Jesus was black

[InsaneApache]

Interesting article from the BBC.


Jesus has been named the top black icon by the New Nation newspaper. Their assertion that Jesus was black has raised eyebrows in some quarters - so what colour was he?

https://img206.imageshack.us/img206/411/40460295jesus203gn8.th.jpg (https://img206.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40460295jesus203gn8.jpg)

JC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3958241.stm?ls)

Seems to me that he must have been at least olive skinned if not darker. As the article says believers show him in their own image, which seems about right as far as human nature is concerned. If it could be proven that JC was a man of colour, where would this leave the racists and bigots?

[doc_bean]

If it could be proven that JC was a man of colour, where would this leave the racists and bigots?

Mohammed was white, they could all convert to Islam. :laugh4:

[Samurai Waki]

My guess is that Jesus was probably darker skinned, not quite black, but probably middle eastern. I think it makes sense to have that assumption as I think Blacks were probably not prevalent in Judea at the time, and the only whites were Greeks (probably Traders at most) and the Roman Occupiers.
When Jesus was in Africa and apparently he was not found odd does not denote the fact that he would've been black, as Jesus was in Northern Africa and the culture there is also Olive-Skinned. If he traveled as far south as Ethiopia and was not found odd, also does not mean he would've been black as Berber Traders (also olive skinned for the most part) were not uncommon either.
But as far as I know, Jesus was Chinese and spoke with an Irish accent.

[Keba]

That theory already made quite a stir ... with some rather closed minds objecting quite vehemently to that idea.

Of course, it is likely that Jesus looked like pretty much everyone there at the time, and since he was a local, it is only likely that he looked like a local.

Although I do think that the other face is less likeable. Not that I care or anything. :sweatdrop:

[Bar Kochba]

im jewish and i think he would have probably looked like most of the jews those days and that was semetic

i dont believe in him but to people who do what the hell does the colour matter it was the message thats important right?

[Incongruous]

From a religous pint of view it matters not whether Jesus was black/white or orange (ahem bbc gameshow host of the ancient near east, ahem)

But from an historical point of view I think it does, the fact that Jews are not black I think is a clear hinderance to the claim.

I mean how many people here would give a second thought the belief that Cleopatra was black?

[Bar Kochba]

also another point dont want to offend people on this fourm but i dont think in that time white or semetic people would have followed a black person they were seen as slaves back then

[AmbrosiusAurelianus]

i dont believe in him but to people who do what the hell does the colour matter it was the message thats important right?

It matters if someone's ethnicity is altered by people with an agenda.

[Tribesman]

also another point dont want to offend people on this fourm but i dont think in that time white or semetic people would have followed a black person they were seen as slaves back then

Really ? On what basis do you think that .
Surely back then you would have had the romans and all of their "white" slaves from Northern Europe .
Going by your logic then Jesus must have been black , the hebrews were after all descendants of slaves .

[Bar Kochba]

ok i know youve got a problem with me but in the middle east at the time there were lots of black slaves and they werent usally seen as leaders especailly among the common people.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

There were also plenty of black Romans at the time, hence the cognomon "Niger."

Jesus would have been Semetic, we know he was Semetic because he was a Jew decended from the line of David. Regardless of his religious status he was historically a fairly aristratic Isrealite of the tribe of Judah and a man with a claim to the Jewish throne. Which would be why the appellation "King of the Jews" was nailed over his head when he was crucified.

As to Cleopatra, well she was almost certainly the same colour as modern Egyptians, i.e. olive.

This is all rather like saying Septimus Severus was Black, or that Hannibal was Black, it doesn't wash.

[L'Impresario]

As to Cleopatra, well she was almost certainly the same colour as modern Egyptians, i.e. olive.

I don't think the Ptolemaic dynasty would have a very similar appearance to modern Egyptians...

[Bar Kochba]

wouldnt they be mostly of greek looking?

