• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

The time has come to admit Jesus wasn't white!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I made exactly this point when I was 14 years old at catholic school and the teacher told me I was "missing the point" and should pipe down.

But I wasn't, he was missing the point. This is an important point, Jesus was clearly not white but continues to be depicted that way, especially in central america. I think it's utterly ludicrous and hypocritical.
 
Krishna and Vishnu are depicted as blue.

The color of skin in religious illustration has
more to do with hopes and symbolism than
physical reality.
 
I made exactly this point when I was 14 years old at catholic school and the teacher told me I was "missing the point" and should pipe down.

But I wasn't, he was missing the point. This is an important point, Jesus was clearly not white but continues to be depicted that way, especially in central America. I think it's utterly ludicrous and hypocritical.

When I was young under 9 not sure exactly, I was in some catholic class my parents sent me to, It was my second year, I don't remember what it was specifically but something with the core rules changed

I had said Jesus was her 2k years ago how could it have changed in the last year, they said I was arguing

My thing is either the bible is true or not, If its true it can't change if it's not then why to read it

I do happen to believe the Bible, although I am not living it right now, But that's beside the point
 
I hated Religious Education at school, because they sang pointless songs that had no melody, and the bloke who taught us was a complete numpty.
 
Sometimes I wonder if this isn't sort of a phenomena like pareidolia. Where people are so likely to see human faces in what could otherwise amount to visualizing a random pattern. With those believers who may want to think that Jesus was in their image, with their specific features.

Interesting that Islam forbids depicting any images of the prophet. Neatly avoiding such controversies.

On pure logic alone I have to assume Jesus appeared much as would any Semitic person of that region at that time. Regardless of artistic or religious convictions.
 
Last edited:
If Jesus did exist he wouldn't have looked anything like the way he is portrayed in Western churches, this is purely a made up image of what people imagine that a son of God could look like to make it easier for people to accept it, as we already said he wouldn't have been white, but his entire features would have been totally different too from that part of the world in those days.

Here is a common Western portrayal of Jesus:

Jesus-Main-626779.jpg


But in reality if he had existed he'd more likely look something like this:

yIhyI.jpg


But the 2nd image just doesn't fit as a image for Western society to worship. And what is it about Worship? If God or Jesus existed, why would they want to be worshipped anyway? Would loving parents want their son or daughter to bow down stating that they'd dedicate themselves to them like many prayers do while worshipping them? Of course not and the whole thing is just totally wrong to me.

I hated Religious Education at school, because they sang pointless songs that had no melody, and the bloke who taught us was a complete numpty.
I was always arguing with my RE teacher (I believe they changed the name to RS a little later for Religious Studies instead of Religious Education). The reason was because she was so biased towards Christianity including the belief in one God and that Jesus was the son of God, there was no debate, we were literally taught this as the truth and even then I saw this as indoctrination which I wanted no part of. This was because in those days in the mid 1980s we still effectively lived in a Christian state in the UK and most schools openly taught Christianity. For instance we were forced to pray using the "Lords prayer" in assembly, I would refuse to repeat it and got told off a few times for raising my head. I also remember when I refused to attend a carol service during Advent stating that it was wrong to attempt to force Christianity on me when I'm not Christian, but in those days they still forced children. For a few years I was forced to attend carol service under protest at our local church, but one year I'd had just about enough and I hid in the computer room while everyone else went lol!

Once my RE teacher tried to list all the things that makes us believe in God, one was that only God can control the weather, I argued that humans can and will be-able to manipulate the weather, that if we set off a nuclear war we would definitely create a nuclear winter and that we'd be-able to do things to manipulate the weather in a more controlled fashion in future, I said this in the mid 1980s, it's now becoming a reality, yet she continued to insist that only God can control the weather and that it was a valid reason to believe in one God:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_modification
 
Last edited:
I was always arguing with my RE teacher (I believe they changed the name to RS a little later for Religious Studies instead of Religious Education).

They wanted us to just accept things that don't make sense or can't happen as truth.

RE teacher: And so the virgin mary gave birth to a baby boy, Jesus...
Me (interrupting) But if Mary was a virgin, how come she gave birth to Jesus?
RE teacher (in a stern voice): Progster!!!
Me: :openmouth: ?????

All he needed to do was explain it.
 
This is not what Jesus would have wanted. My bible knowledge is non-existent now, but I'm positive Jesus stressed the importance of not judging others based on the surface.

White, brown, black, does it matter? He did exist by the way and there's proof to back it up. The one you're looking for is God (as in, the one mentioned in the Holy Bible, not the other gods), and apparently that's still a toss-up.
 
