Confusing the minds of our children

By Michael Findley, STAR Writer

It seems that the article I wrote on the Rastafarian Christ, featured in one of our school's textbooks, has opened a can of worms and will spark a debate that will continue for a while. The book I speak of is 'Living Together as a Family', published by the Carlong Book series, and my article drew the interest of a Sunday morning programme whose host saw it fit to have me on in the style of a debate with a Rastafarian brethren.

I spoke from a Christian perspective and the result as to who made the better points will reside in the minds of the public. What I will say, however, is that I stand by what I said in the article, that portraying Christ as a Rasta is a gross misrepresentation of the truth, and even though some might find it cute, the fact remains that we are confusing the minds of our children, who will ask questions as to the veracity of the symbolisation of Christ as a Rastaman.

Another misrepresentation

Now, it is true that Jesus has long been portrayed as a white man with blue eyes and long, flowing hair, and as far as I am concerned this is another misrepresentation of what Christ as a Jew would look like in those times. True to say that no one knows what our master's appearance was, as there is little biblical description of Him. John in revelations described him as having hair like wool and eyes like flames of fire, and apart from that there is little to go off, but no way can we surmise either that Christ sported something similar to present-day locks.

This style of hair is a 20th century phenomenon borne out by the birth of Rastafarianism and the way they groom their hair. Some Rastas will say that Christ must have had locks since he took the 'Nazarene vow', but no place in the Bible states this as a fact. The only reason Christ was called a Nazarene was because he came from the town of Nazareth, and the correct name for the vow such as the one taken by Samson where his hair was uncut, was the Nazarite vow.

Now, I know that this may sound like 'splitting hairs' and that it does not matter what Christ appearance was. Maybe that's true. But if we are teaching young minds who are very curious and will ask questions of such nature, then we should at least stay as close to what facts we have.

Black nationalism, as the programme portrays, is a good thing, we need to appreciate our culture and heroes. This will foster a sense of pride and accomplishment for us as a people in majority in this country. I hail the concept of the programme but in our enthusiasm for upliftment we must not go overboard and misrepresent the truth. The question of whether Christ wore locks may seem a bit trivial now. We must start with the truth so that the bigger issues may not be lost because of our laying a bad foundation.