[CBR]

I don't think the Ptolemaic dynasty would have a very similar appearance to modern Egyptians...
Yes how does inbred Greeks look like heh


CBR

[Byzantine Prince]

CBR, Cleopatra was one fine piece of ass.

Jesus was a Jew with semitic ancestry. It's quite possible that he even had blue eyes, considering the greek influence on the region for hundreds of years.
What constitutes black anyways? If I get a deep tan, I'm black too?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

African, in fact the term "Black" is as idiotic as the term "White."

People really shouldn't be so sloppy.

[Tribesman]

ok i know youve got a problem with me but in the middle east at the time there were lots of black slaves and they werent usally seen as leaders especailly among the common people.

The problem is with the content of your post .
Can you find anything from scripture or history to back up your claim ?
I doubt that you can .

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Neither the scriptures nor the few early historical references give us a precise image of Jesus {Yeshua}. I have always thought that he must have been largely similar to the primarily semitic people among whom he lived and preached, or someone probably would have noted the discrepancy.

Roman-era slavery was, as near as we can tell, fairly color-blind in its application: oppose Rome, become a pirate, run into irretrievable debt and you were very likely to be a slave.

[The Spartan (Returns)]

yes, not black, but a bit darker than caucasian.

[Duke Malcolm]

How dark a caucasian person?

[Tribesman]

How dark a caucasian person?
Well since caucasian covers a bloody big area it could be any shade whatsoever , though perhaps not orange as they didn't have sun beds back then .
Now what would be funny is if Mary had some ancestry from when her forbears wear Egyptian slaves and they had been mated with Numidian slaves and become a little bit off colour , then later when they were babylonian slaves had mated with Indian slaves and been a little more off colour .
Though of course once Gods genes had been brought into it then Jesus would have to be pure white due to the superiority of Gods genetic make up and everyone knows God is white:2thumbsup:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I don't see color

[InsaneApache]

Well since caucasian covers a bloody big area it could be any shade whatsoever , though perhaps not orange as they didn't have sun beds back then

Well that's posh spice, Des (for desperate)O'Conner, Robert Kilroy Silk and David 'cheap as chips' Dickenson out of the frame then....:laugh4:

[Kralizec]

Jesus was obviously black. He called everybody his brother and he couldn't get a fair trial :dizzy2:

[The Stranger]

also another point dont want to offend people on this fourm but i dont think in that time white or semetic people would have followed a black person they were seen as slaves back then

black people werent seen as just slaves back then. everyone was a potentional slave. The Mammelukes were slaves and later the rulers of Egypt...

Jezus went to india i thought and there he got the LOVE part of his learning. He was a jew, prolly one of the stricter ones.

Good one Kralizec :P

[Geezer57]

If I remember the old anthropology courses from back in the day (1960's) correctly, the term caucasian could be very broadly applied, and apparently was based more on skull structure than on any external feature.

From Dictionary.com:
Cau‧ca‧sian  /kɔˈkeɪʒən, -ʃən, -ˈkæʒən, -ˈkæʃ-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kaw-key-zhuhn, -shuhn, -kazh-uhn, -kash-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective Also, Cau‧cas‧ic /kɔˈkæsɪk, -ˈkæz-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kaw-kas-ik, -kaz-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation.
1. Anthropology. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of one of the traditional racial divisions of humankind, marked by fair to dark skin, straight to tightly curled hair, and light to very dark eyes, and originally inhabiting Europe, parts of North Africa, western Asia, and India: no longer in technical use.
<STUFF DELETED>

At any rate, it appears caucasians can be or any skin color from fair to dark, any hair from straight to tightly curled, and eye color from light to very dark. Since it's no longer in technical use, I'm sure the academics have come up with a more politically-correct system.

[Patriarch of Constantinople]

There were also plenty of black Romans at the time, hence the cognomon "Niger."

