Black Christ

[Ed Normile]

Jesus as God is our creator and we are made in his image. This transcends mere social limits such as color or status that we as failed beings seperate ourselves with, being created in His image does not mean we look just like him, it means we are able to think and accept His will. We can create things of beauty, art and media that should glorify God and show our acceptance of his will, we can also create life, albeit not as gods, but through the will of God. God supercedes color of skin or societal positions, we are truly born in the image of God whatever color we are. I was in a catholic church in Montego Bay Jamaica when I was 19, went there with a dozen of my friends on vacation and made the mass on sunday to watch the mass being celebrated by a lily white english priest flanked by an image of a black Jesus and a brown Blessed Virgin Mary and baby Jesus. I see nothing wrong with any race glorifying God by creating an image that in their minds brings the image of Him to an image they can better identify with, and I feel that God probably smiles each time he sees his creation honor him this way.

ed

[Micah]

[quote name='Selah' timestamp='1284919634' post='2174613']
Show me a Dogma that proves so and I will believe you. Otherwise, you are simply wrong
[/quote]

Have you read the New Testament? Jesus was a Jew. He recited the Psalms and the Shema twice a day. He taught in the Temple and observed the feasts. He was a Galilean. He was a teacher, a Rabbi. He is the descendant of King David. Don't you understand the importance of his Jewish identity? He was not black nor chinese nor European. It is very important people get this. St. Paul stressed the importance of the Jewish heritage of Christianity when he described Christianity as a tree wherein the gentiles are grafted onto the Hebrew root.

And the Old Testament.. That whole thing is Jewish, and it all points to that little bit at the back, the New Testament. Its like really really important you get this; Catholics are new Israel. (Israel>Jacob>Hebrew>JEWISH)

The Passover and the paschal lamb is the Jewish foreshadowing of the Eucharist, the summit of our Faith and it's Jewish. [b]Portraying Jesus as Chinese or black or any gentile is a lie and that makes it wrong, not to mention undermining the entire deposit of Salvation history. He came from God's chosen people just as Isaiah prophesied. Seriously read this, don't just bight back. This is the identity of our savior and its very important.[/b]

[Selah]

[quote name='Ed Normile' timestamp='1284920867' post='2174619']
Jesus as God is our creator and we are made in his image. This transcends mere social limits such as color or status that we as failed beings seperate ourselves with, being created in His image does not mean we look just like him, it means we are able to think and accept His will. We can create things of beauty, art and media that should glorify God and show our acceptance of his will, we can also create life, albeit not as gods, but through the will of God. God supercedes color of skin or societal positions, we are truly born in the image of God whatever color we are. I was in a catholic church in Montego Bay Jamaica when I was 19, went there with a dozen of my friends on vacation and made the mass on sunday to watch the mass being celebrated by a lily white english priest flanked by an image of a black Jesus and a brown Blessed Virgin Mary and baby Jesus. I see nothing wrong with any race glorifying God by creating an image that in their minds brings the image of Him to an image they can better identify with, and I feel that God probably smiles each time he sees his creation honor him this way.

ed
[/quote]


Very nice, Ed. Micah, I do believe you should read this

[Wikitiki]

...Haven't Jesus and Mary both appeared to people to be of different races, usually a race close to the visionary/visionaries or a race the visionaries are used to seeing them as? I know you don't have to believe in any apparitions, but still. God is God. He has no race. Mary, of course, while on Earth, was a Jewish woman, and so was Jesus. But, because Jesus is God, he can certainly appear to us as any race he chooses, and allow and help Mary to do the same. It's not really all that wrong to think of them with darker or lighter skin, or anything else that could very. I suppose it could even be helpful in creating a even stronger feeling of familiarity and family.

That said, it is wrong to refer to them as "Black Jesus" or "White Mary" (referring to her skin tone, not her purity), or anything like that. It seems to suggest that whoever they are talking about is a black person that has been elevated to the level of Jesus, or that it is impossible for Jesus to appear to be white, or tan, or whatever he chooses. It makes Him exclusively one race, and that strips away His divinity. Likewise, making Mary one race also seems to put limits on what God can do to His creation.

