• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Belief in white Jesus linked to racism

Idols frequently took the form as a representation of a man or women. Or the golden calf. It also prohibits "any symbol". Under your interpretation that would make every Christian church with a cross wrong in their interpretation of the bible that permits such symbols.

Your faith's interpretation of the ancient text has a bit of a problem as it is contradicted by reality - reality based upon archaeological finds

Why Jews Don’t Worship Statues of God

The contradictory concept that God has “no form” (for example in Deut. 4:12) and is an invisible, ubiquitous presence is most probably a later addition to the biblical text, meant to enforce a theological and conceptual about-face, experts posit.

But originally, when they thought of their god, the ancient Hebrews were clearly very much in step with the religious conceptions of neighboring peoples, explains Professor Tallay Ornan, a Hebrew University expert on Near East religious imagery. “Throughout the region, gods were believed to have human shape, with the main difference being that they were immortal and larger than humans,” Ornan says.

In fact, many scholars believe it is likely that in the holy of holies of the First Temple there was an anthropomorphic statue of Yahweh seated on his throne, she notes. There are clues to this in the Bible, in accounts of people worshipping in the Temple, such as the prophet Isaiah, who “saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train [of his robe] filled the Temple.” (Isaiah 6:1)
 
Your faith's interpretation of the ancient text has a bit of a problem as it is contradicted by reality
And truth...

So you agree that your faith's interpretation of the ancient text has a bit of a problem as it is contradicted by reality, "and truth"? I don't think you were trying to say this but I could be mistaken
 
So you agree that your faith's interpretation of the ancient text has a bit of a problem as it is contradicted by reality, "and truth"? I don't think you were trying to say this but I could be mistaken
Absolutely not...there is one truth of scripture and then there are lies/misinterpretations...
 
People who think Jesus Christ was white are more likely to endorse anti-Black attitudes, a new study found, suggesting that belief in white deities works to uphold white supermacy.

Let's see: According to the story he was born in Judea by a Jewish mother during the time of the Roman occupation. Being that the region was previously ruled by Greece, probably some Greek DNA in the mother as well.

Middle easterners are considered Caucasians. Why would anyone think Jesus was not Caucasian?
 
Jesus probably looked like a typical Galilean of the time. Something like this:

_87264971_jesus_bbc.jpg

Actually we could not be sure of that based on the Jesus story. The mother we might take a guess at her DNA, but the "father" was not a mortal, the DNA was therefore was created as the God desired it to be, so it could actually be anything couldn't it?
 
Actually we could not be sure of that based on the Jesus story. The mother we might take a guess at her DNA, but the "father" was not a mortal, the DNA was therefore was created as the God desired it to be, so it could actually be anything couldn't it?
lol...yeah, that's BELIEVABLE.
 
Let's see: According to the story he was born in Judea by a Jewish mother during the time of the Roman occupation. Being that the region was previously ruled by Greece, probably some Greek DNA in the mother as well.

Middle easterners are considered Caucasians. Why would anyone think Jesus was not Caucasian?
Yes they are, but since the study posted asked the question of whether students in the study considered Jesus "white" how that correlated with their racist attitudes (hopefully you read the ENTIRE article so you know what you are arguing about), the notion of Jesus being white is at the very least ignorance to outright bonkers.
as for the term Caucasian, there is the historical use, and then there is the American use:
Besides its use in anthropology and related fields, the term "Caucasian" has often been used in the United States in a different, social context to describe a group commonly called "white people".[80] "White" also appears as a self-reporting entry in the U.S. Census.[81] Naturalization as a United States citizen was restricted to "free white persons" by the Naturalization Act of 1790, and later extended to other resident populations by the Naturalization Act of 1870, Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 and Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. The Supreme Court in United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923) decided that Asian Indians were ineligible for citizenship because, though deemed "Caucasian" anthropologically, they were not white like European descendants since most laypeople did not consider them to be "white" people.
 
Interesting you should say that, because it plays almost no part in it. All complaints about Jews, Christians, and others center around the fact that they are disbelievers. I'm sure of that because such complaints are made several hundreds of times. Verse 98:6 is a good example, "Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and the polytheists (pagans of Mecca) will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the worst of creatures".
All religions are based on the cultures they were founded in, and they all become culturally supremacist as soon as they begin conflating their culture with the will of the divine.
For example: What is the language of Allah? Who should learn it? Who invented other languages?
 
Images are considered to be the same as idolatry by God...

There is not a single instance in scripture where faithful servants of Jehovah resorted to the use of visual aids to pray to God...

