By Ugochukwu Ugwuanyi
The decision by the founder of the David Christian Centre (DCC), Pastor Kingsley Okonkwo to make a public show of the Roman numeral tattoo etched on his arm instantly sentenced him to “you go explain tire” – as they say in Nigerian parlance. The pastor has since been occupied with justifying his act and art that he would exasperatedly declare some few days ago that he does not owe anybody an explanation for the tatt.
Debates over the body art’s propriety and the identity crisis it provokes have continued to dominate Nigerian social media that someone in the street may be forced to ask: “Who send am?” This question in pidgin English is literal, not the colloquial context of “Who cares?” Given the sharp division, inflamed passions and hoopla generated by the 50-year-old’s unveiling of the ink-mark inspired by John 3:16, it has become expedient to ask if the man of God got express divine instruction or approval to do so.
There is no assuming that every action or inaction of God’s people is Spirit-led. Samuel Ortom, governor of Benue State from 2015 to 2023, used his life lesson to teach this less than a week ago. Even while serving as Governor, he presented as a devout Christian that many mistook him for a pastor. He would reveal in October 2019 while declaring open a two-day retreat for Benue State Government appointees that, “I became born again in 1979 and since then I have professed Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour.”
Yet, for all his intimacy with God, Ortom failed to seek His face when faced with major political decisions. He recently admitted losing the 2023 Benue North-West senatorial election because he did not consult God and seek divine approval. The former Benue helmsman further stated, “The mistake I did in 2023 was to impose a gubernatorial candidate on all of you who are in PDP. I did not ask God…” As such, we can’t assume or infer that Pastor Kingsley started out by asking God if it was okay for him to have a tattoo. If he did so or was led by the Spirit of God to get one, he should unambiguously make this known so that his detractors can rest.
Should the disclosure still fail to appease prevailing sentiments and criticisms, the skeptics would then have given away themselves as bent on altogether disparaging the entire undeniable proofs of Pastor Kingsley’s ministry. The cynics would also be seen as undermining the Spirit behind the immense contributions of Pastor Kingsley and his phenomenal wife, Pastor Mildred to the Body of Christ – particularly the resuscitation of broken homes through counseling and mentorship. They would also be rubbishing his many years of labour in the Lord’s Vineyard via didactic teaching and books on singleness, marriage, purpose, and emotional intelligence. For Pete’s sake, these impacts can’t be pooh-poohed by some parochial perception of tattoos!
God’s directives and assignments don’t pander to cultural movements. He can even ask His servants to stray into gray areas just to shock society and arrest public attention to the point He’s trying to make. He did this with Prophet Isaiah (Isaiah 20:2-3) who had to walk about unclad for three years. If the Lord can make His prophet go this far to press home a message, there’s nothing weird about Pastor Kingsley getting a tattoo for evangelical purposes. That again is dependent on whether the Lord instructed him to do so. It’s for him to unequivocally tell.
But then, why should anyone be bothered about a tattoo-wearing pastor when the gospel isn’t about God trying to salvage the soul from the outside but recreating the man from the inside? Our last essay was on Jelly Roll who courageously declared for Jesus at the Grammy Awards stage. Google Analytics reports that post his holding up of a Bible and assertion that “Jesus is for everybody,” online searches for “Jesus” and “Bible” surged by 20 per cent. Yet, the emergency evangelist who elicited such viral interest in God’s Kingdom has ink on his body, as conspicuous on his face!
Curiously, conservative Christians are no longer basing their uncompromising stance against tattoos on the isolated commandment in Leviticus 19:28. They’ve apparently realised that when contextually situated, “You shall not make any cuts on your body [in mourning] for the dead, nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves” doesn’t apply to the New Testament believer. It’s why the counter argument has shifted to “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient.”
Pastor Kingsley’s critics quote the scripture to buttress their argument that a church elder should not do what can lead those who are weak in faith astray. And that while a pastor is conscious of his boundaries, baby believers can go beyond inking their bodies into profane acts. Proponents of this point are not taking into consideration Pastor Kingsley’s defense that he is sent to those who fancy and wear tattoos. Indeed, those non-conformists will readily follow a pastor who identifies with, and won’t judge them. On this basis, Pastor Kingsley will be acting like the good shepherd Jesus preached about in Matthew 18:12-14 who left a flock of 99 to search for one lost sheep!
It boils down to strategically advancing the Kingdom of God. It is just like Paul the Apostle saying in 1 Corinthians 9:20, “When I was with the Jews, I lived like a Jew to bring the Jews to Christ. When I was with those who follow the Jewish law, I too lived under that law. Even though I am not subject to the law, I did this so I could bring to Christ those who are under the law.”
Warts and all, Pastor Kingsley has done the body of Christ in Nigeria a solid with this tattoo controversy. He has explained that the intention was not rebellion or clout-chasing, but to ignite a conversation that would make people ask questions about Scripture and faith. We can liken this to legal activism where radicals proactively test conventions and trite principles in the court of law to ascertain their veracity and legality.
By filming and posting his body art on social media, Pastor Kingsley has dragged the perception of tattoo in Christendom to the court of public opinion for adjudication. And consensus is already crystallising with most people admitting that God is not against drawing an edifying tatt on the body. But unlike in litigation where judges sit as arbiters with counsels chorusing “As Your Lordship pleases” to every ruling, there is no constituted authority in the court of public opinion to whom everybody must defer. Perhaps, revered fathers of Faith or God’s Generals should immediately fill this void on account of their wide acclaim for rightly dividing the word of truth and distaste for playing to the gallery.
These senior Overseers have so far kept mum on the trending tattoo conversation. Their silence has become too audible. While they’re understandably not given to jumping on trends, this is one instance where their thought leadership can provide highly-needed clarity for all. Of course, the itching and captive audience won’t even mind an indirect expression of their POV on the perception of tattoos as taboo.
*VIS Ugochukwu is a Sage, Storyteller and Media Trainer, who welcomes readers’ thoughts via DMs on X (nee Twitter) @sylvesugwuanyi