And isn't it much more important that Jesus was religiously Jewish, that our roots are in Judaism, than it is what race he was?

Edited September 19, 2010 by Wikitiki

[Selah]

[quote]...Haven't Jesus and Mary both appeared to people to be of different races, usually a race close to the visionary/visionaries or a race the visionaries are used to seeing them as? [/quote]

Yes indeed they have. Our Lady of Akita, for instance, spoke to the Sister through a statue portraying her as Japanese. Mary was Jewish. Should we declare that the apparition was wrong and the Sister was hallucinating?

Do I really even have to bring up Our Lady of Guadalupe?

How about the Nino de Atocha?

The portrayal of the Child Jesus as the Little White Guest?

Our Lady of Levang (the infant She is holding is most certainly NOT Jewish).

This is all hogwash to me. Jesus (God) transends ethnicity and gender. How petty.

[MithLuin]

Yes, Jesus was Jewish. Which means he looks more like Osama bin Laden than not, if we're being technical about it.

Art depicting God was forbidden in the Old Testament. No graven image and all of that. Why? Because...people would tend to idolize the object rather than recognize the reality.

God changed the rule by becoming Incarnate. Jesus walked this earth as a man with particular facial features and traits. Of course, we don't really know what he looked like, since they didn't exactly have photography back then, but we can guess that (for instance) he wore a beard, since men of his time generally wore beards. Etc.

If you want to see Jesus today, where do you go? Do you look at art? Or do you go to church and stare at the Eucharist? That piece of bread IS Jesus, not some lame representation of Him.

Artists are meant to reveal truths in their artwork. In as much as they succeed, they have created good religious art. Not all religious art is good - some of it is insipid, and some of it is poorly executed, and some of it is just plain weird. But I have never heard the Church complain about artists depicting the Virgin Mary or Christ in fancy clothing from a much later time period that is [i]far[/i] from historically accurate. The idea was to show that they are honored as royalty by [i]this[/i] time and place, not to limit them to their own.

Jesus is the Son of Man, and he can be (and is) depicted in many ways, not all of them good. Historical accuracy is not the most important consideration in religious artwork, though.


And, on a lighter note....

[quote]There were 3 good arguments that Jesus was Black:
1. He called everyone brother.
2. He liked Gospel.
3. He didn't get a fair trial

But then there were also 3 good arguments that Jesus was Jewish:
1. He went into his father's business.
2. He lived at home until he was 30 years old.
3. He was sure his Mother was a virgin and his Mother was sure he was God

But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was Italian:
1. He talked with his hands.
2. He had wine with his meals.
3. He used olive oil.

But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was a Californian:
1. He never cut his hair.
2. He walked around barefoot all the time.
3. He started a new religion.

But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was an American Indian:
1. He was at peace with nature.
2. He ate a lot of fish.
3. He talked about the Great Spirit.

But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was Irish:
1. He never got married.
2. He was always telling stories...
3. He loved green pastures.

But 3 proofs that Jesus was a woman:
1. He fed a crowd at a moment's notice when there was virtually no food.
2. He kept trying to get a message across to a bunch of men who just didn't get it.
3. And even when he was dead, he had to get up because there was still work to do.[/quote]

Most of those bigoted statements aren't even true of Jesus, let alone the group of people who is supposed to identify with him on account of them. But I think the point remains that Jesus became [i]like us[/i], so we are bound to recognize some of our own experience in his. I've got no problem with people representing that artistically in culturally significant ways.


Saying 'just because someone else does it doesn't make it right,' is true, but in the case of the Virgin of Guadeloupe, the 'someone else' is not a modern day Mexican. It's the Virgin Mary. So, if you don't like how she appears on that tilma, take it up with God.

Jesus Christ is Jesus Christ. He was Jewish. If someone wants to dress him up like the Infant of Prague, I'm not going to complain. The important thing to remember is that the Church is universal, so he's not 'my' Jesus, in the sense of excluding you.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Lilllabettt' timestamp='1284912536' post='2174566']
I, a lily-white girl, have many times sung a hymn with the line "Mary, flower of our race" in there.

I thought it referred to her being the sole unstained bloom of the human race.
[/quote]

And so the expression should refer to her! As I said, the problem is when people believe it means something else.

