University Of California: ‘It’s Time To Accept Jesus Was A Black Man’

Scientists have attempted to recreate the face of Jesus of Nazareth through forensic anthropology and the results are surprising.

Scientists have attempted to recreate the face of Jesus of Nazareth through forensic anthropology and the results bear little resemblance to the blonde, blue-eyed version of Jesus accepted by most Americans. According to the University of California, it is time to accept the idea that Jesus was black.

In the end, it doesn’t even matter, whether Jesus of Nazareth was white or black. However, speaking in a historical context, maybe its time to ask what was Jesus Christ really like? What color was his skin? Why is Jesus depicted as a having long hair, a beard and of white skin? Was Jesus’ representation always like that? Or did it change throughout time? The answer may surprise you.

Most Historians and Biblical scholars firmly agree that Jesus of Nazareth, born in what is today the capital and the largest city in the Northern District of Israel. In the New Testament, the town is described as the childhood home of Jesus, and as such is a center of Christian pilgrimage, with many shrines commemorating biblical events.

Ancient Code reports: This historical fact may shed light on the appearance of Jesus of Nazareth. Is it possible that he had a Middle Eastern Appearance?

Despite His most likely middle-eastern appearance, it has been proven controversial among many experts who argue that Jesus was a white man.

In historical records, we find only a few description of Bible, and those that exist look more towards his divinity and Power, rather than accurately describing his ‘mortal’ appearance.

So, how can we know what Jesus looked like?

Most experts agree that in order to understand what Jesus might have looked like we should turn towards the area where He was born.

It is believed that the ancient Jews looked very similar to their Middle-Eastern neighbors, being characterized by having dark skin and hair.

Interestingly, many of the earliest representations of Christ are illustrated in this way, where the artist emphasized on Jesus Christ’s Semitic origins.

However, through the years this changed and the way Jesus was illustrated changed drastically.

Science takes a look

Richard Neave, a scientist at the University of Manchester, has spent a good part of his time trying to reconstruct the face of Jesus of Nazareth through forensic anthropology, one of the subdisciplines of physical anthropology.

It is not the first time that the professor has done a job of this kind, he had previously reconstructed the face of other very popular historical figures, such as Philip II of Macedonia (father of Alexander the Great) and King Midas.

To make an image of Jesus more adapted to reality, the scientist counted on three well-preserved first-century skulls that had been found in Israel. From them, Neave used the computerized tomography to try to obtain even the smallest detail.


We are used to seeing representations of Jesus of Nazareth that show him with chestnut hair, white skin, light eyes and a beard.

But science now questions that very Caucasian aspect and claims that His skin color was black, He had a larger nose and also, a much more corpulent appearance.

As explained in Popular Mechanics, scientists believe that this recreation of Jesus could be the most accurate that has been done to date.

According to Alison Galloway, professor of anthropology at the University of California, “it is probably truer to reality than the work of many great masters of painting.”

So, if we know that Jesus was not white, why are we still depicting Him as a white man, brown hair, and a beard?

When Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity, and the religion spread across the Roman Empire, the classic representation of Jesus of Nazareth began to change.

Roman artists started depicting Jesus with long brown hair, with a beard, and white, only to emphasize His connection with the people of the Roman Empire and Europe. Over the centuries this trend would spread across the continent, and the world, where Jesus was depicted as looking more like a Central European man, than someone born in Nazareth.

Baxter Dmitry

Baxter Dmitry

Baxter Dmitry is a writer at Your News Wire. He covers politics, business and entertainment. Speaking truth to power since he learned to talk, Baxter has travelled in over 80 countries and won arguments in every single one. Live without fear.
Follow: @baxter_dmitry
Baxter Dmitry
  • Amaris

    Science thinks it knows everything but they don’t. Jesus was neither black nor white, he was Jewish.

    • IronV

      Stupid scientists!

    • doittoday

      YES HE WAS A real jew.. AND HE DIED FOR OUR SINS.. and if you haven’t accepted him as your Lord and Saviour…….. you are going to hell……. it really is that simple..

  • Kane

    they say the garden of Eden was about where Iraq is so the first of Gods people were from that region .But black genes are recessive and breed out from intermarriage except for throwbacks I doubt God would be a recessive person . and He created Man in His own image. Caucasian is the dominant race genetically And the Bible tells us a black man assisted Jesus with the Cross..There was a song that sang about the world being filled with coffee coloured people after all the globalist’s interbreed every race ,so Middle Eastern Not black not white .Both together .

    • IronV

      Nice synopsis, Adolph.

    • ohhmygoodness

      God is spirit.. he created man in his spiritual image….. not flesh image

  • Guest

    We are ALL white humans ,, Look at the bottoms of a black persons feet and there palms and what color are they ? White and when a black person has a burn and when it stats to heal what color is it ? White ,,, Humans base color is white our color comes from the area of the world we lived in to absorb the sun or to reflect it ..

  • Mike Pilgrim

    Jesus is a Nazarene, never was a Jew. Hebrews were black slaves of the Pharaohs, google the statues of Pharoanic Hebrews. The Israelites were Samaritans, not Jews, Israel was the Samaritan kingdom, not the Jewish kingdom. The Jewish kingdom was Judea, founded 1,000 years after the Exodus. Jews had nothing to do with Moses or Abraham. Jews book is Talmud, not the Bible. The Jews have deceived Americans.

    • quest

      Is your name Ignorance ? Can you read the Bible please, not google or propaganda research that aim to distort and confuse history.

      • Mike Pilgrim

        Matthew 2:23 “And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, he SHALL be called a NAZARENE” Jackass you never read the Bible, you are a liar.

    • yousirareanidiot

      do you realize how manic your comment is?… you regularly contradict yourself .. or is this a one off time?… lol

      • Mike Pilgrim

        Israeli Hasbara trolls like you with your lies about Jesus.

    • Dave

      1000% true just like the Vatican man made and controlled, all religion is man made they wrote the Bible and your school books and your Webster’s dictionary! Blacks law dictionaries are real English, divide and conquer the n control! Nothing has changed since the beginning!

  • mark peaker

    who gives a shit
    Hail Odin

    • ohyesyouwill

      you will give a shit when you enter hell… that much is true….

  • Steve S

    I dont think Arabs, Jews and other middle easterners consider themselves black. Fake news.

  • quest

    What a waste of a time for an article(typical of Baxter) and waste of research time and money. Jesus was of a line descendent of king David of the tribe of Judah. Jesus the Christ was a Jew and of the tribe of Judah in a similar appearance to typical jews of the time. As Isaiah says, his(the Christ) looks where no different to an ordinary man. The sceptre and salvation was to come through the jews. So, stop all this nonsense! Which detracts from the whole reason for Jesus the Christ who was and is the WORD coming to earth among humankind, and urning it into a race/colour issue.

  • guitardude

    While He most likely looked more like Osama bin Laden than Brad Pitt, Jesus most definitely wasn’t black. Unless of course, Semitic people now have honorary black status.

  • Vernon Roche

    Not that it matters when it come to his works and message but I’m going
    with the Shroud of Turin. Certainly a strong middle eastern look, though
    badly beaten (Much more compelling evidence surrounding the shroud than
    this article presents…) His Mother is also described as being fair,
    so whatever shade skin he was probably wasn’t seen by most as being toward the
    ugly end either.

  • EdG

    Black looking for another hero. How’s that inferiority complex coming along? Don’t blame me. Look in the mirror.