were Jesus, his mother, and those around him, white or black.

If you look at the paintings and depictions in European museums, you will see Jesus as a fair-skinned, handsome man with long blonde hair, blue eyes, and a tall height.

That’s the typical physical appearance of any European man in a bid to prove that Jesus was a white man from Europe.

But interestingly, the Bible does not explain Jesus’s physical appearance.

Then how come Europeans have depicted a Jesus of their own choosing? How can we know what Jesus, his mother, and his people looked like? Well, that’s when we have to heed toward the Russian vaults holding 15th and 16th century religious paintings.

These hidden paintings are now being presented before the world, raising questions about how Europeans depicted Jesus.

Because Russia did not actively participate in Europe’s propaganda of whitewash religious paintings, the depictions we see in Russia are one of their kind, preserving reality.

So what do these paintings suggest? Let’s find out.

thumbnail

So how has Europe depicted Jesus? Until now, the world has been confused about how Jesus looked.

Even though Europe has tried hard to whitewash the Bible and religious paintings, people still doubted Jesus appearance, especially because he was a Jew born in Israel where people were of black complexion.

Jesus blackness, much like his Jewish heritage, signifies his connection to a specific community.

This racial dimension stems from Christianity’s rejection of Jewish identity.

The notion of whiteness portraying superiority based on skin color and cultural background ignores the essential Christian distinction between Jews and non-Jews.

It fails to recognize that this division originally established by God but corrupted by sin into conflict and separation has been resolved through the Jewish Messiah Jesus on the cross.

Therefore, in Christ, all other divisions among people, whether based on geography, language, social class, status, nationality, ability, and more, should not serve as grounds for discord or hostility.

In Christ, all are united.

Thus, the racial divide between black and white directly contradicts the essence of Christ and his universal mission.

Jesus’s blackness holds historical significance because like his Jewish identity, it situated him in a specific time and place as do his followers.

To truly understand Jesus, we must acknowledge the historical context in which he lived and died.

As Carl Bar pointed out, including Pilate’s name in the creed signifies that Jesus suffering occurred not in some distant realm, but in our tangible earthly reality.

Consequently, we must not avoid the complexities of the lives and bodies with whom Jesus identified.

As Paul teaches, each member of Christ’s body brings unique gifts and contributions.

If Jesus aligned himself with specific people distinguished by particular traits, then the identities of those people profoundly influence our understanding of him.

To deny Jesus’ blackness risks falling into the heresy of docatism, which suggests that Jesus only appeared to possess a physical body, an idea incompatible with his divine nature.

Although the incarnation of the word in Jesus, a Jewish man, was a unique event, his resurrection and exaltation enabled his presence to transcend time and culture, appearing in various cultural forms and human bodies.

For centuries, the prevailing depiction of Jesus Christ, especially in Western societies, has been that of a bearded, fair-skinned man with long, wavy, light brown or blonde hair and often blue eyes.

However, the Bible does not describe Jesus physically, and evidence suggests that he likely had a marketkedly different appearance from the traditional portrayal.

The Bible offers scant clues about Jesus’ physical appearance, with our understanding primarily drawn from the first four books of the New Testament.

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

According to these gospels, Jesus was a Jewish man born in Bethlehem and raised in Nazareth, Galilee, formerly Palestine, now northern Israel, during the first century.

While the Bible indicates that Jesus commenced his ministry at around 30 years old, little else is mentioned about his physical characteristics except that he did not possess any outstanding features.

Isaiah 53:2 says that the Messiah didn’t have any striking beauty or impressive appearance that would catch people’s attention.

This suggests that Jesus probably didn’t stand out physically.

Another mention is in Revelation 1:14:15 where John has a vision of Jesus.

It describes his hair as white like wool, his eyes as fiery, his feet as glowing bronze, and his voice as powerful like rushing waters.

Even though the depiction is not explicit, it clearly leans toward black features and physical traits.

The historical Jesus likely had brown eyes and skin, which were common among other first century Jews from Galilee, a region in biblical Israel.

However, there’s no definitive record of Jesus’s appearance since no images of him from his lifetime have been found.

