What color was Jesus?

[Lik3]

There are Middle Eastern people today who are quite light and could pass for Europeans like some in North Africa and Isreal, not counting Askenazi. But I guess what I am trying to say is why are people so caught up in Jesus' color or race. I am not but I am just curious as to that. If Jesus were black would people still see Him as Lord and Savior? If Jesus were white with European features, why would it matter? Has anyone ever actually known what He would look like based on verses about bronzed feet, wooly like hair, and about His eyes? The thing is, He was a Jew, but could He an Ethiopian Jew or did He look Sephardi? It is kind of like the ancient Egyptians. Why do some people get so caught up in their race and color? They are Africans, but North Africans are a tapestry of a mix of peoples from light to dark just like Jews are, so Jesus could be dark. Why the aversion that some people have to a dark skinned, wooly haired Jesus?

 

[Americanus christianus]

There are Middle Eastern people today who are quite light and could pass for Europeans like some in North Africa and Isreal, not counting Askenazi. But I guess what I am trying to say is why are people so caught up in Jesus' color or race. I am not but I am just curious as to that. If Jesus were black would people still see Him as Lord and Savior? If Jesus were white with European features, why would it matter? Has anyone ever actually known what He would look like based on verses about bronzed feet, wooly like hair, and about His eyes? The thing is, He was a Jew, but could He an Ethiopian Jew or did He look Sephardi? It is kind of like the ancient Egyptians. Why do some people get so caught up in their race and color? They are Africans, but North Africans are a tapestry of a mix of peoples from light to dark just like Jews are, so Jesus could be dark. Why the aversion that some people have to a dark skinned, wooly haired Jesus?

There is one thing we can be dogmatic about and that is the ancestry of Christ. Paul starts the book of Romans off with these words: Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; Romans 1:1-3 But we cannot be dogmatic about what Jesus looked like.

But before altogether dismissing the question of His racial type as one of those foolish questions St. Paul said we are to avoid (II Timothy 2:23), consider this passage from Hebrews: For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people Hebrews 2:16-17. He wasn't made according to the seed of Ham or Japheth, etc. but, rather, the seed of Abraham. It may be tempting for Christian people to say that these are minor points of Scripture that we shouldn't get hung up on. But consider the Lord's response to Peter, a zealous Christian if there ever was one, when Peter innocently and well meaningly put forth the idea that Christ should not go to the cross. The Lord said, "Get thee behind me Satan for thou savourest not the things that be of God but those that be of men" Matthew 16:23; Mark 8:33. It was not simply because of the supreme importance of Christ dying for our sins but also that the Scriptures "must be fulfilled." Mark 14:48-50. The Lord placed great emphasis on the Scriptures being fulfilled. Even Christian people as devoted as Peter was are tempted, at times, to sidestep this.

But as much sense as this hopefully makes, how relevant is it to the question you raise? If the ancient Hebrews were all black and we knew that for certain, then if someone were to present Christ as white, we could either say it doesn't matter, or, we could say as Christ did, How then, shall the Scriptures be fulfilled? Matthew 26:53-55. Conversely, if they were white, and we knew that for certain, then an image of a black Jesus should evoke the same response. The question would become something more than catering to people's carnality. But, one might say, we don't know these things and it's probably just as well and we were meant to be kept in the dark because of people's carnality.

But, to continue, you have said there are white Jews, black Jews, and mixed. Others have said to look at present day Middle Easterners. If we sincerely think that these are the most likely criteria that should determine our thinking, then presenting Christ as an American Indian or an East Asian probably would be a disservice to those communities in presenting the gospel to them, Mormon belief on the Indians, notwithstanding.

The authenticity of the Archko Volume has been questioned but if we are to accept it at face value, it purports to be an historical document from the time of Christ tucked away in the Vatican archives and brought to light in the nineteenth century. If I remember correctly, the physical description of Jesus is that He had golden hair with blue eyes, swarthy complexion due to exposure. I don't know if this is true. But it has the advantage of being a written record and might be more reliable than someone's vision.

Though present day Jews are mixed, the ancient Hebrews, for the most part, were not, given the Scriptural injunctions against this. The mixture came later. And the dark skin among many Middle Easterners came chiefly from the Arab slave trade in the Christian era long after the time of Christ.

 

[QueSi]

To say that Jesus was white would assume he looked like an albino, to say he was black is silly because no one is black, only brown. No one has the same skin color as anyone else just like we don't all have the same nose. To guess at his skin color is to guess at how many stars are in the sky.

