Heath:
1- If you follow Jesus' admonition that your body is a temple, then typically defiling that temple with tattoos is considered sinful.
Like I said, I could see Jesus going either way on this one. I don't think people who get tattoos consider it "defiling" their bodies, though, so I think the issue would be whether Jesus thought it was or not. I could see him go either way on this one, really.
Heath:
Even if not, what kind of image is tattoos giving off? Not the kind that the ultimate creator and wisdom of the universe would probably give off...
Well, depends on the tattoo, really. A naked chick with devil horns on a harley gives off a different message than, say, a celtic cross, or a bible verse. But I think worrying about conservative and/or establishment people's opinions is exactly what Jesus
didn't. He quite clearly did things that many of his day would consider to "send the wrong message" or be the kinds of things that "the ulitmate creator and wisdom of the universe" wouldn't do. Many of the things Jesus did would have been considered far more taboo than tattoos are today.
Heath:
2- As to the dominant cultural norm, gangbanger is one example. Look at rap/hiphop music, or movies, or our commercialized society...many different cultural norms that are becoming prevalent and to some degree worshipped as laudable are simply not Christ-like. I think I can safely say that our cultural norm as a society is NOT a selfless, deep-thinking culture...failures perhaps attributable to the media, to our school systems, but most importantly, to the failure of our families.
Okay, but I'm not sure what this implies in regards to the subject at hand. I can happily agree that many of the prevalent social norms are not christ-like, but the guy in the article that started the discussion off doesn't seem to have accepted those norms. What clothes you where aren't what make you christ-like or not. How long your hair is, or what color it is isn't what make you christ-like. You seem to equate wearing certain clothes with taking actions that
other people associate with those clothes, or at least equating it to promoting or accepting those actions. Wearing a basketball jersey and baggy jeans doesn't make you a ganster anymore than wearing a suit makes you a mormon. I don't think Jesus would care one iota what clothes you wear, and I don't think he'd care one iota what other people think of the clothes you wear either. I think he'd tell people who were worked up about such things that they're missing his point fairly significantly. I think he'd tell people who judge people based on their clothes that they're missing a big part of his message.
Heath:
I think we are talking past each other. I agreed with you that he was challenging his cultural norms and the assumptions built into the Mosaic law which was prevalent. My point is that he "raised" the cultural norms when he challenged them. It can easily be argued that the people at issue in this thread are lowering Christ's standards to make it more popular. That's what troubles me. There is no raising of the barre there.
Sure, it could be argued, but so far no one seems to have done so. I think the counter argument could also be made. The guy in the article seems to think the
mainstream churches are the ones that have lowered their norms to make them more popular. I don't necessarily agree with him, but I don't its fair to just say he's lowering the bar and expect everyone to agree with you. In what way do you feel he's lowering the norms?
Also, remember that while you and me think Jesus raised the bar, the establishment of his day certainly viewed it as lowering the bar to appeal to the lowest common denominator. The pharisees certainly didn't view Jesus' work with prostitutes, tax collectors, and the like as 'raising the bar.' They considered it a debasement of what was holy. They considered it behavior that God would not approve of. And they honestly believed this, just as you honestly believe that this guy is lowering the bar. The question is, how do you know that you're not making the same error they did? Remember, these weren't just evil bad guys who wanted to wring all they could out of the system, but people who devoted their life to God, and studied His word and laws.
Heath:
I find "rap" in and of itself troubling and not Christ-like. I'm not advocating against it, but if you look at the way the beat works on the psyche and how it affects people, it is not a calm, spiritual type of music at all. It raises your blood pressure, not lowers it. Same with hard rock, for example.
Or gospel? Or even "onward Christian soldiers," or "a mighty fortress is our God?" I think you're making a false, overly-broad generalization, and trying to make something quite big out of simple personal preference. And while you say you're not advocating against it, you say it's "troubling and not christ-like." Sort of sounds like advocating against it to me. I'm not a huge fan of rap, but I know that it's a broad enough style that you can't categorize the entire genre accurately the way you have. There are calm, spiritual rap songs. There are even pro-Jesus rap songs, even by mainstream artists (check out "Jesus walks" by Kanye West, for example).
Heath:
Even if you put the Sermon on the Mount into a Megadeath song, it's not going to elevate you spiritually or give you a "spiritual experience."
No? Might not for you, but how do you know what's going to give someone else a spiritual experience? Do spiritual experiences always happen the same way for all people? Do they only happen during traditional, conservative, quiet, what-many-would-call-boring church services?
You're gettin' old, Heath! "Turn that racket down, you durn kids!" ;)