Was Jesus ugly?
- Thread starter Chica
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S
I don't think that verse means he was necessarily ugly:
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.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]He was despised and rejected by men;
a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
The first part doesn't say the Jesus was ugly as such, more so that he had none of the outward majesty that the Jews would have expected of their King-Messiah. He wasn't clothed in expensive clothes, etc. Perhaps he wasn't amazingly handsome, no, but not ugly necessarily.
For me the second part speaks of Jesus during his crucifixion; despised and rejected by men, one from whom men hid their faces. This wasn't the case in Jesus day-to-day life, of course.
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.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]He was despised and rejected by men;
a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
The first part doesn't say the Jesus was ugly as such, more so that he had none of the outward majesty that the Jews would have expected of their King-Messiah. He wasn't clothed in expensive clothes, etc. Perhaps he wasn't amazingly handsome, no, but not ugly necessarily.
For me the second part speaks of Jesus during his crucifixion; despised and rejected by men, one from whom men hid their faces. This wasn't the case in Jesus day-to-day life, of course.
Ugly? I don't believe in such a thing. The bible doesn't say he was ugly it said he was average looking how you wouldn't be able to tell who he was had the holy spirit not landed on his shoulder which is so poetic and beautiful, think about it amongst a crowd of average joe's is a man who is the very essence of beauty.
D
Beauty is vain when the Word was made flesh I dont believe he chose to come in any form of vanity (even in beauty being of the same)
Proverbs 31:30 Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised.
There is outward beauty (after man) which appeals to us, and there is the beauty of holiness
Psalm 29:2 Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name; worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.
Psalm 90:17 And let the beauty of the LORD our God be upon us: and establish thou the work of our hands upon us; yea, the work of our hands establish thou it.
Romans 1:4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Proverbs 31:30 Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised.
There is outward beauty (after man) which appeals to us, and there is the beauty of holiness
Psalm 29:2 Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name; worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.
Psalm 90:17 And let the beauty of the LORD our God be upon us: and establish thou the work of our hands upon us; yea, the work of our hands establish thou it.
Romans 1:4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
A
He gave the blind sight. He healed the leper. He raised the dead. He removed demons from people. He talked of loving God and others. He didn't snap off a bruised reed nor snuff out a smoldering candle. He is gorgeous!
The only thing we don't know, (and for a reason), is what he looked like. Who he is is the important part.
The only thing we don't know, (and for a reason), is what he looked like. Who he is is the important part.
It says He had no beauty and like I said in another post, if a person is charismatic and good looking (eye candy) it doesn't really matter what they say, people have a bad habit of being attracted to someone because of their physical appearance and they will follow them off a cliff no matter what they espouse.
I think God didn't want people focusing on Jesus's physical and wanted them to hear His message.
I think God didn't want people focusing on Jesus's physical and wanted them to hear His message.
What do you think? How many times our first impression of a person is that he or sheis rather plain, however afte interacting with the person we leave thinking that perons one of the mosst beautiful you have ever met.
Beauty is not judged by appearances. Jesus Christ is the most beautiful of all, amen.
Beauty is not judged by appearances. Jesus Christ is the most beautiful of all, amen.
D
We know the Word was made flesh
We also know that Absalom (in his flesh) was praised for his beauty
2 Sam 14:25 But in all Israel there was none to be so much praised as Absalom for his beauty:
from the sole of his foot even to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him.
And we also know beauty is vain (Prov 31:1) even in the flesh (as men judge by appearances)
In contrast to Absalom in Israel the prophet writes of Christ
Isaiah 53:2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.
Isaiah 53:3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Men both esteem and praise beauty as the same in respects to Absolam was praised for his beauty.
Beautiful human beings after the flesh cannot help that they are beautiful (after the same) its just skin deep (short lived) as beauty fades (and it goes away). All the glory associated with the flesh (all the praises and admirations in it in whatever form) passes away. Beauty (after the flesh) is appeals to the lust of the eyes (thats our vanity) Jesus Christ (the Word) made flesh didnt take on vanity (according to the same) when he did so is how I am understanding it.
Beauty is vain (after the flesh) but not all beauty can be vain when there is actually the beauty of holiness (according to the spirit)
Psalm 29:2 Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name;
worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.
Even as Jesus Christ the Lord is declared with power ...Romans 1:4 Son of God according to the spirit of holiness) by the resurrection from the dead.
