I don't believe Isaiah 53 describes a physically unattractive man so much as it describes a man who is beaten and scourged, bloodied, and hung upon an old rugged cross.
This passage in no way describes the Christ who rode into Jerusalem on an ass just days before.
"...he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted."
I do not suggest that He was an Adonis among men, but neither do I accept that He was flat-out ugly. Having said that, it's not a point I intend to argue, as it would be pointless in terms of Grace; we are not saved from the judgment of our sin by His good looks, but by His good work-- namely, His death, burial, and resurrection.
However, I will say this: Revelation describes Him as a strikingly different figure, though not as descriptively as Isaiah. And I have to ask, can anyone imagine our savior not being magnificently beautiful? Or at least easy on the eyes? But I would not be disappointed either way, for what He has done for me.
There is beauty and there is beauty. Miss X at my church was a small, roundish, elderly lady with sometimes bad breath and body odor, who sometimes was less than clean, who spoke and sang with a horse whisper who was, God love her, a strikingly beautiful woman of God.
Mother Teresa, with her wrinkles, blemishes and age, was amazingly beautiful.
I could go on but I'm sure you agree.
I have no opinion as to what Jesus looked like (other than he wasn't some blond aryan looking fella), I was just pointing to the verse that Mark asked about.
He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
~Isaiah 53
(I believe that's the passage that people usually point to when they talk about an unattractive Jesus.)
This passage in no way describes the Christ who rode into Jerusalem on an ass just days before.
"...he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted."
I do not suggest that He was an Adonis among men, but neither do I accept that He was flat-out ugly. Having said that, it's not a point I intend to argue, as it would be pointless in terms of Grace; we are not saved from the judgment of our sin by His good looks, but by His good work-- namely, His death, burial, and resurrection.
However, I will say this: Revelation describes Him as a strikingly different figure, though not as descriptively as Isaiah. And I have to ask, can anyone imagine our savior not being magnificently beautiful? Or at least easy on the eyes? But I would not be disappointed either way, for what He has done for me.
Mother Teresa, with her wrinkles, blemishes and age, was amazingly beautiful.
I could go on but I'm sure you agree.
I have no opinion as to what Jesus looked like (other than he wasn't some blond aryan looking fella), I was just pointing to the verse that Mark asked about.