FYI...just a little update in the times se are in🤔🤔🤔

[AlpineGuy]

the Bibal schollars used Revelation 1:15 in their description of Jesus + the whooly hair.

Said verse doesn't probably describe the earthly appearance of Jesus at all, for the reasons I mentioned previously.

a man of simple appearance, mature age, dark skin, small stature, three cubits high, hunchbacked, with a long face, long nose, and meeting eyebrows, so that they who see him might be affrighted, with scanty hair (but) having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazireans, and with an undeveloped beard.

The issue is that "dark skin" as mentioned here is ambiguous. It could actually mean that Jesus was only slightly darker than the average for the region's population, and hence why he is referred to as dark.

 

[AlpineGuy]

i am not saying it is not impossible. but read this list. these include people who knew Jesus, Church Fathers, Theologians of that day, Historians of that day, plus Biblical descriptions. these are sources outside the Bible and Isaiah which is the Bible.

• 1. According to Hierosolymitanus, as well as John of Damascus, ‘the Jew Josephus’ recorded that Christ ‘was seen having connate eyebrows, goodly eyes, long-faced, crooked, well-grown.
• • 11. According to Irenaeus, Christ was described as weak, unattractive and afflicted:
  • • 14. According to The Acts of John, John wrote of Christ:
    • He (Christ) appeared to me again as rather bald-headed but with a thick flowing beard.…But he sometimes appeared to me as a small man with no good looks.
    • 15. Saint Augustine states that Christ ‘appeared ugly (foedus, meaning ‘horrible, abominable’) to his persecutors.
    • 16. Tertullian, denying that the appearance of Christ had any beauty, goes as far as stating that:
    • The ignominy of the face (of Jesus) would roar (as a witness against the heretics) if it could.
    • 17. In the Koran Christ is described as an ‘amazing thing’ brought forth by Mary.
    • 18. Mandaean and Gnostic texts describe Christ as ‘something that was created in the womb of Mary’ and an ‘amorphous substance’ that Sophia (a figure based on the life of Mary, Christ’s mother) had given birth to, causing her to grieve at the sight of its imperfection. In another text this birth is further described as ‘something came out of her that was imperfect and different in appearance from her, for she had produced it without her partner. It did not resemble its mother and was misshapen.’ Sophia later repented ‘with many tears’ the wickedness that had occurred and the robbery that her son had committed. Christ’s reign of terror is described in full in Barbelo (see also accompanying article The Violent Messiah). Paul would later described himself as ‘one abnormally born’ (1 Cor 15:8), matching the descriptions presented above.
    • 19. Christ anticipated that he would be taunted ‘Physician, heal yourself’ and at his crucifixion he was indeed taunted that while he saved others, he could not save himself. The statement about the physician healing himself suggests that Christ had to be healed, or in other words, he had a physical affliction or deformity of some kind.
    • 20. Christ no doubt attempted to use the messianic promise of Isaiah 53 to convince his simple-minded followers that he was indeed their promised Messiah. Isaiah 53 dictated step by step what he should do to qualify as the Messiah, including that he should die and rise again from the dead. More specifically, Isaiah’s Messiah had to comply with the description
    • He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
    • which Christ evidently did.

And which is your point?

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

And which is your point?

that Jesus is God and it does not matter what He looks like He is my Lord and Savior!

but this is interesting, even though i cannot find it, yet:
The Romans issued a wanted poster for Jesus, which still survives, describing him as short (about four foot six), bald-headed, and hump-backed.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Said verse doesn't probably describe the earthly appearance of Jesus at all, for the reasons I mentioned previously.

The issue is that "dark skin" as mentioned here is ambiguous. It could actually mean that Jesus was only slightly darker than the average for the region's population, and hence why he is referred to as dark.

no, if we follow Isaiah 53, Jesus made sure He was obviously different in stature, height, color, appearance. and that list proves He followed Isaiah 53 to the very description.

 

[AlpineGuy]

that Jesus is God and it does not matter what He looks like He is my Lord and Savior!

We agree for first time.

The Romans issued a wanted poster for Jesus, which still survives, describing him as short (about four foot six), bald-headed, and hump-backed.

I just found a source (supposedly a letter written by Pilate to the Caesar) which describes Jesus as blond haired and bearded. I don't know how authentic it is, but my point is that we can find a source that contradicts the other, and vice versa:

One day in passing by the place of Siloe, where there was a great concourse of people, I observed in the midst of the group a young man who was leaning against a tree, calmly addressing the multitude. I was told it was Jesus. This I could easily have suspected, so great was the difference between him and those listening to him. His golden-colored hair and beard gave to his appearance a celestial aspect. He appeared to be about thirty years of age. Never have I seen a sweeter or more serene countenance. What a contrast between him and his hearers, with their black beards and tawny complexions!

