Jesus was 'rough and scruffy' [tr]

MailOnline ^ | 9 February 2018 | By JOAN TAYLOR FOR THE CONSERVATION

[sparklite2]

Jesus aligned himself with the poor and this would have been obvious from how he looked.

The appearance of Jesus matters because it cuts to the heart of his message.

However he is depicted in film and art today, he needs to be shown as one of the have-nots; his teaching can only be truly understood from this perspective.

[hinckley buzzard]

This train of thought is designed to challenge identification by non Semitic peoples. The universality of Jesus Christ is that he was fully human but also fully divine, and his physical appearance is irrelevant to His mission on earth. To an Asian He will appear as an Asian. To a Semite He will appear Semitic. To an African He will appear African. The Christ has nothing to do with squalid earthly distinctions.

[RandallFlagg]

Nope. That was from Empire.

[DoodleBob]

God Bless you, FRiend.

[PAR35]

Perhaps there are some advantages in a theology that prohibits making graven images to worship.

[bramps]

Great post!

[SkyDancer]

Spent four days at a Shroud seminar with speakers from France, Spain, Italy as well as a few of our specialists on the Shroud. One four hour day followed by three eight hour lectures from all scientific disciplines. See:http://www.shroud.com/ and http://www.holyshroudguild.org/index.html this last site is the one I attended and you’ll see what the hall looked like.

[ichabod1]

True and to Europeans he would must needs have appeared somewhat European.

[bigdaddy45]

Why absurd? What would you expect? Blonde hair and blue eyes?

[reasonisfaith]

Nothing specific, it just looks wrong.

I think the guy drew it with the opposite agenda to the one you wrongly suspected of me.

[sparklite2]

The danger of replacing the deity with the more accessible graven image is real and prevalent, denials to the contrary.

[bigdaddy45]

Why? You think Jesus was a pretty boy? This is really an illogical post I must say.

[reasonisfaith]

You’re really not doing yourself a favor when you buy into old, low information cliches dealing with topics like “multiculturalism” and race.

[Palio di Siena]

Franco Harris after the immaculate reception

[faithhopecharity]

Mark, usually cited as the earliest gospel ( closest in time to Jesus) tells us Jesus was a carpenter ( craftsman - tekton), his father Joseph’s trade. Fathers were expected to teach their trades to their boys. There are some scholars who think maybe They were stone masons ( tekton being capable of wider meanings, some prefer to translate it as builder—- and the family’s area of Israel had more rocks than trees ( and therefore more stone houses than wood ones). Church tradition follows the carpentry version. Either way, Jesus had a saleable trade, he was not on the government dole (which didn’t exist anyway). Building trades were in demand there, too, at least because the Roman “EU” occupiers of that era were still building Greek colony city the Romans took over—- Sepphoris— Within just five miles of jesus’ home town of Nazareth. So there was work in the area. Of course, a building construction worker 👷‍♀️ wouldn’t be manicured or dressed in tux and tails, but the artist’s portrayal still looks unnecessarily scraggly and impoverished , imho. And I disagree that one’s appearance tells us very much about him or his message. Jesus’ Jewish faith and culture tell us a lot more about his teachings—indeed almost everything he taught reflected his Jewish faith, scriptures, culture, and norms/ values. His imagined or purported appearance? Pretty much irrelevant imho

[bigdaddy45]

I have no idea what you’re talking about. I just find it odd that you’re so offended by a rendition of Jesus based on some historical research as to what a Jew would look like 2000 years ago. The guy in the picture isn’t the best looking dude in the world. So what? That has zero relevance to who Jesus was as a man and the son of God.

[reasonisfaith]

You’re making things up. I didn’t say anything about good looks.

This picture doesn’t even make him look Jewish.

[bigdaddy45]

Scraggly and improvished? What are you talking about? The guy has slightly unruly hair and a beard. This was 2000 years ago. You didn’t bop down to the barber for a shave and a haircut whenever you needed one. Do you think Jesus was spending his time getting manis and pedis?

[bigdaddy45]

Looks pretty Jewish to me.

[reasonisfaith]

“zero relevance to who Jesus was as a man and the son of God.”

This comment of yours would apply very well to what the artist did with this picture.

Makes me think your agenda is not what you want it to look like.

[reasonisfaith]

You’re feverishly pushing this particular artwork on everyone.