I'm glad others are irritated by this untruth that is continually perpetuated. "Making sense of the Passion" is extremely easy considering the shitstem we are all living under...
For all those nay sayers that try to call us "racist/perjudice" for caring about the color Jesus was....here is my eternal response...
If it doesn't matter what color he was....than why not just show the TRUTH?! Why would the same institutions that "claim" to be instilling morality(yah right) in the masses, give people a perpetual LIE?! If Yeshua's teaching are what is important than why is he always depicted inacurately?
There must be a reason he is continuousley depicted as "European" when it is quite obvious that he WAS NOT! It isn't a coincidence that we are living under a neo-colonial, white supremacist system and the Christian God is being portrayed as European/White....I don't understand people who tend to write this off as if it is NO BIG DEAL???!!!
I didn't know the Catholic church came out and said it was "completely accurate". That is strange considering the pope prays neeling to an image of a BLACK Madonna and Child in the Holy of Holies, in the Vatican....It would then seem they KNOW Yeshua is Black, and the color issue cannot be passed over as just an oversight....
What is sad is that it isn't questioned enough, especially by the oppressed people's...when it is so obviousely a falshood/lie being perpetrated for SYMBOLIC and PSYCHOLOGICAL reasons... Here is an article I found quite telling on the subject...
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=45096THE WHITEWASHING OF THE PASSION
by Michael Edward
http://worldvisionportalRegarding his PASSION movie, Mel Gibson has repeatedly stated in every interview how his film “accurately depicts the crucifixion of Jesus.” He stresses how he has consulted with “hundreds of scholars” and has “read hundreds of books over the past 13 years” (note the number 13) to make his movie realistically correct. He went as far as to have a modern dialect of ancient Aramaic, the language of Jesus and his disciples, be spoken throughout the movie. The Romans who were portrayed spoke in a modernized Latin. After people watch this movie, they are astonished at the great lengths Gibson has taken to make his movie so “accurate.”
But I have just one question concerning Gibson’s PASSION. I would like to know what scholars or reference books he consulted to portray Jesus as a European looking man with light European skin colour, what the world now racially classifies as a “white man.” Perhaps he used the 1970’s ABC television movie JESUS OF NAZARETH as a skin tone guide since Jesus was a fair skinned (pronounced “white”) and blue eyed man in that movie. Or perhaps he used the 1500’s paintings of Jesus made by Michelangelo, who used his pale skinned cousin as his sitting model.
Just to set the record straight, Jesus' skin was not white: It was dark brown, the same colour as all the indigenous people of the Eastern Mediterranean two thousand years ago. And before someone accuses me of being a black racist, I want you to know that my skin is white, I have blue eyes, and my hair is (naturally) blonde.
Soon after Jesus was born, Herod is believed to have sent his soldiers to seek and kill him as an infant. To hide Jesus from Herod, we are told his family fled with him to Egypt. The Egypt of that historical time period was a society of dark-skinned Africans, as evidenced in their own hieroglyphs. That region of the world was referred to as Kemet, meaning “the black land,” and the inhabitants called themselves Kemetcu, meaning “the black people.” It would surely have been an impossible task to hide and blend a light-skinned child among a dark-skinned population.
Under Emperor Justinian II, the Roman Empire minted a gold coin that pictured Jesus. This coin, which is currently housed in the British Museum, shows a man with clearly non-white facial features and tightly curled hair.
There is no doubt that suggesting Jesus might have been dark-skinned (pronounced “black”) makes most Europeans and Westerners very uneasy... perhaps just as uneasy as dark-skinned Africans feel when Jesus is portrayed as a white, blue-eyed, blonde Aryan.
What we have here is the whitewashing of the PASSION (pun fully intended). By portraying Jesus as a light-skinned European-American, Gibson’s movie creates a religious based clash between Protestant-Catholics (represented by Jesus’ inaccurate light skinned portrayal) against the darker skinned Jews who crucified Jesus.
With that in mind, this movie has sub-consciously triggered a conflict between the white European-American race against darker skinned races, which just happens to include all Arabs, Persians, Syrians, Palestinians, Egyptians, Libyans, etc.
I deliberately excluded the “Jews” from among the dark-skin races - those people who occupy the current UN established borders, commonly known as Israeli - since nearly all of them migrated from Europe in the modern-day “Exodus” of the 1950’s. Modern “Israel” is actually of recent European and American origin, so they are accurately counted among the European-Americans.
Furthermore, is it any mistake on Gibson’s part that this movie is graphically violent? What Gibson’s movie is triggering, without conscious knowledge by most viewers, is a violent racial conflict between white and black because, in modern racial terms, ‘black’ is any skin colour from light brown to dark black.
Gibson’s PASSION movie is an absolute WHITEWASH in terms of both colour and accuracy, but this is no mistake. It’s an attempt to re-write history in order to make it fit the current agenda of the “powers that be.”
Gibson’s controllers have done an excellent job in promoting their agenda, right down to having nearly everyone believe that this movie is “accurate.”
Author
