Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158 brill.

nl/exch

A Controversial Debate over the Interpretation of

Tattooing in the Bible: An Ethnohermeneutics
Approach From ‘Rice to Bread’

Shuma Iwai
Belhaven College, Jackson, Mississippi
shiwai@hotmail.com

Abstract
This paper examines from the cross-cultural perspective the increasing practice of tattooing. The
author, a native of Japan, investigates tattooing in both the Japanese and American context, and
analyzes the biblical principles related to tattooing in order to discover the implications for
Christians in various cultural contexts.

Keywords
ethnohermeneutics, diversity, biblical theology, cross-cultural studies

Introduction
There are different perspectives on tattooing among Christians in a variety of
cultures today. Although it is ideal for all people in diverse cultures to have a
biblical universal understanding on tattooing, it is difficult to follow it. It is
because they view the subject based on their worldviews, which are grounded
on what they believe, practice, and value in their own cultures.1 Therefore,
they sometimes interpret the same teaching from the Bible in different ways.
It is necessary for interpreters to explain cultural factors of different times in
the Scripture explicitly, understand their own cultures, and transcend both so
that they can apply the words of God to different cultures.2

1
For example, the Copts in Egypt have tattoos of a small cross on their right wrists.
2
Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., ‘Obeying the Word: The Cultural Use of the Bible,’ in: Walter C.
Kaiser, Jr. and Moisés Silva (eds.), An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning,
Grand Rapids mi: Zondervan Publishing House 1994, 173-174.
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010 DOI: 10.1163/016627410X12608581119759
148 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158

It is significant for us to understand different views on tattooing and seek

the biblical principle of how we should respond to the issue of tattooing, for it
will lead us to have a better understanding of leading Christians in varied cul-
tural contexts in order to glorify God. This paper will discuss the concern of
tattooing from three different points; the Bible, interpreters, and receptors.3
The argument will be grounded on the following research questions: (1) What
biblical perspective is evident regarding tattooing? (2) Based on their culture,
what aspects do the Japanese church have in terms of tattooing? (3) What are
the approaches to bridge gaps among various aspects for the American citizens
on the topic of tattooing?
This article will first describe the biblical teaching on tattooing: its defini-
tions, functions of the body, and aims of tattooing, especially focusing on the
passage of Leviticus 19:28. Then, it will examine its concepts, including its
history and perspectives among non-believers as well as Christians, in the Jap-
anese context. Lastly, it will focus on its various views and missiological appli-
cations in the American framework.

Biblical Views on Tattooing

Definitions of Tattooing
There are different passages in which the Scripture mentions marking on the
body in both the Old and New Testaments (Gen 4:15; Ex 13:9, 16; Lev 19:28;
21:5; Deut 6:8; 11:18; 14:1; Jer 16:6; 41:5; Rev 3:12; 13:16-17; 14:1; 22:4).
The meanings of marking on the body in these passages vary, depending on
the contexts. Most of them refer to the connotation of inscription. Consider-
ing the literal meaning, laceration on the body can imply tattooing, plastic
surgeries, or body piercing in modern society. However, this paper is limited
to tattoos.4 It is only in Leviticus 19:28 that God has used the particular term,

3
Kaiser asserts that these three horizons have the cross-cultural perspective: the culture of the
Bible, of the interpreter, and of the receptor. See Kaiser, ‘Obeying the Word: The Cultural Use of
the Bible,’ 178-179.
4
There are five types of tattooing. Traumatic tattoos are caused ‘by the unwanted imbedding
of dirt or debris beneath the skins’ due to physical accidents. Amateur tattoos are ones put by
people themselves or their friends. Professional tattoos are placed for either cultural ethnicity or
modern art. Medical tattoos are performed to delineate marks for radiation. Cosmetic tattoos are
used for permanent make-up. This paper focuses on the third sort of tattooing, professional tat-
toos. See American Academy of Dermatology, Tattoos, Body Piercing, and Other Skin Adornments,
 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158 149

