A Portrait of Jesus

Recently I had a conversation about all the pictures of white Jesus in which I was asked why there were no pictures of black Jesus. Of course there are plenty of pictures of black Jesus.

What I pondered in the end was the true nature of that conversation and it got me to thinking about the physical versus the spiritual image of Christ.

The explanation I've found for the resulting appearance of Christ as portrayed in any work of art, is simply attributed to the desire of either the artist or those commissioning the work to make Jesus  relatable in physical appearance, to the surrounding culture.

If people are to spiritually identify with Christ they naturally tend to do so more easily if they can also relate to him physically, or as sharing / suffering in their own afflictions.

That makes sense enough. But the reality is that no one knows what Jesus actually looked like, since he never posted a profile pic on his Facebook account. I jest, but you get it.

The problem as I see it in trying to depict the physical appearance of Jesus is that by his very nature, his ministry and his work, he transcends race.

So by depicting him in any appearance, white or black, we can also misrepresent him and give means to others to associate him with the stereotypes inherent to them regarding not so much the image we present, but what that image represents to them.

Whatever the motive, however pure in doing so, we do run the very real risk providing the means to a grave injustice to Christ's cause by affording a means off putting others to him and the purpose of his actual ministry.

That's just a symptom though.

The problem really comes into play in that we also often tend to approach scripture and Jesus himself in the same manner we approach the art.

That is we try to make sense of either by fitting them to those things we most relate to in our own situations, rather than seeking out what the actual intention was meant to be in the situation which it occurred first.

It's somewhat understandable because I think what we're actually seeking is the bond of mutual affliction. I get it.

It's not wrong to want to identify with something in the person of Christ. It is in fact why many people become Christians. He is relatable if we truly examine him.

That aspect of relation was a part of his ministry in becoming flesh, to be in relationship with us, at least to my limited understanding of things.

I think it's really just human nature at it's core to do so even among each other. We judge by appearance and I believe that in larger part it's simply a primitive survival tactic. Viewed in that light one would be foolish not to do so.

This perhaps may lend some insight as to why we fear that which we do not understand, it is simply a primitive survival response.

This what I see whether I see people wearing band t shirts, or displaying tattoos, and other visual identifications, whether they acknowledge it or not. However unconsciously, those people are making a statement to say, this is the tribe to which I belong. In case you too are of the same tribe, you can be at ease with me we have this much in common. I am no threat to you because we have immediately established a mutual understanding on some level.

However this also serves as a way of warning those not of the same tribe to watch out for potential danger and keeps us somewhat alert for signs of threat.

The heart of the problem in all of this, however difficult it is to admit to ourselves and aloud, is that on many levels we try to associate God with our tribe rather than denying ourselves to be to associated with his. We fear that which we do not understand and rather than reject God we try to change God.

The bottom line is that God made us in his image and we feel inclined to return the favor.

That should be a reprehensible thought to consider.