138 replies to this topic

[freetoroam]

I have heard some people  saying that Jesus was a black man, personally I doubt it, but if the Europeans can depict him as European looking, then I suppose the black christians can depict him as  a black man. What do the christians think about him being black theory?

[ealdwita]

freetoroam, on 11 February 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

I have heard some people  saying that Jesus was a black man, personally I doubt it, but if the Europeans can depict him as European looking, then I suppose the black christians can depict him as  a black man. What do the christians think about him being black theory?

Well, if we read Genesis 1:27 literally - His father was 'mixed race' of the most complicated kind!

[freetoroam]

ealdwita, on 11 February 2013 - 12:18 PM, said:

Well, if we read Genesis 1:27 literally - His father was 'mixed race' of the most complicated kind!

What, like Sammy Davis Junior?

[Paranoid Android]

freetoroam, on 11 February 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

What do the christians think about him being black theory?

About the same as if he were white.  We don't know what Jesus would have looked like.  Current historical research suggests that a hypothetical average Joe Jew from the 1st Century AD would look much like the photo in the original post, and that's relatively dark-skinned (though not black black).  Whether Jesus looked exactly like an average Joe Jew of the 1st Century AD, no one can say.  And personally speaking, I don't really care what he looked like.

I follow Jesus because of what he taught, not because of what colour his skin is.

[freetoroam]

Paranoid Android, on 11 February 2013 - 05:50 PM, said:

About the same as if he were white.  We don't know what Jesus would have looked like.  Current historical research suggests that a hypothetical average Joe Jew from the 1st Century AD would look much like the photo in the original post, and that's relatively dark-skinned (though not black black).  Whether Jesus looked exactly like an average Joe Jew of the 1st Century AD, no one can say.  And personally speaking, I don't really care what he looked like.

I follow Jesus because of what he taught, not because of what colour his skin is.

I am not a follower, as you may have worked out, so I was just wondering why different races make him look either black, blonde haired and blue eyed or more like a Hebrew?
It seems it does matter after all to some people.

[Seeker79]

and then, on 09 February 2013 - 11:58 PM, said:

If one believes the accounts of scripture - which I assume most Christians would - after the Lord returns there will no longer BE any Atheists.  They will either accept His rule or perish but certainly they will believe.  And RULE is exactly what He will do.  With "a rod of iron".  The meaning is inescapable that He will allow no disrespect or disobedience.  Fortunately He is about love so His rule will not be a painful burden, but an experience of utmost wonder and joy.  I think that it will be during this time that humanity will finally become aware of the WHY we have so long sought.

So follow me or perish is it? That dosnt sound loveing at all , it sounds megalomaniacal actually.

[HavocWing]

Seeker79, on 11 February 2013 - 07:26 PM, said:

So follow me or perish is it? That dosnt sound loveing at all , it sounds megalomaniacal actually.

It's blackmail.

[IamsSon]

I doubt most people really give much serious consideration to what Jesus may have actually looked like.  Yes, the majority of Christians probably picture him as the white-skinned, blue-eye blond man from the Renaissance paintings, but they also understand that He was a Jew and lived in the Middle East, so if someone points out that obviously he would have looked more like the guy on the left than the one on the right, most, I think would simply acknowledge the truth of that and move on.

[Everdred]

freetoroam, on 11 February 2013 - 06:01 PM, said:

I am not a follower, as you may have worked out, so I was just wondering why different races make him look either black, blonde haired and blue eyed or more like a Hebrew?
It seems it does matter after all to some people.

In traditional depictions, the basic idea is that Jesus is depicted like the average person of the culture in question.  Someone in, for example, 8th century England wouldn't have the slightest idea what a 1st century jew would have looked like.

Now of course there are also modern trends of pseudoscholarship trying to claim Jesus as a blond-haired blue-eyed Aryan, or a black African, but this is completely different from tradition and rather is an attempt to harmonize people's racist viewpoints with their Christian religion (i.e. if a white person or black person posits that their race is responsible for all the wisdom in the world, then they can't possibly be worshipping some brown guy).

[Paranoid Android]

Seeker79, on 11 February 2013 - 07:26 PM, said:

So follow me or perish is it? That dosnt sound loveing at all , it sounds megalomaniacal actually.

