Prove to me that Jesus was white

>jesus came to the earth as a man
>no man is without race or even looks to be without race
Thus Jesus must have at least looked to be part of a race. So which race was it?
If you mean to tell me that God chose to come to earth in the form of a nonwhite man, you admit that he chose to reveal the truth to the world as a lesser race.
God expects you to take a shitskin seriously.
Care to explain?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=FgCKXJPwSts
youtube.com/watch?v=8FXlqFPHAaU
youtube.com/watch?v=oL6IU1cu17c
israelite-identity-archive.blogspot.com/2014/11/the-marks-of-israel-by-jack-mohr.html
israelitewatchmen.com/archive/reference/
christianidentityministries.com/witt.html
youtube.com/watch?v=8GOcttn4VwE
youtube.com/watch?v=s9wo2VKrP7c
usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/03/30/shroud-turin-display/2038295/
israelite.ca/research/specialstudiesfiles/scriptural_marks.html
youtube.com/watch?v=hVBDXSWOJSM
youtube.com/watch?v=33DC4UatExo
archive.org/stream/ThePhoenicianOriginOfBritonsScotsAnglo-saxons/POEN_djvu.txt
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Jesus was a evil Jew.
That's why the SS burnt down churches.

you got dat rite

But I thought Hitler was one of those Christians who insists that Jesus was Aryan.

that's why that cracka lost his war against the jew

>Jews
>white

He was brown

I'd stop worshiping right there if God thought salvation was such a joke that he sent his son in the form of a nigger.

then you best go speak to your synagogue rabbi, cracka

Then you can't also believe whites are the master race. Also nice dubs.

get it through your lily white cracka brain
your "white jesus" is a jew myth
dumb honkey

the common image that we have of Jesus was painted by Michelangelo in thr 15th century.he used as a model Cesare Borgia, son of the then pope, Pope Alexander the 6th.After Michelangelo others started painting Jesus as a white blond long hair man.Christcucks actually pray to the image of one of the most depraved men in history, who fucked his sister TOP KEK (pic related that's Cesare Borgia)

he looks like a white faggot

Then why are other, much earlier depictions of Christ visually similar?

satan be messing with your white cracka brain
dumb honkey

Jesus was a proud Englishman from the heart of Gloucestershire.

roman beardless,short haired Jesus resurecting Lazarus, notice he looks roman

lord have mercy on those white faggot cucks

See, I'd have LOVED that.
If God chose to send his son in the form of man to be born in England, it would be irrefutable evidence that Jesus was white.
Instead he chose to be born on the edge of the white world and the nonwhite worlds.
What's the deal?
What am I supposed to make from this?

nigga you one dumb honkey

Looks like Putin tbqh

the image of christ is a product of the society at the time

youtube.com/watch?v=FgCKXJPwSts
youtube.com/watch?v=8FXlqFPHAaU
youtube.com/watch?v=oL6IU1cu17c

israelite-identity-archive.blogspot.com/2014/11/the-marks-of-israel-by-jack-mohr.html
israelitewatchmen.com/archive/reference/
christianidentityministries.com/witt.html

And artistic limitations.
But it doesn't matter how an artist draws him. What matters is how he really looked.
Do we know his race? If we don't, why even chance worshiping him if you might be worshiping a nigger?
>putin looks roman
Huh
Kinda

satan dances on top of white people

You might be interested in this, friends.

youtube.com/watch?v=8GOcttn4VwE
youtube.com/watch?v=s9wo2VKrP7c

Roman mosaic of Jesus Christ
Check and mate heretics

just another Satanic cracka jew lying about my brother JC

This an estimated scientific recreation of Jesus based on what the average man in Judea looked like during that era.
The hair is short because it was forbidden to have long her and the beard was a cultural norm.
As someone in the thread said, different societies represent Jesus as their own race.

The chinese depict Jesus as fucking asian and africans depict him as blacks.

No one can prove you wrong because he was not white

Why? That means Jesus really had struggle and harsh times.

