Evidence for God from Science

you know, the long dark hair, the beard, the mustach....


I was just wondering how that image came to be?

SUGAAAAA wrote:you know, the long dark hair, the beard, the mustach....


I was just wondering how that image came to be?

I am convinced that it came to be based on what early Jews looked like in His time. However, just because we don't have a real life picture of Him, doesn't mean that He doesn't exist.

I don't think that is Correct. It says in the bible that Long Hair on a Man was not the thing.
1Co 11:14 Doth(2228) not even3761 nature5449 itself846 teach1321 you,5209 that,3754 if1437 a man435 have long hair,(2863) it is2076 a shame819 unto him?846

you guys seem to overlook the SHROUD OF TURIN
http://www.shroud.com/menu.htm
The image in the Shroud is believed to be that of our lord Jesus Christ.

Deborah I think I am going to trust the Bible on this one before I trust the Shroud. That is of Course MHO

Not sure. He is extremely important in the lives of people during his time and our time, so I would think
there is a good chance that considering the similarity among the pictures and their historical accuracy depicting a Jewish man from Nazereth 2000 years ago that they could be at least a fair likeness.

bizzt wrote:I don't think that is Correct. It says in the bible that Long Hair on a Man was not the thing.
1Co 11:14 Doth(2228) not even3761 nature5449 itself846 teach1321 you,5209 that,3754 if1437 a man435 have long hair,(2863) it is2076 a shame819 unto him?846

I think this may be true, but am not sure that custom would apply to God himself. I can imagine long haired prophets also, when God gave his greatest portion of strength to a man he--samson--had long hair.

Actually, Jesus probably did not look like what we see in modern pictures, mostly resembling a European. Here is an interesting article with a picture of what was probably a closer match (Of course, it almost certainly isn't exact).

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science ... 82186.html

Hey, that reminded me... The preacher at my church said Jesus was ugly, and it was prophesied in a book (Isaiah I think)... Its funny cause I never really considered how good Jesus' looks were, I just kind of imagined him as Mel Gibson's Passion Jesus...






That's a pretty different visual of him... although it looks like he's 60 in that picture


But it doesnt matter.... Jesus is Jesus

Most of the pictures we see are of a 'Europeanized' version. You must remember Jesus was a Jew.

I kind of liked the Black Jesus in the site ^

The link didn't work for me. Bad Comcast+crappy computer, bad!

I think they're all wrong. Those pictures you guys posted, I mean. And of course the image we're all familiar with. Man, that makes me mad! That they made him European. How stupid can you be.

I'm going to go home and look up hair in my customs and manners of Bible times books, (I have two, plus other references that might work,) to see for sure about that. I've heard it said that the Jews did what the Romans they were ruled under did and had their hair short and their faces shaven. And I've seen a first century painting of Jesus as the Good Shepherd that depicted him as not only that but with sandy-brown hair to boot!

However, I'm reading a novel called The Nazarene that describes the Jews as having the long curly hair. It depicts the priests as having very elaborate designs with these curls too. Makes me wonder.

There are New Testament verses on how men shouldn't have long hair, however I'm sure Paul would allow weak-minded men to have it long as part of the... what do call it? The vow to chastity and no alcohol that John the Baptist took. Could only Levites take it? I'm forgetting. I used to know. Although Paul would of course say as Christians we aren't under such compulsions of legalism. But Jesus was. He didn't take that vow, obviously, but he was under Jewish law and not the full Christian freedom we've enjoyed since his resurrection.

Some say Paul's comment on hair was merely cultural, (and that would be of the Romans,) as he taught Christians aren't to offend people because of cultural differences, but he made it clear that nature itself dictated that rule. Some also say that his definition of long hair is different than ours of today. That shoulder length was acceptable or thereabouts.

I'll be able to look that up pretty easily though, and I will. Not sure when I'll be able to post the findings, but I'll try to as soon as I can.

Or I could even scan the pictures from my books and post them. Now wouldn't that be convenient! Technology is so cool! I'm continually impressed with what it lets us do.

Sorry, no pictures. But short hair and clean-shaven is the answer. And no, he didn't look as African as that one model showed. I saw them do that head on probably the Discovery Channel. Darn secular shows on the Bible! All liars!

But, and I forgot to voice my support for this before- sorry- the Bible did say in the OT that he wasn't going to be anything to look at. Something about nothing in his appearance that would attract people to him. Possibly ugly, but I'd go for neutral. God wouldn't bother to make Him hideous just to prove a point. Just that he wouldn't be attractive.

the picture of Jesus we have today has been said to have come from the Shroud of Torin (spelling might be off). i have seen a documentary on it from a program called Bible Mysteries or something (borrowed it from a friend) and it was really interesting. i suggest that whoever reads this should look it up on a non-secular site (if there is such a thing anymore).[/quote]

1) The dating from the Shroud of Turin shows that it came from a different era than Jesus' time, so it's not Jesus' body, sorry.

2) There is, I believe a letter to or from someone like Caeser or maybe Pilate? I don't recall, that mentions Jesus' appearance. The writer described Jesus as having long hair and a very serene, warm, almost 'golden' appearance. It was interesting, I'll google that.