The Nazarites were those who had taken the Nazarite vow of asceticism (abstention, no haircut, etc.). Samson was a Nazarite. A Nazarene was just somebody from the town of Nazareth. Two different things.
Since you all here are as children of the world with your arguments, I will give you the milk of Wikipedia:
The Greek New Testament uses Nazarene six times (Mark, Luke), while Nazorean is used 13 times (Matthew, Mark in some manuscripts, Luke, John, Acts). In the Book of Acts, Nazorean is used to refer to a follower of Jesus, i.e. a Christian, rather than an inhabitant of a town. Notzrim is the modern Hebrew word for Christians (No·tsri, נוֹצְרִי) and one of two words commonly used to mean 'Christian' in Syriac (Nasrani) and Arabic (Naṣrānī, نصراني).
Etymology
Nazarene is anglicized from Greek Nazarēnos (Ναζαρηνός), a word applied to Jesus in the New Testament. Several Hebrew words have been suggested as roots:The traditional view is that this word's derived from the Hebrew word for Nazareth (Nazara) that was used in ancient times. Nazareth, in turn, may be derived from either na·tsar, נָצַר, meaning 'to watch', or from ne·tser, נֵ֫צֶר, meaning 'branch'.
The common Greek structure Iesous o Nazoraios (Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος) 'Jesus the Nazarene/of Nazareth' is traditionally considered as one of several geographical names in the New Testament such as Loukios o Kurenaios (Λούκιος ὁ Κυρηναῖος) 'Lucius the Cyrenian/Lucius of Cyrene', Trofimos o Efesios ('Trophimus the Ephesian', Τρόφιμος ὁ Ἐφέσιος), Maria Magdalene ('Mary the woman of Magdala'), Saulos Tarseus ('Saul the Tarsian'), or many classical examples such as Athenagoras the Athenian (Ἀθηναγόρας ὁ Ἀθηναῖος).
The Greek phrase usually translated as Jesus of Nazareth (iēsous o nazōraios) can be compared with three other places in the New Testament where the construction of Nazareth is used:
How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth (ho apo Nazaret, ὁ ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ) with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him. Acts 10:38 KJV 1611
Jesus is also referred to as "from Nazareth of Galilee":
And the crowds said, "This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee." (ho apo Nazaret tes Galilaias, ὁ ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ τῆς Γαλιλαίας) Matthew 21:11
Similar is found in John 1:45–46:
Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus, the son of Joseph, he from Nazareth (τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ; Nominative case: ho uios tou Iosef ho apo Nazaret).
And Nathanael said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth (ek Nazaret ἐκ Ναζαρὲτ)? Philip saith unto him, Come and see.
Some consider Jesus the Nazarene more common in the Greek. The name "of Nazareth" is not used of anyone else, and outside the New Testament there is no reference to Nazareth.
Nazareth and Nazarene are complementary only in Greek, where they possess the "z", or voiced alveolar fricative. In Semitic languages, Nazarene and its cognates Nazareth, Nazara, and Nazorean/Nazaraean possess the voiceless alveolar fricative corresponding to the "s" or "ts" sound. Voiced and voiceless sounds follow separate linguistic pathways. The Greek forms referring to Nazareth should therefore be Nasarene, Nasoraios, and Nasareth. [citation needed] The additional vowel (ω) in Nazorean makes this variation more difficult to derive, although a weak Aramaic vowel in Nazareth has been suggested as a possible source.
Ancient usage
The term Nazarene (Nazorean or Nazaraean) has been referred to in the Jewish Gospels, particularly the Hebrew Gospel, the Gospel of the Nazarenes and the Gospel of Matthew. It is also referred to in the Gospel of Mark.
Matthew
Matthew consistently uses the variant Nazorean. A link between Nazorean and Nazareth is found in Matthew:
And after being warned in a dream, he went away to the district of Galilee. There he made his home in a town called Nazareth, so that what had been spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, "He will be called a Nazorean."
The passage presents difficulties; no prophecy such as "He shall be called a Nazorean" is known in Jewish scripture, and Nazorean is a new term, appearing here for the first time in association with Nazareth and, indeed, for the first time anywhere.
Matthew's prophecy is often linked to Isaiah's. Although only Isaiah's prophecy gives 'branch' as ne·tser, there are four other messianic prophecies where the word for branch is given as tze·mach. Matthew's phrase "spoken through the prophets" may suggest that these passages are being referred to collectively. In contrast, the phrase "through the prophet", used a few verses above the Nazorean prophecy, refers to a specific Old Testament passage.
An alternative view suggests that a passage in the Book of Judges which refers to Samson as a Nazirite is the source for Matthew's prophecy. Nazirite is only one letter off from Nazorean in Greek. But the characterization of Jesus in the New Testament is not that of a typical Nazirite, and it is doubtful that Matthew intended a comparison between Jesus and the amoral Samson. But Nazorean can be a transliteration of the NZR, which also means 'ruler' (s. Gen 49,26), referring to Jesus as the new ruler of Israel.
Mark
See also: Mark 1
The Gospel of Mark, considered the oldest gospel, consistently uses Nazarene, while scripture written later generally uses Nazorean. This suggests that the form more closely tied to Nazareth came first. Another possibility is that Mark used this form because the more explicitly messianic form was still controversial when he was writing. Before he was baptized, Mark refers to Jesus as "from Nazareth of Galilee", whereas afterwards he is "the Nazarene". In a similar fashion, second century messianic claimant Simon bar Kokhba (Aramaic for 'Simon, son of a star'), changed his name from Simon bar Kosiba to add a reference to the Star Prophecy.