Jesus would have been Semetic, we know he was Semetic because he was a Jew decended from the line of David. Regardless of his religious status he was historically a fairly aristratic Isrealite of the tribe of Judah and a man with a claim to the Jewish throne. Which would be why the appellation "King of the Jews" was nailed over his head when he was crucified.

As to Cleopatra, well she was almost certainly the same colour as modern Egyptians, i.e. olive.

This is all rather like saying Septimus Severus was Black, or that Hannibal was Black, it doesn't wash.

Hannibal was African so it is possible he was black. What about the Numidians? there even deeper in africa yet are depicted as white

[The Stranger]

Geezer:
that is about everyone except asians...

1. i doubt hannibal was black. I believe it definitly would be mentioned by the romans
2. +that the coins some carthaginians are depicted on dont have common black facial features.
3. the carthaginians came from the phoenicians and the phoenicians came from Libanon that area and probably look like the semetic people... like jezus i guess

[Geezer57]

that is about everyone except asians...
Pretty much - caucasian appears to include everyone except those of oriental, negro, and red indian (Native American?) descent.

[Crazed Rabbit]

And Jesus probably did have some African links - after all the conventional theory is that he lived as a child in Egypt where, presumably, his appearance did not make him stand out.

That's about the best proof the article has.

But guess what? People traveled -*gasp!*- to different places! And Egypt had been ruled by Greeks and the common folk were probably mediterranean in Appearence, like, I would think, Jesus.

What a stupid article.

Crazed Rabbit

[Justiciar]

Hannibal was African so it is possible he was black. What about the Numidians? there even deeper in africa yet are depicted as white
He was Phoenican, and thereby, Semitic.

[Alexanderofmacedon]

I couldn't care less. I'm sure he was darker skinned for sure though, from the region he was partial to.

[IrishArmenian]

He probably looked like a common Jew. Not European Jews, but Israel Jews. More of an Olive skin tone, definitely not white.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Actually he could have been quite fair, Not all Semetic people are that dark. The idea that he could have been black is bull, because that would require his Phonecian-ruler ancestors to intermarry with their Numidian Subjects. Not going to happen.

[GoreBag]

Black...and irrelevant. Okay.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Actually its very relevant. For exactly the same reasons as Black Athena is relevant.

[InsaneApache]

It's not irrelevant to some. Christianity has been used for thousands of years as a mechanism of social control, one of which, was an attitude towards 'untermenche' if you like. (non-believers)The Jews being a very good example, and latterly the Negroes. (Despite what the bible said)

That JC may have been a man of colour (not one drop, for my yank friends) is potentially explosive.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Well he wasn't an Irish-American or an Italian.

[Flavius Clemens]

But guess what? People traveled -*gasp!*- to different places! And Egypt had been ruled by Greeks and the common folk were probably mediterranean in Appearence, like, I would think, Jesus.
Crazed Rabbit

and there was a long established Jewish community in Egypt at the time
"Alexandria was not only a centre of Hellenism but was also the largest city with a Jewish population in the world. The Septuagint, a text of the Hebrew Bible, was produced there. The early Ptolemies kept it in order and fostered the development of its museum into the leading Greek university (Library of Alexandria) but were careful to maintain the distinction of its population into three nations: "Greek", Jewish and Egyptian. " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria%2C_Egypt

and for that matter, who says he didn't stand out?

[IrishArmenian]

Egypt also became an area where there were many Christians, despite later Moslem rule.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Actually its very relevant. For exactly the same reasons as Black Athena is relevant.

What reasons, exactly? :dizzy2:

[Papewaio]

What colour are leprachauns, fairys, dragons and sounds again?

[GoreBag]

What colour are leprachauns, fairys, dragons and sounds again?

My point.

[Xiahou]

What colour are leprachauns, fairys, dragons and sounds again?What color are trolls?


Jesus black? If you mean that in terms of modern usage, then no he almost definitely was not. But, nor was he the likely the blonde haired, blue eyed man that has often been depicted either.