There are two ways of looking at it, a negative and an affirmative.  Your interpretation is the negative - follow me or die.  It assumes that God is going to go and off you if you don't believe in him. That is not the only way of viewing it, though.  You could put it in the affirmative - follow me and live.  This approach assumes that we are doomed because of what we ourselves have done, but by Grace God has offered a way to eternal life.

Follow me or die.
Follow me and live.

A subtle difference, but one I believe makes an enormous difference.

[IamsSon]

Seeker79, on 11 February 2013 - 07:26 PM, said:

So follow me or perish is it? That dosnt sound loveing at all , it sounds megalomaniacal actually.

You make it sound like this is the only stark choice in the world.  You have cancer, only one surgery will actually save your life.  Are you going to be mad that only THAT surgery can save you, or are you going to be grateful that there IS a surgery that can save your life?

[Religulous]

I often wonder why Jesus Christ is often depicted as a red-haired Caucasian.

[euroninja]

and then, on 09 February 2013 - 11:58 PM, said:

If one believes the accounts of scripture - which I assume most Christians would - after the Lord returns there will no longer BE any Atheists.  They will either accept His rule or perish but certainly they will believe.  And RULE is exactly what He will do.  With "a rod of iron".  The meaning is inescapable that He will allow no disrespect or disobedience.  Fortunately He is about love so His rule will not be a painful burden, but an experience of utmost wonder and joy.  I think that it will be during this time that humanity will finally become aware of the WHY we have so long sought.

Accepting Jesus Christ has to be real in your heart. It's not a lip service. If you don't feel Christ in your heart there must be reason for it. Jesus knows His people. Those who are being called back to Christ will have their sign and a change of heart as a result. They may even see their names written in the Book of Life. Read the eyewitness accounts of people experienced divine presence. The unifying fact is they feel this indescribable love. Your mind is questioning. The mind is the slayer of soul. If you are one of His children you will have a burning desire to know and ask for a sign that's in your heart not in your mind.

[Seeker79]

Paranoid Android, on 12 February 2013 - 01:28 AM, said:

There are two ways of looking at it, a negative and an affirmative.  Your interpretation is the negative - follow me or die.  It assumes that God is going to go and off you if you don't believe in him. That is not the only way of viewing it, though.  You could put it in the affirmative - follow me and live.  This approach assumes that we are doomed because of what we ourselves have done, but by Grace God has offered a way to eternal life.

Follow me or die.
Follow me and live.

A subtle difference, but one I believe makes an enormous difference.

It would seem that could be an option, be we are talking about god, the designer of the system in he first place. I made a thread about this once. Jesus has his hand out any you are hanging over a cliff. You must let go and reach for his hand hopeing he is there on very flimsy evidence. He could just reach down and save you. There are good people that will never be Christians, the view that one must be Christian to be saved, to me, is simply built in proprietorship much like apple is guilty of. Spirituality abounds in this world, from wonderful men Like Tenzin Gyatso ( the Dali lama), to native American holy men that can never accept middle eastern mythology as the one and only spiritual path. It's exceedingly hard for me to believe in a god that would allow such people to perish because they cannot believe in the divinity of one man a world and several millennia removed from the context and culture that they belong to. The whole notion is just.... Well... Silly.

[Seeker79]

IamsSon, on 12 February 2013 - 01:36 AM, said:

You make it sound like this is the only stark choice in the world.  You have cancer, only one surgery will actually save your life.  Are you going to be mad that only THAT surgery can save you, or are you going to be grateful that there IS a surgery that can save your life?

Sure.... But I would only need surgery if I were sick. If I did not have cancer then any surgeries would simply be to line the pockets of the doctors. Further more, if I did have cancer and the doctor new for sure I were a dead man and would suffer a miserable death without his help, he could simply sneak up behind me sedate me and do the surgery anyway. I'd be p***ed but alive. This happens all the time in real life. Especially with children. If parents don't have faith in medical science courts will force medical treatment on the child because the child dosnt know any  better.

Analogies like this are ineffective. Let's call it what it is. God certainly has the ability to save who he wishes regardless of their belief, but the Christian god only saves those that believe he exists and in a man from 2,000 years ago non the less.

It all seems very business like to me. There is no reason to accept it as truth. Just because somebody wrote it down. I often wonder if Christians truely have faith in god ( I do) .... Or if they really worship their bible.