IS JESUS BLACK OR WHITE ?

[Mike S]

(Luke 24:36-39)

I disagree that He is no longer in "human physical form".

OK...I really don't care.

 

[jasoncran]

Hebrew Names Of God: Elohim-Creator And Judge http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/Elohim/elohim.html

The word Elohim is the plural of El (or possibly of Eloah) and is the first name for God given in the Tanakh: “In the beginning God(Elohim) created the heavens and the earth." Genisis 1:1

mark , you posted this. that implies that you said that el and eloah is his name which its not.a title would be the best but i can see why they say that.

 

[handy]

Mark,

I think it's an important point... One that really needs to be made, that Jesus physically resurrected and remains in a physical body. The physical resurrection... not just the Christ's but for all believers is what sets Christianity apart from all other religions. As Paul said, if there is no resurrection our faith is futile and we are still in our sins.

Now, I don't mean for a moment to say that you were equating the idea that He is no longer in physical form with saying that there is no resurrection. But, if we say that He no longer is in physical form, then others can say that our belief in a resurrection is at best, mistaken... that He died and is now spirit, much the same way any other religion believes that we go onto somewhere after death.

By recognizing and holding to Jesus being in physical form, even now as I write this, it undeniably points to the fact that we serve a risen Savior.

Not to mention that the New Testament teaches that He is in physical form, so we simply should just stick to Scripture.

 

[felix]

I mentioned earlier that Adam was "ruddy" as well. I do believe that Adam and Eve were created with a skin color that is no longer known here on earth, the color that Jesus is now described as having... the color of jasper or sardius. I've looked at jasper and sardius and they are red, but with both brown and golden tones. It's a beautiful color, but not one that I can pinpoint to any skin type that I know of.

I've come to believe that the skin tones we have now are just nothing more than micro-evolution at work... once Noah and family disembarked and began to spread throughout the world, exposure to the environment slowly changed the skin tones. Which goes along with what I've always believed, that there is no such thing as "race"... We are all simply one race, human, with a variety of skin tones. The idea that there are separate types of human, based on skin tone is really ridiculous once one really thinks that through.

I believe there will be some group of people who will have this color described for Jesus because the same color survived from Adam to Jesus.

Penn State anthropologists Nina Jablonski and George Chaplin wrote in a 2000 edition of Science that there is a correlation between the skin color in people residing in an area for more than 500 years and their exposure to ultraviolet light. They even came up with an equation that determined the pigments of a population based on sun exposure and length of time spent living in an area. (Source: bgsu.edu).

Skin color changes to the location and the exposure of Sun. So, in the next 500 years, we may expect our descendants to have a skin color same as the natives of that location.

Which leads to further speculation... If Jesus' glorified body is like Adam's, the color of jasper or sardius, will all of ours be as well? Will we, after the resurrection and in the new earth lose the skin tone we have now and have this red or ruddy color?

I was reading an article which described about skin color and social status in ancient history. It basically, states, that every person belonging to a particular skin color thinks that their skin color is the best and greater than all the rest. However, if there is a group of people who is in a higher status, all people tend to become that skin color.

For example, Easu was more attracted towards Canaanite women. Israelites where more attracted towards Canaanite women during Exodus in Balaam incident. Samson was more attracted towards Philistine women. It is natural for everyone to consider a skin color as beautiful and superior when people in that skin color is dominant. This is the same in Egypt, Babylonians and even during Caliphites (or mohammand). Although not worthy to state here but just for the sake of history, mohammed describes how 72 virgins in heaven would look like for his islamic fools when they kill themselves for the sake of their god - where he states women will have black hair, black eyes etc - if you like blond and a muslim, oops..

So, Jesus being ruddy is not even considered as a beautiful color by this present generation because non of the people who are dominant on this world today are ruddy. But scripture says, we will be like Him.. so we may have ruddy color.

 

[Mike S]

mark , you posted this. that implies that you said that el and eloah is his name which its not.a title would be the best but i can see why they say that.

In response to the OP, I used the Hebrew word for creator God, just as the authors of Genesis used it for the same purpose. There are many Hebrew words used to refer to God, and elohim is used more than 2000 times in the Hebrew writings. I find the fact that you want to obsess over this -that elohim isn't the "revealed name of God" and can't be used to describe Him - troubling, what's your point?

I'm not interested in the least in your obsession on this, and won't be responding further to your comments on it.

 

[Mike S]

Mark,

I think it's an important point... One that really needs to be made, that Jesus physically resurrected and remains in a physical body. The physical resurrection... not just the Christ's but for all believers is what sets Christianity apart from all other religions. As Paul said, if there is no resurrection our faith is futile and we are still in our sins.

Now, I don't mean for a moment to say that you were equating the idea that He is no longer in physical form with saying that there is no resurrection. But, if we say that He no longer is in physical form, then others can say that our belief in a resurrection is at best, mistaken... that He died and is now spirit, much the same way any other religion believes that we go onto somewhere after death.

By recognizing and holding to Jesus being in physical form, even now as I write this, it undeniably points to the fact that we serve a risen Savior.

Not to mention that the New Testament teaches that He is in physical form, so we simply should just stick to Scripture.

As I've said before, I have very little respect for dueling proof texts, but I'll give you a text now.

There is a difference between the physical nature of Jesus after his resurrection, and the nature of Christ now, after His ascension.



1 Corinthians 15:

41There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.

42So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:

43It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:

44It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

45And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

46Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

47The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.

48As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.

49And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

50Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

 

[jasoncran]

In response to the OP, I used the Hebrew word for creator God, just as the authors of Genesis used it for the same purpose. There are many Hebrew words used to refer to God, and elohim is used more than 2000 times in the Hebrew writings. I find the fact that you want to obsess over this -that elohim isn't the "revealed name of God" and can't be used to describe Him - troubling, what's your point?

I'm not interested in the least in your obsession on this, and won't be responding further to your comments on it.

because its a title, its like this you dont know and just first met and arent in the army i am and you ask my name i then say ssg cranman. did i lie to you? NO for that is my name in the army as far rank and last name. god has the right and has done with his creation and alot of those names were that way. his revalation of his name and charisteristics as he went along. but ultimately YHWH and yeshua are all that is needed to be said as they have all the others in them.look i used to be jehovahs witness and sadly that is the first attack they use to draw christians away from the their bible.

by their programming me to this day i know whenever i see LORD GOD in the ot its JEHOVAH.they used to use the kjv when i started with them as kid. and used that as reference to beat the christians in a debate

exodus 6:3 and psalms 83:18 was used.and i have been asked by nathan and monica what god was named in the bible and i said YHWH.however, he will respond to the other names/titles. i dont even call him any those but father. go figure.