Does anyone else develop about taste in their mouth about the lying portraits of Jesus with these features? Defend it however you like, but the fact is that we have always known that Jesus was from a region where the people had some color. In reality, he would look more like Osama or Saddam than he would Leonardo Dicaprio. Doesn't this bother anyone else? What about all the crucifixes that show him pierced through the hands and feet, something we know historically and scientifically to be impossible?
2006-09-28 03:18:25 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I am amazed at the people trying to say he was pierced through the hands and feet. Scientifically it is impossible for hands and feet to support the weight of a body. We know historically that Romans did not crucify through hands and feet, but through wrists and ankles.
2006-09-28 04:01:24 · update #1
If, Jesus was indeed a real person, he was from the middle east and would likely have had a dark completion, and dark hair.
I always found the very European, blue eyed red haired image a little odd for a guy born in Jerusalem.
2006-09-28 03:23:58 · answer #1 · answered by landerscott 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
First off, I am not a Christian so I am not defending Christianity or putting it down. I am giving an Art Historian point of view.
When Christianity spread to the Upper parts of Europe it was rare for any of the people there to have seen a dark skinned man. Therefore, it was easier to depict Christ as white with blue eyes. People were able to more easily identify and accept a savior that looked more like them then to accept one that was so obviously different. After the world got smaller (when travel was made easier) it was already common for people to see Jesus as a white guy so they just kept him white, instead of changing the way he looked into what he most likely looked like.
2006-09-28 03:25:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can share much more about his features!
did you know he was short with a very medium/dark wheat colour with hair woolly remember hay they describe him yet lie on a his image they went totally opposite on each feature!(Imagine that they say king James added this is a drunken stupor)!
Here's how i get them on this fact remember when Jesus (pbuh) fled he went where he would blend in to the ones who favoured him genetically -alright now imagine a blond with blue eyes 6ft tall walking among the short olive skinned woolly hair WHOLE society Now would he be no problem finding! It is sad what they will do to promote that they come from colour and that the bible old Testament is indeed recorded by the olive to dark skinned!
WAIT TIL KING JAMES DECIDED TO CHANGE ALL OF THIS!
imagine not seeing your folks mentioned in the book hay they figure we shall super hero"this" guy and change his description!
\
PS
Roxiecat4 they should have read the decription in the bible so your excuse for a blantant lie do not support what you claim so no intelligent person would except your reasoning sorry!
NOT AT ALL!
2006-09-28 03:38:22 · answer #3 · answered by wise 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't but , nor have I ever seen a picture of a blond haired, blue eyed Jesus. Jesus was pierced through the feet, hands and side.
2006-09-28 03:51:50 · answer #4 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I agree about Jesus' ethnicity.
I think the artists portray what they picture Jesus as, not an actual depiction of what He probably looked like.
Same with the crucifixes.
2006-09-28 03:22:30 · answer #5 · answered by Char 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Doesn't bother me. I know that the pictures of Him, are just that. Pictures that someone drew from what THEY thought that He probably looked like. I don't care what He looked like. He is my Savior. Also about Him being pierced through the hands and feet, ( doubting) Thomas( His disciple) didn't believe that it was Jesus when he saw Him walking down the road. Jesus showed Thomas the nail holes in His hands to prove that it was Him and even let Thomas put his finger through one of them.
2006-09-28 03:41:43 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
It's called artistic and cultural convention. It's a fact of history. Live with it-it is of limited relevance in the modern era.
2006-09-28 03:24:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
When He sat for those portraits, back in 1945 I believe it was, that was how He appeared.
2006-09-28 03:45:40 · answer #8 · answered by NickofTyme 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
each culture potrays Christ in there own race....the way I see it is it doesn't matter if he's white...black....even purple for all I care....the main thing is that ppl carry the faith and believe in HIM....even if Christ would look like a 2x4 piece of wood...would it really matter as long as you believe and praise Him
2006-09-28 03:23:46 · answer #9 · answered by echoedwhispers 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes.,that accurate on His eyes and hair color.
2006-09-28 04:08:30 · answer #10 · answered by Tinkerbelle 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