do you believe Christianity would even exist if in life Christ had been unattractive?

[Trauntj]

I just had this thought for a second. lets say Christ for all intents and purposes, wasn't the attractive male figure people think of him as looking like, but instead a hideous man by whatever standards you deem considerably ugly. would the people who followed and heard the words of God see him as a crazy man and disregard his word simply based on appearance? maybe he in fact was actually ugly but had very good persuasive skills. I'm not bashing Christianity in any way seeing as I'm a follower of the religion but every picture I see of Jesus he looks to be the staple vision. just a thought on how every society bases its judgments in some way on looks, but I'm sure I'll get hell for this.

[DrunkFetus]

Um, I'm not sure jesus was ever a real person and if he was i dunno what he looked like.

[Trauntj]

well, the point was that we don't really know what he looked like. whether you believe he existed is up to your preference.

[Vizier]

Jesus was probably the world's first comic book hero

[Rodrat]

why do people say he doesnt exist
its in the roman records im pretty sure that he is killed, its even in the history books

[Grinch]

Apparently the character of Jesus Christ wasn't the best looking character to cross your path:

"He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him."

Isaiah 53:2

But then again, pictures and caricatures of the supposed messiah have probably been skewed as much as their doctrine.

[ArmsMerchant]

In ages past, people seemed not to care as much about physical appearance as they do today.

Obviously, no one knows what jesus looked like, but he most likely was short and had a big nose--like most other men of his time and place.

Socrates was pretty ugly by modern standards, as was Abraham Lincoln--both of them seemed to do pretty well. Um, until they were killed, that is.

[Raziel]

Jesus looks like that dude that sleeps in front of the coffee shops here.

[Agent 008]

That's actually a very interesting point!

[DJ Meaty Cheeks]

He looked like that.

[slickt0mmy]

Yeah, the bible says he wasn't "good looking". I'd assume he was just an average guy. Definitely not the skinny white guy you see in paintings and films. I mean, for heaven's sake (excuse the pun), the guy was a carpenter. Back then carpenters had to cut down and haul their own trees for lumber. Doing all the physical work, I'm willing to bet Jesus was ripped.
So don't think of him as that white dude, smiling creepily at everyone as he walks through the silent crowd. IRL, he was more likely pretty muscular with dark, beat up skin.

[Other Side of the Pillow]

Since Jesus is supposed to be the human form of God or something like that does that mean regular people who differ from his characteristics are less godly?

e.g. Women

[slickt0mmy]

Originally Posted by Other Side of the Pillow

Since Jesus is supposed to be the human form of God or something like that does that mean regular people who differ from his characteristics are less godly?

e.g. Women

According to the bible, all humans "were made in the image of God." God isn't male or female. So I suppose as long as you're human, you're how God wanted you to be. I don't know. I've gone to church all my life and still don't know what I'm talking about.

[Other Side of the Pillow]

But he chose to make Jesus a certain way right? He could have made him any kind of way he wanted. He deliberately chose for him to be the way he is.

Jesus was like his representative. If you had to choose from a group of people to represent you in a scenario that mattered, would you not chose the best possible candidate?

[slickt0mmy]

Originally Posted by Other Side of the Pillow

But he chose to make Jesus a certain way right? He could have made him any kind of way he wanted. He deliberately chose for him to be the way he is.

Jesus was like his representative. If you had to choose from a group of people to represent you in a scenario that mattered, would you not chose the best possible candidate?

Oh, ok. I see what you're saying. I don't know. I mean, I suppose the only choices are that either...
A: Jesus carried on the physical traits of Mary and God, himself.
B: God's traits were left out and its only Mary's that got carried over.
C. God somehow gave Jesus the traits of Joseph, as well as Mary.

The problem with A is that I doubt God actually planted "Godsperm" in Mary's vag. I always assumed it was more like he just made a baby start growing. There wasn't really a point that Jesus was magically conceived, he just started growing. And also, is there even a physical God? The bible tells of a point where Abraham is in a cleft of some rocks and God "passes by" and Abraham sees the edge of his cloak or something. But I was always taught that Jesus was God's physical form.
With B, can you even have a human being without male traits? Much less, a MALE human being? I don't know enough about genetics to explore this option, unfortunately. Maybe someone else would know?
And C, I suppose this is the most feasible. But again, I don't know if its what actually happened.

It's definitely an interesting question. I might send an email to the pastor of my church and see what he says.

But yeah, I understand where you're coming from. Did God actually manipulate Jesus' DNA to make him look like he did? And if he did, does that mean Jesus' body is the "perfect" body? The bible says he wasn't really good looking but do you have to be good looking to be perfect?

[Ambient]

Originally Posted by slickt0mmy

?

The short answer- There's more to life than genetics

Attractivity or beauty is a social construct and you will see it probably differs differs between cultures i.e. 2000 year old Jewish culture and contemporary American culture.

Once you get that out of the way there are two points of note.

A) People generally value the viewpoints of individuals who are seen to be attractive

B) There is no historically verifiable for Jesus physical existence, but by all means the generic physical portrayal of Jesus looks nothing like a Jew (for instance, Jews are beige not white)

[DrunkFetus]

Originally Posted by rodrat

why do people say he doesnt exist
its in the roman records im pretty sure that he is killed, its even in the history books

there are actually almost no historical references to jesus outside of the bible.

[negz]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Socrates was pretty ugly by modern standards, as was Abraham Lincoln--both of them seemed to do pretty well. Um, until they were killed, that is.

But none of those have a religion after them.

[Township Rebellion]

I'm going to go ahead and point out the most realistic explanation - for starters, Mary couldn't have been a virgin. Going by the fact that the egg of a female womb cannot begin the process of turning into a human until male fertilization is introduced, Joseph and Mary to my mind definitely did mate and have their child the natural way. I don't really want to start a war with the believers in this thread so I'll try not to discuss the implications of that, but something tells me some of you won't believe me anyway.

Jesus probably looked quite similar to most other men of his time and place, and seeing as he was a carpenter - slickt0mmy does have the right idea here - he probably was fairly well built and had dark, tough skin. After all, they didn't have much in the way of beauty and hygiene products back then, and he would've spent most of his time out in the sun with everyone else.

I think Jesus probably did exist, but I think his existence is blown out of proportion 'a little'. He was more of a humanitarian, a philosopher, an activist, an enlightened man who probably had his shit figured out. I'm not so sure he was trying to preach the word of god specifically, but more his ideas of human rights and a better way of life. I think if he did exist, he was trying to teach people to love and respect each other, to move away from what probably was a more barbaric attitude at the time. He was trying to give answers to the ultimate question.

I think alot of the religious stuff was thought up more by people who wanted to use the memory of such a noble man and fashion a story out of that for their own, more nefarious desires. I think he may have been deliberately misinterpreted to allow for the then new church to recruit more followers and eventually become the reigning power, the authority of the time. Perhaps they weren't deliberately misinterpreted but instead Jesus' followers just weren't quite up to speed with his ideas, so it could've been an honest mistake. There could be any number of more plausible reasons than what is written in the bible. After all, the bible was written by people, who claim they were influenced by god himself. To me, it all sounds like more human invention and ideas than anything factually 'holy'.

Maybe my ideas are a little controversial to some of you, but I emplore you all to think seriously of them. You may come out of it a little bit wiser

[negz]

^ that

http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/

[DrunkFetus]

Originally Posted by negz

^ that

http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/

lol @ angelfire website.

[Trauntj]

wow I'm surprised nobody has trolled this yet.