You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form like anything that is in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters under the earth." Exodus 20:4



You've left out an important part of that Commandment, Elvira.


Exodus 20

4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.
5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

You're adding again.
God does not forbid creation of any images.....unless it's for the purpose of worship or idolatry!



If we go by with just the edited part that you quoted:

You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form like anything that is in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters under the earth." Exodus 20:4


You'd breaking your own stipulation if you answer yes to these questions!

Do you have photos of yourself? Your children?

Is picture-taking forbidden, and not practiced by Jehovah's Witnesses?

DO YOU HAVE ANY REPRODUCTION - like the WATCHTOWER Magazine?

Lol. Go to your JW official website! :)




How many images do you see?





God is very specific...

15 “Therefore, watch yourselves closely*—since you did not see any form on the day Jehovah spoke to you in Horʹeb out of the middle of the fire—

16 that you may not act corruptly by making for yourselves any carved image having the form of any symbol, the representation of male or female,+

17 the representation of any animal on the earth or the representation of any bird that flies in the sky,+

18 the representation of anything creeping on the ground or the representation of any fish in the waters under the earth.+

19 And when you raise your eyes to the heavens and see the sun and the moon and the stars—all the army of the heavens—do not get seduced and bow down to them and serve them.+ Jehovah your God has given them to all the peoples under the whole heavens." Deuteronomy 4:15-19

Christians are to walk by faith, not by what we see with the physical eye..."for we are walking by faith, not by sight." 2 Corinthians 5:7


Indeed, yes, God is very specific. But unfortunately.................................. YOU'VE REMOVED HIS SPECIFICATION:


you are not to create images for the purpose of worship (bowing down to them, praying to them, etc..,).


You chopped off, and left off the CAVEAT to that Command, just to support the narrative you want.
You're distorting God's message.
 
Last edited:
Images are considered to be the same as idolatry by God...

There is not a single instance in scripture where faithful servants of Jehovah resorted to the use of visual aids to pray to God...

You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form like anything that is in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters under the earth." Exodus 20:4

God is very specific...

15 “Therefore, watch yourselves closely*—since you did not see any form on the day Jehovah spoke to you in Horʹeb out of the middle of the fire—

16 that you may not act corruptly by making for yourselves any carved image having the form of any symbol, the representation of male or female,+

17 the representation of any animal on the earth or the representation of any bird that flies in the sky,+

18 the representation of anything creeping on the ground or the representation of any fish in the waters under the earth.+

19 And when you raise your eyes to the heavens and see the sun and the moon and the stars—all the army of the heavens—do not get seduced and bow down to them and serve them.+ Jehovah your God has given them to all the peoples under the whole heavens." Deuteronomy 4:15-19

Christians are to walk by faith, not by what we see with the physical eye..."for we are walking by faith, not by sight." 2 Corinthians 5:7


Your message isn't only false.....but, it's also hypocritical.

Your WatchTower magazine has photos of Jesus!





 
Last edited:
Images are considered to be the same as idolatry by God...

There is not a single instance in scripture where faithful servants of Jehovah resorted to the use of visual aids to pray to God...

You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form like anything that is in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters under the earth." Exodus 20:4

God is very specific...


Here! Another photo of Jesus by your WatchTower! Your JW isn't following what you're preaching here.




You better sit down with your elders and get your narratives straight! :ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:
Probably lots of them.
That makes sense. Fictionalized characters often are a composite of several real people. I can see a few guys running around the region, preaching the song of hope.
 
Here! Another photo of Jesus by your WatchTower! Your JW isn't following what you're preaching here.




You better sit down with your elders and get your narratives straight! :ROFLMAO:

That’s not god. It’s just blue-eyed white Jesus.
 
It matters because we are commanded not to do so... :rolleyes:

Jesus was also on the cover of AWAKE magazine. And, read the following:





What Did He Really Look Like?


For more than two decades (mid-1942 through early 1968) the Watchtower Society produced books and magazines picturing Jesus without facial hair. Then a 'new truth' was revealed in the May 1, 1968 Watchtower: "it is apparent that Jesus did wear a beard, and so artistic representations of him in future Watch Tower publications will harmonize with the Scriptural evidence to that effect." (page 288)


Suddenly, due to this 'new truth,' Jehovah's Witnesses came to believe what everyone else knew all along.


What, though, about Jesus' hair length? The December 8, 1998 Awake! magazine cover, pictured here, shows Jesus with shorter hair than most traditional portraits. This is very strange, in view of the Bible reference used to restore his beard in 1968.


