By Dorrothy Moyo | For more than a millennium, Western art has depicted Christ as a fair-skinned, blue-eyed figure—an image wholly at odds with the historical Jesus, a first-century Galilean Jew. Recent forensic reconstructions and scholarship invite us to reconsider the “white Jesus” and reflect on how colonialism and white supremacy shaped Christian iconography.
A Semitic Man, Not a Scandinavian
Modern scholars agree that Jesus was born in the Levant around 4 BCE and lived as a Galilean Jew. Based on archaeological evidence and contemporary descriptions, his appearance would have reflected the local population.
“The reconstruction provides the closest image of what this remarkable man may have looked like,” said the BBC of a 2001 forensic model based on first-century Jewish skulls, which yielded a broad-faced, dark-skinned man with short, curly hair—far removed from Renaissance depictions of Christ.
Similarly, CBS News reported that researchers described their reconstruction as “an accurate reflection of the people at that time,” noting that traditional Western art grew out of European portraits, not historical data.
Scriptural Hints of Darker Hues
Even early Christian texts suggest Jesus’s complexion differed from European ideals. Revelation 1:14–15, for instance, describes his “feet…like burnished bronze” and hair “white as wool,” imagery more consistent with Middle Eastern features than with Nordic traits.
The Colonial Roots of “White Jesus”
Art historian Nicholas Broadview argues that the familiar fair-haired Jesus serves colonial narratives:
“Sallman’s Jesus is a depiction grounded not in historical accuracy or research, but in the foundation of colonialism and white supremacy,” reflecting a dogma that “white is right” and reinforcing Western dominance in religion and politics.
Indeed, art historian Dr. Kelly Brown Douglas has called the idealization of a white Christ “America’s original sin,” linking it to theologies that once justified slavery and segregation.
Why It Matters Today
The enduring image of a white Christ isn’t merely an art-historical curiosity. It shapes whose faces we deem sacred and whose leadership we accept. As recent social media debates around a potential Black Pope have shown, many still assume Christianity’s pinnacle must look European. That assumption echoes a broader pattern: in over two millennia, the Catholic Church has never elected a Black pontiff—even early Popes of North African origin are often portrayed in Eurocentric art.
Reclaiming Jesus’s true Semitic visage offers more than historical accuracy—it challenges racial hierarchies within faith communities. As Religion Dispatches urges, Christians “begin the important work of removing and replacing depictions of Jesus as a white man with more historically accurate representations—or with no representations at all.”
Jesus of Nazareth was almost certainly a brown-skinned, Middle Eastern Jew. The “white Jesus” emerges from centuries of colonial theology and art, not from Scripture or history. Embracing a more authentic image helps dismantle lingering white supremacist narratives and fosters a richer, more inclusive faith.