JESUS'S/MARY'S COLOUR/PHOTO MISCONCEPTION "What is Jesus's Skin Colour?"

[FrDavid96]

Father,
I don’t think the archaic mid-20th century attempts to divide humanity into neat races holds much water in the modern scientific community.

Nor do I.

And frankly, its offensive and unfair to me that you are implying that I am doing so.

I am doing no such thing.

With our modern knowledge of genetics, the reality is much more complex. The term “Caucasian” or “Negroid” are not scientific terms…not anymore…they’re more of social constructs than anything, and definitions will vary.

I don’t know what you’re trying to get at here.

I typed a word a few posts back. A word that I am uncomfortable using, and I added a note that I intend the word in a scientific sense to indicate exactly that I was NOT using it in the racist sense.

I know that word can offend people–which is exactly why I typed my post the way I did. It’s clear enough to anyone who reads the entire paragraph, because I began with the words “if by black you mean…”

For example, the various peoples of sub-Sahara Africa have greater genetic diversity amongst themselves than do all non-African peoples (e.g Northern Europeans are more closely related to the Japanese than certain African groups are to each other)… yet we lump them all together as the “black race”. It’s a social construct, not a scientific reality.

You’re making an issue where there is none.

 

[twf]

My apologies Father.
Though I’ll leave what I said as is for the benefit of others.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Xanthippe_Voorhees:

What?

Sorry, no.

Jesus and Mary were real people. But in 2000 years they have consistently appeared with the racial makeup of those who they appear to. There is no evidence that they would all of the sudden become exactly as they lived on Earth. Perhaps it will be like the gift of tounges where everyone hears words in their own language. Perhaps it will be that we all have a glorified appearance as with us that forges race.

Who knows. But I think that twenty centuries of visions give us a better idea of what’s going to happen than some sort of guess based in no reality.

Then you deny the Ascension.

No, no I don’t.

You’re putting words in my mouth that are so far from the truth it isn’t even funny.

Jesus and Mary ARE real people. Jesus ascended from the dead. His appearance was such His friends didn’t even recognize Him until He chose that they did. Obviously, He can “appear” any way He wishes for the purposes He needs.

There is no evidence that He will look 100% like He did to every person and for all time in 33AD for all eternity.

 

[ConstantLearner]

Isn t it that look like when you are outdoors as David was tending sheep?

Not in the original translation. I had it. I’d have to go back and find the page. It means “red hair.”

 

[graciew]

Thank you!
I turned to Merriam Webster but you know your language best as how to apply it

Definition of RUDDY

having a healthy reddish color; red, reddish; —used as an intensive… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[ConstantLearner]

I’m not going to go off on some silly tangent about King David’s hair.

No need to. I posted the biblical passage for your convenience. I’m confused though. Isn’t the whole discussion silly? No one knows what Jesus, Mary, King David or anyone of that time looked like. Like the poster above, I hope I know Jesus when I see him. I trust I will.

 

[ConstantLearner]

I do not know his exact appearance…but when he appears to me, I hope I instantly recognize him and follow…

I think you will, and I think I will, and that’s good enough for me.

 

[ConstantLearner]

This link shows the translation as “ginger” and how biblical scholars came to the conclusion he had red hair. Honestly, I don’t care if it was green and purple plaid! It was just a casual comment.

https://americanzionism.wordpress.com/2016/10/17/king-david-and-the-red-headed-canard/

 

[graciew]

Neither do I!
Just a passing opportunity to learn English better.
God bless!! And thank you.

 

[ConstantLearner]

You’re welcome!

 

[James817]

From which text?

 

[FrDavid96]

There is no evidence that He will look 100% like He did to every person and for all time in 33AD for all eternity.

That’s where you are completely wrong.

He will look EXACTLY as He did at the Ascension. Exactly. And yes, for all eternity.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Xanthippe_Voorhees:

There is no evidence that He will look 100% like He did to every person and for all time in 33AD for all eternity.

That’s where you are completely wrong.

He will look EXACTLY as He did at the Ascension. Exactly. And yes, for all eternity.

And your proof is where?

It’s not in the Bible or in private revelation. As I’ve pointed out, it seems to be quite the opposite from what occured in the Bible and has occured in private revelation since.

 

[FrDavid96]

FrDavid96:

Xanthippe_Voorhees:

There is no evidence that He will look 100% like He did to every person and for all time in 33AD for all eternity.

