an issue, unless (possibly) in the early stages of healing.

Personally, I think mouth piercings (tongue, lip, whatever) are disgusting. But that's a matter of taste.

As far as the Hb, HIV, etc. If the piercer is clean and keeps a clean house (sterilizes, wears gloves, etc.) those simply will not be an issue. They are blood borne pathogens. No shared blood, no pathogen.

You may not advocate a "legalistic approach", but a lot of us have to deal with those who do.

I'm taking a "right or wrong" legalistic approach due to an article that iMonk linked to on BHT (it was also posted in the comments on InternetMonk). The man that wrote the article linked to any piercing to sexual intercourse and a piercing on a man to sodomy.

If you follow the trail, the gist behind that link it's pretty disturbing.

We (as humans) have no problem with drawing a line where Jesus drew a line. What seems to be harder is not drawing a line where Jesus didn't draw a line.

22

Reading the way Joe cleverly drew a bunch of the usual suspects into their over-mannered poses and strident tones over his singularly bland assertions about an especially trivial matter, I just have to say--this post's comments get a theme song.

Take your medicine,
PGE

23

No, no, no . . . the researchers have it all wrong. The hippies didn't get sick from lack of sanitation. Here's the relevant sentence:

"or that you and five other people shouldn’t drink from the same bottle of Shasta"

Its Shasta. That stuff is evil, and does harm to your body. Drink Classic Club for a restorative effect (if you can find it anymore).

CLASSIC CLUB SODA, FOR YOU AND THE FELLAS!!!

(This post brought to you by Camp Hickory Hill, a place where I spent many a summer. Classic Club Soda was the pop we used to serve there at the camp store.)

24

Ellen,

Joe, "HIV, hepatitis B and C, Herpes Simplex virus, Epstein-Barr virus, candida" have been a "reason" to say that everything from ear piercings to tattoos are "dangerous".

True, but the tongue has more blood vessels than other piercing locations, such as the ear. Also, when your pierced ear gets infected you don’t swallow the pus.

Broken teeth - if the piercing is well placed, shouldn't be an issue.

I’ve never heard a dentist that says there is no danger of broken or chipped teeth from a piercing. In fact, I’ve never seen a dentist who doesn’t think the procedure is downright idiotic. ; )

If you take care of your piercing, it shouldn't be an issue, unless (possibly) in the early stages of healing.

The American Dental Association would disagree with you. Their official position is that piercing the tongue, lip or cheek represents a public health hazard. And the American Academy of Dermatology opposes all forms of body piercing, except the earlobes.

You may not advocate a "legalistic approach", but a lot of us have to deal with those who do.

So let’s get back to my underlying point: Is getting a tongue pierced a “wise” decision? If not, then why should we condone it?

What seems to be harder is not drawing a line where Jesus didn't draw a line.

Interesting point. I think the problem is that we also tend to draw a line between God and Jesus. We believe, for example, that book of Proverbs is inspired by God. Yet we don’t think of Proverbs as coming from Jesus. Why is that? Is not all real wisdom from Jesus?

I believe that all truth is God’s truth, whether it is found in the red-letter parts of the NT or in the “common sense” understanding that God provides when we violate natural laws and find that we have a big, fat, infected tongue.

25

I don't think anyone has yet injected the words "natural" and "unnatural" into the conversation. Allow me.

Any piercing, cutting, tattooing, or cosmetic surgery carries a certain amount of risk. (Have you heard the latest? They are now putting metal balls and rods under the skin for decorative lumps!) These are all unnatural, and thus suspect, as far as I am concerned. I can't see the point, but culture just can't be homogenized. As an old hippie myself, you won't find a tattoo or a piercing on me anywhere. Hippies pretty much predated most of this fad before it became so popular. At most, a few of us might have gotten a butterfly or peace symbol engraved somewhere on our personal canvases.

But as an American male raised Christian, I will admit to being circumcised. I like it OK; I have to. It ain't gonna grow back. But what is interesting is the science I have heard concerning circumcism.

1. Seems to reduce the occurance of unhygenically-caused infections and socially transmitted infections.
2. In relation to the above, makes the penis easier to examine and keep clean.
3. Reduces sensitivity to stimulation; in short, makes the penis numb compared to the uncircumcised.

