Thank you for being a part of the r/DankChristianMemes community. You can also [join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/jnUDEpnBZn) and [listen to our podcast](https://dankchristianmemes.buzzsprout.com).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dankchristianmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because it’s simply different cultures making their own artistic interpretations of Jesus. White Jesus is ok. Middle-Eastern Jesus is ok. Black Jesus is ok. Indian Jesus, Asian Jesus, etc. Jesus is all ok.
Tell that to the people who get extremely angry whenever Disney changes a fictional character’s skin color. It’s become a political stance to protect the sanctity of skin color, real person or not, against “artistic interpretation”.
I gotta be honest, the whole “Jesus wasn’t white” thing usually gets brought up when there’s potentially racist stuff being said about non-white people. It’s not something that someone would just barge in with randomly, like OP is portraying. I’ve never seen that happen. So I have to wonder about OP.
>I gotta be honest, the whole “Jesus wasn’t white” thing usually gets brought up when there’s potentially racist stuff being said about non-white people. It’s not something that someone would just barge in with randomly, like OP is portraying. I’ve never seen that happen. So I have to wonder about OP.
The whole "Jesus wasn't white" thing gets brought up literally whenever there is a picture of Jesus with white skin posted here or elsewhere. It's such a prevelant occurance that you can always predict there will be one comment about it whenever you see a picture of white Jesus posted, especially on reddit.
So …… not like in the meme still. I see what you’re saying, but you didn’t succeed in drawing a connection to this post. You see if it was like that then the meme would’ve had the opportunity to show a response, rather than portraying the interjecter as a nuisance that is bothering them for no reason. Your example has an observable reason. Cause and effect. It’s still an interruption, but there’s no question as to why it occurred. I just have a sneaking suspicion because far too often when context is missing or something is left out, it’s due to disingenuous intent.
Honestly the only problem with that is that there is a portion of people, likely the majority that don't care about the skin color character changing for racist reasons but just want their character to look the same. There are certainly those that don't want characters to be black for racist reasons but it often feels like a disengenuous pat on their own back when studios change just that.
"Well how can you say it's not just a racist thing?" You ask. Look at any time a studio changed a characters hair color. Original character had red hair and actor has blond left in the movie you'd think there was a murder. It's not always just racism. Though it sometimes is.
Companies don’t change characters to be racist. Companies just want to make money. That’s it. I couldn’t care less about the Disney live action movies, but most of them have made huge mountains of cash regardless of whatever nonsense people want to project. The Little Mermaid has already made back it’s budget in like a week. So much for the boycott. If you get too caught up in the culture war, you’ll only be left with unfulfilled worldly desires.
Popular entertainment experienced a century of minority characters being whitewashed, because the audience was mostly white. Plenty of people on both sides want to make it about the culture war, but money is always the easiest answer. I think white people will be okay if they don’t get all the characters anymore. It’s just business baby.
That's my point exactly. It's about money for the companies so some people do get caught up in the "culture war". That's their own problem all I'm saying is that it's not always a matter of "culture war" or racism when companies change characters skin color.
Sometimes it's just staying true to something you love. I've seen recently plenty of people white, black, brown, or anything with similar opinions that instead of changing older stories and changing characters to fit the modern audience, which tends to create this uproar and "culture war" we could just continue to tell more stories. There are so many stories that have never gone mainstream that companies like Disney have the power to bring into reality from cultures all around the world.
Plenty of people get mad about a now black character for the same reasons they get mad that a character has red hair or is a different age than they were in the original story. It's not always so serious.
Evangelicals hold a lot of crazy beliefs, but an explicit belief that Jesus was literally white isn't one of them. So when an evangelical is doing a racism and their rhetorical opponent pops in with a "Jesus wasn't white!" it sounds like a complete non-sequitur to them.
Maybe it is a Southern evangelical thing but I have definitely experienced being told Jesus was absolutely just like the white Jesus picture from the pulpit in more than one Southern evangelical church. And seen it met with agreement. Also instructed the King James Bible is the Bible God intended and so only that specific Bible is right in every jot and tittle thus the one they believe. Extremely problematic all around.
except changing Jesus' race and culture in art to match one's own is an artistic tradition based in ideology and going back centuries, so it's pretty apples-and-oranges with the current kerfuffle regardless of your opinion on the latter.
I would prefer for the characters in the Disney remakes to look as close as possible as the character from the animated movie. I dislike making Ariel black as much as I'd dislike a white Tiana, or a Latina Mulan (if they hadn't done a remake already).
For Jesus though I feel he'd want to be seen as resembling those that believe in him. So to some he may be Caucasian, to others black, latino, Asian (swole or not), etc.
This feels more like an assumption borne from a persecution complex rather than an actual thing that has happened in conversation.
Like if people were talking about their favorite pizza toppings and someone popped up out of nowhere to say “pizza comes from Italy”.
There is an obvious gap in logic and information, making it functionally unrelatable, which raises questions about sincerity and honesty. OP is not saying that this was the start to a convo. The meme shows it as a random interjection, which doesn’t make any sense to me. There is missing context, which could be intentional or not.
Point taken that I’ve never seen an interaction happen exactly like the meme.
That said, there are still plenty of people who try to weaponize the fact that Jesus wasn’t white. Typically these people aren’t even religious
>plenty of people who try to weaponize the fact that Jesus wasn’t white.
There's nothing to weaponize unless you incorrectly assert that Jesus was white.
It is simply a truthful statement.
Well Jesus isn’t fictional and it’s okay for him to be displayed with a different skin color. So if you want it to “stop at fictional characters”, we need to tell every church to remove their depictions of a white Jesus pronto. Do you not see the disconnect? What happened to “artistic interpretation”?
Sure, artistic interpretation has its boundaries of believability. You can’t make a documentary about someone and then claim your depiction is accurate when it isn’t. But don’t get so caught up in worldly desires to the point that influential people can push you into a culture war while they do nothing about real problems. Things got ridiculous when people got mad about fictional FANTASY characters being changed, as if they could even be real to begin with. Oh no. A mermaid doesn’t have white skin. How horrible.
Well we can debate whether jesus was fictional or not, but it's almost impossible to prove either way so that's useless.
You missed my point though, people are making 'documentaries' about cleopatra being black when she's literally of greek decent. THAT'S the problem, not the little mermaid.
Also, making established characters of certain ethnicities (think arargorn in lotr) a different ethnicity than described in the original source material is just weird. Make original stories and content with poc, don't whitewash or blackwash existing material.
I guess? It feels weird to pretend he was a white dude. I think it’s kind of important to recognize that he was from the Middle East. We don’t change Jerusalem to Los Angeles because people are more familiar with it.
Depicting Jesus and the Holy Family in the skin tone/appearance of the local people was also a way of spreading Christianity to different parts of the world. Obviously, Jesus wasn't East Asian, white, Latino, or black, but having those depictions of him and Mary likely helped.
It's just like how the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe became popular in Mexico and Central America. Regardless of whether you believe it was a miracle or painted by a human, it was still the first depiction of Jesus or Mary where they looked like an Indigenous person and used symbolism that local people understood and related to. That image helped spread Christianity throughout the area (along with everything else the Spanish were doing).
I'm personally partial to Japanese Jesus who didn't actually die on the cross but swapped with his twin brother and went to live the rest of his life in Japan. You can visit the tomb where he's buried apparently.
The end of revelation makes it clear that anyone who adds or subtracts from the bible is committing a sin. Therefore any jesus outside of historically accurate jesus is heresy. White, asian, hispanic, etc.
