Throughout history jesus was a white man

Collin

Byrnzie wrote:

Would you care to explain what your gripe is?

What a joke! There is no archaeological or anatomical science with which to reconstruct Jesus because there is absolutely no historical evidence that ever existed, outside of the Bible. And the Bible isn't evidence. It was written 50 - 100 years after his supposed existence.

Are you saying there is absolutely no archaeological and anatomical evidence of people of Jesus' time?

"It isn't the face of Jesus, because we're not working with the skull of Jesus, but it is the departure point for considering what Jesus would have looked like," he added.

And if you are saying that there is no proof that Jesus ever existed (even then this imagine would still be closer to the imagine we all know, even though it would be of a fictional character), I have to ask why do you think he didn't exist? I'm not talking about Jesus the miracle man, but about the historical Jesus?

angelica

Byrnzie wrote:

So they took an Israeli face and then constructed their Jesus around what they figured a Jew looked like in that time. Anyone could have done the same. You must admit it's a bit pathetic. I'm not having a go at you. I'm having ago at these arseholes who are being paid to produce this crap.

Not that you asked, but I'll admit it! I think it's interesting how people gobble up anything that remotely resembles science--throw in a couple of "technical" words, too, and apparently it sells magazines!

And this is not to discount Collin's point, where Jesus doesn't look like that medium-brown haired pale-skinned guy we like to imagine here in North America. Or that Jesus resembled a Jewish man of olden times.

Byrnzie

Collin wrote:

What a joke! There is no archaeological or anatomical science with which to reconstruct Jesus because there is absolutely no historical evidence that ever existed, outside of the Bible. And the Bible isn't evidence. It was written 50 - 100 years after his supposed existence.

Are you saying there is absolutely no archaeological and anatomical evidence of people of Jesus' time?



And if you are saying that there is no proof that Jesus ever existed (even then this imagine would still be closer to the imagine we all know, even though it would be of a fictional character), I have to ask why do you think he didn't exist? I'm not talking about Jesus the miracle man, but about the historical Jesus?

It's one thing to produce a waxwork head resembling someone from the 1st century A.D. It's another thing to even pretend to recreate what one particular individual may have looked like based on zero evidence.
As far me not thinking that the historical Jesus didn't exist, I'm merely pointing out that there is absolutely no evidence to support the belief that he did, either archaelogical or otherwise. No written account of the time mentions his name.

Collin

Byrnzie wrote:

It's one thing to produce a waxwork head resembling someone from the 1st century A.D. It's another thing to even pretend to recreate what one particular individual may have looked like based on zero evidence.

Neave emphasizes that his re-creation is simply that of an adult man who lived in the same place and at the same time as Jesus. As might well be expected, not everyone agrees. Forensic depictions are not an exact science, cautions Alison Galloway, professor of anthropology at the University of California in Santa Cruz. The details in a face follow the soft tissue above the muscle, and it is here where forensic artists differ widely in technique. Galloway points out that some artists pay more attention to the subtle differences in such details as the distance between the bottom of the nose and the mouth. And the most recognizable features of the face--the folds of the eyes, structure of the nose and shape of the mouth--are left to the artist. "In some cases the resemblance between the reconstruction and the actual individual can be uncanny," says Galloway. "But in others there may be more resemblance with the other work of the same artist." Despite this reservation, she reaches one conclusion that is inescapable to almost everyone who has ever seen Neave's Jesus. "This is probably a lot closer to the truth than the work of many great masters."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/1282186.html?page=1

As far me not thinking that the historical Jesus didn't exist, I'm merely pointing out that there is absolutely no evidence to support the belief that he did, either archaelogical or otherwise. No written account of the time mentions his name.

I disagree but I'm not going to elaborate on it.

Abuskedti

LifeWasted21 wrote:

so the rest of you can all just go to hell.


Im kidding of course. Why is this? he has been painted, portrayed as a white man since the beginning of this crazy fairy tale.

im stilling trying to decide what i believe in but the older I get, the more i think its a big goddamn conspiracy to rule people. There I said it. Jesus would not have even been white? Am i wrong about this?

maybe i can believe in jesus as a good man and thats it.

actually that is only true among white people... you may want to research Jesus likenesses in other cultures.. you may be suprized

LifeWasted21

Abuskedti wrote:

actually that is only true among white people... you may want to research Jesus likenesses in other cultures.. you may be suprized

thats exactly my point thought. If jesus was the son of god, and he existed, then he was a real being. His color should not be maniuplated to fit anothers religious views. If he existed he existed. If he existed then he would have been of arab color, not white.