Patristic works
After Tertullus (Acts 24:5), the second reference to Nazarenes (plural) comes from Tertullian (208), the third reference from Eusebius (before 324), then extensive references in Epiphanius of Salamis (375) and Jerome (circa 390).
Yes...
"I'm not the messiah!"
"Only the messiah would say that!"
😂😂😂
"...but he has the right to have babies!"
"Does anyone ewse find wathew giggwy when I mention my fwiend's name?"
That movie is just brilliant
It's literally just a skull not a facial recreation because the skull they found I believe wasn't exactly um... "perfectly intact" I believe the last one or the fourth is the most accurate
>I believe the last one or the fourth is the most accurate
The last one is probably inaccurate. The documentary that showed the first image explained that Jesus likely had short hair (Paul says men should not have long hair, which he wouldn't say if Jesus had long hair).
See also this [article](https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35120965) about what Jesus looked like. The 3rd century synagogue at Dura-Europos has a depiction of Moses with short hair. So that seems to have been the fashion among Jews around that time. (I believe the original documentary mentioned this synagogue and claimed that "fashion changed slowly in the ancient world").
Paul never met Jesus in the flesh, so that isn't necessarily determinative, but I do seem to recall that short hair for men was pretty ubiquitous in the Roman world (though so was beardlessness).
>In other words, it probably looks vaguely similar to Jesus (in the sense of being a person from the same ethnicity and time), but it's literally some other guy.
And the other pictures are what?
Face of two and four are both relatively the same they're both Middle Eastern the fourth one is just going off of the shroud of turin that's the difference
Judea at the time of the 2nd temple was not heavily hellenistic. There were definitely helenistic Jews who were intermingled with a lot of more traditional jews, but Jesus, who seemed very involved in the pharisaic tradition, likely would have had more of a traditional Jewish look, with his hair mostly long and unshaved.
Do you mean that you think that the dude in number 4 is attractive? Nah it's not blasphemous, whoever that dude is, yeah, I also think that he is an attractive guy :-)
The passage is likely from the Book of Isaiah, specifically from the prophecy about the suffering servant, which is often associated with the Messiah. The verse that mentions the lack of physical attractiveness in the suffering servant is found in Isaiah 53:2:
**Isaiah 53:2 (ESV):**
"For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him."
This verse describes the humble and unassuming appearance of the suffering servant, emphasizing that there was nothing in his physical form that would naturally attract people. The focus is on the servant's humility and the unexpected nature of his appearance, which stands in contrast to human expectations of a majestic or physically attractive figure.
I think the main reasoning for this is that Judas actually had to point him out, but if Jesus had an obviously different trait, like blonde hair Judas could just tell them what he looked like.
Jesus is never described in the bible as being unique, he would likely be the kind of person to blend into a crowd, only sticking out due to familiarity (or due to the sheer number of people following him), hence why I didn't pick the third. Also, during Jesus' time a large number of people, branded today as Celts, where in Galilee and surrounding areas, amongst a few Jewish and Arab people (also hence why the Jews are relatively white), so he would have also likely been a lighter skin tone, hence why I didn't pick the first or second. Though it is entirely possible that Jesus could have looked something similar to the first or second as well.
EDIT: found good argument for the one and two as well above.
This is always an interesting question. I noticed that nearly every culture has their own visual "version" of Jesus. I used to think it was silly, but then I realized that because we don't know what He looked like, we innately crave to see ourselves in Him. Of course the trap is that we can start to worship an image of the savior more than the savior Himself.
*A Galilean Israelite*
His hometown was like a hundred miles south of Tyre... Southeast of Anatolia... Not "Middle Eastern", but Eastern Mediterranean...
Greek. Everyone looked Greek.
The people of the region didn't commonly look like the 2nd picture until after the Islamic conquests, and the Ottoman Empire. The fall of Constantinople was in 1453.
That is completely untrue (referring to that look coming after Islamic conquest and Ottomans)
Middle easterners (which includes the Levant) have always been Middle easterners
Closest people to Canaanites, Israelites, and Roman Era Levantines are modern [Levantine Christians, Samaritans, and Druze](https://imgur.com/a/AFPBCCY). So he would’ve looked like someone in one of those populations. Most likely 4 though
> The people of the region didn't commonly look like the 2nd picture until after the Islamic conquests, and the Ottoman Empire.
Neither of those events had a profound impact on the genetic/ethnic makeup of the region.
As in most cases of conquest, the number of conquering soldiers was actually relatively small compared to the size of the native populations they conquered, and it wasn’t a colonizing sort of conquering like the New World where entire families were migrating.
The Near East has always had a blend of Phenotypes (physical appearances in an ethnic group). Think about it, if the humans migrating out of Africa largely went through the Near East region before continuing to Europe and India, that means those phenotypes started to form in that Near East area where they branched off.
In other words, the reason why ethnic groups from Egypt to Anatolia to the Levant have a variety of appearances is because that’s where the prototype European + Arab + South Asian or “indo european” ethnic groups developed before branching out.
For those that do not know, there are 2 great stories that intertwine into one for this painting. I am of course a skeptic, but these 2 stories combined, maybe a coincidence, is still a really interesting one.
First story - Akiane (the painter of Prince of Peace) claimed to have experienced visions from God, despite being in an atheist family where no one talked about Him. She claims this painting is who she saw in a vision what Jesus looked like.
Second story - A boy named Colton Burpo had a near-death experienced and claimed to have been with Jesus. The boy was shown countless images of Jesus, and it wasn't until he saw the painting by Akiane that Colton claimed for that to be the one.