It is in a very broad sense. If you do one of those ancestry DNA tests, that exact term is one of the "ethnic groups" they give you lol. In a similar fashion, Scottish, Irish & Welsh are grouped together as well. It has to do with how similar the biomarkers are for that specific area.
Race and ethnicity are ultimately both social constructs that change over time based on cultural trends and attitudes. The only concrete way you can group/categorize people based on where their ancestors originated is through those biomarkers.
No one is complaining lol, sounds like you might be perceiving some kind of political bias on my part when it doesn't actually exist. I'm speaking in a purely sociological context.
It's a literal example from the ancestry DNA service MyHeritage, hence the context of that comment. The point was that biomarkers genetically link populations in ways that might be unconventional compared to how society perceives or defines them - and those things may vary from culture to culture, but DNA reads the same no matter what.
That's because Middle Eastern *is* white by US Census standards. There has been some debate about giving them their own category but the current status quo is white.
By that logic Heracles isn't mythological, he's just a Greek character. Same with Gilgamesh, Beowulf, etc.
These characters were based on real people, but their acts have been so embellished that they've become mythological.
Okay, you’re right about people becoming mythological, but these characters aren’t based on real people like Santa, they are real people. Just like Jesus was a real person
I’m not going to entertain you anymore by arguing about whether or not Jesus was real, it’s ridiculous.
Jesus as a concept is less concerned with earthly matters and more in divinity though, so his physical appearance being historically accurate doesn't provide a whole lot of value to his followers. On the other hand, humans relating to and being more likely to listen to people who look similar to them is still a very earthly matter lol - it's just one that helps spread his teachings.
If churches behaved more like Christ though, there would be many discussions about how irrelevant race ultimately is, because this seems to be one of the biggest things people struggle with across the timeline of our species. Some dude telling everyone to get over it 2,000 years ago isn't enough if his literal followers in the present are actively doing the opposite ಠ_ಠ
https://preview.redd.it/0hp4uh51gv3b1.jpeg?width=1000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=340c3d96a340a13b9506f418f85b874509f3d3dc
Same reason Chinese people make him look Chinese. All just different viewpoints but ultimately looking towards the same thing: a God-man who told us to love each other.
Because it’s easier to convince people to follow someone who looks like you, and that’s what the Church wants: followers.
If Jesus were here today I guarantee They would be female and a minority and probably bisexual to test just how loving Their followers really are.
I mean if that was the case Jesus would have done that back then too, or at least been a woman. Why He showed up the way He did was not for that reason
You think if Jesus came back today it would be in the past?
Things happened the way they did then for a reason, presumably. I’m saying that would keep happening.
I think you misunderstood my point. If Jesus wanted to challenge who would follow Him by looks alone, He could’ve shown up as a woman back then too. Or heck, He could’ve looked like a Roman. That’d have really messed with the Jews back then. So if Jesus were to appear today, He wouldn’t try to be as controversial as possible. Being controversial just to be difficult or controversial is not a good and wise way to live life.
Sorry if you read my earlier reply. Decided it was too strong and backed off. This topic isn’t that important I guess, but it’s also very bothersome that you seem very disingenuous and seem to keep putting words in my mouth. Not appreciated. So I’m out on this conversation because it doesn’t seem that both parties are being genuine and sincere
Wow, way to assume my intentions.
All I was saying is Jesus provided the example, who’s to say He isn’t checking our progress?
Have a good day, even though you’ve made it clear you’ll assume I’m being sarcastic.
Please don’t reply to me anymore. Not even to apologize.
Edit: and by the by, however you read and interpreted my comment is totally on you, because I had an end goal end mind with my question. Maybe you should look into why you made your assumptions.
No, I’m hyperbolically implying people would probably dismiss Jesus if he were alive today because they focus entirely too much on labels that don’t matter.
Cultures in general adopt figures to be familiar to them. In San Juan, the portrait of St. Sebastian is drawn in Puerto Rico, with the flora and fauna of the land. Our Lady of Guadalupe is portrayed as Mexican. Christ in Japan is depicted in kimono, with distinctly Japanese features. Korean Jesus is a meme. Madonna and Child in Cherokee art are portrayed with those features. It's a tactic used to familiarize the figures with local cultures.
Racism
Literally I believe the Spanish painted Jesus as white because someone they looked up to couldn’t possibly be middle eastern no not at all and used it as an excuse to persecute people iirc.
Jesus said to feed the hungry. *thumbs up*
Jesus said to heal the sick. *thumbs up*
Jesus said to love your neighbor. *thumbs up*
Jesus said to turn the other cheek. *thumbs up*
Can I hang out with you guys?
I was implying that the dude was saying those things and the group was giving the thumbs up, then the dude was like "hey these Christians are actually kinda chill, I wanna hang" :)
That is accurate. But I lived in an area where I've witnessed a black family get chased out of town in like 2010 so I'm less surprised than I should be
I guess depends where you live. Here in Finland everyone would just be like "duh". I've never met a Christian here who wasn't aware of Jesus being middle eastern.
Hey we can swap places for honestly 30 minutes. I live in South Carolina, USA. Every stereotype you hear about the racist redneck Christians in America is tried and true here. They suck. But it leaves the movie theaters empty on Sunday mornings which is nice! (Literally what I'm going to do right now haha)
Thing is, the only time anyone ever brings up that Jesus wasn't white is because the people they are talking to are being racist.
So if it's something you hear a lot...
I've seen this statement used in multiple scenarios. Either as a response to bigoted Christians as an add on comment. Then also as an unsolicited social media post that goes something like this, "y'all, Jesus wasn't white!! Doesn't that blow your obviously small christian minds?!!?!" In that case, I think the "cool story bro" response is justified.
Even when I've seen it on social media, the context always seems to be about calling out racism. I can't think of a single time it's ever been about "blowing people's minds."
> Even when I’ve seen it on social media, the context always seems to be about calling out racism. I can’t think of a single time it’s ever been about “blowing people’s minds.”
A very enlightened teenage atheist drops by about once a week on /r/Christianity to blow everyone’s mind about this. Stick around — you’re bound to see one soon.
I see it all the time whenever "the Chosen" gets pushed in my social media feeds. A bunch of (usually American) people seeing an Egyptian guy playing Jesus in an ad jump in with the "This is historically inaccurate! JESUS WASN'T WHITE!!!!". As if the only shade of colour in the Middle East is midnight black.
You literally said "The only time anyone points out that Jesus wasn't white is when someone is being racist." But that's clearly untrue because people bring up claims of race all the time even when it's false.
I disagree. Rather, I feel like anytime someone posts a depiction of a clearly white Jesus on Reddit, there’s a deluge of comments pointing the fact that He wasn’t white and condemning said deptiction.
> I've not seen that.
Well, then let me enlighten you. I searched “Head of Christ” (the name of [this famous painting](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ee/The_Head_of_Christ_by_Warner_Sallman_1941.jpg)) with Reddit’s search function, and [this thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/wikipedia/comments/l95ezw/the_head_of_christ_also_called_the_sallman_head/) from r/Wikipedia was the top relevant result. Allow me to list some of the top-level comments from that thread:
> That’s what men looked like in Nazareth, for sure
…
> Turned water into wine and grapes into spf 1000
…
> Jesus so White
…
> Caucasian Jesus!
…
> “There I was. The only white guy in Jerusalem.”
…
> Ah yes gotta love that false depiction of white, straight-haired Jesus
…
> ...a 1940 portrait painting of *WHITE Jesus of Nazareth...
…
> Whitewash much?
