Why I Disagree With Depictions Of Jesus

I am uncomfortable with graven images of Jesus.

This was amplified when I saw someone post a photo of Jesus writing on a MacBook on facebook. My first thought is that it’s rather blasphemous, and disrespectful being posted a week after Easter had just occurred. Excusing the fact that Jesus would never operate on an overpriced wannabe-hipster creation , the image of Jesus depicted makes me uncomfortable. I’m not entirely convinced what exactly it is, but there is something in my gut that doesn’t feel right.

This is not a new debate, with the Byzantine church arguing about this exact thing, whether Christians should revere symbols in what was known as the Iconoclastic Controversy between the mid-8th century and the mid-9th century.  Where most believers tended to revere icons, but many political and religious leaders sought their destruction because of the veneration being a form of idolatry.

This disagreement resulted in the image of Christ commanded to be taken down in 726 by Byzantine Emperor Leo III from the Chalke gate of the imperial palace. However, it was restored after much debate during a council meeting in Nicaea in 787, with greater restrictions on how they were used. For example, they could not stand out unnecessarily, and had to be painted flat where no features which stood out.

From this controversy, we know that what was distinguished further by theologians was a distinction between proskynesis and latreia, that is the difference between veneration and reverence which was paid to religious figures, and adoration which was owed to God alone respectively.

Of course in the Old Testament there was the commandment to the Israelites that:

““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.” Exodus 20:4 (English Standard Version)

The assertion here that worshipping God through images is forbidden, and the application that we see through Scripture was that the Israelites took this to mean: no images whatsoever as a subject of worship. In fact, the Amish still take this command extremely seriously, and so much so that they do not allow to have their photographs taken, in the extreme case that become an idol.

The principle behind this was that the tangible form of God is not a part of his nature, He is completely spirit. It is a manipulation of the truth to create a form from a formless God “because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.” Romans 1:25 (English Standard Version) The notion of a physical form is taken to comic extreme in the Apocrypha, with the Jeremiah in his letter musing that, “[Idols] do not notice when their faces have been blackened by the smoke of the temple. Bats, swallows, and birds alight on their bodies and heads; and so do cats. From this you will know that they are not gods; so do not fear them. (Letter of Jeremiah 20-22)

So, if we transfer this to a New Testament context, if Jesus is fully God, and a manifestation of God as a fully bodily man. How does that impact how we approach graven images?

If Jesus is physical, then should we react to a physical imitation of Him and what he has done? I see this in many a Catholic churches, with the stained glass giving stories and illustrating what is contained within the Scriptures. In many ways, I heard this aided the illiterate in the church in ages past, where people did not have the ability to read, and they could learn about the Gospel through these pictures. Then again, it could be argued as to who was the cause of the lack of reading and writing ability…*cough* Pope *cough*

How about when the physical medium becomes what is the subject of worship? For example, many people come to see the Sistine Chapel, painted by Michelangelo – and arguably, less have come to admire the stories that are embedded within these images, but more so the medium: the artistry.

Nevertheless, I think my argument for the abolition of iconography in the church is that our memory of Jesus is spiritual, not physical.

Recently we had an earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand. It was a big earthquake, and occuring a few month after a devastating earthquake a few months prior, this one brought greater destruction to already damaged buildings. Of a multitude of buildings damaged, the central cathedral was damaged in the quake – the main spire falling to the ground. Now, there was a lot of debate, one voice of whom was the loudest argued that the spire should be put up immediately and that it is a representation of the Christchurch people. This is true, there is no more iconic building in Christchurch than the Christ’s Cathedral. But the cathedral has two forms of memory: there is the brick and mortar that stands, and the spiritual memories. And therefore, what is history if it is not embodied within people, buildings themselves are only of secondary importance.

The other example is the World Trade Center destroyed by Al Qaeda. America did not die that day when the buildings fell, the hearts may have grown weaker but essentially our ideas and ideals of society still remain in their place. People have their own ideas of what the World Trade Centre meant to them, and no one can change those. Our heritage is kept within human hearts, and the legacy of Jesus carries on through the Holy Spirit and not through images.

Our knowledge is not embedded within what we can see in the images of Jesus, but they are only influences of what Jesus means to us. If our identity of Jesus is embedded beyond what is essentially an abstract representation of the person, they it has gone off the tracks. How effective the image of Jesus operating the Macbook is built into the correlation of goodness and the person of Jesus. This is where it falls, only one aspect of the person is displayed through this, if we are using images, then they must show the complete person. This is impossible through images, as they are merely 2dimensional representations.  There will never be an accurate means of representing Jesus in print, because humans are three-dimensional creatures, and Jesus more.

Limits to iconography and semiotics lead to a packaged idea of Jesus. What can fit within a page is never enough to describe a person as important as Jesus to the Christians. For this exact reason, I believe that God will never be embodied in an image, but He is indeed a living and alive today.

