Jesus was black.

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Well, if there is evidence that George Washington existed there is evidence that Jesus existed.. Which is why I made that ludacris remark that there is no evidence George Washington existed.
rofl There are some of Geo's possessions still around and they have been verified, contrary to what Ariadne would have us believe. Are there any possessions of Yeshua's around? No? Not even a tooth, a diary, a hairbrush, etc. Digger's have found possessions of people that date back thousands of thousands of years, yet someone as famous as Yeshua was supposed to have been vanished without leaving a hair behind? It's irrational.
But still....did you personally remove his wooden teeth? Or is it faith that makes you believe they are genuine? What about his house? Were you there when he lived in it? Or is it faith? Sure lots of books and writings were made by and about Washington.
Nope. I haven't even seen them in real life. I read. Science journals of various kinds, science magazines. If there are 5 people whose business it is to sort out fact from fantasy saying the same thing, I'd would logically accept their facts over the fantasies of millions.
Same with Jesus.
As I said, there's absolutely no proof of Yeshua's existence. Just a lot of hearsay.
Face it you weren't there when Washington was around. Everything you believe about him is pure faith- trust in the fact that you are not being lied to. In reality you really can't prove a single thing about Wahington's existence.
Wrong, I do not use faith. I use reason. As I said, if 5 people whose business it is to sort out fact from fiction, it's more reasonable to accept their findings than it is to accept the fantasies of millions.
Just because it is thousands of years ago that Jesus was on earth instead of hundreds like Washington doesn't make it less true.
QUite right.
THere is no proof Jesus existed? Well what about that 33 year period where hundreds of thousands of people looked on Him with their own eyes?
Did they leave sworn affidavits of this? Or is it just that so-and-so said several people said they have friends who met some of the hundreds of thousands that saw Yeshua? Got a newspaper clipping dated at those 33 years about this phenomenon?
Cmon man. He walked around the earth for DECADES. YOur calendar is based on his existence.
.......... and didn't leave a hair off his head behind. This is your proof? The more logical calendar was twisted by the church from having 13 months to 12 months.
The holocaust. Did it really happen or no? That is less than a hundred years ago. Is it true or a lie? Were you there? Many people deny it. So did it happen? How do you really know?
Unless there is some fantastic conspiracy among scientists, witnesses, survivors, photographers, culprits, etc. to pull off this incredible hoax, reason tells me so, not faith.
I know, I know. Based on that logic how can I really know if Jesus was on earth.The answer- faith. Just like George Washington.
I wonder if he believed in the existence of Jesus?
Well, perhaps you have faith that either existed, but I prefer reason and science.
The probability exists that Geo was religious (Church of England, I think). Google it and find out. (Lemme tell you, though, if one site says he was Buddhist and 5 tell you he was Anglican and provide evidence, I wouldn't think he was Buddhist.)
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
nothing definitive, but plenty of good circumstantial evidence. several versions of his life story were written down, admittedly hundreds ofyears after, when it began to appear just how important he was, but I have always believed there WAS a jesus and he was PROBABLY a man, POSSIBLY the son of God, and DEFINATELY not from san fransisco.
Yup, lots of hearsay around, I agree.
But, as I said, such a famous person would reasonably leave some sort of evidence behind. A cup, a piece of cloth that someone stole off his robe, a tooth that fell out, ........... something. People woulda scooped up anything the guy left behind and promptly displayed it as something of his. But, there is nothing. Yet, as I said before, diggers (archæologists, paleontologists, anthropologists, etc.) can find stuff that people have owned or made from thousands of thousands of years ago, but absolutely nothing concerning such a famous dood as Yeshua. Amazing.

I think I would have liked him.
If there was such a person, me too.
 

Ariadne

Council Member
Aug 7, 2006
2,432
8
38
Math was developed to support the field of physics.

Disagree. Math exists on it's own and is divided into two categories: pure, where all the laws are defined and applied, where we see how it is used in the real world: physics.
 

Ariadne

Council Member
Aug 7, 2006
2,432
8
38
lol I was kidding, Ariadne. I paraphrased my physics prof and simply forgot to put a smilie in my post. :)

Thanks ... and here I was looking for a debate about what came first, the physics or the math. We all know it was the math and physics nerds are always trying to take credit for mathematics. Math is the only truth.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
I'm sorry bout getting your hopes up. As much as I thought Rickards was an arrogant ass ( wasn't very good at teaching either), he did crack me up with that bit about math being developed to support physics. Just thought I'd share it. ;)
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
65
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
sanctus said:
Most unlikely. Joshua bar-Jonah was not only of Jewish descent, he was also Aramaic.Though we lack a defined physical listing of what Jesus looked like, we can infer that he would not look any different from His human roots. In other words, certainly Jewish looking(unlike the European pictures painted of Him in The Middle Ages), and certainly not negroid and/or black.