[Papewaio]

Note that it is a mix of fantasy and real elements, none of which attributes rely on colour. I assume that what Jesus had to say is irrelvent to his skin colour regardless if he did or did not exist.

[IrishArmenian]

Really, race is not that important to me. But Pape, Jesus actually did exist, ask anyone no matter what their beleefs are. I think you meen if he actually was the son of God, correct?

[ajaxfetish]

Not white or black. But white people like to picture him as white, black people as black, Asians probably as Asian, etc. For it is at least as true that Man created God in his own image as vice versa.

Ajax

[Papewaio]

Really, race is not that important to me. But Pape, Jesus actually did exist, ask anyone no matter what their beleefs are. I think you meen if he actually was the son of God, correct?

Well I'm a person and I doubt that the historical version that is often referenced existed. His value was in the ideas which are probably distilled from many sources.

A person named Jesus probably existed.

Was he a hippie preacher, possibly.

Was he the son of God, doubt it.

Was he a useful fulcrum for future generations powerplays, undoubtably.

[Tachikaze]

I have argued in other threads that race is an allusion. It is arbitrary and vague. I think the discussion here supports what I have said. Watching everyone try to assign racial labels to people is kinda funny.

"African" should not be not synonomous with "black". There are people with all sorts of skin tones and other physical features on the continent. The Carthaginians were Phoenicians, who may have been from Asia Minor, the Mediterranean islands, or the Black Sea area. They could have mixed with locals in North Africa. They are not normally considered Semites.

Jesus was probably a Semite. He is rarely depicted that way in European art. He had to have been quite dark through exposure to the sun and probable melanin content of his skin. His hair could have been dark brown to black, and straight, wavy, or curly. Eye color could possibly--though not probably--have been green, gray, or hazel. Blue is highly unlikely.

Mohammed was probably also a Semite. He and Jesus very likely had a lot of features in common.

[Samurai Waki]

Well considering almost all racial groups from Morocco to India are Semitic and there haven't been too many major migrations into the area (save the Turks and a few Mongols) since the fall of the Roman Empire. I think that it is more likely than not he was Fair-Olive-Dark Skinned Semite. The Darker the Skin usually means more time spent under the sun (melanoma) , hence that Berbers in the Sahara and Arabian Deserts appear darker than their Cosmopolitan counterparts along the North African Coast and the Fertile Crescent, yet they are virtual cousins and share very few genetic disimilarities.

If Joseph and Mary came from Nazareth (or possibly Bethlehem) statistically speaking it would be more likely that Jesus was born fairer skinned because these areas were fertile (not in the middle of the Desert) It would be more likely that Jesus wouldn't have had to spend endless hours in the sun and could quite easily find a place to shade himself or hide during the hotter hours of the day. I believe, Jesus wasn't of extreme poverty, as his parents could move him far distances with few impedements, and would've had the money to afford water, food, shelter, and pack animals to move from place to place. As Jesus did find himself in Nineveh, Alexandria, and perhaps as far south as Ethiopia.

The likelihood of Jesus being fair skinned is almost right out, as the only fair skinned people in the region would've been Merchants, Slaves, and Auxilia from mainland Europe, not including Italy, who are by majority olive skinned.

The Chances of Jesus being black is a bit likelier, however, statistically far from likely, as the only very dark skinned people in the region were more than likely Berbers crossing over from the Sahara into the Arab Desert and do not generally enjoy the cosmopolitan lifestyle like Jesus had. The only other possible equation into Jesus being black is that Joseph was a freed slave or Merchant, which if you can believe anything in the bible, was not true as Joseph was a Shepherd and had a family before meeting Mary. Also, the chances of a wealthy Roman freeing slaves in the region is also unlikely, as Jerusalem wasn't as wealthy as Alexandria, Baghdad, or Tyr.

From an anthropologist's view point, it would seem more likely than not Jesus was...ta da'...ummm Semitic of several possible, if not totally irrelevent shades varying from very dark, to almost fair depending on the lifestyle he lived.

