|
|
|
|
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/2/2008 10:36:43 PM |
I don't blame earlier Europeans for imagining him as a White man. I disagree with their reasoning for doing it, but I do UNDERSTAND it. Without strong evidence regarding appearance, they of course assumed that a great man would be consistent with their own ideas of beauty.
Surely racism also came into play? | |
|
NERO1
|
Joined: 3/8/2008
Msg: 177 | |
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/3/2008 7:42:47 AM | ^^ Another thing that came into play was that they had never really even seen blacks in most of Europe at the time when much of that art was conceived. Some of the Europeans, by medieval times at least, would have been to the Holy Land (on Crusade and/or pilgrimage) and therefore would likely have been familiar with the actual phenotype that should have most historically matched Jesus --- Jews, Kurds, Arabs, etc. Still, we tend to like to picture our gods and demi-gods as close to ourselves as possible; human nature to an extent, I suppose.
But the first time they actually came across sub-Saharan black Africans was a bit later actually. The Portuguese for instance, moving slowly and tentatively down the coast of what is today west Africa. And as soon as they saw black people along the coast or inland, they captured and enslaved them. Wherever a fight was put up by the soon-to-be slaves, they simply killed them and left them where they lay. The Spaniards and Portuguese nearly went to war in fact over slave "poaching" in the 15th century just before the discovery of the "new world".
The Portuguese king was convinced that Spanish outlaw brigands were taking black slaves and selling them in Spain (and they probably were) , from territory which Portugal had already staked off as its own. This "incident" led to the particular town in Spain, Palos, from which the "outlaw brigands" originated, being pressed by the King to give two ships and part of a crew to an enterprising Italian explorer...
So, yes racism, obviously, essentially upon first contact , and so there's no serious reason to think people like this in a time like that would have conceived of a black person being "worthy" of being placed into anything resembling a work of art...... much less a religious work of art , which they probably, more than likely, would have considered blasphemy plain and simple.... possibly even worthy of the notorious "auto-da-fe". | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/3/2008 9:21:06 AM | I'm wondering if the original poster is referring to a group called the "Black Hebrews"? This sect believes that those who call themselves "Jews" today are actually Romans, and that the real jews fled to Ethiopia and other parts of Africa after the destruction of the temple. Hence, the black race are "the chosen people". Yes, it's a very racist organization. Still, the idea is fascinating.
The common portrait of Jesus is taken from the Shroud of Turin. The image thereon seems to be of a European male. This is the main reason it is considered a fake.
It has always puzzled me why blacks are some of the most deeply devoted Christians in America. I can understand that they were kidnapped from their native soil and forced into slavery here in the United States. The religion of the slaveowners would be forced upon them, and their original religion gradually disappeared. But, in the 60's there was a "back to the motherland" movement and blacks started doing things like wearing traditional African dress and changing their names. Yet, there has not been a surge in new churches with African-based religions. ( I don't even know what they might be!)
I would think that it is because Christianity appeals to the downtrodden.
However, Cival Rights have allowed for blacks to have the same opportunities as whites. Yet, blacks still are predominantly Christian.
If I didn't know better, I'd think the Black Hebrews were onto something. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/3/2008 9:54:24 AM |
The common portrait of Jesus is taken from the Shroud of Turin. The image thereon seems to be of a European male. This is the main reason it is considered a fake
Not at all. First, the image on the Shroud is not that of a European. It may have similar features to some Europeans, but it has more in common with Semitic groups (including it's stature). Second, disputes regarding it's authenticity surround the carbon dating of parts of the fabric. New tests should resolve those matters. Where it gets interesting is if the new tests do resolve the disputes and offer conclusive scientific proof that the Shroud is from around the time of Jesus' death, how many will make the 'baby step' of accepting that He existed. | |
|
NERO1
|
Joined: 3/8/2008
Msg: 180 | |
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/3/2008 12:03:16 PM | And it should be unsurprising that the Shroud's features seem to reflect a European male's features even if it comes from the time of Jesus. Many Semitics , if not most actually, ARE in fact Caucasian (ie, of the Caucasian physical type -- their skulls, their facial shapes and features, etc, are "Caucasoid", not "Negroid" or "Mongoloid / East Asian"). The actual skin tone in and of itself is definitely not the defining factor, from a scientific point of view.
The US Census Bureau in fact nowadays counts everyone from Turks and Iranians, to northern Africans (Berbers, north African Arabs, etc), to other Middle Easterners (Jordanians, Palestinians, etc), and all other Mediterraneans as "Caucasian/white". A Palestinian Arab-American friend of mine who is unfortunately doing time in a US federal penitentiary at this point is indeed classified as well , on his Bureau of Prisons page which we recently found, as a "Caucasian/white" inmate. Granted however, the modern-day (particularly American) essentially social construct of "whiteness" will sometimes differ from what the Census Bureau says, but, nonetheless....
(And as a sort of "post-script" here I'd add that since the term "Hispanic" is actually a linguistic designation and not descriptive of any one particular race, it's arguable that there are many more people who theoretically could or should be considered "Caucasian/white" in the US --- thus destroying the "fears" of there being a sudden "shortage" of Caucasians in the USA within 50 yrs or whatever that one recent story in the news had said. "White Anglo-Saxon Protestants" or "Nordics" perhaps could become a minority here eventually, yes....but Caucasian peoples in general....... not a chance). | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/3/2008 12:03:35 PM | And as soon as they saw black people along the coast or inland, they captured and enslaved them. Wherever a fight was put up by the soon-to-be slaves, they simply killed them and left them where they lay. The Spaniards and Portuguese nearly went to war in fact over slave "poaching" in the 15th century just before the discovery of the "new world".
