Introduction:
At first glance this topic may seem carnal and inconsequential, but we sincerely approach this subject with the intention to edify and bring men closer to the mind of God, and to glorify His only-begotten Son who became a man for our sake. I want to ask everyone that greets this with a skeptical and hesitant mind, someone who thinks this subject is superfluous; please read through the evidence. Please pay attention to the lesson and how it’s relevant to all Christians, because the physical appearance of Jesus Christ is not something that is irrelevant – but something that greatly informs us about both His character and the nature of His advent, as well as how we ought to think about our own physical appearances.
When discussing a subject like this, on the physical appearance of Jesus Christ, it’s very easy to derail the entire dialogue with worldliness. It’s nearly always the case that if a person is discussing the physical appearance of Jesus that they’re only doing so for carnal reasons, not for edification. For this reason it’s important that this disclaimer is given immediately; this article will not be like anything you have ever read before on this subject.
The Inaccurate Depictions:
As much as people who think they know something like to shout, “Jesus wasn’t actually white,” I assure you that’s only the tip of the iceberg. While skin color will be discussed here, this video isn’t racially charged. It goes so much deeper than any of that.
And before anyone assumes that the facial reconstruction by BBC will be referenced at some point, I want to make it clear that this video will not be relying on anything like that. The researchers behind that image were only making a model that exhibited the common physical characteristics found in Jewish skulls from the first century. While I have no reason to deny that the model represents what the common Jewish man looked like at that time, it doesn’t necessarily tell us what Jesus, as an individual, would have looked like. Nor will I be referring to any facial sketches based on the shroud of Turin.
Why the Mainstream Depiction is Evil:
Now, I find that it’s usually easiest for a person to grasp the truth if it’s only the simple plain truth being told to them, without distracting them with common misconceptions, even if they’re only brought up for the sake of refuting them.
However, this is another reason for making the video; it would be one thing if it were only a simple matter of replacing a small mistake with the truth, but the mainstream depiction of Jesus Christ over the past few hundred years now is far from a “small mistake” – but the mainstream depiction is in fact evil and harmful.
I’m definitely not the first person to point out the long hair, which is contrary to manliness. But I might be the first to call out that the mainstream image was influenced by satan or merely his demons. First, it’s not only that the hair is long, but that the hair hangs at a lower distance from his chin than his beard does. Many would say, “as a Jew, Jesus wouldn’t have trimmed his beard because that would be contrary to the torah,” but really, He wouldn’t have trimmed His beard with scissors because it would be evil and effeminate. It was evil for a man to mar his beard long before the utensil Moses used to write that command was even made. In recent years, more people have become aware of this issue, and have started moving away from making his hair “woman length”. However, they clearly try to make a compromise, still making sure that it completely covers his ears and at the very least goes down to his chin.
Second, as we examine his “pretty” dress, we’ll see that once again, he has been made like a woman. The artists making sure that his dress goes up to his neck and down to his ankles, and for peak modesty; the addition of a veil. As if the long hair given, which is a natural veil, wasn’t shameful enough, they go further in their mission to feminize him by adding an actual head covering. In the mistakenly beloved show which is called “The Chosen”, they attempt to correct his clothing but fail terribly by adding a purple garment to it. No doubt that after the most minimal of research they discovered that in ancient times to clothe yourself in purple was the mark of royalty, but if they had continued on in their research they would have quickly discovered how expensive it was.
Third, his height. They regularly depict him as a very tall man, especially in the movies. Max Von Sydow was 6′ 4. Jeffrey Hunter was 6’ 0. Jim Caviezel was 6′ 2. Diogo Morgado was 6′ 3.
And fourth, his beauty. They love to make his face so soft and so pretty, it would be the face of the woman if only they could get away with removing that pesky beard. I mean, when you combine all of the elements, the long hair, the head covering, the beautiful face, and the female dress, it really comes across as if their main goal is to feminize Jesus. Now, these physical attributes might seem harmless, especially His height and the beautiful long dress, but you should ask yourself the following questions; what does the body that God made for Himself tell you about His character? And how does the Son of God’s attitude toward His own body – affect the attitude that you have toward your own body?
To believe that this is how Christ made Himself look is not only harmful because it contradicts the commands found in Scripture, as it relates to hair length and clothing, but also because it lies about His character. It depicts a god who is short-sighted, who doesn’t contemplate eternity, but can only think about the temporal things of the present – like physical beauty.
This particular god seeks to glorify Himself, and not just with divine glory, but with vain, earthly glory, with fancy clothes, a pretty face, and a tall stature. He wants to be respected for his good looks and find acceptance through the fleshly preferences of men – namely, that of being pleasing to the eyes. Is this really how Christ appeared in His first advent? Was this the example He wished to set for His followers, to seek after empty praise? Would he really make his mission as easy as possible for Himself, and does that line up with His actions throughout the story of His ministry?
And those values won’t end with him either, but will manifest in the people who follow him. They’ll say to themselves, either consciously or subconsciously, “if God’s Son made such a beautiful body for himself, who will condemn me for taking so much time in front of the mirror to anxiously fix every small imperfection I find?”
But enough of how the world has chosen to depict His likeness, let’s turn to both the Scriptures and the early church fathers for insight into what Jesus Christ truly looked like.
Isaiah’s Description:
We will begin by reading the prophetic account from the Old Testament by Isaiah, which is commonly referred to as “The Account of the Suffering Servant”. Don’t miss the fact the servant is described as “suffering”, not “jovial” or “beautiful” (which is the sort of servant Isaiah would have described if He had been prophesying about the Christ that currently exists in the minds of people today).
“In which fashion many shall be frightened of You, so Your appearance and Your reputation shall be marred more than men. So shall many nations be astonished at Him, and the kings shall shut their mouths; for that which had not been told them concerning Him shall they see, and that which they had not heard shall they consider. Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? We have announced Him as a child before Him, as a root in a waterless ground. He has no form or comeliness, and when we saw Him He had no form or beauty; but His form is dishonored, and fails more than the sons of men. He is a man in affliction, and acquainted with bearing sickness, because His face has been turned away; He was despised, and we esteemed Him not.” Isaiah 52:14-15, 53:1-3
This excerpt from Isaiah has been used by Christians for 2,000 years now to defend against the Jews, who claim that the Christ was predicted by the prophets to be powerful and militant. This is perhaps one of the most famous prophecies from the Old Testament amongst Christians. It is constantly used to prove to the Jews that the Old Testament doesn’t prophecy only one Advent of Christ, but that it predicts TWO Advents of Christ; the first Advent was in humility, the second Advent was in glory. Yet, aside from the shame that came with dying on a cross, the self-acclaimed Christians of today don’t really recognize any shamefulness or suffering or humility in Christ’s life at all. They condense all of it down to a few hours at the end of his earthly life.
