Question about Jesus for Christians

[nomhar]

I will start off by saying I am not religious, and while I don't deny the possibility of a creator, I can't say I rationally or logically accept religion to be true. Regardless I would like for people to give their opinion on this interesting question.

In the Old Testament, Daniel 7:9 states;

"His vesture was like white snow
And the hair of His head like pure wool"

Now most bibles vary on what exactly this above passage states, but almost all Old Testaments are nearly identical with a slight change of wording.

Onward then, Revelation 1:14 states;

"His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow;"

Now again, different bible versions once again vary, some instead of 'like snow' say 'as white as snow,' but again they are almost identical aside from some minor wording.

So then, the Old Testament more or less seems to be describing the 'hair' of His head as wooly, in other words arguing that Jesus was Black. Many groups such as the black hebrew israelites (cult) claim that this proves Jesus was indeed black. Furthermore many or most black christians who are normal people also believe this to be true. Personally if Jesus did exist, I don't care whether he was black or not. If so then that's great, but why is there such a significant difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament for what these passages say? The New Testament implies nothing about a hair type; but rather that the 'wool' or white description of his hair refers to its pureness and not the texture or color correct? Perhaps this is the same for the Old Testament, that the wool description simply means pureness and not a literal hair type.

Anyhow, in my opinion if Jesus did exist then I believe he was of Middle Eastern or semitic descent, a semite. Surely not European Caucasian, Black African, or Asian? Perhaps only if God himself supernaturally chose for the appearance of Jesus to be one of those ways could it be true. But I highly doubt that.

[Goat]

I will start off by saying I am not religious, and while I don't deny the possibility of a creator, I can't say I rationally or logically accept religion to be true. Regardless I would like for people to give their opinion on this interesting question.

In the Old Testament, Daniel 7:9 states;

"His vesture was like white snow
And the hair of His head like pure wool"

Now most bibles vary on what exactly this above passage states, but almost all Old Testaments are nearly identical with a slight change of wording.

Onward then, Revelation 1:14 states;

"His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow;"

Now again, different bible versions once again vary, some instead of 'like snow' say 'as white as snow,' but again they are almost identical aside from some minor wording.

So then, the Old Testament more or less seems to be describing the 'hair' of His head as wooly, in other words arguing that Jesus was Black. Many groups such as the black hebrew israelites (cult) claim that this proves Jesus was indeed black. Furthermore many or most black christians who are normal people also believe this to be true. Personally if Jesus did exist, I don't care whether he was black or not. If so then that's great, but why is there such a significant difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament for what these passages say? The New Testament implies nothing about a hair type; but rather that the 'wool' or white description of his hair refers to its pureness and not the texture or color correct? Perhaps this is the same for the Old Testament, that the wool description simply means pureness and not a literal hair type.

Anyhow, in my opinion if Jesus did exist then I believe he was of Middle Eastern or semitic descent, a semite. Surely not European Caucasian, Black African, or Asian? Perhaps only if God himself supernaturally chose for the appearance of Jesus to be one of those ways could it be true. But I highly doubt that.

One thing I will point out is that Daniel was not written about Jesus, no matter what
Christians claim.

[Easyrider]

I will start off by saying I am not religious, and while I don't deny the possibility of a creator, I can't say I rationally or logically accept religion to be true. Regardless I would like for people to give their opinion on this interesting question.

In the Old Testament, Daniel 7:9 states;

"His vesture was like white snow
And the hair of His head like pure wool"

Now most bibles vary on what exactly this above passage states, but almost all Old Testaments are nearly identical with a slight change of wording.

Onward then, Revelation 1:14 states;

"His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow;"

Now again, different bible versions once again vary, some instead of 'like snow' say 'as white as snow,' but again they are almost identical aside from some minor wording.

So then, the Old Testament more or less seems to be describing the 'hair' of His head as wooly, in other words arguing that Jesus was Black. Many groups such as the black hebrew israelites (cult) claim that this proves Jesus was indeed black. Furthermore many or most black christians who are normal people also believe this to be true. Personally if Jesus did exist, I don't care whether he was black or not. If so then that's great, but why is there such a significant difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament for what these passages say? The New Testament implies nothing about a hair type; but rather that the 'wool' or white description of his hair refers to its pureness and not the texture or color correct? Perhaps this is the same for the Old Testament, that the wool description simply means pureness and not a literal hair type.

Anyhow, in my opinion if Jesus did exist then I believe he was of Middle Eastern or semitic descent, a semite. Surely not European Caucasian, Black African, or Asian? Perhaps only if God himself supernaturally chose for the appearance of Jesus to be one of those ways could it be true. But I highly doubt that.

One thing I will point out is that Daniel was not written about Jesus, no matter what
Christians claim.

Yeah, it was, no matter what the skeptics say.

[jeremiah]

Well that was short and sweet, wasn't it? Why do you think it talks like that nomhar?

[Quixotic]

Yeah, it was, no matter what the skeptics say.

Remember that you too are a skeptic. Your are a skeptic of thore, vishnu etc etc etc. all other religions so on so forth

We just extend that to everything.

