Why don't we have more artwork representing the Christian God (i.e. the Father)?

[psychoslice]

''The father'' is actually a metaphor. Jesus, Esa, explains this via saying that he is in the father, and the father in Him. It's the same being.

Yep the whole thing is a metaphor.

 

[fantome profane]

It's easy to find pictures of Jesus Christ. We see pictures of Him teaching the Sermon on the Mount, pictures of Him on the Sea of Galilee, pictures of Him walking on water, pictures of Him raising Lazarus from the dead, pictures of Him blessing the little children, pictures of Him healing the sick, pictures of Him dying on the cross, pictures of Him as a resurrected being on Easter morning.

So why don't we have more pictures, more sculpture, etc. of God the Father? Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel and God the Father is depicted there. I'm aware of another few pictures of Him. But why is He so "ignored" in Christian art in general?

It occurs to me that if you don't know what "God" looks like then it is possible that there are a lot more pictures of "God" out there than you realize.

 

[Skwim]

It occurs to me that if you don't know what "God" looks like then it is possible that there are a lot more pictures of "God" out there than you realize.

The many faces of the god

I​

MY FAVORITE​

 

[HekaMa'atRa]

So why don't we have more pictures, more sculpture, etc. of God the Father? Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel and God the Father is depicted there. I'm aware of another few pictures of Him. But why is He so "ignored" in Christian art in general?

Because then we'd have images and busts of Zeus everywhere!

 

[jonathan180iq]

This is an image of mine. Religious imagery, depictions of god and so on have always been popular themes in art.View attachment 9166

You mean that's your art? You painted that?

 

[Norman]

It's easy to find pictures of Jesus Christ. We see pictures of Him teaching the Sermon on the Mount, pictures of Him on the Sea of Galilee, pictures of Him walking on water, pictures of Him raising Lazarus from the dead, pictures of Him blessing the little children, pictures of Him healing the sick, pictures of Him dying on the cross, pictures of Him as a resurrected being on Easter morning.

So why don't we have more pictures, more sculpture, etc. of God the Father? Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel and God the Father is depicted there. I'm aware of another few pictures of Him. But why is He so "ignored" in Christian art in general?

Norman: Hi Katzpure, Here are just a few paintings I found.

6th century

Leonardo da Vinci, 1495-97 Last Supper

Hans Memling, c. 1490

Warner Sallman, 1940

Jose Clemente Orozco, 1932-34

 

[Nada]

It's easy to find pictures of Jesus Christ. We see pictures of Him teaching the Sermon on the Mount, pictures of Him on the Sea of Galilee, pictures of Him walking on water, pictures of Him raising Lazarus from the dead, pictures of Him blessing the little children, pictures of Him healing the sick, pictures of Him dying on the cross, pictures of Him as a resurrected being on Easter morning.

So why don't we have more pictures, more sculpture, etc. of God the Father? Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel and God the Father is depicted there. I'm aware of another few pictures of Him. But why is He so "ignored" in Christian art in general?

Maybe because He is a spirit.We cant see Him, so we have no idea what He would look like.

 

[Norman]

Norman: Hi Katzpure, Here are just a few paintings I found.

6th century

Leonardo da Vinci, 1495-97 Last Supper

Hans Memling, c. 1490

Warner Sallman, 1940

Jose Clemente Orozco, 1932-34

Norman: I forgot to list my source:

Jesus In Art Through The Centuries - Beliefnet.com

 

[Katzpur]

Norman: Hi Katzpure, Here are just a few paintings I found.

6th century

Leonardo da Vinci, 1495-97 Last Supper

Hans Memling, c. 1490

Warner Sallman, 1940

Jose Clemente Orozco, 1932-34

I was asking about pictures of God the Father, though, not Jesus Christ.

 

[Katzpur]

Maybe because He is a spirit.We cant see Him, so we have no idea what He would look like.

If a spirit can't be seen, how do you explain the fact that when Jesus first appeared to His apostles after His resurrection, they were afraid "because they thought they'd seen a spirit"? Apparently His spirit looked enough like Him that they couldn't tell the difference.

 

[Desert Snake]

If a spirit can't be seen, how do you explain the fact that when Jesus first appeared to His apostles after His resurrection, they were afraid "because they thought they'd seen a spirit"? Apparently His spirit looked enough like Him that they couldn't tell the difference.

Jesus is the exact image of the father, if they saw Jesus, they essentially saw the father. the father looks like Jesus, the scripture is explicitly clear.
people are painting Zeus, or something, clearly.

 

[Norman]

I was asking about pictures of God the Father, though, not Jesus Christ.

Norman: OOps, sorry

 

[Nada]

If a spirit can't be seen, how do you explain the fact that when Jesus first appeared to His apostles after His resurrection, they were afraid "because they thought they'd seen a spirit"? Apparently His spirit looked enough like Him that they couldn't tell the difference.

Well,if you read closely, it mentions they did not recognize him by his appearance, but by the way he spoke.

• John 20:14, 15
  14 After saying this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus.+15 Jesus said to her: “Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you looking for?” She, thinking it was the gardener, said to him: “Sir, if you have carried him off, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.”
  
  
  John 21:4-7
  4 However, just as day was breaking, Jesus stood on the beach, but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus.+ 5 Then Jesus said to them: “Children, you do not have anything* to eat, do you?” They answered: “No!”
  
  So,Jesus was indeed a spirit, but he was materializing in a human body, when he talked to his disciples, after his resurrection.
  
  

 

[Nada]

Jesus is the exact image of the father, if they saw Jesus, they essentially saw the father. the father looks like Jesus, the scripture is explicitly clear.
people are painting Zeus, or something, clearly.