But let’s take a moment to meditate on what Isaiah is really saying here before moving on any further, and contemplate if the things mentioned are only in reference in one moment of time at the cross; he says that his appearance, which can also be translated as body or form, is marred more than the rest of men, and that people are frightened of him. He has no form or beauty, but his form “fails more than the sons of men”, which is to say that He fails in beauty more than any other man. His condition is described as miserable, and this misery didn’t last only for a single moment in time because it says He is “well-acquainted” with bearing sickness. If His misery were limited to the cross, He would have only known that misery for about one day. Instead, He’s described as having been well-acquainted with sickness and disease, and in the Greek this word doesn’t describe any mere cough, but a debilitating and handicapping disease.
A straightforward reading of this passage tells us that Jesus was not beautiful, but was very unattractive and unsettling, who was seemingly in a consistent state of misery from some bodily handicap He suffered from. But if anyone should argue against the straightforward reading, suggesting that this has nothing to do with His physical appearance, but only His reputation, I would first like to point out that Isaiah clearly says that both His physical appearance and reputation are disgraced. The use of δόξα denotes His public reception or reputation, while the use of εἶδος connotes His physique or physical appearance. But if this isn’t enough then let’s look at how the early Church fathers read this passage, and if any of them believed that Jesus was beautiful in His first advent.
First, we will read from Clement, who was the Bishop of Rome from 88-99 AD;
“Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Sceptre of the majesty of God, did not come in the pomp of pride or arrogance, although He might have done so, but in a lowly condition, as the Holy Spirit had declared regarding Him. (Clement continues on from this point by reading Isaiah 53)” 1st Clement Chapter 16
Next, we will read from Justin Martyr;
“Trypho said, ‘But this so-called Christ of yours was dishonorable and inglorious, so much so that the last curse contained in the law of God fell on him, for he was crucified.’ And Justin replied, ‘If, sirs, it were not said by the Scriptures which I have already quoted, that His form was inglorious.’” (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 32)
“For when the rulers of heaven saw Him of uncomely and dishonored appearance, and inglorious, not recognising Him, they inquired, ‘Who is this King of glory?’ And the Holy Spirit, either from the person of His Father, or from His own person, answers them, ‘The Lord of hosts, He is this King of glory.’ For every one will confess that not one of those who presided over the gates of the temple at Jerusalem would venture to say concerning Solomon, though he was so glorious a king, or concerning the ark of testimony, ‘Who is this King of glory?’” (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 36)
Next, we will read from Irenaeus, who was the Bishop of Lyon in the second century;
“Some of them, moreover when they predicted that (Jesus) as a weak and inglorious man, and as one who knew what it was to bear infirmity, and sitting upon the foal of an ass…” Irenaeus (Against the Heresies, Book 4, Chapter 33.12)
Next, two excerpts from Tertullian, who was a presbyter of Carthage in the second century and one of the most respected teachers of his time;
“His body did not reach even to human beauty, to say nothing of heavenly glory. Had the prophets given us no information whatever concerning His ignoble appearance, His very sufferings and the very contumely He endured bespeak it all. The sufferings attested His human flesh, the contumely proved its abject condition. Would any man have dared to touch even with his little finger, the body of Christ, if it had been of an unusual nature; or to smear His face with spitting, if it had not invited it (by its abjectness)? … But how, I ask, could He have incurred contempt and suffering in the way I have described, if there had beamed forth in that flesh of His anything of celestial excellence? From this, therefore, we have a convincing proof that in it there was nothing of heaven, because it must be capable of contempt and suffering.” Tertullian (On the Flesh of Christ)
“Let us compare with Scripture the rest of His dispensation. Whatever that little body may be, because it was an object of touch and sight, it shall be my Christ, be He inglorious, be He ignoble, be He dishonored; for such was it announced that He should be, both in bodily condition and aspect. Isaiah comes to our help again: We have announced (His way) before Him, says he; He is like a servant, like a root in a dry ground; He has no form nor comeliness; we saw Him, and He had neither form nor beauty; but His form was despised, marred above all men. Similarly the Father addressed the Son just before: Inasmuch as many will be astonished at You, so also will Your beauty be without glory from men.” Tertullian Against Marcion Book 3
Psalm 44:
Some men, later in history, in opposition to this view that Jesus was not physically beautiful in His first advent would quote from the 44th Psalm when David says, “You are more beautiful than the sons of men.” However, this quote does not contradict what’s said by Isaiah, because no one denies that Jesus sitting at the right hand of God in Heaven is beautiful. No one believes that Jesus is eternally unattractive or in a state of physical misery, but only for as long as He was a man in His first advent. And going further, this passage from David can still be very easily applied even to that time He was unattractive. As Tertullian explains,
“For although, in David’s words, He is fairer than the children of men, yet it is in that figurative state of spiritual grace, when He is girded with the sword of the Spirit, which is verily His form, and beauty, and glory. According to the same prophet, however, He is in bodily condition a very worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and an outcast of the people. But no internal quality of such a kind does He announce as belonging to Him.” Tertullian (Against Marcion, Book 3)
As Tertullian points out here, if you use David against Isaiah then you’ll consequently be using David against himself as well, since David also describes Christ as “no man, but a worm, scorned by everyone,” in the 21st Psalm.
This highlights the great and ironic contrast on display in the first Advent of Christ; that He, as the most unattractive man in body to men, was the most beautiful man in spirit to God. If anyone has the mind of Christ or His Father they will see this statement as self-evident.
Jesus’ Body and the Law of Moses:
He dethrones the carnal primacy in the minds of His followers, inviting them to the spiritual. One objective of Christ’s ministry was to lead men away from the carnal and literal reading of the Old Testament, the letter which is said to kill, and to lead them up to the spiritual and allegorical reading of the Old Testament, the spirit which is said to give life. He intended to lead men away from the carnal circumcision so He could lead them toward the spiritual circumcision, to lead them away from the carnal Sabbath so He could lead them toward the spiritual Sabbath. Knowing this, it would make sense for Him to make Himself so physically off-putting and unapproachable, which would provide the opportunity to test their character; whether or not they could pass beyond the unapproachable visual of the carnal, and look ahead to glory which was veiled for spiritual eyes to see through.
Origen of Alexandria, in his 1st Homily on Leviticus likens Jesus’ physical body to the Law of Moses in the following passage;
“As ‘in the last days,’ the Word of God, which was clothed with the flesh of Mary, proceeded into this world. What was seen in Him was one thing; what was understood was something else. For the sight of His flesh was open for all to see, but the knowledge of His divinity was given to the few, even to the elect. So also when the Word of God was brought to the humans through the Prophets and the Lawgiver, it was not brought without proper clothing. For just as there it was covered with the veil of the flesh, so here with the veil of the letter, so that indeed the letter is seen as flesh but the spiritual sense hiding within is perceived as divinity.” Origen Homily 1 Leviticus
Jesus’ Clothes:
John the Apostle describes in his respective written Gospel how the soldiers took Jesus’ clothing as He was on the cross, he uses the Greek word χιτῶνα to refer to his tunic. The chiton was a sleeveless garment which was cut off at the knee. (See example below) Far from the beautiful gown He’s normally accused of sporting. And it most definitely would not have been purple as “The Chosen” supposes, because of how ridiculously expensive a garment entirely made of purple would be for a homeless man.
