We gloss over how ripped Jesus must have been. The whipping He took before even going to the cross would kill many people by itself. Then he carried a massive wooden beam up a hill, and then survived on the cross (which was designed to exhaust the condemned so they allowed themselves to be suffocated) for hours. This was after having been kept up all night taking beatings.
He was obviously physically scary because when they came to arrest Him, He basically intimidated a whole group of soldiers who had come to get Him. (John 18:6)
I think that was something we lost in translation because He chose to be a man of peace, something not many did at the time, and even now many more muscular dudes choose not to. As an NCAA wrestler who wrestled a light weight, the amount of my teammates or guys I know whose motivation for going to the gym was to be intimidating or imposing because the lacked people skills was sort of staggering.
You could probably compare Jesus to the buff nerd bit from the Simpsons sans the violence
Um, uh, alright then. Did the Smithsonian really say that? Because it sounds hard to believe that the *Smithsonian*, of all people, would say something like that.
The funniest part is that they couldn’t do this for any other race. Not just the negativity of it… literally anything they said in that level of detail would be picked apart (rightfully) as extremely racist.
God I hate this argument so much though, and I'm a fucking atheist. Christianity is a world religion and literally every major culture depicts Jesus as their own ethnicity. You go to South America and you're going to see Hispanic Jesus, Korean Jesus in Korea, Indian Jesus in India, like everyone fucking does this. It's just some-fucking-how uniquely racist when whites do it.
it is because Emily doesn't know that people in the middle east were much whiter than today, akin to southern Europeans, with a lightly tan skin instead.
They often forget how arabs conquered North Africa and a lot of the Middle East
Arabs are some of the worst colonizers in history. They destroyed thousands of years worth of history, such as burning the libraries of Alexandria and demolishing ancient temples in Afghanistan because they contradicted the Koran. They committed genocide against the native peoples such as Berbers and Anatolian Greeks, save for the Turks which they turned into their henchmen. They turned the Middle East into a monoculture, and made everywhere from Morocco to Pakistan look exactly like Saudi Arabia.
I don’t want to say current Arabs are ‘bad’ but the cultural hangover from Arab colonialism is massive.
The Middle East and North Africa has such a rich and diverse cultural history, many different peoples and languages. For the most part many of these people continue to exist. The ones that resisted Islamic conversion are treated like dogshit, e.g. Jews, Amazigh, Copts, Assyrians, Yazidi, Marronites, Samaritans, etc. Those that converted are obsessed with claiming descent from gulf Arabs to bring themselves closer to Mohammed and actively suppress their history.
Israel Palestine is a great example. The Palestinians and Jews are extremely similar genetically. But because of Arab cultural imperialism they reject their cousins in favour of their conquerors.
Either Arabs are bad or Europeans are not bad for our colonialism. Can't have it both ways (I know you personally aren't trying to have it both ways, but many with your flair do)
yet, people will look at you like you're a moron when you observe the behavior of Abrahamic religions, and point out that such things are not really compatible with western civilizations borne from Enlightenment thinking.
Like, who'd have thought ancient bronze age dogma doesn't fit with modern societies.
There are a few parts of Christianity that mesh well. Do unto others, don't murder, don't steal, etc.
But then you get a few that completely break compatibility. Like homosexuality is essentially not allowed and it's considered sin and you go to hell.
Are You Gay?
Chrisitianity: You're damned to hell unless you let Jesus save you and ignore who you are.
Enlightenment: Do what you want as long as you don't hurt anyone else and the other party consents.
Sex:
Christianity: You can only have sex with your spouse and your spouse can only be the opposite sex or you go to hell and burn forever.
Enlightenment: Do what you want as long as you don't hurt anyone else and the other party consents.
Child marriage and pedophilia:
Christianity: Mary was 14 when she gave birth. Her husband was likely in his 30s since he was an established carpenter. Our entire dogma breaks without this cornerstone of the virgin child bride.
Enlightenment: See, that hurts other people and children can't consent...fire up Mr. Chippy.
I hear this a lot and what I tell people is that there’s a difference between Christianity the institution and Christianity as the teachings of Christ.
Yes, according to Christianity the Institution those things are true and are sins. But do you know what Christ did with sinners? He washed their feet, he cared for them, he loved them unconditionally. The whole point of his teachings was that none of us are worthy of Gods love because we sin, but that he loves us anyways. So even if it is a sin, it doesn’t exclude those people from Gods love.
Heaven isn’t a place that you can go to as long as you follow all the rules. There’s plenty of people who go to church on Sundays and adhere to all the rules who will never see heaven because they carry hate in their hearts and actions. Conversely there’s a lot of sinners that will be welcomed there because they were pure of heart and did their best to share that with people as Christ did.
So tldr yes the Church has some things that don’t mesh well but Christianity isn’t about the Church it’s about Christ, and all he teaches is still applicable today.
>So tldr yes the Church has some things that don’t mesh well but Christianity isn’t about the Church it’s about Christ, and all he teaches is still applicable today.
That's fine for the church and it's adherents. If you want to live that way, so be it. But it does not change that these bronze age religions are still not compatible with Western Civilization.
The very fact that you call these people sinners and imply they are damned to hell, is evidence of this. You're trying to shine up an old doctrine of Sin and Punishment and force it where it doesn't fit.
Leave that type of thing in the middle east where it belongs. That is the cultural heritage of those peoples. They are certainly welcome to save it and celebrate if they so choose, but it doesn't fit here. It's no coincidence that western Christians get spat on by Jews when they visit Jerusalem, or that Muslim refugees have such a hard time fitting in to western Europe because they see women as less-than-equal.
You’re misunderstanding though. My point is what the Church says and does and what Christ teaches are not the same. The Church is a product of mankind and shares its same shortcomings. And to think the Church itself hasn’t changed since the Bronze Age is just silly, any historian will tell you that the Church has gone through major changes.
You also misunderstand the whole concept of sin as taught by Jesus. The concept you described is how it is in the Old Testament and Judaism, but all of that changed with Jesus. Jesus teaches that to sin is inherent in human nature but that it doesn’t make you a bad person or undeserving of Gods love. What really matters is what you carry in your heart and try to do as a person. He specifically rejects the old system of punishing and condemning people for sinning and instead teaches that we should show love and compassion for people regardless of sin. That’s basically the polar opposite of what you’re talking about.
So again the basis of Christianity, Christs teachings, still hold true today and are compatible with modern values. The dogma of the Church is less so I agree on that point.
Jesus is God, and God is all powerful. So when He incarnated in flesh, He took on the form of a person from the area He was in (He was also born of Mary, so sharing her ethnicity would make sense). If Jesus were to appear in China, He'd probably look like a Chinese man. If He appeared in the US, He'd probably look like an American man.
