Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in
Question 2
Isaiah 53:2 is used to push back against our impulse to make Jesus physically attractive (“no beauty that we should desire Him”), reinforced by Clement of Rome (“deficient in comparison with the ordinary form of men”) and Tertullian (“not handsome to look upon”); what do these early Christian voices assume is spiritually important about Jesus coming without “pomp,” and what modern Christian instincts does that confront?
Another way to ask: Why did early Christians think it mattered that Jesus came without good looks or showy “pomp”? What modern Christian habits does that challenge?

Direct Answer The transcript suggests Clement and Tertullian saw spiritual value in Jesus coming in “lowliness” rather than “pomp,” so that people were not drawn to Him by appearance but by who He was and what He taught. This confronts the modern instinct to picture Jesus as unusually handsome and visually impressive.

Support from Transcript:

  • Bercot quotes Isaiah 53:2: “He has no form or comeliness… there is no beauty that we should desire Him,” and says our tendency is “to want to portray Jesus as this handsome man.”
  • Clement of Rome is quoted saying Jesus “did not come in the pomp of pride or arrogance… Rather, he came in a lowly condition.”
  • Clement adds: “His form was without eminence, yes deficient in comparison with the ordinary form of men.”
  • Tertullian is quoted: “The first coming was in lowliness, when he was not handsome to look upon.”
  • Bercot summarizes: “He wasn’t strikingly handsome… People were not attracted to Him because of His looks.”
Discussion Follow-ups How much of our devotion is shaped by a “hero image” of Jesus rather than the humility and authority the Scriptures emphasize?