As for the veil they often give Him in art; He taught that men should not cover their heads, but women should cover their heads. A teaching which comes down to us from His student, Paul. The only time Jesus was ever described to be veiled was when the Jews had arrested Him; they threw a veil over His face so that He couldn’t see, and when they would punch him in the head they would ask Him which one of them had punched Him.
Jesus’ Height:
Historians estimate that the average height of a Jew in the first century was around 5’ 5 based on remains, and so it is assumed by many that this was the historical height of Jesus, as opposed to the tall figure he is usually depicted as. But was Jesus’ the average height of the average Jewish male? Was He taller than most? Or maybe shorter than most?
If you noticed earlier, Tertullian wrote, “that little body.” Why would Tertullian describe Jesus’ body as ‘little’? Well, let’s turn to Scripture and see if there’s any mention of Christ’s height,
“And there was a man called by the name of Zaccheus; he was a chief tax collector and he was rich. Zaccheus was trying to see who Jesus was, and he was unable due to the crowd, because he was short in stature. So he ran on ahead and climbed up a sycamore tree in order to see him, because he was about to pass through that way.” Luke 19:2-4
Many English readers are unaware of how ambiguous this passage from Luke’s gospel is because in their English translations it will commonly capitalize the H in “he” when it’s referring to Jesus, and make it lowercase the rest of the time. And as you might expect, translators keep the “he” in “he was short in stature” lowercase. But in the Greek, the letters aren’t differentiated in this way.; it was written in ALL capital letters! The “he” could either be referring to Zaccheus or Jesus, there is no telling from the text alone. But are there any writings that say that Jesus was short? Well, we have already discussed Tertullian’s reference, but let’s take a look at the others.
Ephrem the Syrian, who was a Deacon, writing sometime in 320-379 AD says;
“God took human form and appeared in a form of three human ells; he came down to us small of stature.” Ephrem Syrus (Hymn. de eccl. et virg)
Three ‘human ells’ would be 4’ 5. That would put Jesus exactly one foot under the average Jewish man in the first century. (See graph below)
There is another quote from Ephrem the Syrian from a treatise he wrote which is available in Armenian;
“Our Lord came, he appeared unto us as a man small of stature.” Ephrem Syrus (Armenian Treatise)
Next, Theodore of Mopsuhestia who was made Presbyter in Antioch in 383 AD writes in a hymn which has been preserved in Syriac;
“Your appearance, Christ, was smaller than that of the children of Jacob.” Theodore of Mopsuhestia (The King’s Manifestation Hymn)
And the second century critic of Christianity named Celsus mockingly attacks Jesus in the following passage which Origen quotes,
“Since a divine Spirit inhabited the body (of Jesus), it must certainly have been different from that of other beings, in respect of grandeur, or beauty, or strength, or voice, or impressiveness, or persuasiveness. For it is impossible that He, to whom was imparted some divine quality beyond other beings, should not differ from others; whereas this person did not differ in any respect from another, but was, as they report; short, and ill-favored, and ugly.” Celsus, Quoted by Origen, Against Celsus Book 6 Chapter 75
His small stature sheds new light on when He says,
“Who among you by worrying can add a single cubit to his stature?” (Matthew 6:27)
When you are told not to worry about something, it’s much more powerful to be told not not to worry by someone who actually suffers from that same thing.
And is there anything else in scripture which points to Jesus being short and small? Well, everyone is aware of the fact that Jesus rode a donkey into Jerusalem. This is proof enough that Christ refused any glory for Himself during his earthly ministry, but chose the lowliness of a donkey over a horse, when he could have easily acquired a magnificent stallion if he’d chosen to. But instead, he comes riding on a donkey, an animal which specifically symbolizes lowliness and inferiority (because donkeys are always viewed in light of their superior, which is a horse) – but what people always miss is that He actually came riding not on a donkey, but on a baby donkey, a foal! A donkey is considered a foal until around 12 months old. All donkeys, regardless of age, can only carry about 20% of their body weight. The foal couldn’t have been a newborn then, but it reasonably could have been somewhere around 6 months old. At 6 months a foal will weigh around 460 pounds, and 20% of 460 pounds would only be around 90 pounds. 90 pounds would correspond well to a height of 4’ 5, as most men around this height are only around 100-110 pounds or so. Jesus HAD to have been a small man, or else he would have crushed this foal by riding on it.
From this, we have a more complete picture of the perceived foolishness of Christ than ever before. As we all know, a King is expected to ride in on a beautiful and majestic horse, and he himself should ideally be beautiful and majestic. The visual we’re so accustomed to of Jesus riding on the donkey is a half-measure, as it’s a beautiful and majestic man riding on a pathetic little donkey. But if we go all the way with it, we have a truly foolish and ridiculous mental image, which is appropriate since the donkey is associated with foolishness. What we have is this; a small, weak and inglorious man riding on an equally feeble and inglorious jackass.
And the Jews were told that this sad sight was the arrival of their king.
Spurious Works:
I hesitate to even include this section in the video, but since I’ve decided I will make mention of a few spurious and forged works I will make the following disclaimer; I do not believe the following to be Scripture or in any way inspired by the Holy Spirit. The only reason I make any use of the following works is to show that in addition to the previous traditions already testified to by the ancient fathers, even early forgeries acknowledge and agree with the tradition of Christ’s physical appearance and height.
In the Syrian work titled Acts of Thomas it depicts the Apostle Thomas as looking exactly like Jesus Christ, most likely based on a misunderstanding of Thomas’ name (which literally means “twin” in English), and Thomas is commonly mistaken by others to be Jesus. At one point Thomas is written as saying the following, “You men who have come to the assembly of the Messiah, men who wish to believe in Jesus, take unto yourselves an example from this, that if you do not raise yourselves up, you cannot see me, who am little.”
Again, I do not support the reading of this work, and I do not believe it has any authority, I do not believe that Thomas looked like Jesus, but what is significant from this is that even the writers of this work were aware of the traditions that Jesus was little, or short. The parallel to Zacchaeus is self-evident, as he tells the people that they have to rise up in order to see him because he’s so short.
Another spurious work which is titled The Acts of John, which is believed to have been made sometime in the second century, provides a description of Jesus. At one point the author writes, “again he was seen of me as being rather bald,” and in another spot the author describes Jesus as, “a small man and uncomely,” and in a later part the author again describes Jesus as, “appeared as a man of small stature.”
Another spurious work which is titled The Acts of Peter, which is believed to have been made sometime in the second century, says that ignorant men only see Jesus as “small and ugly.”