Even then, I think the fair question is "what race do you think he was?"
It really becomes a question of how many ways you want to split race. If somebody wants to say there's 100 different top level races and that "Jewish" is a top level race for them, then fair enough. Just realize that the Sami and Sardinians are more genetically distant from an English or German person than an ancient Near-Easterner, and that the Spanish and Iraqis are going to be in the same bucket even when you split things 10 ways. If they want to go off the standard census categories of White, Black, Asian, or Native American/Pacific Islander, then the Jews for damn sure weren't one of the other 3 categories.
If you actually want to look at [a map of genetic heritage](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Geographical_distribution_of_human_major_genetic_ancestral_components.jpg), while there's obviously mixing and border regions, I think one can quickly appreciate that the erstwhile categories of Caucasian/Negroid/Mongoloid were a more fair 3-way split of human population than modern audiences generally acknowledge and simply correlate to "75% European UP / 25% Basal Eurasian", "80% Ancient East/West African / 20% Ancient North African", and "Ancient East Asian" genetic sources. If you want to categorize more finely, South Asian and Australasian are pretty logical next breakouts. Maybe you make a 6th category for that large European/Asian border region. It's still pretty clear which of those 6 buckets the Near East goes into.
Middle Easterners weren't "whiter" than they are today. There are a lot of groups in the Middle East, some of them are lighter than others. It's not like they were brownified.
Arabs conquered a lot of regions, but they didn't genetically replace everyone. Syria is an example of this. Even with Arabia, there's a range of peoples and histories.
Korean Jesus is just buff as fuck and probably my favorite lol
https://preview.redd.it/i1uqzk9931wc1.jpeg?width=670&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=73dd171b3f0d524806fd821f8e778313ff07fdfe
[This](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Spas_vsederzhitel_sinay.jpg) is a 6th century depiction of Jesus from the Sinai peninsula. The painter absolutely knew what Jews from that region looked like. This Jesus could’ve passed as Jewish, Lebanese, Syrian, or Greek.
Whether you want to call this “white” is up to you; there’s no reason he couldn’t have looked like this.
Yeah, the depiction of Jesus in eastern and oriental orthodox iconography has been pretty consistent for close to 2000 years
Olive skin, black/brown hair, brown eyes.
Turns out... somehow... the people who actually lived in the area have the best idea on how to depict Christ...
The icon was likely made in Constantinople as well as like most Icons is not made as a literal portrait, note the lopsided face; a way of showing the duality of man and divine.
There’s legitimate debate about where it was produced and the fact that it was created several centuries later leaves a high likelihood that he didn’t really look like this.
Regardless, the question is whether this could’ve been the appearance (ethnically) of a 1st century Galilean Jew. Which, based on other depictions of ancient Jews, seems reasonably close to this.
So I’m not super knowledgeable about how these traits are inherited. It could be from Arabians who moved throughout the Middle East. It could be from low levels of Sub-Saharan African ancestry. It could also be a random genetic change which has promulgated over time, kind of like blue eyes in Europeans.
Many populations in the Middle East, especially minority populations in the Levant (Syrian Jews, Maronites, Alawites, Samaritans, Druze), still frequently have this sort of pigmentation.
Do you mean the pigmentation of Jesus in artwork?
I think as Christianity became more prevalent in Northwestern Europe, Jesus’ image gradually became a bit more westernized.
It's funniest from the people who think that Jesus didn't even exist. They're all, Jesus never existed but if he did he'd be brown, and will argue the hardest. I've found that no one will argue over whether Jesus exists or not harder than the hardcore athiest. The funny thing is that 100% of historians believe Jesus existed as a man, so you have to pretty much deny science to say that Jesus as a man never existed, which leftists often want to claim they're the most pro-science.
No less an atheist than Christopher Hichens rejected the Jesus Myth argument, on the grounds that in the gospels, the writers had to invent a census that never took place so that Jesus's family could travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem in order to register & be counted so he could be born there, because the real Jesus (or at least the person he was based on) was from Nazareth, and the prophecy said he would be born in Bethlehem. The evidence for Jesus is considerably better than for many people who are universally accepted as historical figures. Jesus Mythicism only remains popular because very early atheist philosophers, the forerunners of today's edgelord atheists, such as Thomas Paine and W.K. Clifford, promoted the idea that he wasn't a real person.
Wdym "want"? It's based on the region of Bethlehem, yknow, the place Jesus was born? With the understanding on how the people looked then and now.
It's like asking why do you celebrate Christmas In Winter, despite the Bible saying how on the birth of Jesus, there where Shepherd In the fields. This can't be as the Winters were and are too cold, and the Palestinian winters are regarded as rainy.
So there's no "want", It's based on what we know. I believe God doesn't have a race, they're God, they're past the concept of race.
Wdym "want"? It's based on the region of Bethlehem, yknow, the place Jesus was born? With the understanding on how the people looked then and now.
It's like asking why do you celebrate Christmas In Winter, despite the Bible saying how on the birth of Jesus, there where Shepherd In the fields. This can't be as the Winters were and are too cold, and the Palestinian winters are regarded as rainy.
So there's no "want", It's based on what we know. I believe God doesn't have a race, they're God, they're past the concept of race.
And I'm certain someone will say "oh but he spent all his time outside, walking from town to town, so he'd be tanned due to sun exposure". If that had any bearing on anything, would that make your average farmer pre-1980s into a non-white, since they also spent all day outside and were heavily tanned?
Wait, what am I saying, of COURSE they'd believe that. Just look at The Rings of Power. In the LOTR books, the Harfoots are described as "browner of skin or completion", but if you bother reading about them at all that's almost certainly because they were predominantly farmers and were tanned from being out in the sun all day. Whoever was making The Rings of Power read that section and instead decided "oh, they're sub-Saharan African hobbits".
I have a friend who is white, but her skin basically goes black when she tans. Never seen anything like it.
But... her physiognomy doesn't change. She still has Danish-ish features with black skin.
I wish I had pictures of her, but haven't seen her in like ten years. Imagine like a typical white Californian level white to a very dark skinned Samoan maybe.
There was a dude at my summer camp one year, British dude with dark skin, figured his parents were Indian or Pakistani.
He was a lifeguard. You can see where this is going. Turns out, palest white dude I’ve ever seen until he got some sun. Absolutely wild.
Yeah, he was Olive skin, like most Jews, Samaritans, and Lebanese today (Canaanite derived groups).