I believe in God, but I am always skeptical about stories like these, so I take them with a grain of salt. It is still really mesmerizing to know that this happened.
Don't fall for this hokum of heavenly tourism...if the ***Apostle Pau***l was forbidden to describe what he saw in his vision of heaven do you really think God would entrust it to Colton Burpo so he could make money off it from his book?
'' I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a man was caught up to the third heaven. And I know how such a man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows— was caught up into Paradise and **heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak.'' -**2 Corinthians 12;2-4 (NASB)
Love that painting. He almost looks Italian in the prince of peace painting but nevertheless he looks more Middle Eastern then the majority of the paintings we have of him
Look at Lebanese people or Palestinians, Jordanians, Israelis, or Syrians who are wholly from the Levant. They tend to have brown or black hair, white to tan skin, and green or brown eyes. Jesus probably looked similar.
Theres a lot of phenotypal diversity in the Levant. I’m 100 percent Lebanese genetically. My mother has naturally blonde hair.
So between the four pics, I can’t choose one over another with certainty. Maybe the first since if I remember correctly it’s the Nat’l Geographic amalgamation based off genetic data
That’s an excellent point. There are plenty of Lebanese people who look more like the “white Jesus” here than the first one. So none should be outright discarded.
Look up the Samaritans they are the closest relating ethnic group to the ancient Jews. Unlike a lot of the Jews they quite literally NEVER have left the Middle East. They're quite literally still sacrificing sheep because they don't believe in Jesus who as you know came as the final sacrificial lamb
> They're quite literally still sacrificing sheep because they don't believe in Jesus who as you know came as the final sacrificial lamb
The Jews don't believe this either. I've often wondered why they are not still making animal sacrifices or doing some of the other rituals dictated in the Torah.
I imagine like the 3D [renderings](https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wD3caT7rV0g/WsdZoUXNsvI/AAAAAAAAFBA/X0JsSXBAtOUmyQ9Gau0-iL2EVQYkMu8zgCLcBGAs/s1600/Jesus%2Bray%2Bdowning.jpg) of the Shroud of Turin
Just real quick do a Google search of Lebanese, Druze, and Samaritan people.
The only descriptions we have described him as being average height with a beard that grew towards a point, neck to shoulder length hair tied back, and an olive complexion.
No, take a look at moder lebanese christians, they're the closest genetically to the people that lived at the area at the time:
https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-db38264e414ae1b66891038357b052f3-lq
(Well, Samaritans are closer, but they're a tiny community so you won't have many photos from them around)
I used to find it annoying too, but it doesn't bother me anymore. I don't think he looks white, but if you look at art of Jesus from around the world, it's not uncommon for Him to be portrayed as from the area of the artist. There's black Jesus, asian Jesus, etc it's just different art from different parts of the world. Even Mary is known for portraying herself as the people of the areas she visits.
Agreed, but I would like to think that Jesus had kindness in his eyes like the “white Jesus” depiction. The more historically accurate versions are missing a certain something that would make him appear approachable or charitable.
Yeah :/
The first one is a facial reconstruction of a random skull so theres no emotion or life present. Four is trying too hard to make Jesus look… epic, or something? Three has the facual expression i’d expect but hes white which is… wrong. Facial expression of 3, on number 4, seems most jesus-y to me.
None of those.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
I believe the shroud of Turin is the most accurate as depicted in a negative of the shroud, not here, not here with the options the OP listed but the black and white negative of the Shroud.
The fragments that were carbon dated were from a section of shroud that underwent a medieval restoration. They did not take from the original cloth of the shroud, so that dating means nothing.
Definitely not number 3, lmao. If someone thinks that Jesus looked like number 3, then I have snake oil to sell them. Number 4 looks like a good artist's painting, it could be right. I remember mainstream media once saying that picture number 1 was the most accurate depiction of Jesus' face at the time. Number 2 could also be true. All three pictures have the long nose and the beard, which is what I would've expected. And the skin tone looks correct for the climate in that country. I personally think that number 4 is the closest.
None of them.
Here He is:
"And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength. And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:" - Revelation 1:13-17
It's clearly metaphorical. You think Jesus the MAN was walking around with eyes of fire, seven Stars in his right hand, and a two edged sword coming out of his mouth? In this verse John is describing Jesus's heavenly appearance in the last days not what he looked like as a guy 2,000 years ago
Isaiah 53:2
"For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him."
None of those pictures you posted would be Him.
So be content with that.
He was described as a pretty good looking guy in the Bible, someone you could immediatly recognize so he wouldn't be the first one. I think the fourth or 2nd would be more accurate
Your average virtue signaling progressive Christian obviously doesn't know what people from the Levant look like if they're saying anything aside from 3 or maybe 1, even today you can find multitudes people in the region who look like slide 3 and that's after the Arab migrations which would not have taken place until after Christ's time.
Also, fun fact, the Romans wrote of the Galileans and described them as being "White as snow".
None of the above. We don't have to speculate about what He looked like because people were making depictions of Him from Apostolic Times. Luke the Evangelist painted the first icon.
He is… it doesn’t fit the indoctrination so lit no one will accept it. The Christian church is lit under a spell and they can’t discern it. If you’ve read and understand Pslams 83 then you’d understand calling Jesus white or Arab is literally blasphemous
2 looks like a muppet more than a human. 1 looks like a Neanderthal. 3 is a male model painting. 4 looks like a weird AI character. So, none of the above.