It actually means that Jesus is the exact representation of his Father.Not that when you see Jesus you literally see the Father.The Father is a spirit.No one knows what He looks like.It speaks of His attributes,not His physical appearance.

 

[Katzpur]

Well,if you read closely, it mentions they did not recognize him by his appearance, but by the way he spoke.

• John 20:14, 15
  14 After saying this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus.+15 Jesus said to her: “Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you looking for?” She, thinking it was the gardener, said to him: “Sir, if you have carried him off, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.”
  
  
  John 21:4-7
  4 However, just as day was breaking, Jesus stood on the beach, but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus.+ 5 Then Jesus said to them: “Children, you do not have anything* to eat, do you?” They answered: “No!”

• I was thinking of Luke 24:37-39, which states: But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
  
  

  So,Jesus was indeed a spirit, but he was materializing in a human body, when he talked to his disciples, after his resurrection.

  What do you mean? Are you saying He didn't really have a resurrected body of flesh and bone?

 

[Nada]

• I was thinking of Luke 24:37-39, which states: But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
  
  What do you mean? Are you saying He didn't really have a resurrected body of flesh and bone?

Where I showed you in those other versus,it states Jesus was physically unrecognizable.He appeared in different bodies.Just as when the two men were walking along side the road to Emmaus, and encountered Jesus.They did not recognize him until he broke the bread in the home with them.

Luke 24:13-35 - On the Road to Emmaus - Now that same - Bible Gateway

So Jesus was not resurrected to a human body.Jesus was resurrected as an eternal spirit.Jesus took the form of a human when he encountered his followers.Spirits are invisible and unseen to the human eye.Jesus was in human form so that they can touch, feel and see him.

"After Jesus’ resurrection he appeared in different bodies. Mary mistook him for the gardener. (Joh 20:14, 15) He again appeared, entering a room with locked doors, having a body with wound marks. (Joh 20:24-29) Several times he manifested himself and was recognized, not by his appearance, but by his words and actions. (Lu 24:15, 16, 30, 31,36-45; Mt 28:16-18) Once a miracle performed at his direction opened his disciples’ eyes to his identity. (Joh 21:4-7, 12) Jesus, having been resurrected as a spirit (1Pe 3:18), could materialize a body for the occasion as the angels did in past times, when they appeared as messengers."

Body
The passage you are referring to is right after this one I showed about the two men on the side of the road.For 40 days after Jesus was resurrected,he appeared to many people and they all did not recognize him physically.Only by his mannerisms and speech.If you read it all in its entirety it makes more sense.

 

[Katzpur]

Where I showed you in those other versus,it states Jesus was physically unrecognizable.He appeared in different bodies.Just as when the two men were walking along side the road to Emmaus, and encountered Jesus.They did not recognize him until he broke the bread in the home with them.

Luke 24:13-35 - On the Road to Emmaus - Now that same - Bible Gateway

So Jesus was not resurrected to a human body.Jesus was resurrected as an eternal spirit.Jesus took the form of a human when he encountered his followers.Spirits are invisible and unseen to the human eye.Jesus was in human form so that they can touch, feel and see him.

"After Jesus’ resurrection he appeared in different bodies. Mary mistook him for the gardener. (Joh 20:14, 15) He again appeared, entering a room with locked doors, having a body with wound marks. (Joh 20:24-29) Several times he manifested himself and was recognized, not by his appearance, but by his words and actions. (Lu 24:15, 16, 30, 31,36-45; Mt 28:16-18) Once a miracle performed at his direction opened his disciples’ eyes to his identity. (Joh 21:4-7, 12) Jesus, having been resurrected as a spirit (1Pe 3:18), could materialize a body for the occasion as the angels did in past times, when they appeared as messengers."

Body
The passage you are referring to is right after this one I showed about the two men on the side of the road.For 40 days after Jesus was resurrected,he appeared to many people and they all did not recognize him physically.Only by his mannerisms and speech.If you read it all in its entirety it makes more sense.

Clearly it's going to be a complete waste of both your time and mine to continue this discussion. We simply disagree and aren't going to agree no matter how long we talk. I believe that Jesus was what He told His Apostles He was; you believe it was merely a ruse. I have nothing more to say to you on the subject.

 

[Nada]

Clearly it's going to be a complete waste of both your time and mine to continue this discussion. We simply disagree and aren't going to agree no matter how long we talk. I believe that Jesus was what He told His Apostles He was; you believe it was merely a ruse. I have nothing more to say to you on the subject.

It matters not what you and I think about it.What matters is what is stated in the holy scriptures.It is very clear for those who can see.

Ps.This forum is not set up so that we can all agree.It is a discussion forum.

 

[Nada]

Clearly it's going to be a complete waste of both your time and mine to continue this discussion. We simply disagree and aren't going to agree no matter how long we talk. I believe that Jesus was what He told His Apostles He was; you believe it was merely a ruse. I have nothing more to say to you on the subject.

Thanks.Have a great day.

 

[Desert Snake]

It actually means that Jesus is the exact representation of his Father.Not that when you see Jesus you literally see the Father.The Father is a spirit.No one knows what He looks like.It speaks of His attributes,not His physical appearance.

No, image of the father, means that that is what G-d looks like. It isn't like a directional thing, ie G-d-->Jesus. It is rather, G-d==Jesus. The wording makes it appear to be saying that Jesus resembles the father, as a son would, but son and father are metaphor, not literal. That is why Jesus and G-d, are both titled 'G-d'. The entire idea of Jewish people randomly calling each other 'G-d', is fictional. It's an incorrect interpretation from other passages. It doesn't even hold up to textual analysis.
But, I think I will leave that as it is, no use arguing about this.