It's not totally out of the question, because I'm of German Irish descent and if you look at pictures of me from when I lived in Colorado I'm as white as a sheet, but since I've lived in South California, I've often times been mistaken as being Mexican, since... I do...uh...tan.

[Andres]

Jesus was human.

[Duke of Gloucester]

Jesus was obviously black. He called everybody his brother and he couldn't get a fair trial :laugh4:

Best org joke of 2006!

The important question is not whether he was black or not, but why it matters to some people when the clear Christian message is that things like race don't matter.

Some interesting points have come out on this thread:


Note that it is a mix of fantasy and real elements, none of which attributes rely on colour. I assume that what Jesus had to say is irrelvent to his skin colour regardless if he did or did not exist.

Logically, what he said can't be regardless of whether he existed or not.


As the article says believers show him in their own image, which seems about right as far as human nature is concerned. [/QUOTE

Theologically this is about right. I think it is good if people depict Jesus as simillar to themselves, because it emphasises that he came as their saviour (so long as they remember that he is came as everyone else's saviour too - which is a problem).

[QUOTE]If it could be proven that JC was a man of colour, where would this leave the racists and bigots?

Sadly, refusing to accepth the evidence. After all, it is explicit in the Gospel accounts that Jesus was Jewish and practiced his faith as a Jew, but Christianity has a terrible reccord of anti-semitism.


. But, nor was he the likely the blonde haired, blue eyed man that has often been depicted either.

I have seen the blue eyes depiction (Robert Powell), but never the blond. Do you have a reference?

[InsaneApache]

Ahh yes Robert Powell.

Mrs Apache MK I was very enthusiastic about him. Although I eventually forgave him (how Christian of me :laugh4: ) when .....
[i] We divorced (Mrs Apache MK I that is) and
[ii] He did the detectives with Jasper Carrot.

[The Stranger]

What color are trolls?


Jesus black? If you mean that in terms of modern usage, then no he almost definitely was not. But, nor was he the likely the blonde haired, blue eyed man that has often been depicted either.

ive never seen a blond blue haired jezus before... only a brown eyed brown haired light skinned one

Thank You Andres, i was about to say that ;)

[Andres]

Long hair, long beard, always talking about peace and love.

Don't know about his color, but he certainly was a hippie.

[edyzmedieval]

Jesus was a Roman.

I wonder what would have happened if Jesus lived in the time of the KKK clan(in the 60's in America). Jesus Christ, a black person.

They would be confronted: We hate black people, but we hate Jesus too. And they were religious people. :laugh4:

[Husar]

Well, unless all those people constantly hid their faces from the sun, I guess they were somewhat darker than white...:juggle2:

[Vladimir]

Jesus was Black, Ronald Regan was the Devil, and the government is lying about 9/11. All the proof is here (http://www.adultswim.com/shows/boondocks/).

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

What reasons, exactly? :dizzy2:

For exactly this reason. I'm an Anglo-Sweed, if I claim Jesus was white with blue eyes and blond hair I am claiming ownership of him and perhaps using him to put foward a claim of racial supperiorety.

By the same token claiming the Athenians and the Carthaginians were Black, as well as Jesus, is an attempt to strip the white people of their herratige, leaving us with just the unwashed barbarians up North and the Romans.

The fact that the latter attack is badly misaimed is beside the point. The reality is that Jesus was an ethnic Jew with what must have been at least and believable claim to the throne. David certainly wasn't Black so Jesus wasn't either.

[Pannonian]

Jesus was Batman.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Or maybe he was Budha, or the Egyptian Ormus.....

[Samurai Waki]

Well to get a good perspective on if Jesus had been black before the civil rights movement in the South. The Green Mile is a good read...or watch.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Well to get a good perspective on if Jesus had been black before the civil rights movement in the South. The Green Mile is a good read...or watch.

