Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up

[Skwim]

"Forensic anthropologists, geneticists, and other scientists have come up with a picture of Jesus much different from the one most of us are familiar with. Using the best techniques available to science, they have come up with a “best guess” image of what a male individual living in that place and at that time would have looked like. Not an image of Jesus, but a general idea of his appearance. The results? Jesus had dark rather than light-colored eyes, he was bearded as was the practice in Jewish tradition of the day, and his hair was probably short with tight curls.

The average height of a Semite male at that time and place was approximately 5’1,” and he would have weighed in at around 110 pounds. Since he was a carpenter until the age of 30, working outdoors much of the time, scientists say he was probably muscular and physically fit. His face may have been weather beaten because of exposure to the elements and he may have appeared to be older than he was. So what emerges is an image of a short, muscular man with short, curly brown hair, a dark and swarthy complexion reflecting his Middle Eastern roots."
source​

.​

 

[JJ50]

Jesus would have been of Middle Eastern appearance of course. The Bible never described his appearance, so presumably he didn't stand out from the crowd in that way.

 

[Terese]

What he looked like doesn't matter, what he taught does.

 

[JJ50]

What he looked like doesn't matter, what he taught does.

It is highly likely that much of what that guy had to say was created by the gospel writers, the gospels were written well after Jesus was dead. As nothing was apparently written down when he was alive, it is highly unlikely any so called eye witnesses would have remembered word for word what he had to say.

 

[Skwim]

What he looked like doesn't matter, what he taught does.

Yup, and I assume you'd be fine if people began portraying Radha and Krishna as Australoids or Mongoloids.

.

 

[Terese]

Yup, and I assume you'd be fine if people began portraying Radha and Krishna as Australoids or Mongoloids.

.

I know what you're getting at, but that logic doesn't really apply in this scenario. The vast majority of Christians see Jesus as the 1st and 2nd appearance in the OP. Drawing Jesus as Chinese would put them off, just so as i would be put off if someone portrayed Radha and Krishna as Australoids or Mongoloids. What i'm saying is people are fine with Jesus being portayed as white, because it's the norm for all Christians, just as it is When they think Jesus, they don't think of the 3rd picture of the OP. Does this make sense? Everyone is fine with the eurocentric portrayal of Jesus. (Maybe some historians are peeved )

 

[blü 2]

dark [...] hair was probably short with tight curls.

Oh.

As for your main point, the modern Jesus as shown in the images you provided, with his well-shampoo'd chestnut locks and Nordic blue eyes, makes me think of a Volvo driver on his way to a toga party.

But as you say, there are few hints as to Jesus' appearance in the gospels. You've mentioned the inferences from his being of tradesman class socially and being a carpenter.

As for the 'type' image you supply, it assumes his genetic background came from the region. His Y chromosome was oddly obtained, but it came from a source associated with the Semitic lands, so that may not be a problem.

Luke 4 says ─

22 And all spoke well of him, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth; and they said, “Is not this Joseph's son?” 23 And he said to them, “Doubtless you will quote to me this proverb, 'Physician, heal yourself; what we have heard you did at Capernaum, do here also in your own country.'” 24 And he said, “Truly, I say to you, no prophet is acceptable in his own country.
​

That suggests that Jesus had some visible physical defect; a puny build, or something of the kind, maybe even curvature of the spine or a withered limb. Perhaps this is supported by Luke 23 ─

38 There was also an inscription over him, “This is the King of the Jews.”
​

since you could argue the jibe doesn't really work if the figure underneath looks like Arnie.

On the other hand, it could be a piece inserted to make sure the Jesus of the story fulfilled what might be messianic prophecies in the Tanakh, in particular ─

Isaiah 53
2 For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or comeliness that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.
​

Who knows for sure?

 

[sayak83]

I know what you're getting at, but that logic doesn't really apply in this scenario. The vast majority of Christians see Jesus as the 1st and 2nd appearance in the OP. Drawing Jesus as Chinese would put them off, just so as i would be put off if someone portrayed Radha and Krishna as Australoids or Mongoloids. What i'm saying is people are fine with Jesus being portayed as white, because it's the norm for all Christians, just as it is When they think Jesus, they don't think of the 3rd picture of the OP. Does this make sense? Everyone is fine with the eurocentric portrayal of Jesus. (Maybe some historians are peeved )

It's the norm for white Christians.