The May 1, 1968 Watchtower based its 'new truth' about Jesus' beard on Leviticus 19:27, commenting like this:



"Like all other Jews, Jesus was under obligation to keep the whole law. One of the commandments of the Law was: 'You must not cut your side locks short around, and you must not destroy the extremity of your beard.'" (page 286)




They even gave Jesus a new hairdo!






Absolutely not...there is one truth of scripture and then there are lies/misinterpretations...


You got that right.

And, we know - as shown - JW spreads lies and misinterpretations!
 
Last edited:
Yes they are, but since the study posted asked the question of whether students in the study considered Jesus "white" how that correlated with their racist attitudes (hopefully you read the ENTIRE article so you know what you are arguing about), the notion of Jesus being white is at the very least ignorance to outright bonkers.
as for the term Caucasian, there is the historical use, and then there is the American use:
Besides its use in anthropology and related fields, the term "Caucasian" has often been used in the United States in a different, social context to describe a group commonly called "white people".[80] "White" also appears as a self-reporting entry in the U.S. Census.[81] Naturalization as a United States citizen was restricted to "free white persons" by the Naturalization Act of 1790, and later extended to other resident populations by the Naturalization Act of 1870, Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 and Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. The Supreme Court in United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923) decided that Asian Indians were ineligible for citizenship because, though deemed "Caucasian" anthropologically, they were not white like European descendants since most laypeople did not consider them to be "white" people.


A racist white person who believes Jesus is white.....will, of course, believe, Jesus is white! What else? :LOL:

Like I said, he was raised to seeing Jesus depicted as a white person.
And, if he's a sensible person who has knowledge about Jesus, how can he not think of Jesus as a light-skinned person?
Having that belief doesn't make him a racist.


We cannot conclude that his racism has something to do, or, have any so-called "co-relation,"with his belief in the color of Jesus' skin.....

...................after all, most, if not all SENSIBLE people who read the Bible, will sensibly think of Jesus as having the coloring of a Jew.



That's the point!

Thus, I question that so-called "study!"
 
Last edited:
People who think Jesus Christ was white are more likely to endorse anti-Black attitudes, a new study found, suggesting that belief in white deities works to uphold white supermacy.

For the study, published March 1 in Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, researchers conducted a survey of 179 mostly Christian college students at a midsize private university in the Midwest. The students, over 70% of whom were white, were asked whether, based on personal understanding of Jesus, they thought of him as white, black, something else or unknown.

Using established scales, the survey then measured students' explicit racism, subtle racism, implicit bias, their preferences for hierarchies and their endorsement of colorblind racial ideology - the set of beliefs that deny the effects of racism.

The researchers argued that a Jesus who has the same race as the dominant group helps that dominant group maintain power and legitimacy.

Compared with 95 students who believed Jesus was not white, the 84 students who believed Jesus was white hand more negative explicit ideas about black people, more subtle prejudices, more feelings of warmth toward white people, greater preference for group based hieirarchy, and more insistence that they, essentially, do not see race.


more on the study:

Colorblind racial ideology:



The researchers conducted their alleged study on 179 of mostly CHRISTIAN college students! The students, over 70% were white.....

The researchers argued that a Jesus who has the same race as the dominant group helps the dominant group
maintain power and legitimacy.




Hahahaha - mostly CHRISTIANS!
Lol - tell me any of them hasn't been seeing Jesus depicted as white! Hahahaha
Assuming these Christians hadn't read the Bible, and hasn't pondered on the linenage of Jesus - tell me that pictures of Jesus hasn't helped
shaped up their belief that Jesus is white!


It's nothing but a politicized narrative masquerading as a "study!"


Lol. Anyone can say they did a study! Studies are a dozen a dime these days.
 
Is this thread about condemning anyone, it is about a study done to correlate between people who have white supremacists views

I was responding to a post.
 
Takes quite a bit of arrogance to presume you are correct and billions of Christians are wrong.
Not really. Let's face it. Dead people do not rise three days later. They are not born to virgins. And, their fathers are not immortal. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that those are all myths, even if a billion people swallowed the Kool Aid to believe it's real.
 
Not really. Let's face it. Dead people do not rise three days later. They are not born to virgins. And, their fathers are not immortal. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that those are all myths, even if a billion people swallowed the Kool Aid to believe it's real.


We are discussing the interpretations of the words. Not their reality. Im an atheist.
 
Back
Top Bottom