December 13th, 2013
09:30 AM ET

Call Jesus (or Santa) white? Expect a big fight

Opinion by Edward J. Blum, special to CNN

(CNN) - Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly sparked outrage this week by insisting that Jesus and Santa Claus are both white, saying it's "ridiculous" to argue that depicting Christ and St. Nick as Caucasian is "racist."

"And by the way, for all you kids watching at home, Santa just is white," Kelly said, "but this person is arguing that we should also have a black Santa."

Kelly was responding to an article in Slate that said St. Nick needs a makeover from fat, old white guy to something less "melanin-deficient."

The Fox News host would have none of it.

"Just because it makes you feel uncomfortable doesn't mean it has to change," Kelly said. "Jesus was a white man, too. It's like we have, he's a historical figure; that's a verifiable fact. As is Santa, I just want kids to know that. How do you revise it in the middle of the legacy, in the story, and change Santa from white to black?"

Arguing about St. Nick, who was originally Greek before Currier & Ives got their hands on him, is one thing. But as for Jesus, people have been arguing about his skin color since the earliest days of American history. You might even call it an American tradition.

What's new about this latest brouhaha is how swiftly Kelly’s remarks were attacked. Thousands of people have rebuked her through blogs, articles, Twitter posts and Facebook updates.

Comedian Jon Stewart accused Kelly of "going full Christmas nog."

“And who are you actually talking to?" Stewart said on "The Daily Show." "Children who are sophisticated enough to be watching a news channel at 10 o’clock at night, yet innocent enough to still believe Santa Claus is real — yet racist enough to be freaked out if he isn’t white?”

It seems that now, if you want to call Christ — or even Santa — white, you should expect a fierce fight.

The immediate and widespread rebuttal showcases how much America has changed over the past few decades. The nation not only has a black president, but also has refused to endorse the Christian savior as white.

Since the earliest days of America, Jesus was thought of as a white man.

When white Protestant missionaries brought Bibles and whitened images of Jesus to Native Americans, at least a few mocked what they saw.

Taking the imagery seriously, the Shawnee warrior Tecumseh asked future President William Henry Harrison, “How can we have confidence in the white people? When Jesus Christ came upon the earth you kill’d and nail’d him on a cross.”

It was not until around 1900 that a group of white Americans explicitly claimed Jesus was white.

Concerned that large numbers of immigrants from southern and eastern Europe, especially Jewish immigrants, were “polluting” the nation, anti-immigrant spokesmen like attorney Madison Grant asserted the whiteness of Jesus to justify calls for exclusionary legislation.

READ MORE: From science and computers, a new face of Jesus

Making Jesus white was a means to distance him from Judaism.

“In depicting the crucifixion no artist hesitates to make the two thieves brunet in contrast to the blond Savior,” Grant wrote in his xenophobic best-seller "The Passing of the Great Race."

“This is something more than a convention,” Grant continued, and suggested that Jesus had “Nordic, possibly Greek, physical and moral attributes.”

Even Martin Luther King Jr. claimed that Jesus was white, after being asked why God created Jesus as a white man.

King responded that the color of Christ’s skin didn’t matter. Jesus would have been just as important “if His skin had been black.” He “is no less significant because His skin was white.”

READ MORE: Turkish town cashes in on Saint Nick legacy

Challenges to Christ’s whiteness have a long history, too.

Famed evangelist Billy Graham preached in the 1950s, and then wrote emphatically in his autobiography "Just As I Am," that, “Jesus was not a white man.”

But Graham was far from the first American to contradict the whiteness of Jesus. That honor goes to Methodist and Pequot Indian William Apess.

In 1833, he wrote to white Christians, “You know as well as I that you are not indebted to a principle beneath a white skin for your religious services but to a colored one.”

Almost 100 years later, the Jamaican born, “back-to-Africa” spokesman Marcus Garvey told his followers, “Never admit that Jesus Christ was a white man, otherwise he could not be the Son of God and God to redeem all mankind. Jesus Christ had the blood of all races in his veins.”

In our age, the color of Christ has become both politically dangerous and the butt of jokes.

In 2008, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s words “God damn America” and “Jesus was a poor black boy” almost derailed then-Sen. Barack Obama from winning the Democratic primary.

Now, Kelly bears the brunt of attacks and, in no surprise, was pilloried by comedians like Stewart and Stephen Colbert.