Jesus’ Age:
In this next section we will briefly go over how old Jesus was at the end of His ministry – a subject I’m sure many didn’t expect to be brought up in this video. That’s because in most people’s minds today it’s set in stone that from the time Jesus was baptized at the age of 30 a time of only 3 years passed before He was crucified. I believed this for as long as I can remember. It isn’t necessarily my intention to debunk this mainstream belief as much as it is to open you up to the idea that there are other possibilities as to how old Jesus was when He died.
The reason people believe Jesus was 33 at the time of His death is mainly based on the fact that Jesus was about 30 years old when He was baptized, and following this there are 3 passovers which are mentioned in the Gospels. While this information alone certainly gives validity to the possibility that He was only 33 at the time of His death, it’s equally possible that the Gospels simply didn’t record other passovers.
There are four Passovers mentioned in John’s Gospel (John 2:13, John 5:1, John 6:4, John 13:1). So if someone wishes to say that this is a viable method to determine Jesus’ age then he must concede that Matthew, Mark, and Luke set Jesus’ age at 33 but John sets Jesus’ age at 34. Some scholars have tried to brush off the idea of John 5:1 to be speaking of a Passover, but Irenaeus states, “Afterwards He went up, the second time, to observe the festival day of the passover in Jerusalem; on which occasion He cured the paralytic man, who had lain beside the pool thirty-eight years, bidding him rise, take up his couch, and depart.” (Against Heresies, Book 2, Chapter 22)
You’ll be surprised to learn that the very earliest Christian writer who says anything about Christ’s age does not say that Jesus was 33 at the time of His death, but instead close to 50 years old.
“Now, that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years, and that this extends onwards to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as the Gospel and all the elders testify; those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of the Lord, [affirming] that John conveyed to them that information. And he remained among them up to the times of Trajan. Some of them, moreover, saw not only John, but the other apostles also, and heard the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to the [validity of] the statement… But, besides this, those very Jews who then disputed with the Lord Jesus Christ have most clearly indicated the same thing. For when the Lord said to them, ‘Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day; and he saw it, and was glad, they answered Him, You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?’ Now, such language is fittingly applied to one who has already passed the age of forty, without having as yet reached his fiftieth year, yet is not far from this latter period. But to one who is only thirty years old it would unquestionably be said, You are not yet forty years old. For those who wished to convict Him of falsehood would certainly not extend the number of His years far beyond the age which they saw He had attained; but they mentioned a period near His real age, whether they had truly ascertained this out of the entry in the public register, or simply made a conjecture from what they observed that He was above forty years old, and that He certainly was not one of only thirty years of age. For it is altogether unreasonable to suppose that they were mistaken by twenty years, when they wished to prove Him younger than the times of Abraham. For what they saw, that they also expressed; and He whom they beheld was not a mere phantasm, but an actual being of flesh and blood. He did not then want much of being fifty years old; and, in accordance with that fact, they said to Him, You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham? He did not therefore preach only for one year, nor did He suffer in the twelfth month of the year. For the period included between the thirtieth and the fiftieth year can never be regarded as one year…” Irenaeus (Against Heresies, Book 2, Chapter 22)
Here, Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lyon, appeals both to Scripture and eyewitness testimony to show that Jesus was close to 50 years old when He died. The appeal to Scripture is self explanatory; after Jesus had claimed He knew Abraham, the Jews pointed to how young Jesus was to prove it was impossible for Him to have ever met Abraham. While doing this they would not have extended His age from early 30s to late 40s, when their entire point is to make Jesus appear as young as possible. Irenaeus is particularly reliable in interpreting the Apostle John’s meaning for us because he was the disciple of Polycarp, who was the disciple of John.
Irenaeus says in his Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, “For Herod the king of the Jews and Pontius Pilate, the governor of Claudius Caesar, came together and condemned Him to be crucified.” Most people today believe that Jesus was crucified when Tiberius was Emperor (who reigned from 14 – 37 AD), but Irenaeus says that Jesus was crucified when Claudius was Emperor (who reigned from 41 – 54 AD).
Giving further credibility to this interpretation, John Chrysostom interprets this passage from John’s Gospel in the same way, however his manuscript is incorrect. Where the earliest and most reliable manuscripts read, “you are not yet fifty,” for whatever reason Chrysostom, who is writing in the fourth century, has a manuscript which reads, “you are not yet forty.” Regardless, Chrysostom comments on this passage saying, “so that we conclude that Christ was nearly forty.” Despite having a different manuscript, Chrysostom confirms that this passage gives us insight into His age (that Jesus must be close to whatever age the Jews say). And since the earliest manuscripts confirm that the Jews say, “you are not yet fifty,” then Irenaeus is correct when he says that Jesus would have been very close to the age of fifty at the time of His death on the cross.
And when Irenaeus appeals to the men who were told by John the apostle that Jesus was old, he mentions that “the elders testify” to it. Some scholars, such as Michael W. Holmes, recognize that one elder in particular that Irenaeus is mentioning here is a man named Papias, who was the Bishop of Hierapolis in the first century. In fact, this section is included amongst the Fragments of Papias as the “Traditions of the Elders”.
Furthermore, Irenaeus and Papias are not alone in their belief that Jesus was older in age, but Hippolytus, who was the Bishop of Rome in the third century, corroborates this possibility in his Refutation of all Heresies,
“This Logos we know to have received a body from a virgin, and to have remodeled the old man by a new creation. And we believe the Logos to have passed through every period in this life, in order that He Himself might serve as a law for every age, and that, by being present (among) us, He might exhibit His own manhood as an aim for all men.” Hippolytus (Refutation of all Heresies, Book 10)
Josephus’ Account:
But now we will move on to the account which was provided to us by the Jewish historian Josephus, which I’m sure many weren’t expecting to be referenced at any point in this video if they are already familiar with it, because as it reads today, it says nothing regarding his physical appearance. Today, there is a raging debate regarding the authenticity of Josephus’ mention of Jesus; some argue that as it reads today is exactly how Josephus wrote it 2,000 years ago, while others argue that the entire passage was interpolated into his history, and historians speculate that it was done by some desperate Christians, who were desperate to prove that Jesus was a historical figure, and so they supposedly tampered with Josephus’ respected historical work in order to lend credence to Jesus’ existence.
While I am convinced that men who called themselves Christians absolutely did alter the passage by Josephus, I do not believe it was written from scratch, but rather it was altered for an entirely different reason; to portray Christ in a more favorable light and to erase the physical description of Jesus which was written by Josephus. I believe this based on two things; There are early writers who directly quote or talk about this passage from Josephus that don’t match the current quotation found in most copies of Josephus, and a 13th century forgery called the Letter of Lentulus.
First, let’s take a brief look at what the ancient sources, John of Damascus and Andrew of Crete, have to say about what exactly Josephus wrote about Jesus in their copies. It’s here that we will finally reveal what the debilitating handicap Jesus may have had was, which we had alluded to earlier.
