You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
6
ApexVeritas on scored.co
6 months ago6 points(+0/-0/+6Score on mirror)2 children
Almost all of the first hand accounts from people that met Jesus described him as having blue or gray eyes and blonde or blonde/brownish hair. The Judeans and Israelites were also able to consume dairy products, which is inherently White. Non-whites (including modern day jews) can't consume dairy products without digestive problems.
> Her skin was pure white; She had long lovely hair; Her limbs were smooth and rounded (her thighs were shapely); She had slender legs and small feet; Her hand were slim and long and so were her fingers.
From the letter of Pontius Pilate to Tiberius Caesar (regarding Jesus):
> His golden-colored hair and beard gave to his appearance a celestial aspect.
A letter from the Roman consul Lentulus to Emperor Tiberius (regarding Jesus):
> [He had] a noble and lively face, with fair and slightly wavy hair; black and strongly curving eyebrows, intense penetrating blue eyes and an expression of wondrous grace. His nose is rather long. His beard is almost blonde, although not very long. His hair is quite long, and has never seen a pair of scissors.....His neck is slightly inclined, so that he never appears to be bitter or arrogant. His tanned face is the color of ripe corn and well proportioned. It gives the impression of gravity and wisdom, sweetness and good, and is completely lacking in any sign of anger.
There were other first hand accounts describing Jesus as having blue-grey eyes, but I can't find them now, even using Yandex. Almost all the search results about Jesus' appearance are thoroughly jewed, and make the fallacious argument that ancient peoples never moved, claiming "because modern Middle Easterners have brown hair and brown eyes, therefore all ancient Middle Easterners had brown hair and brown eyes". It's preposterous.
In any case, here are two links that provide proofs that the ancient Israelites/Judeans were White. They repeat a lot of info, but the info is solid, and they're worth reading through.
Not necessarily. The Bible itself doesn't mention what Jesus looked like, except his visage in the end times. Perhaps they didn't consider the physical characteristics important for Him. Furthermore, back then information sharing was incredibly limited. We can see even nowadays, with instantaneous information exchange en masse, that it still leaves vast, vast swaths of people wholly uninformed. It wouldn't be surprising at all if people in antiquity, even in Jesus' time, be unaware of specific letter detailing him.
> this must also be the millionth time I tell you Christo Genea is cherry-picking nonsense.
That's entirely possible. I don't ascribe, with certainty, one theory over another, at least right now. I will, though, posit that the language and historical breakdowns on Christogenea are much better than what we see in current judeo-Christian globohomo. If Christianity served globohomo's purpose outright there'd be no reason to subvert and corrupt Christianity, or to change the language of the Bible. It should also be a huge mark in support of this position, given that jews are so hellbent on saying that Jesus was brown. While I don't believe with 100% applicability that one should believe the exact antithesis of everything the jews say, at the very least it's a good starting point, and one should seriously question their position if jews support it.
Furthermore, this proclamation that ancient peoples were brown doesn't just occur with Israelites and Judahites, but with other ancient peoples as well. Modern (((historians))) love to leave out details of White people in the past, to obscure, censor, and manipulate the history of ancient peoples. Solutrean theory, out of Africa theory, White people in ancient Egypt, White people giving knowledge to "native" Americans, even Atlantis. Our history is curated entirely by people that hate us. It would be extremely foolish to believe the things they're trying to convince us of.
Here is a depiction of Sarah (wife of Abraham):
> Her skin was pure white; She had long lovely hair; Her limbs were smooth and rounded (her thighs were shapely); She had slender legs and small feet; Her hand were slim and long and so were her fingers.
From the letter of Pontius Pilate to Tiberius Caesar (regarding Jesus):
> His golden-colored hair and beard gave to his appearance a celestial aspect.
https://www.agapebiblestudy.com/documents/Jesus_What%20did%20He%20look%20like%20.htm
A letter from the Roman consul Lentulus to Emperor Tiberius (regarding Jesus):
> [He had] a noble and lively face, with fair and slightly wavy hair; black and strongly curving eyebrows, intense penetrating blue eyes and an expression of wondrous grace. His nose is rather long. His beard is almost blonde, although not very long. His hair is quite long, and has never seen a pair of scissors.....His neck is slightly inclined, so that he never appears to be bitter or arrogant. His tanned face is the color of ripe corn and well proportioned. It gives the impression of gravity and wisdom, sweetness and good, and is completely lacking in any sign of anger.
There were other first hand accounts describing Jesus as having blue-grey eyes, but I can't find them now, even using Yandex. Almost all the search results about Jesus' appearance are thoroughly jewed, and make the fallacious argument that ancient peoples never moved, claiming "because modern Middle Easterners have brown hair and brown eyes, therefore all ancient Middle Easterners had brown hair and brown eyes". It's preposterous.
In any case, here are two links that provide proofs that the ancient Israelites/Judeans were White. They repeat a lot of info, but the info is solid, and they're worth reading through.
https://truthvids.net/3d-flip-book/100-proofs-the-israelites-were-white/
https://truthvids.net/heraldry-and-symbols-of-the-12-tribes-of-israel/
The best resource for the theory that Israelites were White is:
https://christogenea.org/
That website has tons of resources and pages dedicated to properly translating the Bible, and showing who everyone is. Here are some relevant links:
https://christogenea.org/podcasts/exactly-why-jesus-christ-not-jew
https://christogenea.org/podcasts/genesis
https://christogenea.org/essays/classical-records-dorian-danaan-israelite-greeks
https://christogenea.org/essays/german-origins
https://christogenea.org/essays/classical-records-origins-scythians-parthians-related-tribes
https://christogenea.org/essays/race-genesis-10
https://christogenea.org/overview/concise-explanation-creation-jewish-people
> this must also be the millionth time I tell you Christo Genea is cherry-picking nonsense.
That's entirely possible. I don't ascribe, with certainty, one theory over another, at least right now. I will, though, posit that the language and historical breakdowns on Christogenea are much better than what we see in current judeo-Christian globohomo. If Christianity served globohomo's purpose outright there'd be no reason to subvert and corrupt Christianity, or to change the language of the Bible. It should also be a huge mark in support of this position, given that jews are so hellbent on saying that Jesus was brown. While I don't believe with 100% applicability that one should believe the exact antithesis of everything the jews say, at the very least it's a good starting point, and one should seriously question their position if jews support it.
Furthermore, this proclamation that ancient peoples were brown doesn't just occur with Israelites and Judahites, but with other ancient peoples as well. Modern (((historians))) love to leave out details of White people in the past, to obscure, censor, and manipulate the history of ancient peoples. Solutrean theory, out of Africa theory, White people in ancient Egypt, White people giving knowledge to "native" Americans, even Atlantis. Our history is curated entirely by people that hate us. It would be extremely foolish to believe the things they're trying to convince us of.