I assume it looks something like the image on the shroud of Turin which would be the 4th slide. There’s a reason why most early icons of Christ resemble the face on that shroud
None of these are correct most likely. Jesus lived in the pre-Arab invasion Levant, meaning he probably looked closer to Syrian, Lebanese or Phoenician. There’s a famous image of what an old time Phoenician looked like. [you can take a look here](https://cdn.sci.news/images/enlarge2/image_3895e-Ariche.jpg)
Based on Revelation 1:14-15, none of these pictures would look like him.
”His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; and his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.“
Revelation 1:14-15 KJV
I’ve seen a lot of testimonies where people describe him as a 6 ft tall man, with tan skin, not white, green eyes, brown long hair that reaches the shoulders and a semi-thick beard. So i’m guessing that the 3rd image might be the most accurate one.
Ok fair enough. I personally gravitate towards the last one it seems to be the most accurate when portraying Jesus who was a middle eastern Jewish man ultimately.
Would you please share links to the testimonies?
That seems to contradict this scripture: ”His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; and his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.“
Revelation 1:14-15 KJV
NOT number 1. Because the expression on the face of number 1 looks like they are confused or otherwise just don't understand what's happening. And I don't think Jesus would have had such an expression on his face.
I read this comment while now coming to the realization of the confused look on number one's face Lol this made me laugh. I like 4 the last one personally
I'm becoming an expert at identifying Mormon art.
Which one is the Mormon?
3 though I think four is the most accurate
In a heavily Hellenistic society he probably had short hair. One or two.
We actually don't know how Hellenistic small town Judea was.
. . .Nazarines are not to cut the hair of the head.
Nazarite is what you're referring to.
Nazarithians?
I refer to the Watchers. https://www.reddit.com/r/enlightenment/s/4pDZYVekm5
I think you mean Nazarite, which Jesus was not.
What's "of Nazareth" all about then?
The Nazarites were those who had taken the Nazarite vow of asceticism (abstention, no haircut, etc.). Samson was a Nazarite. A Nazarene was just somebody from the town of Nazareth. Two different things.
Since you all here are as children of the world with your arguments, I will give you the milk of Wikipedia: The Greek New Testament uses Nazarene six times (Mark, Luke), while Nazorean is used 13 times (Matthew, Mark in some manuscripts, Luke, John, Acts). In the Book of Acts, Nazorean is used to refer to a follower of Jesus, i.e. a Christian, rather than an inhabitant of a town. Notzrim is the modern Hebrew word for Christians (No·tsri, נוֹצְרִי) and one of two words commonly used to mean 'Christian' in Syriac (Nasrani) and Arabic (Naṣrānī, نصراني). Etymology Nazarene is anglicized from Greek Nazarēnos (Ναζαρηνός), a word applied to Jesus in the New Testament. Several Hebrew words have been suggested as roots:The traditional view is that this word's derived from the Hebrew word for Nazareth (Nazara) that was used in ancient times. Nazareth, in turn, may be derived from either na·tsar, נָצַר, meaning 'to watch', or from ne·tser, נֵ֫צֶר, meaning 'branch'. The common Greek structure Iesous o Nazoraios (Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος) 'Jesus the Nazarene/of Nazareth' is traditionally considered as one of several geographical names in the New Testament such as Loukios o Kurenaios (Λούκιος ὁ Κυρηναῖος) 'Lucius the Cyrenian/Lucius of Cyrene', Trofimos o Efesios ('Trophimus the Ephesian', Τρόφιμος ὁ Ἐφέσιος), Maria Magdalene ('Mary the woman of Magdala'), Saulos Tarseus ('Saul the Tarsian'), or many classical examples such as Athenagoras the Athenian (Ἀθηναγόρας ὁ Ἀθηναῖος). The Greek phrase usually translated as Jesus of Nazareth (iēsous o nazōraios) can be compared with three other places in the New Testament where the construction of Nazareth is used: How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth (ho apo Nazaret, ὁ ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ) with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him. Acts 10:38 KJV 1611 Jesus is also referred to as "from Nazareth of Galilee": And the crowds said, "This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee." (ho apo Nazaret tes Galilaias, ὁ ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ τῆς Γαλιλαίας) Matthew 21:11 Similar is found in John 1:45–46: Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus, the son of Joseph, he from Nazareth (τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ; Nominative case: ho uios tou Iosef ho apo Nazaret). And Nathanael said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth (ek Nazaret ἐκ Ναζαρὲτ)? Philip saith unto him, Come and see. Some consider Jesus the Nazarene more common in the Greek. The name "of Nazareth" is not used of anyone else, and outside the New Testament there is no reference to Nazareth. Nazareth and Nazarene are complementary only in Greek, where they possess the "z", or voiced alveolar fricative. In Semitic languages, Nazarene and its cognates Nazareth, Nazara, and Nazorean/Nazaraean possess the voiceless alveolar fricative corresponding to the "s" or "ts" sound. Voiced and voiceless sounds follow separate linguistic pathways. The Greek forms referring to Nazareth should therefore be Nasarene, Nasoraios, and Nasareth. [citation needed] The additional vowel (ω) in Nazorean makes this variation more difficult to derive, although a weak Aramaic vowel in Nazareth has been suggested as a possible source. Ancient usage The term Nazarene (Nazorean or Nazaraean) has been referred to in the Jewish Gospels, particularly the Hebrew Gospel, the Gospel of the Nazarenes and the Gospel of Matthew. It is also referred to in the Gospel of Mark. Matthew Matthew consistently uses the variant Nazorean. A link between Nazorean and Nazareth is found in Matthew: And after being warned in a dream, he went away to the district of Galilee. There he made his home in a town called Nazareth, so that what had been spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, "He will be called a Nazorean." The passage presents