A Jesus So Soft You'd Think He Was Stuffed

Many, when they think of Jesus, will conjure up some sort of notion of the Jesus found in this painting. Many see Him as gentle, soft, passive, and warm. When most are asked to think about Jesus, more often than not they will imagine in their minds an image of Jesus compassionately holding a lamb in His arms.

Positively speaking, we must not downplay the compassion or even gentleness in Jesus, most often portrayed in His loving-kindness and patience towards us sinners. Of course though, a Jesus who's attributes end here is anemic and deprived of the biblical reality.

When we read the Gospels, we are acquainted with a man who teaches with authority, a man who is constantly showing frustration towards his uncomprehending disciples, and who even overthrows tables and chases people with whips in the Temple. Naturally, this is not all that we see of Jesus, as we are demonstrated His kindness, grace and mercy frequently, but we must not be so biased towards one side of His attributes to ignore the rest.

When we open up the book of Revelation--the greatest depiction of our risen, ascended, glorified and exalted Lord, we see a very different Jesus than Him who cusps a lamb in His arms with a passive peace on His face. We see very clearly that the wrath of the Lamb is so fierce that those who go through it are crying out for their imminent death to avoid it (Rev. 6:16). We must understand that Jesus was both present and in full agreement in the judgement of the flood (Gen. 6-9) and the judgement of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 19). That is, unless you deny proper Trinitarian doctrine which associates the Son as being co-eternal and co-existent with the Father (and the Spirit, might I add). Finally, we see this most clearly in Revelation 19, where Jesus enters the scene on a white horse, with a sword coming out of His mouth, descending to earth to wage war with all the evil and wickedness in the world. Both references, to the beast (satanic or demonic forces) and to kings/nations (humans and human institutions), imply that He is judging and waging war will all of His enemies, and yes, that includes people.

What I am saying then, is not that we need to forsake the tenderness and gentleness of Christ, but that we need to understand Him in His fullness in order to appreciate the special love that He shows towards His own. We do not worship a soft, passive Messiah, but rather the King of Kings who wages war with the wicked and avenges His saints. He is a conquering King, and He has set a day where He will judge the earth. We must understand and present a cohesive and full Gospel message if we are to honor our Lord and see people truly saved, putting their faith in the Jesus of the Bible.

A Jesus So Jewish It's Shocking!

"The Gospel of John", released in 2014, follows the pattern set out by "The Visual Bible: The Gospel of John" which was released in 2003, where the biblical text is narrated over the various scenes which are being acted out. The 2003 movie used the Good News Translation (GNT) while this 2014 version uses the New International Version (NIV). The biblical text of the gospel according to John is read from front-to-back, word-for-word (according to the translation being used), which leave it being the most faithful to the text.

One of the most notable features of this one is that Jesus actually, for once, resembles a middle-eastern, first-century Palestinian Jew. He's not attractive, has a fairly rugged beard, and while we could argue that his hair is longer than it most likely would have been, it does not flow down past his shoulders looking luscious and well-maintained. His hair is rugged, rough, and greasy. His nose is fairly large, and his face is quite "manly." Throughout the movie, his composure is one of seriousness and frustration, especially towards the Jewish leaders of his day, which aligns quite well with John's description of Jesus.

The entire movie is narrated in English, but the characters speak in Aramaic. This makes the movie feel authentic and real. What I love the most about it is that you are visually brought into the scene, into the world and life of Jesus, while at the same time being fed audibly the full account of John's gospel as written and translated in the NIV.

I find that this movie, over all the other movies I have watched, does the best job at depicting Jesus. He's described as doing many things and experiencing many emotions in the gospels, but we see him frustrated and serious most of the time. Many of the other depictions leave us with an impression that Jesus was a happy-go-lucky, take it as I go, life-is-great kind of guy, where we see very little, if any of that, in the narratives.

While I do believe that this movie does a very fair job at depicting Jesus, there could be some inherent imbalances adopted in the mind of the viewer. The viewer could walk away thinking that Jesus is always frustrated and over-serious and that joy is non-existent in His being. This is simply not true, and this is where an accurate depiction of Jesus must be balanced with the rest of the biblical understanding of His person, work, and mission. We are told that joy is a fruit of the Spirit. Jesus tells us that He came to give us life and joy. Now, naturally, our understanding of "life" and "joy" are more informed by our culture than it is from the Bible, but nonetheless these characteristics are part of the Christian faith. I do not fault this movie for leaving us with that impression, as this is the overarching theme of Jesus' ministry, but we must now go from this understanding based on the film to a more holistic, biblical understanding based on the rest of the gospels and the fruit of Jesus' work in Acts and following. This movie, I believe, is a must for those who want an accurate depiction of Jesus' life and ministry, and is a great start for the unbeliever.

Mel Gibson Screams Bloody Murder!

Perhaps one of the most popular movies about Christ to ever hit the theaters was "The Passion of the Christ" by Mel Gibson in 2004. This movie focused primarily on the last 12 hours of Jesus' earthly life, showing in great detail His agony, suffering and crucifixion. This movie had a production cost of $30 million and brought in over $600 million. The film is the highest grossing R-rated film in the United States, as well as the highest grossing religious film and non-English film of all time.