Outward beauty ( as we might count beauty) was not so much found in Christ in the flesh but rather according to the spirit (which likewise is not that which appeals to men either aparently)
In a whole different sense of beautiful (which has nothing to do with the flesh/ person of the same) but in respects to religiously people can also appear as beautiful outward also.
Mat 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward,
but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
God has not called us to uncleaness but unto holiness, these were outwardlt beautiful but inwardly full of uncleaness, whereas Jesus might not have had any outward beauty as a man but inwardly of the spirit of holiness, and even that kind of beauty doesnt seem to appeal to men
There would be that which is beautiful in the flesh (after a man's appearance) in the same, just as there is that which looks outwardly beautiful (by appearances) in a religous sphere of things (after the spirit of the flesh) in its outward form. And that which is beautiful (in truth) but according to the spirit of holiness, in the which is the beauty of holiness.
Would appear to depend on which part (as men judge by) whether in the flesh, after the flesh, or according to the flesh in these various things here. Like in which way would they behold him (in the flesh) or after it or according to what.
Beacuse there is a man's beauty (in the flesh, or form, per the man's appearance) and that which is put out there as a vain shew by man's religion outwardly beautiful (after its form, according to the flesh)
Just as there is a form of godliness verses true holiness
We know Jesus Christ is the image of THE INVISIBLE God (who is declared the Son of God even as according to the spirit ofholiness) as it speaks of worshipping the LORD in the beauty of holiness, and that is where the beauty of God is which is not after the flesh (which is vain) .
Seemed like men looked upon him after appearances (even after the flesh) as he said they judged by the same. It would seem their own persepective (or ability to see, and not perceive) would come into play here given it speak of how he would be seen according to them.
Even 2 Cr 5:16 shows that how they knew him
2 Cr 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh:
yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh,
yet now henceforth know we him no more.
We also know that Absalom (in his flesh) was praised for his beauty
2 Sam 14:25 But in all Israel there was none to be so much praised as Absalom for his beauty:
from the sole of his foot even to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him.
And we also know beauty is vain (Prov 31:1) even in the flesh (as men judge by appearances)
In contrast to Absalom in Israel the prophet writes of Christ
Isaiah 53:2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.
Isaiah 53:3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Men both esteem and praise beauty as the same in respects to Absolam was praised for his beauty.
Beautiful human beings after the flesh cannot help that they are beautiful (after the same) its just skin deep (short lived) as beauty fades (and it goes away). All the glory associated with the flesh (all the praises and admirations in it in whatever form) passes away. Beauty (after the flesh) is appeals to the lust of the eyes (thats our vanity) Jesus Christ (the Word) made flesh didnt take on vanity (according to the same) when he did so is how I am understanding it.
Beauty is vain (after the flesh) but not all beauty can be vain when there is actually the beauty of holiness (according to the spirit)
Psalm 29:2 Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name;
worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.
Even as Jesus Christ the Lord is declared with power ...Romans 1:4 Son of God according to the spirit of holiness) by the resurrection from the dead.
Outward beauty ( as we might count beauty) was not so much found in Christ in the flesh but rather according to the spirit (which likewise is not that which appeals to men either aparently)
In a whole different sense of beautiful (which has nothing to do with the flesh/ person of the same) but in respects to religiously people can also appear as beautiful outward also.
Mat 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward,
but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
God has not called us to uncleaness but unto holiness, these were outwardlt beautiful but inwardly full of uncleaness, whereas Jesus might not have had any outward beauty as a man but inwardly of the spirit of holiness, and even that kind of beauty doesnt seem to appeal to men
There would be that which is beautiful in the flesh (after a man's appearance) in the same, just as there is that which looks outwardly beautiful (by appearances) in a religous sphere of things (after the spirit of the flesh) in its outward form. And that which is beautiful (in truth) but according to the spirit of holiness, in the which is the beauty of holiness.
Would appear to depend on which part (as men judge by) whether in the flesh, after the flesh, or according to the flesh in these various things here. Like in which way would they behold him (in the flesh) or after it or according to what.
Beacuse there is a man's beauty (in the flesh, or form, per the man's appearance) and that which is put out there as a vain shew by man's religion outwardly beautiful (after its form, according to the flesh)
Just as there is a form of godliness verses true holiness
We know Jesus Christ is the image of THE INVISIBLE God (who is declared the Son of God even as according to the spirit ofholiness) as it speaks of worshipping the LORD in the beauty of holiness, and that is where the beauty of God is which is not after the flesh (which is vain) .