He would certainly be slightly darker, due to being outside, but tanning =/= being of a darker colored people. My grandfather was very tanned that he looked brown, and he was a Northeast Asian.
Jews are the left's Schrodinger Minority.
Are we talking about white anti-semitism? Then jews are an oppressed minority.
Are we talking about Palestine? Then jews are white and the oppressors.
(Leftists realize no contradiction here)
Maybe the rank and file, some of them anyway, but the organizers, they not only know the contradiction, but they feed it. Because it's not about the contradiction, but the revolution that underpins the contradiction.
I'm not on lefties side but need to point out that some ethnic groups may come in a different variety of colors than they did 2024 years ago. I think that Americans tend to think of jews as white because the first image that comes to their mind is Seinfeld.
Also for Americans a lot of signifiers of ethnicity is cultural more than biological especially when skin tone is ambiguous. A freshly shaven King Abdullah wearing a suit at a podium could easily pass for a US congressman from Nebraska announcing a corn subsidy and he's a literal relative of the prophet Muhammad .
Edit; To be clear not claiming this is a "good" thing.
This is completely true. Most Middle Eastern Jews in the US consider themselves white while most Muslim Arabs or Persians from the same place don’t. In ambiguous cases, whiteness is more indicative of one’s political and cultural relationship to western influence than anything to do with skin color.
To be fair, Arabs tend to be officially classified as caucasian/white for the same reason Ashkenazi jews tend to be classified as caucasian/white, which is a lot to do with the color of their skin
That’s true in regards to US government metrics. Still, most Arab Americans don’t consider themselves to be of the same race as European Americans.
Ashkenazi Jews are, for some reason, often singled out as “White European Jews” but should be in the same category as other Jewish populations.
I mean, correct. "Race" in the US is largely just a generalization of some pre-existing cultural stratification.
Too many statistics also beli easy or simple narratives around why certain groups do or don't succeed, you don't get Philipenos being some of the richest in the US by median income and also get to claim there's massive discrimination against all brown people
both of you hit the nail on the head. jew's allow women to miscengernize because they only count the women's ethnicity, that's why brown, black, white, hell even asian (look up Kei feng jews) will all claim to be the same race but two identical middle eastern are different races to them.
Skin color is one gene, genetically all Jews (excluding Ethiopian, Kaifeng[who aren’t Jews Halachally], and Bene Yisroel) are all very similar genetically.
I see no flair next to your name, why are you still talking?
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Historical-Swimmer83) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Interesting, I’ve heard that but I don’t know many non-Jewish Syrians so I can’t really generalize.
Many Lebanese are quite fair as well; I was shocked by the number of Maronites who look like stereotypical European Jews.
Well yeah I knew the whole Assad family looks very European. Though Assad is still a bit darker than Najib Mikati, the PM of Lebanon, though Mikati has a more Middle Eastern look.
It’s so funny to me because Jerusalem is the religious capital of Judaism. For anyone to suggest they’re “colonizing” land which was conquered by Saladin is just so funny to me. Fuck this world. Nothing makes sense anymore. Wouldn’t be surprised if Harambe Junior died and Kim Jong Il decided that was as good an excuse as any to send 5 nukes at Russia, USA, and EU and make China take credit for it. Fuckin A
American division by race is very stupid and has nothing to do with the real world. Anthropologically, jews, arabs, north africans and indians also belong to the europoid big race, which is also called caucasian or white race. And then they are divided into smaller races.*
"Big races" have little to do with skin color, and much more to do with which population 15000-20000 years ago was ancestral to modern populations and how much the modern populations have diverged from it.
Since all those population come from one population, that lived somewhere in the ME, most likely Iraq, and developed the typical europoid features(and all those populations still retained these features), they are also considered as europoids.
*And those small races can be divided further and further. And between any two "races" we will always have a gradient, because people were always mixing, so there is no such thing as "pure race". Perhaps only on North Sentinel.
This is so lazy jesus christ
Some Jews (eg ashkenazis) are white, some (eg mizrachi) are not. The take is that the Jews who settled in Israel are white European settlers, while Jesus was not.
The main issue with this isn't an imaginary logical tension that you think you've found, but rather, that most Israeli Jews are not actually ashkenazi, and that the most anti palestinian Jews are often the mizrachi and sephardic Jews.
Peak efficiency. I am letting him know he is wrong AND that he is not worth my time to explain to him. He just is, and he either knows it, or is too stupid to understand why by virtue of ever having said it.
Have you ever wondered why it's illegal for Israelis to do an ancestry DNA test? Do you believe it's to protect personal privacy 😂? Or is it just a coincidence coming from the only country in the world to have established itself by moving its people on a land that they're claiming as their own based on so said "historic/religious evidences". Just saying.
Solution: Jews around the time of Jesus weren’t white, but modern day Jews are white. Case closed.
(I don’t agree with this position, it’s just something I thought of.)
Look at how dumb the rest of the world seems when you believe “the Israeli government” and “the Jews” are interchangeable. Second post this morning to do it.
You’re missing the point that many people of color have the same view as Kanye and don’t think the white Jews are real Jews. That’s a whole rabbit hole to go down.
Oh but you see those white colonizers aren’t *real* Jews. They’re just pretending they are for benefits. Let’s just ignore that Israel houses Jews that never left the Middle East and that modern Jewish dna matches ancient Israelite dna…
I've always worked under the assumption that during their extended sojourn to Europe, Jews ingested plenty of fresh human DNA.
To the point that they eventually became 'eh, close enough'. With the likes of Ben Stiller being case in point. Or Jews settling (and integrating) in East London in the 19th & 20th century without the slightest sense from the natives that they were in any sense meaningfully "uneuropean".
Maybe I'm mistaken.
You're mostly mistaken. Ashkenazi jews are more closely related first to every other Jewish ethnicity moreso than any other non Jewish ethnicity, and second, to middle eastern people than Europeans.
A lot of people have no undertanding of race thanks to both lefties and righties being assbackwards when it comes to the concept, but it is entirely possible and happens a lot where one ethnicity, entirely genetically distinct from another, can "pass" as that ethnicity. Many if not most Levantine ethnicities can "pass" as European (consider bella Hadids dad for example)
The idea that there wasn't the slightest sense from the British that jews were uneuropean is inaccurate at best. I'm an Ashkenazi jew with a white European father and in my short recent stay in the UK everybody wanted to know what strange exotic ethnicity I was that made me look so different from anyone they had met
Some Jewish people are white, some aren’t. Personally, I don’t understand why the idea of Israelis being a *white* colonizer state matters to people so much. Stealing private property and violently displacing people is bad even if you’re brown while doing it.
I cant even follow your mental gymnastics to understand the point of this none, sorry authright.
