Jesus was Black?

  • Thread starter Thread starter koda
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
koda:
I have a friend who says Jesus was black. I don’t know where she get this and don’t want to get into it until I have a proper response. What would that proper response be???
Click to expand...
Jesus was born of a member of the Tribe of Israel. Mary was a descendent of David. Now, whether David had very, very dark skin is unknown. Whether Mary had very, very dark skin we do not know. After all, there are no photographs of either Mary or Jesus. The only human DNA Jesus carried was Mary’s. However, Jesus was Semetic, not traditionally ‘African’ so to say, simply, that “Jesus was Black” seems like a misleading statement.

When I was in high school, I once wrote a teasing article about St. Patrick. Because Patrick was, technically, a Roman subject when he was first kidnapped by maurading pirates I claimed that Patrick was Italian. Boy oh boy, the Irish community just about had a collective conniption fit.

If your friend is implying by the statement “Jesus was Black” that Jesus was of Negroid origen then I would question that - the science has not determined anything specific on the exact features of our first parents, though we know that we have been created in the Image and Likeness of God, no matter what we look like.
 
Well to me our Lord doesn’t look like a certain race by the images I see. The artists make it look like He looks like God, not a certain race.

That’s what I see.
 
Paris Blues:
Well to me our Lord doesn’t look like a certain race by the images I see. The artists make it look like He looks like God, not a certain race.

That’s what I see.
Click to expand...
Because you see with the eyes of Faith, just as St. Peter.
 
40.png
LSK:
Because you see with the eyes of Faith, just as St. Peter.
Click to expand...
And see, that’s what I always saw! Our Lord in paintings, sculptures, etc. does not look European, Black, Asian, Jewish, etc. He looks like God! I can’t explain it! The features are way beyond my comprehension to describe it!

Even though He was human, He still didn’t look like a certain race!
 
Paris Blues:
And see, that’s what I always saw! Our Lord in paintings, sculptures, etc. does not look European, Black, Asian, Jewish, etc. He looks like God! I can’t explain it! The features are way beyond my comprehension to describe it!

Even though He was human, He still didn’t look like a certain race!
Click to expand...
Actually, you don’t know that. It’s possible (probably likely) that Jesus looked like a typical Jew from the Middle East: dark hair, dark eyes, olive-skin. The claim that he was black is a bit foolish, insofar as it represents a need to claim greatness for one’s race—“see, we blacks are great because Jesus was great, and he was black”—that sort of thinking. But I have no problem whatsoever with different cultures and different races making Jesus their own in a figurative sense, if not in a historical sense. That includes the art of a particular culture. There’s a Catholic priest who works with American Indians who paints Jesus and other Biblical figures as American Indians—I think that’s great. Depictions of Jesus as black are fine too, if the desire is to help blacks relate to their Savior. Nor do I have a problem with European artists making Jesus their own, by giving him lighter hair and blue eyes (if it’s OK for other races to apppropriate Jesus, why can’t whites?). The art is not meant to be a historical statement of fact, as in “this is a historically accurate representation of what Jesus looked like”. How Jesus has been portrayed by artists has much more to do with the desire to make Jesus approachable and real to the culture the artist lives in.
 
40.png
Sherlock:
Actually, you don’t know that. It’s possible (probably likely) that Jesus looked like a typical Jew from the Middle East: dark hair, dark eyes, olive-skin. The claim that he was black is a bit foolish, insofar as it represents a need to claim greatness for one’s race—“see, we blacks are great because Jesus was great, and he was black”—that sort of thinking. But I have no problem whatsoever with different cultures and different races making Jesus their own in a figurative sense, if not in a historical sense. That includes the art of a particular culture. There’s a Catholic priest who works with American Indians who paints Jesus and other Biblical figures as American Indians—I think that’s great. Depictions of Jesus as black are fine too, if the desire is to help blacks relate to their Savior. Nor do I have a problem with European artists making Jesus their own, by giving him lighter hair and blue eyes (if it’s OK for other races to apppropriate Jesus, why can’t whites?). The art is not meant to be a historical statement of fact, as in “this is a historically accurate representation of what Jesus looked like”. How Jesus has been portrayed by artists has much more to do with the desire to make Jesus approachable and real to the culture the artist lives in.
Click to expand...
She was making a point about what she felt when she looked at paintings, etc. She did not ‘see’ Jesus as a member of an ethnic group or race…she saw Him…because our Nicole has, in her heart, always been a Catholic Christian. But in three weeks she formally enters into the FAMILY…and I understood exactly what you meant, my sister in Christ, because I believe you look at the renditions of Our Lord with the eyes of Faith.
 
Nobody even bothered to weigh in with the “Shroud of Turin”? That image is exactly what you would expect from a Jew from the middle east. One thing is for sure: Jesus was not white. He was a man of color, though “black” is probably not the most accurate description. It’s amazing to me that this thread came up because just YESTERDAY I overheard a man use the word “Catholic” as I was walking by so I slowed to hear what he was saying and it turns out that he had a “Black Heritage Bible” with pictures of all the Prophets, Apostles, and Jesus as African. My personal opinion is that such a view is no more distorted than the view of Christ as white.
His color is not significant per se, but the acknowledgment of the fact that he was mostly likely dark skinned could be an enlightening fact for those who have racial prejudices, and enable greater understanding on their part.

Phil
 
40.png
LSK:
She was making a point about what she felt when she looked at paintings, etc. She did not ‘see’ Jesus as a member of an ethnic group or race…she saw Him…because our Nicole has, in her heart, always been a Catholic Christian. But in three weeks she formally enters into the FAMILY…and I understood exactly what you meant, my sister in Christ, because I believe you look at the renditions of Our Lord with the eyes of Faith.
Click to expand...
Yeah, isn’t it great to see Nicole’s enthusiasm?! I’m so pleased for her—and for us, as she will be a wonderful ambassador of the Faith.

Nicole, you have to be sure and tell us all about the Big Day!
 
I always figured he looked like a buff Jew.

Kinda like a Jewish Paul Sr., from Orange County Choppers, more hair and a full beard though.
 
40.png
Philthy:
Nobody even bothered to weigh in with the “Shroud of Turin”? That image is exactly what you would expect from a Jew from the middle east. Phil
Click to expand...
That’s true but it still looks like God. 🙂
 
40.png
Philthy:
Nobody even bothered to weigh in with the “Shroud of Turin”? That image is exactly what you would expect from a Jew from the middle east.

Phil
Click to expand...
You make an excellent point. We DO KNOW exactly what Jesus looked like. We have a miraculous photograph of his very true face and body. The evidence for the authenticity of the Shroud is overwhelming and the only “evidence” to the contrary (the carbon test) has been proven as undeniably botched. Not only is carbon testing VERY unreliable in the dating of textiles (according to Dr. Harry Grove who invented the method of carbon testing which was used) but the tests were performed on fibers from the section that was repaired and re-enforced after the fire. Jesus was not Black, nor white. He was a typically medium to fair skinned Jew. Discussions of his “ethnic” descent based on the region he was born in or lived in are baseless anyway because they ignore not only the evidence of the shroud but the fact that his father was not human nor was he from any of the regions discussed.
 
Trelow said:
Kinda like this
Click to expand...

Wow, but i don’t think Jesus can break the cross especially since’s he’s weak by the time he was crucified.

It’s so sad that Jesus is being misused by racists. Of course He isn’t black in the literal sense, he is a jew. I also agree to represent Jesus as an asian, african, european, as long that it is used so people can relate to Him and not use Him for their own agendas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top