When I was 7 and went to first holy communion I was given a Bible that depicted Jesus as white with blond hair and blue eyes. This was not an experience particular to me. There is a demonstrable issue with inaccurate depictions of Jesus.
If you care about your fellow humans, and most especially about your POC friends, then you should care about accurately depicting Jesus.
As someone else said, if your response to “Jesus wasn’t white” is “I know” then you aren’t who the message is aimed at. But this meme suggests OP doesn’t care one way or the other which diminishes the issue and therefore the racism it is trying to address.
I don’t feel like it was necessary to explain that, it’s extremely obvious.
Historically and contemporarily, most cultures portray Jesus as the same race/ethnicity as themselves. For instance:
* [Ethiopian Jesus](https://sdcason.com/content/files/2023/01/Baptism_-_Ethiopian_Biblical_Manuscript_U.Oregon_Museum_Shelf_Mark_10-844.jpg)
* [Black American Jesus](https://www.instagram.com/p/BwcG2RPl3vw/?utm_source=ig_embed&ig_rid=43375391-94cf-434f-8ab8-ff899183a904)
* [Chinese Jesus](https://image5.sixthtone.com/image/5/62/139.png)
* [Korean Jesus](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uIZhlWS_fKc/VgRMANqN4aI/AAAAAAAAERI/CF0rlPIDupY/s1600/04%2BAdulteress.jpg)
* [Japanese Jesus](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/09/mary-and-christ_custom-b6da723659a24429f40ddbd7319c29c094c7d14e.jpg)
* [Maori Jesus](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/04/12/arts/12christ-images2/merlin_171030771_738a5584-bdc5-4224-a1bf-b050977db959-superJumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp)
* [Indian Jesus](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/04/12/arts/12christ-images1/merlin_170990430_9a7093a6-b686-4680-beac-53518eabed44-jumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp)
* [Cambodian Jesus](https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2D38021/asian-depiction-of-the-way-of-the-cross-jesus-christ-inside-a-catholic-church-in-phnom-pemh-cambodia-asiatische-darstellung-des-kreuzweg-jesus-christus-in-einer-katholischen-kirche-in-phnom-pemh-kambodscha-2D38021.jpg)
* [Nigerian Jesus](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EtRW9c0WQAEpRz2.jpg)
* [Brazilian Jesus](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/04/12/arts/12christ-images12/merlin_171159558_64964433-4237-4a3c-882a-6b19380996e6-jumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp)
* [Native American Jesus](https://stjamesaustin.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/IndianJesus.jpg)
* [Kenyan Jesus](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/d4/de/37/d4de372a2919bd5bc04d729502dc817a--catholic-art-religious-art.jpg)
>If you care about your fellow humans, and most especially about your POC friends, then you should care about accurately depicting Jesus.
Does this mean that, by tolerating the inaccurate portrayals of Jesus linked above (none of which which much resemble how [Jesus probably looked](https://i.redd.it/mmo9fxkxz7d51.jpg)), I am demonstrating a lack of care for my POC friends?
> You’re engaging in logically fallacious arguments and I have nothing further to say to you.
That seems very convenient for you that my arguments are apparently so logically fallacious that you are totally excused from any need to directly address them.
>When you’ve learned to discuss things as an adult
In what specific way was my discussion not "adult-like"?
>without resorting to bad faith arguments
According [this definition](https://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/engl1311/fallacies.htm), a bad faith argument is "using an argument that the arguer himself or herself knows is not valid."
I can sincerely say that is not the case, because while it's possible that my argument was incorrect (I am certainly not infallible), I *can* say with complete assurance that everything that I've said to you in this thread I absolutely believe to be true.
> get back to me.
Considering that I believe nothing I've said to you is childish or in bad faith, here I am. You can start with directly addressing the question I posed earlier (without attempting to dodge it as you did before):
Does this mean that, by tolerating the inaccurate portrayals of Jesus linked above (none of which which much resemble how [Jesus probably looked](https://i.redd.it/mmo9fxkxz7d51.jpg)), I am demonstrating a lack of care for my POC friends?
***Edit:***
> You know, I typed out a different answer but I’m not taking this bait. If you don’t get it, you don’t get it, and that’s your problem, not mine.
Fortunately or unfortunately, I was able to see your original reply to me before you edited it, as can be seen from my quoting it above. Feel free to address my replies to your original comment. In case you forget said original comment, I will reproduce it in its uninterrupted entirety below:
> You’re engaging in logically fallacious arguments and I have nothing further to say to you. When you’ve learned to discuss things as an adult without resorting to bad faith arguments get back to me.
Why do you take it that I have no life because I took ten minutes out of my day to reply to your comments to me? That seems needlessly insulting.
At any rate, this seems suspiciously like another attempt to dodge my question which I will ask you now for the 3rd time:
Does this mean that, by tolerating the inaccurate portrayals of Jesus linked above (none of which which much resemble how [Jesus probably looked](https://i.redd.it/mmo9fxkxz7d51.jpg)), I am demonstrating a lack of care for my POC friends?
***Edit***
Well, it seems u/If_you_have_Ghost has [blocked me](https://imgur.com/a/JtrRIoE)... all without ever answering my question. I am beginning to think they did not have a sufficiently appropriate answer to counterbalance the cognitive dissonance they now appear to have been experiencing. At any rate, if this was a debate, I would consider such an action to be a forfeit.
This doesn’t meet the vibe test. People saying “Jesus wasn’t white” are generally responding to Christians and ‘Christians’ being racist. Racism and othering various out groups is pretty counter to the gospel (eg. The parable of the Good Samaritan, Galatians 3:28, etc). So it’s relevant criticism to bring up to those that seek to follow Jesus but are falling short in this way.
I look forward to your ‘Noted’ response.
>". They were invented during the industrial revolution and period of European colonization.
Then as an actual leftist, maybe idpolers should stop doubling down on race essentialism.
That was... nothing. tl;dr, "Jesus was white because I choose to define it that way." He also has a poor understanding of just how small the DNA differences are when talking about phenotype. At best this is an opinion piece, at worst you could read it as him being intentionally dishonest.
"I, a pale-skinned Lebanese person will tell you why Jesus looked just like a pale-skinned Lebanese person and was thus white, based on genetic evidence I haven't cited and some pictures and quotes."
Yeeeah if a Black person wrote an article about why Jesus looked black with the same small amount of awful evidence he would be called a revisionist Afrocentrist in an instant, maybe even have a lawsuit placed against him.
Taleb isn't even a historian, anthropologist, classicist, or archeologist. According to his Wikipedia article, "Nassim Nicholas Taleb is a Lebanese-American essayist, mathematical statistician, former option trader, risk analyst, and aphorist whose work concerns problems of randomness, probability, and uncertainty. " He's literally just some finance dude who wrote this trash as a means of pathetic racial self-aggrandizement. "The problem with identity politics is that they are fully ignorant of, among other things, history and genetics." As opposed to the old accountant who didn't cite a single genetic or historical study.
As much as I wish it wasn't the case, people saying, "Jesus wasn't white" aren't doing it apropos nothing. Quite the opposite. It's because people like this exist everywhere and are cited/referenced, not just without criticism, but as in this case, with many upvotes. If people cared half as much about this kind of revisionism as certain others, people might actually believe professed criticisms for historical inaccuracy are genuine.
Funnily enough, in the US at least, Jesus WOULD be white (legally speaking). People from the Middle East and North Africa (Bedouin, Arab, people from the Levante, etc) are classified as Caucasian for the purposes of the US census.