Are you suggesting that man was Jesus, because thats the only way those two sentances make any sense.

[Samurai Waki]

Yeah. I was suggesting that the Huge Black Guy on the Green Mile was probably Jesus.

[doc_bean]

Wasn't he mentally retarded ?

[yesdachi]

Well, his mom was from the neighborhood but his dad was from haven so he was probably an interracial baby. ~D

[Don Corleone]

I think Jesus is black. I also think He's Asian, Latino and whatever else people who believe in Him choose to see him as. As others have mentioned, and I think this is one of the few things Tachi & I will ever agree on, the whole concept of race, especially based on skin color or current residence is terribly flawed.

Just out of curiosity, and I mean no disrespect, it's a legitimate question...

Why is the term 'colored' offensive (this part I can understand), while 'people of color' isn't:dizzy2: Why aren't Asians, using the whole silly 'color' thing, they're yellow, people of color (which I guess means all the brown, black and red people versus all the white and apparently yellow ones?)? :dizzy2: Why aren't Asians added up in minority achievment quotas? :dizzy2:

Can somebody explain to me the logic behind this whole PC 'politics of race' business? Isn't race a concept who's time in the civilized world has come and gone, much as the whole idea that crop failures are caused by witches?

[Crazed Rabbit]

Silly Don.

You can't do away with races, because a few of the victimhood mongers cling to the idea to further their cause.

Also, Asians don't get the 'special minority' status because they do better than white people, on average, in school and the like.

Crazed RAbbit

[Tribesman]

Why is the term 'colored' offensive
It is offensive because it is an insult to the English language , it should be "coloured" you damn colonial .:2thumbsup:

[Don Corleone]

Why is the term 'colored' offensive
It is offensive because it is an insult to the English language , it should be "coloured" you damn colonial .:2thumbsup:

Good one. Here's another PC question for everyone...

In America, it's racist to call people Japanese/Chinese/Vietnamese people Oriental. They apparently get pretty upset about it and insist on being called 'Asian'. In the UK, Asian refers to people from the Indian subcontinent (Indian/Pakastani/Bangladesh, et. al).

What is the polite term for what an American would call an Asian in the UK (when their national origin is unkown)?

Why don't Indians and Pakastanis freak out about this over here?

[Bar Kochba]

Why is the term 'colored' offensive
It is offensive because it is an insult to the English language , it should be "coloured" you damn colonial .:2thumbsup:

LOL:2thumbsup: :2thumbsup: :2thumbsup:

[Strike For The South]

Did you know Jesus was a jew?

[Papewaio]

Logically, what he said can't be regardless of whether he existed or not.


"To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,"

Its referred to as one of Hamlets Soliloquies not Shakespeares even though the writer would be the obvious authour not the character. It is a rather stirring piece when read and understood in the full and can be quite inspiring. Regardless of the fact that Hamlet was a character of ficition the truth behind his words was what was important.

Plato wrote about Socrates ideas. Yet it is more likely that although Socrates existed a lot of the ideas attributed to him are Platos. Plato modified or invented them and then used his mentor as the mouthpiece.

You have quoted Papewaio, but Papewaio is a fictional character and just a mouthpiece for his authour. What has merit? The ideas of Papewaio or the particular person that places the words through that character?

Ideas of worth have merit regardless of the existence of the character that is attributed in pronoucing them. That their existence isn't important means that their race pales into insignificance.

[Justiciar]

What is the polite term for what an American would call an Asian in the UK (when their national origin is unkown)?
We say Asian too, and everyone suffers the confusion silently. Could always say "South Asian" or "East Asian", but who could honestly be arsed? Two words!? Bog off!

[Papewaio]

I found it strange the first time to hear Indians called Asians. It took a while to figure out that since they were east of Asia Minor they were considered Asians.