Judea at the time was multicultural. It became that way after the southern tribes were taken into Babylon. They returned with Edomites, and other sorts of people. That's like making a composite of Turks and Germans and saying the hybrid looks like what Germans truly were, which is obviously bullshit.

I'm an atheist I don't believe he even existed. my theory: Saul of Tarsus( St Paul ) wanted to make his own religion (cause money) he heard of this Jesus fellow and created the christian mythos based of mithraic teachings ( Sauls
family was made of rich Mithras priests). The dope goes to Rome , becomes first pope and starts a very subverting cult for his well being.

Pele is a true white and redpilled god

All praise pele and ask her for more volcanic erruptions

was jesus real or made up by the romans

Made up by the jews dummy

This is why the Bible says no graven image or idols shall be worshipped. Islam follows that rule.

Your religion is fucked so bad. It's divided through depictions of Jesus.

...

made up by St Peter ( Saul of Tarsus) based on the Mithraic religion

these cracka jews got Satan twistin their minds up
they be thinkin they is black when they is crackawhite

>christian identity
All of this puts so much emphasis on the white race that you have to wonder why the Bible itself doesn't explicitly say that white people are the master race.
I'm not convinced, but I'll definitely watch these videos.
This however just seems like strange alt history.
If this was more credible, wouldn't it be more widely accepted?

it's a 15th century fake dude

Why do you think the welsh tongue has been suppressed so hard since the (((Bankers))) gained influence in Britain 200 years ago? Who controls popular thought, and the two major British universities that Wilson refers to?

People can also paint Beethoven as black, but that does not make him such.
Okay so Judea was multicultural. So is London, but we all know what the natives in London look like. How can we know what Jesus looked like?

nigga we know what jesus look like
he a brother

the worship of idols is a metaphor for the worship of the self.
there are real reasons as to why christianity is fucked but what you said is not one of them.
are you muslim?

This
The Levant was full of different people back then
And if we go by the letter of lentulus, then Jesus was pretty much either a Greek/Hellenized individual (due to Greek association with the Nazarenes and the historicity of Eusebius of Ceasaria) Syrian/Assyrian, Phillistine (most likely a proto-Hellenic people) Levantine in general or Latin (highly unlikely)

I'd rather think that Europe and the white race as a whole hasn't spent the last millennia working off a lie.
Races should be divided so it's good that depictions divide. What's important is finding out which depiction is right.
Well some new study suggests that the shroud could be from the appropriate era.
usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/03/30/shroud-turin-display/2038295/

Icons =/= Idols

>being unable to analyse history
there were very few documents referring to Jesus during the time Jesus was alive.
this mosaic is way after Constantine converted to christianity.

The mosaic is a good source about catholicism in its prime but not a source on the historicity of jesus

Comparet is pretty thorough on his biblical discussions, better than most, imo.

so saul who was killing christians at the time came up with the biggest lie the world has ever known and got himself tortured and prisoned just to prove it?

>got himself tortured and prisoned

No evidence for any of that.

lyin jews say jesus was white
brothers know not to fall for the jew lies

FORGIVU THEM FATHERRU, FOR THEY DO NOT NROW WRAT THEY DONE

Oh didnt see your earlier post but, cool info.

Hmmmm I wonder

The representation we have from Jesus is a mix between the emperor Constantine and the pagan god Apollo.

NO PREASE
NOT SPREAR OF RONGINURU

I really want to believe you because it would finally end my search for religion, but the evidence seems underwhelming.
The evidence for whites and anglo saxons specifically being God's chosen race seems to be largely logic rather than evidence.
It's like a thought exercise being used to show evidence for the existence of God (such as the Unmoved Mover) instead of physical evidence like his face.
>letter of lentulus
That's fake though

there are too many simillarities between them , virgin birth,12 disciples,raised dead,walked on water,turned water to wine. There might have been a human Jesus who died, some disciples roamed around, Saul picked it up ,created the christian mythos and off he went to Rome(the center of the world at that time)

((((ok))))

Well he seems to be the one guy that is always mentioned when I look for evidence of white Jesus. He's like the David Duke of Christian Identity.
That said, he still seems to use only logic rather than physical evidence.

like a sort of cream colour i think

...