I have previously provided biblical quotes which refer to Jews as being black. Therefore, Jesus could have been so as well. But there is no proof that He was white as Europeans portrayed Him after the 1400s.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
Yeah, given Jesus' origins as an Aramaic Levantine Jew, the probability that he was the light-skinned Renaissance prince that appears in much European Christian iconography is pretty much zero. I doubt that he was anything we would currently call black either. Odds are that he was a skinny, swarthy, hairy little man, but the whole issue seems supremely irrelevant to me. We don't know, and will almost certainly never know, what he looked like, and it really doesn't matter anyway. That's why I made fun of the OP's claim that he was black. That was just a cheap trick to get attention, I thought, which the OP more or less admitted off the top anyway, so I mocked it. That seems to have offended some people, and one person in particular who threatened to put me on her ignore list, but I'm constitutionally incapable of responding to self-righteous indignation any other way. I'm not a believer, as most of you know, but neither am I so arrogant as to dismiss believers as fools (with the possible exception of alasdair), because I just don't know, and I don't believe anybody else really does either. There are deep mysteries here, but the weight of evidence seems to me to support my position, that god is an entirely human invention and has no reality outside the realm of ideas.
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
Calling your god's existence "science" is mocking it? Science is the study of natural phenomena; it is what gives us knowledge about the round (actually elliptical) thing we live on (among other things). I cannot see how the existence of a deity could be confused with something that seeks to satisfy curiosity.
Um, as far as I am concerned, faiths in deities of any kind are flights of fantasy, but apparently some feel the need for them so that's fine with me (each to his own, sorta thing). I know what I feel, who I am, what I am, etc. and have no such need, but I am curious about things that science can explain for me. Simple as that, no racism, very little bigotry (I have a low tolerance for critters that prefer to remain ignorant rather than learn anything

Took the words right outa my mouth. I totally agree.
 

sanctus

The Padre
Oct 27, 2006
4,558
48
48
Ontario
www.poetrypoem.com
Yeah, given Jesus' origins as an Aramaic Levantine Jew, the probability that he was the light-skinned Renaissance prince that appears in much European Christian iconography is pretty much zero. I doubt that he was anything we would currently call black either. Odds are that he was a skinny, swarthy, hairy little man, but the whole issue seems supremely irrelevant to me. We don't know, and will almost certainly never know, what he looked like, and it really doesn't matter anyway. That's why I made fun of the OP's claim that he was black. That was just a cheap trick to get attention, I thought, which the OP more or less admitted off the top anyway, so I mocked it. That seems to have offended some people, and one person in particular who threatened to put me on her ignore list, but I'm constitutionally incapable of responding to self-righteous indignation any other way. I'm not a believer, as most of you know, but neither am I so arrogant as to dismiss believers as fools (with the possible exception of alasdair), because I just don't know, and I don't believe anybody else really does either. There are deep mysteries here, but the weight of evidence seems to me to support my position, that god is an entirely human invention and has no reality outside the realm of ideas.


You may not realize it, but you have made one of the most succinct and complete answers to this question of Christ. In other words, IT DOES NOT MATTER what He did or did not look like.And that is probably why we have not been provided a physical description of Him in the Scriptures.

Attempts to identify His racial heritage as black have happened many times during the course of the history of the Church. The truth is, such attempts are foolish. As you noted, and as I also noted earlier in this thread, Jesus could not possibly have been black given His place of birth and racial heritage in human form.
 

sanctus

The Padre
Oct 27, 2006
4,558
48
48
Ontario
www.poetrypoem.com
I have previously provided biblical quotes which refer to Jews as being black. Therefore, Jesus could have been so as well. But there is no proof that He was white as Europeans portrayed Him after the 1400s.


Your quotes are mis-interpretations. Jesus was without a doubt white. Not European white, but certainly as white as the Jewish people He was born into.

We also can surmise He wore His hair long and had a beard based on the customs of the Aramiac people whose males wore their hair long and had beards.

In short, it is unlikely the Saviour was of a different race than His human mother Mary.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Your quotes are mis-interpretations. Jesus was without a doubt white. Not European white, but certainly as white as the Jewish people He was born into.
C'mon sanctus. This is tripe. The almost racially pure Jewish people of the time were obviously not going to by white!

They would be at the very least, olive skinned. Nothing white in that at all. The White Christ is a manifestation of the European tribes that would eventually embrace Jesus and become his biggest boosters. Thus he was re-invented in ther image, not that of his.