Few Americans went on public record against King when he asserted Jesus had white skin in the 1950s. Today, thousands upon thousands from virtually every race and tribe of Americans have taken Kelly’s words seriously and seriously disdained them.

All the chatter about Jesus being white (or not) shows how much America has changed. There used to be “whites’ only” restaurants and schoolrooms. Now, even Jesus cannot be called white without repercussions.

What the debate hides, however, is what Jesus of the Bible actually did and how he related to people.

The gospels are full of discussions about Jesus and bodies. He healed the blind and those who suffered from disease. He touched and was touched by the sick. His body was pierced by thorns, a spear and nails. And he died.

READ MORE: What all those Jesus jokes tell us

The phenotype of Jesus was never an issue in the Bible. Neither Matthew, nor Mark, nor Luke, nor John mentioned Christ’s skin tone or hair color. None called him white or black or red or brown.

Obsessions about race are obsessions of our age, not the biblical one. When asked what mattered most, Jesus did not say his skin tone or body shape. He instructed his followers to “love the Lord your God with all your heart” and to “do unto others as you would have done unto you.”

Maybe this Christmas season, we can reflect not so much on whether or not Jesus was white and instead consider what it meant for him to be called the “light” of the world.

Edward J. Blum is the co-author of The Color of Christ: The Son of God and the Saga of Race in America. He can be followed on Twitter @edwardjblum. The views expressed in this column belong to Blum alone.

- CNN Religion Editor

Filed under: Art • Belief • Bible • Billy Graham • Black issues • Christianity • Discrimination • Faith • God • Jesus • News media • Opinion • Persecution • Prejudice • Race • United States

soundoff (7,485 Responses)
  1. altroyan

    The Bible makes no reference to Jesus physical looks; however, there are known Roman military transcripts by the MiddleEast Military Regiment (under Pontius Pilot) that make reference to Jesus as dark olive complexion, the Vatican jealously protects this known fact and to acquire the info would mean an audit of Vatican records, and that has never been done in the history of Mankind. In the region of Central Israel where the Tribe JUDAH was the majority populace and the genetic type was dark hair and dark olive skinned. Here King David himself originated and is said to be a distant bloodline of Jesus. Given the origin of Jesus according to the Bible, his tribal origins and the statements of the Roman Legion Captain who described all executed ina ledger,,,Jesus was almost assured to be dark olive skinned and dark haired. Add to that the Judah custom of not trimming a beard and dissalowing long hair Jesus in REALITY would look a lot different from what each and every orthodox or christian faith Thinks HE SHOULD LOOK LIKE. The science, the history and the record all point toward darker skin and hair complexion.

    December 14, 2013 at 8:03 am |
    • Red


      December 14, 2013 at 8:07 am |
      • NooYawkah

        Yes, he is. Of course, this "controversy" could be completely avoided if people, artists or otherwise, would obey the 2nd Commandment.

        December 14, 2013 at 8:10 am |
        • sam stone

          The right to bear arms?

          December 14, 2013 at 9:03 am |
  2. maybrick

    Debating over this is stupid because there IS no real debate. White people are from way up north in Europe. You did NOT find white people in Jerusalem 2000 years ago. End of story. If you don't think so, then you need to take a class in geography.

    December 14, 2013 at 8:03 am |
    • HistoricalTruthOut

      On the contrary, you found whites in the Middle East and farther away places long before that (thousands of years before). The ancient Europeans were an advanced people and traveled far, establishing or influencing many of the great ancient cultures. Ancient artwork, archaeology, and genetic testing proves it.

      Ancient persians and some of the oldest egyptian pharaohs were white. DNA tests on Egyptian King Tutankhamen (1300+ BC) show him to be genetically related to Western Europeans. Since they are known to have been in areas surrounding modern day Israel thousands of years ago, it is highly likely they were there as well.

      December 14, 2013 at 8:28 am |
      • David

        Hold a moment buddy... just slow down..

        DNA tests do not by themselves determine if someone is white or not. DNA tests will show that Obama's great grandchildren are related to Nordic Europeans....

        You may find whites all over those areas, but you find more evidence of black and darkerskinned people there also. Australia, India, etc. Some of the holdest egyptian Pharaoh's clearly show them as black.