No really, it'd be amazing if you could clear the confusion I have about the Letter of Lentulus.
Is it real? How do we know? Most people seem to believe it's fake.

...

Would you worship that?

I'm not 100% sure on this either. I don't think the bible makes much sense any other way. However, white people are called "caucasian", correct? The ten northern tribes of Israel were taken into captivity by the Assyrians in about 700 BC. They were taken to the caucasus region. God gave Israel specific promises. Those promises were eternal, and are fulfilled by the NW European people alone. Jesus had to die because the old law said that after a man puts away his wife because she has been an adulteress(as the Israelites had with strange gods), that he cannot remarry her. The only way was with Jesus dying so they could be remarried. Jesus said he only came for the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and they would hear him and know his voice. Who followed him? Europeans! It was also prophecied that Israel would forget it's heritage and be called by a different name. Isaac's sons = Saxons, and Christians are known as sons of the living god. Also, look up the early church of England history which was established before the Roman church tried to destroy it. Some theories think it's also (subconsciously) why NW Europe left the Roman church during the Reformation.

To understand who the "Jews" were in Jesus' time, you need to understand the southern captivity in Babylon of the two tribes of Judah. When they came back, they had broken the tribal purity dictated to them by God. They allowed Edomites, Caananites, and others to convert to their religion. That is where the Babylonian Talmud came into play. They usurped the Hebrew religion. They didn't follow Jesus because they weren't his sheep. Look up the story of Esau and Jacob. Esau is the "Jew" forever trying to undermine Jacob out of jealousy from throwing away his birthright.

After they were taken into the Caucasus region, the Scythians, Kumri, etc... just magically showed up in history. Think about it.

>Who followed him? Europeans!
lying devil cracka

This article talks about the marks of Israel.

israelite.ca/research/specialstudiesfiles/scriptural_marks.html

this is your god white boi

kek

youtube.com/watch?v=hVBDXSWOJSM

cracka pope know whassup

cracka be losing his mind

Would you worship him if he was?

I know I wouldn't.

A fascinating perspective, but most people believe they understand the bible from another perspective where every race is magically equal. I'm worried that we're just being heretics or something if we believe something that so few other Christians believe.
It'd be so much easier to believe that God made whites the master race if he didn't make it such a riddle to understand and outright said it instead.
This however I don't understand. I have to admit, I'm undereducated on who those groups are.

accept your fate white boi

England didn't exist at the time you idiot.
And he was born to two Jews and was undeniably a Jewish man

Would I worship Jesus if I know he was white? Absolutely. It'd change my life forever.

Why? He'd still be Joseph's wife's son and a zealous anti-nationalist.

>england didn't exist at the time
Might as well say Italy didn't exist at the time because it was called Rome.
Anglos and Saxons did not step out from their ships into the ocean and rise land from the water to invent England. The land which Englishmen live on has been inhabited for much longer than the nation of England has.

Hint: The Welsh are also called Cymry. Those tribes just so happened to have the same craftsmanship as the Israelites.

youtube.com/watch?v=33DC4UatExo

The old testament makes it pretty clear that race mixing is bad, and leads to disaster for our people, which is still obviously the case. I agree that it is weird being so far out of the mainstream thought on this, but to me it rings true. Unfortunately, there are some CI preachers who are rather extreme and who I would personally stay away from. It doesn't give us a right to be assholes.

Well Jesus has a maternal and a paternal lineage. His paternal lineage specifically lists Joseph as his father so even if Mary was a virgin, God still used Joseph's DNA.
I still need to think on the anti-nationalism though.

How do you combat the
>WE WUZ
shitposting?
Also what denominations do you think could fit this belief? Can you be CI and Catholic for example?

