Italian scientist reproduces Shroud of Turin

Does anyone remember seeing pictures of Jesus that looked anything like this?

picture.php


But this is closer to reality than the tall, fair-skinned, blue eyed man with long flowing hair that we commonly see.
Yes, on the History Channel. That was a cool program.

I don't see why people are so bent on trying to claim Jesus as part of their "race." We all came from the same place. If you use Adam and Eve or evolution Mankind has a common ancestor for all races.
 
Yet Joseph's lineage can be traced back many generations, and ethnic mixing with Jews at that time in history was a rarity. I suspect that Jesus looked pretty similar to other Jews of that period: dark curly hair, brown eyes, olive complexion.

lol, SM....even the Jews weren't the Jews before Abraham.....how many ethnicities were mixed up in the blood of the inhabitants of Ur before Abraham was even born.....the Bible gives us no information regarding how many generations existed between Noah and Abraham or between Adam and Noah, it could have been thousands..........Ethiopian traders headed to India, Chinese traders headed to Egypt.....Caucasians are named after a mountain range only a few hundred miles north of Samaria.....they all contributed to the genetic mix.....what is the ethnic "purity" of the Middle eastern "race".....

besides all that, logic tells us that genetic change is more distinguished the farther you get from the origin.....Norsemen and Mongols and Tutus became more estranged from the ethnic center as the distance from the geographical center increased because in the more remote areas there was less "remixing" of the gene pool...it is in places like the Middle East where you are most likely to find the ethnic starting point.....
 
Last edited:
I don't see why people are so bent on trying to claim Jesus as part of their "race."

quite frankly, the only people I have ever seen making an issue of Jesus' race are unbelievers.....the largest Christian church in the world is in Korea....the nation with the highest number of Christians as a percentage of population is Nigeria....the continent with the most Christians is South America.....the largest Protestant denomination in the US is predominantly black.......Christianity is a non-racial religion......
 
The fact that you don't understand it damn near gurantees my correctness.

You sir are the classic example of an unlearned American. If you didn't see it on TV, it can't be true.

You didn't see this on TV .. so it can't be true ..

tut8.jpg


This goes against all your programming ..

Egyp095_150pixBest_copy.jpg

When visiting Egypt today, this is what we see of The Sphinx of Giza.

Sphinx_drawing_best_cropped.jpg

This is what Vivant Denon saw in 1798 before the Sphinx was defaced.

QUICK dummy .. who built the Sphinx of Giza.

Whatever you do, don't read this article
The Black Pharaohs
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/02/black-pharaohs/robert-draper-text/1

Don't read this one either dummy
Nubia's Black Pharaohs
http://discovermagazine.com/2005/dec/nubia-black-pharaohs

I know, I know .. National Geographic and Discovery only have scientists and archaeologists .. no actors .. can't be true, eh?

I could go on for days, but ye of limited intelligence does not possess the capacity to understand it.

Oh, by the way .. your mother, grandpappy, and YOU are all of African descent.

I know .. your head is exploding.

:0)

Yeah, you being the racist you are would look to anything that might reinforce your longings for a great black race....
In reality, what your really reading about is the greatness of the ancient Africans....

Tunisians, Libyans, Egyptians, Moroccans, etc.....all being Africans, as African as the folks in the Congo......though some not being quite as "black looking" maybe as you would like....
Are Nubia's Black Pharaohs physical features 'black' enough for you?

And we all know that Africa is believed to be "the cradle of man" so to speak....that being the place of the discovery of mans earliest remains...that could change with the next new discovery....no matter.

You really believe that the picture you posted from 1798 was before the Sphinx was defaced? If so, your probably wrong....
The Egyptian Arab historian al-Maqrīzī, writing in the fifteenth century CE, attributes the destruction of the nose to iconoclasm by Muhammad Sa'im al-Dahr, a Sufi Muslim fanatic from the khanqah of Sa'id al-Su'ada. In 1378 CE........long, long before 1798...

1798 being when Napoleon's soldiers were thought to have blasted the nose off....obviously wrong also.....

But hey....you go right ahead an cherry pick all the history you want to make you feel good, its understandable.....but don't bring to us as fact.

 
????...isn't it the understanding of secular liberals that we originally populated the world from two single cell creatures?......what's so hard about doing it with 8 people?....seems like a considerable head start to me......

In spite of our occasional spats, I believe you to be a person of intelligence .. just chained to a failed ideology. I believe that failed ideology stands in your way of understanding on this issue as well brother. Surely the science in you tells you that it took billions of years for life to develop as we see it today.

Irrespective of the "regional flood" argument, God, not a regional God but the God of everything said, "Everything that is on the earth shall die."

Without getting mired in the argument of whether the world would repopulate with humans in 4,500 years .. who put the animals back where they belonged? Who put the humans back?

Surely the science in your was gnashing its teeth when you asked that question .. no disrespect intended brother.

Close attention to the fantastic and absolutely amazing story of the human journey answers all questions about God.
 
Yeah, you being the racist you are would look to anything that might reinforce your longings for a great black race....
In reality, what your really reading about is the greatness of the ancient Africans....