If you go to Jerusalem today, even with the inter breeding of Europeans and the peoples of Arabic and Hebrew back grounds, the skin colour is still darker then that of the Churches image of Jesus.
 

sanctus

The Padre
Oct 27, 2006
4,558
48
48
Ontario
www.poetrypoem.com
C'mon sanctus. This is tripe. The almost racially pure Jewish people of the time were obviously not going to by white!

They would be at the very least, olive skinned. Nothing white in that at all. The White Christ is a manifestation of the European tribes that would eventually embrace Jesus and become his biggest boosters. Thus he was re-invented in ther image, not that of his.

If you go to Jerusalem today, even with the inter breeding of Europeans and the peoples of Arabic and Hebrew back grounds, the skin colour is still darker then that of the Churches image of Jesus.


Granted, I should have typed caucasian, as is the ethnic mix of the people of that area of the world. You are obviously correct in the description of the skin colour. In no way was I trying to imply Christ was European in descent.

But regardless of the semantics, He was certainly NOT negroid in terms of racial origin.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Granted, I should have typed caucasian, as is the ethnic mix of the people of that area of the world. You are obviously correct in the description of the skin colour. In no way was I trying to imply Christ was European in descent.

But regardless of the semantics, He was certainly NOT negroid in terms of racial origin.
That's debatable.

It is interesting to note, that we see many images of the Egyptians of later dynasties, but if you research archeological discoveries of early and contemporary researchers. You will find the further you go back the more negroid the features become.

There is good reason for that.

The further you go back, the less interbreeding you have.

Hence, it is logical to sumize that not only did Jesus have olive or darker skin, but he likely would have had features that were likely more negroid then caucasian. He was and I can say this, with the support of an entire field of scientific and archeological research, that he was as far from caucasian as I am from Chinese.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,353
1,800
113
Lighten up. You think God has no sense of humour?



Question: "Does God Have a sense of humor?"


Answer: The American Heritage Dictionary defines a “sense of humor” as “...The ability to perceive, enjoy, or express what is comical or funny.”

According to this definition, then, God must show an ability to either perceive, enjoy, or express what is comical or funny if he is to have a sense of humor. The difficulty is that people perceive what is comical or funny differently. I believe that you would agree that much of what the world calls humor is not funny but is crass and crude and should have no part in a Christian’s life (Colossians 3:8 ). Other humor, such as blonde jokes (which I tell) are usually told at the expense of others (they tear down rather than building up), again something contrary to God’s Word (Colossians 4:6; Ephesians 4:29). But I do believe that God has a sense of humor, but that perhaps too often His sense of humor is not always perceived or appreciated by us.

Some cite the fact that God giving Abram (“exalted father” or “father of many”) the name Abraham (“father of multitudes” or “father of many nations”) is comical (Genesis 17:5). Can you imagine Abram coming back to his barren wife and his servants, saying, “Guess what! God has changed my name from “the father of many” to “the father of many nations!” All the while he is still without a single child in his old age! Would that not make you laugh if you were part of his household? Obviously, it was prophetic, but still the situation is comical.

To me, the greatest indication of God's humor is in the instant in which the Israelites were using the Ark of the Covenant like a good luck charm in taking it to battle, and the Philistines end up capturing it and placing it in their temple before their idol of Dagon. What happens next? They come into the temple the next day and find Dagon flat on his face before the ark. They set him back up. The next morning, there he is again, but this time he has his hands and head cut off as a symbol of his powerlessness before the God of the ark (1 Samuel 5:1-5). To me, the picture is hilarious!

And then you have the illustration that Isaiah makes concerning idolatry in Isaiah 44:9-17. The prophet paints a word picture of a guy cutting down a tree and using part of the tree for firewood to warm himself and cook his meal and then carving up the rest of the tree and bowing down to it! Is it not comical?

There is also the instance of Elijah on Mount Carmel with the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18 ). He challenges them to a test to see who has the true God. The test is to prepare a sacrifice but to put no fire to it but to let the real God show Himself by lighting the fire from heaven. He lets the prophets of Baal go first. For hours they call on Baal but are getting no response. How does Elijah encourage them? In verse 27, he says, “Hey, boys, you better yell a little louder. Maybe Baal is in the middle of a conversation, or on a journey, or maybe he’s asleep and you need to wake him up!” (my paraphrase). Is this not sarcastic humor?

