xjwsforChrist

JUSTMOM SAID

Hello Paul
I see your reasoning here but truly the outward appearance is of NO concern to God (Jah)

1 Samuel 16:7 "But Jah said to Samuel with regards Elijab...Do not look at his appearance and at the height of his stature, for I have rejected him. For NOT the way man sees is the way God sees, because mere man sees what appears to the EYES, but as for Jah he sees what the heart is."

1John 2:16, "Everything in the world...the desire of the flesh and the desire of the EYES and the showy display of ones means of life, does not originate with the Father, but originates with the world."

What we see with our physical eyes and desire, can become a distraction because the flesh is so weak. It is the spirit that we are to beautify.

justathought
love justmom

AGUEST SAID




Actually, there are two accounts in the Gospels that comment on our Lord's appearance, my dear brother (the greatest of love and peace to you!). The first, is our Lord's words to his opposers regarding his own (very poor) health, which THEY could only know of based on evidence/a manifestation of his condition... via his appearance:

"He said to them, "You will surely say this proverb to Me, 'Physician, heal yourself! Whatever we have heard done in Capernaum, do also here in Your country.' " Luke 4:23

The confusion comes in with that last part ("Whatever we have heard done in Capernaum," etc.) which is not part of the original discussion, but was something also stated at another time and said to have been in reference to the first statement. The TRUTH, though, is that he was speaking of his own condition. The REASON he said they "would say, 'Physician, heal yourself," is because although he had been going around healing the sick, lame, blind, etc., he himself appeared sicker than them ALL! Because IN healing the others, he TOOK their "sins" (those of their flesh) into his OWN body! Thus, he was leprous, lame, almost blind, bleeding, oozing, stinking, etc.

Which is why the second account is important:

"Now when He said to them, 'I am [He],' they drew back and fell to the ground." John 18:5

They drew back SO abruptly that they fell down, dear one... BECAUSE of his appearance (THIS is the man everyone's talking about?!)! By the time they came to arrest him, his outward appearance was horrific, by Jewish Law standards. There was NO mistaking that he was "unclean"... in the flesh! How, then, could THIS man be a king of the Jews?! He wasn't even capable of carrying the "utensils" of JAH, let alone leading them as their king! Isaiah 52:11

And yet... this WAS the king that God had chosen for them. They entirely missed... and so many still do today (as evidenced by the "beautification" of his flesh in various depictions)... that it is not the OUTWARD appearance that amounts to anything for JAH... but what's IN a man.

And although his outer garment/robe, the vessel of flesh with ITS blood (which he received from Mary, which is why he had to COME through a woman of flesh - Romans 8:3) was "soiled" and now FULL of "sin" (that of those whose sins he TOOK into his body when he healed THEM - Isaiah 53:3, 4; Zechariah 3:3-5; Luke 8:44-46), the "man" our Lord was on the INSIDE was absolutely undefiled and without blemish, guile, or corruption. Hebrews 7:26; Isaiah 53:9; 1 Peter 2:22

None of this should be hard to understand, though, in light of our Lord's own words as TO the flesh:


"The spirit produces life; the flesh counts for nothing." John 6:63 (I would exhort you to research the Greek rendering of this verse and not rely on any particular Bible translation)

We, though, earthling man... because we are FLESHLY... keep our minds on the things of flesh (which is bound to the earth/physical realm). And so physical beauty is a thing of importance... to US. It is NOT important, though, to the Most Holy One of Israel:

"JAHVEH said to Samuel, "Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For JAHVEH sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart." 1 Samuel 6:7

We, humans, keep walking by sight... basing our faith on what we can see... with our eyes. This is not the way of God and Christ, though, because looks... CAN be deceiving. Think of the appearance of our Lord, the "Copper Seraph"... and, in contrast, that of our Adversary, BeliJah-el. HUGE difference in outward appearance there. Ever huger difference on what is INSIDE these two.

I hope this helps, my dear brother, and again, peace to you!

Your servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

SA

ANTHONY SAID

For the sake of completeness I would offer one more physical description of Jesus from Luke 19:3

And he sought to see who Jesus was, but could not because of the crowd, for he was of short stature.
_________________
Author of 'Happiness: How to Find It'
www.anthonymathenia.com

PSACRAMENTO SAID



True, but in a culture that equate physical deformalities with being cursed, his critics would have pointed that out.

PSACRAMENTO SAID



That doesn't refer to Christ, but to Zaccheus.

YPPUPLLEH SAID




I think that verse pertained to Zacchaeus and not Jesus

Either Zacchaeus was short or his position in the social scale was low.
_________________
Love is a warm rubber puppy...