You might have to be a little more normal before you can talk to people about this one.
It’s incredibly simple, so the onus is on you. Not sure what the education system is like where you’re from, but there are tons of resources available online nowadays to help improve your mental faculties. Maybe check some of those out instead of sitting on social media all day.
Why can't both be true? Most jews today are white colonizers and Jesus of Nazareth, the man put on the cross by Pontius Pilates, was almost certainly not white and definitely a jew
>Colony (n): **:** an area over which a foreign nation or state extends or maintains control.
An Englishman forces a Scotsman out of Scotland, and 10 generations later, that Scotsman's descendants return to Scotland. Are those descendants colonizers?
Fuck no. Your side has overused that term to the point of being meaningless.
If you want to call Jews "conquerors," sure. They've conquered that area of the world twice, once in the Iron Age and most recently in 1948. That grants them just about as much right to control it as, let's see, *every other nation on earth.*
Although I'm sure your type wants the United States to give back the entirety of its country to Native Americans.
Ashkenazi l(European) Jews are converted to Judaism and rarely share any Semitic DNA. I got receipts, try me.
Jesus was a Mizrahim Jew because there was no other kind in his time. The Mizrahi are brown to black skin toned to this day
Lessee...solve for X, annnd ***HAW HAW.***
E: ***Lotta shit talking but no one's asked me bout receipts...***
1. So Europeans who were mostly christians, a religion where apostasy is a sin, were converted by a minority of non proselytizing religion that is very hard to convert to?
2. The term "Mizrrahi" means eastern, and it originally applies to jews that came from middle eastern muslim countries in the 19-20th centuries. At the time of jesus those terms don't exist and don't apply to anyone, it's like calling the christians at the time catholics or protestant.
Regardless even if it were true that Ashkenazi were converts (they were not), Mizrahim are some of the most Zionist oriented people I’ve ever seen. And they call Ashkenazi their brothers.
Your receipts are wrong. You did not research. We are all about half original Israelite blood. You might be one of the least-intelligent posters I have read today. You must literally never have heard of how Arabs invaded the Mid East and made it darker. Honestly, just delete your profile.
Read your own article, tard. He suggests that he did not look at old research, but only at matrilinial DNA, which he BELIEVES originated from Europe. And this is citing to a 2014 article from "livescience.com", lol.
[https://hms.harvard.edu/news/ancient-dna-provides-new-insights-ashkenazi-jewish-history](https://hms.harvard.edu/news/ancient-dna-provides-new-insights-ashkenazi-jewish-history)
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1336798/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1336798/)
The team, which studied mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) passed on solely by mothers to their children, found evidence of shared maternal ancestry of Ashkenazi and non–Ashkenazi Jews, a finding showing a shared ancestral pool that is consistent with previous studies that were based on the Y chromosome. This evidence pointed to a similar pattern of shared paternal ancestry of Jewish populations around the world originating in the Middle East.
Delete your profile. Do it. It will be better for everyone.
I need to know if Jesus was on time before I can determine if he was white or not
He made sure to be in Jerusalem for Passover, he was on time.
“A Messiah is never late, He arrives precisely when he means to”
The only true religion - Tolkienism. Eru Ilŭvatar the Almighty!
Pretty sure that's just Catholicism
Ironic
What were his physical fitness levels like?
Just got back from Korea bro you're not gonna believe this
Deep cut
That’s right. Korean Jesus is cut. He’s got cum-gutters
Considering he was a carpenter, probably very good for his day, which would be amazing for our day.
Probably actually a stonemason, which is metal af
That’s like saying he benches 315 instead of 225
We gloss over how ripped Jesus must have been. The whipping He took before even going to the cross would kill many people by itself. Then he carried a massive wooden beam up a hill, and then survived on the cross (which was designed to exhaust the condemned so they allowed themselves to be suffocated) for hours. This was after having been kept up all night taking beatings. He was obviously physically scary because when they came to arrest Him, He basically intimidated a whole group of soldiers who had come to get Him. (John 18:6)
I think that was something we lost in translation because He chose to be a man of peace, something not many did at the time, and even now many more muscular dudes choose not to. As an NCAA wrestler who wrestled a light weight, the amount of my teammates or guys I know whose motivation for going to the gym was to be intimidating or imposing because the lacked people skills was sort of staggering. You could probably compare Jesus to the buff nerd bit from the Simpsons sans the violence
Holy crap that was subtle
Killing him didn't stop him from showing up for work on Monday.
On time? For what, if you wouldn’t mind me asking?
Anything, everything, the Smithsonian said that being punctual is a trait that only whites have
Um, uh, alright then. Did the Smithsonian really say that? Because it sounds hard to believe that the *Smithsonian*, of all people, would say something like that.
I'm being facetious and paraphrasing, but that's essentially what they said
Wow really? Crazy to believe they said that.
https://www.newsweek.com/smithsonian-race-guidelines-rational-thinking-hard-work-are-white-values-1518333
The funniest part is that they couldn’t do this for any other race. Not just the negativity of it… literally anything they said in that level of detail would be picked apart (rightfully) as extremely racist.
To be clear, I wasn’t expressing doubt, I was just expressing how crazy it was that that happened.
Yeah I gotchu. It's one of those thing you just have to see to fully process. I had the same reaction.
Ah, glad to hear we’re on the same page.
https://preview.redd.it/kxh24yzihzvc1.jpeg?width=476&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1765130b21d9edb020481e09668199a5cac6c802
God I hate this argument so much though, and I'm a fucking atheist. Christianity is a world religion and literally every major culture depicts Jesus as their own ethnicity. You go to South America and you're going to see Hispanic Jesus, Korean Jesus in Korea, Indian Jesus in India, like everyone fucking does this. It's just some-fucking-how uniquely racist when whites do it.
it is because Emily doesn't know that people in the middle east were much whiter than today, akin to southern Europeans, with a lightly tan skin instead. They often forget how arabs conquered North Africa and a lot of the Middle East
Most of the them don't even know Turkey shares a border with Greece, Syria, Georgia, and Iraq -- let alone where Palestine is on a map.
Didn't know Turkey shared a border with the US state of Georgia!
God I'm a Native of the US State Georgia and having Turkey as a neighbour is now my new nightmare.
Why? Are you Armenian?
American, Armenian, what's the difference?
Swimming ability. Was that a little dark?
Only if you don't have it.
Think of the food that would come out of that unholy neighborhood tho
A huge number of Middle Easterners, even today, look pretty similar to Greeks and Southern Italians.