        And as far as being genetically related to Western Europeans... Here my friend you got it backwards...

        Yes we know the white EUropeans are genetically relataed to the EARLIER black Egyptians. That doesn't make the black Egyptians white

        December 14, 2013 at 8:35 am |
        • HistoricalTruthOut

          You are incorrect about DNA testing. It does not just show relatedness, but PERCENTAGE of an individuals DNA attributed to one group or region. My DNA tests by the two largest testing firms shows my DNA to be 99.99% (Conservative) or 100% (Speculative) European. So a DNA sample alone would show I am guaranteed to be white, even if DNA was all you had to go on, without seeing me.

          A DNA test of Obama for example would likely show him to be about 50% European DNA and 50% (or sightly less) Sub-Saharan African. His children would have a significantly lower percentage of European DNA, thanks to their mother.

          The FBI has already using DNA profiling to determine race/ethnicity of suspects for years based on percentage of ancestry in their DNA. This was first known to be done in 2003 by Tony Frudakis, who determined the serial killer the police and FBI were looking for was NOT white as they had assumed (and been searching for), but had 85 percent Sub-Saharan African and 15 percent native American DNA. Using this new information, the real killer was in custody within 60 days.

          As for Egyptian pharaohs, if by "black" you mean the phenotype similar to modern sub-saharan africans, then you are wrong. The hair and facial structures of early royal mummies do not resemble that phenotype at all, nor is there any DNA evidence to support your claim. It was not until the Nubian invasion of a weakened, declining Egypt by King Kashta (745-742 BC) that the first nubian (black) pharaoh dynasty was established there.The other Nubian pharaohs were Piankhi (742-715 BC), Shabaka I (715-701 BC), Shakatak (701-689 BC), Taharka (680-664 BC), and Tanutamun (664-650 BC). None of them were by any stretch "oldest" or earliest pharaohs, having been preceded by at least 2000 years of non-black pharaohs there, the earlier ones being those who built the Great Pyramids.

          December 14, 2013 at 9:14 am |
        • HistoricalTruthOut

          "Yes we know the white EUropeans are genetically relataed to the EARLIER black Egyptians. "

          The vast majority white Europeans tested today have zero Sub-Saharan African DNA in their genome. But many modern Northern Africans have a small percentage of European DNA. That does not just show that they are related, it shows who got the DNA from who. It shows that many Northern Africans of today had some white European ancestors, not vice-versa.

          December 14, 2013 at 9:30 am |
        • David

          The vast majority of Europeans have 1-3% African DNA.... not zero. And that small percentage, over 2000-5000 years matters in this discussion.

          December 14, 2013 at 10:32 am |
        • David

          I address each I am correct about DNA testing becuase PHENOTYPE (how one looks) can not be validated by how we interpret related genetic links. Again, Obama's children may show tell tale signs of Western European ancestry, but there is no way we are going to argue they are white. Also, the ancestors of Ancient Egyptians are not therfore "related" to Western Europeans by virtue of finding links that show some very ancient relatedness... You know why? Egypt is not in Western Europe.

          December 14, 2013 at 10:33 am |
        • David

          Your genetic testing does not show you to be 99.99% European. Even if it does, no genetic test shows Ancient Egyptians to be 100% European. So its a moot point and thus irrelvant. Just like you make another falalcy. You say that Obama's Mother would be 100% white (as if she has not one non-white ancestor), yet you assume that Obama's father is not 100% black (by your assumption that he must not have all black ancestors). And those two assumptions, give you a whiter than blacker Obama. EVEN THOUGH, Obama's mother could have a black ancestor more likely than Obama's father could have a non-black ancesor. Proof? Obama's mother is known to be a genetic descendent of an early slave John Punch in the USA. This was all over the news while you were napping on this topic.

          Next the FBI has their own interpretations of races and ethnicities and more often than not those are based on tacitcal analyses of countries not based on the most rational understanding. Again, Egypt is considered "white" and Sudan is "black". There is a lot in between the two, but the FBI wouldn't include that in their analysis.

          December 14, 2013 at 10:33 am |
        • HistoricalTruthOut

          King Tut's Y-chromasome haplogroup was determined to be haplogroup R1b1a2, which is though to have originated in the Caucasus about 9,500 years ago. This R1B Haplogroup dominates Western Europe, with at least half of European men being from this Haplogroup. 71% in Scotland, 70% in Spain and 60% in France for example. On the other hand, less than 1% of modern Egyptians have it.