Seemed like men looked upon him after appearances (even after the flesh) as he said they judged by the same. It would seem their own persepective (or ability to see, and not perceive) would come into play here given it speak of how he would be seen according to them.
Even 2 Cr 5:16 shows that how they knew him
2 Cr 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh:
yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh,
yet now henceforth know we him no more.
Could this be talking about "after" he was "wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: . . . . " Isaiah 52:14 "As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men:"
I see what you did there 
I can honestly say this is the possibly funniest form ever. Not to be rude or anything since the person in the main post was probably honestly curious. I think that in the eyes of people, He probably just looked like the average neighborhood Hebrew guy. He probably looked a bit like His earthly mom, and that meant He also looked like His earthly step-brothers. That was what was amazing, He probably just looked like a normal guy.
I can honestly say this is the possibly funniest form ever. Not to be rude or anything since the person in the main post was probably honestly curious. I think that in the eyes of people, He probably just looked like the average neighborhood Hebrew guy. He probably looked a bit like His earthly mom, and that meant He also looked like His earthly step-brothers. That was what was amazing, He probably just looked like a normal guy.
NO this was not him after he was wounded.
The NASB renders this more accurately than the KJB:
Isaiah 53.1-4
Who has believed our message?
And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
[SUP]2 [/SUP]For He grew up before Him like a tender [SUP][a][/SUP]shoot,
And like a root out of parched ground;
He has no stately form or majesty
That we should look upon Him,
Nor appearance that we should [SUP][b][/SUP]be attracted to Him.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]He was despised and forsaken of men,
A man of [SUP][c][/SUP]sorrows and acquainted with [SUP][d][/SUP]grief;
And like one from whom men hide their face
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
Surely our [SUP][e][/SUP]griefs He Himself bore,
And our [SUP][f][/SUP]sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
[SUP][g][/SUP]Smitten of God, and afflicted.
Verse 5 starts with BUT and not AND. If vs 5 started with AND, then I could see where you are going, but it starts with BUT.
I do not believe for a moment that Jesus was overly handsome nor completely ugly, I believe he was slightly below average looking. David was the same way, ruddy and not very impressive looking. Whereas Saul was taller and more handsome than the people and flowing black hair.
In fact, if had been a handsome and good looking it would betray the Bible. If Jesus had good looks the people would have followed him by sight and not by faith.
NO, I think Jesus was not someone people were comfortable with looking at, which made him all the greater when he did minister to people. He did not walk as the scribes or pharisees, who were pretty people. [that will preach!]
I do believe there was only one feature that forced peoples attention when they saw him and that was his eyes. The love of the Father shining through those eyes made people take notice of him.
So no, Jesus was not a handsome man or had good looks, he might have been average, but I believe below average looking like David and David was a man after God's own heart.
The NASB renders this more accurately than the KJB:
Isaiah 53.1-4
Who has believed our message?
And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
[SUP]2 [/SUP]For He grew up before Him like a tender [SUP][a][/SUP]shoot,
And like a root out of parched ground;
He has no stately form or majesty
That we should look upon Him,
Nor appearance that we should [SUP][b][/SUP]be attracted to Him.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]He was despised and forsaken of men,
A man of [SUP][c][/SUP]sorrows and acquainted with [SUP][d][/SUP]grief;
And like one from whom men hide their face
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
Surely our [SUP][e][/SUP]griefs He Himself bore,
And our [SUP][f][/SUP]sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
[SUP][g][/SUP]Smitten of God, and afflicted.
Verse 5 starts with BUT and not AND. If vs 5 started with AND, then I could see where you are going, but it starts with BUT.
I do not believe for a moment that Jesus was overly handsome nor completely ugly, I believe he was slightly below average looking. David was the same way, ruddy and not very impressive looking. Whereas Saul was taller and more handsome than the people and flowing black hair.
In fact, if had been a handsome and good looking it would betray the Bible. If Jesus had good looks the people would have followed him by sight and not by faith.
NO, I think Jesus was not someone people were comfortable with looking at, which made him all the greater when he did minister to people. He did not walk as the scribes or pharisees, who were pretty people. [that will preach!]
I do believe there was only one feature that forced peoples attention when they saw him and that was his eyes. The love of the Father shining through those eyes made people take notice of him.
So no, Jesus was not a handsome man or had good looks, he might have been average, but I believe below average looking like David and David was a man after God's own heart.