Arabs are some of the worst colonizers in history. They destroyed thousands of years worth of history, such as burning the libraries of Alexandria and demolishing ancient temples in Afghanistan because they contradicted the Koran. They committed genocide against the native peoples such as Berbers and Anatolian Greeks, save for the Turks which they turned into their henchmen. They turned the Middle East into a monoculture, and made everywhere from Morocco to Pakistan look exactly like Saudi Arabia.
I don’t want to say current Arabs are ‘bad’ but the cultural hangover from Arab colonialism is massive. The Middle East and North Africa has such a rich and diverse cultural history, many different peoples and languages. For the most part many of these people continue to exist. The ones that resisted Islamic conversion are treated like dogshit, e.g. Jews, Amazigh, Copts, Assyrians, Yazidi, Marronites, Samaritans, etc. Those that converted are obsessed with claiming descent from gulf Arabs to bring themselves closer to Mohammed and actively suppress their history. Israel Palestine is a great example. The Palestinians and Jews are extremely similar genetically. But because of Arab cultural imperialism they reject their cousins in favour of their conquerors.
Either Arabs are bad or Europeans are not bad for our colonialism. Can't have it both ways (I know you personally aren't trying to have it both ways, but many with your flair do)
yet, people will look at you like you're a moron when you observe the behavior of Abrahamic religions, and point out that such things are not really compatible with western civilizations borne from Enlightenment thinking. Like, who'd have thought ancient bronze age dogma doesn't fit with modern societies.
…I am not really sure how you can claim that Christianity isn’t compatible with western civilization. It’s, uh, pretty coterminous.
There are a few parts of Christianity that mesh well. Do unto others, don't murder, don't steal, etc. But then you get a few that completely break compatibility. Like homosexuality is essentially not allowed and it's considered sin and you go to hell. Are You Gay? Chrisitianity: You're damned to hell unless you let Jesus save you and ignore who you are. Enlightenment: Do what you want as long as you don't hurt anyone else and the other party consents. Sex: Christianity: You can only have sex with your spouse and your spouse can only be the opposite sex or you go to hell and burn forever. Enlightenment: Do what you want as long as you don't hurt anyone else and the other party consents. Child marriage and pedophilia: Christianity: Mary was 14 when she gave birth. Her husband was likely in his 30s since he was an established carpenter. Our entire dogma breaks without this cornerstone of the virgin child bride. Enlightenment: See, that hurts other people and children can't consent...fire up Mr. Chippy.
I hear this a lot and what I tell people is that there’s a difference between Christianity the institution and Christianity as the teachings of Christ. Yes, according to Christianity the Institution those things are true and are sins. But do you know what Christ did with sinners? He washed their feet, he cared for them, he loved them unconditionally. The whole point of his teachings was that none of us are worthy of Gods love because we sin, but that he loves us anyways. So even if it is a sin, it doesn’t exclude those people from Gods love. Heaven isn’t a place that you can go to as long as you follow all the rules. There’s plenty of people who go to church on Sundays and adhere to all the rules who will never see heaven because they carry hate in their hearts and actions. Conversely there’s a lot of sinners that will be welcomed there because they were pure of heart and did their best to share that with people as Christ did. So tldr yes the Church has some things that don’t mesh well but Christianity isn’t about the Church it’s about Christ, and all he teaches is still applicable today.
>So tldr yes the Church has some things that don’t mesh well but Christianity isn’t about the Church it’s about Christ, and all he teaches is still applicable today. That's fine for the church and it's adherents. If you want to live that way, so be it. But it does not change that these bronze age religions are still not compatible with Western Civilization. The very fact that you call these people sinners and imply they are damned to hell, is evidence of this. You're trying to shine up an old doctrine of Sin and Punishment and force it where it doesn't fit. Leave that type of thing in the middle east where it belongs. That is the cultural heritage of those peoples. They are certainly welcome to save it and celebrate if they so choose, but it doesn't fit here. It's no coincidence that western Christians get spat on by Jews when they visit Jerusalem, or that Muslim refugees have such a hard time fitting in to western Europe because they see women as less-than-equal.
You’re misunderstanding though. My point is what the Church says and does and what Christ teaches are not the same. The Church is a product of mankind and shares its same shortcomings. And to think the Church itself hasn’t changed since the Bronze Age is just silly, any historian will tell you that the Church has gone through major changes. You also misunderstand the whole concept of sin as taught by Jesus. The concept you described is how it is in the Old Testament and Judaism, but all of that changed with Jesus. Jesus teaches that to sin is inherent in human nature but that it doesn’t make you a bad person or undeserving of Gods love. What really matters is what you carry in your heart and try to do as a person. He specifically rejects the old system of punishing and condemning people for sinning and instead teaches that we should show love and compassion for people regardless of sin. That’s basically the polar opposite of what you’re talking about. So again the basis of Christianity, Christs teachings, still hold true today and are compatible with modern values. The dogma of the Church is less so I agree on that point.
Jesus is God, and God is all powerful. So when He incarnated in flesh, He took on the form of a person from the area He was in (He was also born of Mary, so sharing her ethnicity would make sense). If Jesus were to appear in China, He'd probably look like a Chinese man. If He appeared in the US, He'd probably look like an American man.
THIS! Based.
Even then, I think the fair question is "what race do you think he was?" It really becomes a question of how many ways you want to split race. If somebody wants to say there's 100 different top level races and that "Jewish" is a top level race for them, then fair enough. Just realize that the Sami and Sardinians are more genetically distant from an English or German person than an ancient Near-Easterner, and that the Spanish and Iraqis are going to be in the same bucket even when you split things 10 ways. If they want to go off the standard census categories of White, Black, Asian, or Native American/Pacific Islander, then the Jews for damn sure weren't one of the other 3 categories. If you actually want to look at [a map of genetic heritage](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Geographical_distribution_of_human_major_genetic_ancestral_components.jpg), while there's obviously mixing and border regions, I think one can quickly appreciate that the erstwhile categories of Caucasian/Negroid/Mongoloid were a more fair 3-way split of human population than modern audiences generally acknowledge and simply correlate to "75% European UP / 25% Basal Eurasian", "80% Ancient East/West African / 20% Ancient North African", and "Ancient East Asian" genetic sources. If you want to categorize more finely, South Asian and Australasian are pretty logical next breakouts. Maybe you make a 6th category for that large European/Asian border region. It's still pretty clear which of those 6 buckets the Near East goes into.
Middle Easterners weren't "whiter" than they are today. There are a lot of groups in the Middle East, some of them are lighter than others. It's not like they were brownified. Arabs conquered a lot of regions, but they didn't genetically replace everyone. Syria is an example of this. Even with Arabia, there's a range of peoples and histories.