tattoo, in the Old Testament.5 Hence, the emphasis on tattooing will be on

that text, as the primary passage, as well as other related texts in this paper.
The Bible says, ‘Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on
yourselves’ (Lev 19:28). The word, tattoo, is qa˓ăqa˓ in the Hebrew language.
Even though its etymology is unknown,6 qa˓ăqa˓ is defined as a ‘cut, incision’,7
or ‘gross cutting of the skin’.8 John W. Kleinig and John E. Hartley explain
that the noun, qa˓ăqa˓, refers to ‘a mark or inscription as a tattoo’,9 ‘making
tattoos on the body’,10 or ‘painting the body’.11 In summary, tattooing refers to
inscribing or gashing on the body. Since tattooing is placing inscription on the
flesh, the next section will focus on the body per se.

Functions of the Body

From the previous section, tattooing indicates lacerating one’s body. In order
to understand what the biblical message is on tattooing, the discussion will be
highlighted on the body, the object of its receiver. George A. F. Knight addresses
that the word, flesh, in the Hebrew shows the whole being of man, his person-
ality, soul, and body.12 It is indispensable to contemplate the original intention
of how the Almighty God created human beings. ‘God created man in his own
image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them’
(Gen 1:27). Then, He pronounced all creation very good (Gen 1:31).13 One’s

website American Academy of Dermatology, http://www.aad.org/public/Publications/pamphlets/

tattoo.htm, accessed 8 December 2008.
5
Lorne Zelyck, ‘Under the Needle: An Ethical Evaluation of Tattoos and Body Piercing’, The
Christian Research Journal 28/6 (2005), 4.
6
David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker (ed.), World Biblical Commentary 4, Leviticus, by
John E. Hartley, Dallas, TX: Word Books 1992, 321; John W. Kleinig, Leviticus, Concordia Com-
mentary: A Theological Exposition of Sacred Scripture, ed. Dean O. Wenthe, St. Louis mo: Concor-
dia Publishing House 2003, 400; Jacob Milgrom, The Anchor Bible 3, Leviticus 17-22: A New
Translation with Introduction and Commentary, New York: Doubleday 2000, 1694; M. E. J.
Richardson (ed.), The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament 3, New York: E. J. Brill
1996, 1116.
7
James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Hebrew, Oak
Harbor wa: Logos Research Systems 1997, s.v. ‘qa’aqa’.
8
Swanson, s.v. ‘qa’aqa’.
9
Kleinig, 400.
10
Hubbard and Barker, 321.
11
Hubbard and Barker, 321.
12
George A. F. Knight, Leviticus, Philadelphia pa: Westminster Press 1981, 125.
13
Gordon J. Wenham. The Book of Leviticus, Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Pub-
lishing Company 1979, 272.
150 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158

body is God’s marvelous creation.14 It signifies ‘the beauty and perfection of

holiness’.15 The body as the divine likeness is to be kept whole and is not to
disfigure.16
As the Scripture reveals, believers are children of the Lord (Deut 14:1).
They are not to mar themselves because they are holy people of God and
belong to Him as His chosen people (Deut 14:2). Paul also addressed a similar
point. Christians’ bodies are not their own but Christ’s; therefore, they must
use their bodies for God’s glory (1 Cor 6:19-20).17 Thus, believers’ bodies are
created in the image of the Lord, possessions of Christ, and should not be
scarred because they need to keep the natural order of creation.