While the Old Testament describes King Saul and David as tall and handsome, there’s little mention of Jesus’s physical attributes in either the Old or New Testaments.

Additionally, when Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane before his crucifixion, Judas Escariat had to point him out among the disciples to his soldiers, suggesting they looked similar.

However, the Bible doesn’t explain their resemblance or racial features.

Contemplating these events raises questions about whether certain truths were deliberately left out of the Bible to hide realities or if the gospel writers overlook these details.

In this period of reflection on society’s history of racism and the quest for truth, the portrayal of Jesus as a white European man has come under renewed scrutiny.

A key factor driving this scrutiny is a recent development from Russia.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has attracted attention by moving one of Russia’s holiest icons from a museum to a Moscow cathedral.

This has allowed the world to see religious paintings that nobody saw before, completely changing how we think about Jesus, his mother, and his people.

The icon Andre Rublev’s Trinity was relocated from Moscow’s Treakov Gallery to the Russian Orthodox Church for a year.

Depicting the Oak of Mamry, where three angels visited Abraham in the book of Genesis, the icon predominantly showcases black icons dating back to the 14th century collected from private collections across Russia.

These rare and impressive artworks, many of which were lost during the Soviet era, have captivated audiences with their beauty and significance, providing a profound visual experience.

But what are these Russian icons and what do they contain? The Russian icons we are talking about are religious paintings painted in the 14th and 15th centuries.

The adoption and crafting of icons began in Kievan Roose after its conversion to Orthodox Christianity in 988 AD.

Initially, these icons closely adhered to the patterns and models revered in Byzantine art, which originated from Constantinople.

However, over time, the Russians expanded the diversity of icon types and styles far beyond those found elsewhere in the Orthodox world.

Before the 17th century, Russia’s religious art lacked the distinct innovative touch seen in Western European traditions.

However, by the 17th century, Russian icon painting underwent a significant transformation.

Heavily influenced by religious artworks and engravings from Protestant and Catholic Europe.

Changes in lurggical practices initiated by patriarch Nikon in the mid-7th century led to a schism within the Russian Orthodox Church.

While traditionalists known as the old ritualists or old believers adhered to the stylized depiction of icons, the state church adapted its approach.

Henceforth, icons were painted in the traditional stylized and non-realistic manner and in a blend of Russian stylization and Western European realism, often resembling Catholic religious art of the era.

Although these types of icons are prevalent in Russian Orthodox churches, they can also be found in various rights of the Catholic Church.

Russian icons typically crafted from wood vary in size with some being small while others found in churches and monasteries are considerably larger.

Additionally, some Russian icons were made from copper.

Many Russian households prominently display icons on walls in a designated corner known as the red or beautiful corner symbolizing their devoutness.

In Russian terminology, icons are often described as written, reflecting the dual meaning of the word pisat in Russian, signifying both painting and ridding.

Icon are regarded as the gospel depicted in paint and meticulous attention is given to ensure faithful and accurate representation.

Some of the most revered icons considered miraculous are linked to specific towns such as the Vladimir, Smolinsk, Kazan, and Chentoa.

images of the Virgin Mary referred to as the Theotocos by Orthodox Christians.

Andre Rublev, a leading Russian icon painter, was canonized and officially recognized as a saint by the Moscow patriarch in 1988.

His most renowned work is the Old Testament Trinity.

Here’s a reminder to please like and share the video and subscribe to our channel to watch more videos on black culture, history, civilization, and identity.

Let’s continue now.

Russians frequently commissioned icons for personal use, often incorporating figures of specific saints associated with themselves or their relatives.

Icons were commonly adorned with metal covers fashioned from guilt or silvered metal, sometimes adorned with enamel or filigree work or set with artificial, semi-precious or precious stones and pearls.

Pairs of icons featuring Jesus and Mary were popular wedding gifts for newlywed couples.

However, people at that time didn’t know they were creating history.

These icons were to be preserved and stored in safe vaults to be revealed in recent years, changing how the world thinks Jesus, his mother, and his people looked.

