Shroud of Turn
Holy Face of Vienna
Christ Pantocrator
4th century catacomb
Posted on 03/04/2011 6:27:07 AM PST by dangus
It is commonly claimed that we have little idea what Jesus looked like. Some have even gone to such despicable extremes as to describe traditional depictions of Jesus as looking like an "effeminate hippy." The truth is that although some images of Jesus have made him look overly European, we do have a good sense of what he looked like.
Jesus had a beard. To shave off one's beard was a great dishonor (see 1 Sam 21, 2 Sam 10:4, Isaiah 50:6). One particular humiliation the Messiah withstood was that the centurions plucked out his beard (Isaiah 50:6); certainly they were grabbing significant portions, not just a few day's growth.
Jesus probably did have long hair. The Gospel of Matthew states that the birth of Jesus "fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene (2:23)." In context, Matthew is obviously making a play on the fact that Jesus was born in Nazareth, but prophesy isn't dismissed by a pun, and the prophecy plainly referred to the a Nazarite.
Nazarites were people who atoned for the sins of the people by making sacrifices of their bodies. (Sound familiar?) They abstained from strong drink and grape products. Since Jesus didn't do this, one might suppose that he was not a Nazarite. (Actually, as Luke 5:33 records it, his disciples didn't abstain from drink, there's no reason to suppose Jesus drank apart from ritual.) On the other hand, it confounded people that he didn't do this, which suggests he may have been regarded as a Nazarite, or appeared to be one. So how does one appear to be a Nazarite?
Nazarites didn't cut or groom their hair. As such, they were considered offensive and humiliated in Jewish culture, which began to assume that they were atoning for their own sins, even though this was in opposition to scripture! (See Lam. 4:7, Amos 2:11). The fact that long hair was considered shameful (1 Cor 11:14), thus, shouldn't be considered evidence that Jesus didn't have long hair, since Jesus bore our shame (Isaiah 53:4).
Jesus was fairly ordinary looking, for his time and place. Isaiah 52:14 notes that "He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to Him, nothing in His appearance that we should desire Him." But this doesn't mean he looked perfectly typical. The Talmud depicts Adam as a majestic and beautiful giant; one might have expected the Messiah to look like a Son of God. (The Sons of God were a race of giants, see Gen. 6:2.) We shouldn't discount the possibility that he was rather tall, or forget that recent growth in mankind's average height is a result of better diet, not genetic change. Contrary to the recent assertions of the History channel, There is no reason to believe Jesus was rather short.
He was, however, gaunt. As a carpenter, he probably had been fairly muscular, since carpentry involved real labor. But the bible tells of frequent fasting, including one fast of forty days with no food at all (Mat 4:2). By the time he was crucified, he was so thin, you could count all his bones (Psalm 22:17).
Lastly, it's not necessarily true that we have no record of his appearance. Eastern Christian tradition, not infallible, but not baseless, either, asserts that the evangelist Luke was a physician and a painter, and that although Luke's images are lost, the iconic images of Christ Pantocrator are based on them. Christ Pantocrator is consistent with scripture: Bearded, slender, long-haired.. and very Jewish looking. It's also consistent with the numerous supposedly miraculous images of Christ, such as Veronica's veil and the Shroud of Turin. Among scripture and these images, we have a very good sense of what Jesus looked like, indeed.
Shroud of Turn
Holy Face of Vienna
Christ Pantocrator
4th century catacomb
Very interesting. Thanks, dangus.
Do you still beat your wife?
LOL...written letters and words are visual symbols. Insisting all you want that it is otherwise does not make it so...in fact, most of our letters all started out as visual symbols for animals, tools, objects etc. When you type or write the letters "G-O-D" (or any other word) you are graphically representing a thought or concept. Specifically, when you type the letters "G-O-D" you are forming a "symbol" or icon that all persons literate in your language understand to represent the Divine. No matter how strenuously you object to that, that's exactly what you are doing. Again, I'm not saying you worship the letters "GOD" but am pretty sure you worship the Being to whom those letters refer. Similarly, I'm saying that few people if any actually worship a painting or sculpture of Christ (and I would concur with you that those who do are commiting idolotry) but rather the Being they represent.
You seem to approve of how you visually communicate that thought while objecting to and demeaning the manner in which others do. If you believe that an artist or poet or songwriter's gifts come from God, but their use of their blessings to celebrate Him and compel others to venerate Him should be "hidden under a bushel basket" you might want to see Matthew 5:16.