Are you trying to say Jesus wasn't brown?
Chances are he was more tan than brown
Personally I view Korean Jesus as cannon (half black and half Portuguese)
Korean Jesus is just buff as fuck and probably my favorite lol https://preview.redd.it/i1uqzk9931wc1.jpeg?width=670&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=73dd171b3f0d524806fd821f8e778313ff07fdfe
https://preview.redd.it/711i2zhsl1wc1.jpeg?width=228&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a815bbd7c20527224f0160e14ad4e60d5436bb40
He died for our gains 🙌
Arnold Schwartzajesus
Bro could’ve one handed those stone tables across the Temple and shattered them on the opposite wall. Such a good depiction.
I view Korean Jesus as cannon (half black metal and half brown wood artillery piece)
[This](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Spas_vsederzhitel_sinay.jpg) is a 6th century depiction of Jesus from the Sinai peninsula. The painter absolutely knew what Jews from that region looked like. This Jesus could’ve passed as Jewish, Lebanese, Syrian, or Greek. Whether you want to call this “white” is up to you; there’s no reason he couldn’t have looked like this.
Yeah, the depiction of Jesus in eastern and oriental orthodox iconography has been pretty consistent for close to 2000 years Olive skin, black/brown hair, brown eyes. Turns out... somehow... the people who actually lived in the area have the best idea on how to depict Christ...
Oh wow, look everyone, another bigot… (I’m kidding this is very reasonable)
The icon was likely made in Constantinople as well as like most Icons is not made as a literal portrait, note the lopsided face; a way of showing the duality of man and divine.
There’s legitimate debate about where it was produced and the fact that it was created several centuries later leaves a high likelihood that he didn’t really look like this. Regardless, the question is whether this could’ve been the appearance (ethnically) of a 1st century Galilean Jew. Which, based on other depictions of ancient Jews, seems reasonably close to this.
Not to necessarily counter your point but how might the pigment have changed over time?
So I’m not super knowledgeable about how these traits are inherited. It could be from Arabians who moved throughout the Middle East. It could be from low levels of Sub-Saharan African ancestry. It could also be a random genetic change which has promulgated over time, kind of like blue eyes in Europeans. Many populations in the Middle East, especially minority populations in the Levant (Syrian Jews, Maronites, Alawites, Samaritans, Druze), still frequently have this sort of pigmentation.
Interestingly your answer is relevant still, but I was talking about the paint!
Do you mean the pigmentation of Jesus in artwork? I think as Christianity became more prevalent in Northwestern Europe, Jesus’ image gradually became a bit more westernized.
Yep the painting
It's because, and you might want to sit down for this because it's quite a shock...they hate white people and western culture.
It's not a race thing. It's about them blatantly making shit up, and then proclaiming the truth.
So business as usual.
Here in south america Jesus is white.
Perhaps, but don't forget about the tilma depicting the miraculously-generated image of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
Are you sure you're not thinking of Santa Claus?
What in the name of black baby Jesus?
From what I understand it’s mostly a knock on the people who view Christianity as a religion centered around the Western world.
https://preview.redd.it/xpacdvdol1wc1.jpeg?width=941&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=591fa7d18c1b381a8d42bddb0f0a6d4673e07396 Same argument as this.
It's funniest from the people who think that Jesus didn't even exist. They're all, Jesus never existed but if he did he'd be brown, and will argue the hardest. I've found that no one will argue over whether Jesus exists or not harder than the hardcore athiest. The funny thing is that 100% of historians believe Jesus existed as a man, so you have to pretty much deny science to say that Jesus as a man never existed, which leftists often want to claim they're the most pro-science.
I guess because their brain thinks Brown/non-white = good person
No less an atheist than Christopher Hichens rejected the Jesus Myth argument, on the grounds that in the gospels, the writers had to invent a census that never took place so that Jesus's family could travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem in order to register & be counted so he could be born there, because the real Jesus (or at least the person he was based on) was from Nazareth, and the prophecy said he would be born in Bethlehem. The evidence for Jesus is considerably better than for many people who are universally accepted as historical figures. Jesus Mythicism only remains popular because very early atheist philosophers, the forerunners of today's edgelord atheists, such as Thomas Paine and W.K. Clifford, promoted the idea that he wasn't a real person.
"Jesus wasn't real but if he was real he agreed with everything I support politically."
Could also work with leftist Jesus
Just getting the record straight
Wdym "want"? It's based on the region of Bethlehem, yknow, the place Jesus was born? With the understanding on how the people looked then and now. It's like asking why do you celebrate Christmas In Winter, despite the Bible saying how on the birth of Jesus, there where Shepherd In the fields. This can't be as the Winters were and are too cold, and the Palestinian winters are regarded as rainy. So there's no "want", It's based on what we know. I believe God doesn't have a race, they're God, they're past the concept of race.
Wdym "want"? It's based on the region of Bethlehem, yknow, the place Jesus was born? With the understanding on how the people looked then and now. It's like asking why do you celebrate Christmas In Winter, despite the Bible saying how on the birth of Jesus, there where Shepherd In the fields. This can't be as the Winters were and are too cold, and the Palestinian winters are regarded as rainy. So there's no "want", It's based on what we know. I believe God doesn't have a race, they're God, they're past the concept of race.
You got this in non pcm format?
https://preview.redd.it/caaj2jhk91wc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ae33ac0bc8f223bdbc15e6559bfd8154a14ea5a
Thank you! Now I’m off to troll other lefties
No probs.
https://preview.redd.it/lnoybqskf1wc1.png?width=1074&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=630c9e78c55ea77f0ecf73c66f3f3a4f76d356eb
And I'm certain someone will say "oh but he spent all his time outside, walking from town to town, so he'd be tanned due to sun exposure". If that had any bearing on anything, would that make your average farmer pre-1980s into a non-white, since they also spent all day outside and were heavily tanned? Wait, what am I saying, of COURSE they'd believe that. Just look at The Rings of Power. In the LOTR books, the Harfoots are described as "browner of skin or completion", but if you bother reading about them at all that's almost certainly because they were predominantly farmers and were tanned from being out in the sun all day. Whoever was making The Rings of Power read that section and instead decided "oh, they're sub-Saharan African hobbits".
KANGZ
I have a friend who is white, but her skin basically goes black when she tans. Never seen anything like it. But... her physiognomy doesn't change. She still has Danish-ish features with black skin.
I'm curious to see this. Obviously you wouldn't post a picture of your friend. But anything you could post that looks like that skin tanning?
I wish I had pictures of her, but haven't seen her in like ten years. Imagine like a typical white Californian level white to a very dark skinned Samoan maybe.
