Men used to paint way before Christ. How come no one painted a picture of Jesus?
2007-02-15 00:04:12 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The Romans would not allow it.
2007-02-15 00:07:00 · answer #1 · answered by Militant Agnostic 6 · 0⤊ 4⤋
The Lord God wants us to be into His word and characteristics rather than His appearance. (Matthew 6:33) - "But seek first God's Kingdom, and his righteousness..." With that being said, there probably are some "true" portraits of Jesus but, because He has all power in His hands, He won't allow them to get out (don't think that people have control over that matter, even if it seems like it). Think about it, there's enough racial tension as it is. If we had a "true" portrait of Jesus, the tension would be so much greater because people we say, "He looks like us!" or "He looks like me!" Finally, if we search the Scripture, we will learn Jesus' earthly lineage, thus, determine what His true physical attributes are. That in itself is fine to research, but, remember, it's all about the love that He has given to us by laying down His life for His people. (John 3:16) - "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him will not perish, but have everlasting life." Praise be to the Lord!
2007-02-15 08:33:45 · answer #2 · answered by C.O.G. 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because God didn't want it that way and all these pictures you see to day are not Him for the Bible says:
Daniel 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
The "Ancient of days" seems to be the Father (Daniel 7:13) receiving the Son of man, yet His appearance is like that of the Son of man as described in Revelation 1:13-15. This phenomenon emphasizes the doctrine of the Trinity--one God in three persons, but not three Gods. The "wheels" associated with the throne may suggest the cherubim (Ezekiel 1).
Revelation 1:14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
This is the only record we have in Scripture of the physical appearance of Christ. The Gospel writers give much information about His words and deeds, but not His appearance while here on earth. Thus He can be identified not as of any particular race or stature, but merely as the Son of Man, representing all men before His Father. Compare the description here to that in Daniel 7:9, where He is called "the Ancient of days."
2007-02-15 08:21:13 · answer #3 · answered by Child of God 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is just a guess, but Jesus was largely an outcast during His public ministry. The Romans looked upon Jews as little more than property since they were slaves, and the religious leaders of the time saw Jesus as a threat because He pointed out their hypocrisy and wickedness. He was also not welcomed by the Jews because He didn't fit the image of a "King" they expected from their Messiah. Since He wasn't exactly Mr. Popularity and didn't stay in one place very long, I imagine there weren't many offers (if there were any at all) to paint His portrait. Besides, Jesus didn't come to Earth for fame and recognition -- He came here to save the lost.
P.S.: k7q7x7 is dead wrong. There is more documented evidence of the life, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ (other than The Bible) than there is of the voyages of Christopher Columbus. Google "Christian evidences" and you'll see very quickly just how overwhelming the evidence proving His existence is. I still love that bumper sticker that says "If you believe there is no God, YOU BETTER BE RIGHT!!!"
2007-02-15 08:10:56 · answer #4 · answered by sarge927 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
I think there are many portraits of Jesus. There are portraits of Him in many Churches, in the internet, in calendars, in almost every Christian or Catholic website, country, etc. There is even a Shroud of Turin that is believed to be a portrait or painting of Jesus in His own blood. It is the cloth to be believed to have wrapped the Body of Jesus after He was taken down from the cross after He died. This is controversial but I believe it is true. The Passion of Christ must have used the cloth as it records the brutal way Jesus died for us to show us He loved us and suffered so that we can be with Him in heaven. Peace be with you.
2007-02-15 08:13:46 · answer #5 · answered by hope 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
This was only for the rich, and since Jesus came with little or no Earthly riches, HE was never entitled to having His portrait done.
2007-02-15 08:45:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Aren't there lots of paintings of Jesus?
2007-02-15 08:48:40 · answer #7 · answered by Skippy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is an easy one...Jesus/God didn't want us to focus on a picture. That is too easy to make into an idol. Idolatry is one of the commandments. I mean, look what we have done with the cross/crusifix?! Instead, we are to focus on the words and their meaning for us to live by.
2007-02-15 08:17:13 · answer #8 · answered by Micheal F 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One of two reasons...
One of the ten commandments forbids making graven images.
Jesus was too poor to have someone paint his portrait the way a lot of the wealthy Greeks, Romans, and Egyptians were accustomed to.
2007-02-15 08:13:36 · answer #9 · answered by mamasquirrel 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
He became much more famous, in earthly terms, after His death and resurrection.
Prior to that, He was not widely famous. Thus, there was no big demand for His portrait.
Besides, I don't think He was the sort of guy who would have approved of such vain displays.
.
2007-02-15 09:12:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Messiah was YAHOSHUA! That Hail Zeus guy is the imposter, or a bad name applied to a good person.
2007-02-15 08:16:04 · answer #11 · answered by hasse_john 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