I hear the term Indian, Chinese, Indonesian, Japanese as well as broader areas (mind you Chinese is broader then European in sheer numbers if not divesity) such as South East Asian (Phillipines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore Malays), Far East for Koreans, Chinese and Japanese. On the other side is finer tuning such as Hongkongnese, Singaporean Chinese, Taiwanese, Mainlander, Shanghai... Indonesia then breaks down into islands Balinese vs Sumatran etc

[Tachikaze]

Regardless of the fact that Hamlet was a character of ficition the truth behind his words was what was important.

Plato wrote about Socrates ideas. Yet it is more likely that although Socrates existed a lot of the ideas attributed to him are Platos. Plato modified or invented them and then used his mentor as the mouthpiece.

You have quoted Papewaio, but Papewaio is a fictional character and just a mouthpiece for his authour. What has merit? The ideas of Papewaio or the particular person that places the words through that character?

Ideas of worth have merit regardless of the existence of the character that is attributed in pronoucing them. That their existence isn't important means that their race pales into insignificance.
I think the only problem I have with this logic is the notion that Papewaio's ideas have merit.
~:joker:

[Tachikaze]

Why is the term 'colored' offensive (this part I can understand), while 'people of color' isn't:dizzy2:
We also agree on this.

[Xiahou]

I think Jesus is black. I also think He's Asian, Latino and whatever else people who believe in Him choose to see him as. As others have mentioned, and I think this is one of the few things Tachi & I will ever agree on, the whole concept of race, especially based on skin color or current residence is terribly flawed. I dont get it- what's the crime in acknowledging that Jesus was an ethnic Jew? Sure, much of what he said transcends that- but that's still no reason to disregard who He was as a man.

Julius Caesar was Italian... it doesnt really matter in terms of what he did- but that doesnt mean we should forget that he was. :dizzy2:

[AntiochusIII]

I dont get it- what's the crime in acknowledging that Jesus was an ethnic Jew? Sure, much of what he said transcends that- but that's still no reason to disregard who He was as a man.It is my interpretation of the posts here that they are saying, basically, that Jesus the symbol long superceded Jesus the individual -- if he ever exists, as is always in at least small doubt as most historical characters do. And that the presentation of the idea will serve better without the need to identify whether "he" is of "us" or not.

About the side discussion. I think the term "Asian" is used in general language nowadays. For USA, at least. That and I find just about every possible Asian insult to be not at all offensive personally, which means I don't really care if someone finds me, erm, Oriental.

I guess "Asian" as in general understanding really limits to the more Eastern ones; rather unfair to the Middle Easterns and the Sub-continent people, if I might say so myself, to be excluded from their continent in Western understanding. :sweatdrop:

[Xiahou]

It is my interpretation of the posts here that they are saying, basically, that Jesus the symbol long superceded Jesus the individual -- if he ever exists, as is always in at least small doubt as most historical characters do. And that the presentation of the idea will serve better without the need to identify whether "he" is of "us" or not.Jesus is of "us"? Who is us? Im of primarily German descent- Im not trying to claim He was a German. I think that to suggest that Jesus was Korean or any other ethnicity than what he clearly was is patently ridiculous. :shrug:

For a non-believer to say that ethnicity is irrelevant to the message is almost understandable- but for a Christian it's pretty fundamental as Jesus was descended from the line of David and the Messiah who fullfilled Old Testament prophecies...

[kataphraktoi]

Is calling westerners "Occidental" offensive?

No, its not "Accidental".....

[Duke of Gloucester]

@Pape

It's an interesting philosophical point, but I would contend that the importance of words does change according to their context. Thus if we take your example, it does not make sense to speculate what was going through Hamlet's mind when he said those words because we know that Hamlet is merely a character in a play. The meaningful speculation is about what Shakespeare is saying about a human being in Hamlet's position. If the words are attributed incorrectly to a real character, then the response to those words will be different - it may be speculate why they have been attributed to that person, why and by whom. If the words are direct and correct quotes, then it makes sense to consider what the person saying them meant and to tie the words in with what we know about the actions of that person.

