• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

White Jesus Must End

Adonia

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Shaun King, the activist who claimed he was black (bi-racial) but is actually 100% white has said that all depictions of Jesus as a white European must be purged from society. All murals, pictures, statues, and stained glass depictions of Jesus and the Holy Family must come down. There can be no if's, and's, or but's on this issue, such depictions are a "form of white supremacy", "created as tools of oppression", and are "racist propaganda" according to Mr. King.

First they came for the Confederate monuments, then they came for the Founding Fathers and now they are coming after the European depictions of Jesus. Marxist thought, of which this is an example of, is a great evil - the great evil of our time today. This madness must stop!
 

Scarlett O.

Moderator
Moderator
Well, Jesus wasn't white, as in European and fair ..... .but this is ridiculous and overkill and he needs prayer.
 

AustinC

Well-Known Member
Jesus wasn't white. If he had any genetic features from Mary, and I contend he didn't have either Mary or Joseph's genetic markers, then Jesus clearly had a black African gene code.

The artists rendering of Jesus are purely their cultural imagination.
 

HeirofSalvation

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jesus wasn't white.
If by that you mean Anglo-Saxon in genetic makeup, that is true, he was closer to being a Semitic Jew.
If he had any genetic features from Mary,
Of course he did, he was her son. To deny that is to deny his real humanity which renders you a docetist.
and I contend he didn't have either Mary or Joseph's genetic markers,
Thus, Jesus was not a man, and not a human.
Docetic heresy.
then Jesus clearly had a black African gene code.
How would that follow? What evidence that he was Black African as opposed to Semitic?....parentage?
You've already denied parentage, so that's out the window..

Maybe he followed a purely Anglo-Saxon gene code then,
or a Far-eastern one?
Maybe he looked like the Eskimos?
If we can simply deny Jesus' real maternity and humanity, we can make him look however we want right?

Given your proposals, it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that he had blonde hair, blue eyes, and ruddy Anglo-Saxon features...….

Or...
Maybe he looked a lot like Kim Jong Un.
Since he wasn't a real human with any genetics whatsoever....
Maybe he was green.
The artists rendering of Jesus are purely their cultural imagination.
Yeah, but there's genetic limits to what they could imagine (at least) which seem to have been dispensed with by you so maybe he had six arms in your mind?

I'll take "artists renditions" any day over heresy.
 

HeirofSalvation

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Bathsheba
Bathsheba isn't a woman's real name.
Any Theologian with real knowledge of Hebrew knows that. Her "name" is "woman of sheba"...or "daughter of Sheba"
"Bathsheba" is not her name.
The writer of the book didn't use her proper name....
On purpose.
Bathsheba is not a hero
of that story line
She is the unnamed gentile bride of an honorable gentile (who has a name) Urriah the Hittite. Who wittingly seduced David. David was of course equally at fault for his sins....
But there's a reason Urriah didn't go home and sleep with his wife when David wanted him to.
He knew what was going on, and he wasn't stupid.
He wouldn't give David the cover he needed.
That's why he was killed.
He was killed because he wouldn't cover for David and his unnamed whore of a wife when they needed him to provide plausible deniability.
Urriah (who has a real name unlike his wife) didn't play ball, so he died,
That's the story.
as well as the woman in the Song of Solomon who is a black woman.
No, she isn't noble, or rich, and she works outside and therefore has potentially semi-calloused hands and a tan from hard work.
Maybe she incidentally is, in fact black, but, that's not what she is saying when she says "I am black but comely"...
that meant, she isn't fair and un-touched by the Sun and hard work.
Any real Theologian with knowledge of Hebrew knows that too.
 
Last edited:

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jesus wasn't white. If he had any genetic features from Mary, and I contend he didn't have either Mary or Joseph's genetic markers, then Jesus clearly had a black African gene code.

The artists rendering of Jesus are purely their cultural imagination.
He was Jewish, so would have looked like normal Jewish male of that time!
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
If by that you mean Anglo-Saxon in genetic makeup, that is true, he was closer to being a Semitic Jew.

Of course he did, he was her son. To deny that is to deny his real humanity which renders you a docetist.

Thus, Jesus was not a man, and not a human.
Docetic heresy.

How would that follow? What evidence that he was Black African as opposed to Semitic?....parentage?
You've already denied parentage, so that's out the window..

Maybe he followed a purely Anglo-Saxon gene code then,
or a Far-eastern one?
Maybe he looked like the Eskimos?
If we can simply deny Jesus' real maternity and humanity, we can make him look however we want right?

Given your proposals, it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that he had blonde hair, blue eyes, and ruddy Anglo-Saxon features...….

Or...
Maybe he looked a lot like Kim Jong Un.
Since he wasn't a real human with any genetics whatsoever....
Maybe he was green.

Yeah, but there's genetic limits to what they could imagine (at least) which seem to have been dispensed with by you so maybe he had six arms in your mind?

I'll take "artists renditions" any day over heresy.
Jesus looked as a traditional Jewish male of that time did!
 

HeirofSalvation

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Interesting. Why do you think this?
She knew her proximity to the palace.
Women did not traditionally bathe on their rooftops at that hour.
Proximity of one's home to the palace wasn't a situation people were blind to....
Every realtor still knows it's: location, location, location.
She knew where she lived, where she was and the connections that her being the wife of Urriah granted her.
She was right next to the palace, and she knew that.

Also..."Bathsheba" isn't a name....or any name any linguist or Theologian might have heard of...it's simply Hebrew for "Daughter of sheba" or "woman of Sheba"...

She isn't named.....
On purpose.
Remember she was "comforted" by David laying with her after her son died.
Interesting. Why do you think this?
It's about understanding that culture and reading it closely.
Why did Urriah (a proper name) sleep on David's porch instead of go home to his wife???
What David had done wasn't a secret.
He sent "Messengers" (plural) to Bathsheba to get her to come to him.
He wasn't trying to keep it secret as such...

What mattered, is not the gossip, it's that the parties involved gave cover for the event. David needed Urriah to cover for him.
David offered Urriah all manner of things to provide him cover....It doesn't matter what the gossip is....it matters what was offered in trade.
Urriah refused it.
That's why he died.
It's a different culture.
That's the story.
 

HeirofSalvation

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sounds like you jump to a lot of conclusions in your own mind without much to back them up except your own reasoning.
No, years rather years of researching the Scriptures in their own cultural contexts without assuming that the Scriptures were written by people who think exactly like you do.
I'm not perfect.
I probably get a lot of things wrong...
I promise you this:

Where the Scriptures are concerned, I never "JUMP" to any conclusion.

If you think that about me, than you aren't paying attention.
Anyway, thanks for replying.
Anyway, thanks for insulting my intelligence and due diligence in research.
 
Top