My theory on Jesus

I'd like to share with you a sort of revelation I've had. A few days ago, I was discussing an aspect of Jesus with Glen (of McBain fame), and I made the point, which Glen wholeheartedly agreed with, that there is altogether far too much dead Jesus. In fact, if you think about it, the bulk of paintings about Jesus are either of his first day (baby in the crib, doting parents, the wise men, and half the extras from the production of Noah's Ark) OR of his last day (3 dying guys on the cross, mourning citizens, unsympathetic romans, sneering jews).

The question I pose is this - why can't we have more paintings of the thirty-three years in between all this? How about a painting of when Jesus stayed at the temple as a child and outsmarted all the professors? We could show him being whipped by the teachers for being a snotty-nosed young upstart who dared to question his elders. Or perhaps a painting of when Jesus turned the water into wine? It could be done as a before and after - on one side we have the sad looking party goers, despondent due to having to face a night of sobriety. On the other side we have a wild drunken orgy and Jesus entertaining the crowd by dancing on tables.

Perhaps a different tack - the examples I've mentioned are of notable events in Jesus' life. We could have painting of what would be far more mundane pursuits. Such as "Jesus making a packed lunch of tuna sandwiches" Or "Jesus eating supper with his parents" Or even "Jesus walking through puddles."
I think it has potential. But to get the idea noticed, we'd need some pretty prominent artists to get to work.

This brings me onto another point - by and large all the paintings of Jesus I've seen are by artists I've never heard of. Why didn't the masters ever get round to putting Jesus on canvas? Well, while walking through a rather dull stretch of Rome today, I thought what it would've been like if the masters had painted Jesus.
- Rembrandt would have painted yet another self-portrait, but subtlely altered his own facial features so he resembled Jesus.
- Michaelangelo would have sculpted Jesus out of marble, and then had homoerotic fantasies about Jesus.
- Donatello would have started painting Jesus but died before finishing, leaving the world to wonder if the secret to Jesus' divinity was the fact that he had no eyebrows.
- Da Vinci would have painted Jesus as a woman.
- Botticelli would have forgone the usual muscular features of Jesus, instead portraying him with a big arse and large floppy breasts.
- Van Gogh would have painted Jesus and then driven real nails through the painting.

Perhaps they did paint Jesus, and that's what the Catholic Church has squirrelled away in its vaults. Not the priceless works of art everyone seems to think, but all the paintings of Jesus that aren't of his first or last days.

I'm onto something here. Comments?