I cannot relate, in this case, to the natural. I might have preferred to be natural, had it been my choice. But it wasn't, it was Mom's, when I was three days old. As far as I know, I have had no adverse effects, except perhaps No. 3 above, which some of my mates have considered a positive.

Like my own Jewish-inspired and unnatural mutilation, most of these things are irreversable. After the initial injury, and healing, if it occurs smoothly, there probably isn't much harm.

As a Daddy, I opposed my daughter's idea of having her belly button pierced. You know she did it anyway. She had a terrible and painful infection afterwards, kept the piercing for a few years, and then gave it up. Just a fad.

I think maybe anyone who would like a nail through the glans penis has some other issues they may want to seek professional help with. But, maybe it's just a fad.

26

Hey, Joe, putting tongue-piercing on the "too stupid for words" list is a good thing. Thanks for that.

It would be interesting to explore why people do it in the face of the obvious (to some of us) health concerns. Much like smoking and hang gliding (one of the deadliest sports), there must be some positive reinforcement for the behavior.

27

I read the ADA site. There's a lot of "cans" and "coulds".
This is from their website: Common symptoms after oral piercing include pain, swelling, infection, an increased flow of saliva and injuries to the gum tissue. (this can happen after a cleaning, also) if a blood vessel was in the path of the needle during the piercing, severe and difficult-to-control bleeding can result. For some, chipped or cracked teeth, blood poisoning or even blood clots can occur. For many, the swelling of the tongue is a common side effect. And in extreme cases, a severely swollen tongue can actually close off the airway and prevent breathing.

And the American Academy of Dermatology opposes all forms of body piercing, except the earlobes.

This is from the AAD website: Think before attempting any of the procedures. Only use a trained professional with experience and proper hygienic technique. Be sure of what you want and discuss it. If there is a problem, see a dermatologist quickly.
Is getting a tongue pierced a “wise” decision? If not, then why should we condone it?

Is snowboarding or skiing a "wise" decision? If not, then why should we condone it?

BMX bikes? Swimming in the ocean? Getting artificial nails carries a risk!

I believe that all truth is God’s truth, whether it is found in the red-letter parts of the NT or in the “common sense” understanding that God provides when we violate natural laws...

So then you're saying that if it violates "common sense", it is law.

I should probably take away my son's snowboard.

As a Daddy, I opposed my daughter's idea of having her belly button pierced.

Yep - belly buttons are the site that most often get infected.

28

What amazes me most about you Christians and your love of Jesus and the Bible is how little you know about either of the two.

Jesus was born into the Jewish community. He would have read from, and had read to him, the Old Testament. See Leviticus 19:28 -- that's where lots of our anti-tattoo and anti-piercing tradition comes from. THE BIBLE SAYS IT'S WRONG.
Doesn't say it's unhygenic, just flat out says it's wrong. Maybe none of you self-styled 'Christians' read Leviticus, but you can be darn well sure the Savior did.

It's like Joe C's comment (just above) that all knowledge comes from Jesus. READ THE GOSPELS, JOE! Jesus never said that. The New Testament doesn't say that. Only the folks who go around shouting about how great their personal friend Jay-zoos, with whom they speak daily, believe it. And do any of those folks LISTEN to the Savior? Somehow, I don't think so -- and that's how Jerry Falwell can fulminate about all the killing he wants to do in the world, and still believe he's a Christian. He never listened.

29

See Leviticus 19:28 -- that's where lots of our anti-tattoo and anti-piercing tradition comes from. THE BIBLE SAYS IT'S WRONG.

Nurtz, do you follow all of the letter of the Old Covenant?

30

nurtz, some of the stuff that Joe C says is full of crap. but most of it is fairly moderate. compared to many other similiar religious-leaning blogs, this one tends to be less crapicular.

Here is an example of pure crapulence:

"I believe that all truth is God’s truth, whether it is found in the red-letter parts of the NT or in the “common sense” understanding that God provides when we violate natural laws and find that we have a big, fat, infected tongue."