Tunisians, Libyans, Egyptians, Moroccans, etc.....all being Africans, as African as the folks in the Congo......though some not being quite as "black looking" maybe as you would like....
Are Nubia's Black Pharaohs physical features 'black' enough for you?

And we all know that Africa is believed to be "the cradle of man" so to speak....that being the place of the discovery of mans earliest remains...that could change with the next new discovery....no matter.

You really believe that the picture you posted from 1798 was before the Sphinx was defaced? If so, your probably wrong....
The Egyptian Arab historian al-Maqrīzī, writing in the fifteenth century CE, attributes the destruction of the nose to iconoclasm by Muhammad Sa'im al-Dahr, a Sufi Muslim fanatic from the khanqah of Sa'id al-Su'ada. In 1378 CE........long, long before 1798...

1798 being when Napoleon's soldiers were thought to have blasted the nose off....obviously wrong also.....

But hey....you go right ahead an cherry pick all the history you want to make you feel good, its understandable.....but don't bring to us as fact.


:lmao:
 
I was actually quite surprised by how European Tut looked. That royal overbite was quite a distinguishing feature.
 
Yes, on the History Channel. That was a cool program.

I don't see why people are so bent on trying to claim Jesus as part of their "race." We all came from the same place. If you use Adam and Eve or evolution Mankind has a common ancestor for all races.

The answer to your question is as obvious as the nose on your face brother.

You're right, we all the same people .. it's why I call you brother.

But surely .. my brother .. you already know the answer to your question.

I'm just trying to inject some truth that doesn't get told .. never gets told.

The Moors, who were black, civilized europe. For the unlearned their heads are exploding. They don't even know who the Moors were .. but if they were black, they could not have civilized europe.

The reason that story doesn't get told to Americans is the same reason why Jesus looks like a Montanta biker ... HERE.
 
The answer to your question is as obvious as the nose on your face brother.

You're right, we all the same people .. it's why I call you brother.

But surely .. my brother .. you already know the answer to your question.

I'm just trying to inject some truth that doesn't get told .. never gets told.

The Moors, who were black, civilized europe. For the unlearned their heads are exploding. They don't even know who the Moors were .. but if they were black, they could not have civilized europe.

The reason that story doesn't get told to Americans is the same reason why Jesus looks like a Montanta biker ... HERE.
Jesus was Native American, because God obviously is too.

;)
 
The answer to your question is as obvious as the nose on your face brother.

You're right, we all the same people .. it's why I call you brother.

But surely .. my brother .. you already know the answer to your question.

I'm just trying to inject some truth that doesn't get told .. never gets told.

The Moors, who were black, civilized europe. For the unlearned their heads are exploding. They don't even know who the Moors were .. but if they were black, they could not have civilized europe.

The reason that story doesn't get told to Americans is the same reason why Jesus looks like a Montanta biker ... HERE.

Moors, black ? Possible but improbable..Brown or dark skinned about covers it....African ? Just about positively...

Civilized europe? Hardly....Southern Portugal and Spain are hardly all of "Europe" ...

Jesus looks like a Montana biker ? Cute line, but idiotic....
99.99% of the world recognizes Jesus as a JEW....and their perception of a Jew then, is just about the same as their perception of a Jew now or more probably like todays Arab....So yeah...cute, but idiotic .....
 
Last edited:
Surely the science in you tells you that it took billions of years for life to develop as we see it today.

not at all.....the science within me is also chained to my ideology....the only reason seculars believe it takes billions of years is that they have to account for the failures of random chance.....I expect that an intelligent designer, having created the reproductive process, has the power to twitch the necessary DNA exactly the way she wants it, thus producing the desired results in a single generation....nothing contradictory to science....merely pulled in the necessary direction by the weight of my chains.....

Irrespective of the "regional flood" argument, God, not a regional God but the God of everything said, "Everything that is on the earth shall die."

Without getting mired in the argument of whether the world would repopulate with humans in 4,500 years .. who put the animals back where they belonged? Who put the humans back?
actually, he didn't say "Everything on the earth shall die", he said "Everything on the earth that I don't spare on an ark will die".....I expect that the same deity that put the animals and people where he wanted them the first time, put them back where he wanted them the second time....
 
Moors, black ? Possible but improbable..Brown or dark skinned about covers it....African ? Just about positively...

Civilized europe? Hardly....Southern Portugal and Spain are hardly all of "Europe" ...

Jesus looks like a Montana biker ? Cute line, but idiotic....
99.99% of the world recognizes Jesus as a JEW....and their perception of a Jew then, is just about the same as their perception of a Jew now or more probably like todays Arab....So yeah...cute, but idiotic .....

Here's a primer for your education:

http://cdn.optmd.com/V2/67072/11757...=www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0833942.html
 
No big deal...put your dicks back in your pants and curb your imaginations.....

The Black Madonnas are generally found in Catholic areas. The statues are mostly wooden but occasionally stone, often painted and up to 75 cm tall, generally dating from between the 11th and 15th centuries. They fall into two main groups: free-standing upright figures and seated figures on a throne. The pictures are usually icons which are Byzantine in style, often made in 13th or 14th century Italy. Their faces tend to have recognizably European features.

