Does it really matter what His skin color was? He is Jesus. And Jesus is Jesus, end of conflict.
Upvote
0
Does it really matter what His skin color was?
The term olive complexion has been grossly misunderstood. Olives come in two main colors, green, and black, and that is what olive complexioned means. For the record, I agree with you and I know Yahoshua was olive complexioned, black, HalleluYAHYellowSapphire said:I have no problem with the idea that Jesus might have been black. I just don't think the evidence supports that. How is that racist?
With modern views of Arabs as terrorists, can we assume that those who don't want to believe he was of olive complexion are bigots?
****ducking****
Contrary to what you have written, we can all know what color the true childrenof Israel are, and it is CERTAINLY not European. Life started in what is called Africa, and it all will end there. Learning what color Israel is, and the facts about their color is not hidden from any of us,all we have to do is line up scripture.DOCPOW said:It is sad how much racism is still present today, EVEN IN THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY! I just want to say that no one on this site knows what color the original jews were. Alot and I mean alot of poeple in this world however want to reduce the black race as being some kind of ignorant beast eating crub worms somewhere in the jungle. Who knows, the jews may have been originally dark skinned. For anyone to say that it is not a possibility that maybe who we call black people today were in the bible a little bit or maybe just maybe involved in the whole thing is truely racist at heart. I call them racist because I noticed that people just do not want to even consider Jesus as being a dark skinned man(not arab but african descent) I mean it's to the point of ANYTHING BUT AN AFRICAN. In closing I want to state that salvation is not based on race as we all know, but to say that their is no possibility what so ever that maybe some of them were black, is racist as I already stated before. My personal opinion is that the people you see today walking all around today are descendants of jews, all colors shapes and sizes. Heck according to scripture we ALL come from two people Adam and Eve
Hitler was a Nazi that killed the Ashkenazi people who lie and call themselves "Jews", but are not. He was wrong for taking those lives, but the real holocaust were the millions of blacks that died during forced slavery, and history shows us that. I have always wondered how it is that the holocaust is looked at as such a tragedy, and the people are so pitied, when millions of blacks were hung, castrated, burned alive, tortured, raped, and forced into menial labor for hundreds of years with no compensation. Even after that, blacks have been degraded in every possible way, even to this day. They were a people always on the bottom rung of the social and economical ladder, and still are, and no wonder. When slavery was finally abolished, they were sent out with the clothes on their backs, and forced to take on menial jobs that barely supported their families, and then still they were looked down on because they had nothing. Where does the buck stop because this is ridiculous!!!! They received nothing, nothing for their hardships and then are expected to grin and bare it, just get up and pull themselves up by their boot straps and make it, that's unrealistic for the majority of blacks. The real victims in society are the blacks, and they endured the longest most brutal holocaust ever.Trigger said:Well, I dunno. Does it really matter what nationality Hitler was? All that matters is that he killed a bunch of Jews, right?
I'm not interested in Jesus' skin color because how I view him, his call, or his Father depends on it, I'm interested in being historically accurate, because dang it sometimes that's important.
If you'd take just a little time to do the research, you would learn that what is called the Middle East was parted from "Africa" by the Suez Canal, and YHWH will punish them for parting HIS land, and scattering HIS people.shamsweedo said:I definitely don't believe Jesus was the pale, blue eyed guy we see in a lot of pictures. I really don't think he was black either. He was from the middle east so I would assume he would have looked like it.
You just don't want the evidence to support that, and that is what makes it racist. Why don't you take the time to do the research, or are you afraid of what you'd find out?YellowSapphire said:I have no problem with the idea that Jesus might have been black. I just don't think the evidence supports that. How is that racist?
With modern views of Arabs as terrorists, can we assume that those who don't want to believe he was of olive complexion are bigots?
****ducking****
Scripture alone IS enough to satify any answers that we may have about any matter, especially if we loved YHWH and trusted in HIS word. History is just that his-story, and has been heavily influenced by this corrupt world and system, but YHWH's word is pure and true.Trigger said:It's relevant to me. Wouldn't Jesus being black make the Passion of the Christ and any other media depicting Jesus as Caucasian/Arabic historically inaccurate? Let alone featuring Adam, Abraham, etc...
Not that it matters as far as people's salvation goes, but being historically accurate is important!
I haven't been able to discern any truth out of these arguments; if you're going to push forward the concept that Jesus was black, you have to give more sources than just scripture. Scripture was meant to be a spiritual counsel, not a history book. The fact that it lines up with history solidifies its integrity in the eyes of men, but it was not meant to be a historical reference book.