I mean, wtf is he trying to state here? Even though I actually AGREE with Joe in spirit, his argumentative style is too fallacious to stomach. Here Joe, find how many fallacies you can find in your sentence with aid from this website:

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html

31

Is anyone actually listening, here? Joe's point is that wisdom--of the sort folks use experience, medical studies, and even "the ick factor" to amass--is not to be disregarded in decision-making, even where there's no stone-tablet or red-letter WWJD on the subject. He's saying that God expects us to use our brains and think through things. Paul, talking about matters of conscience beyond the reach of explicit commands, says that believers should not destroy one another over such things. If you've looked at the evidence and think it's OK, then by Joe's standard you've done your duty--though Joe may still think (and why should he not be free to say?) you're wrong. You have used what wisdom you've been given, and if Joe thinks your decision is unwise, well--he can't answer to God for you, and if he's wise, he won't even try.

Jeez, people, you're thrashing and flailing 'cuz Joe said "not only Bible commandments but also your own wisdom and experience are to be heeded." Do you really resent any hint of "God said so" so very much? Or are you just so set on "attack Joe" that you can't even think clearly through his words? (You'll dance to anything)

Oh, and @nurtz--Throwing around accusations against the faith of professed believers is hardly what the Apostles would have called evidence of a lively faith. Leviticus does indeed teach that if you are a Jew from more than 2000 years ago, living in blood-covenant with a God who personally oversees the operations of your government and priestly hierarchy, that you should wear single-fiber garments with a border/tassels, not "round the edges of your beard," avoid eating seafood without scales, and not have any tattooes or initiation scars. If I meet any Jews from that period, under those conditions, I shall be sure to send them to you, for I'm positive that your example of the proper method of wearing the tasselled/borderd garments is essential to the faith.

And here we are back at "beyond legalism."

Cheers,
PGE

32

with all the problems in today's world, this is what is bothering you????

33

No one's pointed it out yet, but a tongue piercing is a sex toy.

34

pgepps writes: "He's saying that God expects us to use our brains and think through things."

Care to produce a single verse where Jesus says anything even remotely like that?

Here's Jesus on caring for your body parts:

"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell."

Sadly, there have been people who over the centuries who took this quite literally. I guess Jesus didn't realize that some people would miss what he really meant: use your brain and think things through.

35

No one's pointed it out yet, but a tongue piercing is a sex toy.

Sometimes a sex toy, but you have to admit it's a lot safer to use a pierced tongue as a sex toy than a pierced ear. Think of how many ears might get ripped apart if people just used pierced ears 'cause they couldn't use a pierced tongue.

It's therefore postively unBiblical to not have a pierced tongue!

36

Joe's point is that wisdom--of the sort folks use experience, medical studies, and even "the ick factor" to amass--is not to be disregarded in decision-making, even where there's no stone-tablet or red-letter WWJD on the subject.

PGE - it's called "general revelation" (vs. "special revelation).

What I'm trying to say is that to single out a single piercing site as "foolish" (what does the book of Proverbs tell us about people that are foolish") may or may not be correct.

And this is (believe it or not) an important issue - being human, what we believe has a bearing on how we treat people.

How will you treat the next person that comes into your church with piercings or tattoos? Will you automatically consider them "foolish" because of the jewelry they wear? Or will you take the time to look into their heart?

I already know that what most people will answer is very different than what most people will do.

37

"Here's Jesus on caring for your body parts..."

This is an unworthy comment. If you are an ex-preacher you should know better, even if you do have an axe to grind.

38

Joe,

I heard Dennis Prager saying a few months back that all evil is sin but not all sin is evil.

It sounds like you are saying something similar.

All sin is foolish but not all foolishness is sin.

If ive characterized what you are saying correctly, i'm not sure if I agree with it. I'd have to give it some more thought. But at the time Dennis Prager was saying his thing, I disagreed with him.

It just seems to me like sin and evil are the same.

39

Well, Ellen, I'll grant that it's uncomfortable, chatting with someone with any too-obvious tongue piercing, but there's hardly any reason I'd treat them very differently for all that. It's not a terribly significant moral category like, say, "abusers of themselves with small furry rodents" or anything.

That said, I don't think it's terribly intelligent to treat "wisdom" like an either/or, i.e., either call me a fool or say I never do anything foolish. I've known a few very wise people, and they all do something foolish from time to time. On a small scale (the absurd number of receipts so-and-so keeps in shoeboxes to write off from taxes), this is so reassuring that we often joke about it. On a larger scale, it is embarrassing or humiliating (the flamboyant love letters whosey-whatsit wrote to a girl he met at an airport a week after his fiancee left him). When it gets to a grand scale--that is, when our foolishness leads us across a line into black-and-white moral failure, then we start to see why cultivating wisdom, even where it was less significant, might have been--well, wise.

