RageFuel Jesus disproves personality meme

[Akhnai]

If having a good personality actually makes you more attractive then Jesus Christ Himself,along with Gandhi,Alfred Nobel,and other philanthropists will have castles full of wet women trying to have sex with them.


But Jesus disprove this.Jesus Christ Word of God Himself was born as an ethnic incel and that is why the kikes and romans crucified Him instead of venerating Him.Does not matter how good His personality is.

(Jesus was born to represent the most opressed among us;it only makes sense that He was born as a poor jewish incel,the trifecta of the most opressed classes in the world)

Behold He that is the first celibate

 

[just_world_ogre]

If Jesus was represented like that, christianity would have never existed.

 

[Mahlo]

Uh bro what are you talking about? This is jesus. My savior isn't some ugly ethnic guy lol.

 

[Akhnai]

View attachment 181246

Uh bro what are you talking about? This is jesus. My savior isn't some ugly ethnic guy lol.

That is Chadwashing of history done by heathens

 

[Iwanttolive]

If he was presented like that, Christianity would have become a weird cult following that has its own Netflix documentary

 

[zangano1]

Truth if personality was real foids would masturbate while looking at pictures if jesus but they do it while looking at pics of Jeremy meeks

 

[lightskin2thousand0]

where did that “real version” of jesus come from thats an ugly ass jesus

 

[DunSorbus]

If he was presented like that, Christianity would have become a weird cult following that has its own Netflix documentary

 

[Deleted member 18515]

he got mogged too hard by the romans

 

[Akhnai]

he got mogged too hard by the romans

Everyone in Judah was mogged by Romans,that is why they revolted multiple times against Rome

Truth if personality was real foids would masturbate while looking at pictures if jesus but they do it while looking at pics of Jeremy meeks

where did that “real version” of jesus come from thats an ugly ass jesus

Its some software rendition.Probably untrue since mediterranean jews has lighter skin,but its close

Jfl at Saracens flooding the comment section

 

[Monk of Failure]

Muhammad mogs Jesus hard.

 

[Akhnai]

Muhammad mogs Jesus hard.

No.he was an incel too,thats why he forbid his followers from painting a picture of him

 

[Sparrow's Song]

He wasn't a "Jew", it makes more sense for him to be a Canaanite or Parthian.

That reconstruction of what he looked like is dumb because if it's mainstream then you know it's bullshit. He likely was an ugly ethnic manlet though, was probably norwooding too. That picture is brutal because I have the exact same subhuman asymmetrical eyes. If Jesus actually had eyes like that, he wouldn't have died on the cross at 33, he would have died on the rope at 16.

 

[BlackPill Scholar]

View attachment 181246

Uh bro what are you talking about? This is jesus. My savior isn't some ugly ethnic guy lol.

That is the most high IQ perspective ever. How modern Christianity whitewashed and made jesus a good looking man in order to encourage people to convert and stay Christian. Damn.

 

[Iwanttolive]

This looks good

 

[Dregster]

View attachment 181246

Uh bro what are you talking about? This is jesus. My savior isn't some ugly ethnic guy lol.

This looks good

 

[Deleted member 16624]

View attachment 181246

Uh bro what are you talking about? This is jesus. My savior isn't some ugly ethnic guy lol.

Blue eyes halo

 

[Tallcel]

This looks good

mogs me still

 

[Deleted member 21908]

Jesus is a nigger fraud

 

[Mulattocel]

I honestly believe that Jesus will look like whatever you imagine him too. To people that think he looks like the ethnic dude he will look like that, to people that think he looks like the Christian version he will look like that. It matters more what he is then what he looks like

 

[Opus132]

Don't believe those Masonic lies, that ethnic would have been unusually even at the time. First portrait of Jesus, done in the fifth century by monks in a monastery at Sinai:

Even if the monks used themselves as a model we are still talking about people who lived there mere centuries after Christ was alive in the same area.

Shroud of Turin, which, despite all the claims of it being a "forgery", they still haven't been able to actually explain it:

Even if you think Christianity is man made nonsense, there had to be something special about Christ for Christianity to become so widespread so quickly. If you disagree then you don't actually believe in the black pill.

 

[Deleted member 1060]

He wasn't a "Jew", it makes more sense for him to be a Canaanite or Parthian.

