From science and computers, a new face of Jesus

I don't know if that computer
generated image is "Jesus" or not;
but I'm pretty sure he didn't look like
Michelangelo's Uncle or Cesare Borgia
:








ONE

[Edited on 24-11-2003 by Tamahu]

Originally posted by jezebel
Normally, I wouldn't restart such a heavily discussed topic, but since so many people in the past have argued this point. I thought some of you might find it interesting.
If you've already seen this, sorry. Just pretend you didn't see it, this time.

The Jesus pictured on the cover of this month's Popular Mechanics has a broad peasant's face, dark olive skin, short curly hair and a prominent nose. He would have stood 5-foot-1-inch tall and weighed 110 pounds, if the magazine is to be believed.
www.cnn.com...

Isn't him supposed to be black ?

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
we have the shroud of turin or however it is spelled. provided this is the true shroud (which it is in my opinion. carbon dating is proven to be flawed, so i disreguard any info they derive from it) then we have the face, body structure and height of the true christ right there. plain as the eye can see. pun intended

Too bad the shroud of Turin has Leonardo da Vinci's face and a woman's body eh?

Where has carbon dating been proven to be flawed then?

I Love it when people say something like this, it makes me laugh.

Originally posted by CyberGhost
erm... kinda looks like an Arab or Iranian

Well DUH!

He came from the same area, Arabs are semites, just like Jews.

Originally posted by Salem

Originally posted by jezebel
Normally, I wouldn't restart such a heavily discussed topic, but since so many people in the past have argued this point. I thought some of you might find it interesting.
If you've already seen this, sorry. Just pretend you didn't see it, this time.

The Jesus pictured on the cover of this month's Popular Mechanics has a broad peasant's face, dark olive skin, short curly hair and a prominent nose. He would have stood 5-foot-1-inch tall and weighed 110 pounds, if the magazine is to be believed.
www.cnn.com...

Isn't him supposed to be black ?

Define 'black'.

He was of Semite descent so his skin colour would be something like that.

If you mean African colouring, well, no, you're wrong.

What is the definition of a peasant's face?

It would seem that Jesus wasn't a peasant and in fact was of good stock. People confuse him as being a poor carpenter because the word for carpenter/builder (naggar) is the same as that for teacher. In all probability, Jesus was a religious teacher and not a peasant.

More evidence comes from the miracle that he performed at the wedding in Canaa. The amount of wine needed points to a huge affair and not the sort of function that anyone from a lower caste would be attending, let alone also ordering the servants there around.
Of course, some people have speculated that this occasion was Jesus' own marriage, but even a guest at such a wedding would be expected to be a person of some standing.

I don't know if this is "Jesus" or not:


That pic looks like a Neanderthal with brown skin. Kinda
odd. Didn't someone mention that he looks like a Nordic
giant in that pic???

I think so-called Jesus would have had brown skin
but more homo-sapien looking.....




ONE

Originally posted by Satyr
This old rag? I wouldn't describe it as "plain" at all. You really can't see anything, for certain.

Besides, if you believe the Gospel, this shroud can't possibly be the shroud of Jesus. The shroud shown above, often refered to as the Shroud of Turin is a full body wrap, while the shroud Mary found was only a head piece. And when Lazarus came crying out of his tomb the story goes he was wrapped in many pieces of cloth. One could assume that the same was the case with Jesus. The bodywrappings of Jesus is always refered to in plural. The shrouds.

If you believe the Shroud of Turin is the shroud of Jesus, you don't believe in the Gospel. Simple as that. Besides, the face on the Turin shroud is so far out of proportion, I doubt it even shows a human being. The artist who I believe made it, can't have studied much anatomy. If he had, then he wouldn't have placed his eyes in the middle of where his forehead would have been. This is a common mistake with poorly educated artists. They always place the eyes too high, while infact every human being, except for a few exceptions to confirm the rule, has the eyes placed in the exact middle of his face. The proportions of the human body are very strict. But what do I know. The prophecy goes that he didn't look like a Man. From eye to eye there is one index finger. If you point out your index finger and lay down your thumb, you have the length of your nose which is 1/4th of the heigth of the head from chin to scalp. Further the length from the chin to your nose there is also one such finger length and from your eyes to where the hair normally starts if your not balled there is also one such finger length and the same from the start of the hair to the top of the scalp when you see the face in 2D from the front. The fact that the human body looks like it has first been drawn in 2D, is a proof to me that we are indeed designed.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Let the thoughts and actions of a man be the merit of his character, not his physical being.
Deep

Jesus would never have left anything of himself behind, remember Idol Worship is a Sin. Besides if it was Jesus, someone would have signed the tourin 'Jesus was Here' as not to keep the people in the future guessing "is it or isn't it"? hmmm

Originally posted by ZeroDeep
Let the thoughts and actions of a man be the merit of his character, not his physical being.
Deep

thank you

Originally posted by Leveller
What is the definition of a peasant's face?

