Replies

The New Testament quotes don't do all that much. The Nazarites did not cut their hair, nor is it easy to imagine St. John the Baptist giving himself a crew cut. In 1 Corinthians 11 there is actually no "long", literally, St. Paul says that hair in itself is a disgrace to a man, "κομα ατιμια αυτω εστιν" (St. Paul himself, according to iconography, was bald). The literal reading is thereby excluded, and idiomatic readings are many: then men, unlike women, naturally grow bald, or that men are not preoccupied with their hair (That was the favorite of Jerome's, who translated "si comam nutriat, ignominia est illi"). There certainly is no sign of hair grooming in the Man on the Shroud. Or, perhaps, that men cannot cover their face with their hair and women can, -- but the Man on the Shroud, uncombed and with prominent sidecurls (here's that mandatory hair again), couldn't do that as well, he'd need hair down half his back to do so.

The miraculous escape episode in Luke 4 could mean many things, but that Jesus was able to sneak by unnoticed is not one of them, since the crowd had no difficulty not only locating Him, but dragging Him to the cliff. I could just as plausibly argue that Jesus physically intimidated his assailants BY his large stature, although most likely natural explanation is His commanding psychological presence, many times attested to in the Gospels.

The kiss of Judas is a necessity for two reasons, none having to do with Jesus's not physically standing out. First, let us recall that Judas most likely held no personal enmity to Jesus, -- he was, after all a longtime apostle, and later repented. The kiss was therefore, a sign that he, Judas wanted to give, to signal the complexity of his feelings to Jesus and to others.

Secondly, put yourself in the position of the military officer. You are going to pick and arrest just one man out of twelve or more, at night. Would you be satisfied with the instruction "pick the tall one"? For all you know they may be all lying down asleep, when it is difficult to observe height, it will be dark, and there may be (indeed there was) a scuffle. I think, the officer asked Judas to identify Christ on the spot rather than by description.

annalex: "The Nazarites did not cut their hair,"

Where does it say Jesus was a "Nazarite"?

annalex: "nor is it easy to imagine St. John the Baptist giving himself a crew cut. "

Was John the Baptist ever considered a possible "King of the Jews"?

annalex: "In 1 Corinthians 11 there is actually no "long", literally, St. Paul says that hair in itself is a disgrace to a man, "κομα ατιμια αυτω εστιν" (St. Paul himself, according to iconography, was bald). The literal reading is thereby excluded, and idiomatic readings are many: then men, unlike women, naturally grow bald, or that men are not preoccupied with their hair "

Here we see an easily testable claim. So let's go find what the real experts say about it.

1 Corinthians 11:14

New International Version: "Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him,"
King James Version: "Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? "
New King James Version: "Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?"
American Standard Version: "Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a dishonor to him? "
New Living Translation: "Isn’t it obvious that it’s disgraceful for a man to have long hair?"
Young's Literal Translation: "doth not even nature itself teach you, that if a man indeed have long hair, a dishonour it is to him? "

This particular link lists 20 different Bible translations -- all but one of which use the terms "long hair" and "disgrace," "shame" or "dishonor."
The one exception is a ludicrous jazz riff on the original words called, "The Message":

The Message [13-16]: "Don't you agree there is something naturally powerful in the symbolism—a woman, her beautiful hair reminiscent of angels, praying in adoration; a man, his head bared in reverence, praying in submission? I hope you're not going to be argumentative about this. All God's churches see it this way; I don't want you standing out as an exception."

So the vote amongst recognized experts in this field is 19 translations of "long hair," and one "head bared in reverence."

annalex: "I could just as plausibly argue that Jesus physically intimidated his assailants BY his large stature, although most likely natural explanation is His commanding psychological presence, many times attested to in the Gospels."

Jesus' "commanding psychological presence" obviously did not keep him out of this tight spot in the first place, so it is not a satisfactory explanation.

The obvious explanation WOULD be that, at the last minute Jesus' friends showed up and formed a protective barrier around him, allowing him to pass through the crowd. I say WOULD be, because that's not what the New Testament says happened. So the more reasonable explanation is that he did, in fact, slip through the crowd unnoticed.

Again, it points to the idea that Jesus was not unusual looking for a first century Judean.

annalex: "Would you be satisfied with the instruction "pick the tall one"? "

Especially not if Jesus were no taller than his fellow countrymen.

Let us note that when the Bible sees a person's physical stature as unusual or important -- i.e., a Sampson or Goliath -- it points that out to us. Where no such mention is made, we have to assume the person's appearance was not out of the ordinary.

The question then is whether the Shroud image was "ordinary" for Jesus' time.
As Swordmaker points out, some experts say it totally was.
Other say "no."
My opinion (for whatever that might be worth) is the image could possibly represent someone considered a potential "King of the Jews," but not someone as our modern scholars identify, a "marginal Jew."

Imho, we can't have Jesus both ways...