That reconstruction of what he looked like is dumb because if it's mainstream then you know it's bullshit. He likely was an ugly ethnic manlet though, was probably norwooding too. That picture is brutal because I have the exact same subhuman asymmetrical eyes. If Jesus actually had eyes like that, he wouldn't have died on the cross at 33, he would have died on the rope at 16.

His parent's name were all classical Jewish names though, "Maryam", "Yosef", these are widely used Jewish names.

 

[ItsOver4cel]

We don't even know that he did exist though (I'm an atheistcel btw) but if he does he was sure as hell blackpilled bcuz in the OT he greatly suppressed foids rights to being merely the husbands housewives because he knew the sluts they were and what they could become.
TL;DR: Jesus is based and testamentpilled.

 

[Deleted member 1060]

Don't believe those Masonic lies, that ethnic would have been unusually even at the time. First portrait of Jesus, done in the fifth century by monks in a monastery at Sinai:

Even if the monks used themselves as a model we are still talking about people who lived there mere centuries after Christ was alive in the same area.

Shroud of Turin, which, despite all the claims of it being a "forgery", they still haven't been able to actually explain it:

Even if you think Christianity is man made nonsense, there had to be something special about Christ for Christianity to become so widespread so quickly. If you disagree then you don't actually believe in the black pill.

Jesus was born in Palestine, not in Norway or Sweden.

He never spoke Latin nor Greek, most probably his and his people's language was Aramaic. Use your common sense.

Ethiopian church depicted him like a black man.

Chinese Nestorian church depicted him like a Chinese man.

He was neither black nor chinese nor white. He should look like the people where he was born, came from and brought up. So he should look like an average Palestinian.

People like to imagine prophetic figures according to their imagination, and imagination is hugely influenced by their surroundings.

Also this picture is not the oldest depiction of him

That is the "oldest surviving panel icon" from 6th century (i.e. drawn after 600 years of his death).

This is his oldest depiction of Jesus --

 

[Opus132]

He was neither black nor chinese nor white. He should look like the people where he was born, came from and brought up. So he should look like an average Palestinian.

Palestianian people today:

What does the average Palestinian look like?

Answer (1 of 13): Palestine is (with Iraq and Syria) at a crossing place of the whole of Eurasia, and is an anciently cosmopolitan area, so the population is very mixed. When you walk down a Palestinian street you can see in people’s faces signs of many different origins (see picture), and these ...

www.quora.com

The Fayum portraits are the closest thing we have to realistic depictions of people living close to that era, even if this was Egypt and not Palestine (so we can expect a greater degree of swarthiness as Egypt had greater influx of sub-Saharan blood compared to the middle east):

Fayum mummy portraits - Wikimedia Commons

commons.wikimedia.org

Lot's of ethnic features but you can tell those were characteristically "middle" eastern in stile and most of them have that typical elongated face we associate with Jews:

So why did our dear "scientists" picked someone with a round skull and not someone with an elongated face? Could it be that even someone looking like the above picture, with the dark skin and woolly hairs, would have been a tad too close to the "classic" depiction of Jesus, where as their object was to move away as much as possible from it, even to the degree of not just giving Jesus swarthy characteristics but giving him a completely different phenotype as well?

Also this picture is not the oldest depiction of him

That is the "oldest surviving panel icon" from 6th century (i.e. drawn after 600 years of his death).

This is his oldest depiction of Jesus --

That's not a depiction, it's a doodle. It was not meant to be a realistic likeness, unlike the Sinai icon. Even if the people at that monastery made Jesus look like themselves, we are still talking about people who lived in that area, even if they were Greeks and not Jews. If you go to Sinai today you'll find mostly Arabs, who as a rule are swarthier than Jews, but still have that "semitic" longer face:

But, there is one further argument that the scientists have ignored. Jesus was of the line of David. He was not a "commoner" as people assume when they hear he was a "carpenter". It was customary for Rabbis at the time to take up simple trades to support themselves, and this is what Jesus was, a Rabbi, who could read Hebrew and preached from the scriptures from an early age. Jesus would have looked, at the very least, like a Pharisee, not a street peasant, or at worse like someone like Josephus, who was also of a Jewish noble line:

 

[Deleted member 1060]

Palestianian people today:

What does the average Palestinian look like?

