Skip to main content

A Picture of Jesus

Image
By

 


I have never been a fan of pictures of Jesus. Several years ago, my, not yet Christian, sister bought me a picture of Jesus. She obviously thought it would be something I would enjoy and very much appreciate. Bless her, they say it’s the thought that counts.

Though I received it gracefully, it was something I would never have bought in a million years. It was one of those pictures of an effeminate looking Jesus hugging a smiling lamb. You know the sort I mean; you may even have one hanging on your wall at home (apologies if you do) – but it was not ‘my cup of tea’ and the picture never saw the light of day. In fact, I have no idea what happened to it.

Now don’t get me wrong, it is not that I believe the bible explicitly prohibits pictures of Jesus, though it does warn against the making and worshipping of graven images.[1] Indeed a picture of Jesus may prompt us to remember He is with us or maybe encourage us to be thankful and to pray. As I do not believe there is anything in the New Testament to prohibit us having a picture, and it could even be helpful, what is my concern?

What did Jesus look like?

Do we know what Jesus looked like? The common image of Jesus, at least in the west, is that of a man with flowing locks of lighter coloured hair, often blue-eyed with a neatly trimmed beard (see the Mormon picture above). But does this image accurately portray a first century Jewish man living in Palestine or is it more like a Hollywood Jesus?

The Bible offers few facts about his appearance, and perhaps deliberately so, but it does tell us that ‘he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.’ (Isaiah 53:2).

Rather than having us be overly concerned about what Jesus looked like, it seems Scripture is more concerned that we understand who Jesus is and what He did for us.

The Mormons love pictures of Jesus


I have a plethora of Mormon Missionaries as friends on social media. They are easily identifiable. Firstly, they will be wearing their LDS badges. Secondly, we can often spot them because somewhere on their timeline, they will have themselves pointing to a ‘cheesy’ picture of Jesus.

Now it is not that I begrudge them having a picture of Jesus, though their pictures are the most cringeworthy I’ve seen since my sister, well you know; rather it has more to do with my total conviction that though they think they know the man in their picture, they haven’t a clue who he is. Not only do they not know what He looked like, they do not know who He is or what He did for them.

The Mormon Picture of Jesus

‘The official doctrine of the Church is that Jesus is the literal offspring of God. He’s got 46 chromosomes; 23 came from Mary, 23 came from God the eternal Father.’[2] 

“That Child to be born of Mary was begotten of Elohim, the Eternal Father, not in violation of natural law but in accordance with a higher manifestation thereof; and the offspring from that association of supreme sanctity, celestial Sireship, and pure though mortal maternity, was of right to be called the ‘Son of the Highest.’”[3]

Mormons believe that the Jesus in their pictures is the product of a sexual relationship between the human Mary and the God they call Heavenly Father.

‘He is the Son of God, literally, actually, as men are the sons of mortal parents’[4]

But this was not the beginning of the Jesus in their picture, no their Jesus pre-existed as the literal firstborn son of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother. In the pre-existence he was known as Jehovah, and he was one of the three gods in the Mormon Godhead.  

Hold on there’s more…

The Mormon Jesus is also the brother of Lucifer.

‘The appointment of Jesus to be the Saviour of the world was contested by one of the other sons of God. He was called Lucifer, son of the morning. Haughty, ambitious, and covetous of power and glory, this spirit-brother of Jesus desperately tried to become the Saviour of mankind’[5]

And there’s more…

The Mormons do not believe that Jesus is eternally God, as the Bible states and orthodox Christians believe no, their picture of Jesus has him becoming a God through his own effort and obedience. For example, as the Mormons believe that baptism is a necessary requirement for progression towards becoming a God, Jesus had to be baptised by John. Also, as marriage is extremely important for a Mormon to progress towards exaltation, they would have to contend that Jesus was married.

A Different Picture of Jesus

From this we see that the Mormons have ‘a picture’ of Jesus, but not one that allows them the right to be call themselves Christians.

Their picture of Jesus puts them outside of historic, biblical Christianity.


[1] “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…” Exodus 20:4-5

[2] Stephen E. Robinson, interview in The Mormon Puzzle, DVD, North American Mission Board, Southern Baptist Convention, 1997.

[3] James E. Talmage, as quoted in Doctrines of the Gospel, p. 9

[4] What the Mormons Think of Christ (LDS pamphlet p.44)

[5] The Gospel Through the Ages – Milton R. Hunter p.15


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Obama's mother posthumously baptized into LDS Church - Salt Lake Tribune

By
In the wake of his remarkable success it seemed that the world and his wife wanted to claim President Obama as their own with even an Irish connection being dug up. Now the Mormons have got in on the act by posthumously baptising his mother. They have in the past upset the Jewish community, the Catholic Church and now the American President with this wacky and unbiblical practice but there is no indication that they will review it. And, of course, it is always someone else’s fault and they promise a thorough inquiry to uncover the real culprits. Maybe they should try looking in the mirror. President Barack Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, who died in 1995, was baptized posthumously into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints last year during her son's campaign, according to Salt Lake City-based researcher Helen Radkey. The ritual, known as “baptism for the dead,” was done June 4 in the Provo temple, and another LDS temple rite, known as the “endowment,” was...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mormon Christians? Whats in a Name?

By
The Mormon Church, disturbed by the continuing identifying of polygamus sects in the news with the name Mormon, recently issued a press statement aimed at "clarifying" issues. It is interesting to note that if you substitute the name "Christian" where they use the name "Mormon" it makes a very good argument for us against the claims of the Mormon Church. The full press release is reproduced below in italics with each paragraph rewritten in ordinary text to present it from a Christian perspective. SALT LAKE CITY 10 July 2008 On 26 June, Newsroom published a package of information featuring profiles of ordinary Latter-day Saints in Texas. With no other intention but to define themselves, these members provided a tangible depiction of what their faith is all about. They serve as the best distinction between the lifestyles and values of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a Texas-based polygamous group that has recently attracted media attent...
70 comments
Read more

Is atheism an intolerant belief?

By
The Big Questions , Sunday 2 August 2009, third question. A growing number of Britons say they are certain there is no God - but how do they know? Professor John Adams of the North Yorkshire Humanist Association begins by asking theists what evidence they have for their beliefs. Paul Woolley of Theos continues by pointing out Richard Dawkins description of faith as a 'virus', and the appalling track record of atheism in the 20th Century, as spearheaded by Pol Pot and Stalin. Chloe Clifford-Frith of the Humanist and Secular Students Society contends that Stalin did not do the things he did because he was an atheist, but because he was evil. Paul Woolley rejoins that atheists are trying to have it both ways when they claim that religion is the cause of evil, but refuse to acknowledge the ideological impetus of atheism when it comes to many evil acts. Mao and Stalin both replaced God with the State - a 'religious' manoeuvre. Rev Alistair Rycroft of St Michael Le Belfrey Ch...
18 comments
Read more