It would seem that Jesus wasn't a peasant and in fact was of good stock. People confuse him as being a poor carpenter because the word for carpenter/builder (naggar) is the same as that for teacher. In all probability, Jesus was a religious teacher and not a peasant.

Indeed. And the fact that almost every house in Palestine at the time were (and still is) built of rocks also cast doubt to the claim that Jesus was a carpenter, but ofcourse there were carpenters around also, so we canb't really say for sure. Besides, Joseph was reknown for his rightiousness. I don't know many carpenters who are reknown for their rightiousness i.e. meaning that they are "unbeatable" in the Jewish Law and Scriptures. Such a man would most likely be a teacher, judge or priest. And Jesus was of royal descent both on his mother's and father's side. He was even the firstborn in a line of firstborns. The one man in Palestine at the time who at any time could have claimed the throne, something he by the way was not interrested in when we read about the miracle in the desert. He supposedly fled from them to avoid them making him their king. And he refused to be called messiah many times. He also had many powerful high society friends, like Joseph of Arimatea for instance. He teached in the synagogues and even in the Temple. This would have been impossible if he hadn't been a skilled teacher. Jesus was a Rabbi. Even a Rabbuni meaning master teacher. He was indeed of prominent descent and he was indeed a teacher.

As for the popular (mis-)conception that Jesus was unmarried: The Tamudians (Pharicees and Saducees, priests and scribes) even called him Rabbi. As far as I know, the Talmud says that a man must be married to be called by the title Rabbi and to be allowed to teach in the synagogues something Jesus did all the time, but the Pharicees who had power over the synagogues were after him all the time, so they could of course have been sarcastic. For Jesus hated the Talmud more than any other thing in the world. He was strictly Mosaic in his teachings. Extremely concervative in the Law. This was how he fulfilled the prophecy of the Messiah, that he would be a prophet like Moses. He demonstrates this over and over again throughout the Gospel. The fact that he also had a house as John 1 indicates, also speeks for the idea that he was indeed married. Building the house was an important part of marriage back then. And it was unheared of that a man in his thirties, or even in his twenties, would be unmarried back then. It would have been a great shame for his parents. And the fact that many women followed him everywhere is also a clue, an unmarried woman following an unmarried man around would most likely have been stoned to death. But who knows, perhaps the story of the adulterous woman Jesus saved was one of his female disciples (allthough this story isn't included in the oldest manuscripts). As you understand, I am of the kind who believe that Jesus was married and had children. His whole mission seems to have been to marry an unchaste woman, even two if you believe Hosea as a prophecy of Jesus and beget a son and two daughters. Hosea and Jesus (and Yeshuah who stood by the entrance of the tabernacle when God showed himself for Moses and Aaron, and also Josva, the successor of Moses btw) are all different transcriptions of the same name.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

Originally posted by Dmsoldier

Originally posted by ZeroDeep
Let the thoughts and actions of a man be the merit of his character, not his physical being.
Deep

thank you

Amen to that! I would count it among the worst of sins to make an image of Jesus or any other person, point at it and say, that is your God! Even a fool would understand that Jesus would not take lightly such a grave sin towards himself, his Father, the Holy Spirit, all the elect, the children and the Law. It brakes and leads to braking of everything that God wrote uppon the stone tablets. When Moses came down from the mountain and saw that Israel had made themselves an idol, he was furious, and God wanted to do off with all of Israel because of it. Instead Moses plead for his people, and they agreed to send out Levites with swords who would kill randomly any person they came uppon. Thousands of people were killed that day. I see nothing that would indicate that anything else would happen when the Rightious returns. The bottom of the ocean will be overpopulated with people wearing millstone ties that day I'm afraid. Including every Catholic priest and all the teachers of the Talmud and eveyone who does not keep the Sabbath. If you keep any other day than the Sabbath the day of worship, you sin greatly towards the Holy Spirit. I fear we will all suffer the same fait that day, I'm afraid. Let's just hope God understands how confused they have all made us with their well planned conspiracy to force everyone in the world to become unforgivable sinners. I know one thing for sure: Jesus is not the person to blame for this, and when it all comes down we can only blame ourselves. For he told us everything in advance, and explained it all in details, plain and simple. I wear dark cloathes because of this, for as it seems, perhaps only a handful will be saved if we're not repenting from our sins soon. The thing that is in the coming isn't something nice and pleasent. The Lamb and the two witnesses will be the most hated and despised characters during this period, and everyone will curse God and his servants for the consequences of our godless, lawless, adulterous behaviour. Dear God! How can anyone be saved? Can you sit calmly and watch while our brothers and sister are sold to the wolves and willingly and with great joy brakes your Law? Can you sit and watch while your children walks right into the pit trusting you will forgive them all?

Blessings,
Mikromarius