          King Tut would have looked much more like the Europeans of today than modern Egyptians.

          December 14, 2013 at 9:52 am |
        • David

          And that haplotype does not a white person make.

          I can find numerous black people in antiquity that have that haplotype. Heck I can find them now.

          Haplotypes relate to ancient migrations, not physical features. I can see the blackest people of the Andamen Islands off the East coast of India. More black thann most africans.

          If i took your approach, they would be ZERO percent black. YOu know why? they left practically before anyone else, THEN, they never remixed with anyone after they got there.

          So no, your hypothesis has been refuted.

          December 14, 2013 at 10:38 am |
        • David

          And most importantly, yes I am right about the PHYSICAL featrues of the Ancient Egyptians. And I can prove that your misguided analysis is the source of the confusion.

          Denzel Washington is not considered Caucasian by his phenotype, but his ancient Egyptian doppleganger is.

          There have been tests done where people have taken typical black people, turned them into "sculpture" digitally and then presented them to people on this topic. At least half the time arguements are made that those are very caucasian ancient egyptians.

          White people who take your view tend to see only what they want to see. And if it's really too much you say they have a disease.

          Look at Akhenatens' features. EVEN THOUGH HE LOOKS JUST like his black mom Tiye... you say "he had a disease" which is why he looks like a black man.

          And his mom? Queen Tiye? Heck his father too. The more realistic busts look black. Yes I am sure you can get your Amenemhat IIIs, but I can respond with a Mentuhotep II. YOu show your Rameses II, and I show you my OLDER Pharaoh Nehesi.

          December 14, 2013 at 10:43 am |
        • David

          So please don't try to drown me with numbers, when the issue here is perception.

          Your FBI DNA analysis of a suspect only ruled out a white person, it did not help determine if the guy looked lightskinned or dark skinned.

          Yea, you thought I didn't see that? White race has since it's been pandered, meant that one must be "devoid" of perceptibly non-white phenotype.

          Now you want to start creeping in on the people in the middle? Naw naw naw... you go back right over there. You made your bed, now you lie in it.

          December 14, 2013 at 10:45 am |
        • dflowers

          Race is a construct of man. All humans have a common ancestor, and it all traces back to the Great Lakes region of East Africa. So all humans are decedents from Africans.

          December 14, 2013 at 11:15 am |
        • David

          Yes we know that, but when you call someone white who lives in Ancient Egypt, youre doing something deceitful for an agenda. The whole "race is a myth" statement is correct, but it's not be applied only when it benefits discrediting the black ancestry of people.

          December 14, 2013 at 11:18 am |
        • dflowers

          David, "white" is perception of physical features, made up by humans. There is no white. White is only what you believe it is. A hundred years ago, people in this country "passed" for white all the time, some still do.

          December 14, 2013 at 11:55 am |
        • David

          Thank you for that insight, but I think it would be more effective to address the bonehead trying to explain to us that all these people who have no relationship to Europe are "white" or "Caucasian"

          December 14, 2013 at 3:04 pm |
  3. W

    If English was good enough for Jesus, then it's good enough for me.

    December 14, 2013 at 8:01 am |
    • dflowers

      Race is a construct of man. All humans have a common ancestor, and it all traces back to the Great Lakes region of East Africa. So all humans are decedents from Africans.

      December 14, 2013 at 11:14 am |
      • BioLogic

        Race is a construct of man? OK, but what biological term isn't? All words used to categorize forms of life, including the entire system of taxonomy, are obviously human constructs. That does not mean the things these terms describe have no objective meaning or significance in nature.

        As for common ancestors, all species of animals have a common microbial ancestor. Does that mean all species are the same or that species don't really exist? Of course not. Having a common ancestor does NOT mean that two species or two human population groups are the same, nor does it mean that they haven't continued on divergent evolutionary paths since that common ancestor.

        December 14, 2013 at 6:59 pm |
      • GeneRipper

        All humans, including Africans, may have a common human ancestor, but most groups also have another ancestor that most Sub-Saharan (black) Africans do not have: Neanderthal.

        That Neanderthal DNA infusion, which included genes associated with brain development, may have been a major factor in the rise of civilization.