Truth is, we can't really know what Jesus looked like. So we have to turn to hints we can see. I personally dismiss the possibility of Jesus being black, but not because I hate black people. Simply, because the modern day peoples of the Levant are not anywhere close to being black.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

We agree for first time.

I just found a source (supposedly a letter written by Pilate to the Caesar) which describes Jesus as blond haired and bearded. I don't know how authentic it is, but my point is that we can find a source that contradicts the other, and vice versa:

One day in passing by the place of Siloe, where there was a great concourse of people, I observed in the midst of the group a young man who was leaning against a tree, calmly addressing the multitude. I was told it was Jesus. This I could easily have suspected, so great was the difference between him and those listening to him. His golden-colored hair and beard gave to his appearance a celestial aspect. He appeared to be about thirty years of age. Never have I seen a sweeter or more serene countenance. What a contrast between him and his hearers, with their black beards and tawny complexions!

Truth is, we can't really know what Jesus looked like. So we have to turn to hints we can see. I personally dismiss the possibility of Jesus being black, but not because I hate black people. Simply, because the modern day peoples of the Levant are not anywhere close to being black.

as interesting as what you discovered is, a handsome Jesus is completely opposite of Isaiah 53. I agree with you things can be found and most likely not authenticated. one thing that is definitely authenticated is Isaiah 53. if we follow that we probably are on the right path to the truth.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

i thought Pilate only met Jesus during His trial. that letter claims Pilate knew Him before. I cannot find in the Bible of Pilate ever seeing/meeting Jesus before His trial. i would have to bet that is fake.

 

[AlpineGuy]

no, if we follow Isaiah 53, Jesus made sure He was obviously different in stature, height, color, appearance. and that list proves He followed Isaiah 53 to the very description.

I only read that he is unattractive.

as interesting as what you discovered is, a handsome Jesus is completely opposite of Isaiah 53. I agree with you things can be found and most likely not authenticated. one thing that is definitely authenticated is Isaiah 53. if we follow that we probably are on the right path to the truth.

I have no problem with Jesus being unattractive (in his earthly form). Physical beauty may compliment a person, but ultimately real beauty lies inside.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

agreed!

 

[Melach]

One thing to point out though is that the Zionist criminal state of IsraHell is not the Israel of the Bible. It is an usurper state created by the anti-Israelite mafia of Edom who wants to destroy the actual Israel.

Modern Jews, Orthodox or not are not the God's chosen people of Jacob. They are the God's cursed people of Esau, from which Herod, the Pharisees and the synagogue of Satan descend. They are pagans who worship Satan and impersonate the people of Israel in order to harm, subvert and drive away Christians from God. This is the sad reality. The churchagogues of today are controlled by the Edomites, not to say some of them (like the (((non-Trinitarian))) antichurches) were outright created by them in order to prevent the more frustrated Christians from becoming dangerous.

there are lots of fake jews out there. if you hold to the black hebrew israelite or british israelite movements, you are one of them. but the bible does teach there will be real jews in jerusalem before Jesus returns.

that means not all of the jews in israel are fake.

and yes you are right in the bible israel usually means the people. not a country founded in 1948 that consists of non-jews as well, such as arabs and chinese and african people etc.
but israel has many uses in the bible, sometimes its Jesus (out of egypt i called my Son, turned out to be Jesus according to matthew, originally it was israel in the prophets), sometimes its the group of people, sometimes its the kingdom of Israel. so many options. much like Jacob can mean the guy Jacob, or the entire nation in general.

i dont know why you would be against the state of israel though? its the only civilized state in the garbage dump we call the middle-east.
they are also extremely peaceful, if it were up to me i would have sent the terrorists from gaza to meet their maker a looooong time ago. instead israel is voluntarily giving aid to these "people". they are not that bad of a country. the only downsides for israel is they are ideologically western, so pro-lgbt and democracy. democracy will destroy the country frmo within once the high fertility arabs vote israel out of existence. unfortunately liberals are very low IQ and dont notice this trend happening all over the place, islamic take over.

long post from me but what im saying is, lets stop worrying about the jews the jews the jews and lets focus on christianity and the gospel. God knows who the real ones are.

 

[Melach]

1. how do we know elam is iran?

2. i like it how you added the nuclear power in brackets there: Behold, I will break the bow (nuclear power) of Elam. since when is a mere bow nuclear power? seriously man?

i dunno. i think its time to take a break from this place again. this is why i left for a long time previously. just so much outlandish stuff to read through, how can you stay positive and loving and friendly? this just makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[AlpineGuy]

https://imemc.org/article/israeli-troops-attack-christians-praying-at-church-of-holy-sepulchre/

 

[Inquisitor]

Are we talking about Old Covenant Israel or secular, democratic, modern Israel?

There is a distinct difference between these two nations.