So, yes racism, obviously, essentially upon first contact , and so there's no serious reason to think people like this in a time like that would have conceived of a black person being "worthy" of being placed into anything resembling a work of art...... much less a religious work of art , which they probably, more than likely, would have considered blasphemy plain and simple.... possibly even worthy of the notorious "auto-da-fe".
Thank so much for saying this. Sometimes people of color just want others to state the obvious.
Just like a woman who has been raped wants her pain to be acknowledged.
What some may not understand is that to people of color, racism HURTS  | |
|
NERO1
|
Joined: 3/8/2008
Msg: 182 | |
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/3/2008 12:14:04 PM | ^^^ There never was and never will be any excuse for the Europeans' extraordinarily xenophobic and hateful murderously racist treatment of the black Africans, as I said upon very first contact, or the Amerindians (again "upon first contact"), and so on. It's a legacy which people of European extraction have to acknowledge and realize. Most of us have and do.
Granted, the Euros are not the only guilty ones. Anti-black prejudice can and does exist amongst the Muslim Arabs for example -- who still enslave non-Muslim black Africans in some parts of the Islamic world. And around here where I live (Chicagoland) some of the most vehement anti-black prejudice and neighborhood territoriality , etc, of recent times, seems to be directed at the black peoples from the Mexican communities --- possibly, or probably, a legacy of the old world Latin racism left behind in the "new world" by the discoverers, conquerors, and colonizers.
But the European peoples have been notorious for this, no doubt. It's something that, IMO, can't even really be apologized properly or enough for, and therefore has to simply be left to (continue to) sort of "heal up". Obviously though, wounds that deep leave scars. Personally I feel the historic success of the Obama campaign has contributed greatly to some of that healing here in America. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/3/2008 1:41:15 PM | ^^^^I think what many people don't understand is just talking about it helps heal the wounds. Just acknowledging that it did happen and that it was wrong, and that the system and the ideology still exists and is still in operation today goes a long way towards allowing people to heal.
Yes, it was high time for us in America to experience the Obama effect! | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/4/2008 2:35:09 AM |
Thank so much for saying this. Sometimes people of color just want others to state the obvious.
Just like a woman who has been raped wants her pain to be acknowledged.
What some may not understand is that to people of color, racism HURTS
Whole heartedly agree.
This is why I have always said that Europeans whom have abandoned their own indigenous religions and adopted Asian ones should acknowledge that their present day religion is not theirs originally even though over the centuries they have adapted it to suit their culture.
This is why we have an "us" verses "them" culture when it comes to the present day hostilities unfolding in Southwest and Central Asia. Europeans or rather the descendants of Europeans actually believe that all the death and destruction they are causing is justified as God's work incumbent upon them to carry out. (refer to some of the religious statements of Pres. GW Bush and VP nominee S Palin)
Which or whose God. Yep that's right the same God that they adopted from Southwest Asia has returned in His European persona to rain death and destruction down on the very people He was adopted from in the first place.
The madness of it all! | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/4/2008 9:31:39 AM | I am assuming in this thread that we are talking about the religion of mainstream Christianity. I'm reminded of those cheesy 40's movies where they had white people playing all the characters from the bible - it looks so phony now and yet at the time, it was considered great cinematography. Go figure. I also get a laugh out of those pious pictures of a very European-looking Jesus surrounded by little white boys and girls. I can see why that would be offensive to just about everyone who wasn't white and even a few of us white folks, too.
It doesn't matter to me if people picture a black Jesus or a white Jesus or an Asian Jesus - it is his message that is important to me. Jesus the man had to at the very least been somewhat semitic-looking and definitely he was more "black" looking than "white." Once he became the "son of God," IMO, he has sort of morphed into a universal Jesus Christ and it is logical that each person would see Jesus Christ in the image most appealing to him/her.
I don't have an issue with people seeing Jesus Christ however they want to, but I don't like one view being pushed down everyone's throat. I can understand the pain felt by people of color at the hypocrisy of white people assuming Jesus the man must have been white. | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/4/2008 1:11:55 PM |
the first time they actually came across sub-Saharan black Africans The OP never stated anything about Sub Saharan Africans being the linage from which Jesus came. Sub Saharan Africans arent the only Africans nor people to which the label "black" is used. BTW, Kurds are more Persian. Fact is however, some of the oldest paintings of Baby Jesus and Mary are of a dark skinned child and mother found in Greece and whats now Turkey as well as Egypt and Ethiopia by various artist. The Moors with whom the Portugesse and Spanish encountered were often very dark skinned certainly cinnamon/bronze skinned with the greatest frequency. Tuaregs their descendents are from light caramel to deep chocolate.
My point is that Europeans of the middle ages certainly Italians who did most of the early great paintings did encounter "black" people or certainly those who could be labeled as such today. Yes, racism is the most likely reason some Europeans especially after the 17th century wouldnt consider the prospect of Jesus being darker than light olive. | |
|
| |
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/4/2008 9:50:48 PM |
Anyone who is using religion to justify racism is reading their Bible upside down.
That would make the Old Testament come after the New... you may be onto something here.... | |
|
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 9/5/2008 10:01:35 AM | | Well i am pagan but both my parents are baptists. They both belive that jesus is not the white skined, blue eyed, blonde hair person that is is dictated as today. They firgure he had dark tanned skin, black hair and brown eyes. | |
|
| |
| Anti-black Racism in Religion!
Posted: 10/13/2008 3:09:44 PM | Sad, but true. White Christians can be some of the most racist people on the face of the earth.
I can't wait until a bunch of them (the racist ones), get to the front gate of Heaven and see a black, FEMALE, dreadlock-wearing "God(dess)"  | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