~Sternhauser

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Micah' timestamp='1284917101' post='2174594']
Dude w.e, racist accusations are just a trump card. Jesus was Jewish; its wrong to portray him as anything else. Period.
[/quote]

It wasn't wrong of God himself to portray Our Lady as having Spanish features?

~Sternhauser

[Micah]

[quote name='Selah' timestamp='1284921130' post='2174621']
Very nice, Ed. Micah, I do believe you should read this
[/quote]

Jesus was fully man as well as God. It seems like everyone is forgetting that and how important that identity was to the coming of Christ. Most of you mayyy disregard this, but Catholic scholars do not. Salvation History is based on a Jewish Christ. Christ was not a gentile and not black. Im not arguing anymore, but if you want to learn, Father Pacwa and Scott Hahn provide some really well done courses at their website:

[url="http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online"]http://www.salvationhistory.com/studies/courses/online[/url]

Genesis to Jesus: A journey through scripture is probably the most relevant..

[Nihil Obstat]

[img]http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/images2/japanesemadonnafall.JPG[/img]

[Selah]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1284923896' post='2174633']
[img]http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/images2/japanesemadonnafall.JPG[/img]
[/quote]

http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/gallery/exhibits/oldshw30.html

http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/gallery/bangosek4.html

[img]http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/gallery/bangosek3%20014.jpg[/img]

"Christ, The King of Korea"

[CatherineM]

Here's a forensic reconstruction of a first century Galilean.
[img]http://www.giveshare.org/BibleStudy/217.realfaceofjesus_files/image002.jpg[/img]

[Sternhauser]

Is it wrong to paint God as an old man with a beard, given that He is pure spirit? Isn't it an inaccurate representation of God?

~Sternhauser

[Era Might]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1284924778' post='2174641']
Here's a forensic reconstruction of a first century Galilean.
[img]http://www.giveshare.org/BibleStudy/217.realfaceofjesus_files/image002.jpg[/img]
[/quote]
Our Lord was Jewish. He looked like Adam Sandler. Get yer fax streight.

Edited September 19, 2010 by Era Might

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1284924896' post='2174643']
Our Lord was Jewish. He looked like Adam Sandler. Get yer fax streight.
[/quote]

Adam Sandler's visage would be a lot better than that mug.

~Sternhauser

[Fragments]

Looks just like Peter in 'The Passion of the Christ.'

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='Fragments' timestamp='1284925637' post='2174650']
Looks just like Peter in 'The Passion of the Christ.'


[/quote]

LOL , it also looks like the shiphand on the old Moby Johnsonville brat movie.

ed

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='Ed Normile' timestamp='1284926149' post='2174653']
LOL , it also looks like the shiphand on the old Moby Johnsonville brat movie.

ed
[/quote]


Well durn, t'weren't I surprised when I seen that the site had edited my use of the name "Moby Johnsonville brat" I guess if I have to write about Batman's ward, young Johnsonville brat Grayson I will be edited too.

ed

[Johnny]

Who cares what people think of when they think of Jesus. Jesus is God, He is above racial identity and certainly above racial word fights on an internet forum. If picturing Jesus as a Chinese man helps bring someone closer to Christ and His Bride then so be it. In reality Jesus when he was a flesh and blood man on earth probably looked a lot like the facial reconstruction of a 1st century Galilean but there's nothing that says that is what He looks like now.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Johnny' timestamp='1284926807' post='2174657']
Who cares what people think of when they think of Jesus. Jesus is God, He is above racial identity and certainly above racial word fights on an internet forum. If picturing Jesus as a Chinese man helps bring someone closer to Christ and His Bride then so be it. In reality Jesus when he was a flesh and blood man on earth probably looked a lot like the facial reconstruction of a 1st century Galilean but there's nothing that says that is what He looks like now.
[/quote]

The world will do anything to discredit Jesus, including making him look like a cro-magnon (renditions which are themselves probably probably pretty inaccurate.) I think people from 2000 years ago looked a lot like they look now. Although a lot shorter!

And it's nearly impossible to distinguish facial features from skeletal remains.

~Sternhauser

Edited September 19, 2010 by Sternhauser