Purposes of Tattooing
With an understanding of clarification of tattooing and roles of the body from
the biblical point of view, it is now essential to investigate aims of the behavior
of incising. For what purposes do people gash themselves? Are they different
or the same in the various contexts of the Bible? There are three aspects on
lacerating the body.
The first view is tattooing should be prohibited because it signifies the wor-
ship of other gods. The passage of Leviticus 19:28 illustrates that tattooing is
in order to mourn for the dead. This activity was practiced by pagans.18 As
written in other references, it was a common rite to grieve for the dead. In
Deuteronomy 14:1, God clearly teaches the Israelite people through Moses
that they should not cut themselves or shave the front of their heads ‘for the
dead’ since they are ‘a people holy to the Lord’. Jeremiah 16:6 also teaches
‘both high and low will die in this land. They will not be buried or mourned,
and no one will cut himself or shave his head for them.’ Self-mutilation is not
what God wants one to perform because its act is not to worship the Lord but
underworld deities.19 Tattoos are ‘proofs of piety among the Gentiles’ but

14
Hubbard and Barker, 320; Rousas John Rushdoony. Leviticus, Vallencito ca: Ross House
Books 2005, 243.
15
Hubbard and Barker, 320.
16
Wenham, 272.
17
Wenham, 272.
18
E. Ray Clendenen, ed., The new American commentary, vol. 3A, Leviticus, by Mark F.
Rooker. Nashville tn: Broadman & Holman Publishers 2000, 262; Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Toward
Old Testament Ethics, Grand Rapids mi: Zondervan Publishing House 1983, 123.
19
Erhard S. Gertenberger, Leviticus: A commentary, Louisville ky: Westminster John Knox
Press 1996, 276.
 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158 151

‘defilements to the people of God’.20 However, it should be noted the act of

lament itself is not forbidden.21 Particular grieving is permissible as disclosed
in the Scripture (Gen 50:1-3; 2 Sam 1:17-27).
Another example of incising one’s flesh is described in 1 Kings 18:28. When
the prophets of Baal called for their god, they ‘shouted louder and slashed
themselves with swords and spears, as was their custom, until their blood
flowed.’ Their god never appeared, for it was not real. This text demonstrates
that cutting one’s body for other deities is not a right performance. In short,
inscription for the dead or other deities is banned.
The second perception is tattooing is permitted if objectives of tattooing
derive from the Lord. Several references in the Scripture support this point.
When Cain killed his brother Abel, the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no
one would kill him (Gen 4:15). When God brought Moses out of Egypt, He
told Moses to put the words He addressed to Moses on his hand and forehead
as a reminder of what the Lord did for him (Ex 13:9). Other passages show
God ordered the Israel people to place His teachings on their hands and fore-
heads (Deut 6:8; 11:18). Milgrom explains that these marks are phylacteries as
signs of their adherence to their Lord.22 All texts imply making marks on their
bodies, but it should be reminded these commands came from the Lord.
Related to the reasons for marking on the body, there is another aspect
originated from God. Isaiah 44:5 says, ‘[A]nother will write on his hand, ‘The
LORD’s’’. Is it legitimate to inscribe the name of God? Albeck asserts tattoo-
ing the name of another god is banned.23 The Tosepta recorded that rabbis
viewed the violation on tattooing was restricted only to marking the name of
another god.24 In this sense, placing the name of the Lord seems to be tolera-
ble. Milgrom further insists ‘blemishes cased by birth or disease, the result of
natural causes, detract from a priest’s holiness’ would not violate the order
of God.25 In summary, marking on one’s body is permitted on the condition
of being originated from the Creator.
The third view on tattooing is that it is not allowed to place stigmata for any
reasons. As Christian bodies are likeness of the Divine and belong to God,

20
John Calvin, Commentaries on the Four Last Books of Moses 1, translated by Charles William
Bingham, Grand Rapids mi: Baker Book House 1979, 52.
21
Wenham, 272.
22
Milgrom, 1695.
23
Ch. Albeck, Seder Neziqin, Jerusalem: Bialik Institute 1953, 4.467.
24
Milgrom, 1695.
25
Milgrom, 1695.
152 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158

they should not be marred.26 This applies in the case of marking the name of
the Lord as a token of submission to Him or conversion to Christianity.