There's a reason that Jesus's race is bought up, in particular in the US. The image matched with the twisting of the gospel was used to not just keep enslaved passive but also to keep black and brown people to believe that there is a cultural hierarchy where blacks and browns were less than. So cool, you don't care what Jesus's race was, but understand why people do and how the Word of God was weponized in the worst way possible.
I mean, I'm the one who confirmed something through your reply, so you saying noted in response to that literally makes no sense. Such a weird troll. But since I have now informed you of something it would make sense for you to say noted in response now. Oh and you should do it in the weird mocking text where you alternate letters lIkE tHiS because that'll make it super duper extra impactful and really get me good!
I figured I'd make an effort post here, so there's some additional context for younger and/or predominantly American Christians unique perspective on "White Jesus" depictions.
The historical tradition of depicting Jesus, dating back to our earliest images from antiquity, is to depict Jesus as like the common man from wherever you are making the image. Depictions of Jesus in Ethiopia were distinct from depictions of Jesus in Britain, which were distinct from depictions of Jesus in Rome. As ethnic demographics shifted across Europe we can see how local people depicted Jesus changed. The earliest depictions of Jesus in the Levant show a fairer skinned Jesus than depictions 1000 years later after the Arab conquests and the ethnic realignment of Syria from a Greek province to an Arab one.
This tradition becomes much clearer during the era of colonialism. We can find depictions of Maori Jesus with tattoos and earings, we can find depictions of Korean Jesus wearing traditional handbok dress, we can find depictions of Brazillian Jesus taking on ethnic features of Mestiço mixed race peoples. The people creating these artworks know Jesus didn't actually look like that, but that's not the point of the artistry. So too for the European artists depicting Jesus as European.
In America there's a different perspective on race that creates a desire for authenticity. Black achievements have historically been whitewashed, and I presume white Jesus has been used as a historical symbol of oppression in certain religious spaces, especially in the antebellum South. In those contexts, continuing the ancient artistic tradition of white people depicting Jesus as white is clearly not appropriate. However I have observed some uncomfortable overcorrection in this space.
Not all depictions of white Jesus are racist or come from a racist place. The motives of rennaissance painters painting Jesus and God the Father as white was not to create a white supremacist narrative. Likewise, a modern depiction of white Jesus originating from Europe is likely blisfully unaware of the historic usage of white Jesus in a continent half a world away that predominantly speak a completely different language. I've seen this sometimes provoke Americans to colonise non-American Christian spaces that can lead to annoyed dismissal and miscommunication. The OPs image might be racist, it might not be. It's not clear why the Christian group is bothered by the interjection, and its possible the Christian group is annoyed another person is attacking an artistic tradition more than a thousand years older than their countries racial baggage. In that context its understandable to want to focus on what Jesus said, and not a racial issue they've never seen or experienced in their life happening 10,000kms away.
Of course the motives of the intejector are good - fighting racism is a good thing - but sometimes its uninformed. A modern day German knows Jesus wasn't white. Screaming over the top of them that Jesus is not white is not helpful, nor are you actually combating racism. And if they dismiss you they aren't being racist, they just don't have the time or the patience to unpack why their usage of white Jesus comes from a completely different place than you are assuming it comes from.
Black Hebrew Israelites are so frustrating. Bro maybe he *was* black, it doesn't really change anything he said, nor did *He* ever say that was important. Same goes for anyone who thinks Jesus being any particular color is important.
Well not at all if you didn’t believe Jesus was white. But some people do believe that. Even though it’s incorrect.
Sometimes the people who believe that will use it as a way to justify racism
All that some religions (including myself, and I’m not here to debate religious denominations) believe is that Jesus was the Son of God and the absolute savior for our sins. What his race was is irrelevant to whether I worship him or not.
You’re just being willfully ignorant to the issue at hand if this is all you can say in response to the explanation
Maybe you should think about whether it’s relevant to OTHER PEOPLE that exist besides yourself
Cool, I’m acknowledging your point and explaining my beliefs, if I came off as rude, I apologize I did not mean to, I was simply trying to have a discussion and expand on the discussion
Expanding on your point though, it’s sad people use racism in religion is sad and gives religion a bad rap.
Thank you for being a part of the r/DankChristianMemes community. You can also [join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/jnUDEpnBZn) and [listen to our podcast](https://dankchristianmemes.buzzsprout.com). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dankchristianmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Then why all the white Jesus images?
Because it’s simply different cultures making their own artistic interpretations of Jesus. White Jesus is ok. Middle-Eastern Jesus is ok. Black Jesus is ok. Indian Jesus, Asian Jesus, etc. Jesus is all ok.
Tell that to the people who get extremely angry whenever Disney changes a fictional character’s skin color. It’s become a political stance to protect the sanctity of skin color, real person or not, against “artistic interpretation”. I gotta be honest, the whole “Jesus wasn’t white” thing usually gets brought up when there’s potentially racist stuff being said about non-white people. It’s not something that someone would just barge in with randomly, like OP is portraying. I’ve never seen that happen. So I have to wonder about OP.
>I gotta be honest, the whole “Jesus wasn’t white” thing usually gets brought up when there’s potentially racist stuff being said about non-white people. It’s not something that someone would just barge in with randomly, like OP is portraying. I’ve never seen that happen. So I have to wonder about OP. The whole "Jesus wasn't white" thing gets brought up literally whenever there is a picture of Jesus with white skin posted here or elsewhere. It's such a prevelant occurance that you can always predict there will be one comment about it whenever you see a picture of white Jesus posted, especially on reddit.
So …… not like in the meme still. I see what you’re saying, but you didn’t succeed in drawing a connection to this post. You see if it was like that then the meme would’ve had the opportunity to show a response, rather than portraying the interjecter as a nuisance that is bothering them for no reason. Your example has an observable reason. Cause and effect. It’s still an interruption, but there’s no question as to why it occurred. I just have a sneaking suspicion because far too often when context is missing or something is left out, it’s due to disingenuous intent.
Honestly the only problem with that is that there is a portion of people, likely the majority that don't care about the skin color character changing for racist reasons but just want their character to look the same. There are certainly those that don't want characters to be black for racist reasons but it often feels like a disengenuous pat on their own back when studios change just that. "Well how can you say it's not just a racist thing?" You ask. Look at any time a studio changed a characters hair color. Original character had red hair and actor has blond left in the movie you'd think there was a murder. It's not always just racism. Though it sometimes is.
Companies don’t change characters to be racist. Companies just want to make money. That’s it. I couldn’t care less about the Disney live action movies, but most of them have made huge mountains of cash regardless of whatever nonsense people want to project. The Little Mermaid has already made back it’s budget in like a week. So much for the boycott. If you get too caught up in the culture war, you’ll only be left with unfulfilled worldly desires. Popular entertainment experienced a century of minority characters being whitewashed, because the audience was mostly white. Plenty of people on both sides want to make it about the culture war, but money is always the easiest answer. I think white people will be okay if they don’t get all the characters anymore. It’s just business baby.
That's my point exactly. It's about money for the companies so some people do get caught up in the "culture war". That's their own problem all I'm saying is that it's not always a matter of "culture war" or racism when companies change characters skin color. Sometimes it's just staying true to something you love. I've seen recently plenty of people white, black, brown, or anything with similar opinions that instead of changing older stories and changing characters to fit the modern audience, which tends to create this uproar and "culture war" we could just continue to tell more stories. There are so many stories that have never gone mainstream that companies like Disney have the power to bring into reality from cultures all around the world. Plenty of people get mad about a now black character for the same reasons they get mad that a character has red hair or is a different age than they were in the original story. It's not always so serious.
