Does the bible say Jesus was Black?

Does the bible say Jesus was Black?

Most people are aware of the traditional portrayal of the image of Jesus. The long-haired white man most commonly used by the vast majority of the Christian world today. It doesn’t take too much investigation or common sense to come to the realization that this image is not and in no way can be what the actual Jesus who walked the earth 2000 years ago looked like.

There is however a movement that claims that Jesus was not only not white but in fact Jesus was black. Many parts of this movement also claim that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were also black as are the “true” Israelites.

 

This is part of my book the Holy Bible vs The Hebrew Israelites 

You can buy my book on Amazon (here is a link to the Amazon.com site) 
Amazon.co.uk 

This writing is not intended to prove that Jesus or anyone else was any specific colour it is solely intended to answer the biblical verses used by those that claim that Jesus was black and that the Bible depicts him as such. Here I will only be answering the biblical evidence for the physical appearance of Jesus and nothing more.

There are in fact only 2 passages of the Bible that are offered as evidence that Jesus himself was black based on the description of Jesus given in the Bible.

The first and most often used passage is in the book of Revelation.

Revelation 1:14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; 15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. 16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

So it is claimed that Jesus had hair like wool which is used to demonstrate the tight curly afro hair of black people and also that his colour was that of brass with this meaning Jesus was of a dark brown colour.

So lets see if the claim stands up to scrutiny.

The first thing that we need to understand is that this ISNT actually Jesus that is being described although it does resemble the image of Jesus.

The simple fact is that when John turns to see who was talking to him in revelation he actually sees one LIKE unto the son of man, NOT the son of man himself We are told this in the 2 previous verses

Revelation 1:12And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; 13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.

John actually saw an Angel. This was the angel that Jesus has sent unto John. This is made very cleat at the beginning of the book of Revelation.

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John

God gave the revelation of Jesus that God gave him, Jesus gave it to his angel and the Angel went and gave it to John. So when John is spoken to and turns to see who it is it is this angel that he sees. Now the angel looked LIKE the son of man so the description of what the angel looked like was a representation of what the son of man looked like but wasn’t actually Jesus.

What is more important to notice is that this depiction of Jesus in Revelation is referencing a resurrected, GLORIFIED Christ, after he has ascended to heaven. This is Jesus in his glorified body. There is no reference whatsoever to the body of Jesus that walked the earth as a Jewish man before his death burial and resurrection. To try and link the reference in Revelation to the physical man Jesus is a complete and utter distortion of scripture and is either due to a lack of study or a purposeful deception.

But let’s continue and analyze the description itself. 
Let’s start with the claim that Jesus had afro style hair. 

Revelation 1:14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;

This verse states his hair was WHITE like wool not that his hair was like wool. The comparison is regarding the colour not the texture. To further illustrate the whiteness rather than the texture we then have a 2nd comparison with snow, surely nobody is going to argue here that his hair was the texture of snow yet BOTH refer to the same thing. If his hair is being referred to as the texture of wool then its also being referenced as being the texture of snow. This is NOT what is being described here, both are referring to the colour not what it looked like.

 

 

This understanding regarding colour is also supported in the Bible in the Book of Isaiah where Isaiah says that the sins of the people, although as red as crimson, shall be as WHITE as SNOW…..as WOOL.

Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Now there are those that will argue that the meaning of the world wool here is Shaggy. Wool can be described as shaggy but that ISNT what is in reference in this verse. Wool has a texture but it also has a colour and it is the colour of wool not its texture that is being compared in this verse.

There obviously is no comparison here between the texture of the sins of the people. White as snow and like WOOL are linked together in reference to colour. They were RED like crimson but they shall be white like wool. The wool is used as a reference to white. Just as crimson is in reference to the colour. The Hebrew word translated as crimson is תּוֹלָע tola, and actually refers to a worm. It is this worm that was used to make crimson red dye for clothes and materials.

(Crimson worm looks like a small grub or beetle)

So while the sins of the people had made them like as if they had been dyed crimson red, they were going to be purified and made clean white again. 

 

It must also be noted that Revelation 1:14 doesn’t just make reference to his hair but his head also. Not only is his hair white but also his head I have yet to see a black man with a white head, unless of course the verse is trying to say the glorified Christ suffered from Vitiligo. I rather think not…..

Unlike what is often used as a counter claim that the hair ON his his were white this is simply adding to the text and forcing into the verse an interpretation which is not found in the text itself. The text is very clear that both his HEAD and his HAIRS were WHITE…. The Greek includes the word καὶ Kai which means AND.

ἡ δὲ κεφαλὴ αὐτοῦ καὶ αἱ τρίχες λευκαὶ ὡσει ἔριον λευκόν ὡς χιών καὶ οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ αὐτοῦ ὡς φλὸξ πυρός

And is a conjunction word, meaning it connects together sentences, clauses, phrases, or words 

 

There is nothing in this verse that denotes a reference to the texture of his hairs on his head.

