Jesus was black

Interesting article from the BBC.

Quote:

---

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/...s203gn8.th.jpg

JC

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

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:

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.

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:

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?

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?

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bar Kochba

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.

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 .

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.

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.

Quote:

---

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...

wouldnt they be mostly of greek looking?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L'Impresario

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

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?

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

People really shouldn't be so sloppy.

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 .

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.

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

How dark a caucasian person?

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:

[colbert]I don't see color[/colbert]

Quote:

---

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:

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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

---

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

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Stranger

that is about everyone except asians...

---

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

Quote:

---

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