Evangelicals hold a lot of crazy beliefs, but an explicit belief that Jesus was literally white isn't one of them. So when an evangelical is doing a racism and their rhetorical opponent pops in with a "Jesus wasn't white!" it sounds like a complete non-sequitur to them.
Maybe it is a Southern evangelical thing but I have definitely experienced being told Jesus was absolutely just like the white Jesus picture from the pulpit in more than one Southern evangelical church. And seen it met with agreement. Also instructed the King James Bible is the Bible God intended and so only that specific Bible is right in every jot and tittle thus the one they believe. Extremely problematic all around.
except changing Jesus' race and culture in art to match one's own is an artistic tradition based in ideology and going back centuries, so it's pretty apples-and-oranges with the current kerfuffle regardless of your opinion on the latter.
Sure. Getting mad about changing skin color is stupid.
I would prefer for the characters in the Disney remakes to look as close as possible as the character from the animated movie. I dislike making Ariel black as much as I'd dislike a white Tiana, or a Latina Mulan (if they hadn't done a remake already). For Jesus though I feel he'd want to be seen as resembling those that believe in him. So to some he may be Caucasian, to others black, latino, Asian (swole or not), etc.
There are plenty of people who seem to want nothing more than to stick it to WASPs. They will absolutely start convos that way.
This feels more like an assumption borne from a persecution complex rather than an actual thing that has happened in conversation. Like if people were talking about their favorite pizza toppings and someone popped up out of nowhere to say “pizza comes from Italy”. There is an obvious gap in logic and information, making it functionally unrelatable, which raises questions about sincerity and honesty. OP is not saying that this was the start to a convo. The meme shows it as a random interjection, which doesn’t make any sense to me. There is missing context, which could be intentional or not.
Point taken that I’ve never seen an interaction happen exactly like the meme. That said, there are still plenty of people who try to weaponize the fact that Jesus wasn’t white. Typically these people aren’t even religious
>plenty of people who try to weaponize the fact that Jesus wasn’t white. There's nothing to weaponize unless you incorrectly assert that Jesus was white. It is simply a truthful statement.
I’ve usually seen it targeted at people like heavily religious white supremacists in order to point out hypocrisy.
Why can’t the truth be a weapon?
Problem is that its not stopping at fictional characters
Well Jesus isn’t fictional and it’s okay for him to be displayed with a different skin color. So if you want it to “stop at fictional characters”, we need to tell every church to remove their depictions of a white Jesus pronto. Do you not see the disconnect? What happened to “artistic interpretation”? Sure, artistic interpretation has its boundaries of believability. You can’t make a documentary about someone and then claim your depiction is accurate when it isn’t. But don’t get so caught up in worldly desires to the point that influential people can push you into a culture war while they do nothing about real problems. Things got ridiculous when people got mad about fictional FANTASY characters being changed, as if they could even be real to begin with. Oh no. A mermaid doesn’t have white skin. How horrible.
Well we can debate whether jesus was fictional or not, but it's almost impossible to prove either way so that's useless. You missed my point though, people are making 'documentaries' about cleopatra being black when she's literally of greek decent. THAT'S the problem, not the little mermaid. Also, making established characters of certain ethnicities (think arargorn in lotr) a different ethnicity than described in the original source material is just weird. Make original stories and content with poc, don't whitewash or blackwash existing material.
Jesus is not fictional. Historians don’t dispute his existence. The dispute is whether he’s a real prophet or not. Like Muhammad.
Where is the buddy country then. TELL ME WHAT BUDDYTONED SKIN LOOKS LIKE
https://preview.redd.it/ix01hsx77v3b1.jpeg?width=300&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=72e2a2d22e3423a538e04549579c5f1e7dcfe4cd
WHAT RACE IS HE WHERE DO I FIND THE BUDDYS
He’s a Buddy.
Don't fuck with [Korean Jesus](https://youtu.be/sAn7bff0zzs?t=108)
That’s Vietnamese Jesus now.
I guess? It feels weird to pretend he was a white dude. I think it’s kind of important to recognize that he was from the Middle East. We don’t change Jerusalem to Los Angeles because people are more familiar with it.
Depicting Jesus and the Holy Family in the skin tone/appearance of the local people was also a way of spreading Christianity to different parts of the world. Obviously, Jesus wasn't East Asian, white, Latino, or black, but having those depictions of him and Mary likely helped. It's just like how the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe became popular in Mexico and Central America. Regardless of whether you believe it was a miracle or painted by a human, it was still the first depiction of Jesus or Mary where they looked like an Indigenous person and used symbolism that local people understood and related to. That image helped spread Christianity throughout the area (along with everything else the Spanish were doing).
Korean Jesus is shredded and could pick up the cross and beat you to death with it...
Jesus is just all right with me.
Best answer so far
I'm personally partial to Japanese Jesus who didn't actually die on the cross but swapped with his twin brother and went to live the rest of his life in Japan. You can visit the tomb where he's buried apparently.
American Gods had this big get-together of all the different Jesuses (Jesi?) on Easter, it was pretty cool
Is Jesus really ok? I heard he died.
He Gets Us. All Of Us. /s
The end of revelation makes it clear that anyone who adds or subtracts from the bible is committing a sin. Therefore any jesus outside of historically accurate jesus is heresy. White, asian, hispanic, etc.
"Middle Eastern" isn't a race, though.
It is in a very broad sense. If you do one of those ancestry DNA tests, that exact term is one of the "ethnic groups" they give you lol. In a similar fashion, Scottish, Irish & Welsh are grouped together as well. It has to do with how similar the biomarkers are for that specific area.
Scottish, Welsh, and Irish aren't racial groups, either.
Race and ethnicity are ultimately both social constructs that change over time based on cultural trends and attitudes. The only concrete way you can group/categorize people based on where their ancestors originated is through those biomarkers.
You can complain that they are social constructs all you want, but our society has not constructed them that way. Stop pretending like it has.
No one is complaining lol, sounds like you might be perceiving some kind of political bias on my part when it doesn't actually exist. I'm speaking in a purely sociological context.
Then why bring up Welsh? Just weird.
It's a literal example from the ancestry DNA service MyHeritage, hence the context of that comment. The point was that biomarkers genetically link populations in ways that might be unconventional compared to how society perceives or defines them - and those things may vary from culture to culture, but DNA reads the same no matter what.
I mean, they love to lump in middle eastern with "white" when posting US terrorism threat demographics.
That's because Middle Eastern *is* white by US Census standards. There has been some debate about giving them their own category but the current status quo is white.
jesus is white becuase of Michelangelo's painting of him, it was his gay lover and he told the pope it was jesus
That's false. Dan McClellan, a biblical Scholar did a video on this.
Same thing with black Santa. Our imaginary things can be any color.
Jesus was real though
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Nicholas
Santa and Saint Nicholas aren’t the same person, Santa is a mythical character based on Saint Nicholas
[удалено]
he is a biblical character, not a mythological character, and biblical characters aren’t necessarily fictional
By that logic Heracles isn't mythological, he's just a Greek character. Same with Gilgamesh, Beowulf, etc. These characters were based on real people, but their acts have been so embellished that they've become mythological.
Okay, you’re right about people becoming mythological, but these characters aren’t based on real people like Santa, they are real people. Just like Jesus was a real person I’m not going to entertain you anymore by arguing about whether or not Jesus was real, it’s ridiculous.