The Greek translated as white is λευκός leukos which means White, a brilliant whiteness, light or even bright. This will become relevant later on in this study when we see the “countenance” of Jesus being referred to. 

Furthermore why is it only the first part of the verse is used as evidence. If the first part of the verse is used to prove the way that Jesus physically looked like then why wouldn’t the second part also be used, “his eyes were as a flame of fire”. How many black men have eyes as a flame of fire. I’m yet to meet any man regardless of colour that possesses this physical attribute although it could be argued this could be referencing a red eye colour possessed by those who are albino but this would be assumption rather than fact. It would now have to be argued that the whiteness was based on Jesus being Albino which would also negate the argument that the reference to hair was referring to texture and not colour. Some even claim that Jesus had red eyes through excessive wine consumption…..i’m not sure that this even warrants a dignified response. However I will simply refer back to this being the glorified Christ as a rebuttal. Also most advocates of a black Jesus do not use the second part of the verse in their argument.

Then we have verse 15

Revelation 1:15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters

It is this verse that is used to demonstrate the dark skin colour of Jesus. The claim being made that Jesus had feet the colour of brass that had been burned in a furnace. Therefore Jesus had dark “burnt” colour skin.

So lets again analyse what the verse actually says against the claim.

The verse starts by saying “And his feet like unto fine brass”. Notice the word fine before the word brass. The colour was like fine brass not burnt brass. Fine brass (polished) is not brown or black but a golden or yellowish colour

The Greek* word translated “fine brass” is chalkolibanō orichalcum, meaning a fine metal, or frankincense of a yellow colour and has an implied meaning of Brilliance or whiteness.

*It is likely that it is actually a mix of a Greek word Chalcos which is brass and the Hebrew laban which means white.

It is used ONLY twice in the Bible the other time in revelation 2:18 which we will come to in just a moment.

The verse then states “as if they burned in a furnace” (present tense), past tense would be as if they HAD BEEN burned in a furnace.  So the colour is linked to BEING burned in a furnace not having already been burned in the furnace. The Greek word here is πεπυρωμένης pepyrōmenēsthis is the perfect participle from of the word πυρόω pyroō.  It literally means made to glow. to be on fire. it comes from the root word πῦρ pü’r which means fire.

This is something that is on fire being burned.

Anyone that has seen metal being burned in a furnace will know that it causes a very bright white/yellow light. So bright in fact that those working with the metal in the furnace wear special eye protection goggles.

 

This isn’t just my own personal understanding of what Revelation 3:15 means. 

This is exactly how the NIV translates the verse. 

Revelation 3:15 His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. NIV

 

The NASB literally states the bronze has been heated to glow in the furnace. 

Revelation 3:15 His feet were like burnished bronze when it has been heated to a glow in a furnace, and His voice was like the sound of many waters. NASB

 

The ISV says his feet were like glowing bronze. 

Revelation 3:15 his feet were like glowing bronze refined in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of raging waters. ISV

 

An argument against this being present tense, something that is burning or is glowing, is the English word “burned” in the KJV. It is argued that this is past tense and so cannot be referring to something glowing but rather something that has been burned already and so is black. 

This again fails. Firstly something that has been burned in the furnace to the point of glowing will still be glowing once it is removed from the furnace until it cools down. So even if this is a completed action there is no reason to assume the glowing is not still happening. 

Secondly, the English word burned in the KJV is clearly used of something that is still burning. 

When God spoke to Moses out of the Burning bush we find the KJV renders the bush as burned while it is still an action that is taking place. 

The angel is in the bush talking with Moses while it burned with fire. The bush was still burning, it was not a completed action. 

Exodus 3:2 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. 3 And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt.

Burned is also used in the present tense in Deuteronomy 4:11 

Deuteronomy 4:11 And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the midst of heaven, with darkness, clouds, and thick darkness.

The NIV makes this even clearer that the mountain was on fire while the Israelites stood at the bottom of the mountain. 

Deuteronomy 4:11You came near and stood at the foot of the mountain while it blazed with fire to the very heavens, with black clouds and deep darkness. NIV

The KJV clearly uses burned within the present tense. 

We must also take the second part of the verse and apply this as well. “and his voice as the sound of many waters”. Can this really be stated of black men, or any man for that matter.

Again the claim just doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. The scripture is simply twisted or misrepresented in order to make it appear to be saying something that is actually isn’t.

Both the eyes like fire and the feet like fine brass are stated again in revelation 2:18

Revelation 2:18 And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass;

Again the Greek word used is chalkolibanō

No mention of being burned in this verse or having been burned just simply like fine brass. There is NO argument in this verse that it can mean anything other than a yellowish colour.