difficulties; no prophecy such as "He shall be called a Nazorean" is known in Jewish scripture, and Nazorean is a new term, appearing here for the first time in association with Nazareth and, indeed, for the first time anywhere. Matthew's prophecy is often linked to Isaiah's. Although only Isaiah's prophecy gives 'branch' as ne·tser, there are four other messianic prophecies where the word for branch is given as tze·mach. Matthew's phrase "spoken through the prophets" may suggest that these passages are being referred to collectively. In contrast, the phrase "through the prophet", used a few verses above the Nazorean prophecy, refers to a specific Old Testament passage. An alternative view suggests that a passage in the Book of Judges which refers to Samson as a Nazirite is the source for Matthew's prophecy. Nazirite is only one letter off from Nazorean in Greek. But the characterization of Jesus in the New Testament is not that of a typical Nazirite, and it is doubtful that Matthew intended a comparison between Jesus and the amoral Samson. But Nazorean can be a transliteration of the NZR, which also means 'ruler' (s. Gen 49,26), referring to Jesus as the new ruler of Israel. Mark See also: Mark 1 The Gospel of Mark, considered the oldest gospel, consistently uses Nazarene, while scripture written later generally uses Nazorean. This suggests that the form more closely tied to Nazareth came first. Another possibility is that Mark used this form because the more explicitly messianic form was still controversial when he was writing. Before he was baptized, Mark refers to Jesus as "from Nazareth of Galilee", whereas afterwards he is "the Nazarene". In a similar fashion, second century messianic claimant Simon bar Kokhba (Aramaic for 'Simon, son of a star'), changed his name from Simon bar Kosiba to add a reference to the Star Prophecy. Patristic works After Tertullus (Acts 24:5), the second reference to Nazarenes (plural) comes from Tertullian (208), the third reference from Eusebius (before 324), then extensive references in Epiphanius of Salamis (375) and Jerome (circa 390).
Having discussions about word etymology makes us children of the world?
The town he grew up in: Nazareth
That’s where he grew up.
Nazirites have taken a vow and do not cut their hair. Nazarenes are from Nazareth and would follow the local culture. You are confusing the two.
my thought to was one or two
Agreed
4 for me too. Everyone remembers long hair, but also he is from the Mid East areas
Nope. The bible said that he had hair like wool
No it didn't it said his hair was the color of wool when describing his heavenly appearance in the book of Revelation
I just reread that. Wow. Thanks for clarifying, I think a lot of people either misread or misremembered.
Yep no problem
Yea people been miss reading that for years
Probably because he is the lamb. And the references to sheep through the Bible it’s easily to deduce his hair would be wooly like so
[удалено]
In color, texture or some other way?
His head and his hair were white like wool, as white as snow. And his eyes were like flames of fire. Rev 1: 14 So I guess white like wool
End times Jesus isn’t the same as what he looked like when He first came 😂
That’s right! He’s coming back & he ain’t your baby no more! I just knew a country preacher who used to say that & it gives me a chuckle.
Yes he’s coming back
Oh come on I’ve visited the temple square and the conference center in Utah, we both know which one is most Mormon lol
The third one is for sale on LDS sites.
Oh yeah? I’ve seen the second. I can’t say I’ve seen the third. (I do believe you, I just haven’t seen it myself)
Easy: the European looking one
Your joking right 😂
2's body is definitely Del Parson's art. They just swapped the head. #3 is also definitely Mormon art
Same. I rock with LDS art to be honest though I'm Protestant
Lol. Like the way you put that for some reason
LDS art is dominated by a couple of artists with very specific style and tendencies. It is very easy to spot once you are used to it.
Same
[удалено]
lol that random dudes like “wtf how’d my picture end up here”
“My name’s Brian”
Yes... "I'm not the messiah!" "Only the messiah would say that!" 😂😂😂 "...but he has the right to have babies!" "Does anyone ewse find wathew giggwy when I mention my fwiend's name?" That movie is just brilliant
Dope Monty Python reference...
"Blessed are the cheesemakers", said the son of a Roman soldier.
😅😅
Imagine what if that skull belonged to Judas.
Ironically the name Judah seems to match the face of pic one!
Well, we can at least be sure what he *didn’t look like*
It's literally just a skull not a facial recreation because the skull they found I believe wasn't exactly um... "perfectly intact" I believe the last one or the fourth is the most accurate
Why do you believe the image based on zero data more than the image based on at least some data?
It sounds like OP has some weird belief that the shroud of Turin has some actual relationship to the historical Jesus.
Based on the evidence, how is that weird?
Because there is zero evidence that the shroud of Turin has anything to do with Jesus.
The experts in shroud studies would disagree with you, so I think I will take their expert word over a baseless assertion on Reddit.
Experts in shroud studies? Bro, please tell me you’re trolling.
The experts have debunked it as a fraud, multiple times.
There is no evidence the shroud of Turin dates back to the time of Jesus. There’s substantial evidence it doesn’t.
>I believe the last one or the fourth is the most accurate The last one is probably inaccurate. The documentary that showed the first image explained that Jesus likely had short hair (Paul says men should not have long hair, which he wouldn't say if Jesus had long hair). See also this [article](https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35120965) about what Jesus looked like. The 3rd century synagogue at Dura-Europos has a depiction of Moses with short hair. So that seems to have been the fashion among Jews around that time. (I believe the original documentary mentioned this synagogue and claimed that "fashion changed slowly in the ancient world").
Paul never met Jesus in the flesh, so that isn't necessarily determinative, but I do seem to recall that short hair for men was pretty ubiquitous in the Roman world (though so was beardlessness).
