Umm . . . that was actually Patrick Henry. Thomas Paine said nothing of the sort. Get your facts straight, stinkin' toerag.

LOL! oh you love that 'toerag' term dontcha?!  

Just picturing one is the ultimate picture of disgust  LOL!

"he had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him." Isa 53:2 Ummmmm . . . I'm really thinking Isaiah is speaking figuratively. You can't just assume Jesus was an ugly son-of-a-gun because of that.

Actually there is nothing there to suggest that he was ugly at all. If you think about what is written there what he was saying is that he was an ordinary, average looking man. Based on this one can assume that he was of average height and build, and was neither overly handsome or overly ugly. Just an average looking guy.

Frankly, the title of this film tells you all you really need to know. It's sole intent is to create a racial stir and perhaps widen the racial divides already present. I really hope that the film makers are terribly disappointed and the film goes totally ignored.

If you think about what is written there what he was saying is that he was an ordinary, average looking man. Based on this one can assume that he was of average height and build, and was neither overly handsome or overly ugly. Just an average looking guy

Good point M, and I would agree with your points more readily.

Frankly, the title of this film tells you all you really need to know. It's sole intent is to create a racial stir and perhaps widen the racial divides already present.

Yes, that is true. The main intent is to create a stir, unfortunately.

I really hope that the film makers are terribly disappointed and the film goes totally ignored.

They're opening the film in mostly black areas, which I think is wrong to do. It should be open enmass so all can go see it if they so wish. They happen to be falling into the stereotypical way of thinking which is wrong and un-christian. I know they mentioned, or someone else, that it's good for blacks to see Jesus looking like them, to a point, although it's not really necessary. I think it's the more radical ones who really care about this. However, I definately think it's not a good thing to be touting it the way they are. Although, maybe they were denied it being shown to other areas, neighborhoods unless they were largely African American.

Although, maybe they were denied it being shown to other areas, neighborhoods unless they were largely African American.

I doubt that. In all likelihood it's an intentional attempt to create more racial problems, which I feel the world could really do without. I'll never fully understand the thinking of people for whom race is such a huge issue.

I'll never fully understand the thinking of people for whom race is such a huge issue.

Ditto on that for me too.

Ummmmm . . . I'm really thinking Isaiah is speaking figuratively. You can't just assume Jesus was an ugly son-of-a-gun because of that. After all, he was perfect . . .

well then Paul was as well when he said this:

"But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the wrold to shame the strong. he chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things and the things that are not-to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him."

As far as being perfect, it was without sin perfect, not looks perfect. Big difference.

Or the Song of Solomon? If that's "inspired scripture", I'm a horse named Maria van Trottington.

So do I call you Maria for short?   

Don't laugh....that's your new nickname!!

So do I call you Maria for short? Don't laugh....that's your new nickname!!

Go ahead, but I still call that book absolute biblical trash. There's a reason I've got it stapled shut in one of my bibles . . .

Actually there is nothing there to suggest that he was ugly at all. If you think about what is written there what he was saying is that he was an ordinary, average looking man. Based on this one can assume that he was of average height and build, and was neither overly handsome or overly ugly. Just an average looking guy.

I don't have a problem with this. I'm just saying he wasn't all of good looks and latest style. He was just somebody we most likely wouldn't have voted for. We tend to look alot at outer appearance.

It also says in that passage he was despised and rejected which gives us a bit more info. He was either NOT good looking at all or as you said average appearance.

We tend to look alot at outer appearance.

That's a logical way our society has grown to be. However, not everyone do that.

he was despised and rejected

Wouldn't it be because of what he represented though and not what he looked like? I think they just didn't want to listen to any of his 'preaching', at least the ones who were not believers.