Answer (1 of 13): Palestine is (with Iraq and Syria) at a crossing place of the whole of Eurasia, and is an anciently cosmopolitan area, so the population is very mixed. When you walk down a Palestinian street you can see in people’s faces signs of many different origins (see picture), and these ...

www.quora.com

First, JFL @ that Quora cuck who digged the entire internet to find one example of most light skinned Palestinians. He is coping like the curries who only post light skinned curry fashion-models from Bollywood, implying that all curries look like them.

Just go to google and search for "Gaza protest", you will have a very good idea of how an average Palestinian looks like.

Yes, they look brown may be because they are poor, live in borderline slums where there is no AC in desert heat. Situation not very different from the Palestinian people in 1st century CE. May be they will get a bit lighter if they were 24/7 living in mansions equipped AC and modern amenities. Jesus's family was from a poor background whose main profession was herding/farming.

The Fayum portraits are the closest thing we have to realistic depictions of people living close to that era, even if this was Egypt and not Palestine (so we can expect a greater degree of swarthiness as Egypt had greater influx of sub-Saharan blood compared to the middle east):

Fayum mummy portraits - Wikimedia Commons

commons.wikimedia.org

Lot's of ethnic features but you can tell those were characteristically "middle" eastern in stile and most of them have that typical elongated face we associate with Jews:

High IQ. Yes, Fayyum portraits can be a good example to gauge the facial features of ancient middle-easterners. Also JFL @ your cope you picked the man who looks like portrait from the Sinai church. But you carefully ignored all these portraits --

So why did our dear "scientists" picked someone with a round skull and not someone with an elongated face? Could it be that even someone looking like the above picture, with the dark skin and woolly hairs, would have been a tad too close to the "classic" depiction of Jesus, where as their object was to move away as much as possible from it, even to the degree of not just giving Jesus swarthy characteristics but giving him a completely different phenotype as well?

That's not a depiction, it's a doodle. It was not meant to be a realistic likeness, unlike the Sinai icon. Even if the people at that monastery made Jesus look like themselves, we are still talking about people who lived in that area, even if they were Greeks and not Jews. If you go to Sinai today you'll find mostly Arabs, who as a rule are swarthier than Jews, but still have that "semitic" longer face:

Does not matter, nor relevant. Elongated or not, either way, Jesus was not a white European man. There were Roman generals, soldiers and officials in that area during that time. They were mostly whites. Jesus didn't look like them.

The bottom line is Jesus did not look like this --

That's not a middle eastern man, that's a man from a nordic country. Simple.

But, there is one further argument that the scientists have ignored. Jesus was of the line of David. He was not a "commoner" as people assume when they hear he was a "carpenter". It was customary for Rabbis at the time to take up simple trades to support themselves, and this is what Jesus was, a Rabbi, who could read Hebrew and preached from the scriptures from an early age. Jesus would have looked, at the very least, like a Pharisee, not a street peasant, or at worse like someone like Josephus, who was also of a Jewish noble line:

JFL @ this cope. You clearly understand that you are creating such a complicated contortion just to make a man white who died like 2020 years ago. There was an Arabian descent Roman emperor called "Philip the Arab", they made his bust look like this:

It does not mean all/most Arab elites looked like him.

 

[BrapZilian]

Mogs me.

 

[LOLI BREEDING]

If having a good personality actually makes you more attractive then Jesus Christ Himself,along with Gandhi,Alfred Nobel,and other philanthropists will have castles full of wet women trying to have sex with them.


But Jesus disprove this.Jesus Christ Word of God Himself was born as an ethnic incel and that is why the kikes and romans crucified Him instead of venerating Him.Does not matter how good His personality is.

(Jesus was born to represent the most opressed among us;it only makes sense that He was born as a poor jewish incel,the trifecta of the most opressed classes in the world)
View attachment 181244
Behold He that is the first celibate

In 2001 forensic anthropologist Richard Neave created a model of a Galilean man for a BBC documentary, Son of God, working on the basis of an actual skull found in the region. Neave did not claim his model showed Jesus’s face but rather offered it as a means of prompting people to consider a Jesus who looked like a man of his time and place
tldr shit thread

 

[Rambocel]

If having a good personality actually makes you more attractive then Jesus Christ Himself,along with Gandhi,Alfred Nobel,and other philanthropists will have castles full of wet women trying to have sex with them.


But Jesus disprove this.Jesus Christ Word of God Himself was born as an ethnic incel and that is why the kikes and romans crucified Him instead of venerating Him.Does not matter how good His personality is.

