Why do you assume that he had a dark complexion? His forefather David was described as 'ruddy and fair'. Ruddy means red. The description of David sounds more like a Irishman than what you say.
So are you not assuming as well?
Whoever comes up with a version of what Jesus looked like is assuming. Why is one rendition less assumptive than another?
2007-09-28 03:54:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by Christian Sinner 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Isn't it a stereotype and gross generalization to say that if someone was from the middle east then they are automatically dark complected and have dark eyes? Given the variance of people in the Middle East both in the past and today, especially even among the Jews themselves, it is quite possible Jesus had dark hair and fair skin, or even light hair and fair skin. Could he not have had brown eyes, green eyes, hazel eyes, gray eyes, blue eyes?
Thats like saying that all African-American's are black. Aren't there also white people who live in Africa? If they moved to America, would they not also be considered African-American?
I guess I am not sure the purpose of this question. Most Christians focus on WHO Jesus was and WHAT Jesus did than how He looked. His looks are irrelevant to the grander scheme of things. I am sure being the Son of God He was undoubtedly a handsome man, but again it's irrelevant.
2007-09-28 11:36:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by Bruce Leroy - The Last Dragon 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Man has portrayed Him in an acceptable way--but Jesus is the human form of God and we are all created in God's image so yes I believe that Jesus probably has dreadlocks and a dark complexion--He is all of us combined.
2007-09-28 10:54:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by heavnbound 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The exact picture of Jesus has little bearing in the Big picture. Part of His persona was not to appear as some one you would follow because of His physical appearance.
Rather one is encouraged to follow because of His teaching.
Therefore the color of His eyes or skin does not matter.
2007-09-28 11:01:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by bobalo9 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Some of the answerers above are so funny. But seriously, I don't know how many Christians believe that. I don't, but it doesn't matter, even if He was blue-eyed or whatever. What matters is how much He cares about me. That's enough for me.
2007-09-28 10:54:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by discombobulated girl 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Jesus was a Jew.
I don't use Leonardo DaVinci's Painting as an / a guide as to what Jesus Looked like in His Human Form.
2007-09-28 10:52:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I think it's pretty obvious to everyone at this point that those pictures are far fetched...
But then, i've seen pictures of a black jesus with charcoal skin and long dread locks, and i'm like "oh c'mon!! Jesus didn't look like a blond hair, blue eyed man, but neither was he jamal from around the way either!"
and i'm black...
2007-09-28 10:53:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by Katrina 5
·
3⤊
1⤋
I am not christian nor do I believe that Jesus Christ existed, but if he did exist he would have had a dark complexion.
2007-09-28 10:53:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by friskygimp 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I believe he had dark eyes and a "tanned" complexion.
And he was not handsome!
Isaiah 53.2 For he grew up before him like a young plant,
and like a root out of dry ground;
he had no form or majesty that we should look at him,
and no beauty that we should desire him.
2007-09-28 10:55:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by Desir D 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The art that depicts Jesus would be the artist's interpretation of what he thinks/feels about Him. There is no supposition that Jesus actually looks like that.
What Jesus is to me may not be what He is to you. He is able to meet each person where that person is.
It isn't about what He looks like, it is about what He has done for each of us...
Ultimately, it is all about His love for you.
2007-09-28 11:17:19
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