The description of Jesus continues on in Revelation chapter 1 verse 16 although this is not quoted by those who use verses 14 and 15 but as verse 16 is a continuation of the description we must also look at what it says and be consistent and apply this in the same way as verses 14 and 15.

Revelation 1:16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

Here Jesus is depicted with a two edged sword coming out of his mouth. “and out of his mouth went a sharp two edged sword”

I am yet to find anyone that can give a convincing argument as to why this would be referencing a black man, I don’t think I need to offer any other statement than this but if we are going to take part of the description as literal we must take ALL the description as literal as we have no indication that any is meant to be taken non literally while other parts are. To state some are literal and others are not is to make personal assumptions that are not indicated in the text itself.

Then we have “and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.”

Countenance being the Greek word Ὄψις opsis meaning the features, outward appearance his face his look was like the sun in its strength meaning in its brightness.

The outward appearance of Jesus was like the sun in its brightness. We see this kind of reference when Jesus appeared to Saul (who became Paul) on the road to Damascus.

We are told about Jesus appearing before Saul in acts 9

Acts 9 :1 And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, 2 And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.

Saul saw a light from heaven.

Acts 9:3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: 4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

When Saul/Paul recounts the event we are told that the light was above the brightness of the sun.

Acts 26:13 At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me. 14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.

The word “above” in the above the brightness of the sun is the Greek word Ὑπὲρ hyper meaning above, beyond, greater than

The brightness of Jesus being beyond the brightness of the sun.

Jesus calls himself the light of the world

John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

When we go back to acts 9 we see that Saul/Paul was actually blinded by this light for 3 days.

Acts 9:9 And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.

In the new Jerusalem there is no need for the sun as The lamb, Jesus, is the light thereof.

Revelation 21:23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. 24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

Jesus is the brightness of the glory of God

Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

At the transfiguration of Jesus, Peter James and John saw a vision of Jesus in his glorified body.

Matthew 17:1And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, 2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.

Again we are told that the face of Jesus did shine as the sun.

The Prophet Daniel saw the glorified Jesus during a vision he was given. He described the appearance of what he saw.

Daniel 10:6 His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.

Again we see that the feet (and this time arms also) were as POLISHED brass not burned brass. The Hebrew word translated as polished is qā-lāl; קָלָ֑ל which means burnished which literally means to be polished. This again would mean a golden/yellowish colour not a dark brown one.

This word is used in Ezekiel 1:7  during a vision of the cherubim. Their feet described as “sparkled” like the colour of burnished brass, not burned brass. Burned brass does not sparkle.

Ezekiel 1:7 And their feet werestraight feet; and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf’s foot: and they sparkled like the colour of burnished brass.

We must also again be consistent. If we are going to use one part of the description in this verse we must also use all the description in this verse. The body is likened to beryl. The Hebrew word translated as beryl is תַּרְשִׁישׁ tarshish which means a yellow or golden precious stone most likely to be a yellow jasper.

The face is as the appearance of lightning and the eyes as lamps of fire. None of which has any likeness to a black man. However it would support the WHITENESS and brightness of the HEAD of Jesus in Revelation 1:14 and the countenance of Jesus.

Lastly I would like to deal with Daniel 7:9 where Daniel describes the hair of Jesus

Daniel 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.

Here it is asserted that Daniel is saying Jesus had wooly hair. However when we look at the verse closely this is NOT what is being stated at all. “the hair of his head like the pure wool” the hair is being described as like the PURE WOOL.

Pure is the Aramaic word נְקֵא neqe which means clean or pure.

Pure wool is one referent. It is the pureness of the wool that is being described, not the texture of it. It is not something that is pure and wooly, these are not two separate referents,  rather one referent that is pure wool. 

The Hebrew equivalent is the word  נָקָה naqiy‘ which just means innocent, pure, clean or free from. This word comes from נָקָה naqah which means clean, or blameless, guiltless. 

 

The comparison again has NOTHING at all to do with the texture of the hair of Jesus rather than the purity of Jesus.  The whole description of Jesus, which again we must remember, is the GLORIFIED Jesus, is  the BRIGHTNESS the whiteness, the INNOCENCE and purity of the Glorified Jesus. This simply is not to show or describe a physical man that walked the earth.

The use of these verses to show that Jesus was a black man work only if you take the representation of the verses by those making the claim, without any investigation into what the verses are actually saying, ignore parts of the verses and misrepresent them in a way that allows you to represent them in a way to support the claim. This is either through ignorance or dishonesty, either way the claim the Bible describes Jesus as being black is incorrect.

 

If you liked this study please subscribe here

You can buy my books on Amazon there is a link here 

Help me keep this site free for all. Join our Patreon membershiphere