Jesus was Black

[Tomorrows_Child]

This is a very difficult topic to discuss, especially amongst Christians both Black and White. Some will argue that the appearance of the Messiah does not or should not matter, only his message and his sacrifice for our sins.

And I agree 100% that his color has nothing to do with our salvation... But, if his color does not matter, why do some people go out of their way to hide how he really looked? What are they trying to hide from us?

The truth is, the very bible that most of our people pretend to read every Sun-day has a description of how the Messiah really looked, and it isn't this...

View attachment 13695

The scriptures state that the Messiah had hair like woll and feet like unto burned brass. Revelations 1:14-16.... His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; (15) And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.

So why the cover-up? Why are so many of our bibles filled with a White image of Jesus? Could it be because the description of him in the bible clearly depicts him as a man of color?

To be fair, there are several paintings of a dark-skinned Jesus and Mary found in other parts of the world. These paintings are never shown in our bibles or in our churches.

View attachment 13696

Interesting fact 101: Did you know that even the Pop prays to a Black Madonna and Child?

View attachment 13697

Note: I do not condone what the Pope is doing. It is a sin to bow down and worship idols. But, I find it interesting that he would pray to a Black Christ.

Interesting fact 102: Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church removed many of the books that were included in the original bible? These books are known as Aprocrypha. In one of these books called the 1st Book of Maccabees, it tells us that the heathen or gentiles or Romans (however you wish to describe them) wanted to paint the likenes of themselves in the bible. They wanted to paint depictions of themselves and place them in the bible, and that is exactly what they did. 1st Maccabees 3:48 And (they) laid open the book of the law, wherein the heathen had sought to paint the likeness of their images.

One needs to question why they would do this. Why paint all the Angels, Apostles, Prophets, Israelites and even Jesus White? Why isn't Jesus being depicted as a man of color? Why are they hiding his true identity? Could it be that if Black people knew the truth of how Jesus looked, then Black people would know how his people (the Israelites) looked, and then ultimately black people would know the truth of who they really are?

What is really sad is that oftentimes White people will put SOME truth right in our faces, but we are so blind that we cannot see it.

MOTIVATIONAL WHISTLE: MALCOLM X WHAT COLOR WAS JESUS

I am not a Muslim but truth is still truth.

So there you have it folks. What else can be said about how the Israelites looked or even now, the Messiah looked? If you still do not believe after reading your own bibles and doing further research, then maybe this truth is not for you. I can only plant the seed and let The Most High take care of the rest. It is every person's duty who is called, to help wake up not just Blacks, but Whites who are equally deeceived. That was the whole mission of Jesus and his disciples. It was to turn the children of God back to our Creator.

It's highly unlikely Jesus looked African, he was middle eastern so would look as such.

 

[Beloved Mike]

You're really on a roll with posting complete bs.

Oh, and First Maccabees is included in the Catholic Bible. Duh. You can't even get the most basic facts straight, let alone anything else. What a trainwreck.

This is a very difficult topic to discuss, especially amongst Christians both Black and White. Some will argue that the appearance of the Messiah does not or should not matter, only his message and his sacrifice for our sins.

And I agree 100% that his color has nothing to do with our salvation... But, if his color does not matter, why do some people go out of their way to hide how he really looked? What are they trying to hide from us?

The truth is, the very bible that most of our people pretend to read every Sun-day has a description of how the Messiah really looked, and it isn't this...

View attachment 13695

The scriptures state that the Messiah had hair like woll and feet like unto burned brass. Revelations 1:14-16.... His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; (15) And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.

So why the cover-up? Why are so many of our bibles filled with a White image of Jesus? Could it be because the description of him in the bible clearly depicts him as a man of color?

To be fair, there are several paintings of a dark-skinned Jesus and Mary found in other parts of the world. These paintings are never shown in our bibles or in our churches.

View attachment 13696

Interesting fact 101: Did you know that even the Pop prays to a Black Madonna and Child?

View attachment 13697

Note: I do not condone what the Pope is doing. It is a sin to bow down and worship idols. But, I find it interesting that he would pray to a Black Christ.

Interesting fact 102: Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church removed many of the books that were included in the original bible? These books are known as Aprocrypha. In one of these books called the 1st Book of Maccabees, it tells us that the heathen or gentiles or Romans (however you wish to describe them) wanted to paint the likenes of themselves in the bible. They wanted to paint depictions of themselves and place them in the bible, and that is exactly what they did. 1st Maccabees 3:48 And (they) laid open the book of the law, wherein the heathen had sought to paint the likeness of their images.

