It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why isnt Jesus, an Arab?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 02:14 AM
link   
The Mandylion of Edessa from the private chapel of the pope in the Vatican is considered to be the earliest painting of Jesus.

en.wikipedia.org...:39bMandylion.jpg




posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Coins, paintings, carvings, statues...........it's all art, and it's all artistic interpretation. That's it. Unless you can provide us with a photograph then it's historical conjecture made into art. No photo, no proof.

Why worry about what he looks like.......eventually you're going to find out anyway.


And again, what He looked like is truly irrelevant to His message..........Jesus was Jewish, read the New Testament. If he was light-skinned or dark-skinned that was truly not part of his His message at all.

He didn't ask people to worship the color of his skin.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
The Mandylion of Edessa from the private chapel of the pope in the Vatican is considered to be the earliest painting of Jesus.

Looks like a Jewish man to me.
Neat picture by the way.
Thank you.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
In the time of Jesus, Israel was jewish land. Jesus christ would have been dark complicted but he would have been jewish, not arabic. I would imagine that he would have been olive colored, but what makes the difference? He lived in the desert!


Was Arabia even a country back then?! I acutally don't know, which is why I'm asking.

If it wasn't then I think you're confusing Arab with Semetic. Which most Arabs and Jews are.

But yeah, Jesus would have been darker than the generally portrayed white Jesus by the renassaince artists and the like.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by wellwhatnow
I think his appearance is completely relevant.

Consider a few hypothetical examples:

If Jesus had been black and had always been pictured that way, do you think that African-Americans would have suffered so much violence and segregation in the US?


Actually...probably. Being that most Black people are from Sub-Saharan Africa, and Sub-Saharan wasn't really all that developed (save for maybe Nubia and a few other scattered places), the people who came to conquer them wouldn't have that thought twice about enslaving them if Jesus had been black. White people enslaved other white people just the same, so I don't see how Jesus bing black would affect anything diferently. People conquer those lower on the technology scale, regardless of what they look like. Which is dispicable, but that's history.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arcane Demesne
... the people who came to conquer them wouldn't have that thought twice about enslaving them if Jesus had been black.


I was thinking in more modern terms - more along the lines of the civil rights movement in the 50s and 60s. I think it might have been harder to justify segregation and general mistreatment if all of our Jesus pictures had been black.

You make a good point though, people always have the potential to mistreat others.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arcane Demesne

Actually...probably. Being that most Black people are from Sub-Saharan Africa, and Sub-Saharan wasn't really all that developed (save for maybe Nubia and a few other scattered places), the people who came to conquer them wouldn't have that thought twice about enslaving them if Jesus had been black. White people enslaved other white people just the same, so I don't see how Jesus bing black would affect anything diferently. People conquer those lower on the technology scale, regardless of what they look like. Which is dispicable, but that's history.


exactly, as sad as it is, blacks were enslaved because they were easy targets. They didnt really have much of a defense against the europeans who arrived in africa. They didnt even have a bow or arrow. In ancient times it was quite common for white people to be enslaved, Romans enslaved practically all their enemies to their detriment. Hell, it was common to enslave even whites up until the 1600s. The phenomenon of only enslaving blacks in early america was a very strange one and relatively short lived.

Also, I think Arabia was more or less a kingdom in those days.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Well I have never seen a blonde haired, blue eyed Jesus portrait.


unforutnately, there are plenty



I think you are trying to be too politically correct. I question, when so many people make a mockery of christianity, what the motivation behind trying to change the racial identity of Jesus Christ from Hebrew to Arab to African. Stop being so damn politically correct.


HEBREWS WERE AN ETHNIC GROUP
dammit
why don't people realize that the hebrew people were, at that time, nothing more than a seperate religious and ethnic group and still of the "arab" racial group?
i even gave a composite of the palestinian hebrew of the early first century, or am i on ignore?
also
there were plenty of african hebrews in the area at the time
it was somewhat common
hence the claims of the ethiopian jews of today



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Jesus (if he existed) most likely was an Arab..........

Actually.. he was a Semite... which is pretty much an Arab.

Actually.. if you look at present day Palestinians, that is what he would of looked like. And the whole Marry Magdalen had red hair bit, people always say well she had to of been white to have red hair! ... not really.. quite a bit of Persians (Iranians) have red hair.

