Replies

The article claims that Jesus would have had short hair because it says "would Paul (one of the apostles) have written, 'If a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him' if Jesus Christ had had long hair?" the article surmises.

This is a false argument as the actual article in Popular Mechanics says that Paul actually KNEW Jesus... seems to me he was a late-comer to apostlehood.

I can show you quite a few passages in the Bible where it states that the hair should not be cut, especially the beard and forelocks. To this day many Conservative and Sephardic Jews do not cut their hair.

The study of the shroud showed that there is a strange blurring in the hair image on the back of the head in the center extending down to the shoulder area. Subsequent research found that male Jews of the period often braided their hair in a queue and oiled it to keep it braided. Short hair was also a Greek and Roman style. It is unlikely that the oppressed people of Judea would emulate their conquerors and oppressors. It would be more likely they would return to ethnic affectations to differentiate themselves from the oppressors.

Contemprory depictions of Levantine people in Egyptian wall paintings show them to be consistently bearded and long haired, in contrast to the shorter haired and mostly beardless Egyptians. The sole exceptions to this were depictions of Levantine people who were clearly in the position of slaves. One can surmise that slaves would not have much say in their appearance.

Also the assumption of a heighth of 5'1" isbased on spurious data also. Data developed because the study of the Shroud of Turin image seems to be that of a man 5'10" tall, found that, contrary to assumptions, the men of that area and period actually averaged about 5'6" inches tall and while the image on the shroud is taller, it is not out of the range of normal for the period. This data was found by measuring skeletal remains from the period. Jehohannon, the one skeleton discovered that HAD been crucified in the first century, is calculated from his leg bones to have been 5'7" to 5'8" tall. The creators of this "new" image took the EXTREME LOWER END of the male height range for their caricature. This choice alone makes me very suspicious of the motives behind this effort.

"The article claims that Jesus would have had short hair because it says "would Paul (one of the apostles) have written, 'If a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him' if Jesus Christ had had long hair?" the article surmises."

Intersting passage, especially in light of the fact that St. Paul never even saw Chriust in the flesh.

"This is a false argument as the actual article in Popular Mechanics says that Paul actually KNEW Jesus... seems to me he was a late-comer to apostlehood."

That's news to me and to most Bible scholars.

"I can show you quite a few passages in the Bible where it states that the hair should not be cut, especially the beard and forelocks. To this day many Conservative and Sephardic Jews do not cut their hair."

Nazarites did not cut their hair or shave their beards. References to Christ as "The Nazarine" may have nothing to do with geography.

"The study of the shroud showed that there is a strange blurring in the hair image on the back of the head in the center extending down to the shoulder area. Subsequent research found that male Jews of the period often braided their hair in a queue and oiled it to keep it braided."

You are correct. I remember reading that somewhere also.

"Short hair was also a Greek and Roman style. It is unlikely that the oppressed people of Judea would emulate their conquerors and oppressors. It would be more likely they would return to ethnic affectations to differentiate themselves from the oppressors."

Excellant point. Short hair styles in men have historically been linked with militaristic societies anyway.

"Contemprory depictions of Levantine people in Egyptian wall paintings show them to be consistently bearded and long haired, in contrast to the shorter haired and mostly beardless Egyptians. The sole exceptions to this were depictions of Levantine people who were clearly in the position of slaves. One can surmise that slaves would not have much say in their appearance."

Another very excellent point.

"Also the assumption of a heighth of 5'1" isbased on spurious data also. Data developed because the study of the Shroud of Turin image seems to be that of a man 5'10" tall, found that, contrary to assumptions, the men of that area and period actually averaged about 5'6" inches tall and while the image on the shroud is taller, it is not out of the range of normal for the period. This data was found by measuring skeletal remains from the period. Jehohannon, the one skeleton discovered that HAD been crucified in the first century, is calculated from his leg bones to have been 5'7" to 5'8" tall. The creators of this "new" image took the EXTREME LOWER END of the male height range for their caricature. This choice alone makes me very suspicious of the motives behind this effort."

I read about the crucified Jehohannon, but didn't know they were able to estimate his size. I agree with you about both size ranges and the questionability of the motives here in their portrayal of Christ.

See my comments about body size in another response here.