> 'hey! Catholic and orthodox art of Jesus is too white! Change it now!! He wuz an Arab!'
I've heard this argument before. Coming from an actual middle eastern Christian, I shall debunk it. But you should note that the ethnicity of Jesus hardly matters. In the end He would be our Lord even if He happened to be Korean.
First let's start off with the worst word on Earth:
> Arab
Total nonsense, because there is no Arab race. Arab refers to anyone from an Arabic speaking country. Does that make all Americans or Australians Englishmen for speaking it? Is Senegal a nation of Frenchmen? No, so 'arab' is meaningless. Egyptians for example aren't even Semitic, they're North African, so they can't be Arabs (especially the Copts). Most levantines aren't Arabs either (Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Iraq). I myself am Lebanese. My people are tan or olive skinned Semitic people. We're clearly not white, but we are certainly not 'Arabs' from the Gulf who are as dark as Indians and have completely different features. Levantine people have an olive or even a slightly grey/yellow skin tone and Semitic features.
So to conclude, representations of a pale Jesus are probably accurate considering the Middle East is a very diverse place and that the Levant is full of Greek-looking Semites with light skin. The liberal argument of a Saudi style Jesus is nonsense. Again, race shouldn't really matter to a Christian, but I think it's nice to know what He likely looked like, and the people around Him.
Here's a few examples of fellow levantines