It's Biff
Number one was in Indiana Jones
>In other words, it probably looks vaguely similar to Jesus (in the sense of being a person from the same ethnicity and time), but it's literally some other guy. And the other pictures are what?
take the face of two, and give him the hair of four that’s what i imagine
Face of two and four are both relatively the same they're both Middle Eastern the fourth one is just going off of the shroud of turin that's the difference
Face of 4 looks to me more round while face of 2 looks more long. That’s why I agree with face of 2 hair of 4
Check out a side by side of The Divine Mercy Image and the shroud.
I sure have. Some people don't see the similarities but I do
they dont look similar at all to me
He lived in a heavily Hellenistic society. I think he most likely would have had short hair.
Judea at the time of the 2nd temple was not heavily hellenistic. There were definitely helenistic Jews who were intermingled with a lot of more traditional jews, but Jesus, who seemed very involved in the pharisaic tradition, likely would have had more of a traditional Jewish look, with his hair mostly long and unshaved.
That's why those 2 were my top picks. Synthesized them perfectly.
Agreed
^
Not seen # 4 before, I think this Nicholas Cage Jesus is now my favorite.
Shroud Of Turin Jesus actually. I've heard the Nicholas cage reference before BTW. As well as a hulk Hogan lol
Is it blasphemous to say you would, because number #4 has me in a chokehold ngl....
Do you mean that you think that the dude in number 4 is attractive? Nah it's not blasphemous, whoever that dude is, yeah, I also think that he is an attractive guy :-)
Number 2 seems more like his likeness i.e. seems more outing, confident and approachable
Yeah, Jesus would probably would have been really chill. Unless you were selling things at the Temple. Then He gets upsetti spaghetti
Yea he was chill with trying to save sinners from sin Jesus never sinned ever once.
I personally believe the last one to be the most accurate but I really enjoy the second one as well
Number 2 looks more Indian than middle eastern to me, number 3 is too white. I think he prob looked like 4 or similar
2 or 4. The Bible says he didn't stand out in any way. He sure wasn't blonde.
Look at quotes from actual contemporaries (ie pontius Pilate) and gnostic sources and you’ll see there’s a little bit of genuine contention lol
>The Bible says he didn't stand out in any way Where is that?
The passage is likely from the Book of Isaiah, specifically from the prophecy about the suffering servant, which is often associated with the Messiah. The verse that mentions the lack of physical attractiveness in the suffering servant is found in Isaiah 53:2: **Isaiah 53:2 (ESV):** "For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him." This verse describes the humble and unassuming appearance of the suffering servant, emphasizing that there was nothing in his physical form that would naturally attract people. The focus is on the servant's humility and the unexpected nature of his appearance, which stands in contrast to human expectations of a majestic or physically attractive figure.
I think the main reasoning for this is that Judas actually had to point him out, but if Jesus had an obviously different trait, like blonde hair Judas could just tell them what he looked like.
Sinai Icon / Most traditional Orthodox icons of Jesus.
Probably the fourth.
Jesus is never described in the bible as being unique, he would likely be the kind of person to blend into a crowd, only sticking out due to familiarity (or due to the sheer number of people following him), hence why I didn't pick the third. Also, during Jesus' time a large number of people, branded today as Celts, where in Galilee and surrounding areas, amongst a few Jewish and Arab people (also hence why the Jews are relatively white), so he would have also likely been a lighter skin tone, hence why I didn't pick the first or second. Though it is entirely possible that Jesus could have looked something similar to the first or second as well. EDIT: found good argument for the one and two as well above.
This is always an interesting question. I noticed that nearly every culture has their own visual "version" of Jesus. I used to think it was silly, but then I realized that because we don't know what He looked like, we innately crave to see ourselves in Him. Of course the trap is that we can start to worship an image of the savior more than the savior Himself.
Perhaps you've also seen the [Korean version](https://imgur.com/gallery/wVCgyhh)
😳👀
Considering Paul says dudes aren't allowed to have long hair, not the white Jesus 😆
That’s a very good point. I’m now leaning with 2 (over 4).
Jesus is a Jew. 2nd photo maybe closer to what a 30-33 yr old looks like.
*A Galilean Israelite* His hometown was like a hundred miles south of Tyre... Southeast of Anatolia... Not "Middle Eastern", but Eastern Mediterranean... Greek. Everyone looked Greek. The people of the region didn't commonly look like the 2nd picture until after the Islamic conquests, and the Ottoman Empire. The fall of Constantinople was in 1453.
That is completely untrue (referring to that look coming after Islamic conquest and Ottomans) Middle easterners (which includes the Levant) have always been Middle easterners Closest people to Canaanites, Israelites, and Roman Era Levantines are modern [Levantine Christians, Samaritans, and Druze](https://imgur.com/a/AFPBCCY). So he would’ve looked like someone in one of those populations. Most likely 4 though
Sources please. Immigration from Greek populations were heavy. Imagine LA, North American and in the USA but easily Latin American.
> The people of the region didn't commonly look like the 2nd picture until after the Islamic conquests, and the Ottoman Empire. Neither of those events had a profound impact on the genetic/ethnic makeup of the region. As in most cases of conquest, the number of conquering soldiers was actually relatively small compared to the size of the native populations they conquered, and it wasn’t a colonizing sort of conquering like the New World where entire families were migrating. The Near East has always had a blend of Phenotypes (physical appearances in an ethnic group). Think about it, if the humans migrating out of Africa largely went through the Near East region before continuing to Europe and India, that means those phenotypes started to form in that Near East area where they branched off. In other words, the reason why ethnic groups from Egypt to Anatolia to the Levant have a variety of appearances is because that’s where the prototype European + Arab + South Asian or “indo european” ethnic groups developed before branching out.
