How accurate is our picture of Jesus' appeareance?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mdgspencer

Guest
I was discussing this with my wife yesterday. Jesus in all our representations has a beard and long hair. But do we know that even this this was true of Jews in Jesus’ time? Are we possibly laboring under misconceptions about this?
 
mdgspencer said:
I was discussing this with my wife yesterday. Jesus in all our representations has a beard and long hair. But do we know that even this this was true of Jews in Jesus’ time? Are we possibly laboring under misconceptions about this?
Click to expand...
I think the hair and beard are historically accurate…it’s the light brown/reddish hair and blue eyes that probably aren’t correct.🙂

I thought I saw on discovery.com where someone did a “real” representation of what a typical jew from Christ’s time would look like…but I can’t find it now.
 
I remember that discovery channel thing or time magazine thing -whatever it was. We already know what Jesus’ face looked like thanks to the shroud and it’s NOT what that picture portrayed. As for the hair and beard, I think they are historically acurate.
 
Well, if the shroud of turin is Jesus , He looks nothing like how He is portrayed in shows.🤷
 
In the weeks prior to the release of “The Passion” I read that Gibson was trying for a very Jewish looking Jesus. Also, he does look like the shroud.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Leviticus 19:27 forbade Jews from shaving their beards.
Leviticus 21:5 repeats the prohibition for Priests.
 
I have a book of the shourd of Turin its really good it has pictures of the actual face of Jesus, and a 3d picture that the nasa took of teh radiation in it.
 
This picture was taken by the NASA. its as a matter of fact.a prove of the resuretion.
They took a tridimentional picture of the radiation that is in the shroud n the were able to make a 3d image of a human being.
 
There are several pictures of the face of Jesus , that have been made by many artists being based in the Shourd of Turin.
 
There is no proof the Shroud is authentic and the Church has not declared it to be authentic. We can believe it or not.
Also there is absolutely no description of Jesus in scripture so apart from assuming his hair was likely long and he had a beard in keeping with the custom of the day, nobody can definitively say what his appearance was like.
The bottom line is we don’t know what he looked like. Any description is purely speculative.
 
thistle said:
There is no proof the Shroud is authentic and the Church has not declared it to be authentic. We can believe it or not.
Also there is absolutely no description of Jesus in scripture so apart from assuming his hair was likely long and he had a beard in keeping with the custom of the day, nobody can definitively say what his appearance was like.
The bottom line is we don’t know what he looked like. Any description is purely speculative.
Click to expand...
Agreed:thumbsup: This man at our church would not say whether or not the shroud belonged to Jesus either. He says science will never prove it. I suppose it is fun to speculate.😃
 
The church dosent make peopel to belvie in the shroud of Turin but you should study his history, it has been abou 1000 years in europe there is a painting with the emperor of the 9 century kising the shroud when he resived it.

Most remakably the shorud of Turin has micro polen of the first century of Judea that. very same polen has been extinted. ´

However the shroud is irrelevant for our faith its just an historic relic.

and the church dont care whether people belivie on it or not , its not a dogma of faith.
 
I hope this thread does not switch to another matter, the question as to whether the shroud is genuine. I would much prefer to hear what people have to say about the appearance of Jesus.
 
I hope this thread does not switch to another matter, the question as to whether the shroud is genuine. I would much prefer to hear what people have to say about the appearance of Jesus.
 
mdgspencer said:
I hope this thread does not switch to another matter, the question as to whether the shroud is genuine. I would much prefer to hear what people have to say about the appearance of Jesus.
Click to expand...
Well, the appearance etched into the shroud looks much older then 33. Im not sure if we can accurately depict what Christ looks like because of the lack of description. Like someone said I guess you could assume his hair was long and he had facial hair because that was the Jewish culture. Other then his who knows what he looked like.🤷
 
I really enjoyed a book by George Martin called “God’s Word”. It includes a chapter on what Jesus would have looked like and it describes the types of work a carpenter really did in those days. Carpenter really means more of an all-around “craftsman” or “artisan” and he may have worked with large stones as well as wood and other materials. Ever since, my mental image of Jesus has changed…he might not have been tall, he was almost certainly very strong and probably had heavy, rough hands and a thick upper body…IMHO anyway.
 
I believe that the majority of people see Jesus as on of their own ethnic background. Many years ago there was a song that said “some people see Him ___________” then went on to give descriptions of Christ from personal preferences.

He was a Jew from the Mid-East. So Blond is probably out and Dark is probably in.😉
 
mdgspencer said:
I was discussing this with my wife yesterday. Jesus in all our representations has a beard and long hair. But do we know that even this this was true of Jews in Jesus’ time? Are we possibly laboring under misconceptions about this?
Click to expand...
JESUS outdid all mortals in keeping the Law - and HE manifested the VERY SPIRIT of the Law.

In the Law, whoever wanted to be more than just allowed to dwell in Israel - that is, whoever wanted to be in a personal relationship with GOD, demonstrating personal Love for HIM, was to be a Nazarite. All Nazarites had to have long hair. It is unthinkable that JESUS wasn’t HIMSELF a NAZARITE.

It is unlikely that any of his disciples but Matthew weren’t Nazarites.

As for how JESUS’ Face looks on the Shroud, we are only seeing HIS Face injured several times more than a hockey player’s that has been hit with a speeding puck. You’ve all seen that, I’m sure: a youth in hockey suddenly looks like a mangled forty year old, from one injury’s swelling and bruising.

Irenaeus, once removed from the Apostle John, via Polycarp, in the succession of keepers of John’s Preachings, said that the Apostle (who had stood right before the Cross) had said that when JESUS was in HIS Passion, HE suddenly had many years weighing on HIS appearance, having passed through all ages up to manhood for infants and children and youths and adults, and finally suffering even for the elderly, looking suddenly aged. So take off the aging and the injuries to imagine HIM as HE was every day in Life before the Passion.
 
I think the Holy Spirit, in wisdom, led the writers of scripture to not physically describe Jesus on purpose. He knows our human nature. If we knew exactly what He looked like, some of us would “claim” Him as one of us, and others would feel alien from Him. His church, His message, and His love is for all people. I feel blessed that our savior can be seen in whatever form each of us find brings us closer to Him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top