Representations and depictions of the deity

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

It all depends on Mary's lineage, and that is vague.

Allegedly, people from the Mediterranean region haven't change much in 2K years.

I do not know who made that allegation but they are somewhat mistaken. In the past 2000 years the Mediterranean region has seen an influx of different peoples from many parts of the world. Even in early human history and migration the area was a crossing point out of Africa.

As for what Jesus of Nazareth may have looked like, certainly among Galilean Jews of the first century CE there would have been an element of in-breeding [as we find in some ultra-orthodox Jewish groups today].

However, the recent history of the region of Galilee should not be forgotten either. We know that John Hyrcanus [135–105 BCE] compelled the conversion to Judaism of the Idumeans/Edomites who were the native inhabitants of southern Palestine, and if we set aside the mythological genealogies with which Matthew and Luke present us, it is historically possible that the historical figure we know as Jesus of Nazareth might have been the descendant of such converts.

However, as both the ancient Hebrews and Arabs were Semitic peoples their physiognomy would have been similar.

[rogue06]

I do not know who made that allegation but they are somewhat mistaken. In the past 2000 years the Mediterranean region has seen an influx of different peoples from many parts of the world. Even in early human history and migration the area was a crossing point out of Africa.

As for what Jesus of Nazareth may have looked like, certainly among Galilean Jews of the first century CE there would have been an element of in-breeding [as we find in some ultra-orthodox Jewish groups today].

However, the recent history of the region of Galilee should not be forgotten either. We know that John Hyrcanus [135–105 BCE] compelled the conversion to Judaism of the Idumeans/Edomites who were the native inhabitants of southern Palestine, and if we set aside the mythological genealogies with which Matthew and Luke present us, it is historically possible that the historical figure we know as Jesus of Nazareth might have been the descendant of such converts.

However, as both the ancient Hebrews and Arabs were Semitic peoples their physiognomy would have been similar.

If we set all evidence aside and settle for wild speculation, virtually anything is possible. Mary might have been the daughter of a wandering Tibetan Buddhist monk.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

If we set all evidence aside and settle for wild speculation, virtually anything is possible. Mary might have been the daughter of a wandering Tibetan Buddhist monk.

Firstly there is no attested extraneous evidence concerning the background of a historical figure that we now regard as Jesus of Nazareth, and secondly given the known history of the region, the possibility that he was a descendant of converts cannot be entirely ruled out.

[rogue06]

Firstly there is no attested extraneous evidence concerning the background of a historical figure that we now regard as Jesus of Nazareth, and secondly given the known history of the region, the possibility that he was a descendant of converts cannot be entirely ruled out.

IOW, in your view, Mary might have been the daughter of a wandering Tibetan Buddhist monk is a completely viable possibility, little to no different from any other.

[Ronson]

I do not know who made that allegation but they are somewhat mistaken. In the past 2000 years the Mediterranean region has seen an influx of different peoples from many parts of the world. Even in early human history and migration the area was a crossing point out of Africa.

This is the general hypothesis (in this case, regarding Egypt specifically): https://medium.com/@fillaman72/why-d...s-74aee790a5be

Although Egypt was conquered many times by outsiders (the Romans, the Greeks, the Persians etc.), you will be surprised to know that the many political changes did not actually affect the appearance and complexion of the Egyptian population.

In fact the ancient Egyptians look much the same as present day Egyptians.

One thing to note is that even in situations of large scale invasions/migrations, the “general appearance of the original indigenous population does not change much”. The reason for this is that even when a group of foreigners invade in large numbers, the original indigenous population is always several times larger, so research has shown that it is always the invaders who often transform overtime to look like the indigenes, and not the other way round.

Makes sense to me.

As for what Jesus of Nazareth may have looked like, certainly among Galilean Jews of the first century CE there would have been an element of in-breeding [as we find in some ultra-orthodox Jewish groups today].

However, the recent history of the region of Galilee should not be forgotten either. We know that John Hyrcanus [135–105 BCE] compelled the conversion to Judaism of the Idumeans/Edomites who were the native inhabitants of southern Palestine, and if we set aside the mythological genealogies with which Matthew and Luke present us, it is historically possible that the historical figure we know as Jesus of Nazareth might have been the descendant of such converts.

However, as both the ancient Hebrews and Arabs were Semitic peoples their physiognomy would have been similar.

All anyone can guess is a general appearance, in any case.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

This is the general hypothesis (in this case, regarding Egypt specifically): https://medium.com/@fillaman72/why-d...s-74aee790a5be

[box] Although Egypt was conquered many times by outsiders (the Romans, the Greeks, the Persians etc.), you will be surprised to know that the many political changes did not actually affect the appearance and complexion of the Egyptian population.

In fact the ancient Egyptians look much the same as present day Egyptians.

Hmmm a rather Afrocentrist article "The most important lesson is not the skin complexion, but rather the fact that they were Africans who achieved great things. This fact that Africans achieved such greatness is a punch in the gut of Eurocentrists who are always trying hard to convince people that “Nothing great can come out of Africa”.

Instead of accepting the simple fact that the ancient Egyptian civilization was an indigenous African civilization invented by Africans, these Eurocentrists are in disbelief, and would rather foolishly ascribe the civilization to “alien” origin or “extraterrestrials”.

One might opine that the various peoples of the African continent might take offence at being lumped together as "Africans".

