Yes, it is an interesting question and one worth thinking about. And you certainly have a very good point that Jesus must have been ordinary looking [like a common Jew of His day] because Judas had to point him out to be identified. For sure, Jesus did not look anywhere like the depictions of Him we see today.
Even if he had been regal looking, Judas would still have had to point him out because the soldiers didn’t know who Jesus was or what he looked like. And Judas probably didn’t want to take the chance the wrong man be arrested and have to answer to the authorities. There are lots of good reasons why he had to do it personally besides Jesus being ordinary looking. I’m not saying Jesus wasn’t ordinary looking for a man of his age, times, and culture, but your premise isn’t proof he that he had to, either, if you see what I mean. Not debating here, just saying. From the Shroud image, which I believe to be authentic along with millions of others, I think we have a very good idea of his appearance. And it’s one of a strong, young man of Eastern extraction. What else could anyone expect?
The reason why humans like portraying Jesus as womanly in appearance has to do with Satan and his controlling influence on us, human beings. Satan is doing everything in his power to keep us away from God – from knowing who He truly is so we can come to worship Him “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24).
Once again, you may be right, but medieval artists didn’t do depictions of Christ in order to make him look weak and unmanly, but rather to make him look meek and humble and approachable. Remember, there’d been a great emphasis on Christ as the Great Judge and Divine Son. They simply wanted to emphasize his humanity–as he himself described himself–“meek and humble of heart”. It’s more about symbolism of the devotional kind than wanting to make him effeminate for Satan’s purposes–an idea they would vehemently deny. There are many modern depictions of a more virile Christ because we moderns like that kind of image.
By depicting Jesus as a beautiful effeminate person rather than as an ordinary-looking, rugged individual [He must be because He worked as a carpenter/builder], Satan has made it more appealing for human beings to keep these supposed representations of Christ, and then readily going to the next step, which is what Satan really wants us to do – break one of God’s commandments by praying to these representations.
Considering you have the wrong end of the stick as to the motives of artists, I have to say this premise isn’t very convincing. I know of no one who prays to any representation of Christ, good or bad, modern or medieval. I think you’ve gone overboard here, my friend
Imagine if our pictures of Christ look like the one Lutheranteach showed [which is a much more accurate depiction because the messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53:2 says of Him: “He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.”]. How many do you think would be willing to hang His pictures in their beautiful homes and offices, or make statues of them in their churches? And do you think anyone would kneel down and pray to such depictions of Christ?
Many Bible scholars agree that the depiction in Is. 53:2 describes the “Suffering Servant of God”. So, it’s a depiction of Christ’s sufferings–the tortures he endured, not of his ordinary visage. And I do have a picture of Christ beaten, wearing the Crown of Thorns as well as crucifixes that do depict him as suffering and less than beautiful, as we humans think of beauty. But, they are beautiful because they show what love he had for us. So, you can’t say we wouldn’t hang such pictures on the wall, when millions of Catholics already have them.
