Jesus Is Black!

How did the Hebrews turn White? Of course they didn't really; just in the imaginations, and then the histories of White people. Who for probably practical reasons, decided that Hebrews the Blacks who originally lived in the Country's that they took over, should all become White for posterity's sake. Seeing as how it only takes three generations to turn a Black person into a White person (and visa versa). No doubt there came a time when as Europe's formerly bi-racial populations, became more homogeneously White, White people decided that they could no longer acknowledge that all that they knew and had, was derived from the minds and labors of Black people - even down to their religious beliefs. The logic no doubt being that Whites could not progress to their full potential, if they were always looking up to Blacks, as the personification of knowledge and wisdom. So a change had to be made, and at some point, by somebody, that change began. Of course, we have no way of knowing when this process of Whitinizing Blacks began, or who did it, or where it was first done. But we do have some materials by which we can track the process, somewhat. But first, let us go back to see what Hebrews REALLY looked like. The earliest authentic pictures of real Hebrews that we have, date back to before Christ. They are Assyrian relief's showing Hebrews, and others that they conquered, in pictorial scenes detailing the battles fought, with associated text. These relief's decorated Assyrian palaces, and were no doubt used to gloat over their conquest of the Hebrews and others. Here we are using pictures of: Assyrian King Shalmaneser IIIs "Black Obelisk" (858 B.C.). Assyrian king Tiglath-pilesar III"s relief's of his conquest of a city near the Sea of Galilee (730 B.C.). Assyrian King Sennacherib"s relief's of the conquest of the Judean City of Lachish (701 B.C.). The pictures below depicts Jesus as a black, Fresco from the via latina catacomb Rome painted in 320 AD This fresco of Christ Among the Apostles 2nd century Fresco fro latina catacomb 4th century painting the resuraction of Lazarus Samson and the Lion painting 350AD latina catacomb Rome . It is worth mentioning, that the Hebrews were just as literate, and just as artistic as the other Black civilizations around them. The reason that we have to depend on outside sources for pictures of them, is because Whites destroyed all that the Hebrews ever created. Even down to the very religious writings that they claim to worship by. That fact is that ALL Hebrew writings, even the SEPTUAGINT {the original Bible}, which was only roughly Hebrew (it was made for the Greek King of Egypt, Ptolemy II (Philadelphus) in 282-246 B.C.), has been destroyed. Everything except for the "Dead Sea Scrolls" which were found in 1947, in Qumran, a village situated about twenty miles east of Jerusalem. The Scrolls are under the joint custody of the Catholic Church and the Israelis. The translated contents of those Scrolls has never been made public, and probably never will be - no doubt the differences in teachings and facts would be irreconcilable. (A few inconsequential snippets have been made public - the entire Scrolls is a huge work, which contains the entire old Testament plus many other works). Why wasn't the material in these pages destroyed? Because after it's fall, Assyria came under the control of the Persian Empire, which was itself a Black Empire. It then came under the control of Greeks, who were at that time, seeking to merge with the Black Persians, not in denying that they were Black people. Then Assyria again came under Persian control, and then finally under the control of the original Black Arabs. So at the time when Whites were destroying vestiges of Black history, they had no access to the Assyrian artifacts. But at those times when Whites did have control of an area, they seem to have been very through in destroying all vestiges of the former Black inhabitants; there is nothing left to suggest that Carthage was a Black city, Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley civilizations are some of the oldest known, yet very little is left - next to nothing in the Indus valley. Ancient Anatolia (Turkey), was home to many great and famous civilizations, but very little has been found there. The Egyptian artifacts, of which there are many, were mostly recovered in modern times, when Whites rather than simply destroy, instead modify artifacts; sometimes just by breaking the noses off, in order to make them look like White people, and then proudly display them as proof of the White mans greatness. The Khazars, a Turkish tribe who had established a Kingdom in the Caucasus region, and converted to Judaism in the 8th century A.D. Must have seen the doings of the Romans and Greeks, and seen it as an opportunity for them to take over the Hebrew identity, and thus control of the orthodox branch of the Hebrew religion - which indeed they did. They logically thinking that if Jesus can be White, why not then, the entire Hebrew nation - which was by then a diaspora anyway. The Islamist side-stepped the entire issue by forbidding imagery of any kind. Further compounding the irony is the fact that America actually has an obsession with the (presumed) color of Christ and has exported her White Americanized Savior around the world, as recently documented by Edward J. Blum and Paul Harvey in their book, The Color of Christ: The Son of God and the Saga