Of course, my personal views on Jesus is that his mother was raped by a Roman soldier (not uncommon at all, but if your raped you would be killed for having sex outside of marriage and shaming the family) so she said it was by divine intervention. So maybe he was half white, half Palestinian?
who knows. Who cares.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
The Mandylion of Edessa from the private chapel of the pope in the Vatican is considered to be the earliest painting of Jesus.

en.wikipedia.org...:39bMandylion.jpg


I think there's a misunderstanding or mistype there in Wikipedia (I see the information repeated elsewhere.) The Mandylion dates from 500 AD. But there's art in the catacombs depicting Jesus (also mentioned in Wikipedia) that dates to 200 AD.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Of course, my personal views on Jesus is that his mother was raped by a Roman soldier (not uncommon at all, but if your raped you would be killed for having sex outside of marriage and shaming the family) so she said it was by divine intervention. So maybe he was half white, half Palestinian?
who knows. Who cares.


technically
she would have been stoned to death for not screaming for help loud enough for people to hear her and stop it
and if they had heard her, the soldier would have had to pay her father, and then she would have been wed to the soldier

yeah, quite the win-win situation there, right?



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Confusing Arabs with Semitic peoples is really blurring the distinctions between all the groups in the regions. A good portion of Europeans look similar, should we call them all German for the sake of simplicity?

ALL the people in the region at the time of Jesus Christ came from basically the same stock, remember that Abraham thing? You would probably be hard pressed to tell the difference between a Jew and a Babylonian just by their look if they were naked and could not speak and wore the same hairstyle. Especially with the travels of the Jews when they were in moved around by Egypt and Babylonia and Persia. Was Jesus light skinned and blond, probably not, he probably looked similar to his contempories of the time.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
and yes, he had olive skin, scruffy dark hair and eyes, IE Arab.


The Jews and Arabs maybe closely related, but there are differences. Hebrews are not Arabic, yet they share common linguistics. They are considered different racial groups.


I am going to have to disagree with you...

Semites consist of jews and arabs. They are the same people. We are all the same people way back when and they are very very close relatives.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 02:19 PM
link   
No, the Arab part of Arabs came from the Islamic conquests in 6th or 7th century AD. So nobody then, even those living in that are was "Arab".

Of course there was lots of intermixing genetically but do remember that in that era it was typical for conquerors to kill native males and impregnate the females, and there was significant migration as well.

It is reasonable hence to believe that the genetic biotype of the Aramaic speaking people of the time is distinct from most current day Arabs.

It would probably be difficult or impossible to find a true "Aramaic Jew" of the time ethnically today.

However, there may be one community with verifiable indigenous continuity and likely little intermarriage, who are probably closest to what one might guess:

Samaritans

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I think that Mary was genetically impregnated by ETs.

The bible said that the wise men followed a star to where Jessus was born. How the hell do you follow a star if it is not moving. Perhaps it was a UFO that they were following.

Just a thought.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
Confusing Arabs with Semitic peoples is really blurring the distinctions between all the groups in the regions.


Arabs are semitic.

Islam's take on Isa's (Jesus') skin color is that his skin is reddish brown, like other Arabs. Muhammad's ascent into heaven at night also gave clues to Moses' skin as well, stating that Moses is black.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 03:23 PM
link   
I find it really amusing when people defend what ethnicity he was. Like it matters



Originally posted by XphilesPhan
christ would have been dark complicted but he would have been jewish, not arabic


Pssst... Judaism is a religion.

[edit on 4/2/07 by SteveR]



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Originally posted by pavil
Confusing Arabs with Semitic peoples is really blurring the distinctions between all the groups in the regions.


Arabs are semitic.


Yes, but not all Semites are Arab. That is the point I was trying to get across. Plus the Koran was written at least 600-700 years after the fact. The Koran's knowledge of Jesus's life is second hand at best coming from Christian sources in the first place.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Basically the difference is mainly georaphical. Racially Jesus would've been a Semite like the Arabs, but at around that time the Arab tribes were mainly inhabiting the Arabian Peninsula.

The Arabians pretty much stayed put until the emergence of Islam and the subsequent Arab Conquests.....Until that time pretty much every Empire in the Middle East (including the Macedonians) left the entire Arab Peninsula well alone.



posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 05:51 PM
link   
The peoples of Israel 2,000 years ago where 1. Semetic 2. Greek/Roman

Those are the biggest populations any ways.

There are always minorities, blacks, arabs..

But like I said.. look at the people of Palestine, who have been there since the time of Jesus and well beyond, they are not really Arabic like Saudies, Sudaneese or such..

They kind of have a mediteranian appearance, like Greeks, and a Persian appearance as well mixed with arabs.

But still I don't see why it matters? Religions are based on the culture that creates them... religion doesnt form society, society forms religion.

My views on how religions are formed...

But isnt the story of Jesus sopposed to be the important part? If he was an Arab or a Semite, would that some how change the story?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join