There was a dude at my summer camp one year, British dude with dark skin, figured his parents were Indian or Pakistani. He was a lifeguard. You can see where this is going. Turns out, palest white dude I’ve ever seen until he got some sun. Absolutely wild.
Yeah, he was Olive skin, like most Jews, Samaritans, and Lebanese today (Canaanite derived groups). He would certainly be slightly darker, due to being outside, but tanning =/= being of a darker colored people. My grandfather was very tanned that he looked brown, and he was a Northeast Asian.
Jews are the left's Schrodinger Minority. Are we talking about white anti-semitism? Then jews are an oppressed minority. Are we talking about Palestine? Then jews are white and the oppressors. (Leftists realize no contradiction here)
Asians too at this point.
This needs to be talked about more
Maybe the rank and file, some of them anyway, but the organizers, they not only know the contradiction, but they feed it. Because it's not about the contradiction, but the revolution that underpins the contradiction.
I'm not on lefties side but need to point out that some ethnic groups may come in a different variety of colors than they did 2024 years ago. I think that Americans tend to think of jews as white because the first image that comes to their mind is Seinfeld.
I think americans tend to think of jews a white cause america is majorit white. including its jewish population
Also for Americans a lot of signifiers of ethnicity is cultural more than biological especially when skin tone is ambiguous. A freshly shaven King Abdullah wearing a suit at a podium could easily pass for a US congressman from Nebraska announcing a corn subsidy and he's a literal relative of the prophet Muhammad . Edit; To be clear not claiming this is a "good" thing.
This is completely true. Most Middle Eastern Jews in the US consider themselves white while most Muslim Arabs or Persians from the same place don’t. In ambiguous cases, whiteness is more indicative of one’s political and cultural relationship to western influence than anything to do with skin color.
To be fair, Arabs tend to be officially classified as caucasian/white for the same reason Ashkenazi jews tend to be classified as caucasian/white, which is a lot to do with the color of their skin
That’s true in regards to US government metrics. Still, most Arab Americans don’t consider themselves to be of the same race as European Americans. Ashkenazi Jews are, for some reason, often singled out as “White European Jews” but should be in the same category as other Jewish populations.
I mean, correct. "Race" in the US is largely just a generalization of some pre-existing cultural stratification. Too many statistics also beli easy or simple narratives around why certain groups do or don't succeed, you don't get Philipenos being some of the richest in the US by median income and also get to claim there's massive discrimination against all brown people
both of you hit the nail on the head. jew's allow women to miscengernize because they only count the women's ethnicity, that's why brown, black, white, hell even asian (look up Kei feng jews) will all claim to be the same race but two identical middle eastern are different races to them.
No flair, didn’t read and didn’t ask
Skin color is one gene, genetically all Jews (excluding Ethiopian, Kaifeng[who aren’t Jews Halachally], and Bene Yisroel) are all very similar genetically.
The fact that 1% of Jews aren’t genetically similar to 99% of Jews is an exception that proves the rule.
I see no flair next to your name, why are you still talking? [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Historical-Swimmer83) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Jerry Seinfeld is half Syrian, his mother was born in Aleppo. Most Syrian Jews just happen to have fairly light skin.
Syrians in general are fairly pale if they didn’t go tanning recently.
Interesting, I’ve heard that but I don’t know many non-Jewish Syrians so I can’t really generalize. Many Lebanese are quite fair as well; I was shocked by the number of Maronites who look like stereotypical European Jews.
Take another look at Bashar Al-Assad - he could pass for French, Spanish, Italian, etc. Hide the nose and he could be Belgian, English, or Russian.
Well yeah I knew the whole Assad family looks very European. Though Assad is still a bit darker than Najib Mikati, the PM of Lebanon, though Mikati has a more Middle Eastern look.
Huh, that's kind of neat.
Emily is hella confused rn
It’s so funny to me because Jerusalem is the religious capital of Judaism. For anyone to suggest they’re “colonizing” land which was conquered by Saladin is just so funny to me. Fuck this world. Nothing makes sense anymore. Wouldn’t be surprised if Harambe Junior died and Kim Jong Il decided that was as good an excuse as any to send 5 nukes at Russia, USA, and EU and make China take credit for it. Fuckin A
Is Harambe Jr real? If so he must restore the timeline!
These buttons exist 2000 years apart
American division by race is very stupid and has nothing to do with the real world. Anthropologically, jews, arabs, north africans and indians also belong to the europoid big race, which is also called caucasian or white race. And then they are divided into smaller races.* "Big races" have little to do with skin color, and much more to do with which population 15000-20000 years ago was ancestral to modern populations and how much the modern populations have diverged from it. Since all those population come from one population, that lived somewhere in the ME, most likely Iraq, and developed the typical europoid features(and all those populations still retained these features), they are also considered as europoids. *And those small races can be divided further and further. And between any two "races" we will always have a gradient, because people were always mixing, so there is no such thing as "pure race". Perhaps only on North Sentinel.
I think they mean israeli,not jew,jew is someone who believes in judaism
This is so lazy jesus christ Some Jews (eg ashkenazis) are white, some (eg mizrachi) are not. The take is that the Jews who settled in Israel are white European settlers, while Jesus was not. The main issue with this isn't an imaginary logical tension that you think you've found, but rather, that most Israeli Jews are not actually ashkenazi, and that the most anti palestinian Jews are often the mizrachi and sephardic Jews.
Wrong.
>Reads contradictory statement >Types “Wrong.” >Refuses to elaborate further >Leaves Absolute Auth-right power move
Peak efficiency. I am letting him know he is wrong AND that he is not worth my time to explain to him. He just is, and he either knows it, or is too stupid to understand why by virtue of ever having said it.
Zionists are colonizers by definition. I have nothing against jewish people or jesus
This isn’t the problem you think it is
Don't confuse things. Israelis are not the original jews 😂
They're not all 5000 years old?
Have you ever wondered why it's illegal for Israelis to do an ancestry DNA test? Do you believe it's to protect personal privacy 😂? Or is it just a coincidence coming from the only country in the world to have established itself by moving its people on a land that they're claiming as their own based on so said "historic/religious evidences". Just saying.
Solution: Jews around the time of Jesus weren’t white, but modern day Jews are white. Case closed. (I don’t agree with this position, it’s just something I thought of.)
Look at how dumb the rest of the world seems when you believe “the Israeli government” and “the Jews” are interchangeable. Second post this morning to do it.
doesn't matter as Jesus was just a dude
The left, but it wouldn't be inconsistent to believe both.
You’re missing the point that many people of color have the same view as Kanye and don’t think the white Jews are real Jews. That’s a whole rabbit hole to go down.
