Biblical Ethnicities
Think about this. What ethnicity/race are most people from the Middle East? Whatever you said, it was not caucasian. Jews of Middle Eastern descent exhibit self similar physical traits, as do Arabs, Palestinians, and really, any other group classified as Middle Eastern. Who remembers that Jesus himself was a Middle Eastern Jew? And died a Jew? He did die a Jew, you know. He did not convert to Christianity. It didn't exist. And what do Middle Eastern Jews look like? Nothing like this photo. So, I would argue that this picture of Jesus is a fallacy, as are all caucasian depictions of the man. An outright lie, propagated on a vast European caucasian majority to ease the spread of Christianity through a pagan Europe. Through very simple reasoning processes, one can reasonably conclude that Jesus was, more than likely, close in appearance to the modern day Arab. Shocking, but even in the Bible, it says that his hair was akin to sheep's wool. What caucasian man has naturally (sorry) nappy hair? Here is another interesting disparity. Moses, depicted as a wisened old man with a flowing gray beard in most Christian lore, married an Ethiopian woman. It is laughable that his Jewish children with any of his wives were caucasian. This manipulation of Biblical history relies on the masses to turn a blind eye to these inconsistencies, but with the importance of ethnicity/race becoming more and more evident (despite our misguided efforts at bridging the gaps) these facts are hard to ignore. Ignorance is bliss for most Sunday church goers, but this is indeed disturbing news for those who live and breathe the church. What lies come next? And what's more, these were lies told simply for convenience, to pacify the ignorant, and to goad them into accepting Jesus Christ, the Lord and Savior. I ask, what else is a lie? What situational truth is there in the Bible? How do we separate this truth from fiction? I will not be taken by a religion that seeks to hide its own origins. Christianity must come to terms with this, and admit the possibility, or more accurately, the probability, that Jesus was either Middle Eastern or African. It would not diminish the teachings of the church, and in my eyes, and the eyes of all intellectuals, it may actually increase the overall credibility of Christianity. I'm agnostic, not apathetic.-The Captain
Rating:4.86
Comments
-
1
religon is the main problem with the world
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
2
I doubt that's a photo, unless they had cameras 2000 years ago.
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
3
I agree thats not a photo of Jesus. :)
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
4
nobody asked YOU
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
5
to comment#1, overpopulation is the MAIN problem in our world.
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
6
No, overpopulation isn't. Fucking environmentalists.
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
7
Hey, white people aren't going to worship someone who doesn't look at least mostly white....
Come on, are you serious?
white churches would be empty if they put A-rab or black jesuses all over the walls.
LOL
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
8
You asked what else did the bible lie about. For a answer go grab a bible, and flip to a random page, now read.
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
9
I didn't ask what the Bible lied about. Situational truth is very different from ethical or moral truth. I did ask what organized religion lied about, more specifically, early Catholicism. The Bible is their source of truth. Whether the Bible is true or not is not the subject of this article.
-The Captain
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
10
^ shut the fuck up. That is all.
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
11
Touchy, touchy... Christians get awfully mad when you question their authority.
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
12
I wish people would bring this up more often. It's not just sappy portraits of Jesus - it's children's cartoons, movie depictions (thanks, Mel Gibson), and bible "illustrations" that consistently portray Jesus as really, really white. Why not tell the truth and show him as what he probably was - a dark guy? Probably a short guy, too - nutrition wasn't great back then. Probably a dirty, greasy-haired guy, too. Hygeine wasn't at its best back then, either. (I'm not even going to touch on the subject of whether he performed miracles or not - like the OP said, that's not within the scope of this post.)
So, yeah, you're right. I don't know why religious people tend to bristle if you mention that Jesus wasn't a tall, blue-eyed, light-skinned guy - you'd think they'd applaud you for sticking to biblical literalism!
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
13
I know Jesus. Jesus is a friend of mine. You are no Jesus, that's for sure. Jesus will materialize a can of soda if i want him to. He's all about my needs and not yours.
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
14
what does the color of his skin or his enthicity have to do with what is reported concerning him by eye witnesses, friends, converts and the like? Did Jesus and his followers not themselves speak of a salvation for all peoples? So what if physical depictions of him were grossly in error due to people's ethonocentricity, which was worldwide then as it is much like today. Does anyone actually read the literature, both early sources and original sources, outside of the many interpretations, before judgeing what is being said or is this enlightened community above toleration of some of the most influential documents of world history?
Posted 7 months ago | Report
-
15
Nope, and that is the problem, because in those documents you would find more than you ever wanted to know about all of Christianity.
Posted 7 months ago | Report
1
religon is the main problem with the worldPosted 7 months ago | Report
2
I doubt that's a photo, unless they had cameras 2000 years ago.Posted 7 months ago | Report
3
I agree thats not a photo of Jesus. :)Posted 7 months ago | Report
4
nobody asked YOUPosted 7 months ago | Report
5
to comment#1, overpopulation is the MAIN problem in our world.Posted 7 months ago | Report
6
No, overpopulation isn't. Fucking environmentalists.Posted 7 months ago | Report
7
Hey, white people aren't going to worship someone who doesn't look at least mostly white....Come on, are you serious?
white churches would be empty if they put A-rab or black jesuses all over the walls.
LOL
Posted 7 months ago | Report
8
You asked what else did the bible lie about. For a answer go grab a bible, and flip to a random page, now read.Posted 7 months ago | Report
9
I didn't ask what the Bible lied about. Situational truth is very different from ethical or moral truth. I did ask what organized religion lied about, more specifically, early Catholicism. The Bible is their source of truth. Whether the Bible is true or not is not the subject of this article. -The Captain
Posted 7 months ago | Report
10
^ shut the fuck up. That is all.Posted 7 months ago | Report
11
Touchy, touchy... Christians get awfully mad when you question their authority.Posted 7 months ago | Report
12
I wish people would bring this up more often. It's not just sappy portraits of Jesus - it's children's cartoons, movie depictions (thanks, Mel Gibson), and bible "illustrations" that consistently portray Jesus as really, really white. Why not tell the truth and show him as what he probably was - a dark guy? Probably a short guy, too - nutrition wasn't great back then. Probably a dirty, greasy-haired guy, too. Hygeine wasn't at its best back then, either. (I'm not even going to touch on the subject of whether he performed miracles or not - like the OP said, that's not within the scope of this post.)So, yeah, you're right. I don't know why religious people tend to bristle if you mention that Jesus wasn't a tall, blue-eyed, light-skinned guy - you'd think they'd applaud you for sticking to biblical literalism!
Posted 7 months ago | Report
13
I know Jesus. Jesus is a friend of mine. You are no Jesus, that's for sure. Jesus will materialize a can of soda if i want him to. He's all about my needs and not yours.Posted 7 months ago | Report
14
what does the color of his skin or his enthicity have to do with what is reported concerning him by eye witnesses, friends, converts and the like? Did Jesus and his followers not themselves speak of a salvation for all peoples? So what if physical depictions of him were grossly in error due to people's ethonocentricity, which was worldwide then as it is much like today. Does anyone actually read the literature, both early sources and original sources, outside of the many interpretations, before judgeing what is being said or is this enlightened community above toleration of some of the most influential documents of world history?Posted 7 months ago | Report
15
Nope, and that is the problem, because in those documents you would find more than you ever wanted to know about all of Christianity.Posted 7 months ago | Report
