Do images of Jesus influence people?

[marco]

We are all familiar with the bearded Jesus whose sad eyes appeal to us, thanks to the wonderful Renaissance artists. There's a Russian who resembles the Jesus artists have painted and he has quite a following.

Are people influenced today by images of: The baby Jesus in a poor manger;

the dead Jesus in the arms of his mother; Jesus hanging helplessly on the cross ?

Muslims forbid images of Muhammad - would this be a good idea regarding Jesus?

[Jagella]

Can anyone explain how statues of Jesus don't the Commandment?

The church probably rationalized the graven images of Jesus as not violating the first commandment claiming that the first commandment only prohibits images of pagan gods.

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

We are all familiar with the bearded Jesus whose sad eyes appeal to us, thanks to the wonderful Renaissance artists. There's a Russian who resembles the Jesus artists have painted and he has quite a following.

Are people influenced today by images of: The baby Jesus in a poor manger;

the dead Jesus in the arms of his mother; Jesus hanging helplessly on the cross ?

As it is highly subjective, I can only hypothesize. My guess is, yes. For instance, if Jesus, throughout history, had only been painted with features typical, if even stereotypical, of a Jew (as opposed to the Swedish, blue eyed with golden locks Jesus that I grew up with) I think it worth at least pondering whether history would have run differently: i.e. the holocaust.

Muslims forbid images of Muhammad - would this be a good idea regarding Jesus?

Muslims forbid images for entirely different reasons than misrepresenting an historically plausible portrait of a 1st c. Jew. In Alaska, some natives paint Jesus as an native Alaskan. Though historically inaccurate, it yet promotes the universalism which is very much a theme of the N.T.


Hmmm. The question is actually much better than I at first thought. For what it is worth, I think that Westerners, and specifically English and Americans (specifically white), should keep in mind that Jesus was a Jew, and that speculative portraits of him which depict this are healthy reminders.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 12 by liamconnor]

A quick reminder:
Jesus was either born of a divine seed, making him divine and not a Jew, or,
Born out of wedlock, and according to Deuteronomy, not a Jew, or,
Advocated changes to laws that would not allow him to be a Jew, either.

That thing about mom being a Jew, is a human and not Biblical convention. I am sure that God could have made Mary give birth to a kangaroo, or had he been a more right-minded deity, with wings, or a glowing mark, or any number of things that would show divinity.

Also FYI, when artists were commissioned to depict Jesus, several hundred years after anyone had thought to describe him - typical of a story, not reality, they looked about and found the only gods available.
And that is why Jesus looks like Zeus.

So, it does look like the site had got you thinking. We'll convert you yet.
As to his depiction changing history, if true, (LOL) it is just another example of gods not existing: He would have picked a better image if your thought is correct.

[bjs]

We are all familiar with the bearded Jesus whose sad eyes appeal to us, thanks to the wonderful Renaissance artists. There's a Russian who resembles the Jesus artists have painted and he has quite a following.

Are people influenced today by images of: The baby Jesus in a poor manger;

the dead Jesus in the arms of his mother; Jesus hanging helplessly on the cross ?

Of course people are influenced by art and its associated symbolism. I grant that some people (both Christian and non-Christian) fail to grasp that all art is intrinsically symbolic, but that is true regardless of what topic art takes on.

Muslims forbid images of Muhammad - would this be a good idea regarding Jesus?

No. That would be Gnosticism; a denial that Jesus was really a man.