So Joe's saying this is unwise. Do you disagree? You say no one in your family will get one because of the "ick factor." So, you're using your authority to enforce your mere personal preferences? Where do you get off criticizing Joe?

I happen to think this is a non-starter as an issue, too. I think that's *why* it's handy that Joe used it, and revealing that it teased out such absurd extremes in the comments.

Somewhere between our conviction that we ought not hurt or humiliate someone for these sorts of choices, and our conviction that these are probably not the choices we'd want our nearest and dearest to make, lies wisdom. Joe is saying, "If you think it's wise, then heed that."

It is foolish to disregard what you know to be wise. If you *disagree* with the wisdom, well, that's why we don't call it black-and-white, stone-tablet, red-letter Law.

But if we want to get beyond endless silly and shrill carping about "Thou SHALT do what my preacher sayeth" versus "You ain't da bossa me!" we're going to need wisdom, and soon.

Cheers,
PGE

40

The more I think about it, the more it seems odd to me that anyone would be treating "wisdom" as either entirely optional or entirely obligatory. The whole thing about Wisdom Literature, for example--whether in a Biblical (say, Proverbs) or a Confucian or ancient Egyptian or modern mode--is that, while it may even contain apparently *contradictory* injunctions, it is a cue, a hint, an observation about what, at some specific point or other, *tends toward* the "good life" or the moral ideal or the socially well-adjusted or whatever.

Wisdom is about the *tendencies* of specific acts and situations, not about fully-qualified, 100% translatable and applicable Truth. But by cultivating Wisdom, we are promised, we are likely to avoid obstacles and be drawn into an engagement with Truth more readily. It seems worth pursuing.

Cheers,
PGE

41

PGE,

Wisdom is about the tendencies of specific acts and situations, not about fully-qualified, 100% translatable and applicable Truth. But by cultivating Wisdom, we are promised, we are likely to avoid obstacles and be drawn into an engagement with Truth more readily. It seems worth pursuing.

Wow, something we call all agree on! Every spiritual tradition and even atheists advocate this.

42

I'll grant that it's uncomfortable, chatting with someone with any too-obvious tongue piercing, but there's hardly any reason I'd treat them very differently for all that.

Then you are unusual. Because most folks see what is most obvious first, and it's a struggle to get them beyond that.

So, you're using your authority to enforce your mere personal preferences?

Yes I am. Because they're in my home. When they're not in my home, they can make their own choice.

Where do you get off criticizing Joe?
I'm not calling it "wise/foolish", "ok/sin", etc. I'm calling it a personal preference (that I don't want to look at a mouth piercing in my house).

If we want to go back to wisdom/foolishness...

When you string together phrases like "Scripture...teaching us how to live properly",

"Lady Wisdom":
You--I'm talking to all of you, everyone out here on the streets!
Listen, you idiots--learn good sense!
You blockheads--shape up!
Don't miss a word of this--I'm telling you how to live well,
I'm telling you how to live at your best. (Proverbs 8:4-6 (The Message)

What would Lady Wisdom have to say about a form of cosmetic mutilation...Why should sane Christians not point out the foolishness of such behaviors as tongue piercing?

...we should not only share the message about how to get right with God but help others see how to live well in the world He created for us.

put together...Scripture tells us how to live properly - Lady Wisdom tells us how to live well...tongue piercing is foolish...we should help others see that.

If I have advocated ignoring "wisdom" (I don't think I have), then there's a problem.

I've experienced the way that people with piercings/tattoos are treated - that is the real foolishness.

43

nurtz,

Ever Read John 1:1?

44

PGE: to see if people really leave this issue to "wisdom/foolishness",

read this in the comments: THE BIBLE SAYS IT'S WRONG.
Doesn't say it's unhygenic, just flat out says it's wrong. Maybe none of you self-styled 'Christians' read Leviticus, but you can be darn well sure the Savior did.

Does nurtz believe that piercing (any piercing) is a matter of wisdom/foolishness?

Or how about this article that says that just by looking at the act of intercourse, you can see that a woman is meant to be pierced. Here is a direct quote: Obviously, piercing for a woman need not involve sodomy or lowering. She was made a woman, for man, a fact to which her body itself testifies.