There are many positives to this film, such as the use of historically languages such as Latin, Aramaic and Hebrew. The entire movie is spoken in these three languages, and while the accuracy of Latin being the truly dominant language could be called into question, it certainly is more accurate than English, or any other modern-day language for that matter.

Another positive would be focus on Christ's suffering and crucifixion, which was central to this movie. I say this because when we read the gospels, especially that of John, we notice that the last week of Jesus' life, especially the events surrounding the betrayal, crucifixion, and resurrection, are central to the gospel writers' accounts.

Many have critiqued the movie for being far too bloody and gory, and with right reason. Mel Gibson seems to have spent over half of his budget on cinematic blood, loaded up a fire hose and sprayed Jim Caviezel, the man portraying Jesus, continuously. It's no wonder that this movie received an R-rating for the amount of blood, gore and violence found within.

While we may rightly critique the movie for its seemingly excessive use of violence, blood, and gore, it is quite plausible that Jesus would have received a beating as gruesome as this one. Romans were ruthless and barbaric killers, and even more so towards criminals. The crucifixion is commonly referred to as the worst method of execution in the history of mankind, and so we can only imagine what other concoctions they dreamed up in the preliminary abuse leading up to this final stage.

With the film focusing on the last few hours of Jesus' life, we spend the movie seeing Jesus mainly in a frantic state, almost as if he is living the torture to come every moment leading up to it. When he is hanging on the cross, we see him in the light of defeat, anguish and suffering. While this is certainly a positive, as it causes us great emotional reflection, it also can overpower the other realities of Jesus which are equally true. We are not given a full account of Jesus' life leading up to the cross, nor are we really shown the truth or the victory of His resurrection and ascension. This can lead to a distorted view of Jesus' person and work.

In seeking the redemption of Gibson's version of Jesus, we are provided with a great baseline. The horrors and realities of Jesus' crucifixion allow for an emotional response and a sense of appreciation for what He went through for us. This, in light of Jesus' earthly ministry, His eternal existence as the second person of the Trinity, His victorious resurrection and ascension leading to His intercession for us followed by His return will leave the viewer with a holistic understanding of Christ. We must understand that Jesus was not the victim of a corrupt government murder scheme, but that He purposed to go to that cross and in doing so, bought us back in victory.

Vidal Sassoon Jesus

Recently, the television screens across the world were enamored with the recent creation of Roma Downey and Mark Burnett--the Bible. This series featured 10 1-hour episodes which took the viewer consecutively from Genesis through to Revelation. The series was praised for its cinematic finesse and alluring imagery, which it produced using it's $22 million budget. All-in-all, it is said that over 100 million cumulative viewers watched the series.

This series provided Bible-believers with many question marks as to the liberties taken in its production, both with leaving out crucial elements and even adding or altering others. While this is not the purpose of this blog, I will focus on their portrayal of Jesus.

The Jesus that Roma and Mark created was a modern-day hippie. He has a soft-complexion, a very finely groomed beard, and luscious brown locks that flow down past his shoulders. Chris Rosebrough, the host of "Fighting for the Faith" on Pirate Christian Radio, described him as "Vidal Sassoon Jesus." He has a gentle smile, and seems to be more enamored with the attention he is getting than anything else. He was drooled over by women from around the world, and even received the unofficial title of "Hot Jesus." He's quite the attractive man, and his soft-spoken, gentle composure had female viewers dreaming of cuddling with this Portuguese star. Diogo Morgado, the man selected to play Jesus in this series, has a history of modelling of starring in soap-operas in his native country of Portugal. What does this mean? He has a history of seducing via media. Perhaps one of the most obvious historical issues with him though, is that he is quite clearly European, whereas Jesus was middle-eastern.

Why do I point out all of this? Well it's quite self-explanatory when I consult Isiah 53. Looking at verse 2 in the New American Standard Bible, we read:

For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot,
And like a root out of parched ground;
He has no stately form or majesty
That we should look upon Him,
Nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him. (emphasis added)

I find it quite ironic that in a messianic prophecy such as this one, we should read that the Messiah will not have anything in His appearance to make us attracted to Him, yet the Bible miniseries decided to use a Portuguese model and actor. The Hebrew word translated here as "attracted" also implies desire and coveting. Have Roma Downey and Mark Burnett accomplished Isaiah's description of Jesus? I'd like to argue that they've done the complete opposite.

Now, how do we redeem such a mess of a Jesus? Well, we must begin by offering a proper, biblical understanding of Jesus' appearance and composure. The happy-go-lucky, nonchalant Jesus of Roma and Mark's imagination is simply not the one you draw out from Scripture. The series is a good primer for the unbeliever, as it introduces them to the biblical narrative, but there is much that needs to be corrected. We can use the knowledge gained from the guide the unbeliever into deeper and more accurate truth about Jesus, as well as allow the series to stir up any thoughts or questions they might have and use it as a jumping pad. We must get it out of their head that Jesus is a Portuguese model, and understand that He was a first-century builder (either carpentry or masonry) of Palestinian Jewish descent. He did not use shampoo, nor was it likely that he had long hair--but that will be an issue taken up later on.