Talk:Race and appearance of Jesus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article candidate Race and appearance of Jesus is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
December 28, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted
WikiProject Christianity / Jesus / Catholicism (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Jesus work group (marked as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (marked as Low-importance).
 

New Testament Descriptions?[edit]

The New Testament includes several descriptions of Jesus' everyday appearance before his death (bronze skin and wooly hair; caucasians were not living in that region during the time of Jesus' birth]])

If such passages actually exist why aren't they cited? Why would you cite someone's opinion of what the bible says instead of the bible itself? Not only does this sentence contradict the rest of this article, it has the appearance of a complete fantasy.

The only part of the Bible that uses the term "wool" in reference to Jesus is Revelations 1:14: His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;

The title of this section is "Biblical references" not "Opinions of commentators" so unless you can come up with actual Biblical references this sentence will be deleted.

Also, as for Caucasians not living in the region at that time, it depends on what you mean by Caucasians, there were plenty of Romans there, and there had been for decades! John Alan ElsonWF6I A.P.O.I. 23:54, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

An editor's analysis based upon primary religious sources is prohibited as original research. In Wikipedia most information is verified to reliable sources, in this case meaning publications written by scholars of history and theology. For the balance between theological claims and secular academia see WP:RNPOV. For the use of academic sources in general see WP:ABIAS. Tgeorgescu (talk) 00:20, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

How is that relevant? The title of the section is "Biblical references" that implies an actual Biblical reference rather than the mere opinion of a commentator. If there are actual biblical references then where? If they actually existed they would have been cited. This statement is also in direct contradiction to several other statements contained in this article and a Wikipedia article should not contradict itself.

Note the introduction Although the New Testament includes no description of the physical appearance of Jesus before his death and the section Early Church to the Middle Ages which states Despite the lack of direct biblical or historical references, also the section Artistic portrayals states Despite the lack of biblical references or historical records, for two millennia a wide range of depictions of Jesus have appeared .

It is obvious that the editor who inserted the sentence in question is citing questionable sources or is just fabricating things out of thin air, hoping that nobody will check his sources.

When you are discussing the actual text of a document (as opposed to how it is interpreted) the only reliable source is the document itself. Many sources could be cited that misquote the U.S. constitution, for example, but the actual text trumps all such sources when the topic is the actual text itself. There are, of course, many references that can be cited for the fact that the New Testament contains no description of the physical appearance of Jesus before his death, which is why the rest of the article states this verified fact, but it is not up to the skeptics of an edit to prove a negative. John Alan ElsonWF6I A.P.O.I. 01:43, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Further research shows that it is the latter: The editor who inserted that sentence was fabricating things out of thin air and the two citations are on an altogether different topic, belonging to the next paragraph about the transfiguration.

I have found BOTH of these references online, http://sociology.sunimc.net/htmledit/uploadfile/system/20100513/20100513181836263.pdf https://books.google.com/books?id=UNIelnuGATgC&pg=PR4&lpg=PR4&dq=The+Content+and+the+Setting+of+the+Gospel+Tradition+by+Mark+Harding&source=bl&ots=EtY4X7UvJo&sig=QB1RokpBKrXHIqYRsMUhn24qH9k&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBmoVChMIwpecl86sxwIVRaKICh02UgN5#v=onepage&q=The%20Content%20and%20the%20Setting%20of%20the%20Gospel%20Tradition%20by%20Mark%20Harding&f=false (the second requires some "fiddling" to get to the pages in question but they are viewable online) both are talking about the appearance of Jesus during the transfiguration, making no reference to his "everyday appearance" either before or after the transfiguration, so it seems obvious that editor didn't even read the references cited and merely lifted them from the next paragraph where they actually belong.

Accordingly, I will edit this sentence to reflect reality, and restore the references to their proper placement. John Alan ElsonWF6I A.P.O.I. 03:55, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

The part about "Visage" and Nazarites is quite taken out of context, and seems mistranslated. http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/lam004.htm It seems to be describing the appearance of their faces after punishment. 68.229.3.39 (talk) 21:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Beautiful?[edit]

Hi, "Nicephorus Callistus quoted an unnamed antique source that described Jesus as tall and beautiful with fair, wavy hair, but his account was most likely without basis and was inspired by the prevailing artistic images of Jesus" this is wrong because Jesus in art described as sexy more than handsome or beautiful. The body of Jesus has been the subject of many paintings over the centuries, and showing his masculinity and his slimness where is the gallery in this article? --Fastez (talk) 11:55, 26 December 2015 (UTC).

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Race and appearance of Jesus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Source wanted[edit]

Why people who know full well that Jesus was a Jew think that Jesus was white? I think the explanation is like this: all the Jews I met in my life (knowing they are Jews) are white Caucasians, that's why. Can anyone find a source for this? Tgeorgescu (talk) 07:42, 14 April 2017 (UTC)