(Jesus was born to represent the most opressed among us;it only makes sense that He was born as a poor jewish incel,the trifecta of the most opressed classes in the world)
View attachment 181244
Behold He that is the first celibate

I can't take it anymore......

If you seriously think religious characters/doctrine are real then kill yourself. You can't be Blackpilled and cite religion as an excuse/justification.

How can supposed adults of this species claim that type of belief which is even more absurd than Santa Claus, demand respect and legitimacy.

 

[masterwizard]

where did that “real version” of jesus come from thats an ugly ass jesus

The cursed tribe, no doubt.

 

[Opus132]

First, JFL @ that Quora cuck who digged the entire internet to find one example of most light skinned Palestinians.

You have to keep in mind that we are not talking about Arabs, but Jews, which are not supposed to be as swarthy, even in ancient times. At the same time, we can't use modern Jews is Israel because they have too much European blood in them, so light skinned Palestinians was the compromise.

Also JFL @ your cope you picked the man who looks like portrait from the Sinai church. But you carefully ignored all these portraits --

Most of those still look closer to the Sinai icon than the one the "scientists" reconstructed. Statistically speaking, there is a far higher chance the Sinai picture is closer to the original (structurally at least, you can ignore the white skin if you want) then the one pushed by the Masonic propagandists.

Does not matter, nor relevant. Elongated or not, either way, Jesus was not a white European man.

That still doesn't make "their" version right, or closer to the truth than the visage Christians have known for 2000 years. And not only Jesus, but other personages as well:

What do you think looks more like a Jew, this mosaic of St. Paul or that reconstructed head?

There was an Arabian descent Roman emperor called "Philip the Arab", they made his bust look like this:

It does not mean all/most Arab elites looked like him.

It doesn't mean you couldn't find an Arab that didn't look like that either, and Josephus was a Jew, not an Arab.

At any rate, you are misunderstanding the entire point of this argument. I'm not claiming Jesus was some kind of blue eyed Aryan, and he was never pictured as such in all of the history of the Church. Protestants are heretics so i'm not interested in those blonde Jesus paintings, i'm talking about the official iconography of the Church, both west (before the Renaissance) and eastern.

But more to the point, even if you can argue that those Christian icons depict a man who was more Greek/Roman than Jew, which can certainly the case, it doesn't mean this "reconstruction" is any more accurate, and we can argue in fact that it is equally as false, except in the opposite direction. It's clear those "historians" set out to make a model that looked as DIFFERENT from the traditional image of Christ as possible. It's obvious that that face is not "typical" of any Jews that have ever existed, ancient or otherwise. Not even those Egyptians looked like that, and those are real paintings and not a figment of some scientist's imagination.

 

[Deleted member 18515]

First, JFL @ that Quora cuck who digged the entire internet to find one example of most light skinned Palestinians. He is coping like the curries who only post light skinned curry fashion-models from Bollywood, implying that all curries look like them.

Just go to google and search for "Gaza protest", you will have a very good idea of how an average Palestinian looks like.

Yes, they look brown may be because they are poor, live in borderline slums where there is no AC in desert heat. Situation not very different from the Palestinian people in 1st century CE. May be they will get a bit lighter if they were 24/7 living in mansions equipped AC and modern amenities. Jesus's family was from a poor background whose main profession was herding/farming.



High IQ. Yes, Fayyum portraits can be a good example to gauge the facial features of ancient middle-easterners. Also JFL @ your cope you picked the man who looks like portrait from the Sinai church. But you carefully ignored all these portraits --

Does not matter, nor relevant. Elongated or not, either way, Jesus was not a white European man. There were Roman generals, soldiers and officials in that area during that time. They were mostly whites. Jesus didn't look like them.

The bottom line is Jesus did not look like this --

That's not a middle eastern man, that's a man from a nordic country. Simple.



JFL @ this cope. You clearly understand that you are creating such a complicated contortion just to make a man white who died like 2020 years ago. There was an Arabian descent Roman emperor called "Philip the Arab", they made his bust look like this:

It does not mean all/most Arab elites looked like him.

Many of them have long midfaces its over

 

[BrendioEEE]

Jesus didn't look like that, that's literal Jewish propaganda. Jesus was a galilean. Galileans migration patterns can be traced back to Europe and he was described by Roman's as white.