The Rise Of Christian Rap Music

I love rap. 

More specifically, nothing makes me more joyful in music than listening to Christian rap.  Those of you that have followed the Christian rap industry would know the famous Ambassador’s ‘Christology’ album. This album is the embodiment of early rap music, where it was more of a diary as opposed to actual messages to people. There was minimal effort put into the beats in the backing track, while much time was spent perfecting the lyrics. For this very reason people would have turned away from this music. Thus causing it to pale in comparison to their secular counterparts.

Luckily over the past few years, there has definitely been a marked increase in the quality of both the producing values as well as the lyrics continuing to grow in conviction.around this time were more than music, but introspective diaries boasting of God’s love and transformation.

I would say that it is almost at a point where it is almost on equal standing with their atheist counterparts minus the crude references. Now, I must confess, I am a bit of a closet rap enthusiast. I immensely enjoyed My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy, much more than any pretender to Kanye. 808′s and Heartbreak was not a Kanye West album according to me! But otherwise, I listen to a lot Kanye, Outkast, Drake, Mac Miller, Hoodie Allen etc. – it’s mostly East Coast stuff that I listen to.
I digress, I love the direction of where rap music is going. It gives me joy that there is some hope in the world of music that is both creative and expresses the beauty of God in a unique kind of way. In other genres of Christian music, it’s all about the same cookie cutter music. It is such a insular market for music, that people have to sound a certain way to sell records, and there isn’t enough of a market to expand into personal expression. There are some that have enough of a history to have some artistic freedom which I do enjoy. Derek Webb and Jars of Clay come to mind. But for the majority, it comes to a point where Christian Rock nowadays is pretty much pop fluff with some electric guitars in the background.

Though, that being said, within the Christian rap industry as well, there are a fair amount of commercialism as well. No matter what genre it is, there are still sinners within the system.

But one recording group I’m mighty pleased about is Reach Records. They have a few artists signed to their record label like probably most famous is Lecrae, but also Tedashii, Trip Lee and newly signed KB. I think generally Lecrae is the most famous artist on the label, but listening to the other people signed to the label which are equally good at rapping.

Moreover, their lyrics are rooted in biblical truth. They truly believe in what they are doing, and at least from the look of things are committing to making disciple more than making music, which I think is lacking a lot in other musicians. While not entirely obvious from the outset, rap seems an ideal canvas to paint doctrine upon because of the fast speed of the lyrics a lot of words can be fit in a comparatively short song. The verse orientated style of rap music lends itself also to heavy topics to be dealt with in comparative depth as opposed to chorus-centric music.  The lyrics therefore can tell really long stories and explain in length some concepts which are only treated with a “I love You. Jesusssss. I love Youuuuu.” in other songs.

Furthermore, what made me most joyful the other day was I picked up Hazakim “Theopanies”. In many ways it blew me apart in the way that it mixes together theology and rapping together. I began to wonder what large reach the words that they were rapping about would get to those that CCM would not normally reach. The album is a concept album around the idea of Jesus being revealed throughout the Old Testament. It is quite in-depth - with over 60 minutes of just music about Jesus revealing himself to Abraham, Moses etc. The argument centered around a 7 minute epic about the Crucifixion of Jesus. What convicted me was that how other people could pick this up and learn about a holistic treatment of the Gospel through music.

That being said, these guys aren’t on a big record company, so they have had no advertising put into the album except for word of mouth. The disc can only be ordered through the record company which is Lamp Mode Records – I think the most famous person they have is FLAME. The rest I haven’t really listened to, but include ShaiLinne, Json and Steven the Levite – of which I think I might have heard before but haven’t been really monetarily blessed to purchase any music.

Anyway, that’s my joyful statement for the day. Christian rap makes me proud to be a Christian and they are displaying God’s glory through their music for all to see. Their message is just what the world needs to hear, the rap makes their message relevant to the culture but their message is something totally different from anything heard before. There is a lot that the other Christian music industries can learn from what has been done in the Christian rap industry. Though, rap isn’t as accessible to the masses as other genres, I think that the honesty and the integrity that exists currently can be imitated to God’s glory in other genres.

More songs for your listening pleasure:

Invasion – Trip Lee
Background –  Lecrae

Greatest Story Ever Told – Shai Linne

Music Piracy: Lady Gaga Is The One To Blame

I wish Lady Gaga would make music that is consistent with her celebrity persona.

For someone who consistently turns up to celebrity events with the most outlandish costumes and the most outrageous statements, she falls into the most discernable music genre: that same-same self-empowerment pop fluff that most other people generate within their musical careers. Listening to “Born This Way”, her music never reaches the heights of her conceptual fancy, she is making the same over-produced ambiguous songs which don’t really mean much. I think that someone so well known in popular culture would have something more worthwhile to sing about than self-empowerment.

