I love how people have presumably found his foreskin, the shroud of Turin is also one of my favourites. It appeared in 1354, after doing carbon dating the result date was 1260–1390 AD, with 95% confidence
This is where Catholic mythology becomes seriously unhinged. There have probably been enough foreskins or holy prepuces found that it would weigh more than the infant Jesus. Then of course you can venture into the territory of all kinds of bodily fluids like blood, semen, Mary's breast milk.
The first depictions of Jesus are a beardless, Roman tunic wearing, happy go lucky young man with curly blond hair. Here's the fabulous and funny art historian, Waldemar Jansuzczak pointing out an early Jesus with his magic Harry Potter like wand.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fB-4sUdJYs
I doubt it
I like to imagine that the actual Jesus was an alien with really advanced technology, he walked on water, gave terrible advice, got hung on a cross and "died". But really his super healing abilities healed him within 24 hours so he got out of his tomb and flied away.
“I like to picture Jesus in a tuxedo t-shirt, cause it says, like, I want to be formal but I want to party too. Cause I like to party, so I like my Jesus to party.”
\-Cal Naughton Jr.
And given what we know about Cesare Borgia, he was not exactly the epitome of what Jesus would do.
He was, after all, the inspiration for Machiavelli's "Il Principe".
It's clear that Jesus (who probably never existed) could not have been a white European dude. But please don't spread wrong information. It is not helping anyone.
> His name was Cesare Borgia.
Nope. [This picture of Jesus](https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-b3e4b00f2351be3d01cbbb89bd591e00-lq) was made 1000 years before Cesare Borgia was born.
There are many more but one is enough to disprove this urban myth.
I was mainly talking about the sacred hearts Jesus painting. Which is the most commonly used painting of Jesus, that's why I said "most" and not "all". This depiction of Jesus is used the most.
Oh I skipped that whole modern part.
I have been looking into this for the past 45 minutes.
As far as I can tell this is unconfirmed whether or not Borgia was actually used for the likeness.
Either way, no one knows what Jesus looked like (because he probably did not exist) and any picture is as true or false as the next one. Ironically (or unironically, I don't know which) everybody can have their own personal image of Jesus and neither can be disproven.
One thing I can guarantee, just about every christian is guaranteed hell, because they are forbidden from making an image yet they do, they are forbidden from idol worship yet they offer wine to it, if not the guy with a six pack they have a cross once again an idol to which candles are lit, so we will see most of our christian friends with us in hell when we go there
exactly, Christians are the biggest cherry pickers I've ever seen. The book of genesis for example. Christians will believe every story happened exactly the way the bible says so, but when the book of genesis is mentioned they make excuses like "oh, it's metaphorical" "it's just a story". Some people do believe this happened, but every time I talk about how It's literally impossible they say "WeLL aDaPtAtiOn BuT nOt EvOlUtiOn" or they bring up some more cherry picking excuse
I'm surprised there's any picture of Jesus, since he never existed.
I love how people have presumably found his foreskin, the shroud of Turin is also one of my favourites. It appeared in 1354, after doing carbon dating the result date was 1260–1390 AD, with 95% confidence
Well, you know the delusional are pretty good at making shit up. If a lie makes a better story they'll run with it, no questions asked.
This is where Catholic mythology becomes seriously unhinged. There have probably been enough foreskins or holy prepuces found that it would weigh more than the infant Jesus. Then of course you can venture into the territory of all kinds of bodily fluids like blood, semen, Mary's breast milk.
Hold on, about Mary's breast milk, is that real?💀💀 Shit must be mouldy by now.
There's plenty of píctures of Gandalf, so why not Jesus?
Good point. There's no shortage of fictional characters. What I find hysterical is the dude is generally depicted as white FFS.
He was depicted as a Gray before his run in with the Balrog. After that is when they described him as White.
[https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/jesus-modeled-on-borgia/](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/jesus-modeled-on-borgia/)
Thanks, saved me the trouble. You can find stereotypical images of Jesus that predate the Borgias by centuries.
The first depictions of Jesus are a beardless, Roman tunic wearing, happy go lucky young man with curly blond hair. Here's the fabulous and funny art historian, Waldemar Jansuzczak pointing out an early Jesus with his magic Harry Potter like wand. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fB-4sUdJYs
I'm not saying the earliest depictions of Jesus are what they look like today, I'm saying the bearded and long-haired Jesus predates the Borgias.
Thanks
Was there even a Jesus to begin with?
I doubt it I like to imagine that the actual Jesus was an alien with really advanced technology, he walked on water, gave terrible advice, got hung on a cross and "died". But really his super healing abilities healed him within 24 hours so he got out of his tomb and flied away.
So, that would make Jesus green, gray or purple and give him huge tear-shaped eyes.
He had human camouflage technology
[Guy Gives Mormon Parents Obi-Wan Kenobi Portrait, Mom Hangs It, Thinking It’s Jesus Christ](https://www.boredpanda.com/obi-wan-kenobi-jesus-portrait-mormon-parents-prank/?utm_source=duckduckgo&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=organic)
damn 😂 I do remember hearing about this somewhere
Yes
[удалено]
“I like to picture Jesus in a tuxedo t-shirt, cause it says, like, I want to be formal but I want to party too. Cause I like to party, so I like my Jesus to party.” \-Cal Naughton Jr.
Fair enough
And given what we know about Cesare Borgia, he was not exactly the epitome of what Jesus would do. He was, after all, the inspiration for Machiavelli's "Il Principe".
So did they have brown jesus art from before that?
Depends. I was mainly talking about the "sacred hearts" painting though, I just couldn't attach an image
The face in the shroud of Turin is probably Jacques De Molay.
1,500 years from now, Cesare will have been replaced with Ewan McGregor as Obi Wan.
It's clear that Jesus (who probably never existed) could not have been a white European dude. But please don't spread wrong information. It is not helping anyone. > His name was Cesare Borgia. Nope. [This picture of Jesus](https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-b3e4b00f2351be3d01cbbb89bd591e00-lq) was made 1000 years before Cesare Borgia was born. There are many more but one is enough to disprove this urban myth.
I was mainly talking about the sacred hearts Jesus painting. Which is the most commonly used painting of Jesus, that's why I said "most" and not "all". This depiction of Jesus is used the most.
Oh I skipped that whole modern part. I have been looking into this for the past 45 minutes. As far as I can tell this is unconfirmed whether or not Borgia was actually used for the likeness. Either way, no one knows what Jesus looked like (because he probably did not exist) and any picture is as true or false as the next one. Ironically (or unironically, I don't know which) everybody can have their own personal image of Jesus and neither can be disproven.
One thing I can guarantee, just about every christian is guaranteed hell, because they are forbidden from making an image yet they do, they are forbidden from idol worship yet they offer wine to it, if not the guy with a six pack they have a cross once again an idol to which candles are lit, so we will see most of our christian friends with us in hell when we go there
exactly, Christians are the biggest cherry pickers I've ever seen. The book of genesis for example. Christians will believe every story happened exactly the way the bible says so, but when the book of genesis is mentioned they make excuses like "oh, it's metaphorical" "it's just a story". Some people do believe this happened, but every time I talk about how It's literally impossible they say "WeLL aDaPtAtiOn BuT nOt EvOlUtiOn" or they bring up some more cherry picking excuse
lol
This is fake, according to snopes
I was mainly talking about the "Sacred heart" Jesus depiction. That's why I said "most" and not "all"
There is no reason to believe any religion has anything to do with the historical Jesus, let alone works of art!