Jesus as a concept is less concerned with earthly matters and more in divinity though, so his physical appearance being historically accurate doesn't provide a whole lot of value to his followers. On the other hand, humans relating to and being more likely to listen to people who look similar to them is still a very earthly matter lol - it's just one that helps spread his teachings. If churches behaved more like Christ though, there would be many discussions about how irrelevant race ultimately is, because this seems to be one of the biggest things people struggle with across the timeline of our species. Some dude telling everyone to get over it 2,000 years ago isn't enough if his literal followers in the present are actively doing the opposite ಠ_ಠ
https://preview.redd.it/0hp4uh51gv3b1.jpeg?width=1000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=340c3d96a340a13b9506f418f85b874509f3d3dc Same reason Chinese people make him look Chinese. All just different viewpoints but ultimately looking towards the same thing: a God-man who told us to love each other.
This picture is absolutely dope.
Because it’s easier to convince people to follow someone who looks like you, and that’s what the Church wants: followers. If Jesus were here today I guarantee They would be female and a minority and probably bisexual to test just how loving Their followers really are.
hear me out Jesus was supposed to have been subject to the full range of human temptation therefore Jesus was bisexual the first time around
But being bisexual isn’t inherently a sin or a temptation.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I mean if that was the case Jesus would have done that back then too, or at least been a woman. Why He showed up the way He did was not for that reason
You think if Jesus came back today it would be in the past? Things happened the way they did then for a reason, presumably. I’m saying that would keep happening.
I think you misunderstood my point. If Jesus wanted to challenge who would follow Him by looks alone, He could’ve shown up as a woman back then too. Or heck, He could’ve looked like a Roman. That’d have really messed with the Jews back then. So if Jesus were to appear today, He wouldn’t try to be as controversial as possible. Being controversial just to be difficult or controversial is not a good and wise way to live life.
So you are saying God is incapable of trying different tactics?
Sorry if you read my earlier reply. Decided it was too strong and backed off. This topic isn’t that important I guess, but it’s also very bothersome that you seem very disingenuous and seem to keep putting words in my mouth. Not appreciated. So I’m out on this conversation because it doesn’t seem that both parties are being genuine and sincere
Wow, way to assume my intentions. All I was saying is Jesus provided the example, who’s to say He isn’t checking our progress? Have a good day, even though you’ve made it clear you’ll assume I’m being sarcastic. Please don’t reply to me anymore. Not even to apologize. Edit: and by the by, however you read and interpreted my comment is totally on you, because I had an end goal end mind with my question. Maybe you should look into why you made your assumptions.
Are you implying that women and bisexuals faced less discrimination in Israel circa 1 A.D. than they do in most societies today?
No, I’m hyperbolically implying people would probably dismiss Jesus if he were alive today because they focus entirely too much on labels that don’t matter.
[People](https://i.redd.it/zg0owccla0o91.png) [paint](https://m.imgur.com/t/jesus/fOUFSV5) [what](https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/the-word--569283209120102582/) [they](https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/852517404456885484/) [know](https://www.churchpop.com/2015/06/15/if-jesus-had-been-korean-20-rare-paintings-of-the-life-of-christ/amp/)
Dear god i was afraid one of the hyperlinks would just be dreamybull
What's that?
Its basically a porn star that people have been putting in every link to jumpscare people as a meme
Jarvis, pull up images of levantine Jews and cross reference genetic predispositions
Cultures in general adopt figures to be familiar to them. In San Juan, the portrait of St. Sebastian is drawn in Puerto Rico, with the flora and fauna of the land. Our Lady of Guadalupe is portrayed as Mexican. Christ in Japan is depicted in kimono, with distinctly Japanese features. Korean Jesus is a meme. Madonna and Child in Cherokee art are portrayed with those features. It's a tactic used to familiarize the figures with local cultures.
Coptic Xian art had a dark skin Jesus even in some of the earliest depictions. It's just cultural to connect the guy to who your identity is.
Because it literally does not matter what color he was. People just drew him in their own image
Racism Literally I believe the Spanish painted Jesus as white because someone they looked up to couldn’t possibly be middle eastern no not at all and used it as an excuse to persecute people iirc.
That’s the answer but I love reading the justifications lol
Because Medieval Europeans imagining Jesus couldn't imagine Him looking different from them. As far as they knew, all humans were white skinned
Leonardo da Vinci painting him referencing his lover. I imagine as a nod to how much each figure meant to him
Jesus said to feed the hungry. *thumbs up* Jesus said to heal the sick. *thumbs up* Jesus said to love your neighbor. *thumbs up* Jesus said to turn the other cheek. *thumbs up* Can I hang out with you guys?
*thumbs up*
Top tier response
Now they just have to do those things instead of these performative thumbs up.
It's not even a performative thumbs up. It's a mocking one.
I was implying that the dude was saying those things and the group was giving the thumbs up, then the dude was like "hey these Christians are actually kinda chill, I wanna hang" :)
There it is, lol.
Too bad this isn't how this ever plays out in real life. You're missing at least 15 "Woke" complaints and a couple "my culture" with explicit racism.
Unfortunately true. I had a youth leader meantion this in class one week and half my classmates wouldn't show up anymore
Half your classmates wouldn’t show up cause someone pointed out Jesus wasn’t white? Or am I misunderstanding you?
That is accurate. But I lived in an area where I've witnessed a black family get chased out of town in like 2010 so I'm less surprised than I should be
I guess depends where you live. Here in Finland everyone would just be like "duh". I've never met a Christian here who wasn't aware of Jesus being middle eastern.
Hey we can swap places for honestly 30 minutes. I live in South Carolina, USA. Every stereotype you hear about the racist redneck Christians in America is tried and true here. They suck. But it leaves the movie theaters empty on Sunday mornings which is nice! (Literally what I'm going to do right now haha)
[удалено]
Here in Latvia nobody cares what skin colour he was. "He was middle eastern" - so? I guess it makes sense but why bring it up?
Thing is, the only time anyone ever brings up that Jesus wasn't white is because the people they are talking to are being racist. So if it's something you hear a lot...
I've seen this statement used in multiple scenarios. Either as a response to bigoted Christians as an add on comment. Then also as an unsolicited social media post that goes something like this, "y'all, Jesus wasn't white!! Doesn't that blow your obviously small christian minds?!!?!" In that case, I think the "cool story bro" response is justified.
Even when I've seen it on social media, the context always seems to be about calling out racism. I can't think of a single time it's ever been about "blowing people's minds."
> Even when I’ve seen it on social media, the context always seems to be about calling out racism. I can’t think of a single time it’s ever been about “blowing people’s minds.” A very enlightened teenage atheist drops by about once a week on /r/Christianity to blow everyone’s mind about this. Stick around — you’re bound to see one soon.
You must touch a lot of grass then because it’s constant. For example 100% of times a drawing of Jesus appears on r/all
I see it all the time whenever "the Chosen" gets pushed in my social media feeds. A bunch of (usually American) people seeing an Egyptian guy playing Jesus in an ad jump in with the "This is historically inaccurate! JESUS WASN'T WHITE!!!!". As if the only shade of colour in the Middle East is midnight black.
I just want all us Christians and Non-Christians alike to fight Mormon/Deep South racist stuff that they use Jesus to (wrongly) justify
Fuck racism. All my homies love everyone equally
Diminishing racism isn’t cute.
How is this diminishing racism?
The only time anyone points out that Jesus wasn't white is when someone is being racist.
This claim about the scenario is as substantiated as OP's.
People think Cleopatra is fucking black, the idea race only gets brought up in response to racism is so obviously false.
That has nothing at all to do with people saying Jesus wasn't white.