>> Those are your words, not God’s. God said “graven images” <<
No, God didn’t say “graven images.” King James, A mass-murdering, genocidal fanatic who loved to have homosexual orgies while bathing in animals’ blood said “graven images.” God said, “idols.”
Please see my #65 (again). Apparently you insist on playing God and insisting that you are above every man in your interpretation. I'll not be party to such blasphemy.
Dear goodness? Are you really serious? In hebrew same word for graven images is the same as idols. God clearly defines an idol as something you worship before God. Again, and please answer all these questions, especially this one. In the verse It says "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of ANYTHING in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below." Keyword is ANYTHING. Now with that being said, how do you have anything in your house? Seriously. We as humans create things all the time. But, yet, God say's "in the form of ANYTHING". That would null and void everything. Not just a Picture of Jesus... b/c, he says "ANYTHING".
Jesus's earthly dad was a carpenter. Guess he's screwed. No where in the 10 Commandments does it say "Do Not draw/paint/sculpt of Jesus. But for arguments sake, let's say you are right about "Graven Images". It still does not change the fact, that the verse says to not draw/paint/sculpt ANYTHING. Not just Jesus, ANYTHING.
How do you know an artist portraying Christ hasn't been compelled (i.e. "commanded") to do so? Although, since you have held yourself up as the definitive source of this knowledge and the true arbiter of all that is righteous and correct, I suppose you would know.
OK, I concede. Michelangelo was actually in Satan's service when he was spending all those hours crafting the Pieta. God would have been far more pleased with him had he, being in the middle of Renaissance Italy, availed himself of the opportunity to better spend that time vandalizing, pillaging and burning every church, chapel and cathedral that dared display so much as a Crucifix. That indeed would have been far more pleasing to God and put those sinners aright.
Gotcha.
She clearly is a prodigy. But I just get this feeling that the family came up with a marketing gimmick.
1800 for a print???? I don’t have a problem with making money. She should charge whatever she can get...but somehow..it leaves a bad sense when she is roping God into Capitalism ..and becoming one of the richest Teens in America???? Off of GOD and Jesus???
They lived in a 10000 square foot house when the girl disappeared..then magically reappeared. I would love to see the police report on that one. I couldn’t help but think of Balloon Boy.
Supposedly, when the girl is 6 she disappears. Mother calls the State Police. 50 police officers show up to scour the house
GET REAL. I don’t believe for a second that 50 police officers show up. the girl was only missing a few hours
http://www.artakiane.com/library/The%20Westsider%20-%20Vol3,%20Issue1.pdf
I think it is a hoax.
By the way, the famous painting of Jesus “Prince of Peace” is a carpenter who just magically showed up at their door looking for work. He became her model for Jesus.
In the end, I think she has a god given miraculous talent....and her parents exploited it.
She has a blog. Last year she offered to do Soulscapes of your soul for a “reasonable” price. Skyping available so she could see your soul. There hasn’t been another entry on her blog since.
**that one picture looks like Hulk Hogan**
Well, yeah, I guess it does, sorta. The big one looks kinda like Sly Stalone.
The Lord displayed a sense of humor in a few places of the gospels. Maybe some of these paintings humor him as well.
Jesus a Nazarite?
There is nothing in the Word to back that up.
John the baptist’s parents were told to raise John as a Nazarite. Mary and Joseph were told no such thing, as far as I can tell.
Physical reminders of the man Jesus Christ are probably good, but all one needs is the infilling of the Holy Ghost to KNOW he is real. The Lord said that that is what gives the power to be his witness.
Whoa. I’ve seen afrocentric images of Christ before, and some of them were kinda neat, but that is just plain ug.
the question is whether the 2nd commandment is or is not a prohibition against images in places of worship per se. What say you? If you say ‘yes’ then why did God command them to be made? If you say ‘no’ then what is intended by the commandment?
“The normative principle of worship is a Christian theological principle that teaches that worship in the Church can include those elements that are not prohibited by Scripture. The most common traditions using this are Anglican and Lutheran.
The opposing view is the regulative principle of worship which teaches that with regard to worship “whatever is commanded in Scripture by command, precept or example, or which can be deduced by good and necessary consequence from Scripture is required, and that whatever is not commanded or cannot be deduced by good and necessary consequence from the Scripture is prohibited”. This is most often seen in many Presbyterian and Reformed churches.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normative_principle_of_worship
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.