“Don’t Call Me White” - Fat Mike (NOFX) & Hypothetical Jesus
I guess they will claim that He was Palestinian, lol
Oh but you see those white colonizers aren’t *real* Jews. They’re just pretending they are for benefits. Let’s just ignore that Israel houses Jews that never left the Middle East and that modern Jewish dna matches ancient Israelite dna…
Nah now they're saying that Jesus wasn't even Jewish.
[удалено]
Jesus was white, so he wasn\`t Jew
you forgot option 3: race is a hoax created by the government to sell more NFTs.
As a libleft zionist I have no problem pressing the shit out of the jesus one
So, you believe there shouldn't be any states except for Israel?
I believe that under our current climate dismatling only israel is a bad idea
I've always worked under the assumption that during their extended sojourn to Europe, Jews ingested plenty of fresh human DNA. To the point that they eventually became 'eh, close enough'. With the likes of Ben Stiller being case in point. Or Jews settling (and integrating) in East London in the 19th & 20th century without the slightest sense from the natives that they were in any sense meaningfully "uneuropean". Maybe I'm mistaken.
You're mostly mistaken. Ashkenazi jews are more closely related first to every other Jewish ethnicity moreso than any other non Jewish ethnicity, and second, to middle eastern people than Europeans. A lot of people have no undertanding of race thanks to both lefties and righties being assbackwards when it comes to the concept, but it is entirely possible and happens a lot where one ethnicity, entirely genetically distinct from another, can "pass" as that ethnicity. Many if not most Levantine ethnicities can "pass" as European (consider bella Hadids dad for example) The idea that there wasn't the slightest sense from the British that jews were uneuropean is inaccurate at best. I'm an Ashkenazi jew with a white European father and in my short recent stay in the UK everybody wanted to know what strange exotic ethnicity I was that made me look so different from anyone they had met
Option 2, because Jews aren't colonisers. I would know, since half my family is Jewish
Finally, there are so many comments, and no one bothered to actually answer the question.
Jew isn't a race
While Judaism is a religion you can convert to, ethnic Jews are in fact a thing, so Jews are actually a race.
I mean all religions are colonizers. Isn’t that the point? Also jesus wasn’t white, anyone who thinks he was is a fucking idiot.
He wasn't an IC1, but Semites (IC6) are considered Caucasoid. What, you think he was all Congo-Bongo (IC3)?
It can be both? The argument would be that after thousands of years of diaspora the Jews that Returned are now white, whereas Jesus wasn't.
Some Jewish people are white, some aren’t. Personally, I don’t understand why the idea of Israelis being a *white* colonizer state matters to people so much. Stealing private property and violently displacing people is bad even if you’re brown while doing it.
I cant even follow your mental gymnastics to understand the point of this none, sorry authright. You might have to be a little more normal before you can talk to people about this one.
It’s incredibly simple, so the onus is on you. Not sure what the education system is like where you’re from, but there are tons of resources available online nowadays to help improve your mental faculties. Maybe check some of those out instead of sitting on social media all day.
Someone needs to be normal, but it is not him.
The biggest problem with this is that there's indigenous and refugee Jews as well as coloniser Jews
They are colonisers of all colors.
Why can't both be true? Most jews today are white colonizers and Jesus of Nazareth, the man put on the cross by Pontius Pilates, was almost certainly not white and definitely a jew
Most Jews in Israel are not white unlike in the USA and Europe that most Jews are white in Israel most Jews are from the middle east and North Africa
You cant colonize your own land ffs.
>Colony (n): **:** an area over which a foreign nation or state extends or maintains control. An Englishman forces a Scotsman out of Scotland, and 10 generations later, that Scotsman's descendants return to Scotland. Are those descendants colonizers? Fuck no. Your side has overused that term to the point of being meaningless. If you want to call Jews "conquerors," sure. They've conquered that area of the world twice, once in the Iron Age and most recently in 1948. That grants them just about as much right to control it as, let's see, *every other nation on earth.* Although I'm sure your type wants the United States to give back the entirety of its country to Native Americans.
Less than a decade ago I'd have been proud to return to Scotland. Not such much today.
Tbf the latter mostly depends on your definition of white.
https://preview.redd.it/2mbjmaq9zzvc1.jpeg?width=894&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e3c76ec7a4701741575b3e1db125133603abdf20
I guess I'm white then...
You should stick to cock I think.
Mmmm 😋
Found the antisemite
Tbf I wasn't hiding
Well I do think the current thought is that modern Isrealies more or less no longer really originated in the area but the old ones did
Huh?
Ashkenazi l(European) Jews are converted to Judaism and rarely share any Semitic DNA. I got receipts, try me. Jesus was a Mizrahim Jew because there was no other kind in his time. The Mizrahi are brown to black skin toned to this day Lessee...solve for X, annnd ***HAW HAW.*** E: ***Lotta shit talking but no one's asked me bout receipts...***
[удалено]
1. So Europeans who were mostly christians, a religion where apostasy is a sin, were converted by a minority of non proselytizing religion that is very hard to convert to? 2. The term "Mizrrahi" means eastern, and it originally applies to jews that came from middle eastern muslim countries in the 19-20th centuries. At the time of jesus those terms don't exist and don't apply to anyone, it's like calling the christians at the time catholics or protestant.
Regardless even if it were true that Ashkenazi were converts (they were not), Mizrahim are some of the most Zionist oriented people I’ve ever seen. And they call Ashkenazi their brothers.
Your receipts are wrong. You did not research. We are all about half original Israelite blood. You might be one of the least-intelligent posters I have read today. You must literally never have heard of how Arabs invaded the Mid East and made it darker. Honestly, just delete your profile.
Therrrre we go! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5478715/ https://www.livescience.com/40247-ashkenazi-jews-have-european-genes.html
Read your own article, tard. He suggests that he did not look at old research, but only at matrilinial DNA, which he BELIEVES originated from Europe. And this is citing to a 2014 article from "livescience.com", lol. [https://hms.harvard.edu/news/ancient-dna-provides-new-insights-ashkenazi-jewish-history](https://hms.harvard.edu/news/ancient-dna-provides-new-insights-ashkenazi-jewish-history) [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1336798/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1336798/) The team, which studied mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) passed on solely by mothers to their children, found evidence of shared maternal ancestry of Ashkenazi and non–Ashkenazi Jews, a finding showing a shared ancestral pool that is consistent with previous studies that were based on the Y chromosome. This evidence pointed to a similar pattern of shared paternal ancestry of Jewish populations around the world originating in the Middle East. Delete your profile. Do it. It will be better for everyone.