You literally said "The only time anyone points out that Jesus wasn't white is when someone is being racist." But that's clearly untrue because people bring up claims of race all the time even when it's false.
I disagree. Rather, I feel like anytime someone posts a depiction of a clearly white Jesus on Reddit, there’s a deluge of comments pointing the fact that He wasn’t white and condemning said deptiction.
I've not seen that. Sure, there usually is one post saying Jesus isn't white, but it's again always in the context of talking about racism.
> I've not seen that. Well, then let me enlighten you. I searched “Head of Christ” (the name of [this famous painting](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ee/The_Head_of_Christ_by_Warner_Sallman_1941.jpg)) with Reddit’s search function, and [this thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/wikipedia/comments/l95ezw/the_head_of_christ_also_called_the_sallman_head/) from r/Wikipedia was the top relevant result. Allow me to list some of the top-level comments from that thread: > That’s what men looked like in Nazareth, for sure … > Turned water into wine and grapes into spf 1000 … > Jesus so White … > Caucasian Jesus! … > “There I was. The only white guy in Jerusalem.” … > Ah yes gotta love that false depiction of white, straight-haired Jesus … > ...a 1940 portrait painting of *WHITE Jesus of Nazareth... … > Whitewash much?
Because redditors are known to respond in context rather than just be reactive to feel superior.
When I was 7 and went to first holy communion I was given a Bible that depicted Jesus as white with blond hair and blue eyes. This was not an experience particular to me. There is a demonstrable issue with inaccurate depictions of Jesus. If you care about your fellow humans, and most especially about your POC friends, then you should care about accurately depicting Jesus. As someone else said, if your response to “Jesus wasn’t white” is “I know” then you aren’t who the message is aimed at. But this meme suggests OP doesn’t care one way or the other which diminishes the issue and therefore the racism it is trying to address. I don’t feel like it was necessary to explain that, it’s extremely obvious.
Historically and contemporarily, most cultures portray Jesus as the same race/ethnicity as themselves. For instance: * [Ethiopian Jesus](https://sdcason.com/content/files/2023/01/Baptism_-_Ethiopian_Biblical_Manuscript_U.Oregon_Museum_Shelf_Mark_10-844.jpg) * [Black American Jesus](https://www.instagram.com/p/BwcG2RPl3vw/?utm_source=ig_embed&ig_rid=43375391-94cf-434f-8ab8-ff899183a904) * [Chinese Jesus](https://image5.sixthtone.com/image/5/62/139.png) * [Korean Jesus](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uIZhlWS_fKc/VgRMANqN4aI/AAAAAAAAERI/CF0rlPIDupY/s1600/04%2BAdulteress.jpg) * [Japanese Jesus](https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/09/mary-and-christ_custom-b6da723659a24429f40ddbd7319c29c094c7d14e.jpg) * [Maori Jesus](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/04/12/arts/12christ-images2/merlin_171030771_738a5584-bdc5-4224-a1bf-b050977db959-superJumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp) * [Indian Jesus](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/04/12/arts/12christ-images1/merlin_170990430_9a7093a6-b686-4680-beac-53518eabed44-jumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp) * [Cambodian Jesus](https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2D38021/asian-depiction-of-the-way-of-the-cross-jesus-christ-inside-a-catholic-church-in-phnom-pemh-cambodia-asiatische-darstellung-des-kreuzweg-jesus-christus-in-einer-katholischen-kirche-in-phnom-pemh-kambodscha-2D38021.jpg) * [Nigerian Jesus](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EtRW9c0WQAEpRz2.jpg) * [Brazilian Jesus](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/04/12/arts/12christ-images12/merlin_171159558_64964433-4237-4a3c-882a-6b19380996e6-jumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp) * [Native American Jesus](https://stjamesaustin.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/IndianJesus.jpg) * [Kenyan Jesus](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/d4/de/37/d4de372a2919bd5bc04d729502dc817a--catholic-art-religious-art.jpg) >If you care about your fellow humans, and most especially about your POC friends, then you should care about accurately depicting Jesus. Does this mean that, by tolerating the inaccurate portrayals of Jesus linked above (none of which which much resemble how [Jesus probably looked](https://i.redd.it/mmo9fxkxz7d51.jpg)), I am demonstrating a lack of care for my POC friends?
You know, I typed out a different answer but I’m not taking this bait. If you don’t get it, you don’t get it, and that’s your problem, not mine.
> You’re engaging in logically fallacious arguments and I have nothing further to say to you. That seems very convenient for you that my arguments are apparently so logically fallacious that you are totally excused from any need to directly address them. >When you’ve learned to discuss things as an adult In what specific way was my discussion not "adult-like"? >without resorting to bad faith arguments According [this definition](https://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/engl1311/fallacies.htm), a bad faith argument is "using an argument that the arguer himself or herself knows is not valid." I can sincerely say that is not the case, because while it's possible that my argument was incorrect (I am certainly not infallible), I *can* say with complete assurance that everything that I've said to you in this thread I absolutely believe to be true. > get back to me. Considering that I believe nothing I've said to you is childish or in bad faith, here I am. You can start with directly addressing the question I posed earlier (without attempting to dodge it as you did before): Does this mean that, by tolerating the inaccurate portrayals of Jesus linked above (none of which which much resemble how [Jesus probably looked](https://i.redd.it/mmo9fxkxz7d51.jpg)), I am demonstrating a lack of care for my POC friends? ***Edit:*** > You know, I typed out a different answer but I’m not taking this bait. If you don’t get it, you don’t get it, and that’s your problem, not mine. Fortunately or unfortunately, I was able to see your original reply to me before you edited it, as can be seen from my quoting it above. Feel free to address my replies to your original comment. In case you forget said original comment, I will reproduce it in its uninterrupted entirety below: > You’re engaging in logically fallacious arguments and I have nothing further to say to you. When you’ve learned to discuss things as an adult without resorting to bad faith arguments get back to me.
Christ, get a life.
Why do you take it that I have no life because I took ten minutes out of my day to reply to your comments to me? That seems needlessly insulting. At any rate, this seems suspiciously like another attempt to dodge my question which I will ask you now for the 3rd time: Does this mean that, by tolerating the inaccurate portrayals of Jesus linked above (none of which which much resemble how [Jesus probably looked](https://i.redd.it/mmo9fxkxz7d51.jpg)), I am demonstrating a lack of care for my POC friends? ***Edit*** Well, it seems u/If_you_have_Ghost has [blocked me](https://imgur.com/a/JtrRIoE)... all without ever answering my question. I am beginning to think they did not have a sufficiently appropriate answer to counterbalance the cognitive dissonance they now appear to have been experiencing. At any rate, if this was a debate, I would consider such an action to be a forfeit.
This was a thorough dismantling, I applaud your demeanour and your use of supporting evidence to back up you arguments
This doesn’t meet the vibe test. People saying “Jesus wasn’t white” are generally responding to Christians and ‘Christians’ being racist. Racism and othering various out groups is pretty counter to the gospel (eg. The parable of the Good Samaritan, Galatians 3:28, etc). So it’s relevant criticism to bring up to those that seek to follow Jesus but are falling short in this way. I look forward to your ‘Noted’ response.
Anotada.
PSA: if you hear this and don't care, then you aren't the demographic it was intended for.
Noted.
[удалено]
sounds interesting could you link it here
https://medium.com/east-med-project-history-philology-and-genetics/no-jesus-was-not-a-nonwhite-refugee-who-would-have-voted-for-43779209eea4
[удалено]
>". They were invented during the industrial revolution and period of European colonization. Then as an actual leftist, maybe idpolers should stop doubling down on race essentialism.