Observations in the Japanese Context

Historical Background
The origin of the tattoo can be tracked back to the Jōmon period (10,000-
300 bc) in Japan. Although it is not clearly supported, it is said clay figurines
during this period have features of painted patterns or markings that can be
identified with tattoos.27 During the Yayoi period (300 bc-250 ad),28 tattoos
were associated with ritual and indication of status.29 This may be related to
the Chinese influence of tattooing for ritual purposes or hierarchical position.
Tattooing was recognized as a form of punishment or social rank since the
Yayoi era. The first record of tattooing in the written form was in the Nihon
Shoki,30 the Chronicle of Japan. A man who plotted rebellion was tattooed as
punishment, which helped others to recognize him as a person who did some-
thing wrong. During the Edo period (1603-1867),31 the power of hierarchy32
became obvious.33 The lower classes, called eta,34 or hinin,35 were inscribed for
classified identification.

26
Wenham, 272.
27
History-induced Stigma: The Role of Tattoos in Japanese Society, http://www.geocities.com/
Tokyo/Shrine/2475/irezumi.html, accessed 7 December 2008.
28
The Yayoi period flourished in the field of agriculture, especially growing rice.
29
Kodansha Encyclopedia, 1983 ed., s.v. “tattoos.”
30
The Nihon Shoki is the second oldest book regarding the Japanese history. It was completed
in 720 AD.
31
In the Edo period the Tokugawa family ruled the nation.
32
The hierarchy, called Shinōkōshō, is divided into four sections: samurai, farmers, artisans,
and merchants.
33
David R. Mayer, ‘Outer Marks, Inner Grace: Flannery O’Connor’s Tattooed Christ’, Asian
Folklore Studies 42/1 (1983), 120.
34
Eta is the people of village who worked as slaughters or tanners. They were not included in
the hierarchy.
35
The Hinin are the outcast clan. Its literal meaning is non-people. They were sorted even
under the hierarchy. They worked with criminals, executioners, or gravediggers.
 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158 153

During the Meiji period (1868-1912),36 the government prohibited tattoo-

ing because they considered it “as being barbaric,”37 and this statute continued
until 1945.38 In contemporary Japanese society, inscription on a body is still
viewed as a negative behavior. Nevertheless, some young generations want to
be tattooed, for they view it only as art.

Depraved Perspectives on Tattooing

Based on the historical framework, nowadays, tattooing still possesses extremely
negative connotations in the Japanese culture.39 Historically, pricking their
bodies with pigment is considered criminal act or a sign of the lower classifica-
tion. These people were recognized as expulsed persons. This is the most excru-
ciating experience for them in the Japanese context in which people value the
social cooperation. As a result, tattooing the body is viewed as immoral. In
addition to the origin of tattooing, there is another point influencing the Jap-
anese people to think pessimistically. Religiously, the country of Japan was
influenced by Confucianism through China. The foundation of the way the
majority of the Japanese nation live is rooted on its idea. Confucianism main-
tains its disapproval for children to harm themselves because the activity is
disrespectable toward filial piety.40 Inscribing upon one’s body is a taboo.
Namihira points out ‘violation of taboos’ is considered ‘impure’.41 It is seen as
pollution and negative stigma. Though there are some exceptions, this concept
is similar to the practice of Buddhism.42
Furthermore, tattooing is regarded as a dissolute behavior. The general
image of tattooing in Japan is covering ‘the whole body or at least a large pro-
portion of it’.43 This image is unlikely in the Western culture in which the
association of tattoos is one-point tattooing on the body. Some examples of

36
The Meiji period. After the long-term national seclusion from the early 17th century to the
middle of the 19th century, the Japanese government finally opened its gate to foreign countries.
Therefore, encounter with the Western cultures occurred during this age.
37
Kodansha Encyclopedia, 1983 ed., s.v. ‘tattoos’.
38
Helena Burton, ‘Oriental Irezumi and Occidental Tattooing in Contemporary Japan’,
2003; available from http://www.nootrope.net/koi/tattooing_in_japan.html, accessed 7 Decem-
ber 2008.
39
History-induced Stigma: The Role of Tattoos in Japanese Society.
40
Burton.
41
Emiko Namihira, ‘Pollution in the Folk Belief System’, Current Anthropology 28/4, (1987),
S65.
42
History-induced Stigma: The Role of Tattoos in Japanese Society.
43
Burton.
154 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158