 

[Knee V]

He was from the Middle East, as well as the Mediterranean area, so He most likely had a dark olive complexion.

 

[Marahuta]

I actually think he was more like a dark-skinned white person as he didn't really live in the more 'tradittionaly' dark coloured areas. And if you look at Greeks, Turks and other people from that area, they are more like white people with a tan. So I guess it was like that.

Truth is his colour is not of much importance.

 

[Knee V]

I actually think he was more like a dark-skinned white person as he didn't really live in the more 'tradittionaly' dark coloured areas. And if you look at Greeks, Turks and other people from that area, they are more like white people with a tan. So I guess it was like that.

Truth is his colour is not of much importance.

All the people from North Africa, the Horn of Africa, the Middle East, western Asia, and Europe are "caucasoids". Thus there will be many physiological features in common, regardless of skin tone.

 

[Marahuta]

All the people from North Africa, the Horn of Africa, the Middle East, western Asia, and Europe are "caucasoids". Thus there will be many physiological features in common, regardless of skin tone.

Yeah...but we are talking about, and I quote the title 'What colour was Jesus?'.

 

[horrace99]

it does not matter.But He lived in an area where He was probably dark skinned.He was not black but He was probably tan

 

[OriginalOatmeal]

Jesus was the Color Black in the film Dogma. Jesus was actually a woman in Dogma and Eddie Murphy could talk to Noah's animals. Wait, it was Chris Rock as the 13th secret disciple of Christ. Jesus was the color Purple as seen in the film Purple staring Whopi Goldberg and Brandi as Black Cinderella. Jesus is the color Rainbow. Jesus wears a techni-color dream coat.

 

[Lik3]

People in the Horn are Caucasoids?

 

[QueSi]

I actually think he was more like a dark-skinned white person as he didn't really live in the more 'tradittionaly' dark coloured areas. And if you look at Greeks, Turks and other people from that area, they are more like white people with a tan. So I guess it was like that.

Truth is his colour is not of much importance.

Dark skinned white person? Really...that would mean not white! White cant be dark.

 

[QueSi]

it does not matter.But He lived in an area where He was probably dark skinned.He was not black but He was probably tan

No person is black

 

[John G.]

After the Diaspora of 70 AD, Jews fled to different countries all over the world.
It is nonsense to believe they did not intermarry with the locals so the closest to ancient Jews would be the Iraqi Jews since they went back to the country of furthest origin.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

He was darker skinned than what most paintings depict him as. He wasn't blonde hair blue eyes. Probably a bit darker than modern day Israelis. He would have spent most of his time outside in the sun, making his tone darker. I'd wager he was likely not "attractive" in the eyes of the world. His thing was not having any physical appeal or standing. Thus He was born to a no body. His way of identifying with all people for all time.

So darker tone, not black though.
Most likely dark brown or black hair.
Brown eyes or some variation.
Likely not very attractive by worldly standards.

 

[Simon_Templar]

I know it does not matter but I created this video because I was curious about his race. I am not sure if he was blonde and blue eyed with long hair. Was it about white supremacy and that is why Jesus is often depicted as a European? What did Jesus look like or what do you believe Jesus looked like? I need your advice on this one. This video is an answer I believe to the racial and ethnic issue concerning how Jesus looked. How do I witness to someone who has a wrong belief, in my opinion, about Jesus and race? Why is it that some people react so strongly about seeing a black Jesus? Why couldn't he have been black as there are many blacks in the middle East?

Color of Jesus - YouTube

It is traditional for different cultures to portray Jesus in the imagery of their culture.

In traditional African icons, Jesus is black. In traditional Asian icons, Jesus is Asian. In traditional European Icons, Jesus is white.

No one objected to this until it became a tactic in the current ideological wars.

If an African artist makes sacred art in which Jesus is black, I have no problem with that.
When a Afrocentrist claims that Jesus was black, because his ideology demands that everything of historical importance must have come from Africa, I have a problem with that.
When someone portrays Jesus as black, because they want to make a political point, or because their identity politics, or their ideology demands that Jesus be their specific race, I have a problem with it.

What Jesus factually was, and how he is depicted in sacred art are two different topics.
Jesus was absolutely not a northern European with blonde hair and blue eyes. He was not a black African, he was not Asian. He was a middle eastern Semitic Jew. That provides a possible range from ruddy to olive skinned etc. By far the most likely is that he looked like people who live in the middle east today.