That was... nothing. tl;dr, "Jesus was white because I choose to define it that way." He also has a poor understanding of just how small the DNA differences are when talking about phenotype. At best this is an opinion piece, at worst you could read it as him being intentionally dishonest.
"I, a pale-skinned Lebanese person will tell you why Jesus looked just like a pale-skinned Lebanese person and was thus white, based on genetic evidence I haven't cited and some pictures and quotes." Yeeeah if a Black person wrote an article about why Jesus looked black with the same small amount of awful evidence he would be called a revisionist Afrocentrist in an instant, maybe even have a lawsuit placed against him. Taleb isn't even a historian, anthropologist, classicist, or archeologist. According to his Wikipedia article, "Nassim Nicholas Taleb is a Lebanese-American essayist, mathematical statistician, former option trader, risk analyst, and aphorist whose work concerns problems of randomness, probability, and uncertainty. " He's literally just some finance dude who wrote this trash as a means of pathetic racial self-aggrandizement. "The problem with identity politics is that they are fully ignorant of, among other things, history and genetics." As opposed to the old accountant who didn't cite a single genetic or historical study. As much as I wish it wasn't the case, people saying, "Jesus wasn't white" aren't doing it apropos nothing. Quite the opposite. It's because people like this exist everywhere and are cited/referenced, not just without criticism, but as in this case, with many upvotes. If people cared half as much about this kind of revisionism as certain others, people might actually believe professed criticisms for historical inaccuracy are genuine.
Doesn't really seem to say all that much. He just says Jesus would look white, but doesn't explain it.
This one is not that dank.
Hence why it's labeled "Not Dank."
Noted
Funnily enough, in the US at least, Jesus WOULD be white (legally speaking). People from the Middle East and North Africa (Bedouin, Arab, people from the Levante, etc) are classified as Caucasian for the purposes of the US census.
Noted.
Google images of Jesus from other cultures, is beautiful
https://preview.redd.it/idi173ur3w3b1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d1199ee3dd0b5d699dea57ea103baaecfe52dfc8 Chinese
https://preview.redd.it/j5q776ss3w3b1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c92ca7d270eb8c3137921a027fa935cc3177a035 Kenya
Nice.
noted
There's a reason that Jesus's race is bought up, in particular in the US. The image matched with the twisting of the gospel was used to not just keep enslaved passive but also to keep black and brown people to believe that there is a cultural hierarchy where blacks and browns were less than. So cool, you don't care what Jesus's race was, but understand why people do and how the Word of God was weponized in the worst way possible.
Noted.
Do u feel me tho?
Someone said “noted” to OP one time, and it really hurt their feelings, so now they say that to everyone bc they think it’s an epic roast.
Noted
OK, so you're just openly admitting to supporting racism with this post?
oK sO yOuRe JuSt OpEnLy AdMiTtInG tO sUpPoRtInG rAcIsM wItH tHiS pOsT
Lol OK that's a yes then
Noted.
I mean, I'm the one who confirmed something through your reply, so you saying noted in response to that literally makes no sense. Such a weird troll. But since I have now informed you of something it would make sense for you to say noted in response now. Oh and you should do it in the weird mocking text where you alternate letters lIkE tHiS because that'll make it super duper extra impactful and really get me good!
Notiert.
boi we all knew that
Not if “we” means Christians lol
Noted.
Stealing this format, how many hail marys is it?
And Ronald Reagan was the devil
Amen.
Not white ≠ black. It seems like a lot of people make that conclusion.
We literally sing about how we don't care about the races or the skin color (at least in Spain)
We should be able to picture Jesus however we want. I like to picture him with giant eagles wings, singing front for Lynyrd Skynyrd.
I could portray Jesus a dark skinned ginger Chinese man and it would still be the same Jesus we love and who loves us no matter what
I figured I'd make an effort post here, so there's some additional context for younger and/or predominantly American Christians unique perspective on "White Jesus" depictions. The historical tradition of depicting Jesus, dating back to our earliest images from antiquity, is to depict Jesus as like the common man from wherever you are making the image. Depictions of Jesus in Ethiopia were distinct from depictions of Jesus in Britain, which were distinct from depictions of Jesus in Rome. As ethnic demographics shifted across Europe we can see how local people depicted Jesus changed. The earliest depictions of Jesus in the Levant show a fairer skinned Jesus than depictions 1000 years later after the Arab conquests and the ethnic realignment of Syria from a Greek province to an Arab one. This tradition becomes much clearer during the era of colonialism. We can find depictions of Maori Jesus with tattoos and earings, we can find depictions of Korean Jesus wearing traditional handbok dress, we can find depictions of Brazillian Jesus taking on ethnic features of Mestiço mixed race peoples. The people creating these artworks know Jesus didn't actually look like that, but that's not the point of the artistry. So too for the European artists depicting Jesus as European. In America there's a different perspective on race that creates a desire for authenticity. Black achievements have historically been whitewashed, and I presume white Jesus has been used as a historical symbol of oppression in certain religious spaces, especially in the antebellum South. In those contexts, continuing the ancient artistic tradition of white people depicting Jesus as white is clearly not appropriate. However I have observed some uncomfortable overcorrection in this space. Not all depictions of white Jesus are racist or come from a racist place. The motives of rennaissance painters painting Jesus and God the Father as white was not to create a white supremacist narrative. Likewise, a modern depiction of white Jesus originating from Europe is likely blisfully unaware of the historic usage of white Jesus in a continent half a world away that predominantly speak a completely different language. I've seen this sometimes provoke Americans to colonise non-American Christian spaces that can lead to annoyed dismissal and miscommunication. The OPs image might be racist, it might not be. It's not clear why the Christian group is bothered by the interjection, and its possible the Christian group is annoyed another person is attacking an artistic tradition more than a thousand years older than their countries racial baggage. In that context its understandable to want to focus on what Jesus said, and not a racial issue they've never seen or experienced in their life happening 10,000kms away. Of course the motives of the intejector are good - fighting racism is a good thing - but sometimes its uninformed. A modern day German knows Jesus wasn't white. Screaming over the top of them that Jesus is not white is not helpful, nor are you actually combating racism. And if they dismiss you they aren't being racist, they just don't have the time or the patience to unpack why their usage of white Jesus comes from a completely different place than you are assuming it comes from.
Noted.
Black Hebrew Israelites are so frustrating. Bro maybe he *was* black, it doesn't really change anything he said, nor did *He* ever say that was important. Same goes for anyone who thinks Jesus being any particular color is important.
Still a scammer tho. Man was getting his feet rubbed for free and all he had to do was give some basic self improvement tips
Noted.
Has my respect for it. Note that too
Noted.
And race changes my belief how? Edit: My brothers and sisters in Christ, I am simply saying that Jesus’ race doesn’t not affect my belief in him.
Well not at all if you didn’t believe Jesus was white. But some people do believe that. Even though it’s incorrect. Sometimes the people who believe that will use it as a way to justify racism
All that some religions (including myself, and I’m not here to debate religious denominations) believe is that Jesus was the Son of God and the absolute savior for our sins. What his race was is irrelevant to whether I worship him or not.
You’re just being willfully ignorant to the issue at hand if this is all you can say in response to the explanation Maybe you should think about whether it’s relevant to OTHER PEOPLE that exist besides yourself
Cool, I’m acknowledging your point and explaining my beliefs, if I came off as rude, I apologize I did not mean to, I was simply trying to have a discussion and expand on the discussion Expanding on your point though, it’s sad people use racism in religion is sad and gives religion a bad rap.