It's not really a denomination in and of itself. If true, then it is simply historical fact, albeit one that can change your view of the world and the bible. Catholicism however, iirc, is considered a Babylonian mystery religion. That's a whole other topic of how Rome became weak through miscegenation, and immigrants from the Babylonian regions who brought their religious beliefs with them and ultimately created Catholicism based on them (Dagon, Tammuz, etc.).

>countering we wuz shitposting
Reread the articles about the marks of Israel. The Jewish people we know do not fulfill them, nor do the Africans.

England is a country not a landmass.
What you're thinking of is the "British Isles"
the Celts were there but they weren't really civilized.
No point in Jesus being born to a bunch of tribals.
Israel actually had civilization and large Roman power.
And the Romans didn't actually colonize it until about 50 years after Jesus' birth and there still weren't much people there.

Britain had a large tin and copper mining industry at the time. The Romans also regarded them as equals rather than inferior subjects when they made a treaty.

We're only ever told history from the Roman perspective. The Germans and Brits were not savages.

The Germans were savages, the Brits were considered backwards by their more advanced continental Celtic brethren.

Well how can we know that if we're only ever told history from the Roman perspective?

Well, there is this infographic floating around explaining the origins of the two tribes, the Kangs and the Sheed, and how they were given administrative duties by Pharaoh Wewuz. What the infographic fails to tell you is that a couple of generations later, under Pharaoh Wewuz IV, Kangs and Sheed warred amongst eachother for power over the Khemite kingdom. Minor tribes, such as the Dong, saw an attempt to expand, further adding to the chaos. Apart form ethnic strife, religious warfare split the tribes, as different groups saw different gods as more important. So essentially, you had Kangs vs Sheed, Kuk vs Ra, major tribes vs minor tribes, old dynasty vs usurpers.

What happened was that the remnants of a Kekist Dong-Sheed army reformed after the Battle of al-Dindo (the Arabic name for the place derived from an ancient Kang word, meaning "place of nothing") and conducted several operations of gorilla warfare against the Kangs, setting their grain storage pyramids on fire with the stone-burning magik of their queens. Mass starvation resulted.

In the meantime, caucasians under the leader Me'ar-Shant the Glad used stolen technology from Afrikan victims of starvation and started wiping out the survivors of the war. They founded the new empire of Ba'al-'air, and covered up the true history of Afrika by putting dinosaur skeletons in the ground to fool coming generations into believing that evolution was true, and that Blacks didn't descend from Adam, the first of men, created by Quincy Jones.

At last I finally understand.

the fact that the only ruins left from before Rome is stonehenge
if there had been big stone cities before Romans came along we would know.

Listen to Alan Wilson and other historians. The Romans and later the Roman Church destroyed most everything. It is no coincidence that they wanted Jesus' early followers gone. They disposed of them and put Catholicism in it's place as the "true christianity".

Am I wrong that when the Romans retreated from Britain, it was written that they gave Hadrian's Wall over to the Britons for their defense, who they called their allies? This was written by Bede, I believe?

Are Alan Wilson and some other historians prophetic in their knowledge or something? If the evidence is strong enough, it should be impossible for so many people to disagree.
That sounds familiar.

Also, just curious on how you feel about this, it seems that most Christians who have done their work in the name of Christ have done so as Catholics.
The Crusaders, Inquisitioners, and most monks have been Catholic.
Is Catholicism so wrong if it produced such mighty people throughout history?

The Reformation didn't start until 1517.

The Jesuits were converted Jews though. Also, did it produce mighty people or was it just a coincidence because they controlled so much of Europe? The protestant countries have also had much more success.

Do you trust what the experts say about Trump? Patton knew what was up and he was killed for it. Why is Hitler demonized so much more than Stalin or Mao by the experts? How about economists? What else might they have a motive to lie about? Wilson and others might have some things wrong, but we do have reason to question what we've been told.

Also, more reading if you're interested:
archive.org/stream/ThePhoenicianOriginOfBritonsScotsAnglo-saxons/POEN_djvu.txt

Right, but was it needed if Catholics made so many great Christians already?