1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

White Jesus

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Spoofer4114, Jun 23, 2020.

  1. Spoofer4114

    Spoofer4114 Established commenter

  2. Nanook_rubs_it

    Nanook_rubs_it Star commenter

    Well, he has a point...
     
  3. nomad

    nomad Star commenter

    He has a point that Jesus, if he ever actually existed, would be of Middle Eastern ethnicity.

    As far as pulling down or destroying statues, what an absolute idiot he is! Who really cares?
     
  4. Lara mfl 05

    Lara mfl 05 Star commenter

    Indeed, considering Jesus was a Jew born in Israel it is unlikely he would be white or beardless.
     
    lexus300, nomad and agathamorse like this.
  5. Spoofer4114

    Spoofer4114 Established commenter

    If no one cares then why not pull them down? The imagery of Jesus as white European is fake news. Something you often complain about.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2020
  6. magic surf bus

    magic surf bus Star commenter

    Don't even get started on God's ethnicity.
     
    Jamvic and nizebaby like this.
  7. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    What would happen if we pulled down the black Jesus or the Asian one, Just hot air to stir up trouble.
     
    lexus300, xmal and agathamorse like this.
  8. Spoofer4114

    Spoofer4114 Established commenter

    Pull down any statue that is not a true depiction of Jesus and put up one that probably is.

    Not difficult.
     
  9. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    I can imagine them going to churches like Oliver Cromwell and tearing down statues....or maybe thats what they want...to stir folk up till they fight? Will it bring the groups together,I doubt it
     
  10. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    What is true? certainly not ones of any colour as no picture exists of him.Now if you wish a war with a religion go ahead, but you wont get my support as i never think of him in coloured tone!
     
  11. neddyfonk

    neddyfonk Lead commenter

    I get more annoyed about paintings showing Jesus/Mary/others wearing bright blue/purple clothes that did not exist and having halos/ visible auras as if they have some sort of mystical power. People wasted their whole lives building things to house their 'sacred' images that bore no resemblance to reality.
     
    theworm123 likes this.
  12. hhhh

    hhhh Lead commenter

    Also who is to say? Some people think he existed, some don't Some see him as Christ, some argue otherwise. If people choose to see their god in a certain way, surely it's their right? Do you have the right to pull down a statue from another religion, because you don't think he'd look like that? If Judaism/Christianity consider God omnipotent, he could have made his son look any way he wanted him to. Jst as it would not have been 'normal' for a ma to have been able to turn water into wine, he could have made a man look different to how he would had Joseph been his father.
     
    Alice K likes this.
  13. artboyusa

    artboyusa Star commenter

    Love how people think this is about what the historical Jesus looked like.
     
  14. nomad

    nomad Star commenter

    True depiction???

    :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

    [​IMG]
     
    agathamorse and needabreak like this.
  15. NoseyMatronType

    NoseyMatronType Star commenter

    This is one fairly recent and painstaking attempt to reconstruct what Jesus might have looked like.

    [​IMG]
    It featured as part of the BBC documentary series Son of God. The process of that reconstruction can be seen from about 38 minutes onwards here:



    Back in the 1960's and 70's the physical appearance of Jesus and its relevance to Black Liberation Theology was an issue of major importance.

    For example, in 1968, Albert Cleage’s book Black Messiah urged black people to liberate themselves from white theological oppression. Though he had initially believed in integration - some of the churches he served were racially mixed - Bishop Cleage eventually came to despair of the hope that whites would ever willingly help blacks advance. He also befriended Malcolm X, the Black Muslim leader, who had Michigan roots. Arguing that scripture was written by black Jews, Cleage claimed that the gospel of a black Messiah had been perverted by St Paul in his attempt to make the Christian faith more acceptable to Europeans.

    According to an obituary in the New York Times, Cleage split with both the white power structure and more moderate black leaders, and began to emphasize black separatism in economics, politics and religion. As he put it:

    ''The basic problem facing black people is their powerlessness,'' he said. ''You can't integrate power and powerlessness.''

    Trying to counter what he saw as white domination of religion, like the Nation of Islam, Cleage promoted a gospel of black nationalism. He installed a larger-than-life painting of a black Madonna holding a black baby Jesus that was radical for its time, and preached that Jesus was a black revolutionary whose identity as such had been obscured by whites.

    [​IMG]

    Subsequently, in 1969, the National Committee of Black Churchmen produced a statement on Black Theology in which it was described as follows:

    Black theology is a theology of black liberation. It seeks to plumb the black condition in the light of God's revelation in Jesus Christ, so that the black community can see that the Gospel is commensurate with the achievements of black humanity. Black theology is a theology of "blackness." It is the affirmation of black humanity that emancipates black people from white racism, thus providing authentic freedom for both white and black people.