“Since moreover Josephus the Jew, as some say, .. . in like manner narrates that the Lord was seen having connate eyebrows, goodly eyes, long-faced, crooked, well grown.” Andrew of Crete (Fragment on Worshiping of Images)
“But moreover the Jew Josephus in like manner narrates that the Lord was seen having connate eyebrows, goodly eyes, long-faced, crooked, well grown.” John of Damascus (Early MSS of An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book 4, Chapter 16)
From this, we learn that an earlier manuscript of Josephus not only mentioned Jesus, but contained a section which described his physical appearance. Not only could Josephus had heard the traditions of what Jesus looked like, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility that Josephus might have obtained access to the warrant of Jesus’ arrest from the official papers in the imperial archive, the same arrest warrant which is mentioned in John’s Gospel, where he describes how the Pharisees had been handing them out. Similarly to modern times, ancient arrest warrants would contain a physical description of the criminal to help citizens identify him. (See below example from 145 BC)
Regardless of however the information was obtained by Josephus, it appears that at one time Josephus described Jesus in the following way; as having connate eyebrows, which would be a unibrow, that He was long faced, and that He was crooked, which is to say that He was hunch-backed.
And there are many more which can be found in Ernst von Dobschütz’s work from 1899 titled Christusbilder, where one description of Christ’s body contains “dark-skinned” or “black” and “long-nosed.” The exact author of the work is uncertain, but it is believed to have been written in Greek sometime around 950 AD.
Yet we no longer have those descriptions in our current manuscripts of Josephus. Clearly, the passages that are thought to be interpolated HAVE been doctored by some well-meaning but but completely foolish person, who would claim to worship Christ, but really worships a physical body made in their imagination; a lover of the letter and not of the Spirit.
Another piece of information about Christ’s appearance comes from an obscure letter known as The Letter of Lentulus, which bears a striking resemblance to Josephus’ account of Christ. The primary objective of the writer was to describe Jesus’ physical appearance in detail. As already mentioned, it reads similarly in its beginning to what Josephus says about Jesus, even more interesting is the fact that it describes Jesus to look exactly the OPPOSITE of how writers in the past testified! We’ll discuss it more in a moment. But first, here is how it reads in its current form:
“Lentulus, the Governor of the Jerusalemites to the Roman Senate and People, greetings. There has appeared in our times, and there still lives, a man of great power called Jesus Christ. The people call him prophet of truth; his disciples, son of God. He raises the dead, and heals infirmities. He is a man of tall and handsome stature (statura procerus, mediocris et spectabilis); he has a venerable aspect that beholders can both fear and love. His hair is of the color of the ripe hazel-nut, straight down to the ears, but below the ears wavy and curled, rather darker and more shining, hanging over his shoulders, and having a parting in the middle of his head according to the fashion of the Nazarenes. His brow is smooth and very cheerful with a face without wrinkle or spot, embellished by a slightly reddish complexion. No fault can be found with his nose and mouth. His beard is abundant, of the color of his hair, not long, but divided at the chin. His aspect is simple and mature, his eyes are grayish and clear. He is terrible in his reprimands, sweet and amiable in his admonitions, cheerful without loss of gravity. He was never known to laugh, but often to weep. His stature is straight (erect), his hands and arms fine to behold. His conversation is grave, infrequent, and modest. He is the most beautiful among the children of men.”
Is this not a very peculiar letter? As you can see, whoever wrote it was positively shameless in their attempts to reverse the established image of Jesus given by much earlier witnesses, to the point that they even go so far as to stress how Jesus absolutely did NOT stand crooked, but that he stood perfectly erect, and that he was of tall stature! I mean, who would be so oddly specific in their description of a person unless they were interpolating their own opinion into the writing in order to overthrow an idea they hated?
As if it wasn’t obvious enough that they are attempting to change a preconceived notion of his bent stature, they say, “He is the most beautiful among the children of men.” This is a childish and absurd attempt by some carnally-minded person to glorify Jesus and correct the historical consensus on his appearance.
But there’s something else that makes this letter stand out in history. There is strong evidence that every line in this description originally said something quite different – presumably the opposite of what we see here – because practically every detail mentioned in the letter is written as a kind of response to things spoken of by past writers, and this has led some scholars, such as Robert Eisler, to believe the original document used to say the exact opposite of what we have now. The interpolations made in Josephus were likely made with the same aim, to amend or delete something a professing Christian found offensive, such as the notion that Jesus was a very ugly man. Here is a side-by-side reconstruction of how Josephus’ original description of Jesus might have read, using Josephus’ words as a template, and the testimonies of past Christians as the source for the reconstruction.
As you can see from the comparison, almost every item in the letter of Lentulus has an opposite descriptor corresponding to each aspect of Jesus’ appearance. It’s hard enough to accept the notion that Jesus was extremely ugly, even hideous, but what about this idea that He was hunchbacked? That implies something far worse than just an aesthetic blemish, but a serious disease. Do the Scriptures say that Christ would suffer from diseases? Let us reflect on the words of Isaiah once more.
“In which fashion many shall be frightened of You, so Your appearance and Your reputation shall be marred more than men. So shall many nations be astonished at Him, and the kings shall shut their mouths; for that which had not been told them concerning Him shall they see, and that which they had not heard shall they consider. Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? We have announced Him as a child before Him, as a root in a waterless ground. He has no form or comeliness, and when we saw Him He had no form or beauty; but His form is dishonored, and fails more than the sons of men. He is a man in affliction, and acquainted with bearing sickness, because His face has been turned away; He was despised, and we esteemed Him not.” Isaiah 52:14-15, 53:1-3
Physician Heal Yourself:
Many will insist that the sickness Jesus bore only consisted of his bearing our sins on the cross, referring to our sins as “sickness” and “disease.” But even while accomplishing the redemption of our sins spiritually, He illustrated it physically by also taking on our bodily illnesses, which are a result of our sins. Every individual kind of sickness is an allegory for a specific sin. For instance, vomit represents any kind of sin that our soul has contracted, being ejected from the soul, and Peter says that when a dog returns to its eating vomit, this symbolizes a Christian returning to his sin after he had already once repented of it.
Jesus calls the Pharisees blind, because they fail to recognize Him as their Lord. He said the people hardly see and scarcely see, symbolizing their inability to comprehend the spiritual truths He was teaching. He compares all other bodily ailments to spiritual diseases, which were brought on mankind as an analogy of sins which afflict the soul. God deliberately made the worst diseases revolting to our senses when we see, feel, or smell them on the body, so that by being disgusted when we find them on our flesh, we’ll learn to cringe at the thought of our soul being in a similar state.
Christ, then, brought these same diseases on Himself in order to reflect our own sins back onto us. Since mankind wasn’t disgusted at their sins as they ought to have been, He took on a physical form that was repulsive to their bodily senses, and when that same body was tortured and killed, and resurrected on the third day, it symbolized all sin being utterly destroyed once and for all, for everyone who follows His example, who receive the remission of all their past sins at baptism, and then die to their flesh daily thereafter.