This is not what Jesus would have wanted. My bible knowledge is non-existent now, but I'm positive Jesus stressed the importance of not judging others based on the surface.

White, brown, black, does it matter? He did exist by the way and there's proof to back it up. The one you're looking for is God (as in, the one mentioned in the Holy Bible, not the other gods), and apparently that's still a toss-up.
There's in my opinion no 100% certain proof that Jesus existed because there's no person alive now who can verify it and there's no known direct descendant that can verify it either, there's no official records that we can 100% truly trust from back then, the bible was written by human beings and has been altered plus translated many times over the centuries and we can't 100% trust the word of the authors or whether they actually even meant for their stories to be taken literally and anything else that is offered as so called proof we can't be 100% certain of it's authenticity either. There's so many people who want to believe in Jesus so much, he's almost like an adult Santa Claus that people often cling to for comfort, if there's something you need just prey to Jesus or God for it and if you're really good you will be rewarded (which definitely isn't necessarily the case in life which is often extremely unfair). These people are also often desperately clinging onto the slightest shred of proof, they will be totally biased towards anything that could possibly be related to Jesus even if the evidence is very poor.

If I had to gamble I would say that Jesus did exist although it's not 100% definite, but if he did exist, what we know of him would almost certainly be massively different to what many people believe because the information will have been changed and will be grossly exaggerated towards what people want to believe, not what truly happened with people filling in gaps of knowledge too and as I said before I don't for one minute believe he was anything more than a human being with a human mother and father, even if he didn't know who his father was it doesn't mean it was God. Whether he existed or not, there's certainly not many people or fictional characters that could have such an impact on some people's lives a couple of thousand years later even if what people believe isn't true, do you think anyone living now or even a fictional character that was meant to be living today will still be very important around the year 4018 to millions of people? I very much doubt it.
 
Last edited:
There were plenty of reliable eye witnesses to the crucifixion and resurrection including a doctor (Luke), who were very close to Jesus and actually went to their deaths rather than deny what they had seen with their own eyes.

And since then, millions of people have met with Him on the spiritual plain and so know that what the Bible says is true. They know that the same person that appears to them in this dimention is the one that walked the earth.

I met with Him when I was a 23 year old atheist from atheist parents and it changed my life forever.

Of course, it takes this encounter before one can believe it. Just being told the story is not enough. It has to become reality for each person.God made man to worship and all men worship something. It is only when the object is the Creator of all things that the worship enables man to overcome his main problem - sin.
 
Last edited:
There were plenty of reliable eye witnesses to the crucifixion and resurrection including a doctor (Luke), who were very close to Jesus and actually went to their deaths rather than deny what they had seen with their own eyes.

And since then, millions of people have met with Him on the spiritual plain and so know that what the Bible says is true. They know that the same person that appears to them in this dimention is the one that walked the earth.

I met with Him when I was a 23 year old atheist from atheist parents and it changed my life forever.

Of course, it takes this encounter before one can believe it. Just being told the story is not enough. It has to become reality for each person.God made man to worship and all men worship something. It is only when the object is the Creator of all things that the worship enables man to overcome his main problem - sin.
I'm afraid that's still not hard evidence and it would be thrown out of any court, reliable eyewitnesses from around 2000 years ago are not proven reliable and back then even people who might be considered healers had extremely limited knowledge to what a doctor has in modern times, that's if he even was a healer, we don't really know for certain in the same way as we don't even definitely know that Jesus existed.

Saying that millions of people have met with "Him" on a spiritual plain is also entirely pure speculation that is not proven and would be thrown out of any court of law.

I was a paranormal investigator for quite a few years from 1996 and from experience I know that there's things that cannot be explained by normal science, I've even recorded some incredible E.V.P. on more than one occasion that's specifically answered a series of questions, one was a really clear women's voice when there were no women in the room, at the time I suddenly heard lots of blatant knocks and fidgeting sounds around me which I've heard a good few times when there's paranormal activity and I've experienced some incredible things over the years. Sadly now there's nothing but fake or grossly exaggerated TV shows like Ghost Adventures which upsets me, I know that you have to be very patient to obtain evidence and often you could spend all night in an alleged very haunted location to get absolutely nothing, yet on shows like this they gain evidence that you'd be lucky to get in 6 months of investigating every few minutes, shows like this are making a mockery of the paranormal and so are most of the very unprofessional public "ghost hunt" groups that didn't exist in the 1990s that charge to try to frighten people, investigating the paranormal is not about frights. I will even talk unprofessionally and go as far as to say that I have seen evidence of what people might call spirits and twice I've had the honour to blatantly witness what certainly appeared to be a full apparition that many people would call a "ghost" (a non conscious replay of past events, or another theory is there's a crack in time and we are seeing the reply as it happens), they're extremely rare because over years of investigations and 100s of hours I've only seen 2, both experiences lasted no more than 5 seconds and on both occasions I thought I was observing a real physical person, before I could react they faded away. I returned to the same location of one sighting repeatedly and spent many many hours there to get absolutely nothing, the same woman I very clearly saw walking in a mourning dress has allegedly been witnessed by numerous people over the years in that location.

