Here's another point, Nazareth doesn't even seem to have existed during the time of Jesus. What's more, it doesn't even seem to be the case that he was from Nazareth. He wasn't called "Jesus of Nazareth" in the Bible, but "Jesus the Nazorean" and you can just look up the words in the text. Nazorean means something like a guru in modern contexts, it doesn't mean a particular place. — Dharmi
Asian Man for their translation of the Bible to Japanese: — Gus Lamarch
We even have "Ethiopian Jesus": — Gus Lamarch
Indeed, there are some Christian denominations and historians who, because they know of this curiosity, change his name from "Jesus of Nazareth" to "Jesus of Galilee". — Gus Lamarch
Ok, this was so painful to see... I never seen it until to day. With your images it is proven that clearly church used the image of Jesus just for spread their power around the globe. When such an image is so distorted for centuries it makes so difficult to believe in. It is impossible having all the ethnics at the same time, does not matter the perfect human theory that Church is used to use in this debates. — javi2541997
This also happens with Judas as a traitor of Jesus. What about this person? Has he even existed? Just another metaphor from the church using a person model? — javi2541997
There's a Japanese/Chinese (East Asian, don't know which particularly) Jesus, a Syrian Jesus, an Egyptian Jesus, yes an Ethiopian one. — Dharmi
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.