BURNTHESHIPS SAID


Dragon like creatures may have been woven into the tapestries in the Tabernacle/Temple.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... ersion=NIV


The Hebrew term cherubim is cognate with the Assyrian term karabu, Akkadian term kuribu, and Babylonian term karabu; the Assyrian term means 'great, mighty', but the Akkadian and Babylonian cognates mean 'propitious, blessed'

The Lammasu was originally depicted as having a king's head, a lion's body, and an eagle's wings, but because of the artistic beauty of the wings, these rapidly became the most prominent part in imagery;[2] wings later came to be bestowed on men, thus forming the stereotypical image of an angel.[5] The griffin — a similar creature but with an eagle's head rather than that of a king — has also been proposed as an origin, arising in Israelite culture as a result of Hittite usage of griffins (rather than being depicted as aggressive beasts, Hittite depictions show them seated calmly, as if guarding),[5] and some have proposed that griffin may be cognate to cherubim,[6] but Lammasu were significantly more important in Levantine culture, and thus more likely to be the origin.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherub

AGUEST SAID

I agree with the others that Luke's account was referring to Zaccheus, dear Ant (peace to you!), but that does not negate that our Lord WAS small in stature. We have a couple things to help us "discern" that:

1. He was able to hide in and slip away through the crowds, which a tall man could not do (folks would have noticed such a man trying to hunker down and wonder what/who he was hiding from. They would have given him up).

2. He rode into Jerusalem on the COLT of an ass. Most likely, the ass was of Miniature Mediterranean, Catalan, Mallorcan, or zamorano-llionés donkey stock, all of which are TINY animals to begin with. A colt, therefore, would be quite small, even at a year old. A tall man would have injured such an animal - indeed, the people would have ridiculed the sight (a man with his legs virtually dragging the ground?) versus lauding him with palm branches!

3. He would have received his flesh from Mary, a Palestinian/Jewish woman. Jewish women are notoriously small, even today. Certainly back then. But Palestinians are, too! I remember seeing a photo of Yasser Arafat with Bill Clinton and all I could think of what, "Man, the people of Palenstine, though perhaps mighty, are TINY!"

4. Depending on the Bible version you read, he "had no STATELY" form. The Jews REVERRED large, tall people, because girth and height was such an anomaly among them and so thought to be a blessing from God. Although quite a big man, Goliath wasn't all the "giant" as the account makes him out to be. No much more than, say, a modern-day NBA'er.

But here comes this small (tiny even) "nobody"... from "nowhere"... and he's to be our king??? The Jews weren't having that, not after having experienced men such as Saul and David as their king! And he was speaking about PEACE... and NOT going up against their enemies, the Romans?? Nope, can't be "our" king!



We shouldn't assume they didn't, dear PSacto (again, peace to you!). Rather, we should assume that those who initially wrote about our Lord left that out... so as not to stumble those who were still walking by sight at the time the gospel accounts were written. Or those who later copied what was written... in order to not look like "fools" before those they were trying to convince.

We should also understand that he didn't start OUT that way - indeed, his flesh was quite "clean", starting OUT. It was only once he started taking others' "sins" INTO his flesh that his became "afflicted." And given the kinds of "sins" he took, that he WAS considered "plagued, stricken by God, afflicted." Isaiah 53:3, 4

I mean, how are you going to convince pious Jews... who are still bound, in mind and heart, to the Law... that their "king" was a man whose body was fully of condemned diseases and conditions? Most would think you were not only out of your mind... but perhaps even blasphemous! They would have stumbled all OVER that "Stumbling Block"! "What, OUR Lord and king... a LEPER?!! No WAY! That would be against the LAW... and so God would NEVER give us such a king! Why, a priest couldn't even get near enough to ANOINT such a man! Please, get away with that crazy talk!"

But that's why we have to walk by faith... and not sight: because what is pleasing to OUR eyes... is not necessarily what's please to the Most Holy One of Israel, JAH of Armies. Quite to the contrary, actually. He looks at what's on the INSIDE - whether we are "clean" THERE.

Because, as our Lord stated, some, who look all that on the OUTSIDE, are actually like "white-washed graves" and so "FULL... dead-men's bones!"

I hope this helps and, again, peace to you all!

Your servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

JUSTMOM SAID

Dear PaulS

This is true. Especially our culture is so caught up in the outward.

There are others that are not so concerned with hair face nails skin dirt etc acceptance is usually better.

Maybe....there are other writings that are not in the bible canon that describe his appearance more/I am not sure of this or.....
maybe

this is exactly what the adversary wants us to think. Mankind are all waiting for a beautiful mostly white Jesus to return.....And when they don't see this/won't they want to turn away/reject him and not even entertain his "voice"

Just athought

justmom

AGUEST SAID

Interesting, dear BTS (peace to you!), particularly this:




Unfortunately, our perceptions can be warped by the depictions of these things, because they are often based on others' perceptions, even artistically so (we assume that every painting/hieroglyph, etc., was for posterity purposes, and not just some ancient guy/girl... child... being "artistic" - LOL! Sure, there were consequences way back then for deviating but (1) what artist doesn't deviate, or at least create from his/her own POV, sooner or later... (2) a LOT of things were commissioned, by kings, etc., and so done from THEIR pov, and (3) they were often depictions of something only HEARD about/related from yet another 3rd, 4th, or even further party).