All anyone can guess is a general appearance, in any case.

That is correct we can only apply generalisations.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

IOW, in your view, Mary might have been the daughter of a wandering Tibetan Buddhist monk is a completely viable possibility, little to no different from any other.

Such contentions are the product of your fertile imagination.

[rogue06]

Hmmm a rather Afrocentrist article "The most important lesson is not the skin complexion, but rather the fact that they were Africans who achieved great things. This fact that Africans achieved such greatness is a punch in the gut of Eurocentrists who are always trying hard to convince people that “Nothing great can come out of Africa”.

Instead of accepting the simple fact that the ancient Egyptian civilization was an indigenous African civilization invented by Africans, these Eurocentrists are in disbelief, and would rather foolishly ascribe the civilization to “alien” origin or “extraterrestrials”.

A bit outdated but not inaccurate. Everything from the pyramids to the ruins of Great Zimbabwe have been credited to everyone but the indigenous people by European explorers and archeologists for generations -- and some on the fringe still do.

And it isn't like Americans didn't do the same thing when we first encountered large earthen structures as they moved westward into the continent.

080e593a9180362eb6c9e73a327d1b9d.jpg

One might opine that the various peoples of the African continent might take offence at being lumped together as "Africans".

In the same way that various peoples of the European continent might take offense at being lumped together as "Europeans"?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

A bit outdated but not inaccurate. Everything from the pyramids to the ruins of Great Zimbabwe have been credited to everyone but the indigenous people by European explorers and archeologists for generations -- and some on the fringe still do.

Colourised and emboldened for emphasis.

Kindly name those "European explorers and archaeologists" who have made that claim concerning the pyramids.

[rogue06]

Colourised and emboldened for emphasis.

Kindly name those "European explorers and archaeologists" who have made that claim concerning the pyramids.

If I'm not mistaken you can find a list in From Atlantis to the Sphinx by Colin Wilson of archaeologists and Egyptianologists who he says provide support to his notions.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

If I'm not mistaken you can find a list in From Atlantis to the Sphinx by Colin Wilson of archaeologists and Egyptianologists who he says provide support to his notions.

Wilson was neither an archaeologist nor an Egyptologist.

He had also self-evidently fallen off his proverbial perch when he wrote that book.

You made a claim concerning "European explorers and archaeologists" . Therefore kindly provide a list of accredited Egyptologists and/or archaeologist from the last 120 years or so who have made such claims about the pyramids.

[rogue06]

Wilson was neither an archaeologist nor an Egyptologist.

Where did I say he was?

What I said, and you appear to have difficulties comprehending, is

If I'm not mistaken you can find a list in From Atlantis to the Sphinx by Colin Wilson of archaeologists and Egyptianologists who he says provide support to his notions.

Please do try to keep up.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Where did I say he was?

Your original comment:

A bit outdated but not inaccurate. Everything from the pyramids to the ruins of Great Zimbabwe have been credited to everyone but the indigenous people by European explorers and archeologists for generations -- and some on the fringe still do.

I requested the names of those "European explorers and archaeologists" who have made that claim concerning the pyramids."

You replied with the following:

"If I'm not mistaken you can find a list in From Atlantis to the Sphinx by Colin Wilson of archaeologists and Egyptianologists who he says provide support to his notions."

Wilson is neither an archaeologist nor an Egyptologist. And the work you cite by him is on the lunatic fringe.

Therefore you have no evidence to support your initial allegation that European explorers and archaeologists" have made such claims "for generations".

[Sparko]

Your original comment:




I requested the names of those "European explorers and archaeologists" who have made that claim concerning the pyramids."

You replied with the following:

"If I'm not mistaken you can find a list in From Atlantis to the Sphinx by Colin Wilson of archaeologists and Egyptianologists who he says provide support to his notions."

Wilson is neither an archaeologist nor an Egyptologist. And the work you cite by him is on the lunatic fringe.

Therefore you have no evidence to support your initial allegation that European explorers and archaeologists" have made such claims "for generations".

FWIU He is saying that the nutter Wilson listed other nutters who are archeologists and egyptianologists who agree with his work. That would be the list you are looking for. Or are you just doing your demanding stuff over and over trolling thing again?

[rogue06]

Your original comment:




I requested the names of those "European explorers and archaeologists" who have made that claim concerning the pyramids."

You replied with the following:

"If I'm not mistaken you can find a list in From Atlantis to the Sphinx by Colin Wilson of archaeologists and Egyptianologists who he says provide support to his notions."

Wilson is neither an archaeologist nor an Egyptologist. And the work you cite by him is on the lunatic fringe.

Therefore you have no evidence to support your initial allegation that European explorers and archaeologists" have made such claims "for generations".

Again. I never claimed that Wilson was either.

Again. What I said about him was about what was in his book -- a list of folks he cites who are an archaeologists or Egyptologists (and experts in other disciplines).

If I'm not mistaken you can find a list in From Atlantis to the Sphinx by Colin Wilson of archaeologists and Egyptianologists who he says provide support to his notions.

Not in a neat list but he brings them up at different points.

And it should be noted that Wilson, like so many other pseudoscientists, could very well be misrepresenting some of them. Particularly the more recent ones (the older ones IIRC are cited particularly because they advanced proposals that the local population didn't build them)