Of course, from a Christian perspective, Jesus is far more than the accumulation of his teachings, but even from a secular perspective it makes a difference whether the New Testament teachings are the ideas of one man, a distillation of the wisdom of the time attributed to one man or a mixture of the two.

[ajaxfetish]

How dare you consider calling me 'occidental.' That is offensive to me in the highest degree. I demand to be called 'Welsh American' or 'of mixed racial descent.' Nothing less is acceptable. Also, as few people I know of claim to be Welsh American, I should get minority status, and all schools and workplaces should be required to accept a percentage of Welsh Americans as employees or students. That'll put an end to this benighted racism that is inflicted upon me.

Ajax

[Devastatin Dave]

Doesn't make a difference what "colour" Jesus was, all that matters is what HE did for all of us. :2thumbsup:

[InsaneApache]

@ Ajax,

Gwna Cymraeg Americanwyr chychwïor ag dafad cystal?

:laugh4:

[macsen rufus]

Persecuting the Welsh isn't racism, it's English heritage!

[ezrider]

Jesus looked exactly like Jim Cavezial

Budda is sometimes blue

Its interestin the way there are no pictures or iconography in Judaeism and Islam. The Greco-Roman devotion to iconography influenced the fledgling Christian religion and now people care what colour Jesus was. lunacy

[Tachikaze]

At my language school, we use the word "Asian" to mean people who share some significant amount of Chinese culture. This is useful when trying to understand commonality in native language (especially pronunciation) and social behavior (e.g. politeness, mores, taboos). Interesting when you consider that the word "Asia" derives from a region of Turkey.

Maybe we should use "Sinocultures" or something.

[Tribesman]

To settle this once and for all , Jesus is very dark brown with short straight black hair .

[InsaneApache]

Just like Saddam Hussein. Anyone else see the resemblance?

[Fragony]

Just like Saddam Hussein. Anyone else see the resemblance?

No, but jezus went on the cross and Saddam crossed us all.

[Tribesman]

Just like Saddam Hussein.
No , much darker and no moustache .

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Tribes':

....understood. Do you know what kind of beer he prefers and whether he drinks his beer American or Irish/English style?



Actually a nice point developed in here.

There is a useful distinction to be made between the historical Yeshua of Nazareth and the religious figure Jesus Christos.

For one, we can posit reasonable "guesses" as to ethnicity etc. based on general knowledge and the limited specific references available.

For the other, the whole issue of ethnicity would be virtually irrelevant.


As an aside:

I always enjoyed the summary put forth by J. Donald Imus in the persona of his "Rev. Billy-Sol Hargus" in Imus' book God's Other Son:

"Jesus is my brother. Now, If I am White, American, and a Baptist, what does that make Jesus?"


:2thumbsup: :laugh4: :laugh4:

[Tribesman]

....understood. Do you know what kind of beer he prefers and whether he drinks his beer American or Irish/English style?

Well thats where it gets confusing , its the trinity you see , the two skinny Jesus's with no facial hair drink lager , the fatter jesus whom is slightly lighter in skin tone and has a scraggly attempt at a beard drinks Guinness .~;)

[Seamus Fermanagh]

....understood. Do you know what kind of beer he prefers and whether he drinks his beer American or Irish/English style?

Well thats where it gets confusing , its the trinity you see , the two skinny Jesus's with no facial hair drink lager , the fatter jesus whom is slightly lighter in skin tone and has a scraggly attempt at a beard drinks Guinness .~;)

Seems about right. I know that wine was a central symbol and all that, but somehow I knew that the almighty would give the nod to Guinness.:2thumbsup:

[AntiochusIII]

For the other, the whole issue of ethnicity would be virtually irrelevant.Just to point out, Xiahou disputes that point when he responds to my "interpreting" post. He argues, or so I assume, on the issue of theology, of Jesus' lineage.