I looked up Ur and Chaldeans separately (although briefly) and found no immediate evidence that their ancestors had dark skin. Since I am not a historian and I don't have one on hand to ask, I can't pull anything useful out of that.
However, it makes sense to me that since Noah settled on Mt. Ararat, you'd need to go back at least that far to find anything conclusive. Also, looking on a map at Turkey and Ur, and seeing how far Ur is from Egypt, and taking into consideration that at least one of Noah's sons (or even he himself) took a different colored wife (otherwise different races wouldn't even make sense), Abraham could be any color by the time his family settled in Ur. Since lineage doesn't take into consideration skin color, only passing on the family heritage through male heirs, seems to me that even David's skin color could have been different from Noah's, or even Abraham's. So, does Jesus' bloodline being pure have anything to do at all with skin color in the first place?
Post some scriptural or historical documentation that proves I am wrong, scriptural preferred because I believe in every word that comes out of the mouth of the FATHER. I am not presenting this information to cause chaos, but am merely presenting facts, whether you want to believe them or not. Everyone has something to say, but no way to disprove what I have stated, and that makes me wonder about your intentions. Understand this, the devil has deceived the world and it is him who rules this world currently, and not the FATHER. Think about it, that is why he told Yahoshua that if you do just one act of worship tp me, I will give you all of the kingdoms of the world. He could not have offered what was not his. Come out of this world and this false illusion. This world is built upon lies, and that is scriptural.Diven said:airren1 ,
You can't make a claim and then expect everybody to accept it unless a disproof is provided. You haven't proven your point. You have found alot of scripture that is true, but it seems like you are just throwing out scripture to prove your point. Believing your argument requires a very specific interpretation of several verses, and that some of these verses share parallels with events that occured to black people. For me these verses don't point to the conclusion that you are making from them, alot of them seem out of context. (I always get a bit skeptical when only single verses are quoted).
So you are asking me to go against common perceptions, which have been held up by historians and anthropologist (who by have evidence which strongly goes against arabs or other medium skinned peoples being the result of interracial marriages).
But perhaps I am just being deceived. Please help me understand how this truth should affect the attitudes and actions of people in general, and how it should affect the attitudes and actions of black and of non-blacks.
Obviously if someone is unwilling to accept Jesus as being black because he's racist its an issue, but my and most people here's struggle is that they haven't been convinced.
It is important to note that black people through history have gone through much suffering, and are still struggling, both in Africa and in the States. But Hebrews and Jesus being black shouldn't change are call as christians to look after the needy and oppressed.
Who am I to hold grudges when the FATHER has told me that I must forgive anyone that trespasses against me...you are forgiven.Celticflower said:airren1
Forgive me for saying this but....
Your posts throughout this thread sound like the mirror image of a white supremist using scripture to "convince" people that Jesus was white and that there is Biblical "proof" supporting the idea of black skinned people as being not worthy of much of anything.
Actually, instead of convincing me of your position, you have bored me to an almost comatose state.
Jesus was not white and he was not black. In all probability he was olive skinned, but it really doesn't make any difference. He could have been pink with purple stars if that was the prevelent skin type of the people he was born to. It does not take away from or add to the importance of who He was/is or what He did.
You are obsessing over a trivial matter. Study less to find the color of the man and more to find the teachings of His heart.
What is this about?airren1 said:If you'd take just a little time to do the research, you would learn that what is called the Middle East was parted from "Africa" by the Suez Canal, and YHWH will punish them for parting HIS land, and scattering HIS people.
Another empty claim, which no proof. Egyptians are the sons of Mizraim, which is the sons of Ham, Gen 10, and EVERY bible scholar and historical scholar will tell you that Ham is without a doubt BLACK. See, that is where it came back to bite them in the butt. The supposed curse of Ham, but of course Ham wasn't cursed but his son Canaan.He was cursed to be a servant of servants, furthermore, it was Canaan's land that YHWH took and gave to the Israelites. They were indeed servants of servants when Israelites came and took their land, Israel who had come out of bondage from the Egyptians.bytheway said:What is this about?
The French started making the Suez Canal in 1858, then the British took control of it and they completed it in 1869.
How does the making of this canal have anything to do with the scattering of the 13 tribes of Israel?
Also you say that the Egyptions were black. This is interesting claim. What year did the Egyptions leave Egypt? And how do explain all the evidence that exists that tells us the Egyptions had same colour of skin as the arab people?