designs preferred in Japan are dragons, carps, shishi lions, peonies, chrysanthe-
mums, cherry blossoms, and so forth.44
In the recent Japanese context, tattooing has prevailed among gangsters or
the Japanese notorious mafia, yakuza. The aim of tattooing is to prove their
commitment to their group or to show their manliness.45 Since the representa-
tion of tattooing is strongly related to these certain clusters, people do not
have a positive reaction to it. When a tattooed person sits next to them in
public places, such as in buses, trains, public bathhouses, swimming pools, or
hot springs, most people are not comfortable or may be even anxious. On this
basis, some facilities do not allow tattooed customers to enter.46
In short, the present Japanese society does not willingly comply with tattoo-
ing because of its past negative background, notions of religions, and associa-
tion of gangs.

Values of Tattooing in Church

The perspective on tattooing in the Japanese churches is founded in their cul-
tural worldviews. As a result, many Christians view tattooing pessimistically.
When Christianity as the Western religion encounters the Japanese people,
they take upon it their cultural values.
Paul G. Hiebert illustrates culture as an iceberg. The visible level, a small
portion of the iceberg, on the surface of the ocean, is what people behave and
believe; whereas, “the large hidden mass beneath the surface that holds the
whole iceberg up” is their worldview.47 The surface part is objective; while the
underlying part is subjective because their worldview is largely and uncon-
sciously grounded on cultural elements. Worldview is not separate from cul-
ture; rather, it is included in it.48 According to Eugene A. Nida, culture is “all
learned behavior which is socially acquired, that is, the material and nonmate-
rial traits which are passed on from one generation to another.”49 It is unavoid-

44
Kodansha Encyclopedia, s.v. ‘tattoos’.
45
Kodansha Encyclopedia, s.v. ‘tattoos’.
46
Burton.
47
Paul G. Hiebert, ‘Conversion and Worldview Transformation’, International Journal of
Frontier Missions 14/2 (1997), 84.
48
Charles H. Kraft, ‘Culture, Worldview and Contextualization’, in: Ralph D. Winter and
Steven C. Hawthorne (eds.), Perspectives on the World Christian Movement: A Reader, Pasadena
ca: William Cary Library, 3d edition 2004, 385.
49
Eugene A. Nida, Customs, Culture and Christianity, London: Tyndale 1954, 28.
 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158 155

able for Christians to view the world through the lens of their culture.50 Hence,
it is natural for the Japanese Christians to include cultural influence in the
matter of their worldview, the issue of tattooing. Yet, this does not indicate
they do not depend on what the Scripture teaches. A part of their interpreta-
tion and value on tattooing is related to their cultural aspects.
Although it is valid to understand the unfavorable observation of the Japa-
nese believers on tattooing, there is a unique Christian group today. Convert-
ers to Christ in this group were previously members of yakuza, most of whom
were already tattooed. They perform their missions, insisting on their dramatic
changes as their mission weapon.

Missiological Applications in the American Context

Influence of Tattooing
Tattooing is ‘ascending to unprecedented levels of popularity among a vast
array of social groups’51 today in North America. Starting from the 1960s, tat-
tooing in the United States has experienced changes.52 For a long time, inscrip-
tion on the body was performed by the lower-class people including sailors
and bikers. However, it has been popularized among more people. A survey
conducted in the early 1990s shows that 24 percent of people from the ages of
18 to 50 wore tattoos.53 Among the young from 18 to 29 year olds, it is
reported that almost half of them (49 percent) had tattoos.54 Moreover, it is
estimated that there are approximately 30,000 tattoo artists working in the
United States today.55 As tattooing has been accepted by more people, selec-
tions of the designs vary from skulls to Walt Disney characters or religious
marks.