In Luke’s gospel, Jesus returns from the temptation in the wilderness and enters Nazareth, where He had been brought up;
“…and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read. And the book of the prophet Isaiah was handed to Him. And He opened the book and found the place where it was written, ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, Because He anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor.to heal the broken in heart, He has sent Me to proclaim release to the captives, And recovery of sight to the blind, To set free those who are oppressed, To proclaim the favorable year of the Lord…’”
The word for “poor” that is used here is actually a Greek word (πτωχός) which means “one who crouches,” referring to beggars who crouch down while asking for alms. And similarly, the word for “broken” (συντρίβω)when referring to the broken in heart is a word which means “crushed.” The word for “oppressed” (θραύω) is another word that means “crushed or bruised.”
“And He closed the book, gave it back to the attendant and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on Him. And He began to say to them, ‘Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.’ And all bore witness to Him, and wondering at the gracious words which were falling from His lips; and they were saying, ‘Is this not Joseph’s son?’ And He said to them, ‘No doubt you will quote this proverb to Me; Physician, heal yourself! Whatever we heard was done at Capernaum, do here in your hometown as well.’” Luke 4:20-23
Notice what Jesus says here. After proclaiming that the gospel will be preached to the crouchers, that the brokenhearted will be healed, the captives will be released, the blind made to see, and the crushed given relief – in other words, all these afflicted people will be made well – He immediately says, “Of a certainty, without a doubt, what you will say in response to this is, “Well, physician, why don’t you heal yourself!”
Now, most people will interpret this statement to be a prophecy about a future time when Jesus is hanging on the cross, and the people tell Him, “If you’re the Son of God, then come down.” But Jesus doesn’t indicate that they will tell Him this at a future time. He makes it sound like the immediate response, coming from the people who just heard his promise to heal everybody, will be, “Physician, heal yourself! Whatever we heard was done at Capernaum, do here in your hometown as well.” Does that sound like something they would say to Him on the cross? He wasn’t even IN His hometown when He was on the cross, so it would make no sense for them to say that to Him while He’s on the cross.
And He said, “Truly I say to you, no prophet is welcome in his hometown. But I say to you in truth, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the sky was shut up for three years and six months, when a great famine came over all the land; and yet Elijah was sent to none of them, but only to Zarephath, in the land of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow. And there were many lepers in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, but only Naaman the Syrian.” And all the people in the synagogue were filled with rage as they heard these things; and they got up and drove Him out of the city, and led Him to the brow of the hill on which their city had been built, in order to throw Him down the cliff. But passing through their midst, He went His way.
It should be clear why the people found fault with Jesus. It was because He promised to heal others, but hadn’t even healed Himself, and the irony was palpable.
It’s worth pointing out that both this account, as well as the account that may be alluding to Christ’s short stature, are both found in the same Gospel which is authored by Luke, who is said to be a ‘Physician’. The occurrence of medical language in Luke’s writings, such as Acts, has been pointed out by others before. If Luke really was a literal physician at some point in his life then it’s no surprise that he, of all gospel authors, is the one to refer to these potential ailments Christ probably suffered from.
Jesus Christ is the physician who doesn’t heal Himself, and the fact that He never once healed any of His own personal ailments is evidenced by the temptations from satan while He fasted for 40 days. Each of the 3 temptations from satan have one thing in common – suggesting Jesus to use His divine and miraculous powers for His own personal comfort and well-being, or things that would bring glory and honor to Himself. But Christ despises these advances made by the devil. Instead He neglects the temporary pleasures as He looks on ahead to the future – the Resurrection. By way of example, Jesus, as our Instructor, has demonstrated how we should treat others and how we should treat ourselves. He teaches us how to treat others by His own charity and generosity, if we have wealth we should freely give it to those who are in need of it, just as Christ, who was God’s Son, used His divine inheritance to cure and treat others. He teaches us how to treat ourselves by His self-neglect, that if we want to be first in the Resurrection we have to treat ourselves as least important in the present.
Another reason He allowed Himself to suffer through such terrible and painful things was to prevent anyone from using their own sufferings as an excuse to abandon God and commit sin. Jesus Christ remains faithful even at the lowest and most miserable moments of His incarnation. Jesus was like Job, and Job’s suffering was a prophecy of Jesus’ fleshly suffering. All of the men of old who found favor in God’s sight and all of the patriarchs each bore a special resemblance to Christ which prophesied aspects of His first advent, and Job shared extreme physical sickness with Christ.
If anyone should argue against this fact, that Christ neglected Himself, by pointing to the times that Christ escaped or fled persecution before the cross I’ll say this to them; again, Jesus, being our Instructor, has demonstrated by His own example that we ought to flee persecution if possible, and to not go looking for it or chasing after it. He did this for other reasons too; to demonstrate that at the time of the Crucifixion He could have easily escaped at any moment, to prove that no one was capable of taking His life from Him unless He allowed them to take it, and to show that He willingly endured His sufferings. He also escaped death a handful of times before the Crucifixion because, as Scripture already clearly spells out, it wasn’t time yet for Him to die. His Father still had work for Him to do before then.
Furthermore, look to the examples of students to learn about the conduct of the master; if Paul refused to use his miraculous gifts to heal himself and fix his troubles then surely Christ did the same. He healed others suffering from His very bodily ailments, and it was a wonder to everyone standing around him. Ask yourself, what are chances that someone being healed from this specific disease of having a bent back would be recorded among Jesus’ miracles?
“And there was a woman who for eighteen years had had a sickness caused by a spirit; and she was bent double, and could not straighten up at all. When Jesus saw her, He called her over and said to her, “Woman, you are freed from your sickness.” And He laid His hands on her; and immediately she was made erect again and began glorifying God.” Luke 13:11-13
But Jesus Himself never used His power selfishly. On the contrary, He was maimed so badly by the scourging He received from the Romans that He shouldn’t have been able to bear His cross, especially after having been up all night without any sleep, and being hunched over as He was. If we were to make any assumptions, it would be logical to assume the only time Jesus possibly ever used His power on Himself was to supernaturally keep Himself alive and conscious until the ordeal was concluded at the cross, extending the torture to be an example of endurance to us.
The Unexpected Messiah:
If we accept everything that has been discussed up to this point (that Jesus was weak, inglorious, short, crooked, and the rest), this casts a new light on His followers, the apostles and the disciples, who were willing to follow Him despite the ridicule that came from following such a man. Even in His ignoble form they not only believed Him to be a prophet from God, but to be the King who would save the people of Israel. There were a handful of other men, at the time of Christ and afterward, who some men believed to be the destined King who would save Israel, but the other men, such as Simon of Peraea, who Josephus describes as “a comely person, with a tall and robust body,” relied on their natural charisma and attractiveness to win the people’s trust over, but if Jesus truly was weak and unattractive, it only makes it more impressive that He could win over such multitudes as described in the Gospels without the aid of physical attractiveness, and become the single most famous person in all of earth’s history. It’s pretty remarkable if a plain man can win over the respect and trust of the multitudes, let alone an unattractive man. And while the other men mentioned were admired by some, they were only admired for their physical attractiveness, with no report of any miracles being made by them. Surely Jesus relied on His divine wisdom and power, and this is what set Him apart.
