What Do We Do with “White Jesus”?

When I was a student at Biola University in the early 1990s, a prominent artist, Kent Twitchell, painted a large mural of Jesus on the side of the science building. Twitchell used a Jewish person as a model, as he wanted to craft an image that represented both East and West. Even so, some students complained that the image of Jesus was too light-skinned and saw it as a symbol of white supremacy. 

After many years of complaints, the University decided to embark on a “restoration” project, part of which included darkening Jesus’ skin tone a bit. Here is that result. Read more about the controversy here and the President’s 12-page letter here.

This controversy serves as an example of a phenomenon called “White Jesus.” And by “white,” I mean “European.” It is common to see Jesus depicted, for example, on stained-glass windows throughout Europe as a fair-skinned man, sometimes even with blonde hair. My ministry partner, Monique, pointed this out to me in the early days of our friendship. At that time, she saw such images as symbols of racism and white supremacy. In fact, she had been part of the chorus calling for the eradication of White Jesus as a student at Biola.

I’ve reflected on this issue quite a bit over the years and wanted to share a few thoughts about it.

Ethnically Correct Jesus 

Ethnically speaking, Jesus was a Jew. But what did Jesus of Nazareth actually look like? The fact that the palace guards had to rely on Judas to point out Jesus with a kiss suggests that Jesus’ physical appearance was probably fairly average (Mark 14:43-46). He likely looked similar to other Jewish men of his time.

A number of years ago, researchers used forensic science to recreate a digital depiction of Jesus. The image below was the result of that effort.

Obviously, this depiction is speculative. However, it’s a lot closer than this portrayal, which was common in children’s Bibles when I was growing up, or in stained-glass windows like this one, showing Jesus with flowing blond hair.

Adding to the confusion is the reality that Jews of the first century didn’t look the same as European or American Jews today. You don't need to be an advocate of Critical Race Theory to deduce that Jesus probably looked more like a modern-day Egyptian than a New York Jew. Also confusing is the raging cultural debate happening right now about whether modern Jews ought to even be seen as an oppressed religious minority—or whether they are oppressive colonizers. 

Sometimes, figuring out how to abide by all the cultural standards about race can be exhausting. 

Correcting Distorted Versions of Jesus

There is a strong perception by some in the black community that White Jesus is inherently a symbol of racist propaganda. Advocates of Liberation Theology, such as James Cone, often advocate for “Black Jesus” instead. Black Jesus isn’t simply about depicting Jesus as being physically black (although it often includes that) but it’s also about saying that Black Jesus––not White Jesus––represents the REAL Jesus because he favors the marginalized and the oppressed. Ironically, Biola featured an artist promoting this very idea back in 2021. The artist put George Floyd on the cross.

I have no idea if this artist is aware of Liberation Theology or James Cone, but he did a great job capturing a core piece of the ethos of that framework.

The existence of these distortions about Jesus, whether Christians like it or not, can have a potential impact on evangelism, presenting a very real hindrance for some when it comes to discussing the gospel. In these cases, it can be helpful to help inquirers understand the backstory of the Bible. 

Jesus was a Jew, and His Jewishness had a divine purpose, namely to fulfill God’s promise to bring the Messiah through the Jews. He promised Abraham that the people of the world would be blessed through him (Gen. 12:1–3). A few hundred years later, God promised King David that the Messiah would come through his family (2 Samuel 7:16). This is the heart of the gospel: "But when the set time had fully come,God sent his Son" (Gal. 4:4). From there, the gospel goes out to the nations (Matt. 28:19–20; Acts 1:8).

Understanding the historical context and purpose of Jesus’ ethnicity can help inquirers see the bigger picture behind God’s plan of salvation.

The Problem with Pictures of Jesus

In reality, White Jesus was likely the result of the Roman Catholic Church’s long-standing dominance in the West, when Jesus was typically shown as having the skin and physical features of the average European. Obviously, this depiction is ethnically inaccurate. But I would say the same about depictions showing Jesus with dreadlocks or as a Japanese man. 

A key passage to consider in this discussion is the second commandment in the Ten Commandments:

You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them. (Ex. 20:4-5)

I believe the focus here is on disallowing the use of man-made images to depict God as prompts for worship. To be fair, some Protestants interpret this passage as condemning the use of all visual depictions of God––including Jesus. 

Personally, I am conflicted about representing Jesus in non-ethnically correct ways. I understand the sentiment behind portraying Jesus in various ethnicities, including European, to show that He is the Savior of all nations. This is what I call the missionary argument. And I get the heart behind that. But sometimes these efforts gloss over the reality that Jesus has an actual ethnicity as a first-century Jew. I struggle with these artistic depictions, as they may lead to distorted views of Jesus.

Theologically speaking, another concern I have about visual depictions of the Son is that it can inadvertently misdirect us to divide His humanity from His deity, which is a heresy. What I can say with more certainty is that literal depictions of Jesus as European (or African or Asian) certainly represent bad history. They may also represent bad theology.

What Should We Do about White Jesus?

It would have been concerning if the mural artist at Biola had not considered Jesus’ ethnicity, but that was not the case. By his own admission, Twitchell intentionally tried to base the image on an ethnically accurate model. The cycle of complaints about the image were relentless and painful to the artist, And the adjustment offered a path to preserve the integrity of the painting. But this situation is a case study of how complex and contentious the White Jesus conversation can be. It opens the door for all sides to be offended on some level.

There is a growing sentiment that Christians should either remove or replace all images of Jesus that look white. But who determines what “looks white”? Some Biola students still complain that the Jesus in the mural looks “too white,” even though his skin has been darkened. And should we really remove images that have been embedded in cathedrals all over Europe for hundreds of years. On a practical level, dismantling 16th-century stained glass would be destructive––physically and symbolically––to Western culture. In some cases, owners may elect to remove those images. Others may choose to leave them in place. 

And what do we do about the images that depict Jesus as Japanese, Chinese, or Native American? Either way, if you are comfortable showing Jesus as these other ethnicities, then there is nothing inherently racist about showing him as light-skinned.

Meanwhile, some may advocate for more historically and ethnically accurate depictions of our Savior. We can look for positive examples of Jesus that have been done well. In recent years, filmmakers have made intentional efforts to depict Jesus in His Jewish context in a more accurate way. If you are a book publisher, you might consider how you can make illustrations of Jesus that are ethnically accurate.

Is every instance of “White Jesus” a manifestation of white supremacy? I don’t believe so. Context matters. To say that an overly white supremacist group who publishes an image of Jesus being white on a flyer is on the same level as the Biola mural is unfair. The biblical standard of justice requires evidence from two or three witnesses in order to establish the truth of a matter. Without such evidence, I can't judge a situation. Only God can judge the thoughts and intentions of the human heart. In addition, it’s worth reflecting on some of the complicated situations that can develop when visual depictions of Jesus are presented in non-ethnically correct ways. We can also appreciate the hindrances White Jesus presents for some to the gospel and help people overcome misunderstandings about this emotional issue.

---

Resources:

I am not addressing depictions of Jesus in Orthodox iconography. Icons are intended to be symbolic representations of key biblical figures that are intended to act as a window into spiritual realities. They are visual prompts for prayer that connect us to the invisible reality of heaven. They are not intended to be literal pictures of people, including Jesus. The validity of icons is a different conversation.

First published: Jul 23, 2020

Updated: March 20, 2025