 

[Akhnai]

If you seriously think religious characters/doctrine are real then kill yourself.

If you dont think that Jesus is real then go kill yourself.Existence of Jesus is the most basic fact of 1st century archeology and is confirmed by pretty much every historian even atheist ones

 

[Opus132]

I would like to point out that the race of Jesus is actually not that important. What's important is the fact he represented a kind of human pinnacle, not in the sense he was abnormally good looking, for normality is itself "divine" so nothing about him could violate the laws of this world, but his physical body was also perfect but not in the kind of way Chads are perfect, since the latter are almost naturally sexual (and thus animalistic to a degree) where as with Christ his physical perfection was a reflection of his spiritual perfection.

I mentioned some Sufi saints in another thread and i think it's worth bringing up the visage Ahmad al-Alawi, who was likened to that of Christ by his French physician:

al-Alawi was a Semite and this is what i expected Jesus to look like, or close to this. The Greeks made him a bit "whiter" in their icons because it was natural for them to imagine him as similar to themselves but all in all i believe the basic design of the Christ Pantocrator must have been very close to the original, despite the change in race.

And then of course we have the Shroud of Turin which some of us believe to be genuine:

And there's nothing preventing features like the above to belong to a middle easterner either way.

 

[Deleted member 1060]

You have to keep in mind that we are not talking about Arabs, but Jews, which are not supposed to be as swarthy, even in ancient times.

Any source? Btw, Arabs and Jews are not ethnically extremely different, like if you compare East Asians with African Blacks.

It doesn't mean you couldn't find an Arab that didn't look like that either, and Josephus was a Jew, not an Arab.

The guy in the bust figure that you have posted does not look like Jew (except his beak nose) tbh, from his side profile he looks like a roman. You are missing the most important facial feature of a middle easterner, almost all of their eyebrows are arched. You can't find it so prevalently in other races. May be Jesus was a lighter skinned middle-easterner, btw the reconstruction made by the scientist does not look that "swarthy", by swarthy people generally assume this type of skin tone:

At any rate, you are misunderstanding the entire point of this argument. I'm not claiming Jesus was some kind of blue eyed Aryan, and he was never pictured as such in all of the history of the Church.

Ah I thought you are one of those "Jesus was nordic man theory proponents".

I would like to point out that the race of Jesus is actually not that important. What's important is the fact he represented a kind of human pinnacle, not in the sense he was abnormally good looking, for normality is itself "divine" so nothing about him could violate the laws of this world, but his physical body was also perfect but not in the kind of way Chads are perfect, since the latter are almost naturally sexual (and thus animalistic to a degree) where as with Christ his physical perfection was a reflection of his spiritual perfection.

I mentioned some Sufi saints in another thread and i think it's worth bringing up the visage Ahmad al-Alawi, who was likened to that of Christ by his French physician:

al-Alawi was a Semite and this is what i expected Jesus to look like, or close to this. The Greeks made him a bit "whiter" in their icons because it was natural for them to imagine him as similar to themselves but all in all i believe the basic design of the Christ Pantocrator must have been very close to the original, despite the change in race.

And then of course we have the Shroud of Turin which some of us believe to be genuine:

And there's nothing preventing features like the above to belong to a middle easterner either way.

That sufi guy and the Shroud of Turin guy does not look the same. The Shroud of Turin looks more like some Viking god like Odin or Thor.

Above all, this "old man with white beard" depiction of Jesus is BS.

1. Jesus did not die from old age.
2. He was killed when he was younger than 40.
3. That Shroud of Turin pic is nothing but a depiction/re-adaptation of Odin.

When European people converted to Christianity from Paganism, they just wanted to have a god that resembled their old god. So they drew Jesus like Odin.

Jesus was a galilean.

Jesus was a Galilean Jew.

Galileans migration patterns can be traced back to Europe

Utter BS

and he was described by Roman's as white.

1. Romans were white themselves
2. A group of white people saying a local native guy "white", but not "looked like one of us"

Mariana trench level low IQ post.

 

[Rambocel]

If you dont think that Jesus is real then go kill yourself.Existence of Jesus is the most basic fact of 1st century archeology and is confirmed by pretty much every historian even atheist ones

Oh please. Evidence? Exactly. There isn't any. It was very common for Jews at that time to go around claiming to fulfil prophecies. It's not a basic fact. It's a convoluted myth that tries to cram everything popular into one box.