Was the Historical Jesus White?

[StevenMerten]

I will not respond to such racist nonsense other than to say that the children of Abraham are NOT only the white race. To think of Scandanavians and Germans as the children of Abraham and to not consider those of Israel and Ethiopia and India to be the children of Abraham is utter nonsense. Obviously, we ignore the children of Ishmael as we should.

In this day, we are all spiritual children of Abraham, not just the white race.

As an aside, to look to Europe for the wealth and power and power that rules the world is simply not Catholic teaching.

Hello Mark,

In our day and age it does seem very racist for God to bless Abraham and his descendants far greater than all the other people of the earth. God did so because Abraham obeyed God while the rest of the world was doing evil. God did what He did, so I want to study what He did.

I want to know where the Blessing of Abraham is today. Ishmael, Abraham's son through Hagar, all Abraham's children through Keturah (GEN 25), Jacob's twin brother Esau, Jacobs twelve sons, the twelve tribes of Israel, were all bypassed by the Blessing of Abraham. The Blessing of Abraham went to Abraham's great grandson Ephraim. I want to know what people on earth today, have today become a multitude of nations, lost in the masses, blessed with great wealth, bearing world dominant secular power, growing to become myriads of descendants, if not the white race.

If you think God was racist for blessing Ephraim's descendants far beyond all other people on earth, OK, whatever. Now, who do you think Ephraim's descendants are, if not the white race? God did bless Abraham's descendants, right or wrong, to rule over others, have great wealth, and grow to become a myriad of people. Who are Ephraim's descendants today. It sure looks like the white race. The Jews, descendants of Ephraim's uncle Judah, sure look like white people to me.

I say Jesus was white.

 

[Gnarwhal]

I guess for me I'm a little sick of the term "white" in general. What is it? There are Spaniards, Portuguese, Latin Americans, and other folks who look "white" if that is to mean more European in appearance?

People seem to think you can't be Jewish and white? Well, like I said, Natalie Portman is as Jewish as they come and she looks pretty darned "white." If Jesus lived in Nazareth and was Jewish, why does he have to have a dark complexion? We just don't know. He could've had a Natalie Portman type of skin or slightly darker?

But if we're talking Tutonic German-looking Thor and Odin blonde hair and blue eyes with long golden locks and pasty skin, that I rather doubt.

It's true, Christ very well could have been a light skinned Jewish rabbi, the same way that Portman is a light-skinned/Caucasian-looking Jewish woman. I think what we're going for here is that since there is no factual evidence that can be scrutinized saying he was indeed white like a Caucasian is considered "white", then the safest bet is that he was darker-skinned like most individuals from that region of the world tend to be.

It doesn't really mean anything, IMHO, other than if we want to accurately discuss Christ's appearance then common sense would seem to indicate he was darker-skinned (at least darker than a western European Caucasian man). Purely from an anthropological standpoint...

 

[Erth]

I'm actually a bit stunned that anybody in 2013 would still make the assumption that Christ was a white man. I mean, in this age of enlightenment when we have an abundance of knowledge and resources to verify things, not to mention common sense, I would think the commonly held understanding would be that Christ was born in first century Palestine and thus his appearance was most likely akin to others in the region.

Anybody remember that computer rendering of what Jesus most likely looked like historically?

On another note, I'm reading a very interesting book right now called Counterknowledge by Damien Thompson that someone on CF recommended - the concept is very interesting, I would dare say that the claim that Christ was a white man may indeed fall under the umbrella of "counterknowledge".

If you have an abundance of knowledge and resources to verify things then please tell me what height was Jesus and how many pounds He was!? The commonly held understanding has nothing to do with verification. A computer rendering based on statistical material has nothing to do with the appearance of this one individual person Jesus from Nazareth. The abundance of knowledge on this issue is nil.

It's true, Christ very well could have been a light skinned Jewish rabbi, the same way that Portman is a light-skinned/Caucasian-looking Jewish woman. I think what we're going for here is that since there is no factual evidence that can be scrutinized saying he was indeed white like a Caucasian is considered "white", then the safest bet is that he was darker-skinned like most individuals from that region of the world tend to be.

It doesn't really mean anything, IMHO, other than if we want to accurately discuss Christ's appearance then common sense would seem to indicate he was darker-skinned (at least darker than a western European Caucasian man). Purely from an anthropological standpoint...

Purely from an arbitrary standpoint; that seems more like what it is. I have nothing against your voicing your opinion, but you said yourself that "there is no factual evidence". That is the only thing that was spot on so far in this discussion.

 

[Gnarwhal]

If you have an abundance of knowledge and resources to verify things then please tell me what height was Jesus and how many pounds He was!? The commonly held understanding has nothing to do with verification. A computer rendering based on statistical material has nothing to do with the appearance of this one individual person Jesus from Nazareth. The abundance of knowledge on this issue is nil.



Purely from an arbitrary standpoint; that seems more like what it is. I have nothing against your voicing your opinion, but you said yourself that "there is no factual evidence". That is the only thing that was spot on so far in this discussion.

My overall point is that the lack of evidence suggesting he was, in fact, Caucasian means that our common sense should say he was most likely darker, being a native of first-century Palestine. Yes, stating either claim with absolutely certainty is moot - but I would think a rational deduction of what we do know would lead us to admit the greater likelihood that he wasn't white.

If archaeologists discovered ruins from around the second century in southern Italy with no clear indications that they were Roman, we wouldn't instead assume that they were Chinese, would we? The realistic assumption is that they were indeed Roman, maybe Etruscan, but if the dating is accurate and they originated in the second century then dollars to doughnuts, they're Roman.

 

[Erth]

My overall point is that the lack of evidence suggesting he was, in fact, Caucasian means that our common sense should say he was most likely darker, being a native of first-century Palestine. Yes, stating either claim with absolutely certainty is moot - but I would think a rational deduction of what we do know would lead us to admit the greater likelihood that he wasn't white.

The only reasons for this preference in the "commonly held" view are ignorance about history and science alike, and the guilt complex in which the term White is embedded. The thing is, people just do not think it is alright to say Jesus was White, but they have a double standard and they think it is alright to say He was Olive, even though there is zero evidence for it. Pointing to how people look in the Middle East today, after the area has gone through massive changes in demography, is easy to do. But as a substitute for evidence it is worthless.

This I am not saying against you personally at all. It is indeed a "commonly held" view and a commonplace view in the real sense.

 

[mark46]

Agreed. Jesus was very likely olive/dark skinned as were folks of biblical Israel.

Of course, there is no proof. Mary (and Jesus) were as likely to be black Ethiopian as Germanic white (the light skinned rabbi). Mary's family could have been immigrants from Egypt or India or anywhere else. However, we have no reason to believe that they were immigrants.

I would not that do say that there is no proof is NOT to say that it is reasonable to believe that Jesus was Chinese, Indian, Ethiopian or Germanic.

It's true, Christ very well could have been a light skinned Jewish rabbi, the same way that Portman is a light-skinned/Caucasian-looking Jewish woman. I think what we're going for here is that since there is no factual evidence that can be scrutinized saying he was indeed white like a Caucasian is considered "white", then the safest bet is that he was darker-skinned like most individuals from that region of the world tend to be.

It doesn't really mean anything, IMHO, other than if we want to accurately discuss Christ's appearance then common sense would seem to indicate he was darker-skinned (at least darker than a western European Caucasian man). Purely from an anthropological standpoint...