Three Reasons Images of Jesus Are Impossibly Acceptable

Some of the most beautiful craftsmanship can be found in stained-glass windows of churches. Older churches tend to have the most ornate. In many churches, you will be hard-pressed not to find a stained-glass window with a picture of Jesus. The most common representation is of him with a shepherd’s staff sitting on a rock with little children all around him.

You can also wander around in your local Christian bookstore and quickly find images of Jesus on mugs, calendars, books, bookmarks, and of course paintings. Common also are children’s Sunday school materials that almost always have drawings of Jesus. I remember as a child watching a Sunday school teacher use those felt cutouts on a green felt board to teach bible lessons.

So, what are we to make of drawings of Jesus? Is it problematic? Worse, is it a violation of God’s law? In this article, I want to explore several reasons why I believe it is impossible to visually represent Jesus, and why pictures of him are not only contrary to Scripture, but cross over into dangerous theological quagmires.

Let’s take a look at the impossibility to physically represent Jesus, the impossibility to theologically draw him, and lastly why it is impossible to lawfully visually represent him.

It is impossible to physically draw Jesus Christ.

We have no Scriptural description of Jesus. Not even a hint. Quite honestly, this point should seal the deal. Any and all pictures, drawings, and paintings of Jesus are sheer speculation. There is not a single physical description of Jesus in Scripture that would allow any kind of visual representation. The Bible is silent, and I believe for an important reason we will cover in another point later.

In fact, the only thing Scripture even hints at is in the negative. Scripture teaches us that Jesus’ appearance was not one that would be admired by men. Isaiah foretells of his brutal appearance before and during the crucifixion. Frankly, probably the closest thing you could do to visually represent what Scripture describes of Jesus is an abstract drawing of a man so marred, beaten, and bruised that it barely even resembles a human.  Peter Gabriel’s musical album cover for Passion is a great example of an abstract drawing of Jesus. (Yes, I am a fan of Gabriel’s music.)

Scripture’s silence of Jesus’ physical description must be intentional - especially considering how in other places it can be quite explicit in descriptions. Take for example David’s appearance. How about Saul? Let’s not forget about Eglon’s portly characterization. The Holy Spirit’s inspiration of Scripture has made a clear point in providing absolutely no way to even imagine what Jesus looked like, much less paint a portrait of him.

It is impossible to theologically draw Jesus Christ.

Now that we have touched on why it’s difficult, if not impossible, to physically draw Jesus, we now touch on a much more important reason. It is theologically impossible (and unorthodox) to represent him visually in drawings, videos, paintings, art, etc.

We need to step back and think about who Jesus is. Theologians have a term called the hypostatic union. This term means that Jesus Christ is very God and very man at the same time. He is one person who has two natures: a divine and a human. He is just as much God as he is man, and he will forever be the God-man. The incarnation was the miracle at Christmas, not his birth.

God cannot be drawn or visually represented. He is nothing like his creation. He is above all and is not like us. God is Spirit. Contrary to the gross error of the heretical Mormons, he is not a man. Nothing we could draw could come close to representing him. In fact, anything we would try to draw would be dangerously wrong. (I recently wrote an article on my hatred for Michelangelo’s painting entitled the Creation of Adam on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, where I go into more detail on why painting God in the form of man is blasphemous.)

If God cannot be drawn (and in a moment we’ll see that he not only cannot, but forbids so), and since Jesus is both God and man, to represent him in a drawing would at the most only demonstrate his humanity. Thus, any drawings of Jesus would be theologically wrong. A visual representation of Jesus would be a very significant misrepresentation of who Jesus actually is.

God is particularly protective of his character. Doing, writing, or saying anything that attacks the person and character of God is what taking God’s name in vain actually means. So, to misrepresent him in any way is taking his name (character) in vain. That being said, images of Jesus actually border on (if not cross the threshold of) blasphemy.

It is impossible to lawfully draw Jesus Christ.

The Second Commandment of God’s Law is clear in forbidding any images of God. We’ve covered above why it’s impossible to draw God, and here we see why it’s unlawful according to God’s Ten Commandments to draw him.

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.” Exodus 20:4

I’ve heard arguments against the prohibition of images of Jesus, and particularly the second commandment. Many will say that this commandment only forbids worshiping those images. However, there are problems with this interpretation. Scripture interprets Scripture, so one need only turn to another passage that further clarifies God’s position on images. For example, in Deuteronomy 4:15-19, we read that the reason why no images are to be made that try and represent God is that the Israelites saw no form of God on Mount Sinai. They were to make no form to represent God. No form of man, animal, or celestial bodies. This verse doesn’t differentiate between images just to make you feel good and images you would bow down to. There is no wiggle room here. The passage is crystal clear. It is a direct command to never try and misrepresent God Almighty through any type of image.

Further, because of who Jesus is (being both God and man), then any image of him is intrinsically to be worshiped, for God is always to be worshiped. Therefore, images of the three Persons of the Trinity are directly forbidden by God’s Law.

The Reformed Confessions also clearly state that images of Jesus are forbidden specifically by the second commandment. Here is what the Heidelberg Catechism has to say:

96. What does God require in the second Commandment?

That we in no wise make any image of God, nor worship Him in any other way than He has commanded us in His Word.

97. May we not make any image at all?

God may not and cannot be imaged in any way; as for creatures, though they may indeed be imaged, yet God forbids the making or keeping any likeness of them, either to worship them, or to serve God by them.

98. But may not pictures be tolerated in churches as books for the people?

No, for we should not be wiser than God, who will not have His people taught by dumb idols,1 but by the lively preaching of His word.

Thomas Watson, one of the great Puritan theologians, had this to say about images of Jesus:

“Epiphanius seeing an image of Christ hanging in a church, broke it in pieces; ’tis Christ’s Godhead, united to his manhood, that makes him to be Christ; therefore to picture his manhood, when we cannot picture his Godhead, is a sin, because we make him to be but half Christ; we separate what God hath joined, we leave out that which is the chief thing, which makes him to be Christ.”

Dr. Neil Stewart provides excellent insight into why images of Jesus are actually the very essence of idolatry:

Images of Jesus Undermine the Sufficiency of Scripture

Bottom line, when we think we need pictures of Jesus to further our worship or understanding, we undermine the all sufficiency of Scripture. The bible beautifully paints the full picture of God in all His triune beauty. The Scriptures read, preached, and studied is all we need.

In my own church, there is a large and quite beautiful stained-glass window of Jesus. However, I cannot look at it with approval and would have no qualms whatsoever if it was taken down and replaced with something that does not violate God’s word. I would imagine if there were a time machine and John Calvin or Thomas Watson showed up at my church and saw that window, they would likely throw rocks to break it without thinking twice.

Frequently I hear from Christians that images of Jesus make them feel good, or give them peace. While that is well-meaning, I believe images of God (including the incarnate Jesus) are problematic on many levels, ultimately violating the second commandment of God’s Law. The comfort that all Christians have is from cover to cover of God’s Word. It concludes with one of the sweetest promises to believers: “We will see His face.” (Revelation 22:4)

There will come a time at the return of the King where all those joined to Christ by faith will gaze at the glorious face of Jesus. Until then, we should rest in the sure and mighty word of God and seek to obey that word. We should also seek to be guardians of the Scriptures and guardians of the great theological truths that elevate the nature and character of Almighty God. Images and misrepresentations of God do neither of those things.