From the Philosopher… NO BEAUTY AT ALL. A Wall-paper photo vendor was passing by, as I was in a market, and one of his collections caught my attention. It was the picture of a man who is nothing more than the most handsome man my eyes has ever seen. With pointed nose, dazzling tender eyes, curly well fed beards, a conspicuous Adam’s apple, and a flowing hair like that of an Egyptian horse’s mane. Wow! I asked myself again—as though I don’t know the populous answer— who could this be? I stopped the vendor to view more of this Asiatic prototype of a handsome man. His wardrobe was that of the Arabs of tens of centuries ago, very radiant and clean. Looking at him, he seems comely, very meek and well fed. He was surrounded by ordinary men, though he stood highly esteemed and distinguished from other men around him, who are looking pale, less handsome and more muscular. Well, I don’t need any man to tell me who the artist was portraying in this good art piece. But could this really be Jesus? I asked myself. If Jesus was so handsome like this, fairy faced like the angels, then the Scriptures WERE WRONG ON THE PICTURE IT CREATED ABOUT HIM. According to the Scriptures, Jesus was never said to be handsome, well fed, and enfeeble-looking man (more especially during His earthly mission. In the book of Revelation, when He was glorified, descriptions about him were celestial)… rather Jesus was painted as being less attractive among all men. A great contrast to what so many artists draw for us to hang as wallpapers in our houses. According to a research I did about professions of the 1ST Century. I discovered that the three hardest professions were (1.) blacksmithing. (2.) Stone hewing and (3.) Carpentry/tree-felling. These three self-occupations demand a lot of agility, strength and muscular power, for any man to do. EVERY OF THE PERSONS THAT PRACTICED THESE TRADES, were KNOWN TO BE MUSCULAR. For instance, Carpenters in those days, fell their own trees. To fell a tree, to make planks from it, is one of the hardest parts of carpentry in the First Century; it is 7times harder than farming. This was the occupation Jesus was born into by his earthly father, Joseph. Joseph died earlier in life, and Jesus took up to the trade immediately, in order to fend for his five brothers and mother, being the first son. Jesus must have been a carpenter for at least a decade and half (15years), and there is no way, he would have been a carpenter, and wouldn’t have a CHIMPANZEE MUSCULAR MOPHORGRAPHY. So, for artists, to use their pencils and paints to conduct a structural 100% body surgery on Jesus as a fresh looking man, rather than a muscular man he was… is artistically an error of mutilation. No wonder the scribes had plotted to catch him but was never found it easy to lay siege on him. If Jesus was not muscularly represented like a man, they would have assaulted him severally during his ministry or arrested him severally before his appointed time. Even when it came to the appointed time… a historian of the First Century, Josephus, wrote, that Jesus’ arrest was matched out by ALL THE TEMPLE GUARDS. If Jesus appeared so enfeebled, or feminine as some artists paints him, I don’t think he was worth being arrested by a Temple Soldier, there wouldn’t be need of calling for guards to arrest a man of a feminine built. On the contrary, Jesus was a muscularly well-built man. Scripturally, Jesus never came to the earth in a guise (fairy-faced like the angels); rather he was guised LESS THAN THE APPEARANCE OF THE ANGELS. Jesus was never a HANDSOME MAN-- {Heb.2:9} rather, He was made like AN ORDINARY MAN… Heb. 2:17—“For this reason he had to be made like his brothers IN EVERY WAY…” Jesus was not made to look better than the men that were his followers, or better than any man during the time he was on earth. In Isaiah 52:14.. it was crystalized that Jesus’ appearance was made less handsome to that of any man, and his form was made in such a way that he won’t be desired. This is in a striking great contrast the ingenuous disillusioned work of some artists who embark on THE BEAUTIFICATION OF JESUS WITH THEIR PAINTS; conducting structural/plastic surgery with their artistry. To buttress his description about Christ, Isaiah lamented in Isaiah 53:3b..” He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.” No wonder, he was despised and rejected by men. He didn’t really appear well-fed and so fleshy as some paints Him to be. He was so dry, a product of a dry shoots. He was lean and hungered, a man of MANY SORROWS. Oh my God!.... This is the true picture of what Jesus decided to guise just because of YOU AND I. He chose to suffer, the consequences of our fallout with God. He suffered, rejection, pains, hunger, poverty, suffering even on the cross. He was the UGLIEST OF MEN… all for you and I. It was very hard to distinguish Jesus among his disciples. He doesn’t dress better than them. He doesn’t appear more handsome than them. He doesn’t have any PHYSICAL ADVANTAGE over them. Thus, it was needful for Judas to lead the arrest of Jesus; else they cannot identify Jesus among His disciples. O what a master? Ordinarily, Jesus was so marred that, among the 13 men, he shouldn’t be the Christ. However, this entire he did for you to have peace, to be glorified, to manifest and shine, to be delivered. He came, having no beauty at all, but ensured He made you beautiful. Thanks
Posted on: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 14:06:51 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015