        December 14, 2013 at 7:17 pm |
  4. gary

    white, black, yellow, green who cares first prove this person ever existed.

    December 14, 2013 at 7:55 am |
    • Whoops

      Actually there's no debate over whether or not they existed. Jesus is referenced widely even outside the Christian faith. What is debated is his status at Son of God.
      Santa, derived from Saint Nicholas came from the area now known as Turkey. He gave out gifts to small children. He is also a real historical figure who became commercialized.

      December 14, 2013 at 10:36 am |
  5. Rainer Braendlein

    The incarnated God Jesus spent a period of time of about 30 years on earth. At the one side he was the ordinary carpenter Jesus, Joseph's son, from Nazareth living in Capernaum at Lake Tiberias, on the other side supernatural power came from him, he was sacral. When Jesus spoke with somebody that was more than human talk. When Jesus spoke with somebody, at the same time Christ or God spoke with the certain person. People which encountered Jesus in fact encountered God or the whole Godhead. That was the special thing and mystery of Jesus. Meeting Jesus meant to get into God's presence.

    However, today Jesus is beyond, and no longer in our world.

    How can we get into God's presence today?

    Is there a temple? The Temple of Jerusalem was destroyed 70 after Christ, therefore this possibility is cancelled. Is there another temple? Yes, thank God, there is the Christian Church. The Christian Church is the place of God's presence today. Through sacral acts of the whole Church we get into God's presence, and that conforms an encounter with the earthly Jesus former times.

    The Church, of course, consists of people of all nations, colours, status, ranks, etc.

    Conclusion: It plays no role if Jesus was red, black, white or yellow. The historical Jesus who certainly had a certain color is represented today through a multi-tude of people of different colour.

    Don't discuss about the colour of the historical Jesus but join his Church where you can still meet him today. The Church, Christ's mystical body.

    What is the Christian Church?

    The real Church preaches discipleship of Jesus on the basis of the releasing power of his sacrifice. This power is dedicated to us through sacramental baptism. Discipleship is kept through Lord's Supper and private confession of sins. I admit that it is hard or nearly impossible to find such a church today. Let us pray.


    December 14, 2013 at 7:53 am |
    • One one

      Thanks for the heads up

      December 14, 2013 at 8:08 am |
    • lol??

      Christians are temples of God and changed from the inside out. Politicians, the military, the Scouts, and the courts, yadda yadda yadda try to work from the outside in. They are stuck in the old covenant manner of thinking. That'll get ya divorced.

      December 14, 2013 at 8:33 am |
  6. Phillip Bunn

    Why don't we dig him up and find out. I mean, since so may new world, dogmatic, Caucasian, Christian zealots believe him to be an American, then surely he is buried in Arlington, right?

    December 14, 2013 at 7:52 am |
  7. Joe

    If you lived in Jerusalem 2000 years ago and where Jewish,you had olive skin and dark eyes.The end.

    December 14, 2013 at 7:52 am |
    • Snafu

      What race was his biological father?

      December 14, 2013 at 7:57 am |
      • Wise man #2

        His daddy was black. Hence the whole virgin story.

        December 14, 2013 at 8:05 am |
    • Deb

      Well my DNA tests shows 100% Middle Eastern Jew and I do not have olive skin. I do have brown eyes and brown hair, but my sister's and dad's eyes were blue....

      December 14, 2013 at 8:05 am |
      • Iasu

        And my genetic tests show I am 100% Middle Eastern Jew and MY skin is very dark, with curly hair. I am often mistaken for black, and compared to Beeta Israeli. Shalom brother.

        December 14, 2013 at 8:19 am |
  8. Lar 5

    Megyn's reply last night : She just made it verifiably worse!

    December 14, 2013 at 7:49 am |
    • HotAirAce

      And she didn't even replay the bit where she mentions jesus.

      December 14, 2013 at 7:58 am |
  9. jim davis

    A black Santa would steal your TV.

    December 14, 2013 at 7:48 am |
  10. jim davis

    You liberals are pathetic racists.

    December 14, 2013 at 7:47 am |
  11. kevin flannigan

    Haven't you ever seen King of Kings, blue eyes, white skin, of course he's white, because Hollywood says so.

    December 14, 2013 at 7:42 am |
  12. Mary

    Does it matter? I thought it was the messages that count . . . . . . .