Thus, i just dont believe it.

rebornFixer

I am not sure why this is so shocking ... Of course people are going to think that their religious figures or icons look like themselves. Did the Chinese or Thais think the Buddha was black? No. Let's turn that into a racial conspiracy theory, too.

And if anything, the historical Jesus was Semitic. Caucasian, in other worlds. Pale white, no, same basic race, yes.

angelica

LifeWasted21 wrote:

thats exactly my point thought. If jesus was the son of god, and he existed, then he was a real being. His color should not be maniuplated to fit anothers religious views. If he existed he existed. If he existed then he would have been of arab color, not white.

Thus, i just dont believe it.

We have all kinds of egocentric views. For example, we call other countries what we want to call them, not what they are actually called. Because we, here, call Spain "Spain", instead of España, does not mean España doesn't exist. It instead shows how egocentric we are.

In other words, because we manipulate and imagine Jesus' image to fit our own views does not in of itself indicate he did not exist.

rebornFixer

LifeWasted21 wrote:

i dont care from what history viewpoint he's been a white man. The fact that a human being can be manipulated to form other peopels beliefs. If the story is true, he shouldnt be turned into someone else, but obviously has been to control others.

Or, alternatively, his likeness simply reflects the views of different groups of believers, like other people have already pointed out.

chopitdown

LifeWasted21 wrote:

so the rest of you can all just go to hell.


Im kidding of course. Why is this? he has been painted, portrayed as a white man since the beginning of this crazy fairy tale.

im stilling trying to decide what i believe in but the older I get, the more i think its a big goddamn conspiracy to rule people. There I said it. Jesus would not have even been white? Am i wrong about this?

maybe i can believe in jesus as a good man and thats it.

it doesn't matter what color Jesus was.

onelongsong

LifeWasted21 wrote:

so the rest of you can all just go to hell.


Im kidding of course. Why is this? he has been painted, portrayed as a white man since the beginning of this crazy fairy tale.

im stilling trying to decide what i believe in but the older I get, the more i think its a big goddamn conspiracy to rule people. There I said it. Jesus would not have even been white? Am i wrong about this?

maybe i can believe in jesus as a good man and thats it.

i don't remember how to spell it but the polish Jesus isn't white. our church depicts Jesus as more ethiopien. guess i don't remember how to spell that either. i'll try to find the spelling and maybe a link when my animals are fed.

LifeWasted21

chopitdown wrote:

it doesn't matter what color Jesus was.

It absolutely does not, i agree.

It just appears to me that it has manipulated over time. Doesnt sit right with me.

P.s this isnt just coming to me now of course.

chopitdown

LifeWasted21 wrote:

It absolutely does not, i agree.

It just appears to me that it has manipulated over time. Doesnt sit right with me.

P.s this isnt just coming to me now of course.

It has been manipulated over time; however, I dont' think that it has necessarily been manipulated for any "holier than thou" reasons in all cases. I think once we (society) focuses on what color jesus is and isn't or should or shouldn't be we're pretty much hosed and have lost sight of what he taught and what he did.

I figured this wasn't a recent epiphany for you.

RavennaSeattle1911

he looks like cat stevens who is half swedish

onelongsong

onelongsong wrote:

i don't remember how to spell it but the polish Jesus isn't white. our church depicts Jesus as more ethiopien. guess i don't remember how to spell that either. i'll try to find the spelling and maybe a link when my animals are fed.

http://www.czestochowa.us/home_us.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Madonna_of_Cz%C4%99stochowa

i'd check the wikipedia link first.

Byrnzie

Collin wrote:

I disagree but I'm not going to elaborate on it.

It's not a matter of you disagreeing. There is no evidence. End of story. If you can produce some evidence then please do.

Byrnzie

chopitdown wrote:

it doesn't matter what color Jesus was.

Really? I wonder how Americans would feel if George Washington began being portrayed throughout the world as a black man?

luxpjamer

Collin wrote:

And and it's throughout western history Jesus was a white man.

That's not true. There are a few black Marias in churches in the south of France. Even in Luxembourg city there is a chapelle with a black maria. There are a lot of theories saying that Maria were from an african country.

luxpjamer

Byrnzie wrote:

Really? I wonder how Americans would feel if George Washington began being portrayed throughout the world as a black man?

That's because everyone knows that Washington was white but who can really say which color Jesus had? The Vatican already lied in a lot of cases.

onelongsong

Byrnzie wrote:

It's not a matter of you disagreeing. There is no evidence. End of story. If you can produce some evidence then please do.

where have you been? why do you think that a man born 2012 years ago is still remembered and honored so? most of the world recognise Jesus including the hindu and buddist scriptures; and yes, muslim.
seems like a pretty big fan club for someone you say didn't exist.