50
Bernard T. Adeney, Strange Virtues: Ethics in Multicultural World, Downers Grove il: Inter-
Varsity Press 1995, 85.
51
Michael Atkinson, ‘Tattooing and Civilizing Processes: Body Modification as Self-control’,
The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 41/2 (2004), 125.
52
Daniel Rosenblatt, ‘The Antisocial Skin: Structure, Resistance, and “Modern Primitive”
Adornment in the United States’, Cultural Anthropology 12/3 (1997), 300.
53
Andrew Bridges, Survey: 24 Percent between 18-50 Tattooed, Website ABC News, http://abc-
news.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2062343, accessed 8 December 2008.
54
Harris Interactive, Americans and Britons Likelier than Italians to Regret Decision to be
Tattooed; website Harris Interactive, http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?
NewsID=760, accessed 8 December 2008.
55
Jean-Chris Miller, The Body of Art Book, New York: Berkley Books 1997, 10.
156 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158

Tension among Various Aspects

In America, there are three views on tattooing: optimistic, pessimistic, and
amoral. The first aspect is the practice of making deep gashes on one’s body is
allowable. Several concepts support this point. The purpose of tattooing no
longer has the same origin as disclosed in Leviticus 19:28. The biblical text
denotes marking imprints on the skin is a pagan practice, which is not in
accordance with the Lord’s teaching. Yet, this principle in the Old Testament
does not fit in the contemporary situation. The reason behind this is that mod-
ern people do not prick their bodies for worshipping other gods; rather, they
do it for their ‘decorative means of self expression and personal decoration’.56
It does not imply they devote themselves to false or anti-Christ deities. This
leads people to consider tattooing as a permitted behavior.
Apart from the teaching in the Old Testament, it is also acceptable for
Christians if they tattoo their skin with signs or words of the Lord. They lift
up their Creator and testify their devotion only to Him through this type of
tattooing.
The second position on tattooing is the opposite. It is absolutely pessimistic
to incise anything into one’s flesh. As it is written in Leviticus 19:28, God
teaches us not to put tattoo marks on our bodies. The principle in the Old
Testament is consistent in the New Testament;57 therefore, it is essential for
Christians to follow His words.
In addition, this notion of the body illustrates our body is not our own, but
the Lord’s (1 Cor 6:19). Our flesh is the temple of the Holy Spirit.58 He cre-
ated us in His image (Gen 1:27) and pronounced all very good (Gen 1:31).59
Do we lacerate the body which belongs to Him? Paul wrote ‘[H]onor God
with your body’ (1 Cor 6:20). Is tattooing a way we glorify Him with our
body? With these foundations, making gashes on the skin is considered a neg-
ative activity; therefore, it should be prohibited.

56
Tattoo and the Bible, website Sacred Ink, http://www.sacredink.net/tattoo_and_the_bible/,
accessed 8 December 2008.
57
See John S. Feinberg, ed., Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship
between the Old and New Testaments, Westchester il: Crossway Books, 1988; Walter C. Kaiser,
Jr., Toward an Old Testament Theology, Grand Rapids mi: Zondervan Publishing House 1978;
Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., The Uses of the Old Testament in the New, Chicago il: Moody Press 1985.
58
What does the Bible Say about Tattoos and Piercing?, website New Life, Community Church,
http://www.new-life.net/faq022.htm, accessed 8 December 2008.
59
Betty Miller, What does the Bible say about Tattoos?, website Bible.com, http://bible.com/
bibleanswers_result.php?id=230, accessed 8 December 2008.
 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158 157