    December 14, 2013 at 7:40 am |
  13. veep

    MeGyn is a foolish woman.

    She got REALLY mad on TV because her religious views were threatened.

    December 14, 2013 at 7:37 am |
  14. SixDegrees

    Honkee Jesus.

    December 14, 2013 at 7:35 am |
    • jim davis

      Shuffling "Jesus" getting His SWAG on.

      December 14, 2013 at 7:46 am |
  15. Westielover

    For god sake, Who cares? What difference does it make? What color is Jesus? What color is Santa Claus? Has every one lost their minds?

    December 14, 2013 at 7:33 am |
    • Evert van Vliet

      I care though, it's these stupid claims which provides folks 'rights' over 'others'.

      It's all make believe.

      December 14, 2013 at 7:35 am |
    • David

      NO, just Megyn Kelly lost her mind.

      Everyone else you're seeing is responding to her widespread ignorance. Are YOU ok over there?

      December 14, 2013 at 7:36 am |
  16. Snafu

    Ones 'race' is determined by the genetic material received from ones 'parents'. Since Jesus had no mortal father and therefore no male contribution of genetic material, why should we assume that Mary contributed genetic material either? Jesus was a creation of God, Mary was only the 'vessel' of delivery and as such Jesus could have been any 'race' that God chose.

    December 14, 2013 at 7:33 am |
    • UncleM

      If Jesus even existed as a historical figure, he was a man like any other.

      December 14, 2013 at 7:46 am |
    • Science Works

      Like Adam made Eve with a rib bone ?

      December 14, 2013 at 7:47 am |
    • One one

      Are you saying Jesus did not have DNA ? That's heavy.

      December 14, 2013 at 8:16 am |
  17. David

    Kelly actually did the world a service... she made us all realize something...

    Just as we realized that most people are not white in the world we realize that most of the world knows that jesus isn't white. And all this time we took for granted that it was accepted that way by everyone else.

    Thanks Megs... you've actually accellerated the end of white supremacy in the world

    December 14, 2013 at 7:29 am |
    • chris


      December 14, 2013 at 8:36 am |
  18. David R

    Jesus was Jewish person born to a middle eastern family. Whatever the prevalent race was in Israel at the time. What I felt the racist fox news announcers were saying was that Jesus was caucasian. This is definitely not the case. Jesus may have been white, however he in not caucasian in the european sense. One can be a white hispanic or a black hispanic. Arabs and others from the middle east do not generally go by the same distinction.

    Don't try to make Jesus something he isn't Fox News....and quit being racist it is a disgusting point of view.

    December 14, 2013 at 7:24 am |
    • Science Works

      Yeah they have not EVOLVED much at Fox .

      December 14, 2013 at 7:30 am |
    • David

      Actually if you really think about it...

      The brown skin of middle easterners, and the very curly hair among them, and their features... it's not as common today as it was then, but even still...

      We see those features, hair, and skin and think that's Caucasian, but we see the same features on a guy in the USA whose black and we can "see" that as black. Because it is.

      The point then is that how we view middle easterners (whom are very near the unquestionably black areas of Africa), and how we view them in the Bible is based on that perception...

      Then we define black and white based on that, not basd on how they look. Israel is right next to Egypt. That's not "white".

      December 14, 2013 at 7:34 am |
  19. stevepatt46

    I would guess that an imaginary character could be any color you could choose, this would be good for either Santa or Jesus or God and the Easter bunny and all our other imaginary friends.

    December 14, 2013 at 7:19 am |
    • Mike

      I'm not Christian or anything, but, unlike Santa and the Easter Bunny, Jesus did actually walk the Earth.

      And no, he was not white. He wasn't born in Eastern Europe, he was born in a region known for a darker complexion.

      It's not up for debate, it's genetics, it's science. And merely arguing that he is white is racist. Who difference does it make what color his skin was?

      December 14, 2013 at 7:29 am |
      • Evert van Vliet

        Where's 'your' evidence?

        And don't cal it faith because that too requires reasoning after making an observation to start with.

        December 14, 2013 at 7:33 am |
        • David

          Being white is a very narrow definition. It requires a greater level of evidence to prove than otherwise.

          Why should someone prove that Jesus "isn't" white? How about you start off proving that Jesus was white.

          Where is YOUR evidence!

          December 14, 2013 at 7:35 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.