When mentally picturing Jesus in His bodily form before the Resurrection, the image of someone like Prince Charming or John Smith begins to fade away now, and what’s left is something that makes us think more of Quasimodo from The Hunchback of Notre Dame. And something funny about that title, is that Notre Dame is a French title for Mary, the mother of Jesus; so in other words, the title is The Hunchback of Mary, a title Jesus reasonably could have been referred to by in His own life, or alternatively, The Hunchback of Joseph.
Now, such an image, like that of Quasimodo, is most definitely not the common image on the minds of the Jews when contemplating the expected Messiah. The Jews had imagined a great mighty warrior who would lead them to victory, so when they met Jesus, a weak and small man, it was impossible for them to accept Him of all people as the Messiah. The situation is honestly not unlike when Luke meets Yoda in The Empire Strikes Back. If you remember, Luke’s mentor and teacher, Ben Kenobi (who resembles Moses in this case), tells Luke to anticipate a wise Jedi Master, named Yoda, who will finish the training of Luke that Kenobi had started. And Kenobi says that everything he had ever learned was from Yoda. Luke quickly imagines this Yoda to be a mighty and powerful warrior, although Kenobi had never explicitly said any such thing. Despite this assumption, he realizes that the only place to find this Jedi Master is of all places on a swamp planet, named Dagobah (which resembles Nazareth, a place the Jews didn’t expect anything good to come from). Luke finds no sign of intelligent life-forms except for a repulsive little creature which annoys him with its apparent foolishness. As everyone knows, this creature is revealed to be Yoda, much to Luke’s shock. It was Luke’s personal expectations that blinded him from realizing that he was speaking to the very one he had been looking for.
The Transfiguration:
All of this, if it is true, exalts the Apostles to an even higher degree, testifying to their excellent character, that they weren’t hindered by silly carnal reasons from following the true Christ. Regardless, it doesn’t appear to have escaped the notice of God that some of them deserved to have their faith rewarded (even before the time of the Resurrection), as God very generously prompted His Son to take Peter, James, and John up to a high and secluded mountain where He revealed His Son’s hidden glory to them. It’s said that Christ’s shape was changed, that He was transfigured in front of them, and He was shining like the sun with a heavenly and divine countenance.
A greater appreciation for what happened here is gained ONLY from learning that Christ was physically weak and inglorious, otherwise the event of a beautiful and gorgeous man becoming slightly more beautiful and gorgeous is at the very most – kind of neat. But in reality, this would no doubt have given all confidence in Jesus to those that witnessed it.
The comment made by the Apostle Peter tells you everything you need to know about the situation, “Lord, it is good for us to be here,” he says this because, as far as he can see, everywhere else in the world Jesus is, for whatever reason, weak and inglorious, yet on this specific mountain, perhaps by some special property it might have, Jesus is mighty and glorified. He quickly suggests that they establish camp on this mountain, so they can stay there permanently. Why does Peter want to stay here permanently? Because on this mountain Jesus is something amazing and heavenly to see, something that He must not be anywhere else. If Jesus were something amazing and heavenly to see anywhere else, then it wouldn’t make sense for Peter to want to stay on the mountain.
But because Jesus went through with this as an act of charity and generosity, to instill confidence in only these three men, they’re not meant to stay there permanently, because there’s still more work to be done. But like a handsome prince who has been turned into a frog, as the stories go, Jesus temporarily foregoes the appearance of the frog to reveal the handsome prince to His disciples. He commands them to keep it to themselves before His Resurrection, because all of this was performed for them only (not for the unworthy Scribes or Pharisees). He reveals His secret glory first to His closest disciples in the Transfiguration, and then finally to all men in His Resurrection.
Levitical Law:
In Leviticus 21, God gives His requirements for the priests of Israel, and this is extremely pertinent to our discussion because Jesus Christ is our high priest. God says:
“No man who has a blemish on him shall draw near; a man blind, lame, with his nose disfigured, or his ears cut, a man who has a broken hand or a broken foot, or hump-backed, or blear-eyed, or that has lost his eye-lashes, or a man who has a malignant ulcer, or tetter, or one that has lost a testicle. Whoever of the seed of Aaron the priest has a blemish on him, shall not draw near to offer sacrifices to your God, because he has a blemish on him; he shall not draw near to offer the gifts of God. The gifts of God are most holy, and he shall eat of the holy things. Only he shall not approach the veil, and he shall not draw near to the altar, because he has a blemish; and he shall not profane the sanctuary of his God, for I am the Lord that sanctifies them.” Leviticus 21:18-23
God commands that the high priest must have no physical blemish, even going as far to say that no man who is crooked or hunchbacked may offer the gifts of God. Does God mean this in a literal sense? Are God’s judgments based on a man’s physical shortcomings, or His moral shortcomings? Doesn’t God say to His prophet Samuel,
“Don’t consider his appearance or his stature… God doesn’t see what a man sees; a man looks at the outward appearance, but God looks at the heart.” 1 Kings 16:7
Instead, when God said the blemishes were forbidden He was really saying that the High Priest is to be sinless, but the high priests always did have sin, especially those living in the days of Jesus’ incarnation. In order to prove that the Law really was spiritual He chose to take on a body that was blemished in every way, while abstaining from every sin. His body reflected the sins of mankind – particularly of Israel – back onto them.
Jesus Himself prophesied to Israel in Leviticus,
“If you come right to me, I will also come right to you. If you walk crooked, I also will walk crooked.” Leviticus 26:23-24
David is recorded, in the second Book of Kingdoms, as having said to God,
“With the holy You will be holy; with a perfect man You will be perfect; with the chosen You will be the choice one; and with the crooked You will be crooked.” 2 Kingdoms 22:26-27
And likewise, in the Psalms:
“With the innocent man You will be innocent; and with the elect You will be elect; and with the crooked You will be crooked.” Psalm 17:26-27
And the Scriptures are always using this analogy to describe evil, so much to the point that it has influenced our own language, in the present day, in ways that most of us don’t even realize. Take the English word “perverse” for example; today, people only use this word to describe someone who is immoral, but in Archaic English it can also be used to describe a man who is slumped over, because the Archaic Definition of “perverse” simply means “turned” or “bent.”
Likewise, Scripture uses a corresponding analogy to describe goodness, by referring to men who are pure and moral in their actions as standing “upright” or “erect”. In the Proverbs it’s written,
“God stores up salvation for the upright.” Proverbs 2:6
The constant use of this analogy in Scripture has influenced our own language, in the present day, in a way that most of us don’t realize. For example, have you ever stopped to consider why we refer to people who are morally good as being “righteous”? In Archaic English the word “righteous” simply means “straight” or “upright”.
The crooked man is bent down toward the earth, being a carnal man. The man who stands up straight extends to Heaven toward His God.
