Would more detail about Jesus help?

[marco]

How tall was he? We don't know. How did he cope with adolescence? We don't know. What colour of hair did he have? We don't know. Was he bearded? We don't know. What food did he like? We don't know, but he did take a piece of fish so wasn't vegetarian. What illnesses did he have? We don't know. Did he limp, stutter, stammer, cough, have allergies? We don't know.


He came out of the shadows at thirty, never apparently took a wife, and lived rough, it seems, as an itinerant preacher.


Would it help to have a physical description of Christ?

Does the psychological portrait we have make him more of a myth?

[StuartJ]

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Doesn't seem to have bothered many folks in the Christian faith communities.

Graven and painted images of what Jesus is imagined to look like abound.

Jewish and Muslim faithful adhere more closely to Divine laws than lax sabbath-breaking Christians who tend to leave out the bits they don't like and make stuff up that isn't really there.

Jesus can be made to look any way you want him to look.

It would interfere ENORMOUSLY with spiritual nourishment if there were a precise image of what this possibly fictional and definitely not divine character looked like.

As they say: you should never meet your heroes.

Better they remain a miracle-working mystery ...

Then they can be just whatever you choose them to be.

But here's a bunch of imaginings anyway:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depiction_of_Jesus

[marco]

Jewish and Muslim faithful adhere more closely to Divine laws than lax sabbath-breaking Christians who tend to leave out the bits they don't like and make stuff up that isn't really there.

I wouldn't commend the prohibitionists too much; drawing Muhamad, never mind Allah, can seriously shorten your life. Christianity to some degree is the smiling (or at least smirking) face of God.

Jesus can be made to look any way you want him to look.

This is very true and perhaps the reason why Jesus remains a ghost; we can clothe him as we want. It is amusing that when modern people see "Jesus" in clouds, rocks or bits of bread they see the face that Renaissance Art has given us. Mary, too, is a beautiful Western woman eternally dressed in blue and white.


I suspect that a six foot tall Jesus with beard and black straggly hair would cease to be God. Fortunately no physical features restrict the imagination.

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

I came to think about Jesus Christ in terms of linguistic twists and turns, possibly creating a character of fiction that's Jesus Christ who plays a symbolic role in the Bible. The Bible is, as we know, written several hundred years after the alleged death of Jesus Christ. So the possibility for the "invented" Jesus Christ is absolutely there.

You?

[JehovahsWitness]

Would it help to have a physical description of Christ?

Help with what? I can't see that a physical description would help people that believe Jesus never existed to see things otherwise, after all any writer can make up a physical description of a man. I can't see anyone saying, "Oh since I read here he had brown eyes so now I I believe he existed"

As one of Jehovah's Witnesses I believe a person's character is more important than his or her physical appearance.

"As a child, I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of Jesus the Nazarene." - Albert Einstein, German-born scientist

RELATED POSTS

Are people influenced by artists depictions of Jesus?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 494#925494

Was Jesus virile?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 474#927474


FURTHER READING

What Did Jesus Really Look Like?
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/maga ... look-like/

Qualities of Jesus to imitate
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/book ... -of-jesus/[/quote]

[marco]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

I came to think about Jesus Christ in terms of linguistic twists and turns, possibly creating a character of fiction that's Jesus Christ who plays a symbolic role in the Bible. The Bible is, as we know, written several hundred years after the alleged death of Jesus Christ. So the possibility for the "invented" Jesus Christ is absolutely there.

You?

I am suspicious that a man who was respected and loved earned no physical description. It is perfectly possible he was a myth, but more likely that he was a shadowy figure who has been used to spearhead a movement, as the imaginary Isis might have done. We should never underestimate the ability of man to imagine; our real art portrays the Jesus story more convincingly than does the Bethlehem tale of supernatural beings chatting with shepherds or worried women listening to nice angels in a sepulchre.