 

[Terese]

It's the norm for white Christians.

Good point. Though historically most Christians lived in Europe, making the portrayal very widespread, unless i'm mistaken. Do non-White Christians see Jesus as black? I'm curious

 

[sayak83]

Good point. Though historically most Christians lived in Europe, making the portrayal very widespread, unless i'm mistaken. Do non-White Christians see Jesus as black? I'm curious

Ethiopian Jesus. Ethiopian Christianity is as old as the Catholic branch.

 

[Vouthon]

As a Christian, I think it is good for people to visualize Jesus according to their own ethnicity and culture, since his message is universal and certainly not confined to first century Judea.

I have seen wonderful paintings of a Chinese Jesus:

 

[Revoltingest]

 

[sayak83]

And then resurrected and ascended into the heavens

 

[Terese]

Ethiopian Jesus. Ethiopian Christianity is as old as the Catholic branch.

Thanks Sayak, good to learn

 

[Tmac]

"Forensic anthropologists, geneticists, and other scientists have come up with a picture of Jesus much different from the one most of us are familiar with. Using the best techniques available to science, they have come up with a “best guess” image of what a male individual living in that place and at that time would have looked like. Not an image of Jesus, but a general idea of his appearance. The results? Jesus had dark rather than light-colored eyes, he was bearded as was the practice in Jewish tradition of the day, and his hair was probably short with tight curls.

The average height of a Semite male at that time and place was approximately 5’1,” and he would have weighed in at around 110 pounds. Since he was a carpenter until the age of 30, working outdoors much of the time, scientists say he was probably muscular and physically fit. His face may have been weather beaten because of exposure to the elements and he may have appeared to be older than he was. So what emerges is an image of a short, muscular man with short, curly brown hair, a dark and swarthy complexion reflecting his Middle Eastern roots."
source

.​

There was a scene in the movie "Spartacus" (Douglas/Curtis) when the slave army was defeated and out of respect the conquering general put forth if Spartacus would reveal himself or his body identified the army would be spared crucifixion. Of course after pregnant moment, Douglas says "I'm Spartacus" and the generals face relaxes and after another pregnant moment, Curtis says with equal conviction, I'm Spartacus and then another and then another...

 

[idav]

Due to 100% non-bias knowledge, I am fairly certain that Jesus was Latino and the "J" was prounced with the "H" sound. Just sayin. See OP third picture!

 

[BSM1]

There was a scene in the movie "Spartacus" (Douglas/Curtis) when the slave army was defeated and out of respect the conquering general put forth if Spartacus would reveal himself or his body identified the army would be spared crucifixion. Of course after pregnant moment, Douglas says "I'm Spartacus" and the generals face relaxes and after another pregnant moment, Curtis says with equal conviction, I'm Spartacus and then another and then another...

Soo...you're saying Jesus was Spartacus?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Bacon Jesus

 

[JJ50]

That looks like a monster mask!

 

[corynski]

I know what you're getting at, but that logic doesn't really apply in this scenario. The vast majority of Christians see Jesus as the 1st and 2nd appearance in the OP. Drawing Jesus as Chinese would put them off, just so as i would be put off if someone portrayed Radha and Krishna as Australoids or Mongoloids. What i'm saying is people are fine with Jesus being portayed as white, because it's the norm for all Christians, just as it is When they think Jesus, they don't think of the 3rd picture of the OP. Does this make sense? Everyone is fine with the eurocentric portrayal of Jesus. (Maybe some historians are peeved )

Terese, what you are saying to me is that reality takes second place to what you believe. If reality doesn't fit, or is awkward, substitute that which you can imagine. For example, Christians never seem to confront the reality of why Jesus' divinity went unnoticed for 30 years. Today, the smallest occurrence that could suggest anything supernatural is immediately known locally and quickly becomes known in a wider circle by word of mouth. Or why is there no archeological evidence of the Jews leaving Egypt, something considered 'common knowledge'? I think it centers around what an individual wants to believe, as it has been for thousands and thousands of years as humans evolved........ science, or the establishment of a recorded and corroborated 'reality', is but hundreds of years old, and is coming after humans have used belief as a basis for decisions, and social structure, rather than reality.
Belief is so easy, so accessible, and when one belief doesn't work, there is always another that can be thought up instantly....... Compare that process to science that requires substantiation and corroboration of everything........