I have only one hesitation about the series. Today’s Hollywood seems to portray Jesus as being filthy; poorly dressed; unwashed, matted hair; dirt on his face, etc.
I just cannot buy that. When Jesus walked by, people would reach out and touch his garment .. but who would touch such a filthy garment ..?? And .. Jesus was in possession of the very life of GOD; nobody can convince me that he walked the earth with dirt on his face and in a filthy garment.
The depiction I agree with most, happened in Ben Hur (the one with Charleston Heston). When Heston was being dragged across the dessert and he fell down from hunger and thirst, it showed a person in a clean white garment covered by a red garment, who scooped up some water and gave it to Heston. Suddenly, a Roman guard came charging toward Heston and screaming that Heston was not allowed to have water. At that moment, the man in the red and white garment stood up .. towering over the Guard .. and the Guard just stood there and stared at the man .. he also stopped yelling.
Two important events took place in that film: First, Heston touched the hand of Jesus, something happened to Heston - He came in contact with the Holiness of Jesus and it changed his heart and made him want to live. Second, the appearance of Jesus was not filthy, dirty, no matted hair, etc. Jesus was clean (even in the dessert) and his hair was neat and combed. Therefore, when Jesus stood up - the guard was shocked by Jesus’ appearance of authority and he immediately stopped what he was doing.
This scene from Ben hur is exactly how I believe Jesus appeared to the people .. they were stunned by the Holiness, which they had never encountered before, since all of them had been living with sin. Jesus’ appearance had to be neat and clean .. it could never be matted hair and a dirty face and filthy garments .. NEVER.
The only reference in the scripture to any washing of any kind was when Jesus washed the feet of His followers - since they would be dusty from walking in sandles on the dirt roads.
I noticed that when Jesus came out of the wilderness (on tonight’s episode) his shoe soles were brand new leather. That really touched me, for some reason.
My opinion, for what it isn't worth:
Jesus was not from a poor family, by any means.
There are good arguments for Mary being related closely to the groom at the wedding in Cana, who himself is certainly not a poor man, based upon evidence in the description of the feast.
Elizabeth & Mary are cousins; and as a temple priest, she & Zacharias were not poor people.
Joseph (often called a ‘carpenter’ NT:5045) was a “skilled craftsman in wood” not some poor hammer-jockey. As a "craftsman" he could easily have had mastery over subordinate workers; the Book is silent on that matter.
Joseph of Arimathea ( a very wealthy Pharisee & member of the Sanhedrin) was almost certainly Mary's uncle, since he was able to claim Jesus’ body without any argument: the right of a kinsman-redeemer, the ‘senior’ uncle of the family. That is also a testament to Joseph being more than a poor man; her family would not have arranged a marriage so far across class lines.
This would put Jesus’ earthly family in at least the upper-middle class, so to speak, rather than among the poor.
An unkempt, dirty & poor man would not have been reading the scrolls & teaching in the synagogues, let alone listened to when teaching in the temple. Nor would one such have been dining with Nicodemus; or mixing socially in the homes of others of at least some substance.
Several, if not all, of the 12 were also not exactly poor people either: “ships” (as opposed to a skiff or rowboat) were not a cheap commodity.