Bible's mention of physical beauty- why?

by Magnum 52 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Magnum

  transhuman68 - The OP actually shows the difference between the OT & the NT- the Jewish writers included beautiful women and lots of sex, whereas the Christian writers thought 'spiritual qualities' were beautiful, and sex was verboten

  I agree with you about the change in attitude from the OT to the NT about beauty and sex. Consider also war, weapons, and fighting. The OT has a lot of material about wars. It describes fights, tactics, etc. It describes weapons. It describes the exploits of mighty men such as those belonging to David (see book of 2Sa). However, the NT concerns itself with spiritual weapons and spiritual fights.
• 

  Magnum

  DJS - I have seen documentaries on the study of physical beauty. They included material about what you wrote concerning symmetry and measurements. There does seem to be some validity to the notion of the existence of a "formula for beauty".

  It would have been far more odd if no references to physical beauty were found in the bible

  What do you think about the NT? Why no references to beauty in it? Why the seemingly abrupt change from the OT to the NT?
• 

  Xanthippe

  Homer is full of beautiful women and strong men. Paris and Helen. Achilles and Hector. Odysseus. Even the godesses are beautiful. White-armed Hera and Hera of the flashing eyes. Who wants to read about ugly people?

  Mythology is all about super heroes.

  There is a school of thought that the NT is influenced by Paul's classical education. They say Plato saw physical reality as just a shadow of the spiritual but I am not so sure. Plato's Academy included a gymnasium for athletes to train, usually naked. Plato valued physical fitness and does not seem to me to be sexually repressed. Some scholars think he was gay. Where the sexual repression in the NT and the lack of description of physical beauty comes from is quite a puzzle. Certainly much of it does seem to be from Paul.
• 

  DJS

  Magnum,

  My opinion would be similar to others already stated: The NT reflected the times and the culture, which if we are to believe the time period of the writers, was compressed to a generation or so. But it's just an opinion.

  The first time I read that beauty = symmetry I thought, that's crazy. But it is true. Symmetry also reveals strength, fertility, etc., whether it is a tree or a person. The more symmetrical, according to the experts, the better the DNA is for passing along to offspring and hence the more attractive that person is to one looking for a mate (whether they know it or not).

  Those who study such things know it much better than I. But think about a beautiful tree. Almost always it is because of its symmetry, that which gives it strength from winds, rains, etc. also makes it beautiful to look at. If lightning or some other issue causes the tree to lose most/all of its branches on one side, it loses a lot of its beauty to our eyes. Nature requires symmetry for survival in many ways.

  Sociologists and the like theorize that humans somewhat broke the cycle when our brains developed more fully. Rather than the biggest, baddest (and likely most symmetrical) male getting all the stuff and the girls, other guys used their brains to find ways to bring girls food and stuff so that they could mate with them.

  It's the same today. We call it dating.
• 

  Magnum

  Xanthippe - interesting. I see why you're not sure about Plato.

  It seems that the historical setting of the NT is one in which physical beauty was still admired... by the Greeks and Romans. Maybe the shift from physicality to spirituality was due to Paul's influence as you indicated.
• 

  designs

  Paul was not comfortable in his own skin and he didn't want you to be either.
• 

  Magnum

  DJS: The first time I read that beauty = symmetry I thought, that's crazy. But it is true. Symmetry also reveals strength, fertility, etc., whether it is a tree or a person. The more symmetrical, according to the experts, the better the DNA is for passing along to offspring and hence the more attractive that person is to one looking for a mate (whether they know it or not).

  Those who study such things know it much better than I. But think about a beautiful tree. Almost always it is because of its symmetry, that which gives it strength from winds, rains, etc. also makes it beautiful to look at. If lightning or some other issue causes the tree to lose most/all of its branches on one side, it loses a lot of its beauty to our eyes. Nature requires symmetry for survival in many ways.

  I agree. I think lack of symmetry can be a sign of genetic inferiority.

  Sociologists and the like theorize that humans somewhat broke the cycle when our brains developed more fully. Rather than the biggest, baddest (and likely most symmetrical) male getting all the stuff and the girls, other guys used their brains to find ways to bring girls food and stuff so that they could mate with them.

  In harmony with that, just judging from personal observation, I believe that inferiority in humans as indicated by lack of symmetry is in areas of physical prowess - areas that would have been perhaps more desirable in man's earlier history. I think that in man's later history, "brain" traits became progressively more important, and I haven't seen evidence that lack of symmetry is indicative of mental inferiority.
• 

  Magnum

  Designs - in response to your first post, I kind of picture the women of the OT who were described as being beautiful looking like "hairy bohemian women".
• 

  DJS

  Magnum, Ditto. The Nerds are taking over in the 21st Century; evolution rocks!!!

  "In harmony with that, just judging from personal observation, I believe that inferiority in humans as indicated by lack of symmetry is in areas of physical prowess - areas that would have been perhaps more desirable in man's earlier history. I think that in man's later history, "brain" traits became progressively more important, and I haven't seen evidence that lack of symmetry is indicative of mental inferiority."

  Another area of interest concerning beauty and symmetry, the one thing, according to those who study such, that causes males to choose a female, over other traits, is waist to hip ratio (symmetry), not facial symmetry. We males probably don't even realize it, but there is a fomula/ratio that drives us crazy. Not surprising, it is also the ratio which has the highest fertility rate and other features that would enable a female to be a good mate (birthing babies). Almost every culture considers that beautiful as well. Sir Mix-a-Lot wasn't just talking about backsides, as a little known lyric in "Baby Got Back" talks about the itty bitty waist. Without that, you just got a lot of junk in the trunk.

  I do not like big butts and I cannot lie, but if she has the right waist to hip ratio - and I've had enough to drink - me and the Mix are brothers.
• 

  Xanthippe

  Magnum, the NT is about a group of people who believed in one of the Jewish Messiahs, the one that was crucified by the Romans. Perhaps they all were, we don't know do we. So after the fact they had to explain why their leader died. Enter the Ransom Sacrifice doctrine. He was meant to die, he did not fail.

  Aligned with that goes the idea that we are all sinful, missing the mark. Falling short of the glory of god. No more super heroes. No more Davids, Samsons, Solomons. Just weak people who need a saviour. I prefer pagan religions to this sad story of the fall I must say.