This is one of the widely portrayed depictions of Jesus Christ.
Everyone agrees, these pictures & statues etc of Jesus, all have a very stereotypical look to them.
Uniformly, it’s one of a tall, handsome, bearded, eastern European looking male, in his mid to late-twenties.
So what does The Bible (the only contemporary historical reference point we have at all for a Jesus of Nazareth) say about the appearance of this messiah bloke?
What biblical-record is there, taken from the thousands of witness’s that allegedly meet him?
The disciples in particular, must have had something to say on how Jesus looked?
Things like his height, the colour of his hair, his skin, facial hair etc?
“He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to Him, nothing in His appearance that we should desire Him” (Isaiah 53:2-5)
That’s it.
That’s the total of the information, believers have to go-on, in respect to what Jesus looked like.
Yet, all these millions of depictions we observe, in every-church around the globe, all look so strikingly similar?
Like much of Christian history versus Christian rhetoric – what you see depicted as Jesus hanging from crosses, in books, on the internet etc – is merely propaganda.
Share fiction, masquerading as fact.
Christianity has its ecumenical roots in Europe, not the middle-east.
These depictions of Jesus are constructed in the minds of Europeans, to extract monies from a European audience.
Rome knew when they started selling Christianity, they needed to present Jesus as looking like ‘one of them’.
There was no way they could market their chosen God, as a dark-skinned, dark-eyed Arab – even though that was most like scenario, given where he was born, and his mothers origins.
To paint Jesus as a Jew, or an Arab, in appearance, would have been an exact representation of their avowed theist enemies.
Even centuries later, those that run the varying Christian sects, know the concept of a dark-skinned Christian messiah – is unpalatable to their audience.
So they continue their advertising campaign with the lily-white, tall handsome ‘he-man’ we see today.
The one mere slither of Biblical record Christians have on the appearance of Jesus, being he was no looker, is completely ignored by virtually all, who depict him.
Goebbels was right, when he said a big lie will gradually become indistinguishable from the truth, and all the more believable, over time.
Perhaps Herr Goebbels was looking at the false characture of Jesus Christ, when he worked that one out?
Uniformly, it’s one of a tall, handsome, bearded, eastern European looking male, in his mid to late-twenties.
So what does The Bible (the only contemporary historical reference point we have at all for a Jesus of Nazareth) say about the appearance of this messiah bloke?
What biblical-record is there, taken from the thousands of witness’s that allegedly meet him?
The disciples in particular, must have had something to say on how Jesus looked?
Things like his height, the colour of his hair, his skin, facial hair etc?
“He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to Him, nothing in His appearance that we should desire Him” (Isaiah 53:2-5)
That’s it.
That’s the total of the information, believers have to go-on, in respect to what Jesus looked like.
Yet, all these millions of depictions we observe, in every-church around the globe, all look so strikingly similar?
Like much of Christian history versus Christian rhetoric – what you see depicted as Jesus hanging from crosses, in books, on the internet etc – is merely propaganda.
Share fiction, masquerading as fact.
Christianity has its ecumenical roots in Europe, not the middle-east.
These depictions of Jesus are constructed in the minds of Europeans, to extract monies from a European audience.
Rome knew when they started selling Christianity, they needed to present Jesus as looking like ‘one of them’.
There was no way they could market their chosen God, as a dark-skinned, dark-eyed Arab – even though that was most like scenario, given where he was born, and his mothers origins.
To paint Jesus as a Jew, or an Arab, in appearance, would have been an exact representation of their avowed theist enemies.
Even centuries later, those that run the varying Christian sects, know the concept of a dark-skinned Christian messiah – is unpalatable to their audience.
So they continue their advertising campaign with the lily-white, tall handsome ‘he-man’ we see today.
The one mere slither of Biblical record Christians have on the appearance of Jesus, being he was no looker, is completely ignored by virtually all, who depict him.
Goebbels was right, when he said a big lie will gradually become indistinguishable from the truth, and all the more believable, over time.
Perhaps Herr Goebbels was looking at the false characture of Jesus Christ, when he worked that one out?
4 comments:
Dude, the Isaiah quote is written entirely in the present tense. Chapters 40-66 are talking about Israel (via Rabbinic Judaism). So the Isaiah quote is completely non-contextual.
The bible is non-contextual. Dude, It's 2000 years later - we don't believe in stoning people to death anymore!
You want to see black Jesus? http://api.ning.com/files/ze3ezbYWZYGkbQ5FKN3JR4buvsXsvd0Oh72MkLRqJDAkRtL-qZU4by4DDisXl4NWWykyp5RfAQX58XqlYDaDYal12oPgs7HU/BlackJesus.jpg
KA, So what you are saying there mate is, there is not one valid line in The Bible, giving us an indication on the appearance of Jesus of Nazareth?
So this gives my original proposition, even more validity, and makes it more farcical.
Thanks for your input.
Paul.
PS: Looking at your musical taste you must go out and get AN EMERALD CITY – great new Kiwi band.
Take a listen at:
http://www.myspace.com/anemeraldcity.
Most Europeans were illiterate after the Fall of Rome. Because books were extremely expensive, only the wealthy could afford to learn to read and own them. Churches were decorated with murals, mosaics, frescoes, and stained-glass windows depicting biblical scenes as a way to teach Christianity to the masses. Jesus was depicted as the Europeans looked: fair-skinned with dark hair. Early depictions were of a Jesus with short, dark hair and a baby-smooth face. The Byzantine Empire had the more well-known image of a bearded Jesus. As the decades passed, visual interpretations of Jesus would change with the times, and it was not uncommon for artists to place biblical events as happening in their own time.
The image of Jesus that we know best stems from the Renaissance. This was a period of new scientific growth and exploration as well as a time when people once again took interest in the stories of Rome and Greece. Jesus was outfitted with long, brown hair, a beard, and a white tunic with a red toga, harkening back to the Roman Empire. It's interesting how this image has lasted about 500 years.
When an artist reinvented Jesus for the 21st century as a clean-shaven black man, people were up in arms! Why? Because it wasn't close enough to the image people have of Jesus. Every culture that adopts Christianity will recreate Jesus in their likeness. The European Jesus is simply the best-known interpretation.
Post a Comment