But thanks for that. Oh, and yes, the cherubim depicted all throughout the tabernacle/temple... were "dragons". Just not the kind we often see depicted on, say, Chinese tapestries - LOL!

Peace!
_________________
Paz a todos!

Su sirviente, compañera de estudios, y un esclava de Cristo,

SA

ANTHONY SAID

Well I disagree about the zaccheus thing. :-p Perhaps we can all agree that he didn't have perfectly coifed and moussed hair like the Watchtower paintings?

So I agree that Isaiah sees flying serpents around the throne of God. But in Ezekiel's vision (as well as John's) the cherubim (living creatures) have a totally different form: that of man, bull, eagle, lion. My understanding is that each of these forms represents the 'king' for lack of a better word of the kinds of living things. Wild Beast - Lion Domestic Animal - Bull Birds - Eagle Man - Well Man. Fish are not considered 'living things' in the Jewish perspective along with bugs and other creepy crawling things. The reason they are full of eyes -- is that they serve as a window or surveillance camera to the living world.

Another thing is that in the ancient world -- cherubim came in pairs. If you look at the Babylonian architecture they'll have the lion with human head stationed in pairs beside entrances.
_________________
Author of 'Happiness: How to Find It'
www.anthonymathenia.com

AGUEST SAID




And now, I have to agree with YOU, dear Ant (peace to you!). Because just as I began to respond to your "twin" cherubs comment... my Lord showed me the event we're discussing! And you are right: Zaccheus, who was not all that tall, okay, climbed into the tree NOT because he couldn't see OVER the crowd, but so as to be able to LOOK DOWN SEE OUR LORD AS HE PASSED BY IN THE CROWD! And it was how our Lord saw HIM - he was above the crowd, so our Lord simply looked up as he was passing by!

Once again, reason to not trust our eyes - LOL! We can read something with out eyes... and THINK it's saying one thing, when in fact it's saying something entirely different! But can allow us to put aside our... sight... and actually "SEE"... as I was granted here!

Oh... my... gosh!! THANK you for that! And praise JAH for His Son using you as the impetus to help correct my "vision", here (once again - LOL!). I realize not everyone may be ready to change their "view"... on this and other matters, and that's okay - in our Lord's time, yes? But I hear you and get this one!

Again, THANK you... and peace to you!
_________________
Paz a todos!

Su sirviente, compañera de estudios, y un esclava de Cristo,

SA

FINALCALL SAID

Hello Everyone

I feel I may be a little late. But, I would like to share that I too have seen the Master. When I first came out of the Jw religion and was use to using the name Jesus Christ He began to appear to me. I would see his appearance as the Jesus I could relate to in JW literature. Still, I was not fully aware of whom I was talking to. Eventuall, just as his apostles came to know ( after his death and then materializing for them) I also came to know whom it was I was talking to. Shortly after he began to show me his true appearance.
As his face began to change right in front of me from the man's face I was use to seeing to this new appearance, I began to feel a little frightened. Jaheshua's face was about 18" from my face. We were face to face. As his facial appearance became more and more grotesque (compared to what I was used to seeing) I began to speak the words my heart was feeling and slowly said "Wow, you are one ugly dude".
At that statement the revealing of himself stopped and I felt my spirit returning to my flesh and blood body that was asleep in my bed.
Some of you may believe my story and some of you may not. I tell it for two reasons
1. As a second witness to AGuest account
2. So that those who do believe and are given this priviledge, hopefully will be able to respond better than I did.
For He is loving and He is kind and I feel sad that I spoke those words to him.

Your brother in Christ

AGUEST SAID




This is my understanding as well, dear one (again, peace to you!), as well as that the Most Holy One of Israel has a "covenant" with all of these: wild beast, domestic beast, flying beast, and man. But not because fish/bugs aren't considered "living" things (to the contrary, every thing that breathes is a living thing, even plants! - Psalm 148:7, 10; 150:6) but because no covenant with them was necessary. Genesis 9:12-17



Because they don't breath air (and so some ancients did not consider them a "breathers" or "living"); however, discounting them as "living things" is a mistake. Psalm 104:25; 148:7; Jonah 1:17



Creeping things are especially undesirable, because the Adversary is considered a "creeping" thing. Unlike all other spirits, he is the ONLY one that was not permitted to STAND... when going before the Most Holy One of Israel in the Assembly. Genesis 3:14b; Job 1:6; 2:1; Daniel 7:10; Hebrews 12:22, 23; Revelation 7:9

But... they, too, are still considered living things to JAH. Genesis 1:24; 7:23; 8:17; Psalm 148:10



It's also why the word "dragon" is appropriate, dear one:



Another thing is that in the ancient world -- cherubim came in pairs.

Yep!

Good stuff, truly... and THANK YOU, again!

Peace!

AGUEST SAID

Thank you, truly, dear FC (the greatest of love and peace to you, my dear brother!). I know you to be a man of few words along these lines so, while long time in coming, yes, it's not too late, not at all. And I am truly grateful! Again... thank you!

Your servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

SA