11-04-2011, 12:00 AM
http://www.ubim.org/what-...esus-actually-look-like/
"First, we can see in the following quotes from the Urantia Book that
the celestials do not approve of the way Jesus has been traditionally
depicted:
“The pictures of Jesus have been most unfortunate.
These paintings of the Christ have exerted a deleterious influence on
youth; the temple merchants would hardly have fled before Jesus if he
had been such a man as your artists usually have depicted. His was a
dignified manhood; he was good, but natural. Jesus did not pose as a
mild, sweet, gentle, and kindly mystic.”
In the first part of the preceding quote, the traditional image of
Jesus is completely trashed. The second part of the sentence suggests
that he was physically intimidating – a big man. The last sentence
tells us that he didn’t look sweet, gentle and kindly. This means that
his facial features were nowhere near as delicate and soft as
traditionally painted. Jesus’ face would have, therefore, exhibited a
more rugged, masculine (even stern) appearance, with “piercing eyes,”
like a true king. We can see this pointed out again in the next quote:
184:3.19 His silence is terrible to endure; his speech is fearlessly defiant.
And again…
140:8.20 Could you have had but one look at him, you would have
known that Jesus was a real man of great experience in the things of
this world…you have also held perverted ideas about the Master’s
meekness and humility.
Again and again we’re told that he wasn’t meek, nor did he look it. As to exactly how big he was, we’re told:
128:6.2 Jesus was one of the most robust and refined specimens of manhood to appear on earth since the days of Adam.
The definition of “robust” is:
“strong and healthy; hardy; vigorous: strongly or stoutly built:
suited to or requiring bodily strength or endurance.
The preceding UB quote is quite telling. If Jesus was one of the
most robust specimens since the days of Adam, it means that he looked
very different from the rest of the men of his day and age. He would
have been singularly unique in appearance – tall and large, handsome,
with a sculpted physique – which explains why he was:
127:5.1 …very highly regarded by most of the young women.
And why…
152:3.2 Every inch he looked a king…
As a carpenter before electricity,
boat builder, someone constantly on the move who could hike and live for
weeks in the mountains with nothing but a cloak and some bread
(extremely difficult), he would have been muscular, tough and lean."
-Robert
"First, we can see in the following quotes from the Urantia Book that
the celestials do not approve of the way Jesus has been traditionally
depicted:
“The pictures of Jesus have been most unfortunate.
These paintings of the Christ have exerted a deleterious influence on
youth; the temple merchants would hardly have fled before Jesus if he
had been such a man as your artists usually have depicted. His was a
dignified manhood; he was good, but natural. Jesus did not pose as a
mild, sweet, gentle, and kindly mystic.”
In the first part of the preceding quote, the traditional image of
Jesus is completely trashed. The second part of the sentence suggests
that he was physically intimidating – a big man. The last sentence
tells us that he didn’t look sweet, gentle and kindly. This means that
his facial features were nowhere near as delicate and soft as
traditionally painted. Jesus’ face would have, therefore, exhibited a
more rugged, masculine (even stern) appearance, with “piercing eyes,”
like a true king. We can see this pointed out again in the next quote:
184:3.19 His silence is terrible to endure; his speech is fearlessly defiant.
And again…
140:8.20 Could you have had but one look at him, you would have
known that Jesus was a real man of great experience in the things of
this world…you have also held perverted ideas about the Master’s
meekness and humility.
Again and again we’re told that he wasn’t meek, nor did he look it. As to exactly how big he was, we’re told:
128:6.2 Jesus was one of the most robust and refined specimens of manhood to appear on earth since the days of Adam.
The definition of “robust” is:
“strong and healthy; hardy; vigorous: strongly or stoutly built:
suited to or requiring bodily strength or endurance.
The preceding UB quote is quite telling. If Jesus was one of the
most robust specimens since the days of Adam, it means that he looked
very different from the rest of the men of his day and age. He would
have been singularly unique in appearance – tall and large, handsome,
with a sculpted physique – which explains why he was:
127:5.1 …very highly regarded by most of the young women.
And why…
152:3.2 Every inch he looked a king…
As a carpenter before electricity,
boat builder, someone constantly on the move who could hike and live for
weeks in the mountains with nothing but a cloak and some bread
(extremely difficult), he would have been muscular, tough and lean."
-Robert