When the New Community Bible first released in 2008, it sold 15,000 hardcover copies in a few short weeks.Yet the resulting hue and cry over certain aspects of the Bible, the first to be produced by Indians, for Indians in simple English, has resulted in a few revisions before the second edition went to print this November.
Why the controversy? Open a copy of the Bible, produced by the Society of St. Paul in Mumbai, and you'll see no changes to the text. But the accompanying illustrations might look a bit different: the Holy Family, for example, is depicted as poor Indian villagers, with Mary wearing a sari and a bindi, and Joseph wearing a turban and loincloth.
Some Protestant Christian groups have argued that the artwork and the references throughout (such as to Mahatma Gandhi and the Bhagavad Gita, a sacred Hindu text) do not faithfully represent Scripture, while some Hindu groups have complained that the Bible will lead to illegal conversions in a country whose Christian population is only 2.5 percent.
I'm not going to argue that depicting Mary in a sari is historically accurate—obviously it's not. But I would enjoy a browse through the religious images in the books and homes of the Christians who are criticizing this Bible.
In my own home, my daughter's favorite Bible is the Precious Moments Storytime Bible, which depicts a doe-eyed, Caucasian Jesus surrounded by equally doe-eyed followers. My own feelings on Precious Moments artwork aside, the artist's vision of Jesus isn't any more accurate than one envisioning Mary wearing a bindi on her forehead.
Remaking Jesus to look like us isn't a new phenomenon. Any number of famous Madonna-and-child paintings depict the Holy Family looking about as historically accurate as I look fastening a head covering over my red hair to play Mary in my church's Nativity play. Mary in a sari isn't any further from what the actual Mary probably looked like than I am.
So why the fuss? Should we limit ourselves to artistic visions that show Jesus as he most likely looked in 1st-century Palestine, or is it spiritually acceptable to show some artistic license as long as our intentions are pure?
As we ready ourselves for Christmas, take a look at your family's creche or Christmas cards. What does Jesus look like to you?
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Pinterest
Comments
Displaying 1–10 of 21 comments
See all comments
birdy
This is really interesting, You are a very skill blogger. Ive joined your rss feed and look forward to seeking more of your excellent post. Also, I have shared your site in my social networks!
Samantha
I guess know what can know what Jesus really looked like. Even if you look at pictures of Jesus you can see a lot of different facial styles etc.
donaldholton
The new version of the Bible was introduced, it sold around 15,000 hard copies and made a record over selling large number of copies. In the newer versions of the bible they depicted the mari in sari and with bindi as images. Also they depicted the joseph wearing a turban. As the dena bank gave the large amount for the production of Bible. The pictures depicting jesus and mare made big problem.
erotik
The Bible is pretty clear on what Jesus, and His family, looked like.
ben ten
Pristy I will be sure to keep my eye out for that book once it is on print. I enjoy reading books trailing the Evangelical subculture in America.
Michael Prabhu
Check out around 15 critiques and reports on the New Community Bible at www.ephesians-511.net
VJ Griffiths
The Bible is pretty clear on what Jesus, and His family, looked like.
Matt
I find it's more beneficial for me to think of Jesus as he is depicted in Revelation, with "eyes were as a flame of fire" and "out of his mouth went a twoedged sword". It's easier to fear the Lord when you think of him that way as opposed to baby Jesus.
RICHARD ROGERS
It is not the sari, but the bindi that bothers me. While the mark can be for decoration or to show marriage, its source is the Hindu third eye or inner eye. It is not technically affiliated with the caste system. However, its Hindu roots should have precluded it from the illustration; anything that encourages continuation of anti-Biblical traditions among Christians should be avoided. T. E. Koshy writes, The caste system has been one of the curses of India. Caste divides but Christ unites. True Biblical Christianity is all-inclusive. Yet even among Christians, particularly in denominations established by foreign missionaries, the caste system is maintained even today...There are Christian churches in India that will not admit to their fellowship, members of certain castes, and others that separate various castes at the communion rail. How, one wonders, can such churches set forth with its full power St. Pauls assurance that Christs death on the cross has broken down all dividing walls? (Eph. 2:14) (Brother Bakht Singh of India, An Account of 20th Century Apostolic Revival, OM Books, 2003)
blackwasp19
I just wrote about how we depict Jesus a couple weeks ago on my blog http://blackwasp19.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/the-hope-of-a-hebraic-jewish-jesus/. It is important that we realize how cultural depictions of Jesus can enhance our understanding of Jesus, especially when they are depictions Jesus as the Christ. But I believe these depictions of Jesus should be taken as art and discussed as art, not realistic images. It is important to acknowledge that Jesus was a multi-racial, hebraic, jew - who lived in the Middle East. Jesus' ethnicity shaped his experience and it is important not to lose that. I believe Christians are supposed to connect with the Jesus' background - part of the reason we put validity in the Old Testament. Again, this doesn't limit artistic depictions. It seems that often when Jesus is depicted with a certain ethnicity there is a power play or attempt to fortify one's culture as normal. Those actions have positive responses, but overall I fear it breeds ethnocentrism.
*