I however believe that spirits can lie just like living humans and how do you truly know the person was who he claimed? I've even allegedly astral projected outside my own body and seen myself, while out I've even pushed my astral body's hands through a wall and felt the texture inside, but I also suspect that you can create things that you're thinking while in spiritual plains, similarly in lucid dreams some people can control what they see or even control people that appear, it doesn't necessarily mean that this person was even a true spirit however and if enough people travel to this plain and want to see a particular thing or person so much they probably will. As I said even if this person was a spirit it doesn't meant they're a genuine one. Another theory is a combined number of people thinking the same thing can allegedly create things in the spiritual plain, but it's all speculation. Many Spiritualists believe they have at least one spirit guide, they try so hard to meet them that many achieve it at first while meditating and often visualising, they see this instead of "Him" as you described, similarly however I'm sceptical as to how genuine this is even though they actually see this person. In other words people tend to see and often communicate with what-ever they personally believe while in that altered state of consciousness.
 
Last edited:
Jesus hasn't been white in a thousand years:) Love how the the bible has to be 100% real or fake. Every idiot gravitates towards the opposite ends of people-made cliches.
 
Jesus hasn't been white in a thousand years:) Love how the the bible has to be 100% real or fake. Every idiot gravitates towards the opposite ends of people-made cliches.
I don't think that, the Bible was written by multiple authors that were all human beings and some of the Bible is even an ancient outdated law book, but you'd think the Bible was written by God by the way some people follow absolutely everything that's written and even try to live their life by it. There's a fair chance that some of what's written is genuine or the author believed it was at least, while other parts are close to impossible in my opinion, there also masses of contradictions. I've said before that I think a lot of the Bible are stories with meaning that weren't meant to be taken literally, some of the stories could even be based loosely on the truth, but with a lot of fantasy added, for instance Jesus may have existed, perhaps he told stories of fantasy to his followers that were just that and he most likely did make a huge impact on some people in these times of high superstition where many people were very gullible, but it was written in the Bible like it's a definite fact. How many people really believe there was an Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden with a snake and an apple? This was most definitely a made up story of fantasy with a meaning in my opinion and Charles Darwin's theory of evolution started to disprove it to the dismay of many devoted Christians and followers of the Bible, his theory probably isn't perfect, but it's most definitely a lot more feasibly possible and I would even go as far to say that it's likely, although there are probably other factors that haven't been taken into account yet too. Also as I've said before, over the years the Bible has been altered many times over the centuries and some of the original meaning has also been lost in translations.

As I said the Bible has many contradictions, but some are huge, for instance it states, "Put to death any woman who practices magic.", but what about the Ten Commandments and "thou shalt not kill"? This caused the Witchcraft Act to be passed and there was witch hunts where many innocent women were burnt at the stake (murdered with a torturous painful death) and practising Spiritualism and similar was still illegal well into the 20th Century in the UK while many Christians still look down upon such practices. I wrote more about what I think of the Bible including some of it's contradictions here:

https://www.autismforums.com/threads/reading-the-bible-its-hard.25908/#post-519243

PS: After Jesus was allegedly resurrected why does the story end not long after? It's all too convenient and it obviously leaves a lot to be explained which I think they'd find too difficult without giving away a lot more of the story's many flaws.
 
Last edited:
Krishna and Vishnu are depicted as blue.

The color of skin in religious illustration has
more to do with hopes and symbolism than
physical reality.
Could we possibly close this thread as it appears to be one atheist harping on and on and on about the existence of Jesus .
 
I don’t understand why people want to close down a discussion provided it is civil, intelligent, respectful and non abusive.

Atheists are just as entitled to an opinion as everyone else, and if I come across a thread I don’t like or find pointless I don’t try to shut it down or curtail free speech, I ignore it and move on.
 
I don’t understand why people want to close down a discussion provided it is civil, intelligent, respectful and non abusive.

Atheists are just as entitled to an opinion as everyone else, and if I come across a thread I don’t like or find pointless I don’t try to shut it down or curtail free speech, I ignore it and move on.
Because the particular person stated the opinion once !why do they need to state it more than once ?????
 
I don’t know why or who you are referring to. Perhaps you should ask them, not try to shut down a discussion many people have commented on because it upsets you and you are unable to ignore the thread, or click on the unwatch thread option at the top.
 