Psalm 2 talks about God laughing at those who would rebel against His kingship (verse 4). It is like the comical picture of a kindergarten-aged child being upset at his parents and running away from home...all the way to his neighbor’s house. But there is obviously a serious side to this as well, and although the picture of weak and silly man trying to match wits with an almighty and all-knowing God is comical, God takes no delight in their waywardness and its consequences but rather desires to see them turn around (Ezekiel 33:11; Matthew 23:37-38 ). And I believe that it is this serious side of man’s condition that keeps us from seeing more expressions of God’s sense of humor this side of heaven. And this is why I believe that we find so many more expressions of God’s holiness, righteousness, mercy, and grace than of His humor.

A person does not crack jokes in the presence of one who has just lost a close loved one; silly jokes are out of place on such occasions. Even so, God is focused on the lost and is looking for those who will care for their souls as He does. That is why our lives (while having times of refreshing and humor) are nonetheless to be characterized by “soberness” (seriousness about making our lives count for Christ) (1 Thessalonians 5:6,8; Titus 2:2,6).

But even as we see comical characters in some of the creatures God has graced this world with, so I believe that our new home in eternity will be adorned with so much more. This will cause our already joyous hearts to overflow into laughter (Psalm 16:11).


http://www.gotquestions.org/God-humor.html
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,353
1,800
113
Um, as far as I am concerned, faiths in deities of any kind are flights of fantasy

You have obviously never read Thomas Aquinas' 5 proofs of the existence of God -





Background:

St. Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274) was a Dominican priest, theologian, and philosopher. Called the Doctor Angelicus (the Angelic Doctor,) Aquinas is considered one the greatest Christian philosophers to have ever lived. Two of his most famous works, the Summa Theologiae and the Summa Contra Gentiles, are the finest examples of his work on Christian philosophy.

"The truth of the Christian faith...surpasses the capacity of reason, nevertheless that truth that the human reason is naturally endowed to know can not be opposed to the truth of the Christian faith."

Aquinas argued that there are at least 5 "proofs" of the existence of God....

First Way: The Argument From Motion

St. Thomas Aquinas, studying the works of the Greek philsopher Aristotle, concluded from common observation that an object that is in motion (e.g. the planets, a rolling stone) is put in motion by some other object or force. From this, Aquinas believes that ultimately there must have been an UNMOVED MOVER (GOD) who first put things in motion. Follow the agrument this way:

1) Nothing can move itself.

2) If every object in motion had a mover, then the first object in motion needed a mover.

3) This first mover is the Unmoved Mover, called God.


Second Way: Causation Of Existence

This Way deals with the issue of existence. Aquinas concluded that common sense observation tells us that no object creates itself. In other words, some previous object had to create it. Aquinas believed that ultimately there must have been an UNCAUSED FIRST CAUSE (GOD) who began the chain of existence for all things. Follow the agrument this way:

1) There exists things that are caused (created) by other things.

2) Nothing can be the cause of itself (nothing can create itself.)

3) There can not be an endless string of objects causing other objects to exist.

4) Therefore, ther must be an uncaused first cause called God.


Third Way: Contingent and Neccessary Objects

This Way defines two types of objects in the universe: contingent beings and necessary beings. A contingent being is an object that can not exist without a necessary being causing its existence. Aquinas believed that the existence of contingent beings would ultimately neccesitate a being which must exist for all of the contingent beings to exist. This being, called a necessary being, is what we call God. Follow the argument this way:

1) Contingent beings are caused.

2) Not every being can be contingent.

3) There must exist a being which is necessary to cause contingent beings.

4) This necessary being is God.


Fourth Way: The Agrument From Degrees And Perfection

St. Thomas formulated this Way from a very interesting observation about the qualities of things. For example one may say that of two marble scultures one is more beautiful than the other. So for these two objects, one has a greater degree of beauty than the next. This is referred to as degrees or gradation of a quality. From this fact Aquinas concluded that for any given quality (e.g. goodness, beauty, knowledge) there must be an perfect standard by which all such qualities are measured. These perfections are contained in God.


Fifth Way: The Argument From Intelligent Design

The final Way that St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of has to do with the observable universe and the order of nature. Aquinas states that common sense tells us that the universe works in such a way, that one can conclude that is was designed by an intelligent designer, God. In other words, all physical laws and the order of nature and life were designed and ordered by God, the intellgent designer.

A more complete explanation of St. Thomas' Fifth Way about God as Intelligent Designer can be seen on my web page dedicated to Paley's Teleological Argument.

http://members.aol.com/plweiss1/aquinas.htm
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Quote:
Originally Posted by gopher
I have previously provided biblical quotes which refer to Jews as being black. Therefore, Jesus could have been so as well. But there is no proof that He was white as Europeans portrayed Him after the 1400s.


But, there is no proof Yeshua was anything to begin with, as I keep pointing out.
But, whether white, black, green, purple, eight-armed, monocular, pseudopod, etc. the principles are the important part, as Sanc says.