Does it matter what Jesus looks like?

Ask Your Question
1

In college I took a hybrid theology/English literature class on C.S. Lewis. We read and discussed his theological writings like Mere Christianity but the most interesting section of the course was when we studied his fictional works. In the Narnia stories, Aslan serves as the Christ-figure, but he is not human. He is a lion. This is not an arbitrary choice by Lewis, but an intentional one that makes a theological statement. The thing that makes Aslan Christ-like isn’t his human appearance but his fundamental identity and actions. Aslan creates, judges, sacrifices himself, and rises again.

The Bible is surprisingly silent on Jesus’s physical appearance, with the possible exception of Isaiah 53:2 which only suggests that he was not noticeably attractive. The significance of Jesus lies in the his incarnation, life, death, and resurrection, not in the details of his facial structure, skin tone, or height.

In Prince Caspian, Lucy recognizes Aslan when others cannot. This isn’t because she is smarter or can see more clearly than her siblings, but because she is more relationally connected to him. This parallels New Testament passages like John 20 and Luke 24 where Jesus’s own followers do not recognize him physically but then suddenly behold him spiritually. In The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, Aslan comforts the children by telling them that they will know him by another name in their own world. In this, Lewis suggests to his readers that Christ is not bound to one cultural or visual form. While Jesus (like Aslan) is a real embodied figure who lived and looked a certain way in a certain time and place, his physical traits are not the center of his identity as Savior, Lord, and God.

So, does it matter what Jesus looked like?

Historically and ethically, it matters that we do not buy into the myth that Jesus was white, which has been used to distance Jesus from his Jewish identity and to justify racial dominance. Caring about what Jesus likely looked like and correcting harmful portrayals is not about reconstructing his face for its own sake, but about confronting how those images have shaped our culture.

Theologically, Jesus’s physical appearance is not central, because the Bible does not anchor our faith in his appearance but in his more fundamental nature as God-made-man for us.

1 Like
2

Hi @Michaela,

This is a polarizing question! But I think it’s also important.

I think the challenge is this:

When we depict Jesus in a way that’s culturally relevant (white, black, Korean, etc) this can HELP us experience the Incarnation. Seeing how Jesus would have come to different ethnicities can help us see how he loves all people, whether the depiction represents us or not.

At the same time, over time, this can also EXCLUDE those who don’t see themselves in that depiction of Jesus.

I think this is connected to the culture of that community. If the community has earned a reputation of building community across ethnic and cultural lines, it’s probably less of an issue - and perhaps the artwork of that church depicts Jesus contextualized into many cultural forms. Or, if that community has a legacy of racism, then a version of Jesus in their own image is showing, visually, part of the problem.

This is where, as a white guy, I can feel uncomfortable with images of a white Jesus. If it reminds me of a period in America when predominately white churches didn’t let people who weren’t white worship with them, the historical reference of the artwork doesn’t inspire worship, but lament.

All that to say, I think artwork is complicated! I understand why some traditions forbid any depictions of Jesus, or God.

For me, the question is: how can we see Jesus in ways that help us love God - and one another?