Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Question_Assumptions
If depicting Jesus as a black man helps a black person better feel that Jesus is his Savior, too, then I don't have a problem with that.

Then depicting Jesus as a woman to help a female better feel that Jesus is his Savior, too, thats OK too? I don't understand that reasoning. His words alone are reason enough to understand him. If his race or gender or even his religion has to be changed to get someone to believe, then that person isn't listening to the wordand incapable of understanding due to blindness through his own bigotry. This is PC gone amuck!

33 posted on 04/05/2006 8:34:57 AM PDT by Bommer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: Bommer
Then depicting Jesus as a woman to help a female better feel that Jesus is his Savior, too, thats OK too?

As I've repeatedly said, race is not the same as sex. That's why we still have male and female restrooms but no longer have black and white restrooms. The Bible makes Jesus' sex very clear. The Bible is quite vague on how He looks. And I again ask, are you as offended by the paintings by Europeans that depict Him as a blonde nordic type? How about the various European actors who have depicted Him in movies?

I don't understand that reasoning. His words alone are reason enough to understand him. If his race or gender or even his religion has to be changed to get someone to believe, then that person isn't listening to the wordand incapable of understanding due to blindness through his own bigotry. This is PC gone amuck!

And as I've also repeated, I do agree that it misses the point. But if white artists and film makers can depict Jesus as a blonde haired Northern European, then I don't see the problem with depicting Him with African features. If His message really transcends His race and His race really doesn't matter, then it shouldn't matter either way. If an artist is depicting Jesus as black for racists reasons (to imply that Jesus was the Savior of blacks, not whites), I think that's wrong. If an artist depicts Jesus as black to emphasize that Jesus is the Savior of black people, too, to get past issues that some in the black community have in that regard (Aren't you the least bit concerned by the expansion of the Nation of Islam among black men?), I'm fine with that.

To give you an imperfect analogy, if you look at statues of Buddha in East Asia, he looks Chinese or Japanese, even though Buddha was most likely Indian. It just doesn't matter. Frankly, I'm more irked by Medieval artists that painted Biblical and historical scenes with the people dressed in Medieval clothing.

34 posted on 04/05/2006 11:43:34 AM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson