Jump directly to the content
Why Jesus Doesn't Belong in Christmas Décor
amanderson2 / Flickr

Why Jesus Doesn't Belong in Christmas Décor

Dec 17 2013
Our attempts to portray our Savior, babe or not, fall sinfully short.

What God has declared is sufficient, but I am also convinced of good reasons for the prohibition of image-making and worship by images.

If we are going to create or choose images of Jesus, we have a few options. We can try to make an accurate representation of his physical body. The Bible tells us that Zaccheaus was short, Goliath was "six cubits and a span" tall, and poor Leah was unattractive with "weak eyes", but about Jesus's appearance we have no details at all. Though the Bible repeatedly affirms Jesus' humanity—he ate, drank, bled, perspired, and experienced human emotions—any attempt at literal representation of his physical features is based on insufficient evidence.

Alternatively, we can create an image based on our personal preference—choosing a Jesus that appeals to us. Or, we can celebrate the diverse preferences of a variety of artists by, say, collecting and displaying multiple nativity sets. Choosing images based on preferences has the problem that, rather than affirming Christ's specific incarnation body, it hints that Jesus' appearance is merely many different things to many people.

But Jesus did look a certain way. In an essay on the subject, theologian John Murray writes, "Our Lord had a true body. He could have been photographed. A portrait could have been made of him and, if a good portrait, it would have reproduced his likeness." Even as a baby, Jesus was not a generic human being. He had a particular shape to his ears. He was a certain weight and height. His fingerprints were unique.

Another option for images of Jesus is not to attempt literality, but instead to symbolize or represent some particular aspect of his being: a loving Jesus or a powerful Jesus or a holy Jesus. But God is, as The Westminster Confession says, "without parts." He is all of his attributes all the time. Unlike humans who grow and change from moment to moment, God is necessarily and always fully himself. He is everything or he is nothing. And a picture that symbolizes one or two or twenty of his attributes is no true picture at all.

J.I. Packer explains the difficulty with images in Knowing God (the book's 40 years of influence were recently profiled by CT):

The heart of the objection to pictures and images is that they inevitably conceal most, if not all, of the truth about the personal nature and character of the divine Being whom they represent.

To add a comment you need to be a registered user or Christianity Today subscriber.

More from Her.menutics
The Real Problem With Female Masturbation

The Real Problem With Female Masturbation

Call it what it is: Ladies who lust.
What the Bible Belt Stereotypes Don't Tell You

What the Bible Belt Stereotypes Don't Tell You

Midwesterners’ ubiquitous church-talk helped me finally address my doubt.
My Kid Is Not My Calling

My Kid Is Not My Calling

How we've mischaracterized the Christian "call."
We Wish You a Busy Easter

We Wish You a Busy Easter

Why the extra services and special meals of Holy Week are good for us.
Include results from Christianity Today
Browse Archives:

So Hot Right Now

Raised in a Christian Cult

‘Girl at the End of the World’ adds to an important line of ex-fundamentalist survivor stories.

What We're Reading

CT eBooks and Bible Studies