of Race in America (2012). In fact, the world"s most popular and recognizable image of Christ is a distinctly 19th-20th century American creation. It is true that versions of the "White Christ" appear in European art as early as the 4th century of the Christian era, but these images coexisted with other, nonwhite representations throughout European history. The popularity of the cult of the Black Madonna and Black Christ throughout Europe is evidence of the fact that the European "White Christs" never acquired the authority and authenticity that the White Christ now has globally. This Christ and his authority are American phenomena. As a predominantly Protestant nation Early America rejected the imaging of Christ that characterized European Catholicism. By the mid-19th century, however, in response to American expansion, splintering during the Civil War and subsequent reconstructing, "Whiteness" took on a new significance and a newly- empowered "White Jesus" rose to prominence as the sanctifying symbol of a new national unity and power. As Blum and Harvey observe: "By wrapping itself with the alleged form of Jesus, whiteness gave itself a holy face " With Jesus as white, Americans could feel that sacred whiteness stretched back in time thousands of years and forward in sacred space to heaven and the second coming " The white Jesus promised a white past, a white present, and a future of white glory." As America rose to superpower status in the 20th century she became the world"s leading producer and global exporter of White Jesus imagery through film, art, American business, and Christian missions, and has thereby defined the world"s view of the Son of God. This globally recognizable Jesus is a totally American product. Indeed, he is an American. Warner Sallman"s iconic image of Jesus called Head of Christ (1941) became the most widely reproduced piece of artwork in world history and its depiction the most recognizable face of Jesus in the world. By the 1990s it had been printed over 500 million times and achieved global iconic status. With smooth white skin, long, flowing blondish-brown hair, long beard and blue eyes, this Nordic Christ consciously disguised any hint of Jesus"s Semitic, oriental origin"and departed from the older European depictions. It both shaped and was shaped by emerging American ideas of whiteness. The beloved White Jesus of today"s world was Made in America. he first century Jewish writer Josephus (37-100 AD) penned the earliest non-biblical testimony of Jesus. He reportedly had access to official Roman records on which he based his information and in his work Halosis or the "Capture (of Jerusalem)," written around 72 A.D., Josephus discussed "the human form of Jesus and his wonderful works." Unfortunately his texts have passed through Christian hands which altered them, removing offensive material. Fortunately, however, Biblical scholar Robert Eisler in a classic 1931 study of Josephus" Testimony was able to reconstruct the unaltered testimony based on a newly-discovered Old Russian translation that preserved the original Greek text. According to Eisler"s reconstruction, the oldest non-Biblical description of Jesus read as follows: "At that time also there appeared a certain man of magic power " if it be meet to call him a man, [whose name is Jesus], whom [certain] Greeks call a son of [a] God, but his disciples [call] the true prophet " he was a man of simple appearance, mature age, black-skinned (melagchrous), short growth, three cubits tall, hunchbacked, prognathous (lit. "with a long face" [macroprosopos]), a long nose, eyebrows meeting above the nose " with scanty [curly] hair, but having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazaraeans, with an undeveloped beard." This short, black-skinned, mature, hunchbacked Jesus with a unibrow, short curly hair and undeveloped beard bears no resemblance to the Jesus Christ taken for granted today by most of the Christian world: the tall, long haired, long bearded, white-skinned and blue eyed Son of God. Yet, this earliest textual record matches well the earliest iconographic evidence. The earliest visual depiction of Jesus is a painting found in 1921 on a wall of the baptismal chamber of the house-church at Dura Europos, Syria and dated around 235 A.D. The Jesus that is "Healing the Paralytic Man" (Mark 2:1-12) is short and dark-skinned with a small curly afro - see below. This description has now been supported by the new science of forensic anthropology. In 2002 British forensic scientists and Israeli archaeologists reconstructed what they believe is the most accurate image of Jesus based off of data obtained from the multi-disciplinary approach. In December 2002 Popular Science Magazine published a cover story on the findings which confirm that Jesus would have been short, around 5"1", hair "short with tight curls," a weather-beaten face "which would have made him appear older," dark eyes and complexion: "he probably looked a great deal more like a dark-skinned Semite than Westerners are used to seeing," they concluded. The textual, visual, and scientific evidence agrees, then: Jesus likely was a short, dark-skinned Semite with short curly hair and dark eyes. Colossians 1:15 describes Christ as the "image of the unseen God" and in the Gospel of John (12:45; 14:9) Jesus declares that whoever sees him has seen God. What Jesus "looks like" then is not irrelevant as it is in some way a pointer to God Himself.