Man, however, was not made a woman nor was he made to abide piercing. It is still a universal that he is not expected to. The recent attack on a Brooklyn prisoner provides a tragic case in point. The Associated Press reported: One of the police officers charged with torturing a man by sodomizing him with a stick bragged about the attack, saying he had to break a man who took a swing at him. Officer Justin Volpe also told fellow officers I had to bring a man down tonight.

Does this writer see piercing (any piercing) as a matter of mere foolishness? No, he sees a man as even having his ear pierced as the equivalent of sodomy.

This blog does not exist in a vacuum. there are real people with real piercings and real tattoos that are dealing with real people like Mr. Schlissel and nurtz.

My son had a friend who didn't want to come to church with us because "they wouldn't like my piercing". He learned that from somewhere. That is a very real consequence to a very real attitude.

I guess maybe that's the reason you see me taking a stronger stand than maybe I should. I want to see more pierced and tattooed people in church. Don't you?

45

Ellen --

As you said in an earlier post "Either it's wrong or its not." It's not posed in Leviticus as a question of wisdom or unwisdom, and I don't know why people want to put that into the religious part of the argument. The religious part of the argument is clear. So ... do you believe in the Bible, or do you pick and choose what you want? Makes no difference to me, I accept you either way.

The argument that "a woman is meant to be pierced" is bogus; normal sexual acts do not involve bodily mutilation. (If your sexual acts do, you're not practicing normal sex.)

And PGE, your tired argument about how hard it is to live according to the Bible is characteristic of 'cafeteria Christians.' If you seriously believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, you believe it all -- not just the parts you prefer. If you believe that you can pick and choose, you're just using the Bible as a way to support the opinions you already hold where there's a convenient passage present.

For me, I don't care whether you're a cafeteria Christian, a Biblical literalist, or something different. If you rely on the Bible for your red-letter law, then you've got to rely on it. If not, not. I just suggest that you not lie to yourself and the world and say you believe in the Bible and then violate its tenents because they're inconvenient for you.

46

I suspect Joe has used a few thousand words to say, essentially:

"I think tongue piercing is foolish, others may disagree and its not a big deal either way"

47

Here are my challenges for Joe and all other evangelicals:

1. Please indicate one place in the Bible where Jesus gave someone advice pertaining to healthy habits.

2. Please indicate one passage where Jesus advised his followers to rely on common sense. Almost everything Jesus taught (much of it good advice) is the direct opposite of common sense.

One more example of Jesus and hygiene:

"Jesus replied, "The one who has dipped his hand into the bowl with me will betray me. . . .
Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you."

Dipping hands into a common bowl and then eating? All drinking from the same cup? Couldn't this be as bad as sharing cans of Shasta?

48

Nurtz, you didn't answer my previous question

Do you follow all of the Old Covenant Law?

Do you wear wool blend pants or socks?
Do you practice companion planting in your garden?
Do you hug your spouse during a menstrual period?

Do you follow all 613?

I think that nurtz is agreeing with my point that not everybody sees the piercing issue as a "wisdom" thing. Those folks who may wander into churches with piercings and tattoos are probably already acquainted with the nurtzes in the church.

At least there are others who only call them "foolish".

49

Ellen,

If you'll go back and read post #28, I think you'll see that nurtz is not a Christian (the phrase "You Christians" is a dead giveaway). I think he/she is making the point that Christians selectively choose which parts of the Old Testament they want to still apply, then ignore the rest.

50

If anyone's up for it (no pun intended), I'd be glad to discuss circumcision. As I see it, there are at least two key issues:

1. Does the Bible ever teach (in OT or NT) that circumcision was designed for hygienic purposes? Sub-issue: If so, what problems does this raise? (For instance, why discountinue circumcision in NT if it has health benefits? And, why doesn't the OT give other health advice - like: eat citrus to avoid scurvy, don't consume food out of lead containers, something about germs, cook beef and chicken at high temperatures, etc.)

2. Is circumcision indeed a wise health move? (especially in situations where unhygienic conditions prevail - like using sharp rocks for circumcision, risk of infection, sucking out the blood, what about hemophiliacs?)