[bjs]

[Replying to marco]

Can you tell me some specific way that a physical description of Jesus would help, or some specific problem that it would alleviate? Off the top of my head I cannot think of any.

A physical description seems unlikely to convince someone that Jesus was a historical person (the Gospel writers did not seem to think that people needed convincing of that, suggesting that their original audience already knew of his existence).

A physical description would not make him less of a shadowy figure, or make who he was or what he did and taught any more important to anyone.

[marco]

Can you tell me some specific way that a physical description of Jesus would help, or some specific problem that it would alleviate? Off the top of my head I cannot think of any.

I think it's satisfactory to say you cannot think of any. I was hoping others might. For me a single blemish might carry conviction. An idiosyncratic gesture might make him come alive. He is just a wandering voice.

A physical description seems unlikely to convince someone that Jesus was a historical person (the Gospel writers did not seem to think that people needed convincing of that, suggesting that their original audience already knew of his existence).

A physical description might not assist some who already carry a picture of Jesus in their mind's eye. The gospel writers possibly gave no description not because they thought it wasn't required, but because they had no idea themselves. Luke, from obvious ignorance, tells us: "And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man."

This is like saying: Once he reached twelve he looked forward to being thirteen and so on, increasing in strength and knowledge, until he was eighteen, when he was really bright.

And is it so very hard to see that some genuine details from an eye witness would be an improvement?

[marco]

I can't see that a physical description would help people that believe Jesus never existed to see things otherwise, after all any writer can make up a physical description of a man. I can't see anyone saying, "Oh since I read here he had brown eyes so now I I believe he existed"

That's true. The point is that lack of description leads many to think that he is just a shadow. There are words but no concrete personage behind them. He has no more life than Hamlet because his biographers said nothing about his physical person, which maybe suggests they had no idea, and this in turn leads us to ask what truths they did know and what was made up.


People are influenced by an artist's impression of Jesus; of course they see a handsome blue-eyed Jesus if that is what has been depicted for them. It may be that if his biographers had given a full description of the man, people would pin their thoughts on this description. Given nothing it is easy to imagine there was nothing.

As one of Jehovah's Witnesses I believe a person's character is more important than his or her physical appearance.

That is not in dispute.

"As a child, I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of Jesus the Nazarene." - Albert Einstein, German-born scientist

I'm not surprised Einstein was impressed by the "luminous" figure of Christ. Fireflies exhibit bioluminescence, which is equally impressive. And Wordsworth loved a rainbow. Does all this show anything other than man admires what he sees as beautiful or interesting.

[Tart]

How tall was he? We don't know. How did he cope with adolescence? We don't know. What colour of hair did he have? We don't know. Was he bearded? We don't know. What food did he like? We don't know, but he did take a piece of fish so wasn't vegetarian. What illnesses did he have? We don't know. Did he limp, stutter, stammer, cough, have allergies? We don't know.


He came out of the shadows at thirty, never apparently took a wife, and lived rough, it seems, as an itinerant preacher.


Would it help to have a physical description of Christ?

Does the psychological portrait we have make him more of a myth?

I think any additional information would certainly be beneficial, if in the least to help us understand more things about Christ and Christianity. Perhaps more historical things about Christ (psychical appearance, health, childhood, etc..)...

However, I do believe that we have sufficient evidence to understand Christianity, in the least to establish Salvation...


but my personal hopes for more information would be in the Resurrection and the details. For instance the four Gospels have different depictions of Christ's Resurrection. Where Matt depicts an all authoritative and glorious Resurrection of Christ. Mark seems to descend a little, where Mary didnt even recognize him, and the disciples werent even fully faithful. Luke says that Disciples didnt even recognize Him, and they were mostly fearful. Matt says that Jesus will be with them to the end, and Mark and Luke tell of Jesus being taken away from the Disciples up into heaven. And the John's is even more so troubling, where the Disciples even grieve the presence of Jesus...

Its an odd depiction that id like more information about.