What color was Jesus?

[PaladinValer]

Jesus would have been a short (probably 5'6" at the tallest), darker-skinned (tanned or olive-skinned) man with dark brown or black hair in a bread, possibly a mustache as well, though not as long as popularly pictured (though not too, too short either).

 

[xenia]

Jesus would have been a short (probably 5'6" at the tallest)

I dunno. The Figure depicted on the Shroud of Turin is about 5'10" or 5'11", if I remember correctly.

 

[Ave Maria]

Jesus would have been a short (probably 5'6" at the tallest), darker-skinned (tanned or olive-skinned) man with dark brown or black hair in a bread, possibly a mustache as well, though not as long as popularly pictured (though not too, too short either).

That's generally about the same view that I have of Jesus. I remember reading an article on Beliefnet a while back about what Jesus may have looked like. But regardless of what He looked like, He is still my Lord and Savior!

 

[Pugwash]

Only the recent Passion movie has attempted to portray Jesus as a *foreign* looking man. I think the whole issue of His appearance is extremely important, since it shows how we can be deceived and not even question it. The most annoying thing for some people is that He was not born in the West with caucasian features.

Pugwash:

 

[Celticflower]

Jesus would have been a short (probably 5'6" at the tallest), darker-skinned (tanned or olive-skinned) man with dark brown or black hair in a bread, possibly a mustache as well, though not as long as popularly pictured (though not too, too short either).

I would add to this only that he probably had a muscular build, esp in the arms. He was a carpenter after all. Definately not the anorexic look often seen in representations of him.

Celtie--a carpenter's daughter

 

[Lordbay]

He was dark, that's for sure. But he sure as hell wasn't a negro..

This is the kind of stuff we are trying to get you to see, this is not needed. This is not arguement over what color Jesus is. It is with this, that most of the world want to see Jesus the color they want and not what the Bible says.

 

[Redguard]

He was dark, that's for sure. But he sure as hell wasn't a negro.

I take offense to this statement.

Considering that you're on a Christian forum, why do you have to be "Sure as HELL" that Jesus wasn't black? And please take into consideration that the word "Negro" is very outdated and inappropriate.

And there's no need for you to be "sure as HELL" about him not being black. I'm not saying that he was, but consider his lineage for a moment. We know that the entire Jewish nation, i ncluding all the members of Jesus' genealogical lineage, lived in Egypt for MANY years before Moses led them out. Where's Egypt? In Africa. And even Jesus lived in Egypt for a short while because Joseph was visited by an angel and told to flee Egypt so that Herod couldn't kill Jesus.

Again, I'm not saying that Jesus had to be black. I'd actually place my bet on the dark-skinned Middle Eastern look. But please don't be "Sure as Hell" about him not being a "negro".

 

[good4u]

What color was Jesus?

Jewish skin tones range from beautiful ivory to golden to olive. He was all of those to me as he was a 100% Jewish male wrapped under the radiance of God.

 

[Macrina]

Having seen so many pictures of the "white Jesus," I suppose that is still the image that comes to mind, almost instinctively. Yet when that happens, I try to remind myself that's probably not an accurate picture. When I think realistically about it, I imagine someone with dark semitic features... and I heard a scholar say once that he was more likely to have had short hair than long.

I think it's natural for Jesus to be depicted as looking like "us" -- whichever ethnic group we happen to belong to. Since the miracle of the Incarnation is that God became flesh just like us, naturally our imaginations picture Him as black, white, asian, etc., according to our ancestry. I have no problem with artwork depicting him as those different ethnic groups. I think the important thing to remember is that if we had been among those original disciples, the man we would be hanging out with would be semitic and probably most unlike many of the modern depictions of Him.

 

[PaladinValer]

I would add to this only that he probably had a muscular build, esp in the arms. He was a carpenter after all. Definately not the anorexic look often seen in representations of him.

Celtie--a carpenter's daughter

Urban legend. No where in Scripture is it said that Jesus was a carpender; simply the son of a carpender (being St. Joseph). Jesus was a rabbi and called that constantly. He was never called a carpender once.

As for the Shroud of Turin, I wouldn't place any emphasis on it in terms of Jesus' physical appearence due to the extreme level of controversy surrounding it. I doubt God the Son would want to be incarnated as, literally, a "giant of His time." Therefore, I still hold to my original shorter guestimate, which was approx. (if I remember rightly) height of the average Semitic man of that time.

 

[Cray]

Does it matter?

 

[Macrina]

Urban legend. No where in Scripture is it said that Jesus was a carpender; simply the son of a carpender (being St. Joseph). Jesus was a rabbi and called that constantly. He was never called a carpender once..

It is not unlikely to suppose that Jesus worked as a carpenter, because sons often worked in their father's business. Raised in Joseph's household, it would not be suprising if, at least as a youth, he participated in the carpentry work.

 

[PaladinValer]

True, but there is no evidence to support that.

Holy Tradition and the Holy Bible are both silent about that topic, and there have been plenty of historically documented incidents in which a son didn't follow in his father's example in Semitic civilization. It is therefore rather illogical to claim Jesus to be a carpender.

 

[Lordbay]

Does it matter?

 

[Celticflower]

Urban legend. No where in Scripture is it said that Jesus was a carpender; simply the son of a carpender (being St. Joseph). Jesus was a rabbi and called that constantly. He was never called a carpender once.

As for the Shroud of Turin, I wouldn't place any emphasis on it in terms of Jesus' physical appearence due to the extreme level of controversy surrounding it. I doubt God the Son would want to be incarnated as, literally, a "giant of His time." Therefore, I still hold to my original shorter guestimate, which was approx. (if I remember rightly) height of the average Semitic man of that time.

Since the normal course of life at the time was to follow in your father's footsteps, it is not outside the realm of possibility that Jesus was trained in his (earthly) father's profession. He did not start preaching until he was 30 or so, and was probably not called rabbi (teacher) until then. Since it is also the belief of some branches of Christianity that Jesus was the eldest son in the household, it is conceivable that he worked as a carpenter supporting the family until such time as a younger male sibling could take care of his mother Mary (since it is supposed that Joseph died when Jesus was a young teen.)

I know none of this is in scripture, because we have very little about Jesus' life before his began preaching. But they are logical conclusions.

Celtie

 

[Bingley]

It seems we're not the only ones discussing this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3958241.stm

and the story that sparked it off:

http://www.newnation.co.uk/iframe_story.asp?NID=1035