Black Spirituality Religion : What Did Jesus Or any Biblical Character Really Look Like?

[SwagII]

If the Ice continues to melt they very well find human flesh inside the belly of a dinosaur.....
humanity is much older than both western science and christian theology suggesst.

Is This a Dinosaur? What Do You Say?​

Ancient Aliens: Dinosaur Secrets Revealed in Ica Stones (Season 4)​

Humans did not run with dinosaurs... stop being fooled into thinking so! Do some better reliable research. I thought you knew... better.

 

[frankster]

This invisible God (with no description) does not exist in this universe period... nothing stated in any thread says or makes one believe differently! You cannot simply "Belief" something into existence! you have addressed nothing, but quoted scripts, etc. And the writings of who as you have accepted these beliefs of the fearful ancestors, etc. Nobody/human on this planet can show existence of this God Creator of the universe you so revere, etc. There is no such thing as a God, etc. But there is a such word as Belief, etc. Its all-mind creation, etc. embedded belief, etc. Man created this deity as man have with all other deities, etc. Rome, Egypt, etc., & Africa's tribes had many of them, etc. That's why man is predominate in all Religions, after all... Man created them all.

Already responded to the above

Humans did not run with dinosaurs... stop being fooled into thinking so! Do some better reliable research. I thought you knew... better.

No ... I do not know better...
That is my evidence that humans most likely run with the dinosaurs.....
do you have anything to support your statements?

 

[SwagII]

Already responded to the above


No ... I do not know better...
That is my evidence that humans most likely run with the dinosaurs.....
do you have anything to support your statements?

Try and do better...

 

[frankster]

Try and do better...

You have done....nothing

 

[IPXninja]

Religion's description of biblical events is flawed, etc. How can there be no accurate description of any of the Biblical era's principal characters? Why isn't there an accurate description of Jesus, his mother Mary, and his stepfather since the bible says Joseph isn't his biological father, etc. God did it! Just think now, Why? "There is no accurate description of any of these characters." One would think that at least his believers would be able to describe Jesus! Something just isn't right!

Like I said before... it's not like you don't have a reasonable argument. You do. But 2 things can be true at the same time. So at the same time that some biblical figures may have been allegorical and may OR may not have existed as we know them... does that mean then that we should doubt them because there isn't a picture or description somewhere? No.

When reading fiction it is understandably reasonable to include some kind of description as the writer is trying to convey how THEY see this character. And so you're getting their description along with whatever details you create from your own imagination. When the subject of a story is non-fiction there may be a picture to go with the story or not. In the absence of a photo maybe there is some description of important features that might distinguish the person in some way that's relevant. But often features are only included based on relevance.

For example... Jacob's "coat of many colors" has a description that is relevant to the story but not so descriptive that you know exactly what it looked like. The writer's objective is not to try and prove to you that the coat existed, but how it relates to the story. The problem with your approach is that you're attempting to disqualify writers for not doing the thing that you expect as a reader who wants proof of existence rather than a reader who is seeking knowledge or wisdom. And so you're not looking at how other stories at the time were written to see if this was normal behavior or not. You're judging them based on more ideal 24th-century standards of journalistic integrity. And the problem is... you're just not going to find that. We have progressed in these areas. 200 years ago writers could freely quote each other without citing sources.

So you have to think about who the writer was and what their purpose and intent was at the time. A description doesn't mean the person is real. Sci-fi characters often have detailed descriptions. So then that means nothing. How many people cared about what Yeshua looked like if it was a story being told to his own (ethnic) people?

If you tell a story involving a friend who is also black... do you tell another black person that the friend is black? How much do you describe the friend? You probably don't describe them unless the feature of the description is relevant to the story. Same is true here. No one is really doubting your friend exists so you don't feel the burden of having to pre-emptively defend that. You don't be like "my friend, JB, who is tall, dark-skinned, with dreads". So think about how YOU tell stories. THEN you can apply the same type of critiques to other people and how they describe situations and events, not necessarily thinking it's important for everyone to know exactly what someone looks like. And unless the feature isn't a common or shared feature, what's the point in specifying? Just try to think about it from this perspective.