    Contrastingly, another black theologian James Cone (better known in the USA than over here) argued that Jesus could be described as symbolically black. Cone used the term 'ontologically black' which meant that in his essence - in his inner being - Jesus is black. This does not mean that, like Cleage, Cone thought that Jesus was actually literally black (though he did point out that Jesus would not have been the blue eyed Caucasian that western Christians tend to depict him as). The point is not Jesus' literal colour, but what he stood for. By choosing to enter into the world in such a way that he himself experienced oppression, God chose to identify with black people. This means that their struggles are his struggles and - importantly - his eventual triumph will be their triumph.

    Cone drew parallels in particular between Jesus' crucifixion and the types of violence experienced by black Americans in the twentieth century. Between the end of the nineteenth century and the mid years of the twentieth century around 3,500 black Americans had been lynched in America - mostly in southern states. Jesus' crucifixion, whilst done at the hands of the Roman authorities, has some similarities with a lynching. Supposedly the crowds chanted 'crucify him, crucify him' forcing the Roman governor Pilate to accept their demands or face a riot.

    If the method of his means of death reinforces his status as one of the oppressed then his resurrection is a promise of hope for a better future. For Cone, part of the significance of the resurrection is that the oppressed one triumphs.

    That is why Cone has arguably added a new Christological title to the range given in the New Testament. Not only is Jesus the 'Son of God' or the 'Son of David', he is also the Black Messiah. Historically Jesus is 'black' because he sides with the oppressed (by being baptised he acknowledges his place with sinners) but as the Black Christ, the Church preaches and recognises that his resurrection marks the triumph of justice over oppression. Black theology therefore argues for the necessity of combining the Jesus of history and the Christ of Faith.

    For Cone, the Jesus of history represents the basis for belief. His life becomes the standard for evaluating Christological beliefs. The Christ of white Western Theology (a meek pacifist teaching people to turn the other cheek and encouraging the oppressed to patiently accept their suffering) fails the authenticity test when compared to the Jesus of History (as found in the Gospels).

    One of the most controversial elements of Cone's teaching is that he believed that liberation should be sought through 'any means necessary' (a phrase originally deployed by Fanon, then Sartre, then Malcolm X) . He justified this on the basis that black people exist within a society which is geared against them (he compared their situation to that of Jews in Nazi Germany). He said 'white appeals to "wait and talk it over" are irrelevant when children are dying and men and women are being tortured.' Whilst his contemporary and fellow Christian black activist Martin Luther King advocated non-violent methods, Cone associated himself with the Black Power movement which was willing to use violence to achieve its goals.

    Any white/black reconciliation which was possible was to be done on black terms. White people needed to ask for forgiveness and 'become black' - i.e. identify with the oppressed and experience oppression before reconciliation could be achieved. Cone was exceedingly critical of white churches which had not done enough to oppose racism and segregation. He argued that their lack of action meant that they were unchristian as they had failed to stand up for what Jesus really stood for. He described white churches as the antichrist and wrote:

    'Racism is a complete denial of the Incarnation and thus of Christianity. Therefore, the white denominational churches are unchristian.'

    Returning to the image of the Black Madonna, more recently the artist Chris Ofili has controversially produced a painting depicting a Black Madonna surrounded by images from blaxploitation movies, close-ups of female genitalia cut from pornographic magazines, and elephant dung. These were formed into shapes reminiscent of the cherubim and seraphim commonly depicted in images of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary.

    I won't reproduce it here but it is easy to find on Google Images. If you see it without knowing about the dung and you don't look too closely, it actually looks fairly innocuous. I couldn't actually spot any blaxploitation imagery but that's what the Wikipedia says.

    Just thought this was worth posting to demonstrate that Martin Luther King Jr wasn't the only game in town back then.
     
  16. Jamvic

    Jamvic Star commenter

     
    needabreak likes this.
  17. Spoofer4114

    Spoofer4114 Established commenter

    Jesus is supposed to be the son of God. If Jesus is white then God must be white. This feeds white supremacy and racism and as such affects and has affected the lives of millions.
     
    JL48 and monicabilongame like this.
  18. George_Randle

    George_Randle Established commenter

    I imagine there's more than one Swiss Guard stationed by the Pieta these days.
     
    agathamorse likes this.
  19. peter12171

    peter12171 Star commenter

    Historically Jesus has been depicted as white, largely because of the association of Christianity with Rome. It is almost certain that Jesus (who few believe was not an historical figure) would have had darker skin than has been depicted over time, but the colour of his skin is irrelevant as far as theology and religion is concerned.
     
  20. peter12171

    peter12171 Star commenter

    And there are also plenty of black Jesus statues around the world. Not as many as white ones, but there isn't a monopoly.
     
    Jonntyboy, alex_teccy and chelsea2 like this.

Share This Page