One needs to question why they would do this. Why paint all the Angels, Apostles, Prophets, Israelites and even Jesus White? Why isn't Jesus being depicted as a man of color? Why are they hiding his true identity? Could it be that if Black people knew the truth of how Jesus looked, then Black people would know how his people (the Israelites) looked, and then ultimately black people would know the truth of who they really are?

What is really sad is that oftentimes White people will put SOME truth right in our faces, but we are so blind that we cannot see it.

MOTIVATIONAL WHISTLE: MALCOLM X WHAT COLOR WAS JESUS

I am not a Muslim but truth is still truth.

So there you have it folks. What else can be said about how the Israelites looked or even now, the Messiah looked? If you still do not believe after reading your own bibles and doing further research, then maybe this truth is not for you. I can only plant the seed and let The Most High take care of the rest. It is every person's duty who is called, to help wake up not just Blacks, but Whites who are equally deeceived. That was the whole mission of Jesus and his disciples. It was to turn the children of God back to our Creator.

Who cares about what color he was... doesnt even matter

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Pardon my ignorance, but would you please explain to me what the "OP" is supposed to mean? Admittedly, I'm not all that "hip"....

It's an acronym for 'Original Post'. It can also stand for 'Original Poster' (as in the person who started a thread) depending on the context it's written in.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Who cares about what color he was... doesnt even matter

Racial supremacists and your typical garden variety white American evangelical.

 

[Sister Cyber]

yet suggested that I have some agenda or other?
I had no agenda,

Again, when did I say that? Print the quote.

you do suggest that most Christians might have agendas of their own. You wrote:- take the time to read those comments, perhaps even learning something you may not have been aware of or were deceived from by mainstream teachings.
See? such deceptions would cause 'agendas'! Simple!

Sorry, I don't do crazy. I neither suggested what you propose, nor made any claims about any agendas. I will ignore nonsense; I just don't have time for it. Go in peace.

 

[Sister Cyber]

It's an acronym for 'Original Post'. It can also stand for 'Original Poster' (as in the person who started a thread) depending on the context it's written in.

Got it, Thank you for explaining that. Now I understand your initial comment and need to correct this individual's comment...

I don't think the OP is interested in discussion, as so many replies were ignored as they don't fit in with their made up narrative.

I have read every reply. I just don't like repeating myself. The truth has been revealed. Whether those here choose to accept the truth or reject it is up to them. There is no need to defend truth; it stands for itself.

he was middle eastern so would look as such.

This is not an accurate depiction of the ancient Israelites from whom Jesus descended:

What that image depicts is the mankind from Europe who overtook the land, claimed it as their own and who live there today mistakenly under the belief that the promise of God will be theirs. The truth is that this mankind never set foot on the land where Jesus dwelled during his lifetime. With all due respect, their population is very, very low in comparison to the true children of Jacob, who has indeed fathered many nations. With all due respect, these "Jewish" (like Jews, like "greenish" is like green...) are living in a land they call Israel (which is more accurately Palestine) that was not their original (ancient) home.

When have you ever seen any of this breed of mankind as black? Because of their lack of melanin, they can never be black, or even dark-skinned, and they simply it is vastly apparent that they do not fit the biblical description of God's chosen people as being black.

White Man admits WHITE israeli jews are not the Real Jews.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Ok, let's go swab the cheeks of every person from the biblical regions. We can look at dishonestly picked paintings and statues all we want, but if you REALLY want to know, DNA analysis will make the point more than racial supremacy stuff will.
edit:
Someone beat me to it:

from here

Haplogroups enable the most basic level of phylogenetic assignment of humans into populations on the basis of shared paternal or maternal ancestry and hence phylogeographic origin. Such haplogroup analysis has been used to trace African origins and subsequent major migration routes for all anatomically modern humans on the planet. In the case of paternal haplogroups, defined by binary markers on the NRY, these have been given designations of major haplogroups A through R, based on the use of a few dozen binary markers, and each such haplogroup can be further refined and subdivided into a hierarchical tree of subhaplogroups, using many additional binary markers. These subhaplogroups are given additional lower case letter and number designations. As an example, NRY haplogroups A and B are dominant in Africa and absent in the Americas. Of relevance to the origin of Jewish populations, the Near East as a whole is populated by a varied mix of major haplogroups among which the most frequent are E and J. Similarly the mitochondrial major haplogroups are designated by letters A through Z, and then again further subdivided using numbers and lower case letters, using additional coding region binary markers. In the case of mitochondrial DNA haplogroups, the major L haplogroup is dominant in Africa and absent in the Americas. Of relevance to Jewish population origins, and as is the case for the Y-chromosome, the Near East is populated with a long list of major mitochondrial haplogroups, among which H, J, T, U, and K are frequent. It is important to emphasize that the most common major haplogroups can be found across very large geographic expanses, and in turn comprise numerous lineages that usually coalesced many thousand years ago.