But someone might say that Jesus, as our high priest, ought to be perfect in every way. And the answer to this objection is, Jesus WAS perfect. Christ commands you,
“Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.” John 7:24
Bodily ailments are only an illustration of sin. They don’t infer that any person suffering from them is automatically guilty of the sins which the ailments symbolize. That was the faulty assumption of those who observed Him.
“He bears our sins, and is distressed for us; and we esteemed Him to be in toil and in affliction, and in evil treatment. But He was wounded for OUR transgressions, He was bruised for OUR iniquities.” Isaiah 53:4-5
Jesus tried again and again to make the Jews think spiritually and not carnally, but they wouldn’t listen. They didn’t have eyes to see or ears to hear. And so the Jews considered Jesus to be accursed by God, judging by his outward appearance.
In reality, our perfect high priest, Jesus, was exceedingly fair and perfectly worthy – in His soul. That’s God’s style of storytelling. He creates contradictions, where the least qualified people are called to His service. And Jesus was a contradiction to everyone who saw Him. On the one hand, he was curing all people of every disease and bodily ailment, but on the other hand, he was sickly and deformed, which made the people wonder why He never healed Himself. They chose to believe He COULDN’T heal Himself. But Jesus was actually exercising self-control and great humility by remaining in such a lowly state and suffering, to serve as an example to us of perseverance. The Jews mocked and laughed at Christ for what they considered to be so foolish and ridiculous, that He could somehow save others when He can’t even save Himself, but
“…the foolishness of God is wiser than mankind, and the weakness of God is stronger than mankind.” 1 Corinthians 1:25
But even if you were to believe Jesus was totally healthy and the most beautiful specimen of human beauty and health, you would still have to accept the fact that by the time He was hanging on the cross, His body had been severely disfigured and didn’t meet the requirement of the Levitical law, that a priest must be “without blemish.” Therefore, you don’t make Him anymore worthy of the priesthood by believing He was beautiful before His body was maimed at Calvary.
Spiritual Meaning of the Cross:
God worked it out that the form of death Jesus would suffer at the hands of men would be crucifixion, and this is full of symbolism. In fact, Jesus Himself said that all Christians must take up their own crosses and follow Him, so this manner of death applies to all of us in a spiritual sense. But what is the spiritual meaning of crucifixion? You see, the Father chose this time period for Jesus’ first advent, and this location, where crucifixion was in use by the Romans, because it represented the way in which Christians must put their own flesh to death, namely by pinning down our members, which always serve the flesh’s carnal desires, and make them immobile, effectively stopping them from ever committing sin again.
“Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.” Galatians 5:24
“Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; for he who has died is freed from sin.” Romans 6:-5-7
“Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed.” Colossians 3:5
Furthermore, the symbolism is heightened when you realize that Christ’s body was hunched over, symbolizing the crookedness of man, who He came to redeem. He said to the wicked Jews,
“O unbelieving and crooked generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I put up with you?” Matthew 17:17
And of Peter elsewhere it says, With many other words he testified, and exhorted them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation!” Acts 2:40
The crooked generation consisted of those, “… who are crooked in their ways, and wayward in their path” (Proverbs 2:15), to whom John the Baptist said,
“Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low, and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth; and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.” Isaiah 40:3-4
It might also be worth adding that an old Midrash concerning the suffering of the Messiah says, “during the week when the son of David comes, they will bring iron beams and they will put them on his neck until the Messiah’s body is bent.”
Now realize what happened when Christ’s body was placed upon the cross, and what happens to all people when they repent of their sins. His body was made straight again, in the most agonizing and painful way possible, straightening his hunched back. While Jesus never committed a single sin, His physical body was an illustration of our own corrupted souls, and it was on the cross that His body took its last breath and died. In our regeneration as Christians, before we are re-born we have to die, and everyone who is baptized into Christ is baptized into His death, the death of “the old man” as Paul says.
Jesus’ Resurrection:
It was three days after His death that God brought Jesus back to life, but this was unlike any “resurrection” that had taken place before. “Jesus was the firstborn from the dead.” (Revelation 1:5) Unlike Lazarus who would die again, Jesus was brought back for good – Jesus would now never die again. He says in Luke’s Gospel, “…on the third day I will be perfected.” (Luke 13:32) God put His Son’s body back together again, and it was indeed the same body, but in a perfected state, correcting all blemishes and wiping the stain of mortality inherited by Adam. The small, weak, and feeble body is no more, it died on the cross. What was re-molded from it was the perfected version. In 2nd Esdras when he sees the Son of God he says,
“In their midst was a young man of great stature, taller than any of the others, and on the head of each of them He placed a crown, but He was more exalted than they.” 2 Esdras 2:43
The fact that He has both a superior body and the same body from the incarnation can be proven from Scripture; we can prove His body is now superior and altered from the fact that He can walk through walls (John 20:19), that Mary Magdalene did not recognize Jesus at all after He’d been resurrected (John 20:14), that the two disciples on the Road to Emmaus didn’t recognize Him after having an entire conversation together (Luke 24:13-27) (Mark 16:12), the fact that He was able to vanish out of thin air (Luke 24:31), and when Peter and the rest of the apostles didn’t recognize Him or even His voice (John 21:4). We can prove He possesses a perfected version of the original body He fashioned for the incarnation from the fact that He still has the wounds which He suffered on the cross, the marks from the nails in His hands and feet, and the mark on His side from the spear (John 20:27). It naturally follows that if our imperfections are to be remedied by God in the Resurrection, but Jesus still has the wounds from the cross, then the only wounds that are preserved in the Resurrection must be the wounds obtained through martyrdom.
Jesus, being our Instructor, by His own example demonstrates that all blemishes and imperfections in the body will be remedied by God in the Resurrection. Everyone who dies looks to Christ as a model, that they’ll follow after His example and be brought back from the dead with a superior body. Anyone still alive at the time of the Resurrection looks to Christ as a model, that they’ll follow after His example of the Transfiguration and be changed in a flash. So that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. (Colossians 1:18) And because Jesus has first place we call Him our model, because we imitate Him in everything. Jesus Christ sets the most extreme example when demonstrating the reality of the Resurrection from the dead, and that all imperfections will be remedied by the Father, by taking on one of the most imperfect and blemished bodies in history. He demonstrates the power of the Father by assuming such a miserable condition so that the Father can raise it back up in perfect condition. It’s one thing to restore a car which is already in fine condition, it’s an entirely different thing to restore a car which had been completely totaled and crushed. But Jesus has absolutely earned His inheritance from His Father, as He currently sits at His Father’s right hand in a perfect state. He tells us how He earned it so that we know how we can earn it when He says, “the first will be last, and the last will be first,” (Matthew 20:16) and, “He who exalts himself will be humiliated, and whoever humiliates himself will be exalted.” (Matthew 23:12) Jesus Christ was for a time weak and inglorious, but “even though we have known Christ by the flesh, yet now we know Him in this way no longer.” (2 Corinthians 5:16)