51

Either that or he/she is implying that he/she is a better Christian than anybody else here because of the "love" factor. Just doesn't like the label

52

Regarding the Law in books like Leviticus, since I am a gentile, it doesn't apply to me or probably 99% of Christians. Read your Romans.

53

One question that I haven't seen asked is: Why do people pierce their tongue (or any other body part)?

I pierced my ear 16 years ago as an 18 year old. Thinking back on it, I did it for several reasons:

54

"Much of Scripture is, after all, concerned with teaching us how to live properly."

Uh, NO! Much of Scripture is about having a relationship with God.

Joe, do you really believe this or is this part of the joke? Legalism is superstition! Worrying about how to "live properly" is legalism!

55

In other words you talk about going beyond legalism in the title but your conclusion is legalism!

I don't get you sometimes! Of course, I realize that may entirely be one of my many deficiencies.

56

Tim L Uh, NO! Much of Scripture is about having a relationship with God.

I think you are interpreting my statement about living properly in a way that creates a false dilemma. As a Christian I obviously believe that to “live properly” means to live in right relation to God (our primary relationship), to man (our secondary relationships), and to creation (our context). I think if you view my statement from that angle and then compare it to the Biblical texts you will see that this is what the bulk of scripture (OT and NT) is about.

Legalism is superstition!

I don’t quite understand what you mean by that. Are you saying that Jews such as Moses and David who lived under the Law were superstitious?

Worrying about how to "live properly" is legalism!

I completely disagree. I think this line of thinking leads to a watered down Gospel in which all that matters is that we say the Sinner’s Prayer, get our ticket punched, and then we are free to live as we choose. I think that “living properly” is not a way to salvation but a response to salvation’s setting us free.

Naturally, I also believe in common grace so I think that in some respects non-believers can “live properly” in relation to their fellow humans and to creation. But I believe that “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.”

While I’m sure you are not espousing such a view, I would reject any heretical notions that we are free to live however we choose once we become followers of Christ. We have freedom within form (creational norms, God’s law) but we are not free to do whatever our unredeemed heart’s desire.

57

Joe,

I agree with your general premise. I also think there’s a point at which a preference for certain cleanliness of habit can border on prejudice or phobia. In other words, habits ought to be based on fact. For example, although head lice are still associated with lack of cleanliness, scrupulously clean children can get them just as easily as grubby children (gross as that may be). The handshake, an accepted and even obligatory gesture in our culture, can be just as dirty as your friend’s toothbrush. Doorknobs, shopping carts, etc. are notorious perpetuators of the latest bug, and cleaning implements found in nearly every household (sponges especially) readily harbor bacteria. I remember reading a study that found that, in general, people’s kitchens are germier than their toilets. No kidding.

Back to toothbrushes – it depends on whose toothbrush you’re sharing. If you wouldn’t share your spouse’s toothbrush (aside from reasons of respecting personal possession), you probably shouldn’t kiss him/her either, or do other things. (Not that I recommend sharing toothbrushes with one’s spouse, but, if one must, a toothbrush can be washed.)

Not to mention that practically every crawling baby on earth has eaten or mouthed enough stuff that’s been on the floor or wherever to thoroughly nauseate the average adult. How much, and in what ways, does this really affect the baby’s overall health?

On piercing, in general it’s a symbolic act. Is it done for mere adornment or for other purposes? Those are the questions that determine whether it should be done or not, besides matters of hygiene.

58

Ellen ---

You're right, I don't see the religious objection to piercing and tattooing as a wisdom issue. I see the health issue as a wisdom issue. I see the religious issue as an issue of faith.

I believe it is silly to try to make religion a wisdom issue. Faith is faith, if you believe you believe, if you don't you don't.

And if you believe "in the Bible" well, you've got a long list of do's and don'ts and with the exception of a truly small number of people of my acquaintance (fewer than 5) basically no one lives in accordance with the Bible. Most people who claim to be believing Christians don't even make a good effort to live in accordance with the few parts of the Bible with which they are familiar.

59

“I think you are (mis)interpreting my statement…”

Come on Joe, when have I ever done that? ;-).