That’s where you are completely wrong.

He will look EXACTLY as He did at the Ascension. Exactly. And yes, for all eternity.

And your proof is where?

Because Heaven is “outside of time.” There is no change in heaven.

For that matter, why would He?

I mean, it’s not as if Christ is in heaven thinking to Himself “I’ve had this same haircut for 400 years now, maybe it’s time to try a new style?”

 

[BoomerangToo]

Ancient Egyptian funerary portraits provide a good example of what Mediterranean people looked like in the first century.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Xanthippe_Voorhees:

FrDavid96:

Xanthippe_Voorhees:

There is no evidence that He will look 100% like He did to every person and for all time in 33AD for all eternity.

That’s where you are completely wrong.

He will look EXACTLY as He did at the Ascension. Exactly. And yes, for all eternity.

And your proof is where?

Because Heaven is “outside of time.” There is no change in heaven.

For that matter, why would He?

I mean, it’s not as if Christ is in heaven thinking to Himself “I’ve had this same haircut for 400 years now, maybe it’s time to try a new style?”

Why would He? I mean, that’s kind of a moot point since He HAS “changed” his appearance.

He did it in the Bible more than once after His Ascension. Many visionaries have described His appearance according to their culture and features (Black, Hispanic, Native, Asian, European).

We KNOW this already. It’s not a guess, it’s a fact. Are you denying the scriptual teachings that Jesus was unrecognizable by His friends and even perhaps His family? Are you saying the Church has erred in approving private revelations and sainting persons who described Him not as a 1st century Jew?

Heaven is outside of time. This is about far more than a whim, but a deep human desire to have a relatable savior. Time and time again Jesus (and Mary) have appeared and been exactly what that person needed.

So why would He? Because Jesus meet’s people’s needs and He does everything necessary to facilitate that. It happened in the Bible and it keeps happening.

 

[FrDavid96]

I really do not care one bit how visionaries describe him. That’s irrelevant as far as I’m concerned. That’s a private matter, not a matter of faith.

In any case, visions are exactly that: they are visions.

Visions (even true ones) do not change the fact that the the body of Christ does not change after the Ascension.

I don’t care what you say about visions or other private revelations.

He ascended into Heaven. His body no longer changes.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

I really do not care one bit how visionaries describe him. That’s irrelevant as far as I’m concerned. That’s a private matter, not a matter of faith.

In any case, visions are exactly that: they are visions.

Visions (even true ones) do not change the fact that the the body of Christ does not change after the Ascension.

I don’t care what you say about visions or other private revelations.

He ascended into Heaven. His body no longer changes.

Last post from me on this because I think your statements really speak for themselves.

His changes in appearance occurred in the Bible, too. There’s no denying that.

 

[twf]

If the Lord prevents people from recognizing Him or appears under a different guise in a vision, that doesn’t mean that His physical, glorified body has itself changed. I hate to use such a crude analogy, but I would see it as akin to what in many fictional, fantasy stories is called a “glamour” - an external projection that alters what others perceive, but not the physical reality.

 

[FrDavid96]

Last post from me on this because I think your statements really speak for themselves.

His changes in appearance occurred in the Bible, too. There’s no denying that.

Well, whether you like it or not, and whether you accept it or not, Christ’s ascended body, now in heaven, is exactly what ascended 2,000 years ago—and will always be that same exact body.

Opinions won’t change that. Ignorance of Christian doctrine won’t change it.

When Christ ascended into heaven, He did so in His earthly body. ONE earthly body.

That Ascended body of Christ has not changed, will not change, cannot change.

FrDavid96:

When Christ ascended into heaven, He did so in His earthly body. ONE earthly body.

Respectfully if one says is true, can one ask this question?

1 Corinthian 15:50 " I declare to you brothers and sister that flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, nor do they inherit the imperishable"
Question>>So what enters the Kingdom then?
Jesus is not a liar is he? Interesting Peace

“IF” the Ascension is true?

Are you really asking that? Do you really expect me to answer that?

YES! The Ascension of Christ is true. Yes. It did happen.

Do you even know what I mean when I write “the Ascension?”

You identify as Catholic. Have you ever said the Creed at Mass? Do you have any idea what it means when Catholics pray in the Creed “He ASCENDED into heaven?”

I cannot believe that on a Catholic board, I have to defend the truth of the Ascension to someone who identifies as Catholic. It’s difficult to fathom.