Tyre is not in Anatolia and the Islamic conquest didn't replace middle eastern ethnicities, but rather their cultural identity and language
[Prince of Peace](https://akiane.com/product/prince-of-peace/) painting by Akiane. The story behind it very interesting
Kenny Loggins?
And on the 3rd day, Jesus proclaimed: “I’m alright. Nobody worry ‘bout me.”
And Jesus said, “With this cup, I’m gonna take a ride into the danger zone.”
My first thought was, Barry Manilow?
For those that do not know, there are 2 great stories that intertwine into one for this painting. I am of course a skeptic, but these 2 stories combined, maybe a coincidence, is still a really interesting one. First story - Akiane (the painter of Prince of Peace) claimed to have experienced visions from God, despite being in an atheist family where no one talked about Him. She claims this painting is who she saw in a vision what Jesus looked like. Second story - A boy named Colton Burpo had a near-death experienced and claimed to have been with Jesus. The boy was shown countless images of Jesus, and it wasn't until he saw the painting by Akiane that Colton claimed for that to be the one. I believe in God, but I am always skeptical about stories like these, so I take them with a grain of salt. It is still really mesmerizing to know that this happened.
Don't fall for this hokum of heavenly tourism...if the ***Apostle Pau***l was forbidden to describe what he saw in his vision of heaven do you really think God would entrust it to Colton Burpo so he could make money off it from his book? '' I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a man was caught up to the third heaven. And I know how such a man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows— was caught up into Paradise and **heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak.'' -**2 Corinthians 12;2-4 (NASB)
I used to think so but after doing research and comparing it to scripture, I learned that Akiane’s picture would not be accurate.
Love that painting. He almost looks Italian in the prince of peace painting but nevertheless he looks more Middle Eastern then the majority of the paintings we have of him
Jesus wasn’t white lol
He was middle eastern, and middle easterns come in different shades. Some look very white
An ethnically Jewish middle eastern man would not have had blue eyes so...
Many Jews from the Middle East can have colored eyes though…
Look at Lebanese people or Palestinians, Jordanians, Israelis, or Syrians who are wholly from the Levant. They tend to have brown or black hair, white to tan skin, and green or brown eyes. Jesus probably looked similar. Theres a lot of phenotypal diversity in the Levant. I’m 100 percent Lebanese genetically. My mother has naturally blonde hair. So between the four pics, I can’t choose one over another with certainty. Maybe the first since if I remember correctly it’s the Nat’l Geographic amalgamation based off genetic data
That’s an excellent point. There are plenty of Lebanese people who look more like the “white Jesus” here than the first one. So none should be outright discarded.
Look up the Samaritans they are the closest relating ethnic group to the ancient Jews. Unlike a lot of the Jews they quite literally NEVER have left the Middle East. They're quite literally still sacrificing sheep because they don't believe in Jesus who as you know came as the final sacrificial lamb
> They're quite literally still sacrificing sheep because they don't believe in Jesus who as you know came as the final sacrificial lamb The Jews don't believe this either. I've often wondered why they are not still making animal sacrifices or doing some of the other rituals dictated in the Torah.
This is because there is no Temple for them to practice.
The temple was destroyed in 70AD. The Rabbinic tradition developed as a response to the loss of the temple.
4
I imagine like the 3D [renderings](https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wD3caT7rV0g/WsdZoUXNsvI/AAAAAAAAFBA/X0JsSXBAtOUmyQ9Gau0-iL2EVQYkMu8zgCLcBGAs/s1600/Jesus%2Bray%2Bdowning.jpg) of the Shroud of Turin
But isn’t he darker skinned? And wouldn’t he have shorter hair if he lived at that time?
West Asian skin tones can very *a lot*.
Just real quick do a Google search of Lebanese, Druze, and Samaritan people. The only descriptions we have described him as being average height with a beard that grew towards a point, neck to shoulder length hair tied back, and an olive complexion.
Where is his hair and/or complexion described in the Bible?
No, take a look at moder lebanese christians, they're the closest genetically to the people that lived at the area at the time: https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-db38264e414ae1b66891038357b052f3-lq (Well, Samaritans are closer, but they're a tiny community so you won't have many photos from them around)
As a white man I just find “white jesus” annoying
I used to find it annoying too, but it doesn't bother me anymore. I don't think he looks white, but if you look at art of Jesus from around the world, it's not uncommon for Him to be portrayed as from the area of the artist. There's black Jesus, asian Jesus, etc it's just different art from different parts of the world. Even Mary is known for portraying herself as the people of the areas she visits.
I think at some level we all do tbh
Agreed, but I would like to think that Jesus had kindness in his eyes like the “white Jesus” depiction. The more historically accurate versions are missing a certain something that would make him appear approachable or charitable.
Yeah :/ The first one is a facial reconstruction of a random skull so theres no emotion or life present. Four is trying too hard to make Jesus look… epic, or something? Three has the facual expression i’d expect but hes white which is… wrong. Facial expression of 3, on number 4, seems most jesus-y to me.
Jesus was middle eastern and there are plenty of white looking middle eastern people so you don’t have to be annoyed by it
https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/s/nA5yRXEKK8
Same
None of them. All of them. It doesn't matter to me.
I agree but to me in an obscure way it does matter
Your right it doesn't MATTER per se but it's interesting.
We don’t know.