Icons depicting the Virgin Mary are more prevalent in Russian iconography and religious observance than those of any other figure.

Marian icons often replicate images believed to be miraculous, of which there are numerous.

While most Marian icons depict her with the infant Jesus, some omit the child.

However, all of them have one similarity.

They show Jesus, his mother, and the people around them as black.

Later, numerous Russian icons were either destroyed or sold abroad by agents of the Soviet government, although some were hidden to avoid destruction or smuggled out of the country.

Since the fall of communism, several icon painting studios have reopened, producing works in various styles for both domestic and international markets.

Additionally, many older icons that were previously concealed have resurfaced or been repatriated from overseas.

The Russian icons that have surfaced now are only intact because of the preservation efforts of museums, without which they would have vanished.

Once plentiful, their numbers have dwindled to just 50,000.

The revelation of these icons serves as a potent testament to the enduring power of truth.

Their authenticity prompts us to re-evaluate our historical understanding, especially regarding the portrayal of black figures.

While these figures may have been hidden over the centuries, their rediscovery now illuminates previously untold stories, challenging entrenched beliefs and inspiring a more inclusive view of history.

Currently, the Castell Santangelo in Rome hosts an exhibition of 40 Russian icons, marking their first ever display outside Russia.

These pieces were hidden after the October Revolution of 1917 to protect them from anti-religious acts.

It’s the first time such a significant collection of Russian icons has been exhibited in Italy.

Additionally, a dozen previously unseen icons are now on public display for the first time.

Usually made of wood, icons depict saints or sacred subjects.

Within the orthodox tradition, they are revered as divine inspirations interpreted by artists guided by divine inspiration.

Their deep symbolism embodies the essence of an econ as a connection to another world.

The wood symbolizes the holy cross with its golden stage representing divine light while the attached cloth evokes the shroud that covered Christ’s body.

It can be said that the Russian icons hold immense significance in Russia, much like the pyramids of Egypt or the temples of Greece.

The exhibition spans from the 15th to the early 20th century, providing a rare glimpse into Russia’s religious culture through its art.

Amid ongoing global discussions, the revelation of these black biblical icons has sparked significant interest.

Some argue that the darkening of the icons over time is a result of aging, while others assert that the depiction of blackness in the icons is not simply due to age, but rather an accurate representation of the skin tone of the depicted individuals.

Various experts insist that the blackness in the icons faithfully mirrors the skin color of the individuals portrayed as they were of African descent.

They raised the question of why their clothing did not also change to black in these artworks if age were the sole factor.

According to some accounts, after the destruction of the Jewish nation by Titus, millions of Jews fled to Africa and settled in West Africa, where they eventually became enslaved.

It is argued that hostility towards black people is not incidental, but rather stems from the disobedience of the Israelites to God’s commandments as described in the book of Deuteronomy.

The intermingling of the descendants of Shem and Ham, both believed to be blackskinned, is seen as the root cause of this hostility, with Shem being punished for his disobedience.

Another perspective suggests that black people were the original figures depicted in the Bible, but their portrayal was later altered to depict them as white in America.

However, it is believed that Russians have preserved the authentic depiction of history.

But why does only Russia have religious paintings where Jesus and his people are depicted as black? Well, the answer lies in Russian history.

The Mongol invasion and occupation of Russia known as the Golden Horde had significant effects on the region’s connections with the Byzantine Empire and the wider Christian world.

Beginning in the early 13th century, the Mongols led by Genghaskhan and his successors launched a series of milit.

This expansion brought them into contact with various civilizations including Russia in establishing the Golden Horde as a vassal state and imposing tribute on Russian princes.

The Mongol occupation had significant ramifications for Russia’s connections with the Byzantine Empire and the broader Christian world.

Before the invasion, Russia had close ties with Bzantium, particularly in religious matters, as the Eastern Slavic peoples had adopted Byzantine Christianity.

The Russian Orthodox Church regarded Constantinople, the capital of the Byzantine Empire, as its spiritual hub.

However, the Mongol invasion disrupted these ties with much of Russia under Mongol control, communication, and trade routes suffered, severing contact with Bzantium.