The third aspect on tattooing is somewhat neutral between the two previ-
ously mentioned. Putting this another way, marking stigmata on one’s body is
amoral. Zelyck mentions different perspectives on tattooing. It does not inher-
ently desecrate ‘the structural aspect of the image of God’.60 God ordered His
people not to put tattoo marks on their bodies (Lev 19:28). Tattooing is pro-
hibited because it was an action of a pagan rite. Body decorations by laceration
in the contemporary framework do not indicate God’s people are to be idola-
trous or committed to false deities.
In contrast, self-mutilation may desecrate the teleological aspects of the
image of God.61 Symbols of tattoos, such as skulls, may connote offensive
illustrations to others. If so, it would affect the image of God (1 Tim 2:9;
1 Pet 3:3). The Christians’ body is His image, and it is not favorable to nega-
tively mar His image. With these notions, Zelyck leaves the alternative response
between the two optimistic or pessimistic aspects. Instead, he provides some
instructions to guide decisions on tattooing biblically.62
There is another support to the noncommittal view on inscription. Mueller
mentions the case of a tattooed girl who converted to Christianity and used
her devotion to the Lord through a means of inscription.63 To her, putting an
imprinted mark of the words of ‘Jesus Loves Me’ on her body denotes her
complete devotion in order to glorify Him. Mueller suggests the importance
of understanding and analyzing her behavior, which will consequently give
interlocutors more ideas of the way she thinks and lives.64 In other word, gash-
ing one’s body can be viewed from different aspects in the present American
situation.

Applications to the Biblical Principles

As discussed in the former sections, human beings in diverse cultural fields
read and interpret the Scripture with a variety of views. Even living within the
same society, understanding of the words of God varies, depending on indi-
viduals. One of the motivations for this tendency is they interpret the Bible
based on their worldviews, which is largely influenced by their cultural

60
Zelyck, 5.
61
Zelyck, 6.
62
There are four tips to determine getting tattoos: the motivation for tattooing, the possible
physical disease, the interpersonal relationships, and the meaning of symbols. See Zelyck, 7.
63
Walt Mueller, Engaging the Soul of Youth Culture: Bridging Teen Worldviews and Christian
Truth, Downers Grove il: InterVarsity Press 2006, 111-119.
64
Mueller, 118.
158 S. Iwai / Exchange 39 (2010) 147-158

elements.65 In order to be able to explain the meaning of the teaching of the

Lord in accordance with His intention, it is crucial to evaluate the ways to see
the Bible objectively, which will hopefully be effective in different cultures and
nations.
There are two questions for biblical consideration that needed to be asked
before God on the issue of tattooing. The first question is, what is the purpose
of tattooing? Is it for one’s body adornment? Is it for his or her own beauty? Is
it for a sign of commitment to a certain group or master? Or is it as a witness
of the Divine? The meanings of inscription on the body differ, hinged upon its
aim. It is essential to judge whether the goals of tattooing are drawn from the
Lord or from something else.
The second query is whether tattooing is marked for the praise of the Crea-
tor or not. The Scripture says, ‘whether you eat or drink or whatever you do,
do it all for the glory of God’ (1 Cor 10:31). As one’s body is God’s own and
the body is His temple, Christians should kneel before Him and ask for guid-
ance on this matter. These two examinations will assist with the interpretation
of tattooing and lead them to biblical decisions.

Conclusion
This article has examined the issue of tattooing using some analyses from the
perspective of the Bible, the Japanese context, and the American context. It
has discussed the biblical views along with the roles of the body and goals of
tattooing as well as moral, immoral, and amoral aspects on it in the Japanese
and American contexts.
Living in modern diverse communities, it is indispensable to interpret what
the Lord teaches to bridge the gap between subjectivity and objectivity. Thus,
the understanding of tattooing is based on cultural aspects, its intentions and
honoring of God need to be considered. Therefore, God’s children ought to
engage in biblical discernment to make such significant decisions.

Shuma Iwai (b. 1971) has recently received his PhD from Reformed Theological Seminary,
Jackson, Mississippi, USA. He is currently teaching at Belhaven College, Jackson, Missis-
sippi as an adjunct professor. His research interests focus on Christian history and theology
in Japan. His scholarly work related to this area has appeared in a variety of journals. His
email is: shiwai@hotmail.com.

65
Stephen B. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, Maryknoll ny: Orbis Books 1994, 2.
Copyright of Exchange is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or
emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.