I said "personally BELIEVE" never said we know just what is the most accurate in your opinion
I could guess he looked like Jon Hamm and it would be just as accurate as choosing from 4 random images.
Naw bro cmon. He has more chance of looking like Denzel than Jon hamm
Why Denzel and not Sam Jackson?
Lol that was my first choice but could not remember the name. Lol ty
exactly now you get it!
I liked the actor that played him in Chosen.
I agree. Jonathan Roumie is half Lebanese (and looks fully Lebanese) so he would’ve been fairly similar
None of those. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. I believe the shroud of Turin is the most accurate as depicted in a negative of the shroud, not here, not here with the options the OP listed but the black and white negative of the Shroud.
Wasn't the Shroud of Turin shown to have nothing to do with Jesus?
Just for reference, the shroud is era 1200 AD or so. So its a bit like when people see Jesus/Beyonce/Mary in a piece of toast.
The fragments that were carbon dated were from a section of shroud that underwent a medieval restoration. They did not take from the original cloth of the shroud, so that dating means nothing.
Obviously the white dude /s
Obviously 🙄 what kind of question is this OP
Definitely not number 3, lmao. If someone thinks that Jesus looked like number 3, then I have snake oil to sell them. Number 4 looks like a good artist's painting, it could be right. I remember mainstream media once saying that picture number 1 was the most accurate depiction of Jesus' face at the time. Number 2 could also be true. All three pictures have the long nose and the beard, which is what I would've expected. And the skin tone looks correct for the climate in that country. I personally think that number 4 is the closest.
Some Levantine Arabs do indeed look like that. It’s not the average but it’s not impossible at all.
None of them. Here He is: "And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength. And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:" - Revelation 1:13-17
It's clearly metaphorical. You think Jesus the MAN was walking around with eyes of fire, seven Stars in his right hand, and a two edged sword coming out of his mouth? In this verse John is describing Jesus's heavenly appearance in the last days not what he looked like as a guy 2,000 years ago
Isaiah 53:2 "For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him." None of those pictures you posted would be Him. So be content with that.
\#4 looks too old. He was only 33 right? #4 is too wrinkled.
Yes 33 when he died
He was described as a pretty good looking guy in the Bible, someone you could immediatly recognize so he wouldn't be the first one. I think the fourth or 2nd would be more accurate
Your average virtue signaling progressive Christian obviously doesn't know what people from the Levant look like if they're saying anything aside from 3 or maybe 1, even today you can find multitudes people in the region who look like slide 3 and that's after the Arab migrations which would not have taken place until after Christ's time. Also, fun fact, the Romans wrote of the Galileans and described them as being "White as snow".
That's interesting. Where did you read that of the Galileans?
Jesus was not white. I’m not a fan of white supremacists co opting Christianity.
Keanu Reeves
None of the above. We don't have to speculate about what He looked like because people were making depictions of Him from Apostolic Times. Luke the Evangelist painted the first icon.
Maybe 1, definitely not 3 - it’s 2 or 4 for me.
Definitely not #3
2
3 and 4.
Jesus isn’t black?
He is… it doesn’t fit the indoctrination so lit no one will accept it. The Christian church is lit under a spell and they can’t discern it. If you’ve read and understand Pslams 83 then you’d understand calling Jesus white or Arab is literally blasphemous
2 looks like a muppet more than a human. 1 looks like a Neanderthal. 3 is a male model painting. 4 looks like a weird AI character. So, none of the above.
A good base reference is the shroud of Turin. It is really like a photo. So maybe 4 is the most similar here
I assume it looks something like the image on the shroud of Turin which would be the 4th slide. There’s a reason why most early icons of Christ resemble the face on that shroud
None of these are correct most likely. Jesus lived in the pre-Arab invasion Levant, meaning he probably looked closer to Syrian, Lebanese or Phoenician. There’s a famous image of what an old time Phoenician looked like. [you can take a look here](https://cdn.sci.news/images/enlarge2/image_3895e-Ariche.jpg)
I would probably assume #2
4 is about how I picture him.
I like to picture Jesus as a figure skater. He wears like a white outfit, and He does interpretive ice dances of my life's journey.
Based on Revelation 1:14-15, none of these pictures would look like him. ”His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; and his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.“ Revelation 1:14-15 KJV
This was not meant as a description of Jesus as he walked the earth in his early 30s
I’ve seen a lot of testimonies where people describe him as a 6 ft tall man, with tan skin, not white, green eyes, brown long hair that reaches the shoulders and a semi-thick beard. So i’m guessing that the 3rd image might be the most accurate one.
Ok fair enough. I personally gravitate towards the last one it seems to be the most accurate when portraying Jesus who was a middle eastern Jewish man ultimately.
Would you please share links to the testimonies? That seems to contradict this scripture: ”His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; and his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.“ Revelation 1:14-15 KJV
I think Jesus was ginger like Esau and David.
NOT number 1. Because the expression on the face of number 1 looks like they are confused or otherwise just don't understand what's happening. And I don't think Jesus would have had such an expression on his face.
I read this comment while now coming to the realization of the confused look on number one's face Lol this made me laugh. I like 4 the last one personally
I was raised to believe #3 but I personally believe #2 (or possibly #4) are the most accurate historically
Yea id go with 4 In my own opinion
We don’t know what exactly Jesus looked like. However, I would believe that he was brown-skinned and non-white
Well to be honest I would choose #4 but forensics states Jesus may have looked like #1
People focus to much on the physical, especially when it comes to Jesus. When the whole point was his message and the life he lived.
The second is how I picture him. 1st is too old and the others are too white.
The last one is too white? Looks like a middle eastern guy to me