Skepticism just means testing ideas against reality.

[chibiq]

I will start off by saying I am not religious, and while I don't deny the possibility of a creator, I can't say I rationally or logically accept religion to be true. Regardless I would like for people to give their opinion on this interesting question.

In the Old Testament, Daniel 7:9 states;

"His vesture was like white snow
And the hair of His head like pure wool"

Now most bibles vary on what exactly this above passage states, but almost all Old Testaments are nearly identical with a slight change of wording.

Onward then, Revelation 1:14 states;

"His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow;"

Now again, different bible versions once again vary, some instead of 'like snow' say 'as white as snow,' but again they are almost identical aside from some minor wording.

So then, the Old Testament more or less seems to be describing the 'hair' of His head as wooly, in other words arguing that Jesus was Black. Many groups such as the black hebrew israelites (cult) claim that this proves Jesus was indeed black. Furthermore many or most black christians who are normal people also believe this to be true. Personally if Jesus did exist, I don't care whether he was black or not. If so then that's great, but why is there such a significant difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament for what these passages say? The New Testament implies nothing about a hair type; but rather that the 'wool' or white description of his hair refers to its pureness and not the texture or color correct? Perhaps this is the same for the Old Testament, that the wool description simply means pureness and not a literal hair type.

Anyhow, in my opinion if Jesus did exist then I believe he was of Middle Eastern or semitic descent, a semite. Surely not European Caucasian, Black African, or Asian? Perhaps only if God himself supernaturally chose for the appearance of Jesus to be one of those ways could it be true. But I highly doubt that.

Are you saying only black people have white, wooly hair? You've obviously never met my grandpa. So maybe we should add the next part to it. Eyes like flames, and feet like "fine brass". Last time I looked (about 10 seconds ago, thank you Google Images), "fine brass" looks sort of gold-ish to me.

As a white Christian, I was raised viewing images of "white Jesus", but I really doubt he was white as we know it to be. So, to throw a stake in this thread's heart, I pull out my Wikipedia card: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_of_Jesus .

I think this one is up for grabs, fellows. There's really no way to know (with the evidence we have today) what race Jesus belonged to.

[Quixotic]

chibiq has a good point.

There isn't enough evidence to demonstrate jesus even existed let alone what race he was!

[chibiq]

chibiq has a good point.

There isn't enough evidence to demonstrate jesus even existed let alone what race he was!

I didn't think anyone would exploit that, you ninja you.

[jeremiah]

Nomhar, Chibiq and Quixotic have made some interesting points. So why did you just pick the hair and start talking about race? I for one believe Jesus wasn't really wasn't white! One has to look at the national origins of the people he was born into. If you want to go off talking about spiritual issues here and trying to say something about that, then say so, that's what this forum is here for.

But I have to ask you Quixotic, when you said,

Skepticism just means testing ideas against reality.

What reality are you talking that skepticism tests ideas against? Is it reality in general? A skepticists reality as to always questioning if there isn't or is a god? I myself am a Christian and yet I to question what I am taught and seek an answer or yet still run into loads of questions, but that is normal to one who wants to learn. Everything begins with a question or an answer and one has to question, yet in the end I have found, when a question has a hard time being answered, you usually have to just let it be, and believe it or not, which is up to the person, but some times the question turns out to be the answer one is looking for.

[Quixotic]

But I have to ask you Quixotic, when you said,

Quote:
Skepticism just means testing ideas against reality.


What reality are you talking that skepticism tests ideas against? Is it reality in general? A skepticists reality as to always questioning if there isn't or is a god? I myself am a Christian and yet I to question what I am taught and seek an answer or yet still run into loads of questions, but that is normal to one who wants to learn. Everything begins with a question or an answer and one has to question, yet in the end I have found, when a question has a hard time being answered, you usually have to just let it be, and believe it or not, which is up to the person, but some times the question turns out to be the answer one is looking for.

Ok for example.....

The bible says the city Nazareth was the childhood home of Jesus.

Outside of the bible nazareth is not mentioned in a single text until at least the second century.

The power of prayer is a very specific claim of many christians.

Every study of prayer has demonstrated that prayer has no affect on the outcome of illness (in fact there is a suggestion in the data the opposite is true)

Other claims include:

That the universe was created approx 6000 years ago etc

This contradicts all evidence, from fields such as biology, astro physics, geology, well...all of them either disagree heavily (and all agree to a certain extent with each other) or have no opinion on the matter.

Christians claim jesus rose from the dead....based on biblical testimony only! i could claim similar things right out of LOTR! People cant rise from the dead, if i am wrong demonstrate how this is possible.



No iim not talking about reality as a general but we can test specific claims of christianity.

I feel that letting go questions which are hard and just deciding is a tragedy, where would that have got us? How can we fight disease? i don't know, sod it lets just keep praying!

it is even worse when people have a question they find to hard to answer, choose to believe one then defend that position based on 'faith'. i makes no sense.

at best you can settle tentatively on the position which looks best at the time until you or someone else has a compelling reason to change.

When you say you are a christian what do you actually believe? Specific claims only please.