I agree that we want to live in right relation to God. However, when I look at scripture, I mostly see how not to live. This is especially true in the OT. Repeatedly we see the Israelites turning away from God, but overall the turning away has to do with not looking and seeking God and not listening to his will, which of course results in not living properly. If the Bible was about how to “get right” with God so that we can live in heaven, it would be much shorter and more simple. I see it as a book about God trying to have a relationship with humans. At first, Israel was the chosen people and then Jesus opened a relationship with God to us all (if we accept).

“I don’t quite understand what you mean by that. Are you saying that Jews such as Moses and David who lived under the Law were superstitious?”

No! But the Jews of the time of Jesus were superstitious (at least the ones that Jesus criticized). They thought that life came from law and that law can adequately guide our life. They were legalists, which eventually forces you into merely symbolic behavior. It is superstition to think that this good behavior has the good effects that they had seeked. This wrong focus is also the reason that they did not see Jesus as the Word. They did not know God, they only knew the letter of the law, and the “letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Cor 3:6). It is not trying to live right that is the problem. The problem is the absolute emphasis on doing everything “just right”, which is legalism. This is how I attach legalism to be superstitious (not that it is my idea, Dallas Willard is an inspiration for this thought, though perhaps I am slaughtering what he said)

“I completely disagree. I think this line of thinking leads to a watered down Gospel”

Not any more of a watered down Gospel than what I just described above. I do not believe that we are free to live however we choose once we become followers of Christ. I do understand that some people do somehow conclude to a watered down Gospel. However, they are wrong in their conclusion. That doesn’t make legalism right!

“But I believe that “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom”.”

Yes, it is the beginning of wisdom. Don’t you want to go beyond the beginning of wisdom? “There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love” (1 John 14:16,18).

Those that do not know God or believe in God and Jesus, should fear God. I do believe and though my faith is still juvenille, I choose to focus on using the Word of God to know God and to know his will and to listen for his voice because of his perfect love. Yes, in knowing his word and voice, I will learn how to “live right” but this is the result of his love, not the path to his love.

60

I think Jesus would have responded to the underlying motive of piercing, and raised the ante: "You pierce your tongue for beauty and fashion, and yet do not form words of truth and love that are timely."

Or "you will suffer blood and pain for a tongue-stud. Can you not spend some time and energy bearing your brother's burden?"

Take each case back to the essentials.

To critics of piercing: "Heal your own tongues."

He let no one off the hook who tried to haul him into their "causes," especially pointing fingers at others. Those who came to him, he pointed to decency and eternal health.

61

I think Jesus would have responded to the underlying motive of piercing, and raised the ante: "You pierce your tongue for beauty and fashion, and yet do not form words of truth and love that are timely."

Are you sure those are mutually exclusive?

62

From a strictly medical point of view, ALL piercings and tatoos have an element of risk. The daughter of one of my partners (I am an MD-pathologist) took him to a tatoo parlor, which he inspected and cleared for her, and she got a tatoo. She then proceeded to get hepatitis (fortunately, mild.) It is cheaper and easier to cut corners on hygiene. I've seen hepatitis; I don't want it! Liver failure is a really disgusting way to die.

Again, from a medical point of view, "prophylactics" are one of the big lies of the age. There is almost no data (ARE almost no data?) on condom effectiveness against sexually transmitted diseases. If condoms are used perfectly and consistently, they are thought to reduce HIV transmission by 85%. Sounds good, right? But all that means in practice is that it will take you six times as long to get infected. Oh, and women, there is something in us men that resists, resists, resists "perfect and consistent" use of condoms...

Dr. Jim

63

Once upon a time I was a stupid, rebellious hippie. I can attest to the mentioned fact that Haight Ashbury had many unexpected medical problems. One more, everyone on the street seemed to own a large dog. Walking down the street barefoot ( which good hippies did ) was an interesting process.
In the midst of this mess began the "Jesus movement". God began with a mess, and began to teach us how to live.
I lived in a sort of "discipleship house" for a while. There, we were taught many Christian virtues like cleanliness, kindness, hope and modesty.
God loved us as we were on the street. He didn't leave us that way. Leviticus is right.

64

Many years ago a street preacher came through campus. After he finished telling us that the women in shorts and pants were all whores, he began carrying on about men with earrings. He said there was a secret code - if the earring was in one ear, the guy was was gay. If the other ear, he was a drug dealer. He looked at the fellow next to me and demanded, "You - what does YOUR earring mean?"

He coolly replied, "It means I have a hole in my ear lobe."