Long story short, certain African genetic markers are NOT found commonly in the Americas or in Jewish or Near Eastern populations.

 

[Sister Cyber]

Ok, let's go swab the cheeks

I understand your struggle with this truth that Jesus was black and that it conflicts with mainstream teachings you and much of the masses have come to accept without question. It's like the day I found my Christmas gifts hidden in my parent's closet and deducted that there was really no Santa Claus. It's like the day my last tooth fell out and I caught my Dad trying to swipe it for a dollar while I faked being asleep. Those, too are mainstream teachings of parents around the globe in their attempt to control their children... "Be good and you will be rewarded." Then when we are too old to be fooled by stupid nonsense, we are introduced, mostly by our parents, to religious beliefs to help them continue to control our behavior... "Be good and you will be rewarded."

The image I am about to show is the original earliest, most ancient image of Jesus. This image is kept isolated in the back of a Museum in Rome and an image white supremists don't want you to see.But before I show you this image, let's take a look at the false images that were made after it, by racist European artists.

This is not what the real Jesus looked like.

Here is what the original Jesus looked like. He was known as the beardless prophet in ancient times.

His feet (skin) were like fine brass

As if it burned in a furnace.

There you have it, the original image of Jesus looking like a black man, just as the bible describes him. It is time for you to accept the truth and let history be restored without the false corruption. Jesus was not a modern-day Middle Eastern or a white man; he was black.

 

[Sleeppy]

It's highly unlikely Jesus looked African, he was middle eastern so would look as such.

You mean he looked like people who migrated just outside of Africa. Impossible not to look African, considering it's the Son of Man's birthplace.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

You mean he looked like people who migrated just outside of Africa. Impossible not to look African, considering it's the Son of Man's birthplace.

Do most Middle Easterns look African now?

 

[Sleeppy]

Do most Middle Easterns look African now?

They are Africans. Humanity is African.

 

[Parsimony]

His feet (skin) were like fine brass

That same chapter said that His head was white as snow. You are cherry-picking by claiming that His skin looked like brass by using one verse (which only describes His feet) and ignoring another verse saying that His head was white. Human beings don't have feet that look like brass anyway. Brass is metallic, unlike human skin. What is being described is not a normal human, but a divine being. The eyes being like fire makes that clear enough. If that chapter was describing a human, then why single out the feet as looking different from the rest of the body?

 

[Sleeppy]

Ok, let's go swab the cheeks of every person from the biblical regions. We can look at dishonestly picked paintings and statues all we want, but if you REALLY want to know, DNA analysis will make the point more than racial supremacy stuff will.
edit:
Someone beat me to it:

from here

Long story short, certain African genetic markers are NOT found commonly in the Americas or in Jewish or Near Eastern populations.

Too short.

This data was formulated beginning in 1997, across "several continents", to interpret "approximately two millennia" worth of "contemporary Jewish history".


There is a major fundamental problem with the level of vagueness accompanying scientific and historical analysis and terminology, presented there.


To attempt to shorten information that doesn't reveal itself as complete is misguided. What can be ascertained withstanding this information as presented, is this: the entire human population shares a common paternal and maternal ancestry. These ancestors originated in Africa, tens of thousands of years ago. So, when it's being said that certain "African" genetic markers are not found in other parts of the population, it has to be accompanied by some indication of what "African" designates within the human population at any particular time. It's obvious that when we remember and consider that the human population is African, that this word "African" is being repurposed to represent a population, or population(s) within unspecified time periods comprising an overall time period of "approximately two millennia."

This is extremely peculiar.

We know that migration affected and divided the evolutionary processes of human populations over several millennia. It follows that every "contemporary" continental population would have variances in genetic marking, depending on when you look, and where you look. Those variances negate as we head backwards towards those common paternal and maternal ancestors from Africa that we all share.

We're missing timelines and vital population experimentation data.