Moreover, the invasion strained the Russian Orthodox Church as the Mongols enforced their administrative structures, occasionally conflicting with the church’s authority.

It’s believed that before the invasion, both Russia and the Byzantine Empire had similar paintings.

However, after the invasion, the whitewashing of religious paintings had started in Europe, except for Russia that was destined to stay under Mongols rule for another 250 years.

That’s the reason why only Russia holds religious paintings where Jesus and his people have been depicted as black while the rest of Europe whitewashed the paintings.

So, was Jesus really black? Well, absolutely.

Jesus was black.

The evidence is strong.

The Bible describes him as having hair like wool and feet like bronze, indicating black and brown skin.

His biological father was absent, and he was raised by a non-biological father.

During his childhood, he sought refuge in Egypt.

He performed miracles such as turning water into wine.

Unfortunately, he was betrayed by a friend, unfairly arrested, and ultimately executed by the government on false charges because his teachings threatened the state.

But how does this prove he was black? Well, whatever he faced feels like a shared experience for all black people around the world.

Jesus unquestionably ranks among the most influential figures in history, and acknowledging his black identity is essential.

The European Church’s portrayal of Jesus as white represents a major act of intellectual theft.

Perpetuating white supremacy.

Embracing afroentrism and decentering whiteness is crucial.

It requires actively challenging white centric ideas and adopting a black centric perspective which empowers black individuals.

The theological importance of depicting Jesus as black is important.

Firstly, white American Christians may find it challenging to grasp the true significance of Christ’s crucifixion without recognizing the black experience in the United States.

This experience extends beyond specific events like lynchings, slavery, Jim Crow laws, segregation, and mass incarceration.

It includes four centuries of enduring secondass treatment, inhumane conditions, constant suspicion, condescension, and humiliation.

Understanding this history is vital for fully comprehending the gospel’s message which centers on the scandal of a crucified Messiah.

Ignoring or sideststepping this history obstructs a genuine understanding of the gospel’s essence.

Secondly, the presence of the black Christian community in America is significant.

Despite their faith being the same as those who enslaved and oppressed them, black Americans predominantly identify as believers.

The resilience, hope, and love exhibited by the black church embody Jesus teachings, forming bonds that make black Americans more than just neighbors or fellow citizens, but often our brothers and sisters in Christ.

Even Jesus teachings themselves provide a rationale for understanding his blackness.

In Matthew’s gospel, Jesus aligns himself with the marginalized and oppressed, stating that whatever is done to them is done to him.

This principle forms the basis of Christian teachings about Jesus and the marginalized, emphasising his solidarity with those who suffer.

Furthermore, this understanding permits the portrayal of Jesus as black in art.

Such depictions do not impose symbolism on black individuals or confine them to victimhood.

Instead, they arise from within the community as an expression of shared emotions, reflecting both communal sorrow and hope.

Presenting Jesus as black underscores the necessity of acknowledging the injustices inflicted on black individuals and rejects depictions that downplay this reality.

Jesus as a Jew is depicted as black because recognizing his identity is inseparable from acknowledging and addressing the injustices faced by black people.

Today, even if the whole of Europe has successfully illusioned itself that Jesus was white, reality cannot be altered.

The religious paintings in Russia serve as powerful evidence that until now Jesus, his mother, and his people were being portrayed wrongly.

Hiding Jesus complexion changed everything, making him only the savior of white people.

This did not quite fit in the picture.

However, if we now accept Jesus as black, everything starts to make sense.

Given that whatever black people endured was not much different than what Jesus had to suffer from.

Isn’t it true that Jesus, his mother, and his people were all black, not white? What do you think? Why did Europeans try showing Jesus a white man? In the comment section right below, share your thoughts on Jesus’s appearance and black Israelites.

Do you want to watch more videos like this one? If yes, subscribe to our channel and press the bell icon next to it.

We have decided to bring videos on something nobody talks about.

The black culture, civilization, history, and evidence about how glorious blacks have been.

Thanks for watching and until the next video, stay tuned.

Photos music.

[Music]