So, if you know me you know I’m an avid follower of all things Tim Tebow. My family are die-hard Gator fans and I’m always interested in keeping tabs on who both the self-proclaimed and unintentional “faces” of the Western church are from year to year. I think Tebow falls under the latter moniker of accidental spokesman, but I certainly think he’s a better media focal point for Christendom then, say, Pat Robertson or Westboro Baptist. However, the meat of his attention isn’t his alleged virginity or his family’s mission work. For better or worse, Tebow would still be anonymous if he wasn’t a damn good football player with a style all his own.

So, with all his talent and the public nature of his faith, we’ve seen a perfect storm of praises and jabs aimed not at his skill but at the idea of his Christianity. When he does well, evangelicals praise G-d and atheists commend his athleticism. When he does poorly, evangelicals remain silent and atheists tease about how Jesus must have let him down.

I guess the reason I’m bringing it up at all is that I feel SO sorry for the dude. I think it sucks that people on both sides of the theological table have projected the belief that “G-d wins football games” onto him. As if the kid sits in his room at night and prays for a “W” until he sweats blood.

I’ve got news for you all and I bet Tebow would agree:
JESUS DOESN’T WIN GAMES FOR PEOPLE

If you believe (or if you believe that I believe) that G-d mystically and miraculously orchestrates the outcome of some fucking game, you must be out of your right mind! If the LORD G-D was in the habit of usurping human decision and error by miraculously determining the outcome of things, I think the situation in Uganda would be a little less bleak, don’t you? Do people really think that G-d grants them a win on game day or pulls that SUV up to their drive way?

Successful athletes draw from a well of confidence and courage to get themselves up off the couch everyday and go after what they want in life. Some players draw on their belief in Allah, some draw on their belief in themselves, and Tebow draws on his belief in Jesus. It doesn’t mean that Jesus has anything to do with the outcome of the game or that the validity of the Hebrew G-D is determined by the success of those who pray to Him. It just means that when Tim Tebow feels like he can’t go out on that field, he prays for strength to do the thing that he’s suited to do. I don’t sit around and pray that Jesus will make me a successful comic book writer, I pray that I can have the strength and confidence to start putting words on the page because I feel like it’s what I’m meant to do. I may fail, but that has no reflection on the fact that my faith gave me the strength to try.

Just like it’s barbaric to think “Oh, Brady, you lost that game so you’re not a man” or “Matt, you’re sales are down, you’re not a person” it’s also ridiculous to assume that just because the Broncos lose and their QB draws from his faith that “oh, Broncos lose, Jesus sucks”.

I’ve noticed when Googling “Christians and tattoos” that cogent arguments for the acceptability of Christians tattooing themselves under biblical mandate seem to be sparse. When recently challenged about my own tattoos by a self-recognized “Messianic Jew” (one who believes in Christ but attempts to retain the Jewish traditions associated with early Christianity) I answered with the following:

Note: I had initially misquoted the scripture as saying “do not cut your skin as the pagans do”. 

“26 Ye shall not eat with the blood; neither shall ye practise divination nor soothsaying.

27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

28 Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor imprint any marks upon you: I am HaShem.

29 Profane not thy daughter, to make her a harlot, lest the land fall into harlotry, and the land become full of lewdness.

30 Ye shall keep My sabbaths, and reverence My sanctuary: I am HaShem.

31 Turn ye not unto the ghosts, nor unto familiar spirits; seek them not out, to be defiled by them: I am HaShem your G-d.”

-Lev. 19:26-31 (Tanakh; Jewish Virtual Library)

You are correct, I fully misquoted the verse in confusion with something that my professor, Rabbi Spiro, commented on the passage. He subscribed to the school of thought that the above passage is, in context, about the Hebrews requirement to stray away from pagan practices. Upon a second and third reading of this conservative, Jewish translation of the text I think, though my quoting of the scripture was off-base, that my original argument stands. 
Consider three things:
First, the scripture is grouped into pairs of instructions that the redactors deemed similar to one another. In this, we see the cutting of the flesh and adorning of “tattoos” as being in the same group. It could be argued that the practices were extensions of each other as the other groupings (namely verse 27) seem to be either repeated for specificity or simply redundant. If they are grouped together, then you could more specifically argue that this calls against the tattooing of ones body for the mourning of the dead (a pagan practice and one that is often practiced today through “memorial tattoos) and as none of my tattoos are in remembrance of anyone, then I stand vindicated.

Secondly, the framing of the single verse (28) by other pagan practices (specifically of mourning but also of temple harlotry) sets up the context of these verses as supporting the idea that the intention was to separate the Hebrew people from their pagan neighbors. To quote Pastor Chuck Gerwig, “The “tattoo” marks described in Leviticus 19:28 were clearly related to false religious practices. The word translated tattoo in our English Bibles is the Hebrew word “qa aqa”, this word appears only one time in the Bible, here in this passage Leviticus. The word “qa aqa” means literally “to cut” but taken with the surrounding words indicates a cutting that left a mark imprinted in the skin. This could have been a form of branding, scarring, cutting or a process where ink was inlaid into the skin; there is not enough data to fully define exactly what this word meant. However we translate the word “qa aqa” though, in this passage, it is certainly used in the context of cultic religious worship. The prohibition against “qa aqa”, (translated tattoo) was to keep the Israelites from being involved or affiliated with cultic worship practices.” In this, my original argument stands.

Lastly, if we accept that this is a cultic practice, and that it’s prohibition by G-d is meant to ensure that we as believers use our bodies as an outward sign of devotion to Him, then the argument that both circumcised and uncircumcised people can be saved comes into the equation. We are no longer under the Old Testament Law as Christians, circumcision is no longer required. This is brought out in a number of New Testament passages, among which are the following: Acts 15; Galatians 2:1-3; 5:1-11; 6:11-16; 1 Corinthians 7:17-20; Colossians 2:8-12; Philippians 3:1-3. As these passages proclaim, being saved from our sins is received through faith in Christ to save us from our sins, and it is this act of turning from our sin and self-righteousness and turning instead to reliance upon Christ’s finished work on the cross that makes us “circumcised of heart” and that the works of the flesh accomplish nothing. Thus, if someone who has tattoos already accepts Jesus and professes him or herself a Christian, then it is no longer that only Pagans have tattoos and the need for separation ceases to exist.

In closing I would say this, the strongest argument given in the context of this passage is to mark yourself in memorial may be prohibited, but the marking of ones skin simply for decoration (not unlike make-up or the styling or coloring of one’s hair) just does not seem to hold argument for those of us who find uncircumcised freedom in Christ.