I hope I am not perceived as hating on Lady Gaga, I enjoy her music enough. She has a lot more guts than many other artists out there, that attempt a lot, but achieve little. But I feel as though if her music were truly reflective of her character, it would appear as a hybrid of Gabber and Fidget-house genres. Hearing something less than these makes me somewhat disappointed, and perhaps cheated of who she really could be. A mere shadow is what I hear.

The Princess And The Frog: What Is Your Dream?

I just finished watching The Princess and The Frog.

In many ways it matches what I’ve been blogging about the past few weeks — and I have been going on the same vein for the past few weeks with what I have been saying, but not that anyone has been following. In many ways it was summated in the rejection of the American Dream, and a search for meaning in the Gospel in my last blog. Though, at first “The Princess and the Frog” may not on the surface be a ideal movie for demonstrating this. I am reading that Christianity Today, in their review of the film they criticized its sexual undertones, and moreover they said that, “it’s the use of voodoo that ultimately reveals the movie’s hollow, thoughtless core.”

I find that somewhat untrue, in the light of the greater message which is question what we put our value in. The voodoo and the “magic” used made me somewhat uncomfortable in light of the children I imagine would watch this movie. But to assert your own narrative on the film, while not commenting on the larger film as a whole is dishonest.

“You know the thing about good food? It brings folks together from all walks of life. It warms them right up and it puts little smiles on their faces.”

Indeed, the movie is the reclaimation of the idea of community. In an individualised world, we are often disconnected from one another, and alone we can only bring ourselves so far. This movie upholds the principles of a classic Disney movie, assembling together the most diverse of characters together in a team to conquer one common evil. In the Lion King, there was Timon and Pumbaa. In Snow White and the 7 Dwarves, the emotional capacity of man is demonstrated through each of the 7 dwarves. In Dumbo, he is befriended by crowes which teach him to fly. In Cinderella, she has two mice and various animals to aid her in her fight. I’m not going to keep on reading the Wikipedia entry on the List of Disney Theatrical Films because I realise I’m only up to the 1950′s and another 60 years to the present. It is never a theme within a Disney movie to keep on a single character, but a myriad of diverse characters bring an irreplaceable dynamic to the main character.

This is something I have never realised, and something that is absent from the movies today. The warmness of the animation brings this back — it is an oft forgotten concept, the importance of community.

The question of the film essentially is what is your dream?

It’s a modernised Disney hand drawn animated feature, modernised in the sense that it re-evaluates the message of all the previous films. Where in countless Disney films, the subject and aim of the film was the concept of “true love” – this film deals with the idea of success, the main character Tiana works at two jobs to pay for the down payment of her own restaurant.

There is a scene late in the movie where a voodoo doctor asks her, what is her dream? She is presented inside of her dream restaurant, she looks at the guitar player, and he is unfamiliar to her. The splendour of the establishment was sure; she is undoubtedly inside the place which she had dreamed about since she was little.

“Just look at this place! Gonna be the crown jewel of the City.”

In many ways, this is what we set our eyes upon. Our dreams are earthly things, and things that would fade. The prize as Christians should be one of the “upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3) The movement from the horizontal view of life, to acknowledging the larger context–namely the vertical acknowledgment of God in the operations of the world, is a total paradigm change that should be the first step of a young Christian. This movie demonstrates this as both of the main characters develop through the movie — the realization strikes them that they cannot change the situation without the community around them. I’m not saying that we should seek answers in jazz-playing alligators or talking fireflies though.

I cannot tell of the end of the movie, for that would ruin it and people would be displeased with me. But the movie represents a rejection of old Disney film ideals to a degree. Whether intentionally or not, Disney movies of old, were a reaction against the simplicity of menial existence, presenting the transcendentalism of both love and wealth. Yet this film rejects that mold and further refines the ideal — not only with an African-American protagonist in this film — the film presents a critique of the American Dream, and how that is not enough either, but purely love.

Of course, the question will never be answered in the medium of film because Jesus is the fulfillment of life. Though, the Princess and the Frog speaks of a love on a horizontal level, with the love between a princess and a frog. It speaks also of love being greater than any earthly principle. It is a paradigm change, with the rejection of material for immaterial — specifically love. “[Our] citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ,” Philippians 3:20 (English Standard Version)

There are a multitude of themes that “The Princess and The Frog” brings up, some less palatable, as evidenced with the great criticism that has arisen from the release of the film. The French even accused the movie of racism because of the working title: The Frog Princess. I don’t know what complaints there can be, where there is a children’s film that continues to promote an undying love. Moreover, the utter sufficiency of love in life that can weather any storm, mirroring the love that Christ has for His church.

 “My Dad never did get what he wanted, but he had what he needed. He had love.”