I'm afraid that's still not hard evidence and it would be thrown out of any court, reliable eyewitnesses from around 2000 years ago are not proven reliable and back then even people who might be considered healers had extremely limited knowledge to what a doctor has in modern times, that's if he even was a healer, we don't really know for certain in the same way as we don't even definitely know that Jesus existed.

Saying that millions of people have met with "Him" on a spiritual plain is also entirely pure speculation that is not proven and would be thrown out of any court of law.

I was a paranormal investigator for quite a few years from 1996 and from experience I know that there's things that cannot be explained by normal science, I've even recorded some incredible E.V.P. on more than one occasion that's specifically answered a series of questions, one was a really clear women's voice when there were no women in the room, at the time I suddenly heard lots of blatant knocks and fidgeting sounds around me which I've heard a good few times when there's paranormal activity and I've experienced some incredible things over the years. Sadly now there's nothing but fake or grossly exaggerated TV shows like Ghost Adventures which upsets me, I know that you have to be very patient to obtain evidence and often you could spend all night in an alleged very haunted location to get absolutely nothing, yet on shows like this they gain evidence that you'd be lucky to get in 6 months of investigating every few minutes, shows like this are making a mockery of the paranormal and so are most of the very unprofessional public "ghost hunt" groups that didn't exist in the 1990s that charge to try to frighten people, investigating the paranormal is not about frights. I will even talk unprofessionally and go as far as to say that I have seen evidence of what people might call spirits and twice I've had the honour to blatantly witness what certainly appeared to be a full apparition that many people would call a "ghost" (a non conscious replay of past events, or another theory is there's a crack in time and we are seeing the reply as it happens), they're extremely rare because over years of investigations and 100s of hours I've only seen 2, both experiences lasted no more than 5 seconds and on both occasions I thought I was observing a real physical person, before I could react they faded away. I returned to the same location of one sighting repeatedly and spent many many hours there to get absolutely nothing, the same woman I very clearly saw walking in a mourning dress has allegedly been witnessed by numerous people over the years in that location.

I however believe that spirits can lie just like living humans and how do you truly know the person was who he claimed? I've even allegedly astral projected outside my own body and seen myself, while out I've even pushed my astral body's hands through a wall and felt the texture inside, but I also suspect that you can create things that you're thinking while in spiritual plains, similarly in lucid dreams some people can control what they see or even control people that appear, it doesn't necessarily mean that this person was even a true spirit however and if enough people travel to this plain and want to see a particular thing or person so much they probably will. As I said even if this person was a spirit it doesn't meant they're a genuine one. Another theory is a combined number of people thinking the same thing can allegedly create things in the spiritual plain, but it's all speculation. Many Spiritualists believe they have at least one spirit guide, they try so hard to meet them that many achieve it at first while meditating and often visualising, they see this instead of "Him" as you described, similarly however I'm sceptical as to how genuine this is even though they actually see this person. In other words people tend to see and often communicate with what-ever they personally believe while in that altered state of consciousness.

On the contrary pjcnet, eye witnesses in those times were much more reliable, as there was greater dependency on the spoken than the written word. And as for modern day doctors, they are merely drug pushers, whereas traditional healers had to have a much broader scope of knowledge and skills. Anyway, they were respected enough to have their testimonies bear weight.

Paranormal activity is demonic joke taking. I encountered these before I became a Christian and they were nothing like the encounter with the Divine. This encounter leaves us totally changed wioth our spiritual eyes opened and truths revealed and especially regarding interpretation of scripture which is impossible without the Holy Spirit's revelations.

There have been countless cases of people having this encounter yet they have had no previous knowledge of Christianity even on isolated islands where no missionary has stepped, and they all 'know' the same person of Jesus Christ and understand clearly the scriptures that the unsaved cannot possibly understand, along with the so called contradictions.

Please read the following book:

"Written by an L. A. County homicide detective and former atheist, Cold-Case Christianity examines the claims of the New Testament using the skills and strategies of a hard-to-convince criminal investigator. Christianity could be defined as a "cold case" it makes a claim about an event from the distant past for which there is little forensic evidence. In Cold-Case Christianity, J. Warner Wallace uses his nationally recognized skills as a homicide detective to look at the evidence and eyewitnesses behind Christian beliefs. Including gripping stories from his career and the visual techniques he developed in the courtroom, Wallace uses illustration to examine the powerful evidence that validates the claims of Christianity. A unique apologetic that speaks to readers' intense interest in detective stories, Cold-Case Christianity inspires readers to have confidence in Christ as it prepares them to articulate the case for Christianity."

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1434704696/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New Threads

Top Bottom