 

[Random]

Jesus was white with reddish-brown hair whilst he lived on Earth, as Robert Graves and other scholars described him and much as he is traditionally depicted in Western Roman Catholic and most other Christian imagery. Culturally dependent alternate versions in the Near and Far East exist where he has sallow (meaning tanned or olive) skin-tones. In African Churches, as with the Blessed Virgin Mary, he may be depicted as a black person, but it is generally understood there that this is only figurative, not literal or historical.

Similarly, depictions of Egyptian deities were figurative, not literal, as in their arts and crafts various exotic colours, pigments, oils and metals as well as animal motiffs were used to represent the gods. But the upper ruling class of Egypt was almost totally comprised of white people, as were the priestly and merchant classes, so the 'gods' were actually white also. Isis was white, Horus was white and Seth was white. Cleopatra was white. Today, it is still the case that a sizable portion of the Egyptian population is white and some of them can claim legitimate ancestry to the ancient Hebrews. As always, you have to distinguish from the general population when talking about history where it is entwined to some extent with the mythical.

 

[Sister Cyber]

That same chapter said that His head was white as snow.

Wrong. in Revelation 1:14: "His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;" Be sensible now; hair like white wool would look something like this,to show you what wool looks like and it's texture:

Not like this:

You are cherry-picking by claiming that His skin looked like brass

Wrong again. Granted, I may have been around since Jesus was a little boy, but I did not write the scripturres inspired by God.

Human beings don't have feet that look like brass anyway. Brass is metallic, unlike human skin.

Strike 3, you're out. You've already proven you don't know scripture so let me help you again here... The scripture says his feet were LIKE fine brass (as if burned in a furnace), not that they WERE brass. This refers to color, as noted above in Post #68. Healthy Human Beings as divine creatures do have a noticable glow. However, other mankind do not exhibit these features that are apparent in those who were fearfully and wonderfully made.

 

[Tumah]

I blame Christians. You guys bought into supersessionism first. And now you have more crazy people trying to supersess your supersession.

 

[Parsimony]

Wrong. in Revelation 1:14: "His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;" Be sensible now; hair like white wool would look something like this,to show you what wool looks like and it's texture:

Except that it didn't say "like white wool", it said "white like wool". You're changing the sequence of the words to suit your agenda. Nowhere is the texture mentioned. If I say that snow is white like wool I have in no way implied that snow has the texture of wool but rather only made an allusion to its color. You are ignoring that it said that His head was white, which would include his face, not just his hair.

Wrong again. Granted, I may have been around since Jesus was a little boy, but I did not write the scripturres inspired by God.

Then how do you explain the fact that you ignored the part where it said that His head (and therefore face) was white?

Strike 3, you're out. You've already proven you don't know scripture so let me help you again here... The scripture says his feet were LIKE fine brass (as if burned in a furnace), not that they WERE brass. This refers to color, as noted above in Post #68. Healthy Human Beings as divine creatures do have a noticable glow. However, other mankind do not exhibit these features that are apparent in those who were fearfully and wonderfully made.

I didn't say that His feet were made of brass either, but rather that brass has a metallic sheen (unlike human skin). Humans do not have skin that looks like metal.

 

[Tumah]

False. The masses of people centuries past did not joyfully hop on the Christian bandwagon and subsequently pass on their Christian upbringing to their children, grandchildren, great grandchildren, etc., therefore Christians didn't stand on line for tickets to be suppressed. The truth is that the only thing that has been suppressed is the true history that they were FORCED into the Christian religious belief system, which at first was solely a Roman Catholic establishment; later denominations formed to bring various branches into being of what we know as Christianity today.

If you know true history you would be familiar with the Roman Catholic (and then the Spanish) Inquisitions that started in the 12th Century that catapulted the conversion of tremendous masses of people from their original religious beliefs into Christianity (Catholicism).

So if you want to blame anyone for people being suppressed by Christianity, don't blame them, blame someone else....

Uh huh.

No where did I blame anyone for suppresing anything.

 

[Sister Cyber]

My suggestion is, ;'Write more accurate sense in less words'. But that's just me....

My suggestion is to do your own research and don't be afraid to read a lot of words, unless you have a problem concentrating, but even so, with practice, you'll get better at it because reading is fundamental.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I've done research. At best, all you could say that given a certain time period, it might be likely being part of the Roman Empire might make Judea multiethnic, but the genealogies of Jesus doesn't suggest he comes from Europeans or Africans. He comes from Middle Eastern peoples, not all of them Israelites or Hebrews, of course. I know better than to think "Hey, I found some racist sites and cherry-picked image searches and now I'm an expert." I mean, did you even stay at a Holiday Inn?