Most theologians and historians believe that most examples of dark coloring can be accounted for by the natural color of the wood used or by changes in color over time. They may add that a pale alabaster face was a post-medieval development. A counter-argument points to the apparently bright colors of the clothing on some images with painted black face and hands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Madonna

Ahhh, but wikipedia non-withstanding, there are more scholarly works on the subject that don't exactly shore up your assertions and beliefs:

http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ahr/107.5/ah0502001412.html
 
I was actually quite surprised by how European Tut looked. That royal overbite was quite a distinguishing feature.

He looks like a Somalian.

There are many Somalians in Atlanta and the men look just like Tut.

The women are incredibly beautiful.
 
From the OP link: "The Catholic Church does not claim the Shroud is authentic nor that it is a matter of faith, but says it should be a powerful reminder of Christ's passion."

Or it could be used as a reminder that religious leaders will use whatever is at their disposal to manipulate and control the masses.
 
Let me transalate....:lmao: = I've been PWNed

NOPE dummy .. I can translate my own words better than you .. and the translation is that you are a really dumb person who knows nothing of the world and your pitiful posts are nothing BUT laughable.

You know nothing of the Moors .. only that if they were black, they couldn't have accomplished anything. You know nothing of the history of Spain, europe, or even your own country. You know nothing of Kemetic knowledge.

Face it .. you're a fucking moron.

What was King Tut's original name?
King Tut's original name was Tutu Ankoma (Asante name--Akan People)

Who was his father?
Akhenaten

What did his father look like?
Akhenaten.jpg

PharoAkenaten.gif


Who was his grandmother and what did she look like?
Tiye.gif

Queen Tiye - King Tut's Grandmother
tiyi2.jpg


Moors not black?

Moors and Arabs

When the Romans entered West Africa in 46 B.C., they saw Africans and called them Maures, from the Greek adjective Mauros, meaning dark or black. It is from Mauros and the Latin term Marues that the word Moor is derived. Since the inhabitants of North Africa were black, the Romans and later the Europeans called them Moors. It is no coincidence that the land inhabited by the Moors was called Mauritania and Morocco, meaning "Land of the Blacks."

In the beginning of the seventh century, the Arab prophet, Muhammad, began to preach the word of Islam. Consumed with religious fervor, the Arabs sought to spread Islam and conquer the world. By 708, the Arabs had overrun North Africa. Consequently, Moors in large numbers accepted Arabic as the national language and converted to their conqueror's religion, Islam. Interestingly, hundreds of years later, Africans who had been enslaved by Europeans would again convert to their conqueror's religion, Christianity.

After the fall of the Roman Empire (fifth century), Spain was held by a barbaric white tribe, the Visigoths. Though they were Christians, their brand of Christianity was cruel and unjust. For this reason, Spain's Jews, serfs, and slaves looked favorably upon the arrival of a new civilization in which they would be able to live free of persecution.

Tarik, a great African chief, was given the rank of general in the Arab army and sent to raid Spain. On April 30, 711, Tarik landed on the Spanish Coast with 7,000 troops. His troops consisted of 300 Arabs and 6,700 native Africans (Moors). An ancient source, Ibn Husayn (ca. 950, recorded that these troops were "Sudanese", an Arabic word for Black people.

The Moors were unstoppable, and Visigothic Spain ceased to be. The few resisting Visigoths fled to the caves of the Cantabrian Mountains. Later in the century, the cave dwellers would venture out of the Cantabrian Mountains and reclaim parts of northern Spain.

The Moors of Africa were the real conquerors. When the Arabs arrived, the hardest part of the job had been done. Instead of treating the Moors fairly, the Arab chiefs assigned themselves the most fertile regions. The dissatisfied Moors were not long in coming to blows with the Arabs. (The History of Spain by Louis Bertrand and Sir Charles Petrie - published by Eyre & Spottiswood, London, 1945, page 36). Ultimately, the Moors acquired two-thirds of the peninsula, which they named Al-Andulus.

Al -Andulus was obliged to pay tribute to the Arab Caliph (King) of Damascus. As Al-Andulus acquired its own identity, its bond with the Caliph began to weaken. In 756, Al-Andulus proclaimed itself an independent state. Thus, its only links to the Arabs would be the Islamic faith and the Arabic language.

The Moorish architectural remains in Cordoba, Seville, and Granada prove conclusively that these cities were more prosperous and artistically more brilliant than any Christian cities in Europe at the time. The Moors of Al-Andulus held the torch of leaning and civilization when the rest of Europe was plunged in barbaric ignorance.

If Moorish Spain had been an accomplishment of the Arabs it would have been called Arab or Arabic Spain. Instead it bears the name of its creators, the Moors, i.e., Moorish Spain. Moorish culture was black in origin, bright in Achievement, and powerful in its influence on the rest of Europe.
http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/moors_arabs.html

Please come again you ignorant bastard.

Gives me the opportunity to speak history .. and make your head explod.

:0)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top